The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-16 00:00:00

ought to be Jealous of their privileges in matters of this
kind, it was-the time at which they had now arrived. The
resolution of 1831 was to the effect that before the house
proceeded to a second reading of any money bill a com-
mittee should report to the house whether in any such bill
brought to this house from the House of Lords, or returned
by the House of Lords to this house with amendments,
whereby any pecuniary penalty, forfeiture, or fee should be
authorised, imposed, appropriated, regulated, varied, or ex-
tinguished, the ancient and undoubted privileges of this
house had been interfered with, and if so that this house
should originate such provisions. In 1849 it was resolved
that with respect to any bill such as he had referred to this
house would not insist on its ancient and undoubted privi-
leges in the following cases :—First, when the object of
such pecuniary penalty or forfeiture was to secure the exer-
tion of the act on the punishment or preventing of offences ;
secondly, where secret fees were imposed in respect of be-
nefits taken or services rendered under the act, and in
order to the execution of the act, and were not made pay-
able into the Treasury or Exchequer, or in aid of the public
revenue, and did not form the ground of public ac-
counting by the parties receiving the same either in re•
spect of deficit or surplus ; and thirdly, when such bill
should be a private bill for a local or personal act. He
thought the first of those resolutions apparently removed
the strength of the resolution of 1831 to which he had re-
ferred, but he thought the language of the second resolu-
tion applied to this case. This was a bill the operation of
which would indirectly be in aid of the public revenue, and
therefore the bill should be laid aside, and not entertained
by the house. (Hear.)
The SPEAKER consulted with Mr. Bouverie and Mr. May
for a few minutes, and was apparently in much doubt as to
the question thus suddenly raised.
Mr. BRIGHT said it was very likely that the house
might consider that there was some force in the objection
that had just been made. It was a pity the question had
not been brought under the notice of the Speaker some time
before the second reading of the bill, in order that he might
have looked into the case and been fully prepared to give an
opinion in regard to it. But the hon. and learned gentle-
man was not to be blamed for that ; for his sagacity had
only enabled him to discover the point since the Speaker
took the chair that evening. If it woxli be a convenience
to Mr. Speaker and the house he thought it would be bet-
ter not to proceed with the bill then—(near)---bnt to ad-
journ the consideration of it for a few days, in order that
the Speaker might have time to consider the matter fully.
He (Mr. Bright) should have no objection to the adjourn-
ment being for three months. (A laugh.) They ought to
be careful lest they should establish a precedent which they
might hereafter have occas'on to regret. (Hear.) He would
move that the order for the second reading of the bill should
stand adjourned until that day week.
The SPEAKER—I should certainly desire to be correct
in any opinion which I might give upon a matter of this
sort, which appears to me to involve rather a nice dis-
tinction. (Hear.) As it is very desirable that nothing
should be said without due consideration, I should certainly
prefer the opportunity that would:be afforded by an adjourn-
ment. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. D. SEYMOUR said the objection had only oc-
curred to him while the Speaker was in the chair, or he
should certainly have consulted him first. (Hear, hear.)
Lord R. MONTAGU did not object to the adjournment
of the bill, but thought that the objection taken was un-
founded. The fines imposed by the bill were not made
payable into the Treasury or the Exchequer, or in aid of
the public revenue. At the same time, if the Speaker wished
for time to consider the question, he would move that the
debate be adjourned for a fortnight.
The adjournment was then agreed to.
TITHE COMMUTATION BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
LAW OF PROPERTY BILL.
This bill was considered as amended.
Mr. WALPOLE (for Sir H. CAIRNS) moved the inser-
tion of a clause, the object of which was to put administra-
tors on the same footing as executors.
After a short conversation,
Mr. PAGET moved the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. WALPOLE hoped the hon. gentleman would not
persevere with his motion. He thought the hon. member
would not succeed in his object by the step.
Mr. HADFIELD said that the charges of crown recog-
nisances on the land were a great injury to the revenue in
consequence of the impediments they placed in the way of
the transfer of the land.
After a few words from Sir G. C. LEWIS,
Mr. PAGET withdrew his amendment.
Mr. WALPOLE proposed two amendments, which
would have the effect of making the provisions of the bill
prospective only as far as judgments were concerned.
Mr. MALINS supported the amendments.
The amendments were agreed to.
TENURE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LAND (IRE-
LAND) BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill.
Clause 1 was agreed to without alteration.
On clause 2, which enacts that the bill should be limited
to Ireland,
Colonel DUNNE said it was usual to put this clause at
the end of the bill, and he moved that the clause be post-
poned.
Some discussion ensued as to whether the clause should
be inserted at the end of the bill.
Lord NAAS was of opinion that it would be the most
convenient course that this clause should be put at the be-
ginning instead of the end of the bill.
The clause was then agreed to, as were also clauses up
to 7,

Clause 7 was, after much discussion, in which several
hon. members took part, agreed to.
Clauses 8 and 9 were agreed to. and
The CHAIRMAN reported progress.
THE LOCAL BOARDS OF HEALTH, &c., BILL.
This bill as amended passed through committee, and was
reported to the house.
The Local Government Supplemental Bill passed through
committee.