Sitting of 30 August 1841

MINUTES
Petitions presented. By Mr. Sharman Crawford, from Individuals at Newcastle-on-Tyne, and by Mr. T. Duncombe, from Individuals at Leeds, Nottingham, and Ouseburn, for Universal Suffrage.—Hy Mr. Villiers, from Montreal (Canada), for an Alteration in the Import Duties.
Elections. Petitions complaining of, for Wakefield, Sudbury, Bridport, and Ipswich.

OATH OF SUPREMACY — PETITIONS OF MEMBERS.
Sir Valentine Blakerose to present a petition upon the subject of the bill to abolish the oath of supremacy, for the. introduction of which he intended to ask leave of the House that evening. The petition was from a Member of that House, and it prayed that all Members of Parliament be relieved from the ' necessity of taking the oath of supremacy, in the same way that Roman Catholics were relieved. The petition denied the correctness of that part of the oath which stated, that no foreign prince, potentate, or prelate, had any spiritual or religious jurisdiction, or authority, within these realms, when it was notorious that the Pope had jurisdiction over the whole of the Roman Catholic clergy and bishops, independent of which he possessed an authority to interfere with the constitution of this House, because he possessed the power of ordination; and by the 9th section of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, any hon. Member of this House, accepting that ordination, his seat became thereby vacant, precisely in the same way as if he had accepted office under the Crown; and then again, his Holiness possesses a power of ordination with the Protestant Church. It is a matter of public notoriety that persons ordained by him, and becoming conformists, are ipso facto ministers of the Established Church, without any ordination therein—a power greater than can be exercised by the head of the Established Church; so that any hon. Member, taking this oath, after his attention has been thus drawn to the real facts of the case, must be guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury.
The Speaker. The hon. Member cannot move the petition without notice; but the clerk, informs me it is signed by the hon. Member himself, and by no other person.
Sir V. Blake. I stated that the petition was from a Member of this House, and it is not necessary to give the names of petitioners.
Mr. Goulburn. The petition being signed by the hon. Member himself gave the proceeding so unusual and anomalous a character, that perhaps the hon. Member would not object to withdraw it.
Sir V. Blake. If it be the sense of the House that the petition should be withdrawn, I shall willingly withdraw it; but. I really cannot see anything irregular in it, as it is perfectly consistent with former precedents.
The Speaker. It is quite competent to any hon. Member to petition the House; but then his petition ought to be presented by another Member.
Petition withdrawn.

ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.
Lord M. HillController of the Household, informed the House that her Majesty had been waited upon, pursuant to the resolution of that bon. House, and he was desired by her Majesty to read to the House the following most gracious answer to the Address of her faithful Commons:—
" It is a great satisfaction to me to find that the House of Commons are deeply sensible of the importance of those considerations to which I directed their attention in reference to the commerce and revenue of the country, and to the laws which regulate the trade in corn; and that in deciding on the course which it may be desirable to pursue, it will be their earnest desire to consult the interests and promote the welfare of all classes of my subjects.
" Ever anxious to listen to the advice of my Parliament, I will take immediate measures for the formation of a new Administration."

RESIGNATION OF MINISTERS.
Lord J. Russellsaid, I have now, Sir, to state to the House, that after the division of Friday night, her Majesty's Ministers thought it their duty at once to advise the answer which has just been communicated to the House, and humbly to tender their resignations to her Majesty, in order to enable her Majesty to form a new ^ministration. Her Majesty was graciously pleased to accept our resignations, and we, therefore, now only hold office until other Ministers shall be appointed to the offices which we respectively filled. Perhaps the House will allow we on this, occasion, and before I make the motion

