Sitting of 12 June 1841

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a first time:—Register of Voters. —Read a third time:—Bribery at Elections; Metropolis Improvements (No. 2); County Bridges (No. 2).
Petitions presented. By Mr. Briscoe, from Thowlwood, and Nutclough, by Mr. T. Duncombe, from Finsbury, and other parts of the Metropolis, by Mr. Ewart, from various parts of the Metropolis, and by the Solicitor-general, from Bolton, in favour of the Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By the Solicitor-general, from inhabitants of London, for the Abolition of the Toll on Southwark, Waterloo, and Vauxhall Bridges.—By Mr. Smythe, from Canterbury, against the proposed Alteration in the Corn-laws.—By Sir R. H. Inglis, from Whitton, and Aukborough (Lincolnshire), praying for Church Extension.—By Mr. Chapman, from Greenock, Liverpool, and other places, against the proposed Alteration of the Timber Duties.

APPROPRIATION—BUSINESS OF THE SESSION.
On the motion that the Appropriation Bill be committed,
Sir G. Sinclairsaid, that he, of course, should not offer the slightest objection to the progress of this bill, but he could not help observing that, within the memory of man, no Session had ever occurred at the close of which the people received so small a return, in the shape of useful and practical legislation, for so enormous a sum of money as it was now proposed to appropriate for the public service. He had of late been paying considerable attention to the somewhat mournful subject of Parliamentary necrology; and he observed every day with sorrow, but without surprise, that so many measures of great interest and value took their places in the diurnal obituary, and were included in the bills of mortality. The reams of paper wasted in printing during this Session would suffice to supply all the trunk-makers and tallow-chandlers in the metropolis with materials for the next six months. He did not by any means intend to cast exclusive blame upon the Government for this inauspicious and unsatisfactory result. All parties were equally in fault for having not only tolerated, but he would even say, encouraged, the pernicious and preposterous practice of adjourning debates—a practice which, if not put an end to by common consent, must inevitably bring on a national bankruptcy, as far as the public time was concerned, and leave very inadequate dividends to be appropriated for the diversified exigencies of legislation. The evil had been greatly aggravated during the course of this Session; "and, Sir," (said the hon. Baronet), "I may without impropriety, utter a complaint on this subject, as I have taken no part in any of these wearisome discussions to which I allude, and by which the public out of doors (I speak of all classes and of all parties) has been both exasperated and disgusted. Many persons are inclining to the opinion, that 658 honest operatives, who spoke less, and did more, would carry on public business with far greater advantage and satisfaction to the empire. The two debates on the sugar duties and the no-confidence question almost engrossed the space of a honeymoon—the one having begun during the first week in May, and the other having terminated during the first week in June; and if at the commencement of the former I had set out for
1478
Caithness, I might have passed one or two days at my own house in that remote district, and then returned to London, without any inconvenience, in ample time for the division. Another reason why the whole Session has been nearly thrown away (so far as measures are concerned), and why so many bills have been relinquished, is, that the leaders on both sides (of whom I wish to speak with all respect) so seldom condescend to address the House at a reasonable hour. They seem to be, if I may so express myself, avidi nimis auricularum, and are unable or unwilling to speak with empty stomachs or to empty benches; but if they would only, like the Horatii and Curiatii, stand forward at once as the accredited champions of their respective parties, the House would not be deserted at seven o'clock, as it now invariably is, and their respective adherents would, I believe, in general, be quite satisfied to leave the discussion entirely in their hands." The hon. Baronet then went on to say—" The accomplished debaters who occupy the front benches are but little aware of the sotto voce chorus of murmurs which their orations, however able, excite among the exhausted malcontents who' sit with sad civility' behind them. I may perhaps be allowed to put a hypothetical case, and to suppose that the Roman Senate had been so absurd and unwise as to devote the night to legislation. When the younger Members strutted in at a late hour, gorged with crude peacocks and hot with the Tuscan grape, I have no doubt that before they had long resumed their seats such objurgatory expressions of uneasiness would be gently interchanged as these—' Surely, Hortensius is particularly heavy to night.' ' Don't you think Lucullus is intolerably long-winded?' ' Ah, Cæsar, I wish to Morpheus you would hold your tongue and sit down; what you say is all very true, my fine fellow, but there is a time for all things, and we have heard these arguments at least a dozen times already.' And it must not be supposed that these comments would have at all been dictated by party spleen. Drowsiness, like death, levels all distinctions; and if the leader of the Movement party at Rome had addressed the House after midnight, before he had half concluded his speech, the great majority of his adherents would have begun to mutter between their teeth—

