Star.
London, England, 1821-05-17 00:00:00

NIWINGTON SELECT VESTRY RILL.

Mr. 11. SuatNER being called upon in his turn by
Mr. SPEAKER, wa, ruing to addres, the House, when
Sir ROS6R I* WILSON and Mr. DENISON rose
at the same time. They stated that they had Petition,
to presen► to the House, on the subject upon which
the Honourable Member for Surrey was about to
address them, and as it would be more proper that
these Petitions should precede the Honourable Mem-
ber's Motiota, than come after it, they hoped he would
have no objection to give them precedence for this
time—( Laughter ).
Mr. H. SUMNER laid he would state the reasons
why he could not accede to the request—
Sir ROBERT WILSON hinted. that the delay
could not be long, and was about to proceed with
his Petition ; bt:t

The SPEAKER interfered, and said, that having
each day a paper put into his hand, with the names
of such Member's as had Motions to make to the
House, he had ne part left him but to call these
Members in their turn as they stood upon the paper.
The House would see that he should do a great in•
justice by putting any Member's name out of its
place. and he was of opinion, therefore, that the Hon.
Member i.-r Surrey had the right of proceeding with
his Motion, as he had caught his eye before the gal-
lant Officer rose to offer his Petition—(Hear, hear).
Mr. H. SUMNER then proceeded. He said,. that
possibly his Honourable Friends would not think Pe;
titions necessary, when they were acquainted with the
nature of his %lotion. These Petitions might be pre-
seined at another time. The Hon. Member then stated,
that this was the third time he had addressed the
House on the subject of the Newington Select Vestry
Bill. The House had suffered that 'Bill o. be read a
first and second time, and referred it to a Committee.
The Committee was afterwards dissolved, as it was
understood the Standing Orders of the House had
not been complied with. A Select Committee was
then appointed, which sat, but no progress was made
in the business of the Bill. He now wished that this

last Committee should be also dissolved by the House.
It ws a standing rule, that when the Orders of the
House were disobeyed twice, the House did invari-
ably dissolve the second Committee; but though he
called for the dissolution Of the last Committee, yet
he was far from wishing that the Bill should not be
inquired into. Ile was not sure that the House would
go into a Committee of the whole House on a private
Bill, and he would theiefoie suggest the appointment
of another Select Committee—(Hear, hear). He also
wished that that Committee should be composed of
Gentlemen who had no local attachments, and who
were totally unconnected with the promoters or op-
'posers of this Bill--(llear, hear). Mt therefore moved,
that the Conimittee on the Newington Select Vestry
Bill should be forthwith dischared.
Mr. DENISON rose.—[The SPEAKER Do you
second the Motion ?"3—(Losighter).
Mr. DENISON—., I rise-to oppose it with all my
force"—(A laugh). He then entered into a defence of
the mode of holding Parish Vestries for Newington,
which, he contended, was quite orderly and regular.
He read extracts from the parish books, by which it
appeared, that for the last seven years, no more than
seven or eight persons 'attended the. Vestries on ordi-
nary occasions, but that at one time there were three
hundred present when the question was for building
a Church. Indeed, 1,000 persons, assembled to dis-
cuss this Bill, and out of that large mass there were
only thirty hands for it-,(Hear). Not only the pa,
pulation, but the wealth of the parish were against
this Bill. He charged that the delays' in the Com-
mittee were occasioned by the Chairman himself, or
by those who were the promoters of this Bill (Hear);
The Honourable Member (Mr. H. SuMner) had made
observations upon the conduct of the Committee. H.
(Mr. Denison) was aware that he would be drawing
hasty inferences from the conduct of Members in that
Committee, which would not, perhaps, be favourable
to their parliamentary character. But the. Honour-
able Member might rail on ; he might say what he
would of that Committee. He (Mr. Denison) was
not unprepared for those attacks; he avowed he had
taken an active part in the Committee against the
Bill ; and he would even take all the lionourable
Member's taunts upon himself. He mad stand
forth alone, and say—

tose**4

Hic adsunt qui foci, in me cannertilefirrune.
He concluded by opposing the motion.
(The debate was here interrupted by the Clerk's
appearance at the Bar with the list of the Committee
on the City of Limerick Election. In these cases, all

•
other business must stand
completell.) The reduced
Sir Laurence V. Palk, Bart. I
Sir C. Cole.

Nicholas Colborne,.N.
Sir Philip Musgrave.
Dr. Phillimore.

still till the Committee is
list consisted of—
Penrslik, Esq.
C Duncombe, Esq.
Lord Walpole.
Sandford Graham, Esq.
Abel Smith, IRsq. atid
George Lucy, Esq.

Charles Champlin, Esq.
Thomas P. hlacqueen, Esq. I -
•These were then ordered to withdraw and chase.
nianinees. After a considerable time they returned.'
and reported that they had chosen. W. 8. BOURNE, I
El. and N. CA LVERT, Esq. Theywere then sworn.
The debate on the Newington Bill was temmed.
Mr. BYNG opposed the motion fur a new Select'
Committee. .