477
with which I intend to conclude, to state the impressions, in doing which I shall as much as possible avoid matter of controversy and debate, to state the impressions I entertain with respect to late events. It was our duly, as we believed, to propose the measures which were proposed in the late Parliament in reference to the trade and commerce of the country, and which we thought essential to its interests. Upon being defeated with regard to one of these measures, we advised her Majesty as soon as the business of the Session would permit it, to resort to a dissolution of Parliament. That dissolution having taken place, and the new Parliament being assembled, on the earliest possible opportunity, we advised her Majesty to submit to them the consideration of measures of the same nature, and to ask for the opinion of Parliament in reference to these matters. It has pleased the House of Commons by a large majority, to address her Majesty, stating that her Ministers did not enjoy the confidence of Parliament and the country. This decision left us no other part to perform than that of resigning our offices. I will not use any arguments to show why we think we were justified in prolonging the struggle until the present hour; but I say, that it was our conviction, that our duty to the Sovereign whose confidence we enjoyed, that our persuasion of the necessity of the measures which we advised, and our belief that the people should be consulted on questions involving their dearest interests, rendered it incumbent on us to continue the struggle to the present moment. I have, on former occasions, justified the course which we pursued on particular occasions, and in future debates I shall be ready to justify them again. But I am now only stating the conviction which we entertain. Sir, it has been our fate now to hold power for a considerable number of years; I will not say that as long as we could use power, as we believed for the benefit of the country, it was with reluctance we continued in office; but this I will say, that I do not think, the possession of power in this country can be accompanied by satisfaction, unless there are means of carrying into effect the measures which Ministers feel essential to the welfare of the country. I do not allude now to particular measures of less or minor importance, but to measures of great and transcendant moment. With regard to such measures, we began,
478
in the commencement of Lord Grey's Administration, with the Reform Act— we ended by proposing measures for the freedom of commerce. With large and important measures we commenced—with large and important measures we conclude in pursuance of great objects we triumphed —in pursuance of great objects we have "alien. Another remark I may make, which elates both to Lord Grey and Lord Melbourne, as severally first Ministers of the Crown. Lord Grey, at the time of the Reform Act, and in the first year of that measure, enjoyed, together with his colleagues, great and almost unexampled popularity. Lord Melbourne, as being the first Minister of William 4th, became, at the accession of the present Queen, the adviser of a Princess, who came to the throne at the earliest period at which by law it was allowable to exercise the power Df sovereignty; it was his duty to offer that advice and give that information which a Queen, without experience, could not be supposed to have, and which was received with the confidence and reliance that became the frank and generous nature of the Royal Person now on the throne. Now, I will venture to say, that neither of these powers, neither the great powers of popularity which were enjoyed by the Ministry of Earl Grey, nor the power and favour of the Sovereign enjoyed by Lord Melbourne and his colleagues, was ever abused by either of them. On the contrary, while fault has been found with both of them for not having proposed measures which, it was said at the time, would be more to the advantage of their party, and the secucurity of their power, no one can deny that both have shewn great forbearance, and a great desire to preserve untouched and unimpaired the constitution of the country, and the prerogatives of the Crown. Having said this much with regard to the. Ministers under whom I had the honour to serve with pride and gratification, I may, perhaps, be allowed to add a few words with regard to the person who now addresses you. I will not pretend to say, that there will not be other persons holding different opinions, who will not bring to the administration of public affairs a larger capacity and more competent intelligence; all I venture to say, is, that while placed in the situation which I had the honour to hold, no considerations of a private nature, no wish for personal advantage diverted my attention from my public duties, and I

