prbated ant! PrOrttningd in VadianTrItt.

THE first ..ession of the second Reformed Parliament was opened on Thursdey, the day appointed for the return of the writs. Unusual in- , terese wits excited on this occasion ; and we never saw the neighbour- hood of the two Houses so much thronged with persons of all classes. The elowd was very considerable as early as ten o'clock ; and it was with some tiifficulty that the Members made their way to the House. The Duke of Cumberland wits hooted, and Mr. O'Connell cheered. The Bishops were also hissed : but genetally the crowd was well-be- haved. I he doors of the house of Commons were opened at twelve : and two 01 three hundred Members entered almost immediately. The seats lii t lie lower part of the House were soon taken; and about one o'clock the side galleries wt re in a great measure occupied. At two o'clock, the Usher of the Black Rod summoned the Mem- bers to the house of Peers to hear the Commission read. Mr. Ley. the Clia:1 Ulerk, accompanied by Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Berries, and about a lutudred Members obeyed, the summons. The Lead Chancellor, tbe Archbishop of Canterbury, Lords What-m.10ft% Rosslyti, and Jersey, were the Commissioners. The CO1 -,14411 was read ; alai the Commons instructed to choose their Speaker, aim present him the next day for his Majesty's approbation. The Lord.. then went to prayers, and the Commons returned to their own Huuse.

The Maiisters occupied their usual seats to the right of the chair. On the same side, on one of the lower front benches, Sir Charles Bute,

We seated ; al d immediately behind him Lord Stanley and Sir .Lm s Graham. in the midst of the Tory Members. Mr. O'Con- nell sat nearly opposite Sir Charles Sutton—a little nearer the chair. Mr. Cobbett, dressed like a farmer, in a light gray coat, yellow gaiters, &e. placed himself among the Whig leaders, tear the chair. Mr. Ley sat as usual at the table, and was addressed as Chairman.

The seats allotted to Peers and strangers behind the bar were ccm- pletely full. Among their occupants, were the Duke of Cumberland,

the Duke of Devonshire, and Lord Mulgrave. In front of these seats, many Members were compelled to stand ; all the scuts in the body of the House and the galleries being taken.

Order having been obtained,

Lord FRANCIS EGERTON rose, and commenced Lig Speceb by al- luding to the great importance of the duty which, in compliance with his Majesty's direction, the House was about to perform. He felt confident that a majority would carry his Majesty's pleasure into effect, Iii such a manner as to promote all the great interests that would be affected by the object of the present discussion. He then continued as follows.

" In the present circumstances of the country, when all know, and I am sure deeply feel, that the House is about inevitably to enter upon fields of discussion of vital importance to the interests of the State, we should look narrowly and closely to the qualifications of the individual to whom we must look for guidance and advice, for the maintenance of our high privileges and constitutienal inde- pendence, for the due control over the fervour and excitement of our debates, and for a wise exercise of that influence which we, with a proud, graceful, and salutary submission, are wont, and I am sure are now wady, to delegate to the individual we call to the chair, and for whose services the attendant honours and annexed emoluments are, in my judgment, no more than a compensation for the toil, the auxiety, and the sacrifices of him who competently fills it. In ad- dition to that mre.s of circumstances which at any time must make the qualifi- cations ot the individual a matter of interest and importance, I need not reniind the House, that a great public calamity has given new weight to the value of those qualifications. If there were to be found temper more rare than patience itself, or acquit ements more estimable than the possession of candour and discre- tion, under present circumstances they would be needed by the individual we are now to appoint to tht office to which I refer. I need scarcely add, that to such a person the object of my motion expressly points; and I must say, that if any circumstances existed which should deprive this House of the opportunity of securing the services and tried abilities of that individual, I can scarcely con- ceive a more legitimate subject of sincere regret. He is a Member competent, above all others, to carry into effect in this new locality, the laws of a new sys- tem in combination with the salutary usages and practices of the old. I ask the House to look at the loss we have recently experienced—to consider the lamentable deprivation we have suffered—the documents, the records, the evi- dence that has been consumed by that melancholy catastrophe, and then honour- able Members will feel that the extensive knowledge and intimate acquaintance with such matters possessed by that individual cannot be too highly appreciated, and afford the best hope of restoration, substitution, and repair. I confess that,. with such feelings, I should grudge him even that ease and retirement which so• many years of service so well entitle him to demand : I should almost giudge him the very favours of the Crown which might have called him to functions- and honours elsewhere, and have rendered him therefore incapable of the situa- tion to which I am anxious that the House should now invite him. After what I have said, it is almost a 104e1Css matter of form for me to utter the name of Sir Charles Manners Sutton—(Much chcering)—that individual who ha; proved for eighteen years in that chair his undoubted competence, and who on seven- successive occasions has accepted an all but unanimous invitation to resume it." Lord Francis then quoted eulogistic passages from the speeches of Lord Morpeth and Sir Francis Burdett, on proposing and seconding Sir Charles Sutton for the chair of the first Reformed Parliament ; and in allusion to the classical interrogatory quoted by Sir Francis Burdett—" Quis vituperavit ? "—said that he did not expect to hear the vituperation that had been uttered elsewhere repeated in that House; and that the question, at any rate, might now be put in this form, " Otis vituperatarus est?" The testimony of Lord Althorp to- the merits of Sir Charles Sutton was also produced by Lord Francis Egerton. He then went on to allude to the " monstrous absurdities" and " strange charges" against the late Speaker, which had been cir- culated for the last two or three months.

