The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-06 00:00:00

was averse to the repeal of the paper duty. He might think
that, as far as common sense was concerned, the House of

mons might have an opportunity of judging whether, under
the new circumstances, they could afford to dispense with
this tax . . . It appeared to him that a short delay
was the course dictated by prudence and sound sense."
The upshot was, that the motion that the bill be postponed
fur a week was negatived without a division. He had now
gone through the various precedents which bore upon the
question at issue, and the result of their examination ap-
peared to him to be that there was no evidence to show that
the House of Lords had ever rejected a b 11 imposing or
repealing a tax upon purely financial grounds, and proceed-
ing upon the notion that it was their duty to square the
income and expenditure of the country. It behoved hon.
members then well to weigh the consequences of the exer-
cise of the new functions which the House of Lords had
taken it upon themselves to discharge. The immediate re-
sult of calmly acquiescing in its exercise must be that upon
no future occasion could a tax be remitted by a vote of the
House of Commons, and that it would be necessary for
merchants, before making arrangements in conformity with
a financial scheme to which the House of Commons had
given its sanction, to ascertain, if possible, the views upon
the subject by which the members of the other Rouse of
Parliament were animated. (Hear, hear.) The whole
mercantile world would thus be thrown into confusion, and
the utmost inconvenience would arise. (Hear, hear.) It
seemed to him, he might add, most desirable that if the
House of Lords were to be permitted to retain the power
which they claimed they should be furnished with the esti-
mates—for which they had often applied, but which they
never got, Mr, Pitt having on one occasion complacently
and firmly refused such an application—in order that they
might be provided with information upon the financial sub-
jeets on which they would have to decide. It might, more-
over, be convenient that the Chancellor of the Exchequer
should sit in the House of Lords, it being left to a Secre-
tary of State to explain the nature of the budget to the
House of Commons. (A laugh.) He trusted, however,
that the noble lord at the head of the Government was right
in believing that the House of Lords did not mean to per-
severe in the course upon which they had so recently en-
tered. The sdecision at which they had arrived on the Paper
Duty Bill had, in his opinion, done more to disturb the con-
stitutional functions of both branches of the Legislature
than any proceeding which had taken place in our time,
and the very fact, he should contend, that the House of
Commons was obliged to take steps to prevent a repetition
of that decision, and to alter their mode of procedure with
that object, furnished in itself a conclusive argument that
the vote .of the House of Lords had in it something novel.
(Hear.) The eyes of the country, he felt assured—not-
withstanding all that had been said about the apathy
which prevailed upon the question out of doors—were upon
the representatives of the people in the present discussion.
During its progress it would be well to bear in mind the
fact that those representatives had this very session vir-
fually rejected the Reform Bill, thereby refusing to assent
_to the extension of popular rights. (Hear, hear.) How
far those to whom that extension had been promised by
statesmen on both sides of the house would be satisfied
with such a result he was not prepared to say, but if, in
addition to the denial of popular rights the House of Com-
mons were abandon the rights which it passed, and to show
itself a remiss and careless guardian of them, the probability
would be that it would ultimately forfeit the confidence of
the country, a forfeiture which would do more than any-
thing else to give an impulse to these democratic and dan-
gerous reforms the advent of which was dreaded by every
man who valued the constitution under which we lived.
(Hear, hoar.) The exclusive right of imposing taxes was
the very lifeblood of the House of Commons, and should
the time ever come when it should consent to abate one
jot of that right, then from that hour might be said to date
the decadence of the greatness of our system of Parlia-
mentary Government. (Cheers.)
Mr. CONINGHAM said he very much doubted whether
the country would receive the speech of the noble viscount
in the same manner as it had been received by hon. gentle-
men on the opposite side of the house. He was convinced
that the deterinination at which tlft Government had arrived
to place a mere idle record upon the journals of the house
must prove fatal to it. He was satisfied that no Government
could stand against the contempt which must be felt by
the country when they saw the noble lord the member for
Tiverton stand up in that house as the defender of the
rights and privileges of the House of Lords instead of those
of the House of Commons. (Laughter and ironical cheers.)
