The Sun.
London, England, 1834-07-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, -JULY 9, 1834.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF LORDS, July 8.

The LORD CHANCELLOR delivered judgment in an
appeal which he had been hearing, and on the question
having been put and agreed to, he desired Mr. Courtenay
to make the minute of it in the very same form that had been
done in Solarte v. Palmer—he had spoken to the Judges
upon the matter, and found that it was quite correct; indeed,
as a Court of Record, it could not be done in any other way.

Public business was commenced at Five o'clock.
Petitions in favour of the Church were presented by the
Earls of Malmesbury and Haddington, Lords Bexley, Skel-
mersdale, and Winchilsea.
The Earl of MALME SBURY presented petitions against
the Poor Laws Amendment Bill, from the parishes of St.
Mary, Whitechapel, and St Martin-in. the-Fields.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said a commission had been
appointed last session to inquire into the Courts of
Scotland. The Commissioners had made a Report
which had been laid upon the table of the other House
so long ago as May last—he supposed there could be no ob-
jection to its being laid before their Lordships. He was happy
in being able to bear testimony to the manner in which the
duty had been performed, the inquiry had been made in the
true spirit of fairness.
Lord MELBOURNE said it was only by mistake that the
report had not been laid on the table—it should be done forth-
with. The Noble Earl also presented petitions to the same effect,
from the females of Queensborough ; and from the Master,
Wardens, and Guild of Merchants of the city of Dublin. Also
a petition from the Dissenters of Dublin, against the Poor Law
Amendment Bill, which the Noble Earl moved to have read at
length, as it contained sentiments well worthy of the attention
of their Lordships. The petition was being read by the clerk
when

Earl GREY rose and said he thought the petition could
not be received, as it referred to words spoken in that House.
The Earl of WINCHIL SE A said, he would stand up for
the right. of his fellow-countrymen to animadvert upon senti-
ments spoken in that House, after they had become the pro-
perty of the public. He considered that the petitioners were
perfectly right, and that the petition could not be rejected.
The LORD CHANCELLOR saidhe should not discharge
his duty to their Lordships if he did not dissent entirely from
the doctrine of the Noble Earl, for whom he was sure nobody
entertained greater respect than he did for his candour
and frank disposition on all occasions ; but he believed
that the Noble Earl was the only ones in that House
who did not know that it was a breach of privilege
of their Lordships' House to make known even the sentiments
of what passed; therefore no oue, legally and strictly speak-
ing, could become possessed of any thing that passed
in the House except by the votes of Parliament. This
was only acting on the doctrine which he had laid down
last night in presenting, a petition from Mr. John Lawless,
when he stated he thought it could not be received on account
of its referring to something that had transpired in the House.
The Earl of WINCHIL SE A thought that if that were
the case, the principle should be acted on generally.
The Bishop of EXETER thought, the petition could
not be rejected upon the ground of its referring to sentiments
that had been uttered in that House, because, although a
distinguished member of it had claimed them as his, yet
he apprehended he would not claim them as peculiarly
his own.—( Hear.) It was probable that other distinguished
persons might have uttered such sentiments in ano-
ther place, although he himself had no doubt that they
alluded to what had taken place in their Lordships' House.
He thought it must be rejected on another ground, namely the
charging certain members of the Imperial Parliament with
perjury in discharging their duties in Parliament.
After some observations from Earl GREY, the petition
was withdrawn.

it would preclude the possibility of any Honourable
Member introducing new matter during the present session,
for the Bills brought in by the Government, delayed as they
had been, would occupy the rest of the session. It would be
much better to let the present system go on. He had known
occasions when Government had assisted in getting the House
counted out, and when the Secretary of the Treasury stood at the
door of the House to prevent Members entering. It would be
encouraging the Ministers to postpone measures to the last
few weeks of the session, and on that ground he would rather
the House should sit for two months longer than give up this
privilege. He objected to the motion, which, if carried,
would be productive of great evil.
Mr. O'CONNELL said if he stood alone he would divide
the House upon the question. There was a curious coinci-
dence between this motion and the hurrying through of a
Bill for taking away the liberties of Ireland. But
it was all by accident. The motion and the accurately
delivered speech were purely accidental. A few years ago
motions took precedence of orders. Now orders had almost
excluded motions, and it was intended entirely to exclude
them by this motion. The House had been taunted with
being counted out ; why the whipper-in of the Govern-
ment took his station at the door on every such occasion,
and kept back Hon. Members ! He was sure the Noble Lord
would not succeed.
Mr. BUCKINGHAM said the House had been counted
out when important motions were to be made, in order to evade a
discussion upon them. He said he should oppose this motion,
and withdraw his own on the subject of duelling.
Mr. POULETT THOMSON denied that the House
was counted out for any such object as that mentioned by
the Hon. Member for Sheffield.—( Hear.) The delay of
public business, and the waste of time arose entirely from the
bringing forward motions just in the manner suggested by the
Hon. Member for Middlesex. . .

