The Sun.
London, England, 1835-02-20 00:00:00

had acted as Speaker for six Sessions, and he asked its
permission to retire. I think that the Right Hon. Gentle-
man will admit, that I was not one of the most grudging of
those who offered their tribute of approbation and praise
to that Right Honourable Gentleman. ( Hear, hear.) I
bore my testimony to his conduct, during the sitting of
Parliament, and I believe that he behaved in the most ex-
emplary manner. If he had any party bias he did no: at-
tempt to shew it, nor was there that danger to be appre-
hended from its indulgence then when it was a weak party
that might happen now. In 1832, the Right Honourable
Gentleman having retired, and having obtained by Act of
Parliament his retiring pension, he was elected Speaker the
following session. I know not what the objects or feelings
'of those who proposed him were, but for my part I felt
exceedingly solicitous far the character of the Reformed House
of Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) There is no doubt, in
point of intelligence, in point of honesty, and in point of
integrity, it was far superior to any other House that
had ever sat, but I did not feel sure that, having a great
number of members who had not turned their attention to
Parliamentary forms, there might not be some deficiency in
those forms, which would become the subject of undeserved
obloquy. From these grounds I departed from my views,
which exactly were, that the Speaker should be
the organ and representative of the House.—( Hear, hear..) I
shall now turn to a question, which, I think, by far the most
important, namely, how far public principle is ii.volved in our
present choice. I think it is necessary to place in that chair a
man who is zealous on behalf of the liberties of the people,
zealous in behalf of popular prerogatives, to be the organ of
this House with the Crown, to represent their feelings firmly,
zealously, and without fear of offending, or a wish to conciliate
those who may have the power of dispensing favours. This is
the doctrine of the reformed House of Commons, which it
is especially necessary to vindicate at the present moment.
That Parliament which, I shall say, was as loyal towards the
Crown as any Parliament that ever existed, was suddenly dis-
solved. It is the well-known prerogative of the Crown,
and that prerogative was asserted ; but when the naked
sword was drawn, it was necessary to have the shield and
buckler of popular privileges.--(Great cheering.) I know of
no right more sacred or less to be infringed, than that of this
House placing its representative in the Chair. We
have all been sent here by persons, not because they like our
manners, but because they agree with us in our political senti-
ments, and because they think that we will reform abuses.—
( Cheers.) So I say. Let us, let all who wish to see reform
of abuses, have a Speaker in this house to aid us in those reforms.
This was the doctrine in ancient times, when the prerogative
was also asserted, as in the time of Charles the Second, when
an attempt was made to force upon the House of Commons
a Speaker favourable to the Court. The attempt was
resisted, and successfully resisted, and I will call the at-
tention of the House for a moment to the sentiments ex-
pressed by Sir Herbert Johnstone and Mr. Sergeant Williams
upon that occasion. The sentiments of those eminent men
were very different from those which I have heard to-day.—
( Cheers.) Sir H. Grimstone asked with indignation, " shall
we not have the liberty of choosing our own servant to do our
own work as we wish it done ?" And again, when he called
upon " every man to consider the right of the people of
England."—( Great cheering.) This is what I say on the
present occasion. I also say, let every man here consider
the rights of the Commons of England.—( Great cheering.)
We have for our choice a man of the character I have
mentioned, who, in addition to his legal and historical
knowledge adds a sound knowledge of the Constitution
and the principles of the liberty of the people
( Hear ) Let us give the country an earnest that
we mean to set zealously about Reform—that we are not going
to deceive the people by mock Reform—let us show that. with
undoubted loyalty to the Crown, we are determined to main-
tain the privileges of the Commons.- --(Tremendous cheering.)
Sir ROBERT PEEL then rose, and was received with
loud cheers. He said—l will pursue the course generally
adopted by every one who has addressed the House, namely,
that of limiting- the discussion on the present occasion to the
matter in question. I appear here as a witness to perfarm a
task I feel to be wholly unnecessary, that of confirming, so far as
my- testimony can, the accuracy of my Right Hon. Friend ( Sir
C. M. Sutton.) As to what took place previous to my arrival
in this country, I will say nothing*. I will speak only with
regard to what I know myself.' In undertaking the duty
assigned to me by his Majesty, or at least shortly after-
wards—l had an interview with my Right Honour-
able Friend, Sir Charles Manners Sutton, and informed him
of the task I had undertaken, and of the principles upon which
I was determined to proceed, namely, that I should seek for
aid in the performance of that task from every man whom I
thought could unite with me consistently with his honour.
I asked him, respecting, as I did, his abilities and experience
in public life, whether it was consistent with his feelings and
sense of duty to enter into the service of the Crown ?
( Cheers.) Sir, I received from the Right Honourable
Gentleman this answer, that he did not seek employment
in an official capacity in the service of the Crown. There is a
defect in that which I will supply, as probably that was the
main reason which induced him at such a time to
withhold his services from his Majesty : he stated
I have served in the Chair for a period of 18 years, and I do
feel that if I were now to enter-into the arena of discussion, I
should, after so long a service, and my personal connec-
tion with the authority of that situation, I should
run the risk of lowering it, if I appeared in the
House of Commons as a member of the Government.—
