Star.
London, England, 1829-05-16 00:00:00

thegreatest hardshipto the Hon.Gentlemao in question,
that, in a case involving the enjoyment of a civil right
of the highest unagnitude.and importance, be should:Awes.
not indeed deprived of that right, but certainly del•
rived of the means of using-it to the fullest eztintVott
indeed. to any considerable extedt at all. He should'
conclude by moving, that the Hon. Member for Clare
be recalled, and heard at the table of the House.
Mr. PEEL said, that whatever form the discussion
may have assumed, it was quite obvious that the House
was now sitting in a judicial capacity, and that the
question before them was to be decided upon the prac-
tice of the House, which was the foundation of the law
of Parliament. Upon the reason of the case, he (Mr.
Peel) had not the slightest doubt that the Honourable
Gentleman who had been returned for Clare was not
entitled to be beard at the table. If the fact wets
otherwise, every Member who may be returned to the
House, and who may have any objection to particular
parts of the oaths required to be taken, would be entitled
to a hearing—(Load ct ies of 4. Hear" from theOppobition
Benches). He apprehended, however, that the law and
usage of Parliament was in direct opposition to such a
doctrine. If it be indispensably necessary to his becom-
ing a full Member of the House that he should take the
appointed oaths, then it is impossible for him :o pei bras
any of the functions of a Member before the oaths have
been administered to him with regard to the precedents
which have been cited. If any serious doubt remained
upon the minds of Hon. Members as to the 'effect of tt4
preceoents, he thought it- would be most desirable that
they should not come to any decision upon the question
thd:y. His (Mr. P.'s) conclusion was certainly different
from that of the Hon. and Learned Member upon the op—
posits side of the House. and he thought that noMember
who refused to take the oaths could be entitled to tAke
his seat. It would be'premature to enter then epon the,
other question connected with the case, as it had been
impossible to give notice to the members of the Hoope
that to important a discussion was coming forward,:
Whether in reference to the difficulty of the subject or
the dignity of the House. he was of opinion that the
most desirable course to pursue would be to postpone
the consideration of the questiohuntil Monday nest.
Mr. W. WYNN said, that he folly agreed with the
Right Honourable Secretary in thinking that it would
be very inconvenient to enter at present into the dis-
cussion of the question, whether a person who, being
a Roman Catholic, and elected before the passing of
the late Act a Member of the House of Commons,
can take his seat in the House opon taking only such
oaths as are contained in the Act recently passed by
the legislature? That was a question of very consider-
able moment, and he thought that a day ought to be
specially appointed for its consideration. The point,
which was at present to be decided arose upon the
motion of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman,and
upon this question, it was his '(Mr. W.'s) opinion that
the precedents were all decisively in favour of allowing
the Hon. Member for Clare to state to the House the
reasons why he objected to the taking of the oaths.—
He agreed with what had been said by the Right Hon.
Secretary, that until the Hon. Gentleman had taken the
oaths. it was not competent for him to perform any act
of a Member of Parliament io that House; but the states
Went

(Ibis objections to the oaths he prefers to make not
as a Member,- but as a person claiming to be a Member,
and for the purpose of getting over some preliminary bu-
siness for the purpose of becoming a Member of the
House. There was a question of for m connected with
ibis subject which may appear trifling, but which, in fact,
wabof considerable importance—it was,whether the Hun.
Gentleman should be heard at the table or at the bar?
A case bad occurred in which the distinction had ap-
peared of some consequence. In the case to which he
'referred a Member who had not taken his seat, and
who would incur penalties if he attempted to take it,
wrote a letter to the Speaker, complaining of a breach
of the privileges of the House which had been coma
witted upon him as one of the Members. The parties
against whom he made the complaint were ordered to
attend the House, and the Member himself at the same
time attended at the b4r, and having heard tile answer
and excu ,e advanced by those who were the objects of his
complaint, he withdrew. It was afterwards questioned
whether his havii,g been at the bar of the House was not
an offence within the meaning of the statutes of Elizabeth,
hut the House resolved the question in the negative.—
He (Mr. %%Wynn) was decioedly of opinion th4t, upon
every ground of
.reason, justice, and consistency,
the House ought to allow the Hon Membef fur Class
to come to the bar,and there state his objections to the
taking of. the oaths, in the same manner as was permitted I,
to any other Member, or, indeed, to any petitioner who
claimed any right or advantage which it was in the
power of the House .to bestow. It was for the House.
itself to decide in what particular manner the heating
should be granted; but, even if the Members had known
nothing of the particular facts of tills cam, he was of
opinion that, if the Hon. Gentleman had asked permis,
sion to address the House from the table. he (Mr. Wynn)
was sure, upon the authority of all the existing piece
dents, be would be entitled to a hearing.
Mr. SUGDEN said, that there was .1 difficulty ohids
would arise in the case of the Hon. M, mber's addressing
the House froth the table which may not exist in his,
addressing them from the har. The sth of Ehz 'beds
imposed upon any ►Member who should enter the House
without having taken the oaths in the Lord Steward's
Office certain penalties, amongst which was that of
being disabled trom sitting, voting, or speaking in the
Parliament to which the Member sn transgressing bad
been returned. Now, it the sth of Elizabeth continued'
yet in force (and he, Mr. Sugden, believed that it did)
it was clear that the Hon. Gentleman who had appeared
at the table had ceased to be a Member of the present
Pitiliament, and could not, therefore, in any event, ad-
dress the House from the table.

