The Sun.
London, England, 1835-04-10 00:00:00

OATHS ABOLITION BILL.

The Duke of RICHMOND moved that this Bill be read
thire time.

The Earl 6f WICKLOW moved an amendment to the
eighth clause, the object of which was to make the Bill ex-
tend to Ireland. He said that it had been his intention to
propose a clause that would have abolished all oaths to be
taken by persons connected with the gaols and fever hospitals
of Ireland, but as he had not been present when the Bill
went through its. earlier stages, he should not do so now.
The Bill set a precedent which he was sure must be more ex-
tensively followed up, and larger alterations must be made
in the law relating to oaths. He was convinced that in
the course of the next session the Government must take
up the matter. He should, therefore, refrain from pushing
his more extensive amendment, and should confine himself
to the introduction of one word, that would make the
Bill applicable to Ireland. As the clause now stood, it
contained only the words " turnpike roads" and " high-
ways." There were but few of the first, and the last would
not be taken to include roads, at least so he was informed by
the lawyers of Ireland. He, therefore, moved that the word
" roads" be added to the clause.

The Duke of RICHMOND had not the least objection
the proposed alteration.

The Bishop of LONDON said that their Lordships must
not consider their work as done, but must look on what had
been done as encouragement to further labours.—(Hear.)
They must appoint a Committee to inquire into the subject.
The time of the appointment of the Committee would be
when the Government took the matter, as they must do, into
their own hands, and made an extensive alteration of the pre-
sent system, an alteration which was required by the best in-
terests of religion and morality.
After some further conversation, in which Lord Brougham,
the Duke of Richmond, and the Earl of Wicklow took part,
the amendment was inserted, and the clause as amended
agreed to.
WITNESSES' BRIBERY INDEMNITY BILL.
The Earl of MULGR AVE moved that this Bill be com-
mitted, and said that he should not trouble their Lordships
with any observations upon it, as they had already agreed to
the principle of the measure, and the details might be taken
in Committee.

The Earl of WICKLOW was much surprised that the
Noble Earl opposite had introduced such a Bill as this, sitting,
as he did, on a bench that was the property of the Whigs (the
Opposition bench), without any further notice than lie thought
proper to give it. It was true that other Bills of the same
sort had passed their Lordships' House, but then all these
Bills were passed for specific purposes, and particular reasons
were assigned for passing them. A certain advantage was
obtained by these particular Bills; but this Bill was of a dif-
ferent nature—it introduced a new principle as the law of the
land. In the better times of our history, in the better times
of the Whig party, the Whigs did not pursue such conduct.
The first on this subject was introduced in the year 1742. At
that time there was a combination of men of all parties, for
the purpose of driving a most able Minister from public life,
and on succeeding in that, for the purpose of persecuting him
in private life. He need hardly say that he alluded to that
celebrated Minister, Walpole. When the witnesses as to his
conduct were first brought forward they refused to give evi-
dence before the Committee, and a Bill of Indemnity was then
proposed for their security. The proceeding at that time was
so far from being countenanced by the Whigs that it was
justly and forcibly condemned by a great Whig historian, who
called it " an Inquisitorial Bill." The Bill passed the Com-
mons, but when it was brought up to their Lordships' House
it was rejected by a majority of 57 ; the numbers being 52 for
and 109 against it. The Lord Cardigan, though a bitter
enemy of Walpole, denounced it as unconstitutional ; and the
greatest constitutional lawyer that, perhaps, had ever sat on
that woolsack (Lord Hardwicke) gave the same opinion. He
should not take the sense of their Lordships on his objections to
the measure, but he could not let it pass without stating them.
The LORD CHANCELLOR recommended that the Bill
should now be committed, and these objections could be dis-
cussed in the Committee—not at that moment, but after the
Government was formed. In the meantime the Bill might
be printed.
Lord BROUGHAM fully concurred in that suggestion.
In justice to his Noble Friend he ought to remind the Noble
Earl opposite that the Bill had been much discussed—that he
himself had opened it to the House last year, when it under-
went much discussion. There certainly was one clause in the
present Bill that was as ill-framed as he had ever seen a
clause in his life, and it had been agreed that the present
clause should be fully considered in Committee. The Noble
Earl opposite had been so anxious to make an historical paral-
lel that he not only altered and amended, but had made a little
history for the purpose—( A laugh)—for such an extraordinary
combination of parties as the Noble Earl had described in
former days certainly had not taken place in those days, and
he would tell their Lordships why. It was because they were
days in which parties had little principle of any sort to guide
them. He was sure that the Noble Earl's history was not
quite so correctly given as usual, for though true it was that
there were now Tories and Whigs, and so far the two periods
were alike, there was this difference between them, that not
only there were then Tories and Whigs, but sections of Tories
and sections of Whigs, which was not the case in the present
day ; and the questions that divided all these parties were not,
as now, questions of great principles, but questions how power
should be distributed in this great family or the other. Lie was
quite clear in his own mind that if the Noble Earl had really