Every word of palliation of the other house of Parliament
that had fallen from the noble lord was a censure upon his
colleague, the right hon. gentleman who sat by his side. It
was not a financial but a great and grave constitutional
question they had to consider. He had recently met his
constituents upon this very question. (Laughter.) He con-
sidered his constituents quite as intelligent and capable of
forming an opinion on this subject as any hon. gentleman
who laughed so rudely. (Renewed laughter.) They might
talk about the apathy of the country, but he was prepared
to deny that the country was apathetic, and to tell the Go-
vernment and those gentlemen on the Opposition benches
who were in favour of the course the Government proposed
to pursue, that they were tampering with very dangerous
elements when they ventured to bring the privileges of an
irresponsible house into collision with the rights and pri
vileges of a responsible body of representatives. (Hear.)
He would tell them further, that the proceedings of that
evening would give rise to such an agitation in the coun-
try as they had not seen for many years. (Laughter, cheers,
and cries of " Oh, oh.") He thought that hon. gentlemen
should conduct themselves in a manner becoming to mem-
o hers of a deliberative assembly. (Hear, hear.) It was not
by rude and idle interruptions that he was to be put down
and silenced. (Laughter.) Ho was an independent mem-
ber of that house, and a real and genuine representative—
(great laughter)—not of a rotten close borough—(in-
creased laughter)—but of a large and enlightened consti-
tuency. He was acting upon his right and privilege as a
member of that house, and he would again tell hon. gen-
tlemen opposite who jeered at him, that he was not to be
put down by such rude interruptions, which he did not
deserve, for he never intruded on the time or attention
of the house ; and when he did speak, he endeavoured to
keep as closely as possible to the point—(hear)—and he ap-
pealed to all who heard him, whether he had not always
conducted himself as became a member of Parliament and
a gentleman. (Cheers.). He rose simply for the purpose
of entering his deliberate protest against the decision of the
Government upon this subject. He maintained that the
house should again pass' a measure for the repeal of the
paper duty by such a commanding majority—(laughter)—
as should compel the Peers to pass it also.
Mr. V. SCULLY said•that though he admired the speech
of the hon. and learned member for Plymouth as an able
exposition of constitutional law, he could not agree in the
conclusions at which the hon. and learned gelitleman had
arrived with regard to the resolutions before the house,
which he thought were all that could to desired at the pi e
sent moment. He did not regard those resolutions as final,
but simply as an initiatory step in a bolder course. With
respect to the proposed repeal of the duty on paper, it was
so difficult a quest ion that even he was not able to see his
way through it, and he did not vote at all upon it, and left
the house unable to make up his mind upon it. Should the
house, however, bring the repeal of the paper duty on again,
he should certainly vote for its repeal. (Hear.)
Mr. LEATHAM disapproved of the course taken by the
Government on this question, and upon other questions.
He wished to know whether the hon. gentleman supposed
that the debate on the Reform Bill was of a nature to raise
this house in the estimation of the public. If hon. gentle-
men road the opinions of the public press, they would find
that this house was held in utter contempt, and that that
was also the opinion of their constituents and the public. A
grave issue had been raised, and efforts were made to effect
a compromise upon it between the Cabinet and the House of
Lords. If the House of Commons gave way, then they
would lose the right to be regarded as faithful representa-
tives of the people. (Hear.) Reference had been made to
precedents; but on this occasion %large remission of taxation
which was proposed by that house was rejected by the other
House of Parliament. By what precedents, he was at a loss
to know, did the House of Lords take the course they had
taken on this occasion ? By. what right did they interfere ?
