The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-07-19 00:00:00

CALL OF THE HOUSE.

Sir J. WROTTESLEY said that he was anxious to bring forward
the motion of which he had given notice at the earliest moment.
It was in their recollection, that at the commencement of the
session the King, in his speech, told his Parliament that subjects
of the greatest moment and magnitude would occupy their anxi-
ous deliberations; and no man could deny that questions of
greater importance could not have been submitted to them.—
Though the session was then pretty far advanced, some of those
important measures had not yet been carried through all their
stages—such as the East India charter, which stood for that
evening, the Bank charter, and the great question of West In-
dia. slavery. Now, he conceived that questions of such great.
magnitude would require a full attendance for their proper dis-
cussion. He was aware that it might be alleged that the prin-
ciples or resolutions on which the measures relating to these
questions were founded, had been discussed and sanctioned by
full houses ; and that the dis•nission of the details did not require
so full an attendance as his motion would enforce. He thought
otherwise ; at the same time he would candidly confess that his
motion was meant to particularly apply to the question of reform
of the Irish church (hear) • in fact, to the fate of the Irish church
bill. (Hear.) He begged it to be understood that his motion
was not at all framed in the spirit of infringement on the privileges
of the other branch of the legislature. No man respected those
privileges more than he did, believing, as he did, that it was by re-
specting the privileges of others that they could best guard their
own. But,in declaring that his motion had a direct reference to the
probable fate of the Irish church bill in another place, he main-
tained that it was perfectly consistent with the practice and con-
stitutional forms of that house to make the public acts and votes
of the other branch of the legislature the subject of comment
and scrutiny, (hear, hear,) and that they should watch over the
progress of a measure which they themselves had originated,
and which they justly conceived to be one of great public im-
portance. Now, great pains had been taken to impress upon
the public mind that the bill for reform of the Irish church,
which that house had passed by a very large majority, and
which he, in common with other friends of the established
church, deemed of vital importance to its permanent stability,
was, according to one noble member of the other branch of the
legislature, nothing less than a " measure of spoliation," while
another noble person of
.great influence declared that he was
" wholly opposed to its principle." (Hear.) The house there-
fore owed it to its own dignity to be prepared to maintain its
own solemnly declared opinions. (Hear, hear.) It should be
prepared to do its duty as representing the feelings and in-
terests of the people. (Hear, hear.) It was not only the prin-
ciple of the church bill which was threatened with danger, but
of reform; and it was therefore the duty of a reformed Parlia-
ment to show to their constituents that it was not owing to any
want of inclination or zeal on their part that measures of great
importance to the public interest had not been carried into
effect. (Hear, hear.) It was, then, for the interest of hon.
members themselves that they should have an opportunity of
doing their duty to their constituents in the event of a crisis
arising, which might demand their energies. He therefore
would press his motion for a full attendance on Thursday, as a
warning to honourable members to be prepared at their
posts to do their duty, either by receiving the wishes or com-
mands of the King or by tendering his Majesty their advice ac-
cording to their views of the public exigencies. (Hear, hear.)
He therefore moved that the house be called over on Thursday
next.

Sir R. PEEL felt it his duty to take advantage of that earliest
moment, first to deprecate all discussion on the motion of the
hon. baronet, and next to deprecate the motion itself being
persisted in. -,(Hear, hear.) The bon. baronet had assigne.
two reasons for bringing it forward, which-a moment's consi-
deration would entirely dissipate. In the first place, said the
hon. baronet, there are very many important measures before
the house, not yet advanced through all their stages, and
which should be discussed only in a full house. But how could
it be said that the house had neglected to attend the progress of
these measures? Was it not a fact that the principles and pro-
visions of all those named by the hon. baronet had been ex_
pounded and discussed before an unusually full attendance of
members? (Hear.) The Bank charter had been so discussed,
the noble lord (Althorp) having yielded to the sense of the
house, and postponed those portions which would require a full
attendance. If the attendance upon the committee on the East
India Charter Bill was comparatively thin, was not the fair in-
ference that little or no opposition would be made to its pro-
gress, its general principle and provisions having been approved
of by a full house? (Hear.) And as to the West India ques.
tion, he never witnessed a fuller attendance than that before
which its principles and provisions were minutely detailed.--
( Hear.) i•ro charge, therefore, could be made of non. attendance
in reference to the important measures cited by the hon. baronet.
The Ilan. baronet had told them that his motion was meant to
apply particularly to a measure then before the other House of
Parliament; and he gave as a reason for the house's acceding
to it, that he had seen in the public prints statements to the
effect that one noble person had characterised the Irish Church
Bill as a " measure of spoliation," and that other noble lords
declared they were opposed to the "principle" of that bill.—.
Now, he implored the house not to adopt such rumours as the
foundation of their proceedings. They owed it to their own
dignity ; they owed it to the dignity and independence of
the other branch of the legislature. (Hear.). He did not
mean to say that an occasion might not arise when it would be
necessary for them to meet and express an opinion in reference
to some act of the House of Lords ; but he must deprecate their
anticipating the possibility of such an event on a mere rumour,
or adopting any proceeding which must appear only as an at-
tempt to control and menace the proceedings of the other House
of Parliament. (Hoar,' hear.) What pretext was there for
such an unprecedented proceeding ? The Irish Church Bill
had been. sent op to the Miuse of Lords: it was read a- first
time; it was appointedgo be read a second time; the day for
that second reading had not yet arrived. Wete they, on mere
flying rumours and vague assumptions, to anticipate- the proba-
ble result of that second reading ? Such conduct, would be most
unwise, and in,the teeth of-all rational precedent. It would be
mbre—it would be placing themselves entirely in the wrong.
(Hear.) They knew nothing, and constitutionally could know
nothing, of the intended acts of the other branch of the legisla-
ture, only as itself communicated them. (Hear, hear.) They
owed it to themselves, to their own privileges and character, to
respect the privileges and character of the other House of Par-
liament ; and they were pot to anticipate any result which might
imply that the members of the other house were not men of ho-
nour, and men who did not exercise their privileges—not as

