Star.
London, England, 1811-03-06 00:00:00

Member out in his statements. When. such &lutes
wi re brought forward, he was anxious that it should
be proved there were solid grounds for them, or that
they should, be flatly contradicted, that it might be
known not only here but in the sister kingdom, that
they had no toundation. He defied the Hon. Baro-
net to name one Trish 811 which had been hurried
through the House if an Irish Member had wished it
to he deterred. If he could not do this, he (Mr.
Croker) would not consent that the House should
throw a slur on itself, and, by acceding to such a
motion, seem to evince a conviction that such a mea-

sore WAS neceasary.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT, in reply, instanced the
inconveniernes that had been experienced through a
Money B;11 being hurried through the House impos-
ing a tax on advertisements, which Bill was puled
before the represeptationsand explanations (Idle peo-
ple of Ireland were received. He also mentioned
anothtr instance of the tax imposed upon hand-bills.
He thought it his duty, however friendly he might
he to the Legislative union of the two countries, to
bring these circumstances forward, and to communi-
cate to the House the general feeling of the people.
Nothing could be more injurious to the interest of the
Empire than to oppose such a Resolution—nothing
more likely to counteract the efforts of the Union.
Mr. FOSTER, in allusion to what had been said
by the Honourable Baronet respecting the Bill which
he had spoken of, as having been passed before the
remonstrance of the people of Ireland mile be receiv-'
ecf, appealed to the House (having stated the-progress
of it ), if it could be said to have been hurried through
the House. He then replied to the other statements
cf the Honourable Baronet, and vindicated the con-
duct of the House, in the intances to which allusions
had been made. He denied that the House had been
in the habit of neglecting the business of Ireland ; so
far frcm that being the fact, every degree of attention
was paid to it which the importance of the subject
could require.
Mr. HUTCHINSON would not take individual
instances that might be adduced, as proving that ge-
neral inconvenience was not experienced.
After a few further observations from Mr. Croke!,
Sir J. Newport, the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
and Mr. Foster, a division took place, when the num-
bus uere—
For the motion 29—Against it 74—Majority 45.

SLAVE TRADE.
Mr. BROUGHAM brought in the Bill rclAting to
the Abp btion of the Slave Trade, which was read a
first, and ordered to be read a second time to-morrow.

MOTIONS AND ORDERS.
On the Order of the Day for resuming the Ad..
iourn'A Debate regarding the priority of Motions and
Orders on certain days, being read,
Mr. WHITBREAD believed the Right Hon.
Gentleman who brought forward the present motion
did it from the best of motives; but the alteration,
if carried, would, he had reason to believe, be of
great detriment to the liberties of the House. He
did not see the necessity of it. The press of business
in the three last Sessions of Parliament could alone
give a colour to its neeessity ; but in each of these Ses-
sions important public inquiries were carried on. The
present Session was not likely to be attended with a si-
Milar cress of business. The great evil was the short-
ening the period of the sitting of Parliament, which
•
had taken place since the Union. It was, it seemed,
inconvenient for the Irish Members to come over till
after Christmas, and it was inconvenient for the Eng-
lish Members to sit after Midsummer ; so that some-
thing was cut off from the beginning and something
cut off from the end, and the Session reduced from
/6 to 20 weeks. If the motion was carried, it should
be followed up with other measures to make it com-
plete. All Orders of the Day should be called on in
succession ; and no new Bill should pass the House,
the debate of which began after ten o'clock'. He
complained of the want of perception in many respect-
able Members of the House, of the evils that would
follow the motion ; and he was afraid, though the
outer was only to remain for a Session, it would in all
likilihood become an annual vote. He then adverted
to the days—the House had never sat any time on
Satin-day since 1793, and that day went for nothing ;
while the Minister had Monday, Wednesday, and
Friday. He hoped he would limit his days to Wed-
nesday and Friday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
thanked the Honourable Gentleman for his candour.
He conceived, however, that the imagined dangers
to the liberties of the House was merely a phantom
of his own creation. With respect to the business of
the House being less in this than former Sessions, it
was too early yet to determine ; but he saw no reason
for concluding so. With respect to the curtailment
of the period of the Session, nothing of importance
was really vier done before Christmas. He did not
see the necessity of the Honourable Gentleman's ad-
ditional regulation. With respect to the days, he had
no objection (.0 taking Monday and Friday for the
Orders of the Day, and leaving Tuesday, %Vednes
day, and Thursday, for Notices.
Mr. C. WYNNE said, when a bad precedent was
11Ifiriftentred;it might to be opposed. He did not like
to depart from the ancient rttles of the House; and in
consulting the Journals he found the present practice
originated with our ancestors from the maxim, that
redress of grievances should precede the granting sup-
plies. Motions were for grievances, and orders of the
day for supplies. These rules had been adhered to
without any inconvenience till very lately, that it had
become a fashion to make the Sessionshorter, and yet
pass more bills in it. In 1797, Parliament sat 27
weeks, and passed 94. Acts. In 1,808, it sat 22 weeks,
and passed 15 Acts. Ministers had an opportunity
of proroguing Parliament whenever they pleased, and
'night get rid of alinotices then to be brought forward,
however important. He therefore objected to the
Motion.
Mr. BASTARD, in answer to what was said by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that Members could
not be induced to attend towardrthe end of a Ses-
sion, said, they were sent there to do the business of
the country, and if it required them to stay a whole
Year, they were bound to do so. He believed the
Chancellor of the Exchequer wanted to expedite the
business of the Crown ; but he (Mr. Bastard) was to
look to the rights and privileges of the people, and as
' the present practice was framed for the benefit of those
rights and privileges, he should object to the motion
which went to change them.
Mr. CANNING said, that there were inconve-
niences in the present practice of the House,' and he

.

_3, ~

• •
was amid of Itteouveniencies Liam the isretifit order I
but, upon the *hole, he was inclined to give it a trial
foi 1 Session.
Mr. WHITBREAD wished to have Monday for
the Notices, as from the two days' rest Members came
fresh to the House on Monday.
M. ELLIS objected to the word notice" as un-
parliamentary.
The House them divided on the original question :
Ayes 82—Noes 30.

ARMY F.STIMATIZe.
tordPALMERSTON stated that it Was his inten-
tion to postpone the Army Estimates till Thursday
next, with the exception of the Resolution granting
the land forces.
Mr. HUTCHINSON wished to know whether
that part of the Report contained any pledge as to the
number of land fort=s, or to postpone the whole of
the Report ?
Lord PALMERSTON repeated his former de-
claration.
Mr. PONSONBY reminded the Noble Lord that
he had given notice of a motion for Thursday respec-
ting Ireland, and hoped he should be excused for per-
severing in it.
Lord PALMERSTON said, that he postponed the
consideration in conformity with the wishes of some
Gentlemen opposite.
Mr. PONSONBY replied :—that circumstance
should make no alteration in his resolution.
After some further elnversation between► Mr.
WHITBREAD and the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER, the Report was brought up, read a
first and second time, and the further consideration
adjourned till Thursday next.—Adjourned.