" I do not believe that I shall hear, on this occasion, of the misconduct of. Privy Courcillors, or the red-lettered circulars of tie Clerks of the Council, construed into treason. I do not believe that we shall be called upun to adopt lists made up from the pages of " The Mirror of Fashion," or from the infor- mation obtained from those invisible and mysterious agents who track the pro- gress of individuals through the aveuues of private life to scenes of convivial pleasure, and who, for details not always correct, bribe the Susias of the Amphi- tryons of the day. To suppose that opposition would rest upon announcements of this kind in the public press of the day, would be too contemptible, and would, I am sure, be doing injustice to those by whom it is intended. But I uuderstaud that the opposition to the motion with which I shall have the honour of concluding is to be rested, not on the qualities of the party I shall !impose, but on a great public principle. (Cheers from the Mformers.) With that public ptinciple it is undoubtenly difficult for me to deal, because the noble Lord who has, with that talent and ability which belongs to him, achieved the dis- tinction and discovery to which I allude, has kept it in Cimmerian daik- ness. ((Jheers front the Tories.) I must say that if he had been the inventor of gunpowder himself, he could not have been more confidently ex- plicit as to the existence of that principle, or more prurient and oracular as to its nature and composition. The noble Lord, who, I believe, may be looked up to as at least the intended leader of this House—( Cheers from the Re... prmers)—wht thee silf.elected—( Cheers from the Tories)—or elevated on the bucklers of a tumultuary host, amid the clash of weapons hitherto crossed in all but mortal strife—a r amidst discordant war-cries, over which one shout alone, the solitary symptom of union, is predominant—' return to office '—I know not ; but that noble Lord, I say, has left the principle he propounded so obscure, that we can only conjecture its nature till some one shall have appeared to expound it to the House. It appears to me, however, probable that it is a pt inciple we have met with elsewhere, not in ambiguity, but in election ballads and hustings speeches, amidst the triumphant acclamations of electors—a prin- ciple new to English feelings, and offensive, as I helieve, to our narrow preju- dices—that of condemnation without trial. If that is to be the principle which to flash conviction on the doubting, to fix the wavering, and reunite the phalanx which, by various accidents of disunion and secession, has had its bands somewhat dispersed, I trust that honourable gentlemen will be able to support it in this House, and carry it into effect without violation of their own consistency, and without the support of arguments which on the last occasion of this kind they raised very eloquent voices to combat and repudiate, namely, the principle that political considerations, the consideration of the political opinion,' of the individual who is to be called to the chair, are to set aside all other considerations of talent, fitness, ability, experience, or even what will be more shocking to some, the consideration of public economy."

He concluded by moving "that Sir Charles Manners Sutton do take the chair."

Sit CHARLES BURRELL, who spoke from one of the front Oppo- sition benches, briefly seconded the motion ; not, he said, on party or political principles, but from a consideration of the superior fitness of Sir Charles Sutton for the office of Speaker.

Mr. W. J. DENISON fully admitted the many excellent qualities of the late Speaker. No one could dispute his virtues in private life.

a But this (continued Mr. Deniaon) is not a question of 'Jerome' character ; it is a question ot great public principle. (A faint hiahli forn _Lord F. _Egerton awl some other Torits, drowned by the cheers qt. the Reformers.) Yes, I say, that however the noble Lord opposite may be ittelired to sneer at public principle, I must add, and he will excuse me for doing so, that I think he has thrown more ;asperity iuto this debate than was necessa-s —that he has rather

• Leaped his light eourscr o'er the bounds or taste.'

I trust I shall not follow his example in that respect, but state my views of the position iii which we are placed, without in the least provoking angry feelings." The King had dissolved the late. Pediment and appealed to his People. The People. had responded to the call by electieg a majority of Reformers ; and he did think it almost incumbent on the House to elect a Chairman whose principles assimilated • with those of the ma- jority Of its Members. In all the political storms which must inevitubly take place in the course of a sleet tinee—in all the troubles and difficulties which are incidental to the present state of the palitical atmosphere, and %vhich, like " coining events, east their shadows before them,"—in all the discussions which must necessarily arise upon the introduction of those measures which the right honout able Baronet now at the head of hi; Majesty's Government, has promised to bring forward— upon the subject of Corporation Reform—and upon the subject of that most crying of all grievances, the pi esent stae of the Church of Ireland,upon which a motion by the talented Member for St. Alban's will speedily be brought fin ward, and most probably canied—in the consideration of these and guestimate in the discussion which must take place concerning the dis- missal of my noble friend Lord Melbourne and his Administration, unheard and without a trial—without that trial which the right honourable Baronet and the friends who surrounded hint so earnestly demanded for themselves,—in the important discussion which must arise with respect to the assumption for a period of three weeks of the greater portion of the chief offices of State by one individual, who, however high in rank and station—how- ever renowned for his achievements in the field (and no man is more wetly to do him justice upon that point than the humble individual who is now addiessing you)—in taking upon himself the discharge of so many functions, appears to me to have acted upon a recent occasion in a most unconstitutional manner,—in the debates which must necessarily arise upon that subject, and upon the many other important questions to which I have slightly adverted, it will be incumbent upon this House to have in its chair a gentleman who, combining impartiality and courtesy with dignity, shall likewise agree in opinion with the majority of its Members. Again, it ever a time should arrive (which from the bottom of my heatt I trust may never he the case) when—I will not use the word ' but when there may be some diffigence of opinion between this and the other House of Parliament—in such an event, as well as in the other instances to which I have alluded, it would be paramottntly necessary that we should have in the chair a gentleman whom we know to he sincerely attached to the great mil:triples of Reform."

Mr. Denison then described the qualifications of Mr. Abercromby for the,right performance of the duties of Speaker.

"I feel that in his presence I cannot say all that I could wish with respect to him: but I take the liberty of stating, that, in my humble opinion, no gentle- man can be inure fully qualified- to till that distinguished but arduous station, ether hy his uniform consistency, his amiable manners, his extensive informs- ton, hi hia great legal knowledge, his long experience' or by his devoted applies. ton to business ; and combining, as he does, with these the coolest temper with the clearest head, and attached, as he has proved himself on many impor- tant occasions to be, not only to the great principles of the Reform Bill, but in every instance to the rights and !themes of the People—possessed of all these qualities, I am convinced that if we piece my right honourable friend in the chair, lie will also act with strict impartiality.'

He concluded by moving that " tbeHonourable Member for the city of Edinburgh, the Right Honourable James Abercromby, do take the chair."

Mr. ORD (of Newcastle) seconded the motion. Be expressed re- gret at being compelled to offer a conscientious opposition to Sir Charles Sutton ; whose industry in the discharge of the duties of his office whose mildness and courtesy of demeanour, every Member of the house must have uniformly witnessed. But he thought the present was one of those occasions when private and personal feelings should give way to considerations of a public nature. The decision of the House on this question would be received by the country as an intimation of its opinion of the important events which had led to the premature dissolution of the last Parliament. He considered that the circumstances of the country were now widely different from what they were when Sir Charles Sutton was last elected.