Mr. BROUGHAM said, that whatever cause may
altimateiy prevent the House from hearing the Hon.
Member for Clare, it would hardly adopt that which
his Honourable and Learned Friend (ilr. Sugden) had
just suggested. The House knew not4.ing of what
passed out of doors, and could not therefrne found its
decisions upon that of which they had no certain know-
ledge. He understood the fact to be, however, that
the Honourable Member for Clete had a certificate of
having taken what he conceived to be sufficient oaths,
before the proper officers—CHere Mr. SUOMI addressed
the House again, upon which Mr. Brougham reminded
him that it was the usage of the House that only one
Member should address the House at once.3—(A laugh).
He should now take leave to suggest, in addition to
what he hid alieady observed, that, as the Member for
Clare had expressed his consent to take some oaths,
whilst he objected to other+, the House would give him
permission to take the oaths to which he did not object,
leaving the question upon the others open as before.
Mr. Secretary PEEL said that be did not agree with
Mr. Wynn io thinking that the•distinction between ad-
dressing the House from the table and from the bar was
not very material. The whole question, however, was
so very important that he earnestly hoped the House
would adjourn the consideration of it until Monday,
`test
the purpose of affording an opportunity of nazis-
,

ing the records tithe House for
_proodtrop applicable
co tre Ca • *.
Mr.-SUDDEN Oidlßitln voyiog Apt the Ron. asts
lietttled Gentleman inonnel I) hafiiiit- Men the
r. isigden) haat not made a rash
"ass'ation. He held in his hand the printed case prepa.ed
by Mr. O'Connell himself, in welch that Gentleman
states that he objecteJ, in the Lnr,l Steward's-office, to
taking some of the oaths which had been tendered.—..,
Now, thee was only one of them to which he could
feel any objection, and he (Mr. Sugden) was therefor*
warranted in interring that that one he had WOE taken.
His Hon. and Learned Friend (Mr. Brougham) might
therefore 'have spared the observation which he bad
made upon his (Mr. Sugden's) view of the case.
Mr. BROUGHAM—Now I think I had much better
not have spared the observation which I made. For
what was it which the Honourable and Learned Mem-
ber was calling upon the House to do ? He was tilling
upon the Houv to proceed in a case of 'such delicacy
and importance upon vain conjeztures &rived float
printed arguments, which may support an inference or
may not. How can the House tell whether the Hon.
Member for Crate took any, or what oaths, or no oaths
at all? How can we know that, after tile printing of
the pamphlet, Mr. O'Connell may not have gone to the
Lord Steward's office, and then taken the oaths? With
regard to the Right Hon. Secretary his ante. va ions
were of a very different nature iron' those of the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman (Mr. &pion), and required a
different notice. The point suggested by the Ittght
Honourable Secretary was, like !v.pry other past et the
case, very important. He '(%lt. Brougham) did not,
however, believe that it was a matter of notch rm•
portance whether the Member for Clare addressed the
House from the table or the bar, although i.e ailowegl
that it was a matter of some conequence ? Howevei,,'
whether from the bar or the table, bear him they muss;
for, supposing him to be an ordinary petitioner, pray-
ing for the re titration 01 pieservatioti of his rights,
without mesiong to go so tar as to say that he has la
right to be hearu at the table of the Howe, I have no
hesitation in saying that we have a right to hear him ;
and this was clearly a case in which we ouAht rather to
be anxious to hear than not to be so.' It the House.
thought proper to postpone the case for this puroose, he
(Mr. BroughSm) had no objection to such a course.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT rose for the purpose of
stating that the oaths to which Mr. O'Conncil Hid not
object had been taken by hen. and that he (Sir Francis)
was present when the oaths were taken at 'the office of
the Lord Steward.
The SPEAKER said that, before he should finally
put the question to the House, they would, perhap,, not.
think him unreasonable if he put them in full posses-
sion of the course which he had intended to pursue, and
which be had pursued. The House had already agreed
that the question before it, both as to the hearing itself
arid as to the manner in which it was to take plase,was
one of great importance. The most decisive picot or
