but if the opinions of the right hon. Baronet and the late Member for Ripon be correct, those hon. Gentlemen will have to go back to their constituents again, for many of their patents are not sealed at the present moment; and the right hou. Member for Dorchester will have the happy opportunity for another oratorical display in his ingenious misapprehension of some of the dinner speeches which may be delivered in the mean time. The conduct of these hon. Gentlemen, acting with the concurrence of the right hon. Baronet, manifests the real opinion entertained by that side of the House. The case put by the right hon. Baronet justly leads to the very opposite conclusion to that which he professes to have drawn. He says some act of formal acceptance in writing ought to be the foundation for the vacating the seat of the Member, and that some solemn act should be done by the Crown to secure to the Member the certainty of the office the acceptance of which is to deprive the Member of his seat. But surely it is obvious, that a more direct evasion of the statute cannot be imagined, nor a more successful attack upon the independence of Parliament, than that the Crown by its first Minister should make a distinct offer of a place which the Crown has the power of bestowing, and that the Member should declare his acceptance of that office, and yet should retain his seat for any indefinite period, during which it might suit the purposes of the Minister to delay the formal act of appointment, in

make anything like an attack upon the right hon. and learned Gentleman, but merely to vindicate the authority, consistency, and independence of this House. But the weight and authority which attaches to the speeches of the right hon. Baronet in this House, makes principles if erroneous, and supposed to be deliberately asserted by him, very dangerous to the country and the circumstances under which he has now spoken, will induce an impression, that he has uttered sentiments which have the sanction of his deliberate judgment. But I am persuaded, that neither the language nor object of the statute of Anne can have been considered by him, and that the Parliamentary course and usage ever since the statute passed must have been entirely overlooked by him, and that he is utterly unacquainted with the clear and strong opinions expressed by several of the hon. Gentlemen now sitting around him when they occupied seats on this side of the House, utterly at variance with those which the right hon. Baronet now professes to entertain. I am satisfied, that a very short investigation would convince the House and the right hon. Baronet, that those opinions he has pronounced are inconsistent alike with the statute, with the Parliamentary usage, and the integrity of the House. There is not the slightest foundation for the proposition that any more formal act of acceptance of an office under the Crown is necessary to vacate the seat, than the announcement of the fact to this House by the first Minister of the Crown, confirmed by the state-order that in the interval he might possess ment of the Member himself; and I am prepared to satisfy the House, that it is quite immaterial whether the place is conferred by patent or in any other mode; and when the right hon. Gentleman, the late Member for Ripon, contended that it was necessary to the vacating of the seat, that the patent granting the office should be issued and accepted, he entirely overlooked the convenience and safety of several of the hon. Gentlemen around him, all of whom, acting contrary to his view, have treated their intimation of acquiescence to the first Lord of the Treasury in the offer made to them of their respective appointments as an acceptance by them of such appointments within the meaning of the act of Parliament, and as having vacated their seats, and acting upon such conviction, have procured themselves to be re-elected by their several constituencies;

the vote of the Member; and should, during that time, effectually control the voter by his fears, that a vote displeasing to the Minister would deprive him of the reward of his corruption. The state of depend. ence thus produced is utterly inconsistent with the unbiassed discharge of his duty to his constituents, and is the very evil contemplated by the statute, and for which the remedy of sending him back to his constituents was devised. As the motion I am about to make is unopposed, I cannot with propriety trespass at greater length on the attention of the House, for the purpose of calling its notice to the language and object of the statute, and of the Parliamentary construction which that language has received; and I must content myself with solemnly protesting against the doctrines advanced by the right hon. Baronet, and with asserting that it has

In Mr. Horsman's case,

there could be no doubt, that he had written to his constituents, that office had been offered to him, and that he had accepted it. Yet he voted in the House after the date of that letter, and the House did not interfere. In the present instance, I have no hesitation in acceding to the motion for a new writ, as I know the necessary instruments are so far ad. vanced as to constitute an acceptance of office.

been the constant course of Parliament, as | conversation.
well in regard of the office of steward of
the Chiltern Hundreds, as of every other
office of profit under the Crown, to act
upon the admission of the Member him-
self, or any one authorised by him, of his
having accepted the office, as a sufficient
ground for issuing a new writ, without any
inquiry whether the office had been form-
ally bestowed or not. I have, therefore,
only to move, that a writ be issued for the
election of a burgess to serve in this
House for the city of Ripon, in the place
of the right hon. Sir E. Sugden, Knt.,
who has accepted the office of Lord
Chancellor of Ireland.