. (Cheers.). That was the. reason, Sir, my friend assigned to
me for his willingness, nay, his desire, to withhold his ser-
vices upon that occasion.—( Cheers.) When I understood
from my Right Honourable Friend that he was not willing
upon that ground to enter into the services of the Crown as a
Member of the House of Commons,-4earing that there might
be something that might lower his authority if he became a
member of the Government at a time when it was likely
that there would be a stormy discussion, I did not feel
it to be my duty to consult my Right Hon. Friend either as
to the formation of the Government or its policy---( Great
cheering)—and not one word passed between my Right Hon.
Friend and myself upon the subject.—( Hear.) I then asked
him whether he would wish again to fill the Chair of the
House of Commons in case of a dissolution.—( Cheers.) My
Right Honourable friend said, that he had no wish or feeling
upon the subject, that it was a matter on which he could have
no personal interest, from the liberality towards him of the
House of Commons.—(Cheers..) At the same time he stated
that the impediment of ill health which had led him, to
meditate retirement no longer existed, and if I thought the
public had claims on a continuation of his services, so
long as health would permit him to exercise his duties,
he would not withhold himself from the House of Commons.
Such were the circumstances, and such the course pur-
sued by my Right Honourable Friend, and the question
now is, whether, since he has been proposed, and professed
his willingness to serve the office of Speaker, it is right and
fitting that this House should select another ?—( Cheers.)
The Noble Lord opposite_says that we have a right to choose
whom we please. I admit that proposition to the fullest extent.
But I say that the Noble Lord who professes to be loudest in
favour of the public good ought not to insist upon an abstract
right • but ought to consider, in an instance like the present,
whether that right can be exercised with justice.—( Cheers.)
The Noble Lord says that he would bring for'vvard precedents :
in all his historical research he can only produce against
the Reformed Parliament and r the Government of
Lord Grey—( Hear, hear, hear)—the example of Lord
North in the session when Sir Fletcher Norton—a worthy
example truly—( Great cheering)—the great objection to Sir
Fletcher Norton being a speech which he had made at the bar.
The Noble Lord cited a case in question—that of Lord
North ; that Lord North answered to this. Did
Lord North, however, present a case parallel to this?
Did not Lord North substitute that by reason of iil-
health ? Sir Fletcher Norton resigned the duties of the Chair
—such was the case under Lord North's Administration. Lord
North was so convinced that whatever might abstractedly be
the right of exercising this privilege, he must be com-
pelled to invent some other pretence for not giving a
true reason for why he did so. The Noble Lord also
has another precedent. But if the Noble Lord has that prece-
dent, he must have concocted that precedent when he thought
the change had arrived which rendered it imperative for a
new Speaker to be elected.—( Hear, hear.) But I ask the
Noble Lord whether this charge was not instituted against my
Hon. Friend in the belief that he had been instrumental in
instigating a dissolution of Parliament? The Noble Lord
has cited another case, also that of Sir Edward Seymour,
The House of Commons then elected a Speaker.—( Here an
Hon. Member observed, " Against the wishes of the
Crown.") Against—against 1 I care not who it would
be against, though I ought to beg pardon for any apparent
warmth which may be observable. My situation is far e:,„
onerous for me to set err example of warmth in the douse.
The case which the Noble Lord has cited, is :10 case at all.
The Crown wished to elect a Speaker, an^..iiief was elected by the
House in his stead ; but I ask the House and the
Noble Lord, whether the case which has been adduced has
any reference sne state of the circumstances at present,
and :.;ere 'not totally different from them ? Not in
the least doubting your right, as far as the office is
concerned— but is it just, or is it fair towards
the individual, looking at it in a sense of common justice and
common fairness, that the .Right Hon. Gentleman who has
received that election during six successive Parliaments
—against whom no charge has been brought—whose
health permits him to exercise its most arduous duties
and who, without one motive-of personal interest to gratify has
consented to undertake the performance of its labours? The
question then resolves itself whether you will permit a speaker
to suffer by six weeks of uncontradicted calumny against him ?
(Cheers.) I say never contradicted by himself on authority,
and which calumnies have aroused the feelings of indignation
which have been displayed throughout the House.—
( Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, I again repeat, may I ask the
Noble Lord, and I am sure the candour of the Noble Lord will
instantly avow it, whether this change was not instituted from
the supposition that my Right Hon. Friend had been instru-
mental in promoting a dissolution of Parliament ?
Several voices—" No doubt."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL--My impression extended no
further than that he attended in the formation of that Go-
vernment, which, from its position, could do no otherwise.
My grounds of objection were certainly founded on the sup-
position that he had been a party to that advice by which the
late Parliament was dissolved.
Sir R. PEEL resumed.—lf this was their impression, I hope
the Members of this House will have the manliness to keep
to their terms of opposition, but if they had determined to
oppose on most other grounds, I have that confidence in
their honour that they will relinquish their opposition.—
( Hear, hear.) What are the arguments which have
been used in favour of the other side of the question ?
One Honourable gentleman says that the Speaker should
always represent the majority of the House. Is that a princi-
ple which ought to be established?—( No, no.) Is it wise that
a Speaker should be seeking favour with a majority of the