the sentiments of the House upon the subject was thr.
unanimitywith which they agreed to postpone its further
consideration to a future day. lie did not agree with the
1-.:n. Member on the opposite side of t .e 14.,use that
there was much difficulty in the case. Yes, even if the
case was one of difficulty, still no time tor deliher anon
was allowed to the Speaker in the Chair. He wa-
fore obliged to act upon the view which he en•ertained,
of the state of the law. As to not hearing tie Hon.
Gent. he founded his conduct upon what he belt. ved
to have been the uniform practice of the House. as h•
knew of no precedent in which a person had been al-
lowed to address the House until a reolution directly
and expressly granting permission to do so had hero
passed. He WAS also in this part of the ca-e influenced
by the consideration how far the Hon. Gentleman might
be affected, not by the statute of Elizabeth, bait that of
Charles 11. it he should proceed to address the House
from the table. There was one other subject on which
he wished to make an observation. The House was
aware that the Lord Steward and his Deputy were nit
officers of the House, and that a certificate from them
of the oaths having been taken was all the evidence
which the House could have of that tact. The House.
therelme, in it, aggregate charactes, cannot gnaw whe-
ther improper oaths have been taken, and were therefore
bound to inter that the oaths taken were the right ortes.
Mr. TIERNEY wished to know, and to understand
correctly, whether it was to be understood• that the Hon.
Memtier for Clare was to be heard at the table or at the
'bar of the House? If that point were n t settled n.,w,
as it might very well be, it Would occasion the loss of
another day. If the motion of his am. and Learned
Friend should be agreed to, which lie understood was to
the effect that Mr. O'Connell should be heard to•state
his objections to taking the oath., then there would re.
main the chief part of the subjet to be decided upon.
He entirely concurred uith the It.glit Hon. Secretary in
thinking that the matter was set sucnimportance as 'to
require deliberation ; but he was at a loss to uoderstand
why they should then adjourn to deliberate upon the
first point when they bad not heard the argument
respecting it. Buc if Mr. O'Ct.ntiell were t• be
perstrit.ed to address the House, Ise apprehend...if
there must be some resolution tweed to a, to time
and place; and those vints, he contended, inie,ht
very properly and easily be settled at once. It was
indeed an imi ortant question, bin it was one upon
which a speedy decision ought to be come to. He en.
derstood his Hun. and Learned Friend to have produced
precedents, by which it was clear that Mr.O'Connell
ought to be permitted to state his reasons for the objet
dons he had made. But it appeared that on a Gentle-
man having been duly declased by a Committee of that
House to be elected a Member of it, it in its wisdom
thought pope' to say, evcn when it had the party at
its table, arid ready to make his sta:enient—no; the
matter is of great inwriance; it requrres-deliberation ;
and that we may deliberate the better, we wlll.sadjousn
without hearing the argument. He begged. the Right
Hon. Sect etary not to understand that he had not the
slightest indisposition to deter the consideration of the'
main question ; but What he was de,irous of was to see
the preliminaries fairly arranged.
Mr. PEEL blamed no one for the delay which had
taken place in the agitation of this question ; but it was
the custom of the House, on much less important occa•
sions, for the Hon. Member bringing a'subject forward
to give a regular notice of his intentions. And that
being the case, he thought it was far trom unreasonable
to ask for a delay of two days before they proceeded to
decide whether a Member of that House should' be
heard before be had taken his seat.' That was his opi-
nion at first, and having heard in the courseof the dis-
cussion great authorities upon the subject, and observed
the discrepancies between tram, he found a further reti.;'
son for requiring time to look inn the precedentia'arid to
consider the subject. The Hon. and Learned MeinheitS
motion wahthat Mr. O'Connell bevecalled and heard it
the table. When that came on for discussion it would be.
in the power of any Honourable Member either 'to sup,
port it, or to move chid Mr: O'Connell be heard at ;the.
bar, or that be be not heard at all. He thotight thattitte
plum discussion, especially the Speake?s opinion, had
ins quite matins to Wm* that the subject could not