Sir R. Peel said, he had not vacated his seat till the patent was in his hands.

Sir J. Graham also stated that he had not vacated his seat until he had kissed her Majesty's hands on his appointment.

Mr. C. Wood said, that in the very last report on this subject, a committee of the House-a committee on which the right hon. Baronet next the right hon. Member for Tamworth had sat, if not the right hon. Member himself-w f-was at direct variance with the principle laid down by the right hon. Baronet. In that case, the case of Mr. Wynn, no difficulty had been made in issuing a new writ; yet it was perfectly well known and admitted, that the right hon. Gentleman did not receive his patent of appointment until two months after his re-election. It was most desirable, as Mr. Wynn himself had suggested, that some course should be taken by the House to define what did constitute the acceptance of office. In the case of Mr. Wynn there was no act done before he vacated his seat; all that he had received was an intimation that directions would be given for making out his patent, and he thereupon vacated his seat, the patent itself not being made out for two months after. Sir R. Peel: I did not concur altogether in the opinion of my right hon. and learned Friend, the Member for Ripon, as expressed yesterday, that the completion of the patent was necessary before a new writ could issue. I should have no objection whatever that it should be understood that the tender of an office under the Crown in writing, and the acceptance of it, also in writing, by the person to whom it was offered, should constitute a vacation of the seat. I think there ought to be some record of the transaction, and that it should not be left to rest upon mere

Lord J. Russell certainly thought that the principle stated by the right hon. Baronet might be productive of serious inconveniences to the public, especially in the case of the subordinate Members of the Government.

The new writ was ordered.

The reason

THE PROROGATION.] Mr. C. P. Villiers wished to ask the right hon. Baronet what was the probable duration of the prorogation of Parliament ? why he wished to put this question was, that an hon. Member on the Ministerial side of the House had stated in his place, that nothing that had fallen from the right hon. Baronet ought to lead to the conclusion that Parliament would be prorogued to so late a period as February.

Sir R. Peel begged to state, that he had made no communication on the subject to any hon. Member who could have made such a remark; he himself had not heard any such remark, and did not at all understand to whom the hon. Gentleman opposite referred.

Mr. Villiers: To the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley.)

Sir R. Peel said, that the hon. Member for Finsbury had made such a statement without any authority from him. The hon. Gentleman opposite must be aware, that it was impossible for the hon. Memher to give any assurance to the House on the subject.

Mr. Villiers said, that he had not described the hon. Member for Finsbury to make the statement as upon the authority of the right hon. Gentleman. A doubt had been raised in the public mind on the subject, and it was the object of his question to set it at rest.

Sir R. Peel said, he had never heard a question of that nature put to a Minister before. It was one to which he could not, consistently with his duty, return an anThe period of the meeting of Par

swer.

Mr. Villiers thought the right hon. Gentleman did say, that if no extraordinary circumstances occurred, Parliament would meet at the ordinary period. They might therefore, he thought, justly infer, that it would be in February.

PRIVATE BILLS COMMITTEES.] Mr. Ewart rose to move the following resolutions, of which he had given notice :

liament might depend on circumstances House. The committees of the House of which it was impossible to foresee. He, Commons were not only partial tribunals, therefore, should give no option what- but, from their size, inconvenient for acever on the subject. complishing the ends of justice. They ought to be purified, and diminished in point of numbers. The remedies which he ventured to suggest, were, in the first place, to propose, that committees should be more nearly assimilated to judicial tribunals. How was that to be effected? By removing as far as possible all motives of partiality. His next desire was to increase the responsibility and efficiency of committees. A body of thirty-five Members had a much more divided responsi"1. That it is expedient that committees on bility than a body consisting only of seven private bills should be approximated, more Members. He proposed, therefore, to innearly than they now are, to judicial tribunals, and exempted, as much as possible, from all crease their responsibility by reducing the motives of local and personal interest. And number from thirty-eight to seven. The that the responsibility and efficiency of such House of Lords had reduced their comcommittees would be promoted by diminish-mittees from an almost unlimited number ing the number of Members composing them. to five, and prohibited any Member, di2. That, with a view of attaining these rectly or indirectly interested, from sitting. objects, the number of Members composing In the year 1838, the Duke of Richmond committees on opposed private bills be reduced to seven. was examined before the House, and his evidence would be found to confirm all that he (Mr. Ewart) had said. In the same year the present Speaker and the hon. Member for Lancashire, drew up a set of resolutions on the subject, which, having examined, he found to be essentially the same with those he now proposed. Not only were the suggestions he had made founded on reason, but they came before them sanctioned by the House of Lords, the Speaker of the House of Commons, and the Chairman of the committee of Ways and Means. How had those rules operated in the House of Lords? Why, it was admitted that they had done great good; and, with respect to that House, he believed they had rendered its committees more effective, and their proceedings much more beneficial. The hon. Member concluded by moving the resolutions of which he had given notice.