It was proved that the House of Commons had hitherto ever
shown itself ready to defend its own privileges, and he
hoped the house would now be prepared to take its stand
and assert its rights. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. B. OSBORNE said that, with all submission to the
Speaker and to the house in general, he could not help
thinking that on the present occasion the house cut a very
humiliating figure. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord who
moved these resolutions—and certainly they were not reso-
lutions which were
" Sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,"
(cheers)—the noble lord made a speech which, if it meant
anything at all, was, in the shape of a defence of the House
of Lords, nothing more than an attack upon his own Mini-
stry. (Cheers) The noble lord was followed by his hon.
and learned friend the member for Plymouth, and ho must
say that to his mind, and he thought to the mind of the
house generally, the speech of his hon. and learned friend
did credit to him as a lawyer and honour to him as a states-
man. He had expected that some morales on the other side,
well fitted for the task, would at least have paid the house,
if not his hon. and learned friend, the compliment to answer
that lucid speech, which had exhausted every argument
upon the question. (Hear.) Ho lamented to find that, after
ex-
hibited,
all the research which his hon. and learned friende
hadhad evi •
and all the painstaking labour which
h
dently given to the subject, the speech was ot followed by
any conclusion. (Hear, hear.)
i
friend's motion was wi
thatthdra at meeting
the
i s hen:ea
Liberal party. Of whom
great a appeared
tLiberal party consisted
pposition cheers.) But he
i ht be to be beaten
upon was at a loss to conjecture. {0
thought that, however distasteful
ts to a direct issue. (Hear, hear.)
brought his arguments
it
t was might
bound to n
upon a division, the hon. gentleman have
The two parts of the
question, the financial and constitu-
tional, had been very much mixed up together. To the re-
peal
of the
gave
a vote was from the first hostile, and he
never paper datiesfor he
measure which he deemed more
rash, reckless, and improper. (Opposition cheers.) But at
aTrthyeyrarteeptehaelehdouthsee regarddpiadpnerotduty. It was true that the 53 it in that light. (Hear.).
majority on the second reading had dwindled down to nine
on the third reading, but that was no argument for the
House of Lords. It was sufficient for the House of
Lords that the paper duty was repealed by a
majority of the House of Commons. (Hear,
hear.) Then came the constitutional question. He

Lords had acted rightly ; but it was strictly uuconstitu.-

tional. (Hear, hoar.) No one had attempted to answer they
hon. and learned member for Plymouth, who had shown

conclusively that all thoprecedents adduced in another place
were just worth nothing at all. (Hear, hear.) He believed
that this house was living in a fool's paradise. (Cheers.)
They were thinking that the people were paying no attention
to these proceedings, and they talked of their apathy. There
might be something in their apathy at the present moment;
but he believed that apathy might be very nearly allied to
contempt. (Cheers.) Did the course which they had taken,
not on this occasion only, but upon another occasion—did
their shuffling conduct with regard to reform conduce to
the credit and respectability of constitutional government.
(Hear, hear.) They had the noble lord coming, there and
making, he agreed, a very adroit, a very clever, and a very
satisfactory speech as far as both sides of the house were
concerned. It would be all very well if there was no public
out of doors watching their proceedings. (Hoar, hear.)
What would the public say? What were the resolutions?
The noble lord talked of a dignified course. The resolutions
might be dignified, but they were not grammatical. (Cheers
and laughter.) How could hon. gentlemen opposite, who sat
there in snlemn silence, as if they were attending the funeral
of the British constitution—(cheers)—how could they recon-
cile 1:-..emselves on the score of dignity with the grammar of
the third resolution? He would not insult the house by read-
ing it. lion. members had asked him what it meant.
s v7l
It was meant to pitch up some discord, and so eager and
willing were the Gov,ctrnment to patch up these differences,
that they did not scrttp,:
to accept an ungrammatical resolu-
tier.. (Cheers) But let th‘.l house remember that, however
they might throw dust in ea,-,h others' eyes, they could not
throw dust in the eyes of the constituencies of the country.
(Hear, hear.) He had no inter:
ti(,:n of mixing himself np in
this debate until he heard the excE7l:-
ent speech of the hon.
and learned member for Plymouth, butt
2.. re should deem him-
self unworthy of holding a place in the .11011se of Commons
if he did not rise as soon as he was able to' testify his thanks
to the hon, gentleman, who at least had sh.gvi•n himself to
be a worthy British member of Parliament, and given
utterance to truly -British sentiments in a way' which
denuded to his own credit and to the honour of ths't .
ouse.