" The election of a Speaker at that time could not at all be regarded, as I conceive it now must be, as a test of the strength of any political party. It was neither so in point of fact, nor was it considered so by any party or by any class of persons in the kingdom. The question at that time, from the p0.. Chum in which parties were then placed, was regarded by all with indifference; but at the present moment, from the altered posture of affairs, it is regarded by all classes of men, and in every part of the empire, with the most intense anxiety ; because by our decision upon this question the probable decision upon other and still more important. questions will be judged of. His Majesty has been advised to appeal to the sense of the People upon those changes which, in the unduubted exercise of his prerogative, he has thought fit to make in his Cabinet. The People, in the Reptesentatives whom they have sent to the present Parliament, have replied to that appeal; and I own it does strike me, that if our first act shall be to give the highest proof of our confidence and ap- probation, by placing. in the chair, to preside over our proceedings, and to be our organ and representative, any one entertaining the principles and political opinions of the right honourable gentleman who has been proposed by the noble Lord, we shall greatly disappoint the just expectations of the People."

He then eulogized the character and dwelt upon the qualifiQttions of Mr. Abercromby; laying particular stress upon the 'known liberality of his political opinions.

Sir CHARLES MANNERS SUTTON then rose, and spoke as follows.

" Sir, I feel it is at all times and under all circumstances an unpleasant thing to speak of one's self; but I am sure the House will excuse my intruding upon its attention on the present occasion, when circumstances render 15 50 necessary. In speaking upon the subject under your consideration, it would be highly pre- N Omptuous in me to state any qualifications which I possess for the often The House and the public have had sufficient opportunity of forming their own judgment of the manner in which I have discharged the duties of tie simation an I to that judgment I think it most safe, as bathed it is most agresabls, to aub- mit the question. On the other baud, I feel myself not oaly not entitled, but in the contrary, I should be conducting myself contrary to every feeling not only of my own but of the House, were I to disparage the qualifications of the right honourable gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, or were I presumptuous enough to attempt to leseen his talents anti aequirements for the purpose of thereby procuring praise for myself. I diall not pursue this course ; but it is due to the respect which I owe to this house, and in justice to myself I am corn- to meet the imputations and charges affecting the integrity and honour of one who has filled the highest place in this House ; and wino has ter eieeteen years been the servant of the public in that honourable station. I have ivaited my proper time to answer these charges ; am! I now use to do so; for I feel that upon this fleor they should be Mil, and here I reserved mysclf to speak of them. In doing so, I hope I shall speak with but little, indeed with no asperity, but go through the charges and the answer with as touch temper as eossible. I cannot but believe that every Member present will admit that I owe

it to the House, and particularly to the noble Lord mei the honourable Ilatonet,

to clear myself from those chat gee which if true would have prevented them from proposing one. I shall proceed then at once to) the charges which in no measured phraseology have been brought against me. The charges are, that 1, being then Sleeker, hnsied myself with others in procuring the subversion of the late Ministry ; that I with others busied myself in the formation of tine present Government ; and, further, tire I was present at and assisted in the

deliberations of the Council which advired the dissolution of the late Parliament. Now these are three points affecting the public character of an inmmlivimlnmah ; they are points affecting peculiarly the character of the Speaker of this House, who must in the discharge of Lis official duties to a certain extent be in conmentica- tion with the Executive, whoever may for the thee being constitute the Govern-

meht ; and they are points affeeting the public mad private charaeter of that toast who, so communicating aye!' :Ministers, is thins soul to be prepared to effect their utter extinction. Now, Sir, to these points, 1 will make to all of them collectively, and to every one of theta individually, this one answer— that there is not one word of truth inn them front beginning to end.

" First, with respect to my having been mixed up with others in giving coco- ttet to his Majesty, which led to the subvershin of the late Government. I beg to state, that as soon after the termination of the last ses.iott as the ptiblic busi- ness, which always remain& ti be finally wound up by the Speaker, would per- mit. I went to Brighton. I beg to remind the House, that at that time his Majesty had gone to Windsor. I remained at Brighton, without having any com- munication, directly or indirectly, with his Illajesty, or with any individual con- nected with the late Government. until I was called back to Lnotiou by express, upon the late lamentable event of the destruction by fire of the two Houses of Parliatnent. I started to London as soon as possible, and arrived here on the following day; and after having seen the devastation which bad taken place, it was suggested to me, and I f it it my duty to adopt the suggestion, to write to his !Majesty, and to acquaint hint with the lamentable event that had occurred. This I felt myself more particularly called upon to do, as by his IMajesty's indul- gence I was then living in a part of the Palace of Westminster, a portion of which was destroyed by the fire. By the permission of the House, I will state the terms in wiled, I wrote to his Majesty. [Sir (herles here read the letter.) "f he Speaker feels it his duty to atemaint his Alaje.sty that, having heard at Briehton, early this morning, of a lamentable fire having happened to the two !lenses of Parliament, and to the House at which, by his Majesty's gracious permission, the Speaker resides, he lost Ito time in coming up to London. The Speaker regrets to state, that both the llou,es of Parliament are entirely de- stioyed, nothing being left standing but the outer walls. With respect to the Speaker's house, the greater part of the domestic portion of it is destroyed, anti to the nst very extensive damage is done. Much el the more valuable part of the Library of the House of Commons, as well as of the House of Lords, have been saved ; and most of the papers and records have been removed. The Speaker adds, with sincere satisfaction, that Westminster Hall, which was at one titne in imminent danger, he: escaped uninjured. The Speaker trusts his Majesty will pardon the liberty he has taken in forwarding this com:nunication." Having written that letter, I eat tied it myself to the office of the Secretary of State for the Home Department : I saw the Under Secretary of State, and I told hint that I haul wtitten such a letter to his :Majesty, and requested hitn, if he had the power, to send it to Windsor by a special messenger. I further sug- gested, that he would have the !soutaness to state to Lord Viscount Melbourne, the object I haul in writing to hie Majesty, as possibly that noble Lord might wish to send something by the same messenger. lit the ceurse of the evening, I received a letter from Sir leerbert Taylor, informing me that his Majesty would be in town next day, and requiring my attendance at St. James's at two o'clock. I received another letter the seine evening from Lord Viscount Melbourne, de- siring to see me before I went to the Palace. In the morning, and before I went to Lord Melhounte, I received another letter from Sir Herbert Taylor, inclosiug also a letter from his Majesty, in which his Majesty stated his wish that two other themes of Parliament should be provided in a manner most convenient to Parliament and the country. I then saw lewd Mebourne, and told him, that I had received an answer to my communication to his Majesty; I in- formed him of the nature of that answer ; and I told him further, that I wished him particularly to observe that in that letter was stated the object for which I wrote to his Majesty. I attended his Majeaty as appointed ; and afterwards his Majesty saw Lora Melbourne and the Lord Chancellor. On that evening, I received another letter ft om Lord Melbourne, stating that he conceived it was necessary to institute an inquiry, by a Committee of the Privy Council, into the cause of the fire ; and he requested that I would attend that Committee. I did so; and I never missed a single day's attendance; but assisted with others of the Privy Council in framing the repent which was presented to his Majesty, as the result of that inquiry. On the Wednesday following, and whilst this ex- amination was proceeding, his 31aieity held a Court of Investiture of the Order of the Bath ; and having the honour of being one of that body, I received a sum- mons to attend. I attenled ; and after the business was over, I asked whether his Majesty would then rsturn to Windsor ? The answer was, that he would. I then asked whether his Majesty haul any further commands ? The answer was, that his Majesty had not expressed any thing to that effect. I immediately bald Sir Herbert Taylor, that I shoull be at the Privy Council, if I should be wanted. On the day following, I received a letter foam Windsor, expressing his Majesty's commands that I should go down to Windsor on Friday, and be there at five o'clock, and remain till Saturday. I went down accordingly, and had a long audience with his Majesty ; and at the conclusion of the audience, requested hs Majesty's permission, and his Majesty was kind enough to grant it, that I might communicate to Lord Viscount Melbourne every thing that had passed. I did not request his Majesty's permission to state it in this House, anti therefore I am not at liberty to do so ; but if any honourable Member enter- tains a doubt upon the points I have stated, I beg to refer him, not only to Lord Melbourne and to the noble Lord whom I see opposite, but to the right homer-