House of Commons, to secure his election ?—( Hear, hear.
Is it not infinitely wiser to look at his qualifications for office
rather than to look at his political opinions ? But that question
was decided by the first Reformed Parham, tit. Lord GreY
and his adherents having a great majority, th ught it
right to elect the Right Hon. Gentleman whom the same party

new oppose. You had the power, then, to enforce your opi-
nions, for you then had a majority, and why did you derart from

the principle you now lay down ? The first decision
of the Reformed Parliament carrhs this conclusion,

that the House did not feel itself called upon to elect
a Speaker whose opinions were in accordance with the
majority of the House.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The Noble
14. rd says "we wanted to avail ourselves of the ad-

vantages of the Right Honourable Gentleman's character,
abilities and experience, and therefore we elected him. But
that man has served us ; he has done his work ; he has an-

swered our object; and, with signal ingratitude, I must say,
—(Loud and repeated cheering)--we will now dismiss
him, after we had established the principle or electing
a S,,eaker not of our own opinions, when we had: the power
to reject him. After we have availed ourselves of his ser-
vices, and after he has co-operated with us in estab!ish-
ing the eharLter of the first reformed Parliament for
decorum, we will unfairly take the very first opportunity
to subject him to disgrace."—( Cries of " No, no.") No, no,
indeed ; for no disgrace can be heaped upon a man who has
done his duty. It is beyond the reach of a majority to do
that; but it is not beyond the reach of a majority to injure
the character of the House.—( Hear, hear.) The Honour-
able Gentleman who seconded the motion with so much
ability and candour, has remarked that it is of great im-
portance, as there i 3 a probability of two or three stormy
debates likely to arise in reference to the present Government,
and the dismissal of the last, that we should have an impartial
Speaker. Look then who has he proposed ?—( Loud cries
of " Hear, hear.") I took down the words—" It is
of importance to have an impartial mediator to still the
raping storm which may be raised by the conflicts which are
likely to ensue between exasperated parties." And whom have
you selected? One who was a distinguished member of the
very government whose principles and removal are to come
under discussion. If impartiality is the object, select whom
you please, but certainly not one of those whose conduct is to
be canvassed.—( Hear.) There are two candidates ; one
who has served the office eighteen years during seven parlia-
ments, and who declined office on the ground that he thought
it would have a tendency to lower the authority of the
Chair. The other candidate is a member of the late
Government, of whom I will not utter one word of disrespect,
but of whose impartiality we have had no opportunity to judge
in this House. Can you doubt cf the preference you ought
to give to either ? The House has a most important duty to
pei form, and should be as careful not to do injustice to any
individual, as not to lessen its own character and influence.
I shall resist the motion, then, of the Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Denison) on individual and personal grounds; and as this is
the only office which the House has the power of conferring,
let us avail ourselves in the selection we may make of the
example which reformed and unreformed Parliaments hal'e
afforded us. The only objection made to the appointment
of the Right Hon. Gentleman ( Sir C. Sutton) is that he at-
tended certain Councils which were instrumental in dismissing
the old Government and in forming a new one. All the
testimonies that have been given of kis tried impartiality
and his abilities remain quite unimpeached. But if be
is to be blamed for acting in the capacity of a Privy Council-
lor, the House should make a rule disqualifying him for
that office. A great mistake pervades the public mind as to
the duties of a Privy Councillor; it consists not merely of the
members of Government ; others besides are called on to attend
the Council. No advice is given in it. But if the Speaker is
in town when a Privy Council is convened, and his advice is