479
have endeavoured to give every moment I could devote to their discharge. With respect to the merits of the measures which I have proposed, or of the measures which I carried into effect, I will not now enter into any dispute; all I wish to observe is, that I have endeavoured, to the best of my power and ability, to exercise such judgment as I possess for the promotion of the best interests of the country, and of the Sovereign whom I serve, and whom I had the honour to advise. Sir, this House having decided at the very commencement of the Session, that it will take measures for controlling the prerogative, and directing the executive authority of the Crown, I can only say, that although that decision may fall with undeserved severity as we think, upon us, I am sure that in all the future consultations of the House, I shall be ever ready to give that advice to the House which I think will tend to secure to it the affections of the people of the United Kingdom, and conduce to the welfare and prosperity of the great empire of which this House is the centre and support. I can assure the House that in whatever circumstances I am placed I shall express to it my conscientious convictions of the measures proposed, whether they be the acts of the Minister of the day, or of those who are opposed to them. I shall be always ready to give such an opinion as I think may tend to the permanent improvement of our institutions— never, as I observed on another occasion, never defending abuses as if they were institutions, and on the other hand never being ready to sacrifice institutions as if they were abuses. I have only further to say, with regard to the Members of this House with whom I have conducted public affairs for many years, that while I am grateful to those who have been my supporters, I wish personally to express a hope, with regard to our opponents, that in all our future relations there may be no feeling of personal bitterness between us; and if our resignation tends to the future welfare and prosperity of the country, I shall always look with satisfaction to the day on which that event occurred. I now, Sir, move that the House at its rising do adjourn to Monday next.
Lord Stanley: The announcement which has just been made by the noble Lord will, I am sure, convince every Member of the House, on whichever side he may sit, of the impropriety of entering now
480
into any discussion of those bygone transactions which have led to differences between the two great parties in the State, and ultimately, as we have just heard, to the resignation of her Majesty's Ministers. But I should do injustice to the feelings, I am sure, of the House, not less than to the tone and manner in which the noble Lord who has just sat down has addressed us, if I did not express from this side of the House, what I am convinced is felt by all—a cordial participation in the sentiment of the noble Lord, that whatever may have been our political differences throughout those great contests, no sentiment of personal bitterness has been engendered in the minds of any of its Members. Sir, it was my good fortune, for some time, to have the honour of acting in political accordance with the noble Lord; it has been my misfortune for some years conscientiously to differ from the course which the noble Lord has seen it to be his duty to follow; but, as I claim for myself, and for every Gentleman who has felt it his duty to oppose him, the belief on the part of the House, that we have acted from conscientious motives, and from none other, so I fully give to the noble Lord the credit of having been influenced by no consideration but the sense of duty, which, with a man of his high honour, must be paramount to every other. Every one who has watched his conduct, must regard it with no sentiments but those of admiration of the great zeal, perseverance, ability, and talent, with which, not only in the duties of his own department, but in the management of the political business of this House, the noble Lord has uniformly conducted the very arduous and difficult task which was assigned to him. I will go back to make no observations on the statement which the noble Lord has made of the course pursued in Parliament, further than to point out what appeared to me to involve some degree of inaccuracy on the part of the noble Lord when he stated, somewhat unhappily, that in resigning office he was content, having triumphed in the assertion of great principles, to fall in the assertion of great principles also. Now, the noble Lord must permit me to say, that having in the course of the last Session of Parliament, received no very unequivocal demonstration that her Majesty's Government as a whole, did not possess the confidence of this House, which the noble

481
Lord justly says, is necessary to enable any Minister to carry on the business of the country, the noble Lord and his colleagues proposed certain measures, into a discussion of which I am not now about to enter; but the only one of those questions discussed by the House was negatived. It thus appeared manifest to the noble Lord and the House, that there were but two alternatives to be adopted by her Majesty's Ministers—the alternative of the resignation of their offices, or that of an appeal to the country with regard to their policy. No Gentleman, so far as I have heard, on this side of the House, denied that it was perfectly competent and constitutional for the noble Lord to resort to either of those alternatives. He advised her Majesty to appeal to the people, and the sense of the people, which has been echoed by the House of Commons on a late occasion, was pronounced unequivocally and dis-distinctly against the measures of the Government. But, Sir, when the noble Lord says, that on the first day of the Session, he felt it to be his duty to submit great measures to the decision of the House, which had been rejected, I must take the liberty of saying to the House, and the noble Lord, that this does not convey an accurate statement of the matter as it really was; because, neither by any possible acquiescence could the House have assented to the individual measures which the noble Lord proposed to introduce, nor by refusing to assent to the Address did the House in any way pledge itself as to the principles which the noble Lord said were under discussion. If I were to require an illustration of this, I would only point out, that whereas one sentence of the Address contained expressions relative to a particular part of the budget, it was supported by Gentlemen who agreed with the measures of the noble Lord, and by others who did not agree with them, but desired the adoption of a principle carrying them much further. It was also supported by other Gentlemen, like the noble Lord, the Member for Lincolnshire (Lord Worsley), who were altogether opposed to those measures, and protested that they did not by any means, in assenting to the Address, assent to those measures; but what this House said, and what I think the House was justified in saying, was, that under the circumstances in which the country was placed, the matters to which the Crown had
482
invited our attention were considerations of too great importance to be deliberated upon incidentally in the House of Commons, which, after all, could come to no decision upon them, from the form in which they were put, and in the absence of any Government possessing the confidence of the House and the country. Therefore it was thought right on the late occasion, not to refuse assent to any of the recommendations which it pleased her Majesty to make, but at once to assert that they had not that confidence in her Majesty's present advisers, which should justify them in proposing measures of great importance to the consideration of Parliament. And I must take this opportunity of expressing my regret that the Speech was so framed as to be liable to a misconstruction in the eyes of the country, to which I am certain the noble Lord, of all men, would desire it should not be subject. I cannot but feel, that the advice of the Government to Parliament to consider these great questions, coupled with the words in which the Speech was couched, would lead in the public mind to an impression perfectly erroneous, and perfectly unconstitutional of course—that those recommendations were the recommendations of the Crown, and not of the Ministers who constitutionally advise the Crown. I do not wish, as I said before, to revive any topics of discussion in the present state of the House. I am satisfied that the noble Lord having bowed, as his constitutional feeling would lead him to bow, to the expression of the feeling of this House and the country, and paid that homage to constitutional principles which I trust every Minister will always be ready to yield, by resigning office when he no longer has the power of carrying his measures with credit to himself and satisfaction to the country, from this moment all feeling of excitement between the noble Lord and Gentlemen on this side of the House will, if it ever existed, entirely cease. I am confident that towards the noble Lord personally, no feelings are entertained but those of respect for his person, and admiration for his talents; and I give to him and the noble Lord at the head of the Government, who has for some time had the delicate and important duty of advising, as the noble Lord says, an inexperienced and youthful Sovereign—I give them both full credit for having in the course of their Government adopted