able gendeman, late at the head of the Woods and Forests, all of whom know the truth of what I have stated. I returned from Windsor on the Saturday

morning, and his Majesty went to Brighton. On my return, I told the right

honourable gentleman to whom I have just alluded, that I had his Majesty's commands to inform him that I was directed to survey Buckingham House and

gardens. The right honourable Gntleman desired that I would send for Mr. lore, the architect; I did so, and went overthe building and gardens with him.

I drew up a report ; but before I sent it to his Majesty, I showed it to Lord

Melbourne, and to the right honourable gentleman himrelf. I then sent it to Brighton, and received au acknowledgment for it from Sir Herbert Taylor ; and there terminated my communication. Subsequently to that, the late Government was disnolved; and was it possible for any man to speak with any greater sanction in this House than upon his porsonal honour, I would, under that greater sanction, declare that I had no anticipation that such an event was near at band, and that the first intimation I had of it was derived from the

Morning Chronicle. on, • " The next charge that I have seen made against me in the public prints, is that I assisted in the formation of the present Government ; and it has been

moreover urged, that I attended at the Privy Council on that occasiou. Sir, I did attend the Privy Council. The first Privy Council I attended on the morning following the resignation of the late Ministry, I was at St. James's ; and there I saw many members of the late Government, as well ati of the pre- sent. They had an audience of his Majesty, but I had not. The Duke of Wellington had an audience; and then a message came out directing that all who were in the outer-room, and who were Piivy Councillors, were to go in and act at the Council-board. I attended at subsequent Privy Councils, on receiving the ordinary summons to attend. No special matter whatever was described in the hotly of the summons; and I believe it is never done with re- aped to Privy Councils, though it is the practice to state the subject matter of deliberation in the i.unimonses on Committees. h would be improper to go into a minute statement of what was the nature of the business transacted at those Councils, although one might perhaps be excused from feeling a desire to do so, under the strong inducements that exist ; but I believe such a course would not be consistent with a Privy Councillor's oath. I have, however, the satisfaction of speaking in the presence of many gentlemen who, like myself, have the honour of being members of the Privy Council. It is in their power to ascertain what business was transacted at those iveetings which I attended, because the minutes of the proceedings are open to their inspection. I shall, therefore, satisfy myself with stating to the House, that at no one of those Councils which I attended was any business done but of the most formal de- ectiption. So much, then, with respect to the charge of by having busied myself in the formation of the present Government. When the right honour- able Baronet returned to this country and took upon himself the 5tation which lie now holds, he did me the honour to send to me, expressing a wish to speak to me the day after. I attended, nmst willingly, that summons. With that excep- tion, coupled with one other which was purely formal—being neither more nor less than to obtain the sanction of the signature of the Chancellor of the Ex- chequer, in older to make good the payment to the Bank of England, of the fixed salaries of the Clerks of Parliament,—with these two exceptions, from the time of the return of my right honourable friend, up to the present moment, it does so happen that I never was inside of his house. (Merit cheer- ing frmn the Me,osteewl benches.) I will not go further in this matter : but the perseverance with which my constant visitings and communications with the Duke of Wellington, before my right honourable friend's return to this country, and, after his return, with him and the noble Duke together, have been asserted and put forth as a matter of charge against me, would not suffer me to say less upon the subject than what I have said. I repeat it, that there is not one word of truth in the whole matter, though perfectly immaterial, if the assertions had been true. I should have been honoured, if I had any just cause to call upon my right honourable friend or the noble Duke, to have made such a call ; but I should have felt myself guilty of an act of impertinence, if, shaving no business to do so, Iliad obtruded myself upon either of those eminent individuals. Finding, however, that it is put forth as a matter of charge against me, all lean say is that it is not true. With respect to the charge of my having busied myself in the formation of the present Ministry, I boldly and at once say, that, with the exception of the appointment of my right honour- able friend, Sir Robert Peel, the Lord Chancellor, and the Duke of Wellington, I never advised, I never suggested, I never was cansulted about, and I never knew of the appointment, of any one individual till after his appointment. So much for that charge.