Mr. TULK was oh the Committee, and he said
there appeared no disposition in the opposers of the
Bill to go on with the hilliness. He thought the
same Committee would never agree in any proposi-
tion, for the only thing in-which they seemed unani-
•mous was that of adjourning the Committee.
Mr. Alderman WOOD spoke against the dissolu-
tion of the Committee, and charged the promoters of
the Bill with all the delay which had takenplace.'
Sir F. 13URDETT moved the adjournment of the
discussion to Friday.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY opposed an-
adjournment to Friday, for the Committee of Sup-
ply was to come on that day. He proposed to-
morrow—po, no). '
Mr. H. SUMNER opposed the adjournment, and
was proceeding to make some obervations, when he
was interrupted by loud cries of "Order. After
'the lapse of a few minutes the Hon. Gentleman re-
sumed, and complained of the interruption he had
experienced. He also complained that in the Com-
mittee the Gentlemen opposed to the Bill had re-
sorted to every device to defeat its object, by sug-
gesting various motions to prevent its progress. .'lf.
that conduct were to be tolerated, it would be im-
possible for any Honourable Gentleman to carry any
private Bill up stairs. During the time that he had
enjoyed the honour of a seat in that House, he had
introduced more private Bills than any other Hon.
Member, and never before had been treated in the
same manner. All his motions hitherto on this sub-
ject had been met by motions for adjournment ; he
would therefore press his motion
Mr. MABERLY said, the Hon. Gentleman had
himself been the great cause of delay. He, as Chair-
man, ought to have sat silent in most cases, instead
of which he had generally been the chief debater on
ever y question.
Mr. -Serjeant ONSLOW denied that the delay
rested on his side; indeed it was improbable that the
promoters of the Bill should cause delay.
Sir VV. DE CR ES PIG NY was proceeding to charge
the Chairman with partiality, when he was loudly
called to order. •

The SPEAKER said, he was 'satisfied the Hon.
Member would see that the course of argument he
was pursuing was not only irregular, but inconsistent
with the dignity of the House. •
Mr. BENNETT, although not a Member of the
Committee, and therefore free from that censure
which the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Sumner) had dis-
tributed so liberally upon his (Mr. Bennett's) Hon.
Friend, because they had differed from, or ventured
to oppose him, still he would venture to express his
disapprobation of the measure in the most unquali-
fied terms. It came to this ; if any County Member
had any job to carry (Load cries of "Order").
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was extremely
sorry to interrupt the Hon. Gentleman in proceeding
With his job—(A laugh),—but really if this kind of
conversati, n went on, it would completely put a stop
to the public busine,.s.
Mr. BENNETT would, notwithstanding the ob-
jections to it, persist in using the offensive word job,
and no other. This was a job which had been dis-
cussed by the most numerous Committee of that
House which any Hon. Gentleman could recollect.
He complained that the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Sum-
ner) had made it a mere party question from his at-
tachment to it, merely because it was a job. Without
entering into the question at large, he would say he
never heard of a more extraordinary motion than
the present, which went to take out of the hands of
the Committee of that House a private Bill ; .and
place it in whose hands? he would ask—why, in those,
of the founder of the job himself. He now asked
for a majority to pack a Committee to carry on the
job—(A laugh).—The motion had one advantage at
least—novelty ; but the reason of the Hon. Gentle-
man for his motion was obvious—it was not always
found so easy to secure a majority in a Committee
above stairs as below. Were the Hon. Gentleman's
motion agreed to; any person wishing to carry a
motion would have only to engage in his interest a
'County Member who was in the habit of voting with
Ministers, through whom he would effect his purpose.
He disclaimed all intention of using any word likely
to wound the morbid sensibility of the House, but he
would say, that if the Members of this House took
upon themselves to name Committees to carry private
Bills, it would be placing all the private business of
the country in the hands of the majority of that
House—(Hear). -
Mr. SOMERS COCKS rose with astonishment at
the language of the Hon. Member. He, for one,
had gone to the Committee day after day, with his
mind perfectly unbiassed, and he found uniformly
that everything propoied by the Gentlemen at one
side was never allowed by them to be replied to. He
would support his Hon. Friend's motion.
Mr. PRICE opposed the adjournment; it was pro-,
posed only foi the purpose of delay, and, if possible,
to get rid of the Bill by that means.
Mr. H. SUMNER said,' Gentlemen had accused
him of causing delay ; he denied the charge; the
delay originated on the other side.
Mr. CREEVEY said, the course proposed by the
Member for Surrey was a new•course; and whoever
might be the cause of it, he hoped the question would
not be pressed without due consideration ; and there-

E 1- -E.

fore that an adjourn?nent of the question would now
take place.
Sir J. GRAHAM had attended the Committee;
his great object had been to make the Bill as palatable
as possible to the Parishioners. He defended the con-
duct of the Chairman of the Committee, who had
only interposed on points of order. He thought the
discussion on the question should be deferred until
to-morrow. 4110'

Dr. LUSHINGTON said that this matter could
not be discussed toluoirow, for the debate on the
Criminal Laws could no:. be longer postponed, after
the 'numerous delays on the subject. He ..muld divide
the House on it.

Sir J. GRA FIAM could not see any reason why
the debate on the Manchester business should be so
very long.
After some obsef vations from Mr. MANSFIELD, Mr.
R. Sums, and others, the [louse divided.
For the Amendment - -
kagnst It - •

Majority for the adjournment to Friday -

-7