asked, what right has he to r fuse such advice ? It is erroneous,
however, to say that the Right Hon. Gentleman contributed
to the formation of the present Government, on the dis-
missal of the former one. I shall vote for the Hon. Gentleman,
because I think that the precincts of the chair of this House
ought not to be invaded to try the strength of political parties.
—( Hear, hear.) I shell resist the motion to appoint
the Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh, on the ground that
the Member for the University of Cambridge posseses superior
qualifications from his long practice in the duties of Speaker,
and because his rejection, for the reasons advanced against his
appointment would tend to disparage as well the character of
the office of Speaker as of the House of Commons itself.
The Right Hon. Baronet sat down, and was loudly cheered
for some minutes.

Mr. COBBETT rose amidst loud cries of " Question,
question." The Hon. Member stated that the last he had
heard of his constituents was, an Address to his
Majesty, thanking him for having dismissed the
late Ministers. (Laughter.) He would do nothing
which had a tendency to bring them back again. There
were a great many reasons why he would not ♦ote for Mr.
Abercromby, and one was, that the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Member for Edinburgh, for whom, personally, lie had
great respect, was one of those who clandestinely pushed for-
ward and carried the inhuman Poor Law Bill.—(Laughter.)
Lord MORPET Ifthen rose, amidst loud cries of Qua.

tion, question." He said he would limit his observa-
tions to what seemed to him to be peculiar to his own
,1
position.--( Hear, hear, hear.) His Noble Friend who had ',,
opened the discussion of to-day so ably had reminded the :-'
House that at the election of the Speaker of the last Par- ',V'
• liament, he (Lord M.) had had the distinguished' '
honour of proposing the successful candidate for that high &I'
pointment ; and true it was, that he rested his recommendation
of the appointment of Sir Charles Manners Sutton on
his eminent fitness for the distharge of the duties and digi
ties of his office. —( Hear, hear.) Not one syllable-of what
he had then stated did he now repent or retract. On the,
contrary, if the opponents of Sir Charles M. Sutton should
fail in their object, they would at least- have the compensa-
tion of yielding to no unworthy foe, and of knowing that the
high functions of that office would be entrusted to a skilful
guardianship. His limited task at the present moment was
merely to claim for himself as full a share of even and strict
literal consistency as could be assumed by any other Member;
for, g's
upon looking at the fullest records of their proceeding
he found that in the very act of proposing the Right Una;
Gentleman, before he came to any mention of his name he used
this expression, and he should certainly state what that was, be-
cause when his Noble Friend had paid him the compliment
of quoting some expressions of his, he did not happen to include
this. He had stated that, in approaching the object for which
he had risen, he had felt that it was due' to himself to men-
tion, and he was sure the person whom he was about to propose
for the choice of the House, would be the last to complain of
it—that there were circumstances which, at one time, in-
duced him to contemplate a different arrangement ; but that°
circumstances to which he had but slightly alluded had not
arisen. Those circumstances, as were known to many, hari net
arisen in consequence of the absence from his place of the
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Edinburgh. The
estimate he then held of Sir C. Sutton, and the respect for the
abilities—the character and the career oftthis Right Bee'
Friend—remained the same.—( Loud cheers. I
Lord DUDLEY STUART arose amidst the loudest cries
of" Question, question," " Divide, divide," and said that he
should certainly vote for Sir Charles Manners Sutton, because,
however painful it might be to him to vote in opposition to those
with whom he usually acted, he considered that nothing had been
stated that could justify any man in supposing that Sir Charles
Manners Sutton had forfeited the confidence of the House.
There was then a constant cry of " Divide, divide," amid°
which