"3. That such seven Members be appointed by the committee of Selection, after the second reading of such bills. But that previous to such appointment, the committee of Selection do ascertain from each of such seven Members that he is willing to serve, and that he is, neither through his constituents nor him

self, personally interested for or against the bill in question; and that in case he is unable to serve, or is interested as aforesaid, the committee of Selection do appoint some other Member to serve in place of him.

"4. That the committee of Selection appoint no Member to serve on more than one such private bill committee at a time."

He believed, that great ignorance prevailed with regard to the transacting of business by Committees on Private Bills. He believed the right hon. Baronet opposite had had many opportunities of seeing the baneful working of the present system of Private Committees; and he appealed to him whether reform was not to be desired in their machinery and construction. In the first place, these committees were appointed principally from the local connection with the subject, and therefore it was impossible that they could be altogether impartial, being interested either through themselves or their constituents. The system of canvassing that went on during the sitting of a committee, was at variance with the justice of the case under the consideration of the committee, and it was discreditable to the character of the

The question was put on the first resolution.

Mr. Estcourt thought, that the principle laid down by the hon. Member was good, and he was not disposed to controvert it, but he thought he had taken a wrong mode of carrying it out. He would not deny-but that he entertained considerable respect for the opinion which he knew prevailed, not only amongst many Members of that House, but also very extensively out of doors-that in the con

provide that town with good and wholesome water. This was said in reference to a private bill now before Parliament, and the object of which was to deprive him unjustly of some property, and take away part of the water that belonged to him.

Mr. Ewart said, that if the proposition he had made had been founded only upon his own opinion, he should at once assent to the recommendation of the hon. Member for Oxford; but as it was a case on which the public felt very strongly, and as many Gentlemen, of great experience, agreed in his views, and feeling, that, as the House had gone so far, they ought to go still farther, he should take the sense of the House on his motion.

stitution of committees on private bills, the principle of representation ought to have due weight. Committees on private bills might be considered under two aspects; first, as judicial tribunals, and, secondly, as inquisitions. They had to inquire as well as to judge. If their functions had been purely judicial, he Sir G. Clerk hoped the hon. Gentleman, would accede at once to the proposition the Member for Wigan, would withdraw of the hon. Gentleman, but where the his resolutions, as it was not expedient matters brought before them might pos- that the House should, at this period, be sibly lead to extensive inquiry, it appeared called upon to go into the consideration of to him, that a larger number of Members such a subject. The experiment of last ought to be appointed than if their func- Session had not been sufficiently tried, tions were purely judicial, more particu- and that to exclude hon. Members from larly, when, in the result of that in- taking part in an investigation whose conquiry, the constituents of the Members stituents might be interested in the submight be interested. So long as the com-ject matter of a private bill, as proposed mittees had been constituted, as formerly, by the hon. Member, would work positive of a very large number of Members, be- injustice. longing not only to the county interested, but to the neighbouring counties. So long as the Speaker's list had been very large, he would admit that considerable inconvenience arose from the canvassing of agents, but both those evils had been remedied during the two last Sessions of Parliament. He confessed he thought there was very great weight in the arguments of those hon. Members who desired to give that tribunal a representative character. As far, however, as he had been enabled to form an opinion, the amendments of last Session had given general satisfaction. If, after a fair experiment, which could not be afforded in a single Session, the objections urged by the hon. Member should be found to have gained ground, he would then be prepared to accede to his propositions; but as no discontent appeared as yet to exist, he thought that was not a fit time for the hon. Member to press his resolutions. If the same system was preserved in the present as in the last Session of Parliament, and if hon. Members would bind themselves to carry the arrangements into effect, he had no doubt that there would be a most satisfactory result-that no party would be disappointed, and no unnecessary expense incurred. Believing the motion was unnecessary and uncalled for, he should take the liberty of moving the previous question.

