The Sun.
London, England, 1835-09-05 00:00:00

close of the Noble and Learned Lord's speech ; but he then
thought he heard the Noble and Learned Lord utter such an
opinion as he had attributed to him. Some Noble Lord had
certainly made an observation to that effect ; but he was not
desirous of fastening on any Noble and Learned Lord the
charge of absurdity made by his Noble and Learned Friend..
—(A laugh.) The opinion might be erroneous ; but an ab-
surdity he did not think they would be justified in calling it.
There was no such thing as common law appointment of
justices of the peace. There were Conservators of the
peace, and they were not appointed by the Crown. What-
ever power the Crown had for the appointment of justices
of the peace was derived from statute.
Lord A BINGER said he never contended that justices of
the peace were appointed under the common law. He must
say he thought that a very extraordinary argument which said
' that because this alteration was to be made by Acti of Parlia-
ment, therefore it was no infringement of the prerogative of
the Crown. If the argument was good for anything, it went
this length, that inasmuch as the King gave his assent to every
Act which passed the Legislature, it was impossible to make
a law to curtail the prerogatives of the Crown. The assent
of the Crown might be considered to a degree forced when it
was required to measures which had obtained the sanction of
the Legislature. All judges were appointed by the Crown.
(Not coroners.) The office of coroner was of very ancient
date ; but coroners, by analogy, might be considered as being
appointed by the Crown, which, by the common law, was the
fountain of all justice, f all honour, of all offices.—(Hear.)
Lord BROUGHAM denied that under the common law
all offices originated necessarily with the Crown. The case
of the coroners was clear: the freeholders chose the coro-
ner, and he had never heard that the appointment was
vested in the Crown originally. Previously to the appoint-
ment of justices of peace, conservators of peace existed under
the common law, and they were elected. That accounted
for the erroneous idea which some persons to this day en-
tertained that justices of the peace were originally elected
by the common law. The truth was, they were appointed
under a statute of Henry 111. The conservators of peace
had many of the functions and much of the jurisdictions of
justices of peace. What, he begged to ask the Noble Lord
opposite, did they think of the election of aldermen at Liver-
pool by the 4,000 corrupt freemen of that Corporation ?
Lord HOLLAND said that the charters were granted in
Ireland by James 1., and then they were renewed by Charles
11. He supposed that the corporations in Ireland had the
same power of making aldermen and mayors as the corpora-
tions in England. All these Acts, then, according to the
Noble Lord, were trenching on the King's prerogative.
Their Lordships then divided—.
Contents
Non- Contents
Majority against the amendment
of the Commons
Several other amended clauses were then agreed to.
On the question in schedule A respecting wards,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH moved that two wards should
be reinstated in the town of Barnstaple, as already decided by
their Lordships. The object of his motion was that every town
included in the Bill containing 6,000 inhabitants should be di-
vided into wards.
Viscount MELBOURNE opposed the motion on tl.e
ground that it was extremely objectionable in itself, but still
more so as the House of Commons had so strenuously opposed
the principle of it.
The House then divided for the amendment of Lord Ellen-
borough-7

Contents
Non-contents
Majority
Lord WHARNCLIPFE moved that the town of Ainwick
be struck out of the schedule.
The Earl of RADOR opposed the motion.
, The Duke of NORTHUMBERLAND said that 266
'members of the corporate body of Ainwick had declared
themselves against that town being included within the opera-
tion of the Bill, and not six were in favour of it. Out of
a population of 6,000 not more than 300 attended the meeting
from whence the application to be included in the Bill
emanated. There were no means in the town of raising; funds
to meet the expences incurred under this Bill ; and as he was
owner of fifteen-sixteenths of the parish they would probably
fall on himself.—(A laugh.)
The motion was then agreed to, and Ainwick was struck out
of the schedule.
The Earl of DEVON moved that Yeovil be struck out of
the schedule.
After a few words from Lord HATIIERTON and the Duke of
BUCCLEUCH the motion was agreed to.
The Earl of DEVON moved that the House disagree with
that portion of the amendments of the House of Commons,
which directed that all the present town-clerks should vacate
their situations in the month of November.
Lord MELBOURNE observed that he bad already stated
what he believed would be the consequence of adopting the
amendment of the Noble Earl. He had exerted himself as
much as was in his power to promote an amicable arrange-
ment in the various points of difference in this measure, but
he feared that it might be fatal to the Bill, if this amend-
ment was carried. It should also be recollected. if the town-
clerks were removed in any case, they would receive full
compensation.

