The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-05 00:00:00

fare and general disposition of the wealth of the country,
and with that resolution could they hope to overtake
the 284 railways that were to be considered and decided
upon in that session. There had never been such a
rush of railway speculations, and he (Mr. Bernal) could
foresee much difficulty in settling those matters, unless
they acceded to the proposition of the Hon. Member for
Lambeth, or at least constituted a tribunal with powers
of a somewhat similar character. He was opposed to

the resolution.
Mr. WARBURTON asked if the Hon. Member
meant that the House should at once abdicate the per-
formance of the duties which were essential for carrying
on the business of the country. He (Mr. Warburton)
was very confident that unless the House did its duty in
this particular, the country would soon inquire whether
the other departments were not equally neglected. How-
ever inconvenient it might be to Hon. Members, when
entering the House they must be prepared to do what
the country required from them in the shape of business.
Notwithstanding the objections advanced by the Hon.
Member below him, he (Mr. Warburton) was very sure
that that Hon. Member himself would be one of the
very first to do his duty to his constituents and to his
country, by conforming to the very resolution now under

discussion.
Sic ROBERT PEEL said he was surprised that the
Hon. Member should advocate the expediency of con-
stituting another tribunal to discharge those duties
which it was the peculiar province of the house to
attend to. They might rest assured, that if there were
to be such another tribunal—a tribunal having the power
of Government, and giving force to law—if private
business were to be left to this tribunal, he repeated,
that the House of Commons would very soon regret
that they had committed the powers which belonged
only to Parliament, to such a tribunal. What was to
be its constitution—what its representative character?
It was the first time that a proposition had been made in
that House to transfer the dutiespeculiar to that House to
a tribunal out of doors, and to register its decisions as if
they emanated from the representatives of the coucountry..Were they to have no power of reversing its decisions?
—(Hear, hear.) Were they about to constitute a power,
which would soon assume to itself a hostile character ?
He could hardly justify the proposition made
by the Honourable Member for Weymouth (Mr.Bernal).
Were they to adopt a measure so pregnant with evil to
the liberties of that House ? They had the opportunity
of recommending themselves to their, constituents, and
of exalting the character of the House of Commons in
the eyes of the country, by a determination to devote
themselves to the performance of those duties; and he
did believe that the good sense and the right feeling of
Hon. Members would preclude the necessity for any ex-
position of the evil of the lion. Member's proposition.
The House of Lords had deputed five of its Members to
consider private Bills—and were they, the House of
Commons, to complain because they were also called
upon to attend for the business of the country? He (Sir
R. Peel) should be ashamed if it were said that they,
the representatives of the country, had a judge sitting
in another place to adjudicate upon what it was their
duty to have done. Lilt them at once resolve to adhere
to their duties. He (Sir R. Peel) would come down to
that House and sit for four or six hours etch day
on a Railway Committee, rather than that opposition
should be carried by the House. If they did not demur
to their attendance on Election Committees, why should
they, in, the matter of private Bills? The House of
Commons would, if this principle were not carried out,
degenerate into a mere debating club. Would they say
that they would not attend at that House to examine
into the internal affairs of the country, while they were
ready to consume eight days in an adjourned discussion
—a mere question of party, involving no principle of pa
remount interest to the country. He repeated—
let them beware ,of the power that would grow
up beside them. If they allowed that tribunal to
discharge the duties which were peculiarly theirs,
they might be assured that not one year would
elapse before they would repent that they had consti-
tuted it. He would not listen to that doctrine, brought
forward fur the first time, but he would fain hope that
the good sense of the House would negative it: He
ventured to say that this opportunity of making a
character for the House would not be lost sight of by
lion. Members; and he would also venture to say, that
many Hon. Members who volunteered, under these cir-
cumstances, would, in two or three sessions, achieve a
higher character than other Hon. Members who spent
the greater part of the session in unprofitable debates in
the House. But he trusted that they would all be pe.
remptory in expressing *aa determination to overcome
that difficulty, and he was certain that nothing would
more tend to establish the confidence of the country.
in that House, than by a steady adherence
to these duties, instead of a continuation of these debates.
which, if extended to the month of September, would
still be unprofitable. He hoped that the Right Hon.
Member would bring forward a motion, in order that
the good feeling of that House might at once extin-
guish it.
After a few words from Mr. HAWES in explanation,
Mr. P. BORTHWICK thought that the resolution
being compulsory took away any credit which might be
due to Hon. Members for this performance of their duty.
He thought the matter might be safely left to their owe
honour. He thought that the high Roman virtue, so
ably advocated by the Right Hon. Baronet, would not be
the less exercised if left to the sense of Hon. Members.
Mr. HUME said it was all very well to talk of Hon.
Members doing their duty, without its being compulsory
on them to do so. The Hon. Member opposite spoke of
Roman virtue. He (Mr. Hume) did not doubt that the
