POSTSCRIPT.
SATURDAY.
In the House of Commons last night, Mr. FIORSMAN abandoned his Se- lect Committee on the Vicar of Frome case.
Since the decision of the House was given against the Government, he must say they gave him every facility for the nomination of his Committee. But Mr. Gladstone had proposed that certain heads or articles of charge should be laid before the House, and be referred to the Committee, and had stated that if that were not agreed to by Mr. Herman, he must trouble them with a long speech in favour of doing it. Personally, Mr. Horsman thought that course would much facilitate the inquiries of the Committee, and he had therefore drawn up the articles and got them in his pocket ; but that course was without precedent where no impeachment was intended ; and as Mr. Herman is well aware that not one of the 156 gentlemen who voted for him intended to impeach the Bishop of Bath and Wells, he did not feel entitled to commit the majority to such a course. The great difficulties he had met with in obtaining Members to serve on his Committee, had caused such delay, and the course threatened by Mr. Gladstone would be the cause of so much further delay, that in the present state of public business, he thought it better at once to state, that, in consequence of the difficulties which had been thrown in the way, he did not feel it now his duty to pro- ceed.
Mr. Gransroain justified the course he would have taken, not only by precedent, but upon the highest principles of justice ; to which he appealed with indignation increased by Mr. Horsman's present step.
Did the honourable Member mend his case by saying that he never meant to proceed to impeach the Bishop ? When he said that, he only showed that either he did not understand the nature of his charges or the duty that be- longed to him as a Member of the House. In the case of the Bishop of Worcester, in the 14th volume of the Journals, it appeared that on the 2d of November 1802, complaint was made by Sir J. Pakington against the Bishop of Worcester and Mr. Lloyd his son, and the House considered the same on the 18th of November. -Sir J. Pakington then presented written articles against the Bishop, and did not profess that it was his intention to move his impeachment. The House of Commons upon that occasion addressed the Crown to remove the Bishop of Worcester from his office of Lord High Almoner. [Mr. HORSMAN—" On that occasion evidence was taken at the bar."] And what in the world had that to do with the question ? If it were necessary that articles should be preferred when evidence was taken at the bar before a full House, by so much the more they were necessary when the matter was to be referred to a Select Committee composed of a small number of Members who were not acting in the face of the public. The honourable Member's duty was to proceed as if he were going forward to impeachment ; and the practice of the House had invariably been to afford to the accused those securities without which they would have no remedy against injurious and cruel accu- sations made in that House by honourable Members, who, under the privi- lege of Parliament, went to a Select Committee to fish for materials, and who, like the honourable Member, were acting upon principles much more worthy of other countries and a more Southern meridian than this.
The CHANCELLOR of the Exennearna intimated, that if Mr. Gladstone had proceeded with his amendment, the Government would have felt it their duty on principles of justice to support it. Dismissing the particu- lar ease, the unsatisfactory state of the law remains: it would be the duty of Government to take into their serious consideration the whole question, with a view to applying a remedy to those grievances that ex- ist as to the institution of clerks by Bishops.
In Committee on the Militia Pay Bill, Mr. BERESPORD stated, that consideration had been given to making the force as economical as possi- ble, and instead of 450,0001., which it was thought would be necessary, the charge would be reduced to 283,000/.
An easy and pleasant progress was made with two measures of Law Reform. The Improvement of Equity Jurisdiction Bill was slightly amended, read a third time, and passed. The Common Law Procedure Bill swept rapidly through Committee, with only one important pause on either of its 123 clauses, and that was a good pause. The Arrommic- GENERAL agreed with Sir ALEXANDER Commas, that special demurrers are a disgrace and scandal to the profession ; and thereupon an amend- ment was made by them to clause 51, and clause 52 was struck out en- tirely, so that special demurrers should be extirpated altogether. As the bill went out of Committee, it drew a train of compliments from Sir ALEXANDER Comma's to the Attorney-General for his sincere co- operation in carrying out the recommendations of the Commission ; and also an announcement from Mr. NAPIER, that the Solicitor-General for Ireland had prepared a bill of a similar character with respect to Ireland. The Crime and Outrage (Ireland) Bill, was again withstood, by Mr. SCULLY, Mr. C. LAWLESS, and Captain MAGAN. The motion for the second reading was carried by 118 to 13.
Another Irish measure, the Encumbered Estates (Ireland) Bill, en- countered opposition from the Ministerial benches. Mr. FRENCH was supported in his objections to the second reading by Mr. Joni Swear and by Mr. Issse Burr. The latter expressed his sincere regret that the first time he addressed the House he should have to oppose a 3,1 inistry which he was most anxious to support. The opposition was overruled by a vote of 78 to 6.
In answer to Mr. Cnownza, it was stated by Mr. Wei.roLE, that the case of Mr. Ham17n Pascoe, who is under sentence of transportation for administering SaV111 with intention to procure abortion, has undergone his anxious consideration. After a careful investigation of the circum- stances brought under his notice, he cannot advise her Majesty to miti- gate the sentence.
In the House of Lords, the Duke of ABOYLL laid on the table the same petition from the Legislative Council of New South Wales which was presented in the House of Commons on Thursday, and made the marked impression there which we have noted in the body of our Parliamentary news. Earl GREY took the opportunity to let off a corrective speech at persons who interest themselves in the Colonies but possess very imper- fect information with respect to their real wants and requirements—who, led away by crude and ill-digested theories, had thought fit to
raise discussions upon a vast number of points, and to condemn many of the provisions of a measure recommended by the Committee of the Privy Council after very full consideration of the whole subject. He affiimed that there is no greater advocate of self-government for the Colonies than himself ; "but he begged their Lordships not to be too hastily led away by those popular cries for what is called self-government."
" Many of the current doctrines of the day are inconsistent with the main- tenance of any colonial empire at all." [Lord Derby—" Hear, hear ! "] He knew that many persons who hold that language are sincerely of opin- ion that it would be for the interest of this country and of the Colonies that the connexion between them should be dissolved.
Lord WODEHOUSE said, there could be no doubt that the waste lands in our Colonies are matter of Imperial concern ; but there is a point of their career after which the Colonies are clearly entitled to a share in the management of those lands, and this point he conceived New South Wales has attained.
Previous page