The Marquis ofS A LlSBURYdoubted whether by the clause,
as it stood in the Bill, compensation wauld be afforded to the
town-clerks who were deprived of their offices. The Noble
Viscount was of opinion that this was sufficiently secured, but
other Noble Lords, fully as competent to form a correct opi-
nion as the Noble Viscount, entertained a different feeling on
the subject. The Noble Viscount ought to agree to the pro-
position, so that the town-clerks might be continued ; and if
it were deemed expedient to get rid of them, it would be easy
to bring in a Bill to remove them, and at the same time secure
them compensation.
The Duke of RICHMOND stated, that there could be no
doubt, if even they made the present town-clerks the holders
of these several offices for life, the Town Councils might make
their situation so disagreeable, that they would be glad to re-
sign. They might tell the town-clerks that they should do
business for nobody else, but should devote the whole of their
professional labours to the town. They might also say, that
the deeds of the Corporation should not be drawn up by the
town-clerks. The question was, how rmy Member of that
House would like to have a solicitor forged on him ?—(Loud
cheers.) A solicitor engaged in business for any person must
be one in whom he could place confidence ; for if he did not,
the solicitor became of no use. He knew many town-clerks,
and they were most respectable men, and he was sure they
would be greatly dissatisfied that any thing connected with the
tenure of their offices, should lead to any thing like a collision
between the two Houses of Parliament.--( Hear.) If these
persons also were retained in their offices against the will of
the town councils, their situation might be made so irksome,
that they would be glad to resign, by which means they would
be deprived of all compensation. It was better, in a case of
this kind, to leave the matter to the House of Commons. It
must be clear to every body, that the House of Commons, how-
ever constituted, could riot so far forget its own dignity and
honour, as to neglect to settle the question of compensation.—
( Hear, hear.) They had already disagreed on two or three of
the amendments of the Commons, which the House of Com-

mons would not very much approve of ; bat he entreated the
House not to seal the fate of the Bill by adopting the proposition
of the Noble Eari.—( Hear, hear.) He was unconnected with
party in that House, and he was only anxious that the question
should be satisfactorily settled, and conciliation promoted.
The Marquis of LANSDO WNE wished to ask the Noble
Duke whether he would like to be deprived of an office of
great emolument, with the uncertain compensation proposed
by the Noble Viscount? The Noble Viscount himself would
not say whether such compensation would be given as these
persons were justly entitled to, if they were deprived of their
offices. He hoped the Noble Duke would answer his ques-
tion, and state his opinion on his honour.
The Duke of RICHMOND said he was desirous to
legislate respecting the town clerks only, as he would be de-
sirous that, under similar circumstances, they should legislate
for him. Now, if he had an office in which he felt that he
could not continue to act with honour and advantage, he would
be quite ready to trust to the liberality of Parliament for com-
pensation on resigning it.
Viscount CANTERBURY was anxious that their Lord-
ships should stand on secure grounds in carrying into execu-
tion the object which they had in view. He doubted whether
the amendment proposed by his Noble Friend would effect
what was intended by it. The first proposition was to
disagree with the amendment of the House of Commons,

for the purpose of introducing a subsequent clause. That
would be to reintroduce tha amendment originally made by
their Lordships. The result would be, that every town
clerk who now held office during pleasure, would hold it during
life. He also called the attention of their Lordships to the
assurance of the Noble Viscount, that if the town-clerks
ceased to hold their offices, they would be liberally compen-
sated. He did not think, therefore, that the gentlemen in
qu'estion would be much benefitted by a Parliamentary recog-
nition of their claims. He therefore hoped their Lordships
would pause before they rejected the amendment which had
been made by the House of Commons in this part of the Bill.
Sixteen years' experience and practice had shown him how
difficult it was in the House of Commons to deal with a nuns-

ber of amendments made in a Bill by their Lordships. •~He
was most anxious therefore that their Lordships should be
aware of the real extent of the proposition on which they
were about to decide. It went far beyond the intention of
the Noble Earl ; and it could not promote the interests of
persons who had the assurance of his Majesty's Government
that their fair, just, and legitimate claims should be attended
to.—( Hear, hear.)

After a few words from the Earl of DEVON, the question
was put ; several Noble Lords desired strangers to withdraw ;

but, eventually, the motion for agreeing to the amendment of
the House of Commons was carried without a divison.

The several Bills on their Lordship's table were then for-
warded in their respective stages, and at a quarter before two
o'clock this morning, the House adjourned until eleven o'clock
this day (Saturday).

HOUSE OF COMMONS, SEPTEMBER 4.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
_ ESCAPE OF MACLEAN.

The Sergeant-at• Arms informed the—House that Norman
McLean, who was in the custody of one of the messengers of
the House had escaped.
The messenger, William Bevan, was called to the bar, and,
in answer to the Speaker, said he had his prisoner in the West-
minster Hotel, Bridge-street. Was with him all day on Sun-
day, and locked him in his room at half-past eleven o'clock at
night. He went to the room in the morning, and found him
gone. The window was open and the towels tied to the bal-
cony. He had got from thence to a wall which was a height
of 11 feet—from the wall he got down to the river, a height
of 14 feet—he there got into the mud, —the messenger slept in