privileges given them for their own personal advantage, but—
for the benefit of the people. When the occasion arose, let them
assert their rights, but let them not lower themselves by antici-
pating such an occasion on mere vague rumour and assureption.
(Hear.) He trusted, therefore, that the hon. baronet would
withdraw his motion, and he also earnestly trusted that the dis-
cussion on its subject matter would here terminate,
Lord EnemozoN said that no man who had attended to the
political transactions and rumours of the last two days could
deny that an occasion was likely soon to arrive in which the
house would be called upon to do, its duty to itself and to the
country. It was true that some of those rumours were absurd,
and to members of that house ektravagantly incredible, but they
were no less calculated to impose upon those less acquainted
with political men and measures, and thereby to produce inju-
rious consequences out of doors, so as to render it the duty of
that house to disabuse the public mind of its apprehensions, and
confirm it in its confidence on them as the honest representa-
tives of the people.
Lord ALTHORP said that his hon. friend had candidly avowed
that his motion was intended to apply to the Irish Church Bill.
Now, he (Lord Althorp) and his colleagues were placed in a
situation of some embarrassment by the motion, from which
they hoped to be relieved by his hon. friend's withdrawing it.
It was most true that ministers had pledged themselves nut to con-
tinue a moment in office if the Irish Church 13111 should fail in its
progress through that.or the other House of Parliament, and that
pledge he would then repeat they. would abide by. (Hear, hear.)
But his hon. friend's motion might have the effect—and he was
confident no such effect was at all intended—of menacing the
proceedings of the other branch of the legislature, so as to place
the government (whose official existence was more or less im-
plicated) in a situation in which it must be admitted they had
not an easy course to pursue. (Hear, and a laugh.) He was
confident that neither his noble friend (Lord ETrington) nor
his hon. friend (Sir J. Wrottesley) had any intention to em-
barrass ministers by urging the present motion, and therefore
felt the more confidence that it would be withdrawn when told
that it would have that effect. (Hear.) He had the less hesi-
tation in making 'this request, because he was confident that ho
practital consequences would folio's!, its adoption; for he had De
doubt that, should the event which the motion contemplated
ocelin there would,be'a full attendance without a call. (Hear.)
He therefore, on the part of himself and his colleagues, whom
he had consulted on the point, begged his hon. friend to with-
draw his motion.
On a division there appeared—
For the call of the house 125
Against it l6O

Majority • 35
The motion of Sir J. Wrottesley was accordingly lost.
EAST INDIA CHARTER BILL.
The house then resolved itself into a committee of the whole
house on thig- bill, and agreed to all the clauses'from the 40th
to the 54th, when the house resumed, and the Chairman reportetl
progreis,*od obtained leave to sit again to-morrow.
Mr. S. MAcitENzm brought in a bill to regulate the trade,
with India, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read
a second time on Friday.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned at half-past one o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS, TUESDAY, JULY 16.

The Earl of Hardwicke took the oaths:

The public works' bill was read a third time, and passed.
The, Bishop of ROCHESTER presented a petition ft orn the arch-
deaconry and. clergy of the diocess of petition
against the
Irish church temporalities bill.
The assessed taxes composition bill and the Highland roads
and bridges bill went through a committee.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented a petition, signed
by one archbishop and several of the bishops of the established
church of Ireland, against the Irish church temporalities bill.
The petition, which detailed the many evils that, in the opinion
of the petitioners, were likely to be created with respect to the
established church, if the bill became the law of the land, was
read at length.
The Duke of CUMBERLAND.—Hove many signatures are
affixed to the petition ?
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY answered, " Twelve."
The Earl of Rolm/ wished the signatures to be read.
They were read accordingly. Amongst them were, the
Archbishop of Armagh, and the Bishops of Ossory, Dromore,
Down and Connor, Ferns, Kildare, and Cork. . .

• •
Lord CARBERY presented petitions from certain parishes in
the county of Cork against parts,of the Irish church tempora-
lities bill, more especially against the clause that did away with
the church cess, and rendered it compulsory on the clergy to
support their churches themselves.
Burl GREY observed that there was no such compulsory pro-
vision in the bill.
The-petitions were, however, laid on the table.—Adjourned.