Mr. W. Ferrand said, that he should support the resolutions, and if for no other reason, because the Members for Bradford had declared on the Hustings, that they would use their utmost endeavours to

Lord J. Russell: as the hon. Member has declared his intention of taking the sense of the House on his motion, I beg to say a few words in reference to the vote which I intend to give. I agree with my hon. Friend in much that he has stated with respect to the exemption from committees on private bills of local and personal interests, and if any scheme can be devised for giving to those committees a more judicial character, I shall support it. However, though I agree so far as I have stated with the hon. Member, I am not prepared to go the length of saying that local interests should be altogether excluded. I am not prepared to say that, admitting certain local interests, is not a mode by which more information can be obtained, and that more easily in a short time than in the more formal shape of witnesses could be obtained in a much greater length of time. By this mode, and in the form of discussion, more information might be obtained in a short time than in the formal way I have mentioned in a long time. I must, therefore, say, that although I shall vote for the previous question, I do not totally differ in opinion from the

hon. Gentleman, and I hope to see still greater improvement effected in the system.

Mr. Aglionby hoped to see the motion brought forward and discussed in every Session, until greater improvements were effected. While he admitted the right of a constituency to the services of their representative, yet they had no right to have that representative transformed into an interested judge. He thought the best plan which could be adopted would be to allow the representative to attend before the committee, and give information where he happened to be connected with local interests, and he thought this plan would cause the House to stand higher in public opinion.

attend, and have a right to be heard; and then the object being to have the bill postponed, the decision of the committee must be delayed until it would be too late to proceed with the bill. The moment they admitted the right of those persons to be heard, they could not limit the time which they might occupy in speaking [Mr. Aglionby: one hour]. If they approved of the appearance of Members in the character of advocates and witnesses, with a view to sustain the rights of their constituents, the inevitable consequence would be, that the bill they opposed must be lost, and he defied a committee to come in sufficient time to a decision that could expedite the opposed bill through Parliament. If the parties appeared by Sir R. Peel was rather sorry that the counsel, there was a difficulty in restrainhon. Gentleman was about to take the ing even them within reasonable limits. sense of the House on this question. In He had seen a dreadful consumption of his opinion it would be much better to time and waste of money in these matters. give a fair trial to the existing system. He had seen how difficult it was for chairThe public attention had been very strongly men to control counsel-how much more called to the mode in which private busi- difficult to control Members, who would ness was conducted in this House. There appear with a greater authority than could was a strong impression throughout the invest the character of counsel. The uncountry that there were great abuses in fortunate committee, unless it showed the mode of conducting it. Nothing could symptoms of yielding to the opposition, tend more to lower the dignity and cha- would be soon reduced to a despairing racter of Parliament than an improper quorum, even if they could get a quorum, mode of conducting the business on private and at last might throw up the duty bills, and of conveying the impression devolved upon them in disgust. But then that improper influence could be used in as to the proposal of excluding Members. carrying them into effect or impeding If the House decided that the represen them. Great improvements had been tatives of local interests should be preven made under the suggestion of Lord Dum- ted from attending committees, it would fermline and the present Speaker. It was be indeed a very strong measure, and one better, then, to give the present system a that required serious consideration. The fair trial, and not call upon a new Parliament, establishing of a disqualification or excluin which there were so many new Mem- sion of Members was a very dangerous bers, who had not yet had the advantage principle, and they did not know when of seeing how the system worked. He did once adopted how far it might be carried. not think it advisable to take the sense of After all, their best security must be the the House at the present moment. The integrity of Members, controlled by pubhon. Member opposite (Mr. Aglionby) lic opinion. If they said that Members thought that the constituents had the representing local interests should be exright to the services of their represen- cluded, they provoked them to assert a tatives and that it was the duty of the right, and to resist, on the part of their latter to attend and claim to be heard. constituents, the rule they laid down, and Now he had had some experience in these he was very much afraid that they would matters, and what, he would ask, must be bring on debates of that nature, by which the effect of this, in the case, let it be much time would be consumed, and that supposed, of a railroad let it be sup- the House always listened to with great posed that it was the object to defeat the impatience. He wished the new Membill. There would then be the represen-bers of the present Parliament to have tatives of several counties and towns. Then, according to the assumption of the hon. Gentleman, they would be bound to

the opportunity of seeing how the present system worked. If, on experience of it, they must despair of improvement, then