" And now, Sir, I approach the remaining charge which has been made against me,—namely, that I counselled and advised the dissolution of the late Parliament. Now my answer to that is, that I was not present at the Council when that measure was determined on, neither was I summoned to attend there. I never did advise, I never did counsel, I never was consulted upon, I never had any thing to do with, the dissolution of the lute Parliament. So little did I know of the steps that were taking upon that subject, that, from a purely accidental circumstance, arising from an indisposition in my own house, I did not know of the fact until it was announced in the Gazette. Indeed, I experienced a personal inconvenience from that very circumstance. My right honourable colleague, from his acceptance of office, made a canvass for the Urn. vemity of Cambridge; whereas, from my ignorance of the intended dissolution, I had to stand alone. It must be clear to every gentleman, that the letter ad- dressed to the University on that occasion applied to my • right honourable colleague's election, and could not apply to mine. But it must occur to the minds of gentlemen to ask, if, as it seems to be so confidently believed, I coun- selled the dissolution of Parliantent, why did I not take those steps which others did, and make provision, upon the hypothesis of a dissolution, for my reelec- tion? Why did I not apply to my constituents? I abstained from taking that step solely because I was ignorant of the fact that the Parliament was about to be dissolved. I had no communication upon the subject whatever, until I ceased to be a Member of the last Parliament. I apologize to the House for detaining it so long; but I will just repeat, that, with respect to my having had any communication with any human being at any time with reference to the dispersion of the late Government, or to my having had any interference at all with the appointment of the present Government, or to my having had any thing to do, either in the way of advice, suggestion, or by being present at any meeting, with the dissolution of the last Parlianient,—I say, to each and all of these matters, with the greatest solemnity, and with the strongest sanction that can be given in any court, and upon the faith and honour of a gentleman, that, from the beginning to the end, each and all of these charges are wholly utterly false.

" Sir, I have felt that it was respectful to the House to make this state- ment. I have said before, Sir, that it has been my pride to be the servant of this House for a long period of years ; and there could be no disgrace that I should feel so heavy upon me as to leave an impression upon the mind of an.; honourable Member that Iliad discredited him. With respect to the proposi- tion now before the House, as to who is the fittest person to be placed in the chair, I am sure the House will concur with me,—and I say it in no way what- ever in disparagement of the impottance and honourable r`istinction which the being placed in such a situation confer, when I say, and must say, asan honest man,—that prospectively, the question, whether elected or not, falls to nothing, as compoted with the vindication of personal character. With respect to the right honourable and learned gentleman who has been proposed, I hope that he believes I speak sincerely when I say, that no man can rate his tab ate and acquirements higher than I do, and that I should feel no dispatagement in ranking and being second to that right honourable gentleman. I will now con- clude; but before I sit down, perhaps the house will permit me to express a wish, which I am sure every gentleman must feel, but which is more likely to be uppermost in my mind, that with the termination of this debate, whatever the result may be, may terminate all feelings of an angry, vindictive, or acri- monious nature. I express that wish most anxiously, for the sake of the decency of our proceedings, and because (and the House will give me some right to form a judgment upon the subject) I am conviuced, by the experience which I have bad, that unless all such feelings shall entirely subside, it will be impossible for your Speaker, be he who he may, to discharge his duty in a manner useful to the countly, acceptable to the House, or satisfactory tu him- self." (Much cheering.)

Mr. ABERCROMBY then spoke to the following effect.

" Sir, while I am duly sensible of the honour that has been conferred upon me, in having been selected by others as a person qualified to be recommended to the favour of the House on the present occasion, I cannot be insensible to the very great disadvantage under which I must labour from finding myself opposed to a gentleman who so long has filled the chair, and whose repeated reelection has marked the sense which has been entertained of his services. This and other considerations were so strongly felt by me, that I was most anxious to de- cline the application of my ft iends to permit them to place me in my present position. I have, however, yielded lily own inclinations and opinions to the

judgment of others in whom I confide ; and whatever the decision of the House

may be, I shall always reflect with great satisfaction upon the 'motif which has thus been afforded to me, that I possess the confidence of friends whom I respect and esteem. My thanks are especially due to my two honoured friends who

have recommended me in terms dictated by their old friendship, aud nut, as all must know, by the merits of the individual to whom those toms have been applied. Sir, the House is now required to perform its first and most important duty in selecting the individual whom it would call into its service. Feeling that the deci ought to be governed by the judgment that may be formed of

the past conduct in life of any one who may be proposed for the consideration of the House, I have thought it most respectful and becoming to taka no part, but patiently to abide the event. Under this impression, I blionia have had little

more to address to the House ; but as the House cannot fail to know that the contest has been conducted out of doors in a very diffetent spirit from that which I am sure will prevail within these walls, it has occurred to ow, that as the right honourable gentleman has vindicated himself (and in doing so he has acted most naturally) from charges which have not been made in the course of the debate, I may be subject to observation if I do not do so likewise. I shall not, however, stiffer in the judgment of this House, whatever I mac suffer else-

where, if on the whole I deem it most correct not to obtrude upon the considera- tion of the House what affects only myself personally, and the rather, as I have reason to believe that before many days of the session have passed, a motion will

be made, which will bring the matter to which I refer, and which has been so much the subject of discussion out of doors, under the consideration of a Com- mittee of this House. My opinion on the leading political questions which have been discussed dulling the tune I have bad the honour of a seat in this House, have been clear and distinct. If I were now to pretend that the fact was other- wise, I should be contradicted by the whole tenor of my life ; and I hope that those opinions, whether right or wtong, have always been adopted from convic- tion and maintained with sincerity. Whoever is called upon to fill the chair of this House, must know that he is always acting in the presence of a critical and vigilant assembly. He must be influenced by a proper regard for his own fame, and animated by a sense of public duty. These considerations may nut be regarded as sufficient guarantees for impartiality of conduct, but at least they deserve to be numbered among the most powerful and strongest motives that can act on a well-regulated and honourable mind. I shall now submit myself to the judgment of the Howie; and will only add the expression of my fervent wish, that the decision of the House may be such as to contribute to the stabi- lity and permanence of that just authority and of those real mul substantial rights and privileges which have been assigned to this House by the constitu-