1479
" ' Quosque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientià nostrâ?'
and, although Brutus was an eloquent as well as an ' honourable man,' the sternest Republican would have ejaculated ' et tu, Brute !' if he had risen to reply at half-past three o'clock in the morning. Nay, he could even suppose the case of some plain, lackadaisical country senator, summoned from the plough, like Cincinnatus (not, however, to save the country by his sword, but to aid a party by his suffrage), sauntering about sunrise in the lobby, lengthways and breadthways alternately, with his hands crossed behind his back, whistling for want of thought, and exclaiming almost every five minutes to the door-keeper, in a semi-plaintive, semi-querulous tone, and with a face full of disconsolate impatience, ' Is Cicero still up !' The inconvenience, or rather torment, to which Members are subjected by the present regulations and practices is very imperfectly remedied by the expedient of pairing-off—a boon which is always most peremptorily denied to those who most stand in need of it. The later the hour, and the nearer the division, the more each of the masters of the ceremonies on either side becomes—
" Impiger, iracundus, inexorabilis, acer;"
and veterans who have hobbled down upon crutches, or valetudinarians who have been carried up in litters, ought, like a soldier when enduring corporal punishment, to have a doctor standing by to feel their pulses, and ascertain whether their lives may not be endangered by being compelled to sit up for another hour. I shall now very briefly state the only alternative of remedies which has occurred to me, and for which I think I almost deserve at medal from the Humane Society. I admit that our constituents are entitled to expect that we shall look after their interests, and attend to the business of the country, until a reasonable hour, but no longer. Now, supposing eleven o'clock to be, as I think it is, the period at which we should be released from the fatigue and turmoil of legislation, I propose that the officers of the House should at that time take their stations in the lobby, with the printed lists in their hands, and that all Members who have made up their minds how they shall vote should have their names marked, and be considered as included in the di-
1480
vision, as if they had needlessly and reluctantly remained for three or four hours longer, and gone through the ceremony of being successively tapped on the shoulder by the tellers. I cannot, I confess, see any very powerful objections to this plan. The curious, in long speeches, or the conscientious scruplemongers, if any such there be, with whom the debate has any influence in determining how they shall give their suffrages, might remain until the end; the orators might proceed without an ungracious accompaniment of yells and yawnings, and the only other consequence would be, a diminished consumption of stamped covers in the library, of sodawater in the lobby, and of cigars in the smoking-room. The second mode of obviating this great inconvenience would be by a regulation, that the debate should terminate at night, but the division not to take place until the House met again; when the question might at once be put from the Chair, and decided without any further discussion—an arrangement which would enable the Members who had remained until the end, to weigh more maturely the arguments to which they had listened, whilst those who had been unable to sit up until the close, might have the benefit of reading in the public prints, before giving their votes, the harangues which they had not had the good fortune to hear, or I should perhaps say, in a great majority of cases, the good fortune not to hear. I therefore venture to throw out these suggestions for the consideration of the future Parliament, and would say to every Gentleman now present—
" —Si quid novisti rectius istis Candidus imperti; si non his utere mecum."
House in Committee.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved the usual clause of appropriation which was agreed to.
House resumed; Report to be received.

CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS
Sir G. Clerkmoved the second reading of the Controverted Elections Trial Amendment Bill.
Mr. V. Smithsaid, he would not object to the motion, though there were many parts of the bill which he should much like to see changed. He was the less disposed to object to it, because he looked upon it as an experiment which would be tried in the first Session of a