483
those measures, and those measures only, which they deemed to be for the welfare of the country. I give them the credit of believing, that ceasing to hold office, they will not attempt to disturb those who may be called upon to undertake the business of the country by a factious opposition; but that while they steadily maintain in Parliament the views which, on political matters, they conscientiously entertain and are bound boldly to express, the noble Lord and his colleagues, in whose hands soever power may be placed, will witness with great satisfaction the progress of measures which will redound to the welfare of the country and the happiness of the people.
Lord J. Russell: I am extremely sorry, that any misconstruction has prevailed in any quarter. I thought it was generally understood, that the Speech from the Throne was the speech of Ministers. I am quite ready to say, that I hope no such misconstruction will continue to exist. The speech was the result of the advice of Ministers, and Ministers alone are responsible for it.
The question that the House at its rising do adjourn till Monday agreed to.
On the question that the consideration of the Lords Commissioners speech be deferred till Monday,

PERSONAL EXPLANATION.
Mr. J. S. Wortleysaid, he should ask the indulgence of the House for a few moments, while he referred to something that was said by the noble Lord opposite in the late debate, and he hoped the circumstances of the case would be sufficient to justify him. The noble Lord, at the close of a debate of four nights, and at three o'clock in the morning, when the House was in expectation of the important division which immediately afterwards took place, had thrown upon him imputations under which he was unwilling to rest. His respect for the House had at that time prevented him from interposing in order to offer any explanation. On the next day the noble Lord, for good and sufficient reasons no doubt, did not make his appearance in that House. The present, therefore, was the first opportunity he had been able to take, and the only one he was likely to have, to perform the duty which he conceived was incumbent on him, to set himself right with the House on this point. The noble Lord, in the first place, had, as
484
he considered, entirely misrepresented the opinions he had stated on the general question of the Poor-laws. He should not, however, now enter upon the subject, as he should find other opportunities of doing so. The noble Lord had also accused him of having gone down to Yorkshire in order to raise an Anti-Poor-law cry against Lord Morpeth. He wished to ask what right the noble Lord had to make any such charge? The noble Lord could know nothing personally of the facts of the case, except from the account of some strong partisan, or perhaps from the columns of that calumnious press of which he seemed so ready to complain when its attacks were directed against himself. The noble Lord could not know that in 1837, when he (Mr. J. S. Wortley) was engaged in a contest of the same description, proposals were made to him by parties feeling strongly with respect to the Poor-laws, that he should make them the subject of a party cry. Representations were made to him that it would lend force to the exertions of his friends, and he was also told by the parties connected with the noble Lord, that if he would consent to take up the question, and at once declare himself in favour of the repeal of the law, he might count on the accession of hundreds who would otherwise not vote for him. His answer was, that he cared not what the effect of the course they suggested might be, but he would refuse to take that course. He said he would state his opinions on the subject distinctly, that he would never undertake to vote for the total repeal of the law, because he considered that there were parts of it which deserved to be maintained. When it was remembered that he was only 400 behind on that occasion, it would be admitted, that had he given his consent to the course recommended, he might have then stood in the situation he now occupied. At the last election similar representations were made to him, and he returned the same answer; therefore the noble Lord had no right to accuse him of having raised the Anti-Poor-law cry, as he said, in order to turn out Lord Morpeth. The hon. Member for Sheffield had said, that by some of his (Mr. Wortley's) supporters cards were thrown among the crowd, with figures of the Bastile upon them. That was, no doubt, one of the jokes of the election; but he might as well accuse the noble Lord of the hon.