tion of our country ; and that the business of this House may be contlecte I with that order, regularity, and decorum, which are essentially nevessat y to command the respect and secure the confidence of the People, wliuse Revesentatives we are." (Much cheering.) Lord STA NLF:Y professed to differ very materially in political opinion both from Sir Charles Sutton and Air. Abercroniby. Ile yiulded to

no man in zealous attachment to the principle of Earl Grey's Ministry

—the principle of Reform. He concurred in all the praise the members of that Ministry bestowed on Sir Charles Sutton, and thought that no difference of political opinion was sufficient to counterbalance the in-

estimable advantages which the country would derive from his services. He was of that opinion then, he was of the same opinion still. The charges which had been made against the late Speaker, that gentleman had ttiumphantly refuted. Upon the ground of those charges, there- fore, the House could not degrade him from the situation lie had so long held. Lord Stanley then adverted to the argument that a great public principle was involved in the decision of the House.

" What was that public principle which was so deeply involved in the pre- sent question, that it was important, that it was essential, that the House should not give it the go-by, and that they should not allow even the qualifications of the right honourable gentleman below me, preeminent as they are admitted on all sides to be, to counterbalance? That public principle was, that the person they elected to fill the office of Speaker should be known to entertain opinions in conforniity with the majority of the House. Was this a new pro. position ? or was that proposition advanced by a certain portion of those who supported Lord Gyey's Administration in the year 18337 Was that proposition not met by Lord lb ey's Administration with the declaration that that public principle was not one which in the case of the right honourable gentlenian

below him and under the circumstances of that day, ought to bear on a public question ? Why, if this were a great public principle, they had given it the go- by in 1831; they had given it the go-by in 1833. I do not question the om-

sistency of those honourable gentlemen who entertained the same opinion in 1833. I contend, that in following up the opinion which I entertained in 1833, it is not for me to vindicate the vote which I am now about to give in consistency and conformity with the vote which, as a member of Loid Grey's Government, I had given then. But it was said that the case of 1833 was not one of an alarming or extraordinary description; that there were no peculiar circumstances attending it; that there was no immediate question at issue; that theme was no question on which a mistake could arise—no (location on which a direct appeal to the country had been matle. Why, what did the House say to 1831—to May 1831—when an appeal was made to the country, involving the whole of the principles of the Reform Bill—involving the very existence of the Reform Bill—involving the question whether the country and the Parliament would have or would not have Reform ? Now was there ever a question on which a public principle was so broadly put forward as the very basis and groundwork of the discussion—that very question being the first act the Parliament rnti.t under take—the first question they must necessarily deter- mine? What was the first act of that Parliament ? Why, the first act of that Parliament—the first act of that Reform Administration, in the very agony and struggle for the Reform Bill itself—was to propose to the House, and to have unanimously adopted, a Speaker whose very principles were in opposition to that measure."

• It was said that circumstances had materially changed. " They are changed certainly," said Lord Stanley, "in one respect—we were in office in 1833, we are out of office in 1835."

" The difference between the cases of 1 803 and 1 835 has been stated

to be, that in one case a Speaker was mproposed by those who wielded the

power of the Government, ait, having a eern ajor i

ity n their favour, and that HI the present instance the majority may he less, and that therefore it is es- sential we should take this opportunity of signifying to the Crown that we have no confidence in the Administration. Is this the principle? (" Hear, hear, hear.") Well, then, if it is, I say that an act of grosser injustice—au act payout irg more of resentment than of justice—never could be perpetraud, than taking a dsci..ion of that aort upon a question materially affectine the honour and character of the House itself. I say, Sir, if it be the intention to try the strength of parties, I t thot question be manfully, brought to issue upon an address for the removal of the Nlinistere. Put I say, do not ou the one hand endanger and damage the charaeter—( Cries of " NO, no !" and " Hear, hear !" from the fillnist,rin, beaches !)—I sa)•, do not commit such an injustice—( Lord cries of "No, no !")—and I:appeal to the honour and the candour of gentlemen in this Ilouse, when I ask them if it be not an injestice—(" Hear, hear !" mid eon elleS of " I%a, no !")—to remove a Speaker against whom you have not only admitted that there is at present charge, but whom you have even admitted to be preeminently qualified for the situation—if it be not an injustice to remove him, for the purpose ot ascertaining the strength of parties ? ( Cheers, and " No, no !") Hut we are that by the election of a Speaker this day, we are, to judge of the strength of paths. If the decision of this question is to be taken as n indieation of the opinions of the House—if the sentiments of the Speoker tumid be in accoolance with those of the majority of the Mendiets of this House will the gentlemen who suppolt the Member for ladieburgli take upon them to deviate that his principles are their principlss—t hat his politics are their polities, and that by his 'public declarations they ate preparea tu be bound."

On many points be himself differed from Mr. A bercromby ; especially on Triennial Parliaments, the Ballot, and the Voluntary Jri 'lei plc.

" Now I have stated three points of free political difference on the most impor- tant qum 't Ions that could be brought bethre the House, and I state them in an- swer to those who said that they were bound by their support of the rand idate to adopt his political views and his political opinions. ( Cheers and " No !") No 'W as it out so ? Why, what became of their test of party strength or public principle ? They were or they were not. Either they were to support by their votes, and declare their coincidence on the principles of the candidates whom they supported, or they were not. III time former case, I could not vote for the right honourable genthrman opposite; in the latter, the i louse indicated no such opinion ; and the decision of the question could not be received by tlis conatry as a test of 'edifice' strength. Ose of these alternatives they nmst abide by."

esotild not bring before the I louse as a candidate any gentleman without having previoualy consulted him, but if he were to name one whose political opinions most nearly accorded with his own, it would be the Member for the town of Cambridge, Mr. Spring Rice. lint, in justiee, candour, and honesty, lie thought the House could not reject Sir Chalks Sutton.

Mr. A noncaostnY inked, upon what authority Lord Stanley asserted that he had made up his mind in regard to the Voluntary principle?

