The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-02 00:00:00

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Lord J. RUSSELL moved that upon Thursday after
Easter until Whitsuntide, the Government orders of the
day should have precedence of notices of motion.
. Col. W. PATTEN strongly objected to the motion The
fact was, the present Government had gradually encroached,
on the privileges of private members, who were cc nsequently
deprived of their legitimate rights. He considered that ie
the motion before the house a very dangerous innovation
was sought to Le introduced, and there was nothing in the
state of Governmental:measures or public business that
required the establishment of a novel precedent.
Lord PALNERSTON considered that hon. members
had no just ground of complaint as regarded the motion of
his noble friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, as that
motion originated simply from a desire on the part of her
Majesty's Government to despatch public business. (Hear,
hear.) He contended that the motion grew out of
the emergency of the time, and was in conformity with the
requirements of the public service. (Hear, hear.) In fact,
all that was asked by the motion was merely to consent
in an early period of the session to that which
they would feel called on to do at a later period.
(Hear, hear.) Ire put it to the good sense of the
house whether, under the present state of public business,
when the Government had been obliged to bring forward
measures that were usually deferred till a later period,
they should not accede to a motion like the present. The
object of that motion was to afford the house an
opportunity of disposing of business indispensable
to the interests of the public service. Hon, members might
consider that there was an attempt to encroach unduly en the
privileges of private members, but the fact was,
and it wovld be demonstrated, that the Government
had only Monday and a part of another day
to bring forward its measures. (Oh, oh.) He repeated
that statement; for although Friday stood as a Government
day, according to the programme of public business, still the
fact was that private members availed themselves of the
opportunity afforded them by the technical forms of the
house, and brought forward motions which sometimes led
to protracted discussions, and delayed the pro-
gress of Government measures. -He had showed
on a previous occasion that private members
should not be deprived of the means of bringing forward
their motions, but at the same time it was only due to Go-
vernment, which was charged with the conduct of public
business to afford them ample opportunity of bringing their
measures forward, and to carry them through without un•
necessary delay. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI considered that the motion was of an
unconstitutional character, and not required by any special
exigency of the public service. He believed that if adopted
it would be the means of introducing into the
business of the House of Commons a precedent that
might be dangerous. With regard to the feeling of the
house, he thought that Government had no reason to com-
plain, because there had been every disposition exhibited
by hon. members to afford facility for the progress of Go-
vernment bills. He contended that the present motion
was uncalled for.

(LEFT SITTING)

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. '

THIS DAY.

The April Sessions of the Central Criminal Court ccm-
menced this morning at the Sessions House, Old Bailey,
before the Right Ron. the Lord Mayor, the Common Ser-
geant (in the absence of the Recorder), Mr. Alderman
Lawrence, Mr. Alderman Condor, Mr. Alderman and She-
riff Phillips, and Alderman and Sheriff Gabriel, the Under
Sheriffs, Messrs. Eagleton and Gammon, and other civic
authorities.

The calendar, owing to the length of time since last 'ses-
sions, is numerically heavy, but none of the cases are of a
very serious or grave character.
The grand jury having been sworn,
The Common Sergeant (as Deputy-Recorder) proceeded
to deliver his charge, in the course of which, having ad-
verted to the bill before Parliament for the abolition
of the grand jury system, the learned judge said he was
not one of those who agreed with the arguments of those
who supported the change. The administration of the law
in this country was very different to that of other countries.
From time immemorial the administration:of the law had
been in the hands of the people themselves, and not in the
hands solely of official and professional persons, and he was
sorry to see any changes introduced which would interfere
with what might be considered the natural currents of just ice
and place it in the hands solely of official and professional men.
With theselobservations he referred to the calendar, but he
did not think that any of the cases were of sufficient im-
portance to call for any very lengthened remarks from him.
The number of prisoners was 113 ; there were only
two cases involving loss of life, but neither of them
involved the serious charge of murder. In one case an aged
lady had been run over by a Hansom cab in Oxford-street
and killed, and the other case was where two youths were
racing on ponies, where a child who was in: the road was
knocked down and killed ; with regard to the lady, who was
79 years of age, on the Ist of January was passing across
Oxford-street, it snowing at the time, when she was knocked
down by a Hansom cab, when five or six of her ribs were
broken, and from the injuries of which she died, and the
only question was whether there had been such negligence
as to amount to manslaughter, and the same question would
arise in the second case. There was also a very long case
in which some foreigners were charged with conspiracy in
obtaining money to the extent of £3OO under false pre-
tences.

The learned Judge having briefly referred to two or
three other cases, dismissed the jury to their room.ll

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—(This Day.)