The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-02 00:00:00

SECOND EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock

THE PARLIAMENT

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
In consequence of a ballot on the Inverness-shire Election
Petition, the gallery was not opened until 20 minutes past
four o'clock.

MEDWAY NAVIGATION BILL. •
Sir E. KNATCHBUL L moved the Order of the day for
resuming the debate upon the Medway Navigation Bill.
Mr. HUM E called the attention of the House to the
resolution of 1826, by which it was agreed that all
committees should report. The cause of justice demanded
that the standing orders of the House should bo imperative,
or what would be the situation of those whose claims were be-
fore the House, if they were to be destroyed by the votes of a
majority of members who never heard one word of the discus-
sion, and were riot at all acquainted with the merits of the
case ? The parties so treated by any Committee, had no op-
portunity of appealing to the House. Since yesterday only,
he had heard that the merits of this Bill were so simple that a
Committee of 48 members could have entirely decided the
case. He trusted that the House would, for the sake of jus-
tice, observe the resolution of 1826.
The SPEAKER said it was certainly decided by the re-
solution of 1826, that all Committees should report upon
every private Bill, and that the parties connected with such
Bills should comply with the forms of the House. That re-
solution, however, was never made a standing order; the
House was therefore at perfect liberty to deal with this ques-
tion according to its own judgment, freely and independently,
being unshackled by any standing order whatever. Various
Bills were brought up, of which no Report ever was made.
Mr. WARB URTON said the House must be obliged to the
Speaker for his statement, but be thought from what had fallen
from him, it was clear that the Committee had not complied
with the standing orders of the House, for Committees
were not required to report the Ijill; they were required to
report the minutes of the proceedings before the Committee.
It was expedient that Committees should report the minutes
both in private and public Bills. He would either give notice
at once that the resolution of 1826 should be made the stand-
ing order, or give notice of bringing it on to-morrow, which-
ever would be most convenient to the House.
Mr. LUSHINGTON—It was clear from what had been
stated by the ,Speaker that there was no standing order, nor
was it the practice of the House to make a Report, and under
these circumstances lie thought the Committee in the pre-
sent instance were not bound to report.
Mr. HUME would not say that there was any standing
order to this effect. In the resolution which he had
proposed, and which had been adopted, there sverd two
parts, the first that the Committee should make a Re-
port, and secondly that they should report the minutes
of their proceedings. No. 27 of the standing orders
provided that the minutes of every Committee, upon every
contested private Bill, should be brought up and laid on the
table of the House, with the report of the Bill. Here there
was a contested Committee—the parties differed. The Com-
mittee had sat, but they had neither made a Report, nor
brought up the minutes of their proceedings; and, conse-
quently, they had not complied with the standing orders of the
House.