Lord STANLEY apologized : he meant to say that he had made up his mind on the subject, and he believed that Mr. Abereromby had not made up his upon it.

Mr. A neeceosniv said he bad made no declaration on the subject.

Mr. ROBERT FERGUSON ( Member for East Lothian) spoke us fol- lows; at first amidst interruption, which, however, subsided as he went on.

" It is exceedingly painful for me to be ()Misted to address a few words to the House on this occasien, the more particularly front the feelings of personal friendship I bear for Sir Charles Manners Sutton. But I trust the House will bear with me in consequence of the painful situation in which I find myself placed. At an eally period, when I perceived that there was likely to be a se- rious division on the Speakership, and that Mr. Abercromby would be nomi- nated in opposition to Sir Charles Manners Sutton, I endeavoured to ascertain the real fact ; and, from undoubted authority-, I was informed that Mr. Aber- cromby bad declined being put in nomination. I still thought it probable that there might be a division and resistance to the late:Speaker, but that it would not be viewed as an important party question. On this conviction, I certainly then allowed a communication to be made to Sir Charles Manners Suttonain- timating that I should not vote against him. It is unnecessary to allude to the intense interest now mtached to the present vote: and considering it of the greatest constitutional importance and with my own known awl decided hos- tility to the present Guvernment—if I had felt myself entirely a free man, I should on such an occadon, on public grounds alone, have most unquestionably voted against my own brether ; and in doing se have fidt that I neither should have sacrificed my private feelings of regard, or of friendship, or of attachment. Situated, however, as I have already described myself to be, I had resolved to he absent on this occasion. But Mr. Abercromby having allowed himself to be nominated, the universal cry of every Reformer throughout the country has be- come most decided. My own constitutents have been, on good grounds, loud in their demands upon me to perform my duty. Many electors, who had in va- rious iastaures made great sacrifices in my support, gad a full right to require of me the return they were entitled to expect. The appeals made to me became so forcible, that I resolved to come to town, and to appeal to Sir Charles Manners Sutton himself for a release from the understanding not to vote against him. :Not a friend anointl me knew my intention till I arrived in town. I resolved, being so imperiously called upon, to recur to Sir Charles himself. In his an- swer, Sir Charles unfortunately chooses to consider his own individual character and honour to be at stake. This leaves me exactly in the situation in which I had mean tunately placed myself. I hold his character not to be at all at stake. This struggle has become a great and important constitutional question. If I had theugimt it otherwise, I should never have appealed to him on the subject. Tide, Sit, is my positinn in relation to the question before the House. I thank the House for their indulgence in listening to may statement. Whatever judgo ment may be formed of may conduct, I trust in God, no shade of dishonour will ever :at tell to me from feeling myself, in the circumstances I have mentioned, not to be at liberty to give the vote which would otherwise have been dictated by my principles."

Sir CHARLES SUTTON said, that he had never held Mr. Ferguson to any intention he might have expressed with respect to himself.

It is peifectly true, as the honourable gentleman has stated, that application was made to me to know, whether, under the pressure of the rhtferent view he

had taken of the subject, I would release him f the intention he had previously ccminunicateml. My reply was—and I appeal for the accuracy of my statement to the honourable geutleinan myself—that I advised him to take that course which should honestly and conscientiously satisfy his own mind, and that, whatever that course wee, he might depend on its proving satisfactory. This WAS the first answer : it was then pressed upon me that I should make the release of the honourable gentleman my own act. My reply was, that if the question did not involve a great personal imputation upon my conduct and character, I might; but that as I felt it did, 414 as I could not therefore be considered an impartia' person, I would only beg to refer him uuce again to the test of his own -honourable feeling. I assured the honourable gentleman, in addition, that as lie had given me a pledge, being an honourable man, he might rest satisfied that in common with other honourable men, I should rest satisfisd with his decision."

Mr. FERGUSON again observed, that the right honourable gentleman had stated that his honour and character were at stake ; and that on that ground alone his deterInination had been founded. [Mr. Ferguson then left the House.]