•

be sati.factotily dealt with .unless an adjournment to
Monday was agreed to. It might then regularly be
broutht forward, and no one considered as pledged to
any opinion upon the question.
• Mr. M. FITZGERALD had nn objection to the
que,tion being postponed, but be did Lot we how di
110.1. Xlember f t Clare, after he had been declared duly
elected, could be refused a hearing. By lbf opinion r 4
the Chair, Mr. O'Connell had been preiren ed front
stating the reasons why he objected to take the oaths;
he ought certainly to be afforded an opportunity of as
doing. It was of little consequence whether he was
heard at the bar or at the table, but it world be depriting
a Member of that House of his privileges ii it was ye„
fused to hear his objections to taking the oaths. Every
hour of delay was are injury not only to Mr. O'Conara
but to his constituents.

Mr. PFAU. thought it was Impowlhlat to bear the stigma if
the Honourable Member for Clare until it had been deeidiillehe
tiger be was to be heard at the table or at the bar.

Lard MILTON said, tbat whatever doubt might situ as sees
mode of proceeding to be adopted, there did nut western be say as
to the proceeding itself. lie was glad to see that, wltethr the
flouourable Member for Clare was to br heard at the nide ir at
the bar. it seemed to be the unanimous opluim, that he .tight to
be heard in some pan of the House.

Sir J. YOItKR said, that he wag not very deeply versed
precedents of the Hints,. In respect, however, to those wiggly,'
bete; cited lie was able to state that Viscount Fanshawe was lent
for by the Speiser, and on his appearance at the table &Asti, be
had any objection to take the oaths. He refused to take thein;and
was then asked to assign his reasons; and in this man be's&
dressed the House at the direction of the House itself. •

Mr. BROUGHAM said Or a the House would, do
bim the justice to recollect that he had had great die.
telly and hesitation in proposing to the House in the
loins of a motion the impression which existed to
*au agli in his own mind. The cases of Sir Healy
!Monson and Viscount Fanstravre, which he had cited to
ibOluuse, had 51:is pecnloatite, that they li.sd been
.Membets of the Convention Parliament, and might
thereto. e have taken their seats in the House during the
sitting ot that Parliament. 'F!,e C..nvention Parlor.
spent was certainly an illegal assembly. and, in point
of fact, a person rh hed ben a Member of it had corn.
milled an offence against the law ; and that Parliame!;t
continued to have the same illegal character *until an
Act was pas.erl alter the accession of William, rendering
the Convzition PA. I I ameng legal. But in that legalising
Act came the oaths to which Sit Henry Monson ob-
jected. The case of Archdale was not much different
from the description which had been given by the Ho.
'towable and gallant Member (Sir Joseph Yorke) of
an-titer case. The fact of Arch-tale having been sent
for by ttie House might make some difference be weer
his case And the present; but the cases of Sir .Heory
ifoubon and Viscount Fan-hawe were ersctly • the
-rune a. that of the present Member fur Clare. The
Honoi.r.b:e and Learned Gentleman went on to say
that the sense catr,e which had rendered him slaw
and unwilling to present to the linuse iii the shape
motion the strong impression .which he entertaibed tin this
subject, and so hold hack until pressed by the House to do so; now
influenced him in acceding to the proposal of the Right Hero. nee.
demon opposite, and consenting to defer till Monday .tbe considers.
tion of whethertbe Hon. and I,earned Minnher lot Clare should
be beard from the table or from the bat. As to the fact of the
House coming to the entieltodoo that they could not hear the Hen.
'Member at all, that was a matter which be (Mr.'tirougham) could
not contemplate as main withip the range ot
Viscount DUNCAN NON said that he had been reqoested'hy
the. Hon. Member for Clare to. request the right of being hard
from the table on support of his claim.
The SPAM KKR then put the question upon the adjournmest to
MotidaY of the consideration alibi. question,witether Mr. Deontica
shoubi be heard from the table or from the bar ?

The question was rattled in thisfiren:i;e
Mr. Secretary rEKL said, tbst it would, he supposed, brander.
stood that this case should, on the day appointed, bare precedence
of all other business.

