The Sun. — 1856-02-08 (London, England)

LYNDHURST—That case, again, has no bearing upon the question, because at the time when the marquisate of Dublin was conferred upon Robert De Vere, he was already entitled, as Earl of Oxford, to a seat in Parliament. There is another similar case to which the same answer will apply. The Earl of Bedford, the King's uncle, was created Duke of Aquitaine ; but he likewise was already a member of your lordships' house. The next case was one in which a lady was created a countess for life, but that, tooe cannot apply. And now, my lords, what was the state of things in the reign of Richard 11., which is the strong point of the case of those who support life peerages ? Why, my lords, at that, the most turbulent perioi in our annals, the barons and the King were at perpetual war—the King and the barons alternately getting the upper hand—the King compelled by the barons to execute a commission transferring all the authority of the Crown to certain persoue named in that instrument—learned judges consulted by the Crown as to the validity of the document— they giving their opinions that the instrument was illegal - the barons seizing their persons, executing without orm of trial the Chief Justice, and banishing the rest of the judges by way of mitigation of their sentence—then the King obtaining a triumph over the barons, and the Duke of Gloucester being thrown into prison and murdered —the barons again getting the upper hand, seizing the person of the King, imprisoned him at Pomfret, and murdered him there. Can any precedents be obtained from a turbulent time of this description that can be of the slightest use in discussing the proper exercise of the powers of the Crown? In the following reign (that of Henry IV.) there is no instance alleged in support of life peerages. Henry V., in the fluslra his popularity, in the first year of his reign, created his brother Dukeof Bedford for life. He created another brother Duke of Gloucester for life ; and he created his cousin Earl of Cambridge for life; but this latter personage never took his seat, and was executed in the following year for treason. The grants to the Dake of Bedford and to the Duke of Gloucester were soon afterwards surrendered, and new peerages in the usual form deacending to their heirs were substituted for them. (Hear.) There were also casts in which the Duke of Doraetshire was created Duke of Exeter, and the Earl of Warwick, Earl of Albemarle, for life ; but to those cases the principle I have already laid down applies—the parties were already members of the House of Peer.. An additional case has been cited. It occurred in the rein of Henry VI., at the end of the contest between the Duke of Gloucester and the Bishop of Winchester. it is said that Sir J. Cornewayll, who had married the queen's aunt, was created a baron for life by the title of Lord FaiinhOpe and Lord Miibroke. Bet there are no sufficient grounds for supposing that this was a life peerage; on the eontrary, as the ,3 was m conferred in the presence of rarliaent, au_a is fte9ranatural to suppose that the new baron had conferred u the rights and privileges of the peerage, inclurint him mat allof transmitting his dignity to his descendants. All these cases, it should be remembered, are included within a period of about 40 years. There are none of the period of Charles 1., when our constitution first began to be settled ; or of the still more important period of the Revolution; when the constitution ultimately took the form it new wears; and will yen say that the cases I have cited are sufficient to j testify the Crown in new modelling this house? (Cheers.) My lords, allow me to say that it is a flagrant violation as it strikes me—if I may use such a strong principles upon which our constionexnression—of the, great . (led lam always afraid to omit anything is fool • • may have be.evneapeitted to, lest. it should .be that thought lam apprehense dealing with it. There is, then, a ease which occurred in the reign of Henry