Hon. Member would exercise it, but he knew many on
that (the Liberal) side of the House, who might
not be so certainly relied on. What was every-
body's business was nobody's business—(Laughter)—
and he (Mr. Hume) thought it was certainly the duty
of that House, as a collective body, to provide that the
business of the House should be properly done. He re-
gretted that the Hon. Member had broached such a pre-
position, and he thought the Right lion. Baronet had
done himself great honour by his conduct on that as on
previous oecasions. Let them suppose that witnesses
had been summoned from Yorkshire on a private Bill,
was it to be supposed that they would come without a
certainty of having some tribunal to go before. He
was certain that the character of the House had been
lowered by these private Committees—(Cheers and
counter-cheers)—and it was high time that they should
retrieve that character. He did not blame individual
Members—it was the system he reprobated. He hoped
this resolution would be carried, for he held that lion.
Members should take everything in turn, and if lawyers
could not find time to attend to the duties of that House
they should not have entered it.
Mr. J. S. WORTLEY thought that the resolution
was more peremptory than the necessity of the case re-
quired. With respect to election committees, they were
acting under the authority of the Act of Pa-liament ;
and they were aware by a preliminary notice that their
attendance would be required on such a Committee,
and it was only after an answer had been returned to
that official notice that Hon. Members were appointed.
Colonel SIBTLIORP said that the Hon. Member for
Montrose had stated that no Hon. Member should enter
that House unless he was prepared to fulfil its duties. He
(Col. Sibthorp) had not seen the Hon. Member for Mon-
trose in the House that day, or on previous days when
property to a very great amount had been disposed of.
Hundreds and housands of pounds were voted away in
that House, and the strictest attendance was therefore
required on the part of lion. Members, but as long a-
those votes did not affect self, it was all very well. Some
Hon. Members had shares in railways, and it was very
easy to vote away a million of money when it did no:
concern themselves personally. He was glad to perceive
that an order was to be issued compelling the Mem-
bers of the House of Commons to attend in their places,
and he, for one, had no objection to the resolution.
Mr. DARBY protested against the aspersions which
had been cast upon the Sect et Committees of that House.
He did not think them justified by the facts, and, as far
as his own experience went, he was prepared to repel
the imputation. Ile believed that, on the question of
railways, the strongest feelings would ever be evinced.
and that no matter what the tribunal were, imputations
would stili be cast upon it by prejudiced and disappointed
parties.
Lord G. SOMERSET said that the conveniences and
inconveniences attendant upon this subject had been
amply considered, and they had thought it better, on the
vs hole, to make the order compulsory, than, perhaps, to
meet. proforma and do nothing.
Mr. GREENE said that it was very true that it was
impossible to obviate the inconvenience under present cir-
cumstances ; but what course was to be taken in respect to
those Members who positively refused to serve on Com-
mittees at all? It was necessary that Members should
be compelled to attend, for if a system were to be
adopted, it was better that it should be abided by, or it
was no system at all. It was better to have no system.
than to have a system that was ineffectual to enforce the
duty of those who were involved in it. How would they
compel the attendance of Members on Committees ?
There were 250 Members of that House who positively
reused to serve on any Committee, and he felt that,
unless there was a requisition, which was sufficiently
weighty to compel their attendance, the whole system
was faulty, and would fall to the ground.
Mr. PROTHEROE s&d, that in consequence o'
having come late into the
.House, he felt that he was
hardly entitled to take part in the debate; but one thing
had struck him. lie thought that there was something
more necessary than to adjudicate that Members should
sit on Committees. It was necessary not only that they
should he Members, but that some means were ne-
cessary to compel their attendance when they were
elected for that purpose. But in order to do this,
they mutt take care that measures were adopted
that conflicting duties should not render the attend.
ante of Members impossible. Last session he had
been a Member on one of these private Committees ;
but daring its sitting his attendance was required on a
local Conitniitee. His lion. Friend the Member for
Wakefield had beta in the same circumstances with him-
self. Ile had been celled to attend the West Biding
Conunittre. %Own his presence was required in the pri-
vate Committee. Some means ought to be adopted to
obviate this inc. tiveniener.
Sir wALTEa JAMES said that the refusal of
Members to eased on the se Committees was a great
evil, and he did not doubt but that it caused great con •
fusion and impedimf nt in the consideration of railway
Bills, Another evil was, the effect which the refusal
cccaaioned, and that was, that the refusal of thc se Mem-
bers to serve had the effect of working other Members
to such an extent that it way likely to work them to
death. There were 250 Members who never came into
I hut should
FE eitherla übAelif free e
saidan d
the House at ell for anything, and unless the system
eworele carried out it wile worth nothing. The attendance
voluntarytht it
was
sr
unfortunate compulsory.
that
there were no means of punishingaw those refused
to attend on any of thes Committees.
It
who
appeared
that there was the great number of 250 Members
w who
refused to attend on these Committees, and he thought
that if this eeel was not remedied by the Government,
the House should take the 4.easup into its own hands
and provide a remedy itself,