Tu this aue Alembets of the opposition side acceded and k,wm
agreed to,Lriog it on at the usual hoer of comoseodug the bitsipms
ut the Howie. namely. four o'clock.
Mr. *Merman WOOD brought op the !Upon of the fissib•
ffeltl ma ket

Mr. R. GORDON, considering that the Bill was not what u
professed to be, namely, a Bill for enlarging SmlthlieW-markeli
moved that ate report be taken into further consideration that day
six months.
• Mr. BY NG supported tjte Bill, became it would• prevent the
passige of carts and waggons through the market On the market.
day, and also because it altered the market-day from Friday to
Thtirsday.
Mr.. WODRHOUSIC opposed the Bill, considering thatit world
be likely to prevent the removal of the market. •
Mr. BEN SIT supported the Bill bedause it conferred a bets& •
without imposing any new berthen on the people.
Str JAMBS M ACINTOSH Objected to the Dill, because.*
:did not go to abate the intolerable nuisance of driving catde
thriaagli the street• to the danger of she paisengers, and also loe.
cause it took away the attention of the public from the nuisance.
Ik., HEATHCOTE said, the opinions of practical men were
in Eavourof tUc IltU, and should therefore support it.
Lord A latiOßP would suppqrt the Bill as an expedient.—
He thought the proposed alteration nfibe market-day from Friday
to ThurSday 'would he au improvement, by equalizing the supply.
Mr. W AR D supported the' Bill, and conteuded that it ought to toe
agreed to, of that something better should be proposed in its stead.
Mr. PROTHEROB objected to the Bill.
• Sit Tliii Al AS. FREMANTLE said that this Bill was but a
tensporary expedient to bolster up the pretensions of the City of
London. lie was sure the City itself would wish for the removal
of the market.

Sir J. MACINTOSH disclaimed all intention of throwing my
reflection on the City of London.
Mr. WARD and Sir J. MACANTUIRI mutually explained. •
Mr. LEG H KECK thought the k rilar—et a Masalire, and diatit
was supported by the City only because it brought a coussilerabb
income to the Corporation.
Mr. COKE opposed the Bill.
* Mr. Aldeiman WOOD, in reply, said that the Capitation Mil
thirteen donee sought an enlargement Of removal of the market.—
The market was so important to London, that the Parliament may
.as well temuve the lt..yal Ezchange.—The House then dividell—.
For the 6111 M I Against it 54 I Majority against the Bill it 3.
ASIIUEST presented a Petition from Whitield will
the tahouren' Wages Bill.
Mr. MAXWELL presented a Petition from the Non-coon&
slotted Mere of the North 'Down Regiment of Militia siiinst
the reduction of the Militia. • . ,
Sir A. CAIIPBELL 'presented a Petition from the Prising .
Society of Glasgoiv against the Printers' Society Bill. -
Mr. Secretary 'PEEL presented a Petition from a parish is !II
comity tar Cock, praying for the introduction of a modified sputa
of Poor Law..

• Lord MILTON .presented a Petition from the Surgeries el
Doncaster. in the county of York, with regard to procuring
jests for Dissection. •
On the motion of the CHANCEE.LOR of the EXCHEQUEIIt
the Bill tot raising £13,4011,000 by Exchequer Bills was read a
first time.
On the Motion of Mr. Secretary PEEL, the Hoax went late
Committee on the Metropolis Police Bill. The Deport was re.
eeiVed, and ordered to be taken into tanker coosideratim se
Monday next.
Oa the motion of Mr. DAWSON they went into Gorr amts
on the Consolidated Fund Bill, as also on the Exchequer Wt
Funding Bilk .
Mr. HUME protested against the principle of the latter DK
and at another stage of the Bill would explain the grenade of
opposition.—The report was ordered. to be received oa Mood*
Oa the motion of Mr. DAWSON the House went into Cow
aguee on the Sinking Fund Bill.—The report was ordered is be
received on Alonday next.
The motto' the Committee on the Bill for replacing °Moo
Duty sins received. '
Mr. DAWSON moved the Order of the Day for tie
journment of the Committee of Supply to Monday next.
lir. MIME w),shed to know why certain bills bad been &11l
on thi British Treasury by Mr. Rothschild, in Paris, at s ramdrat
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there were
somelieculiar circumstinces attending this matter. At the timi
the circulation of the oneloond notes wasotopped, it was thootbe
necessary that there'llsoldte a silver coinage of higher valor an!
was before eireobited. filiverwas in consequence procnred Eros
Orli:land paid for in the manner to which. the Hen. Member
bad.ded.jealelelYs brbillsserbteh "meld not be Male tin
coinagedthe silver skald be raised to meet doss. The Shot