The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-02 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, July 1.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack
at Five &Clock.

SMITHFIELD MARKET REMOVAL BILL.
Lord REDESDALE brought up the report of the
Standing Orders' Committee on the Smithfield Market
Removal Bill, recommending that the Bill be not pro-
ceeded with, inasmuch as the standing orders relating to
private Bills had not been complied with.
Lord BEAUMONT considered that if they treated
this Bill as a private Bill they would establish a most
dangerous precedent. It was a public Bill, to remove a
great public nuisance, aed had been introduced into the
House of Commons, and been there treated as a public
Bill, having been introduced, not on petition but
motion, and had been thonghout treated as a
public Bill, save that the Standing Orders' Committee
of that House having been consulted on the subject, had
recommended that notices should be published in the
Gazette. This was done, and the Bill was proceeded
with as a public Bill, and as a public Bill it had been
sent up to their Lordships. Their Lordships might, it
they pleased, treat it as a private Bill, but the real ques-
tion was, did it concern great public interests or did it
not. In the. cases of the Metropolitan Cemeteries
Bill and other Bills of a similar character their Lord-
ships had treated them as public Bills, and he thought
that in such an important case as this the Bill should be
considered as a public Bill. He would move as a reso-
lution that, inasmuch as the Smithfield Market Removal
Bill partakes more of the nature of a public than
of a private Bill, it is the opinion of that House
that it should be proceeded with as a pub.
lie Bill, and that the standing orders should not
be insisted on. The Corporation of London had had
ample equitable notice, and might if they chose be heard
at the bar by counsel against it.
The Marquis of SALISBURY thought that such a
resolution should not be proposed without notice.
Lord BEAUMONT would, if they thought it neces-
sary, postpone his motion, and give notice of it.
Lord LYNDHURST thought the Bill was not a public
Bill.

Lord REDESDALE said the standing orders bad
been passed for the protection of private property, and
wherever private property was touched by any Bill, it
was necesssary that those standing orders should be
observed. He hoped their Lordships would insist
upon the observance of the standing orders in this
instance. Everybody knew that Smithfield-market
was a nuisance, and that the Corporation of London
actually ,knew all about the Bill, but still it would
be most dangerous to allow the standing orders
to be dispensed with. The notices might have been
given in November, and then the standing orders would
have been complied with. If the Noble Lord thought
the standing orders ought not to bo insisted on he might
make the motion, but it would be most objectionable to
treat this measure a 3 a public Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM wished exceedingly that this Bill
should pass into a Bill, and would recommend his Noble
Friend (Lord Beaumont) to move the suspension of the
standing orders instead of persevering in his motion. He
had no fear of this House losing the respect of the com-
munity by acceding to this Bill.
Earl GREY concurred in the recommendation of his
Noble and Learned Friend opposite, but thought that as
his Noble Friend (Lord Beaumont) had consented to
postpone his motion to Thursday, it would be. better
not to enter into the discussion until then.

Lord BEAUMONT then gave notice that on Thurs-
day he should bring the question under the considera-
tion of the House.
Lord REDESDALE said that the Noble Lord must
give specific notice if he intended to move the sus-
pension of the standing orders.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that by giving
such a notice, his Noble Friend would be admitting that
it was a private Bill. The notico had bettor be given
generally.
After a few words from Lord COLCHESTER,
Lord BROUGHAM recommended his Noble Friend
to confine himself to a general notice.
Lord BEAUMONT gave notice that on Friday he
would call the attention of their Lordships to the sub-
ject, and that on Thursday he would state to their
Lordships the specific words of the motion he intended
to submit to their Lordships.