The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-10 00:00:00

WINDOW DUTIES.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
it might be desirable for the House to know that he pro-
posed to take into consideration the resolution on the
window duties and house-tax the first thing on Monday,
if the motion of the Hon. Member far Bucks were not
disposed of in time to bring it forward on Friday night;
after that he should bring on the resolution for the re-
duction of the coffee and timber duties.
ST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL.

In reply to a question from Mr. HUME,
Sir G. GREY said that arrangements had been made
for opening St. Paul's Cathedral free of charge. An
order in Council would be necessary, but in the mean-
time he understood that the Dean and Chapter had
thrown open the cathedral to the public.
ST. ALBANS ELECTION.

Mr. AGLIONBY moved that the evidence taken
before the Committee should be produced for the in-
formation of the short-hand writers. They first got
the report of the Committee, and that was, that Henry
Edwards should be taken into custody, and that
his evidence should be presented to the Committee.
That evidence was now in the bands of the Members
of this House, but no results had followed from
its publication. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then
read a variety of extracts from the report, and then pro-
ceeded to say, that out of these remarks two questions
arose ; one was a matter of common law, and the other
of commonsense. He was aware that the House
was quite indisposed to attend to questions of law,
but yet it was necessary to look to this matter,
for the evidence of Mr. Edwards had never
been personally derived from him, and therefore
no result could possibly arise except through the action
of the common law, and that was decidedly in favour of
the defendant. By the 73d section of the 11th and 12th
Victoria, the whole of these delinquencies were dealt
with, and regulated the rules for Select Committees;
and from that section it was evident that the in-
quiry could not be proceeded with, under the cir-
cumstances. ley the Committee or the petitioner.
He was told that ?he Committee were anxious to adjourn
beyond tweety-four hours, and they applied to the
Houss to do so. The HOLI6O gave them leave, but after
that leave they neglected to meet again for the purpose
of dtciaring the aeljearnment as the spirit of the Act
required, aztil, therefore, before he proceeded tut ther, be
should be glad to cc the opinion of the Speaker upon
this technical point, because he thought the omission
be had mentioned was fatal to the woole proceeding.
lie would therefore metre that, as the committal of Henry
Edwards was informal, he ought to be discharged from
en study
Mr. GOULBURN thought sufficient time had not
been given kr considering the evidence in this case.
air. E. ELLICE, the chairman of the Committee, re-
lated the steps which had been taken in reference to the
adjournment. He was instructed by the Committee some
days ego to apply to the House for leave to adjourn for
a week. Lave was granted, and they did adjourn an-
cordingiy without again meeting; but he apereheeded
there was no absolute necessity fur a pro farina meeting
to adjourn.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the question
raised by Mr. Aglionby was one of great nicety, and one
which was descrying of consideration before it was de.
cided. He should therefore propose that the evidence
should be printed, and the question brought on at a fu-
ture period.
After a short discussion the motion of Mr. Aglionby
was withdrawn, and on the motion of the Attorney-
General the evidence of the Committee was ordered to
be printed.
Mr. AGLIONBY contended that the committal
of the prisoner was altogether informal, accord-
ing to the rules of the House and the principle which
had been followed in other cases. The charge against
him was that he bad dissuaded another party from
attending the Committee and giving evidence
who had not been served with a Speaker's
warrant, and the Act of Parliament referred only to
those cases in which a party was guilty of keeping a
witness away who had beon regularly served with a
warrant. The Hon. Member concluded by a motion, as
we understood, for the liberation of the prisoner.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it appeared to
him, after the best consideration he could give
to this case, that the proceedings of the Com-
mittee were strictly legal and proper. Edwards
it was proved before the Committee had tampered with
some of the witnesses, and the committal was therefore
within the jurisdiction of the Committee. Unless toe
Committee possessed this power, this Mr. Edwards or
any other party might go on tampering with the wit-
nesses with impunity, but, said the Hon. and Learned
Member, Edwards ought to have been called to the bar
and asked if he had anything to say against his com-
mittal. No doubt upon abstract principles that was
the most desirsble course, but this was not the practice
of the House, and the practice could only be changed
by resolution.