§ Lord John Russell, previous to moving the Order of the Day for taking into consideration the letters received yesterday by the Speaker from the Lord Chancellor and Mr. Lechmere Charlton, begged to call the attention of the House to the propriety of appointing at the commencement of the Session a Committee of privileges in the same way as it used to do formerly. For the last two or three years no Committee of this kind had been appointed, in consequence, as he believed, of its having a clerk attached to it with a regular salary, which, in the absence of any immediate question for the consideration of such a Committee, ap- 62 peared to be a useless expense. In moving for the revival of the Committee of privileges on the present occasion, he should think it unnecessary to appoint a clerk specially to attend upon its proceedings, as there were many gentlemen connected with the House who would be fully competent to discharge all the duties required from such an officer. Fie thought generally with regard to the Committee of privileges that the questions brought before them had been discussed and considered with great attention and fairness, and he did not know that any occasion had occurred upon which the constitution of the Committee had been complained of. He should, therefore, move that such a Committee be appointed, to be constituted in the usual manner, namely, of a certain number of gentlemen named by the House, and of all knights of the shire and gentlemen of the long robe.
§ Appointment of Committee agreed to.
§ On the question that it do consist of all knights of the shire and gentlemen of the long robe,
§ Mr. Humewished to know why any distinction should be made between gentlemen of the long robe and any other members of the House? Upon the questions coming before a committee of the description these were, he thought many gentlemen in the House unconnected with the legal profession quite as competent to form a correct opinion as any who had arrived at the dignity of the wig and gown. Why, too, should an exception be made in favor of the knights of the shire? He thought that the Committee, instead of being composed of such a host of members, which could tend only to protract and confuse its proceedings, should consist of a certain given number, say twenty-one, whose qualification should not depend either upon their being knights of the shire or gentlemen of the long robe.
§ Mr. Williams Wynnsaw no reason to depart from the usual practice. The Committee had never been found inconveniently large, and its proceedings had always been conducted with the utmost propriety, attention, and despatch.
§ Lord John Russellwas not aware that any inconvenience had ever resulted from the manner in which the Committee was constituted.
§ Sir Robert Peelobserved, that in the case of Mr. Long Wellesley, although a great many of the Committee attended it 63 was not found that the number was inconveniently large. Great attention was paid by every member to all the circumstances of the case, which were entered into at great length, and the desire to do justice seemed to be common to all. If it should hereafter be found that any inconvenience arose from the number of the Committee, it would then be time to adopt the limitation proposed by the hon. Member for Middlesex.
§ Mr. Humewould not press his objection, as the general feeling of the House appeared to be against him; but he begged to observe that he was far from being convinced of the impropriety of his suggestion.
§ The motion agreed to.