The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-19 00:00:00

BUSiNESS OF THE HOUSE.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM wished to remind the House
that in consequence of the postponement of the Irish
ltegisteation Bill, he had given notice that it was his
intention this evening to move the second reading of the
County Courts Bill as the first Order of the Day. lie
had, however, omitted to give formal notice of his inten-
tion, and the consequence was that the Order of the
Day for the Committee of Supply stood as the Order of
the Day to be first taken after the Irish Registration
Bill. He wished that no Hon. Member should be taken
by surprise, and therefore he would leave it to the
House to determine whether he should proceed with the
County Courts Bill—(Hear, hear)—or whether the
Committee of Supply should he taken. It was entirely
an error of his own that proper notice had not been given.
Mr. J. JERVIS had given notice ut an amendment
on the County Courts Bill. He had to thank the Right
Hon. Gentleman for his courtesy in informing him that
it was his intention to propeed with the Bill this even-
ing. He (Mr. Jervis) was perfectly prepared to go on,
but he knew several Hon. Members who had gone away
under the impression that the County Courts Bill would
not come on ; and under shoe circumstances, be thought
it would be better, that the County Courts Bill should
be postponed.
Mr. WATSON expressed a hope that the discusston
on the County Courts Bill would be deferred until some
other evening.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM thought it would perhaps be
best to take the business of the evening as it stood upon
the paper
Mr. LABOUCHERE did not object to the arrange-
ments eutered into yesterday ; but he must observe that,
strictly speaking, it was better not to allow that course
to be established as a precedent. By saying that, he did
not mean to throw any obstacle in the way of the
arrangements that had been made.
Lord ASHLEY wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentle-
man in the Chair, whether the same objection applied to
the instructions to the Committee, of which notice had
just been given by the Hon. and Learned Member for
Bath, as the Right Hon. Gentleman had stated, applied
to his (Lord Ashley's) instructions ?
The SPEAKER said that the same objection to the
motion which the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath
proposed to make did not (as we understood) apply, as
in the case of the motion of the Noble Lord the other
day. The rule of the House was this—that no per-on
could instruct the Committee to do that which the Com-
mittee could do without them. If the proposition of the
Hon. and Learned Member was within the scope of the
Bill, it was quite competent to the Committee to deal
with it without any instruction to them. But, if it were
not, the Hon. and Learned Member could move his
instructions.

Mr. ROEBUCK. said—perhaps the lionss would
allow him to state that he, too, had considered the point
of form, and he took the rule of the House to be this—
that no instruction could affirm the powers of a Com-
mittee, but that it 'night restrict or extend those powers.
His (Mr. Roebuck's) purpose was to restrict, and he,
therefore, thought that it was competent for him to move
his instruction.

Mr. lIUME said he was altogether against the prin-
ciple of interfering with manual labour ; but as he was
in favour of several clauses of the Bill, he could not con-
cur with the Hon. and Learned Member's proposal, lest
he should be found acting in opposition to the whole
measure.

Sir J. GRAHAM said, that as a point of order he
thought notice should bo given before they discussed
this question. He would submit that the object of an
instruction to the Committee was not that that Commit-
tee did do anything, or omit to do anything, but only
to give the Committee power to do something, which
otherwise they would not be competent to do.—(Hear,
hear.) If it were competent to them to do anything,
or to omit to do anything, without an instruction, then
he submitted that the instruction not being necesary,
was unparliamentary. The single question was, whether
the abject, sought by the Hon. Member Bath, could be
attained without an instruction ?—(Hear, hear.) If it
could be, he w,,uld submit that the instruction was un-

necessary and unparliamentary.
Mr. ROEBUCK said he certainly could not attain his
object without an instruction. his object was to pre-
vent the Committee from entertaining the question.
The SPEAKER said it would not he for the con-
venience of the House that this matter should be debated
upon a mere hypothetical case. The proper time for
debating the question would be when it arose upon a
point of order. He had endeavoured to explain to the
House what he conceived to be the rule ; at the same
time he thought the question should be discussed when
the Hon. and Learned Member moved the instruction.
Mr. WARD said he thought the Hon. and Learned
Member would fully attain his object, by moving the
omission of the 32d clause, and that would raise he
whole point, He had himself come down to the House
with the intention of giving notice that he would move
the omission of that clause.
The order of the clay for the second reading of the
Irish Registration Bill was read for the purpose of being
postponed.
CHARITABLE PAWN SOCIETIES BILL.
In answer to a question from Mr. GISBORNE,
Mr. GLADST.)NE was understood to say that the
Government. did not intend to interfere with this Bill.
BANK CHARTER BILL.
_ . _ _

Sir J. GRAHAM stated, that as thlitudzetwas fixed