485
Gentleman of raising the cry of cheap bread, with figures of the big loaf and the little loaf.
Mr. Roebuckrose to order. There was no question before the House.
The Speaker: The question is that the Lords Commissioners speech be considered on Monday next.
Mr. Wortleywas perfectly aware he was not speaking strictly to the question; but he had thrown himself on the indulgence of the House. He had said it was the only opportunity he should have— Mr. Roebuck rose again to order. The hon. Gentleman was referring to a preceding debate, and that was contrary to one of the rules of the House.
The Speakersaid, that rule applied in all cases, but where a Member had a personal complaint to make, it was usual to grant him the indulgence of making it.
Mr. Roebucksaid, what he objected to was, that the hon. Member having defended himself made attacks upon others.
Mr. Wortleyhad not said anything which could be considered an attack upon the hon. and learned Member for Bath, or any of his Friends.
Mr. Roebuck; No, not against me.
Mr. Wortleyhad meant to show, that it was too much to make him responsible for matters of the kind alluded to by the hon. Member for Sheffield, for he might just as well say, the noble Lord opposite was responsible for a placard which covered the walls of every street in the Metropolis on the previous day, announcing that the Queen of England was to consider herself now no other than a State prisoner. If hon. Members were to consider each other responsible for such popular topics of clamour, there was no knowing where it would end. He considered that, the noble Lord might better have refrained from throwing out random imputations against him.
Lord J. Russellobserved, that in what he had stated the other night, he had taken for his authority not mere random imputations or rumours, but accounts which he had seen of the speeches made by the hon. Member, and especially an address, signed "J. S. Wortley," issued with a view to the West Riding election. [The noble Lord read the first paragraph of the Address, which Mr. Wortley acknowledged.] He had not Found fault with the hon. Member for holding opinions against the
486
new Poor-law, or for opposing any of the Former Members, but for stating those strong opinions against the new Poor-law at the time of the election; and when the House met, so far was the hon. Member from endeavouring to enforce his opinions, that he took the first opportunity to place persons in power who were the strongest supporters of that law. The hon. Member said in his address,
"As to the character of the new Poor-law, my objections remain unchanged, as well as to the Administration of the Commissioners."
The hon. Member then went on to protest against relief being given only in the work-house, and concluded by saying,
" It appears to me clear, that this law must undergo much alteration, and I shall always approach the subject, whether the law is to be altered or repealed, with a deep conviction, that the first principle I should be guided by is, tenderness to the poor."
He did not find fault with those opinions, but he said, that any hon. Member who thought a man should not be obliged to accept the workhouse as a condition of relief, who thought it a hardship for a man to be separated from his family, and who thought it was a question whether the law should not be totally repealed, ought not, when he came forward to bring the condition of the country before the House, to have omitted these important matters. The hon. Member said, that some persons had called for cheap bread, and had pointed out the difference between a little loaf and a big loaf. He (Lord J. Russell) hoped that those who had done so, did do so in the belief that an alteration of the Corn-laws would give the poor a large loaf, and they were consistent in their opinions when they proposed an alteration in the Corn-laws; but if the persons who had done this out of doors, were to enter the House and never make mention of the Corn-laws, then he should say that their belief in the advantage of an alteration of those laws was not very sincere. The hon. Gentleman had not convinced him, by his speech on the first night of the Session, that he attached any very great importance to an alteration of the new Poor-law. It would be seen by the subsequent speeches of the hon. Member whether, though he might think the subject one of small concern, he was disposed to vote for an extensive alteration or a total abolition of the present Poor-law.
The question agreed to.