Mr. O'CONNELL would not refer to the merits of
this case, of which he was ignorant ; but, from the facts
stated, it must be clear that this Committee had mis-
conducted themselves grossly. The standing orders gave
parties a remedy. It would be wrong if there were no
remedy ; but they could only have a remedy where they had
a Report, and in this case the parties would be without a re-
medy, unless the House insisted upon the Committee making
reports. Of course there could be no appeal, if there was no
they diddispose noot
finsist s uponwithoau
tßepo givingr Report,
it Reportwould
redress. Committees to
the parties an opportunity of appealing to that House for
Mr. EWA RT insisted upon the necessity of a Report being
made to the House.
Mr. HODGES was understood to say that he had no ob-
jection to the Committee re-assembling to make a Report.
Mr. AGLIONBY understood the Speaker to say that no
resolution was imperative upon the House unless it was made
a standing order. Now by the 27th standing order it was
directed that the minutes of the Committee-upon every con-
tested private Bill should be laid on the table, and this was a
plain inference that the standing orders assumed it as a matter
of fact that there should be no case in which a Report should
not be made.
INVERNESS-SHIRE ELECTION.
Mr. DYSON appeared at the bar with the reduced list of
the Committee to try the merits of the Inverness-shire Elec-
tion petition. The following Members were then called to the
table and sworn :—Hon. A. H. Cooper, Leonard Dobbin,
William Turner, Joseph Brotherton, Morgan O'Connell, Sir
Charles H. Coote, Richard Walker, John Cresset Pelham,
Lord Viscount Mandeville, A. R. Dottin, and Wyndham Lewis.
MEDWAY NAVIGATION.
After a short discussion, in which Mr. Plumptre, Mr. Black-
burne, Sir E. Knatchbull, Major Beauclerk, G. F. Young,
and Sir Francis Burdett took part,
Sir G. CLERK observed that the House was bound to
assume that the Committee had done its duty until it was
shown that it had not done so. He would therefore, with
the sanction of the House, suggest as an amendment, that
the Committee to whom the Bill had been referred,
be required, to meet and give a Report to that House of the
proceedings which had previously taken place before them ;
if it was found by that Report that the Committee had not done
its duty, then it would be the duty of that House to refer the
Bill to another Committee.
Mr. HUME thought there could be no objection to the
suggestion of the Hon. Baronet.
Mr. HERRIES thought that the justice of the case would
be fully met by acceding to the proposition of the Hon. Mere-
ber for Edinburgh.
The Resolution, as suggested by Sir G. Glerk, was then
put by the SPEagreed AKER, and to.
CORPORATION REFORM.
Mr. PENDAR VES presented a petition from a place in
Cornwall, in favour of the Municipal Reform Bill. '
Petitions to the same effect were presented from the borough
of Bridport, and by Mr. GREEN from Lancaster.
Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from the freemen
of the city of Worcester, praying that their rights may not be
injured by the Municipal Corporation Reform Bill. He hoped
an opportunity would be given for revising the decision which
the House had come to, upon the elective franchise.
Mr. BAILEY supported the petition, observing that it
would be a great hardship to the petitioners to be deprived of
their freedom, after having purchased it at great expense.
Petitions to the same effect were also presented by Mr.
R. WASON, and other Members, but as they were not read out
by the clerk, the places from whence they came did not reach
the gallery.
LONDON UNIVERSITY—IRISH CHURCH—COR-
PORATION REFORM—AND INTIMIDATION AT
ELECTIONS.
Mr. SHAW presented several petitions; one from certain
schoolmasters, praying that in the event of a charter being granted
to the London University, that body may be restrained from
establishing small grammar schools. Another from a Dis-
senting congregation in Dublin, against the appropriation
clause in the Irish Church Reform Bill. Another from the county
Kildare, praying that certain Crown lands might be assessed,
and suggesting a County-assessment as the hest means
of protecting the rights of voters in the Corporation
Reform Bill. Also a petition from the county of Meath,
complaining •of a system of agitation which had for
several years been exercised in that county, and which
was calculated to put an end to all freedom of election.
The petition alluded particularly to the conduct of the
Roman Catholic priests, who, for four years past, bad
made themselves prominent partizans at every election,
and by their violent and clamorous conduct, had excited
the hostility of the people against those they opposed,
and had gone so far as to drag some electors to the poll, and
to drive others from it.—( Hear, hear.) As a sample of
the language used by these priests, the petitioners, who were
some of the most respectable people of the County, stated that
they were ready to prove at the bar of 'the House, that
one of these Gentlemen, when haranguing a large assembly
of the lowest orders, spoke thus of an estimable young
gentleman of high respectability, " The Roman Catholic
Clergy will flourish when he shall be lying dead, and I
will go and spit upon his stiffened corse."—( Hear, hear.)
With respect to another, who was also addressing the multitude
at the last election, he desired them to make a coffin, to throw a
pall over it, and to put into it four gentlemen of the
county, and then carry the coffin round the town, and after-
wards throw it into the river.—( Hear.) The petitioners
stated many similar circumstances, all tending to prove that
if the House did not interfere and put a stop to these prac-
tices, that freedom of election would be entwely destroyed.
RETURNS.
Mr. F. MA ULE brought up, amidst loud cheers from the
Ministerial side of the House, an immense number of Returns
connected with the Municipal Reform Bill, which were made
by the different Clerks of the Peaca of the counties of Eng-
lund. The lion. Member stated that the Clarks of the
Peace of the count% of Buckingham, of the West Riding of
Yorkshire, of Carnailon and Pembroke counties, had refused
to make any renter), in obedience to the directions of that
House, and he therefore moved that those persons be compelled
to make such Returns.—( Loud cheers.)
Sir R ING LIS knew one instance in which ono of these
gentleman had had his two clerks employed for a period of six
weeks in makinae Returns to that House, without receiving any
remuneration. *lle thought that the expenses of these Returns
ought to come out of the county rates.
Mr. O'CONNELL wished to know whether there was any
law obliging these men to accept the office of Clerk of the
Peace ? If not, and these persons had good salaries, he
thought they might obey the orders of that House.-__( Heat.)
The A TTOR NE Y- GENERAL sail it would be a great
misapplication of the county rates if they gave one shilling for
thfeitrheserlalicoeus7,
this purpose. In some counties there had been already a great
misapplication of the county rates in this
manner.—( Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—No officer
in this country bad a right to refuse obedience to the order
o
tillTh etylieviy_erwe'e breou paid
to pay
aidforthienstLetfnfororbneadniceencoef
to the orders of that, or the other House of Parliament, and
the question of remuneration might be raised afterwards.
These parties made it a question whether they should obey or
disobey, the orders of that House, and he thought that they were
bound to order them to be brought to the bar. Whether
they had any right -to be paid for their services was quite
a different question—..(4ear)—it was tht.' duty of that House