felt all that he had now stated about the Whigs of the present
time, as compared with those of better times, he would have
stepped forward before, and have said so ; for it was not the
part of a very kind friend to keep back his opinion till it was
too late to be of service ; and if the Noble Earl had stated all
this before, there was no saying what might have been the con-
sequence.—(Laughter.)
The Earl of WICKLOW said that there certainly was
this resemblance between the Whigs of former times and those
of the present, that now they were called the Radical Whigs,
and then they were called the disaffected Whigs.—(A laugh.)
There was some resemblance, too, in the anecdote told of
Pulteney, afterwards Earl of Bath, who, when sent for to
form a coalition Ministry, said that the heads of par ties were
like the heads of snakes—they were uy their tails.—
( Continued laughter.)
Lord 13ROUGT-T was glad that he had given the No-
ble Earl the opportunity of explaining the meaning of his re-
ferences, and of showing where the supposed applicability of
them was to be found. The anecdote just related by the No-
ble Earl, of which he had never heard before, certainly did
show that there was some applicability in the circumstances
of past times to the language of the present times, but he
could not say how far the language was applicable to the
facts.—( Renewed laughter.)
The Earl of MULG RA VE really did not see at this
particular moment the point of the joke about these (the Op-
position) benches being the property of the Whigs. The
objection to the Bill might be urged by the Noble Earl at
a future stage.
The Bill was then committed, and their Lordships ad-
journed.

Ho USE OF COMMONS, APRa •.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at four o'clock, and the House
proceeded to ballot for a Committee to try the merits of the
city of Cork Election petition ; the Members of the Com-
mittee, when elected, were sworn at the table.

The only Members of the late Ministry present were, Mr.
Goulburn, Mr. lorries, and Sir George Clerk.
The most distinguished Opposition Members present were,
Mr. Hume, Mr. Spring Rice, Lord Howiek, and Mr. Ellis.
The House proceeded with private business, and the reports
on several Private Bills were brought hp.
Mr. SPRING RICE said, he wished to state to the House,
that the Noble Lord (Mandeville), who had preferred charges
against a Noble Earl (Gosford), for having interfered in an
election in Ireland, had postponed his motion in an unusual
manner, without giving notice in the House. Several Mem-
bers had come down to the House on the different nights which
had been named by the Noble Lord for bringing on his motion,
for the purpose of defending the Noble Lord who was the ob-
ject of his attack ; but now the Noble Lord had, he under-
stood, left the country, without assigning in the House, in the
usual manner, the reason of postponing his motion.
Mr. SHAW said the proceedings in the House last night
did not afford the Noble Lord an opportunity of stating his
reasons for postponing his motion, and he was suddenly called
by business of importance to Ireland. 4
Lord ACHESON said, in the absence of the Noble Lord
who gave notice of the motion, he should only say that every
charge brought forward against his Noble Relative would be
proved to be unfounded.---( Hear, hear.)
CANTERBURY ELECTION.

Mr. C. BULLER moved that the petition complaining of
the return of Mr. Lushington for Canterbury should be taken
into consideration.

Mr. GOULBURN thought it should be delayed until after
the ballot had taken place on the petitions already presented.
Mr. HUME thought no time should be lost in coming to a
decision.—The motion was agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. GOULBURN the House adjourned
at Five o'Clopk.