(Cheers.)
Mr. JAMES said he was not at all surprised tilt,* ,ne
member of the Opposition side hadtaken part in this die--
cussion, because if he had advocated the same policy an
they. did—namely, to support the House of Lords in this--
which, if it were their abstract right, he could
not help
believing was a great stretch of their prerogative,—he too
would have remained perfectly silent. He agreed nub his
hon. friend the member for Liskeard that the resoNtions
did not appear to be
"-- sieklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,'
and he would follow up the quotation as most apposite—,
"And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry
And lose the name of action."
(Cheers.) Beyond all question, a more lame and impotent
conclusion could not have been derived from any resolu-
tions. (Hear, hear.) He ventured to think that as leader
of the house, to whom the honour of the house was confided,
the noble lord was the proper person to have come forward
as the vindicator of these rights and privileges. Mr. Pitt
did so, and on the last occasion, in the case of Stockdale
and Hansard, the noble lord the member for the city
asserted the privileges of the house. But upon other
grounds than as leader of the house and the person en-
trusted with their confidence was the noble lord bound to
vindicate their privileges. The conduct of the Ii Buse of
Lards had paralyzed the whole or a great portion o.f the
financial policy of her Majesty's Government. (Hear, hear.)
These resolutions appeared to him to be a poor and paltry'
compromise of opinions in the Cabinet, and not dictated by
a regard for the policy of the country. (Hear, hear) Ho
concurred in the tribute of admiration which had been paid
by the hon. member for Liskeard to the able speech of the
hon. and learned member for Plymouth. (Hear, hear.)
His hon. friend had exhausted the question of privilege,
and ho did not propose to trouble the house with any re-
marks upon it. But, in withdrawing the amendient of
which he had given notice, he wished to state that ho did so
in order to throw the whole responsibility on the Govern-
ment, who had assumed it, and who, in the most sorry
manner, proposed to vindicate these privileges. (Hear.)
This was no question of party politics ; it was no question of
policy at all. It was not a question which side of the house
was to occupy the Treasury bench; a more vital question,
compared with which all questions of policy sank into insig-
' nificance, was involved in the discussion of that evening.
Our 'system of taxation had been, as every one acquainted
with the constitutional history of the country knew, the
battlefield of the liberties and privileges of the House of
Commons. The most eloquent speakers and the ablest
writers had struggled and had suffered for that cause; and
when these events became history it would be a degradation
to the Government of the day that they allowed impunity
to that which, being a stretch of prerogative, had become
a usurpation, and satisfied themselves' with a meagre and
• paltry resolution. (Hear, hear.)
• The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Sir, be-
fore you put the question I wish to take the liberty of ad-
dressing a few words to the house with reference in particu-
lar to an expression which has been used, and I must say
not unnaturally used, by the hon. and learned gentleman
who has just sat down. It appears to be the determination
of one moiety of this hoibe that there shall be no debate
upon the constitutional principles which are involved in
this question ;:and I must say that considering that gentle.-
Been opposite are upon this occasion the partisans of a
• gigantic innovation—(cheers)—the most gigantic and the
most dangerous that has been attempted in our times—(re-
newed cheering)—l may compliment them upon the pru-
dence that they show in resolving to be its silent partisans.
(Loud cheers.) I should like to know with what language
and in what tones those who assume the name of Conserva-
tive politicians would argue in support of a great encroach-
, ment by one house of the Legislature upon the other.