Mr. TENNYSON said it was the undoubted and ancient
right and privilege of a Member of that House to bring for-
ward any motion at any day he thought fit, without
reference to orders or order days, and he would consent to
no motion or arrangement that would affect that right. If this
motion should be carried, he should take an early opportunity
of asserting his right.
Sir JOHN WROTTE SLE Y considered the question not
one of much general import, except as it related to the point of
time, and for his own part he should vote for it.
Mr. ROBIN SON considered the question one of great
importance. If the House could come to an understanding
to abandon all the notices of motions for the present session,
in his opinion it would be a very good arrangement. There
never was any thing in such a state of confusion as the pre-
sent proceedings of the House, and he should certainly vote
against the Noble Lord's motion.
Sir R. PEEL was in favour of the motion, but still thought
any hon. gentleman ought to be at liberty to bring forward a
pressing motion whenever he should find it necessary so to do.
The number of notices put down every day was immense : that
day there were not less than twenty-six ; two of which, how-
ever, the Hon. Member for Sheffield had abandoned—indeed
he had been sure that this would be the case, for though the
Hon. Member had told him last night that he intended to per-
severe in them, he had been confident that they would be
dropped ; and sure enough they were ; and he found, as he
had expected, that he might place more confidence in the
Hon. Gentleman's prudence and discretion than in his pro-
mises.—( A laugh.)
Mr. SPRING RICE said he was glad the Noble Lord
had brought forward this motion, as whatever its immediate
result, the discussion on it would, no doubt, produce much
good.
Mr. BA RING said he was rather in an awkward position
on this matter, for, however it might be received, he should
feel it his duty, when the Noble Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved the order of the day for bringing forward the Budget,
to make a motion or amendment on that order of the day.
The motion he intended to make was for the production of cer-
tain :papers relative to the mode in which the finances of the
country were managed.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The Noble
Lord had expressed his intention to oppose their production,
and of course the Noble Lord would be provided with some
good reasons for making such opposition. The Noble Lord
having, in giving notice of his intention to bring forward the
Budget, failed in naming any specific day, he (Mr. Baring)
had of course been precluded from naming the day for bring-
ing forward his motion thereupon. He should, however, now
intimate, that on Friday next he should give notice of his
intention to move for the production of these papers as an
amendment on the order of the day for bringing forward the
Budget.
Lord MORPETH said he found that there was nothing so
difficult to collect as the sense of the House—( A laugh)—and
it seemed particularly difficult on this occasion. Almost
every one seemed to admit the justice of his statement, yet he
could not understand whether they would agree to his mo-
tion. His only motive had been to consult the public conve-
nience—( Hear, hear)—and, as his end had, perhaps, in some
measure been attained, by the discussion which had taken
place, he should, therefore, if the House pleased, not object
to withdraw his motion till that day week ; so that if, at that
period, it should be found that the House made no better pro-
gress than it did now, it might be competent in him to renew
his motion ; and in that case, he hoped the House would agree
to it. As to a hint which had been thrown out, that in bring-
ing forward this motion he was acting in an " accidental com-
bination"—( A laugh)—with Ministers, it would be a sufficient
answer to say, that he had given notice of the motion so far
back as the 4th June..—( Hear, hear, and loud cries of " Divide,"
" Withdraw.") If the House preferred it, he would alter his
motion to this effect, " That for the rest of the session, orders
of the day should have precedence of notices of motions, on
every day except Tuesday."
Sir T. FREMANTLE said that this would be an invidious
and unjust distinction, as there were quite as many notices put
down for Thursdays as for Tuesdays.
Lord MORPETH then said that as his altered motion was
not approved of, he should postpone the original motion to
Tuesday ; and this arrangement was acceded to.