1481
new Parliament. He however, must take the opportunity of saying, that no trial of a controverted election could ever be satisfactorily tried, until the jurisdiction was removed altogether from the House.
Sir G. Clerksaid, that the observations of the hon. Gentleman did not apply to the immediate question before the House. It would be impossible at the present period of the Session, to discuss the general subject to which the hon. Member had referred. The object of the present bill was merely to introduce some alterations in the existing law, particularly as regarded the Committee of Selection. It was desirable, that the bill should be made as complete as possible, and the provisions now proposed to be introduced in it were merely intended to remove certain difficulties which had occurred. One of the alterations proposed, was to make the attendance of the Chairman of the committee compulsory. He agreed entirely with the hon. Gentleman who recommended that change. Some such enactment was necessary, for it would be impossible to secure their attendance without it. Another alteration was for the purpose of removing difficulties which had occurred with regard to the serving of notices. Another difficulty had arisen as to cases where more than one petition had been presented against a return. It was proposed to consider all such as one petition, and refer them to the Committee of Selection. His right hon. Friend proposed to re-enact the whole of the former bill, and the alterations proposed to be introduced would be printed in italics, so that hon. Members could see at a glance the alterations intended.
Mr. Orddid not think the law had totally failed; on the contrary, he thought it a great improvement on the old law. He objected to giving to any tribunal out of the House the power of trying election petitions.
Viscount Mahonwould not oppose the bill, though he still adhered to the opinion he had already expressed—that neither the present nor any other measure for the trial of election petitions would be successful which left the jurisdiction in that House in all such cases. The House was now so divided by party, and hostile political collision between those parties so frequent, that he considered the House quite incompetent to give that calm and impartial consideration to election ques-
1482
tions which they required, and which, in his opinion, could be expected only from the high judicial authority of the land. In saying this, he meant to cast no imputation on any Member or body of Members, and he considered his observations applied to himself with the same force that they did to any other Member.
Mr. C. Bullerthought the bill had introduced a great deal of practical good, and he considered it still more valuable as a step to further improvement. He thought the plan of the right hon. Baronet had had the effect of increasing the intelligence of election committees. He thought the mode of selecting the Chairman a great improvement, and he thought it desirable to have as permanent a Chairman as possible. The question whether such Chairman should be of the House or out of the House, was a very grave one, and required much consideration. He was not prepared to go to the extent of making the service of the Chairman compulsory. No set of men would be harder worked than they would be during the' next Session, and it would be a monstrous injustice to the Chairman, and doubling the difficulties of the Committee of Selection. He therefore, hoped, that no such clause would be proposed.
Mr. Prymedid not think this a very valuable measure, but he must admit, that it had not yet had a fair trial. One thing he thought deserved notice. He thought the Committee of Selection exercised too little care and caution in seeing that the persons chosen as chairmen of committees had no local connection of any sort with the matter which the committee had to try. Want of sufficient caution in that respect tended to bring back one of the great evils of the old system which it was intended to get rid of. He did not mean to impute any intentional partiality in the selection of chairmen of election committees. What he wanted to impress on the House was the necessity of due caution in such choice.
Lord Eliotsaid, that no Member was ever chosen Chairman who was known to be in any way locally connected, however remotely, with the county, city, or borough, the return for which he had to try. One thing he thought would be an improvement in the selection of committees. It was, that they should be reduced from seven Members to five. The responsibility would be greater in the case of

1483
each Member, and greater attention would be paid. This was the opinion of many eminent counsel who were in the habit of practising before election committees.
Bill read a second time.

HIGHWAY-RATES.
On the question that the report of the Highway Rates Bill be brought up,
Captain Pechellopposed the motion. He objected to the bill on principle. It went to give the justices a power to appropriate highway rates to private property. He felt persuaded, that the House was not aware of the great power it gave to the county magistrates. He should, therefore, move, that the report on the bill be brought up that day three months.
Mr. Goringsaid, that the bill, instead of injuring the public, was calculated, in a very great degree, to guard against expense being incurred by parishes, inasmuch as by its operation the roads were prevented being in such a situation as that an indictment would lie. It was, he thought, of material importance, that the bill should be continued.
Sir C. Burrell,said the bill was approved of by the Government—and it was in the opinion of many persons absolutely necessary, to enable the trustees of roads to maintain them. It was no violation of principle, for under the old law, statute labour had been applied to the repair of turnpike roads.
Lord Eliotsuggested, that as there were not then Members enough to make a House, the hon. Member should not press his amendment to a division, as it would delay the progress of other bills to which no objections existed.
Captain Pechellwould not object to the adjournment of the debate, but would not withdraw his opposition to the bill.
Amendment withdrawn, and debate adjourned; House adjourned.