Mr. ROBINSON rose and said, they would be doing 1112
act of injustice to the Right Hon. Gentleman—(" No, no")-
HO (leaned that it was a question of public principle ;—if the
chair were vacant, he knew no gentleman for whom he would
vote with more pleasure, than the Hon. Member for Edinlyargb;
The speaker was interrupted by loud cries of " Divide)," anu
" Withdraw," which were kept up without intermis,;ion after
he sat down.

Sir R. PEEL said a few words, but not one was heard.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
' For Mr. Abereromby
For Sir C. M. Sutton

Majority for Mr. Abercromby lO
The question was then put, and carried, that Mr. Aber-
cromby be elected Speaker.
The announcement of the Numbers was received with 10ua
cheers. These were heard without the House, and were
loudly responded to by the assembled multitude.
On our return to the gallery we found
Sir a. PEEL on his legs, who stated, amid much confusion'
"chat after what had taken place, he felt bound to defer to thl
expression of the opinion. of the House on that occasion, aD
we understood the Right Hon. Baronet to add that it only
remained for him to congratulate the Right Hon. Gentterns°.
(Mr. Abercromby) on his election to the Chair.
Mr. H LTME asked what course the Right Hon. Baronet
intended to pursue with respect to the proceeding% of the
House for the next few days ?
Sir R. PEEL said, that the House would F-4:4; each day, iD
order that there might be sworn in a suffi:zient number
Members to admit of his Majesty's speech, being received °II
Tuesday n

The -House adjourned at half-past six o'clock.

BIRTH.
On the 18th inst., in Gower-street, Bedford-square, the wife of
William Porter, Esq., of a daughter. '

MARRIED.
On the 18th inst., at Bromley Lodge, Captain Robert Patull°'
H.C.S. to Mary Erskine, daughter of the late Captain Rolla
On the 18th inst., at Leamington Spa, the Rev. Edward Lew's
of Llambeder, Breconshire, to Charlotte Auriol, youngest daughter
of the late Edward Auriol Ilay Drummond, D. D. , Dean of Boo'
in., and brother of the late Earl of Kinnoull.
On the 16th inst., at Hartburn Church, Northumberland, by thea
Rev. John Hodgson, M.R.S.L., having been previously Tna,Fic
according to the rites of the Roman Catholic religion, Henry 1!.-").ne;
tonnier Hawkins, Esq., eldest son of the late Anthony Montonnl_
Hawkins, Esq., M.D., of Upper Brook-street, and of The Gael,
Monmouthshire, to Jane, only daughter of James Fenwicke, Esq"
of Longwitton Hall, Northun.berland.

DIED.
On the 14th inst., in Brompton-square, aged 41, H. T. Bou
Esq., eldest son of the Rev. G. Buniton, Rector of Oxentiol"'
Northamptonshire.

On the 13th inst., Ellen, relict of John Whitley;
near Warrington.
tisly
On the 18th inst., Mrs. Mary Francis, of the Terrace, Ken
town, relict of J. Francis, Esq., in her 87th year.
Rev. -
On the 6th inst., at Alkham, in his 79th year, the te
Smith, Rector of arlton, in Lincolnshire, and for 55 years Colie
and, Vicar of Alkham and Capel Le Ferne ; and sequestrator of t
adjoining parish of Ewell, near Dover, in
,Kent.
London : Printed and Published by MIPIDO YOUNG. of
112. Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Striuld, in the COw'
of Middlesex. Esq., of Ashtoo,