(Hear.) I agree with the hon. gentleman the member for
• Liskeard that there are two questions involved in this mat-
; ter, the repeal of the paper duties-4 am glad to see that
there is some tendency to a movement on the other side—
; (cheers and laughter) [At this moment Sir J. Pakington,
who, with Mr. Disraeli, had been for some time absent
from the house, entered and took his usual seat upon the
front Opposition bench]—the question of the repeal of the
• paper duties, and the constitutional question respecting the
rights of the houses of Parliament. I join, I must confess, in
the just compliments which have been paid to the temperate
argument made by the hon. and learned member for Ply-
mouth (hoar, hear), and I frankly own that it appears to MO
that he does not deserve the censure bestowed upon him by
a subsequent speaker for the withdrawal of his amendment,
and that upon grounds which I will venture respectfully to
state. The hon. and learned gentleman who has just sat
down says that there has been a poor and paltry compromise
in the Cabinet. Now, the question comes to be, in the first
place, what is the language, what is thepurport of the reso-
lutions that are before the house ? Well, in view of those re-
solutions as they stand, I am bound to say that gea.nnot re e,
fuse to them a cordial support (hear, hear), because they
contain a most mild and temperate declaration, in entire
conformity with the speech of my noble friend who moved
them (some slight cries of " Oh, oh I")—they contain, at
any rate, in themselves a most mild and temperate declara-
tion, but at the same time an intelligible and firm declara-
tion, as far as verbal expression goes, of the rights of the
House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) It has been justly said
I hat if the rights of the House of Commons are to be vindi-
cated, the question has to be considered whether they are to
be vindicated by words or to be vindicated in action. (Hear,
hear.) So far as vindication in words goes, that proposed by
her Majesty's Government is, I think, a good and a sound
vindication ; but in answer to the challenge of the hon. and
learned member for Marylebone, a challenge which he has
a perfect right to deliver, I do not scruple to say that, in my
opinion, this house would do well to vindicate and establish
its rights by action (loud cheers) ; and, without in the least
degree imputing blame to, or finding fault with, the terms
of the proposal of the Government, I reserve to myself en-
tire freedom to adopt any mode which may have the slightest
hope of success for vindicating by action the rights of this
house. (Renewed cheering.) Ido not think that at this mo-
ment the question of precedent requires to be further
argued. In the presence of members of the committee who
sit on the other side of the house, the hon. and learned mem-
ber for Plymouth has, with great conciseness, but at the
penalty
a
same time with great clearness (hear), and I think with
conclusive force, gone through the list of those pretended
precedents (hear), and has shown that there is not one of
them that affords a rag or a shred of covering for the recent
proceeding of the House of Lords. (Rear, hear.) Now don't
let us be lost in discussions about the mere privileges
of this house. The privileges of the Houses of Parliament
are the formal dross in which their real right are shrouded.
Your privilege goes far beyond the essential limit of your
rights. Your privilege coversi n name 20 things with re-
gard to which you cannot establish a substantial claim.
owiultdhnaofteune tyiloluatweloyualdllonwotthaleiHowoutgeomf in-
terfereLoorindstetrfoere
a t
withel
You w
local rate; you would not allow to interfere with a
and absolutely of those supposed precedents which
y ;
have been printed, and properly printed, perhaps, by the
committee, bearing on this constitutional question—of
those supposed precedents some relate to measures whioh do
nothing more as regards their substance than prohibit the
import or export of some article; but because the vio-
lation of the law was attended, perhaps, with a penalty,
perhaps With a forfeiture, they are paraded as questions
affecting the privilege of the House of Commons. I am not
finding fault with the course taken by the House of Com-
mons, which has.found it expedient to assert its privilege
largely, in order that it might stand rigidly upon that pre-
cedent where substantial rights were involved. The House
of Lords has pursued the same course, and I think with
equal wisdom, for these privileges of the House of Commons
are not admitted by the House of Lords. In the year 1640
the House of Lords did make a declaration which undoubt-
edly condoms as strongly as any member of this house could
wish it to condemn the late act of the House of Lords in
rejecting the Paper Duties Bill, because they did then,state
that they would not meddle, no, not so much as to advise,
in the matter of supply, which belongs properly and natu-
rally to us. But at the time they made that declaration they
did it because they had, in fact, another form of innovation
in view. On that great occasion, in the first session of the
short Parliament of the spring of 1846, they had an object