OATH OF SUPREMACY.
Sir V. Blakespoke to the following effect:—Sir, I do not expect you will assent to my proposition to repeal the Oath of Supremacy without grave deliberation. That oath was the prop that was invented to sustain the Reformation in its infancy—and surely it cannot be considered as appropriate food to sustain the establishment, now that it has grown up to a position which will entitle it, if purely administered, to endure for ever. This oath, and the distinction between Whig and Tory, emanated from the same circumstance. The struggle between those two great parties of the State, which has lasted for a period of 200 years, may be said to be now suspended, if not terminated for ever. I speak those sentiments from a consideration of the manly and statesman-like pledge that was given within the last two nights, by the right hon. Member for Tarn worth, and if he is enabled to carry out the views by him so eloquently expressed, that distinction to which I have alluded will cease. But if he fails in the performance, he will, thereby, keep alive the distinction just in the same way that the Whigs, by neglecting those opportunities which they had to attach the whole empire to them, kept alive their opponents, and now their successors in office. Sir, I have the fullest confidence in the sincerity and honour of the right hon. Baronet, but I confess that I am doubtful of his power to allay the troubled spirits of some of his followers. It may be, however, prudent for them to recollect, that if he proves his sincerity, as I am sure he will, he will not require the aid of intemperate men to sustain him in power, while on the other hand, they can never exist as a party, ruling the destinies of this great empire, except in unison with him, and in accordance with his recently avowed principles. Sir, I think that the proper opportunity is not yet arrived to obtain a calm consideration of the merits of my intended bill for the abolition of this Oath of Supremacy, and, therefore, with the permission of the House, I beg leave to withdraw my notice for the present, as the whole object of my presenting it has already been accomplished.
Motion withdrawn.
House adjourned to the ensuing Monday.

MINUTES.
Bills. Read first time:—Foreigners Consecration Act Amendment; Demise of Lands by Incumbents; Spiritual Corporations Leases; Attorneys and Solicitors Consolidation; and Earl of Scarborough's Indemnity. — Read second time:—Administration of Justice.—Read third time and passed:—Buildings Regulation; Boroughs Improvement.

RESIGNATION OF MINISTERS.
Viscount Melbourne: My Lords, I consider it my duty to acquaint your Lordships, that in consequence of the vote which was come to by the other House of Parliament on Saturday morning last, which was precisely similar in terms to a vote come to by your Lordships at an earlier period of the week, I have, on the part of ray colleagues and myself, tended to her Majesty the resigna-
474
tion of the offices we hold, which resignation her Majesty has been graciously pleased to accept, and we now continue to hold those offices only till our successors are appointed.

DRAINAGE or TOWNS.
The Marquess of Normanby,in moving the third reading of the Buildings Regulations Bill, and the Borough Improvements Bill, said, he had no objection to accede to the amendments proposed by the hon. and learned Lord (Lyndhurst) in those measures. With regard to the third bill (the Drainage of Towns' Bill) which he had presented to their Lordships, subsequent inquiries had induced him to consider that it would be more desirable that the Bill should originate in another place. He would therefore withdraw it.
The Boundaries Regulation Bill and the Borough Improvements Bill were respectively read a third time and passed.

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE BILL.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that as the hill which he had presented to the House the other evening for the better Administration of Justice in England had already passed their Lordships' House, and was precisely in the same state in which it had been left by the House of Commons at the close of the last Session, he trusted their Lordships would see no objection to its being then read a second time, in order that it might be considered in committee on Monday next.
Lord Broughamsaw no objection to the proposition of his noble and learned Friend, inasmuch as his objections to the bill would be more properly considered in committee. He had no objection to the principle of the bill, therefore he should not oppose the second reading.
Bill read a second time.

BILL OF INDEMNITY.
The Lord Chancellorconsidered it his duty to inform the House that a certain noble Lord (understood to be the Earl of Scarborough) after he had taken the oaths, had been guilty of a most curious omission. He had omitted to subscribe the roll of Parliament, and by so doing, having subsequently sat and voted, he had subjected himself to certain penalties. He proposed, therefore, to introduce a bill to indemnify the noble Lord from the consequences of the omission, and on Monday next he should move that the

475
standing orders be suspended, in order to enable the bill to pass forthwith.
Bill read a first time.
House adjourned to the ensuing Monday.