DIVISIONS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. WARD having brought up the report of the Commit-
tee on the Division of the House, moved that the further con-
sideration of the report should take place next session. He
contended that some alteration of the existing system was im-
peratively called for, and he hoped the House would adopt the
plan which the Committee recommended.
Mr. H AWE S seconded the motion.
Mr. HUME considered the question of very great import-
ance. Lists had been made out for a considerable period;
but hitherto, for want of some authorized system, it had been
done very partially and incorrectly. They had been prepared
with a great deal of trouble, and had occasioned much loss of
time to those Alembers who had undertaken the task of fur-
nishing them.—( Hear, hear.) He himself had for many years
taken as much trouble to make out lists as any Member in the
House.._( Hear, hear.) Indeed, it was only within the last
twelve months that, having been anxious to get other Members
to attend to the matter, he had given to it comparatively less
attention. He hoped t'iat no man who came to this House was
afraid of it being known how he voted.—( Hear.) Every
member ought to be prepared to defend that vote, be it in ac-
cordance with or against the views of his constituents. He
believed that the effect of publishing the divisions would be to
cause a fuller attendance of members, though the limited at-
tendance, deficient as were the present accommodations of the
House, was rather in favour of those who were the more
hard-working members, and who regularly discharged their
duties there. They ought, however, to have regard to what
was the intention of the Reform Act, which unquestionably
was, that every member should be at his post. His opinion was,
that till a new House of Commons was built, it would be im-
possible that divisions could be taken in the manner that was
most desirable. Several plans had been submitted to the
Committee, and:only one of them met with unanimous ap-
probation ; but it was impossible to carry it into effect for
want of more room. According to this plan, two addi-
tional rooms were necessary, in order that one party might go
out at one door, and another party at the other door ; it was
proposed that as the Members went out they should be counted,
thus both sides could be counted at the same moment, and the
time of the House would not be lost as at present. The want
of the requisite accommodation induced the Committee to re-
commend the plan now before the House. He thought that in
ordinary divisions it would answer very well ; but when they
had such divisions as they had the other night, when between
300 and 400 divided, tho Members of necessity would be sit-
ting so close, that the tellers, unless they had very good eyes,
would not be able to distinguish one from the other.
Sir R. PEEL said he was against the plan altogether.—
(Hear, hear.) He would leave every man who gave his vote
according to his conscience to state to his constituents, if he
pleased, what his vote was on any particular occasion. As to
the liability of being called on by his constituents, to inform
them as to such vote, if the principle of the motion now before
the House was a good • one there ought to be a division on
every question on which there was not a perfect unanimity of
opinion. He thought- that the tendency of the proposed plan
would be to insure divisions to that extent. Thus, if 200
took one view of a question, and only 10 the other view,
there were to be a division and a publication of the list, that the
constituents of the ten virtuous patriots might know how they
voted on the particular motion. He thought that most erroneous
inferences would frequently be drawn from records of the names
unaccompanied by explanation. What could the constituents
understand from the mere statement of the motion according
to the forms of the House ? For example they would some-
times find it recorded thus : —That the words proposed to be left
out stand part of the question ; the " ayes" voted in this way,
and the " noes" in the other way.--( A laugh.) It would be
necessary for Members to explain the grounds on which they
gave their votes. It did not appear to him that they were in
a situation to adopt any of the plans submitted to the Com-
mittee. The first was, that the names of all the Members
should be called over ; this the Committee objected to on
account of the loss of time that would be occasioned. The
second was, that Members should inscribe their names in a
book on entering the House ; this also the Committee rejected
as inconvenient. The third wax, that the Members should go
one side into one lobby, and the other side into another lobby ;
but to carry this plan into execution, extra room would be
necessary. The fourth plan was that now under the considera-
tion of the House ; and it appeared the Hon. Gentleman who
made the motion had himself no great confidence in his pro-
position. The two tellers mutt be acquainted with every Mem-
ber in the House ; this was one great difficulty to be over-
come. Then were the tellers to be appointed now, at the
latter end of the session ? If so, they would have a comfort-
able office during the recess.
Mr. WARD said he did not propose to try the experiment
till next session.
Sir R. PEEL—Then he would put it to the House whether
ouestion had not better be postponed altogether. Why
thb. •tiey be called on to pledge their successors ?—(" Sue-
should t- 'if:4h.) He meant the succeeding session.
cessors ^red the House would not be induced to
Mr. GEJ T F ns., I,e Hon. G entleman. It was unjust to
negative the motion. of 1.4,