Lord JOHN IlussEit. observed, that if Lord Stanley's principle were carried out to its full extent, there would be an end to the option of the Howie in the election of Speaker. For, aeconling to his noble friend's dostrine, there was no need of any thing in future to decide the choice of Speaker, except that a late Speaker should get sonic anonymous journalist to accuse hint of base awl dishonourable conduct in emmunselling the dissolution of Parliament, and intriguing for the dismissal of Misters ; and that the party accused should come down to the (louse and pro- test on his honour, which could not be doubted, that be was innocent : Mune- diateb- upon this, the option of the House of Commons was at an end, for his noble friend %you'd have them believe diet they were bound to replace the un- justly accused in the chair, under the penalty of fixing upon him, if they refused to do so, the char:tete' of a dishonourable and convicted intriguer. Now he must say, that time House had not met to listen to a cm Milne' accusation against the late Speaker, to pass a vote of censure, or for the jiurpose of furnishing mat- ter for an impeachment ; but they were there to exereim one of the most iina portant kuivileges, to perfurin one of the most material acts incident to the House ot Commons—to choose a servant and organ, to select a gentleman to preside over their debates; and in performing this act, they were not to be deterred from its due execution by taunts of fixing an unfair and dishonourable character on one of the candidates by refusing to elect him. Whatever might IlOW happen, it was not without precedent, not only in ancient, but in com- paratively modern times. When the House did not approve of the conduct of a Speaker, it had placed another in the chair. Lu the time of Lord North, Sir Fletcher Norton being then Speaker, lie let fall some expressions displeasing to that 'Minister, who having a majority of the Commons with him, sins deter- iniamol to have a Speaker of the same mind. Lord North therefore proposed aloe !I: r g.:ntlernan for the chair ; making some complimentary speech in that ironimail style of which he was perfect master, to the effect that Sir Fletcher Norma was too old a servant of the House, and ought to be relieved from his duties; and Lord North carried his motion. But could it be pretended that the character of Sir Fletcher Norton was disgraced to all eternity because the house did not reelect him to the chair ? It would not be to attack the character of Sir Charles Manners Sutton if the House refused to elect him on this occasion ; but it wouhl be fixing a disgrace upon the 'louse if it were determined that they had no choice but again to choose that gentleman. Perhaps Sir Charles Manners Sutton would expect him n ta offer some opinion with respect to the imputations cast mum hun in some quart:1s. If so. he inieht be permitted to eay, with regret to the first charge alluded to—his smiles:eth share in an intrigue to over- thi ow the late 31inistry—that he was ready to declare of him, as of time Duke of Wellington, or Sir Robot Peel, his entire belief that there existed no ground or foundation for the charge. NVitli respect to time other charges, he would take the facts, which Sir Charles Manners Sutton admitted, and give his own opinion on time subject. Sir Charles NI:inners Sutton had attended Privy Comnicils at the time the late Alinistry was dismissed, and when the Duke of Wellington was First Lord of the Treasury, and held the seals of three Secre- taries of State. Ile attended several Privy Councils befere the return of Sir Robert Peel to this country. Ile might here observe, in reference to the dis- solution of Parliament, that he thought Lord Coo-per had formerly protested against a dissolution, under circumstances not very dissimilar from the present. Recently, the practice had been to call to the Piivy Council members of the Cabinet, and no others were summoned. It should be borne in mind, that there was no peculiat summons from his Majesty in such cases; the thing was done by order of the Prime Minister, who summoned those to attend mm whom he relied, as holding political opinions in unison with his own. At the period in question, the Duke of Wellington was Prime Minister. Now, though he did not meae to impute to Sir Charles Manners Sutton that lie had done wrong in- tentionally in attending not only the first, but several Privy Councils at the time referred to, yet he confessed it appeared to him, that having been chosen Speaker by a House of reform:me in wh!ell the repinie.r. ef the natjerity vise dee cidedly adverse to those who had just accepted office, his name ought out to have been mixed up in the transaction. His feeling was, that Sir Charles, as Speaker, could not be properly or decently mixed up on the occasion; he could say, he thought such was not conduct must becoming the dignity and impartia- lity of his official character. There was no doubt, that If he had made an excuse, his attendance at Privy Couneite se.ethl havoha wit!:; uh a course would not have been unprecedented. There were a sufficient number of Privy Councillors to be had without calling, on the Speaker of the House of Commons : he believed there were upwards of two hundred Privy Councillors ; and therefore there was no occasion that the Speaker should attend, to act in op- position to the declared opinions of the House of Commons. It could not be donlited that lie would hardly have done that if they were in the middle of a ses- sion of Parliament ; for instance, during the Easter recess, he would not have attended four or five Privy Councils, and be prepared to meet Parliament,-and ask for their approbation of a provisional Ministry, consisting solely of the Duke of Wellington. (Loud cheering.) With regard to the charge of attending Privy Couneils, however, it involved no question of dishonour; and should Sir Charles be rejected on this occasion, there would be no degradation—nothing to cause him to retire from the House with painful or mortified feelings. There was nothing dishonourable in his course; but it appeared that his political bias did not rein :in inert, but lot the better of him, and induced him to concur in acts which, as Speaker of the House of Commons, he should have avoided.

Lord John Russell defended his former vote in favour of Sir Charles Sutton, on the ground of his solicitude for the character of the first Reformed Parliament.

ye felt no doubt, that in point of intelligence, in point of honesty, and in point of public virtue, it was far superior to any other House that had ever sat ; but he did not feel sure, that having a number of new Members, who had not turned their attention to Parliamentaty forms, there might not be SODie defi- ciency in that respect, which would render the House the subject of undeserved obloquy. On that ground, he departed from the general rule, that the Speaker should be the organ and representative of the House, for the purpose of securing the advantage of his experience. If nothing of a particular nature had occur- red since, perhaps time late Spaaker might have been proposed for the chair without much objection ; but, considering what had happened, and taking into account all the carcumstances of the case, he thought there no longer remained any room to doubt as to the course which the House ought to take.

He then referred to the principle involved in the decision the House was about to make.

lie thought it most important that the person who was placed in that chair should be a man who was zealous on behalf of the liberties of the People— zealous on behalf of popular prerogatives—fit to be the organ of this House in its communicatIons with the Crown—to represent their feelings firmly, sea- Lusty, and openly, withuut feat of offending, or a wish to coeciliate those who might have the power of dispeneing favours. Imsaying this, he expressed not only lit own feelings but the doctrine of the Reformed Mouse of Commons, which It A'as especielly 'access:my to vindicate at the present moment. They had heal d •the.thionissal of one Ministry, and the formation of another Minietty on certainly different 1,,ita:411es from that which was dismissed, discussed ; and and they were tuld that it was the prerogative of the Crown to do so, which ought not to be questioned. The late Parliament had confidence in the Mi- nietry which was dismissed, and it was, he would say, as loyal towards the Crown as any Parliament that ever existed ; hut that Pailiament was suddenly diseolved. 1k would say, that if this well-known prerogative of the Crown' was to be asset ted, wheu the naked sword of prerogative was drawn, it was time to be yrepared with the shield and buckler of popular privileges. (Medd chemey.) He knew of no right more sacred, or less to be infringed, than of that House placing representative in the chair. They bad all bten sent to that House by their constituents, not because they liked their appearance or manuers, but because they agreed with them in political opinion, and because their constituents thought that they would reform abuses. Ile would say the risme thing. Let all those who wished to reform abuses, choose a Speaker who lullv concurred with them in that feeling, awl who would be their proper and coni piety organ and representative, and who would aid them in those reforms. This was the doctrine in ancient times, when the prerogative was aleu asset ted ; as in the time of Charles the Second, when the Speaker chosen by the House was refused by the Cr own, and an attempt nes made to force upon the House of Commons a Speaker favourable to the Court. The attempt was resisted, and successfully resisted ; and more eepecially by Sir Ilarbottle Grinistone and Mr. Sergeant %Limns, to whom he was always glad to give his !need of praise. Ile would call the attention of the House for a moment to the expressions made LBW of by Sir Harbottle Grimetunc. Ile said—" Shall we not have the liberty to choose our own servant, fa to do our own wet k ? Other people would destroy our wink, if we part with that which must enable us to do the work of them that twisted us, and sent us hither. If any one man may be imposed upon us, who will not do our work, it may be he will put what question he pleases, and tire you out. This I have seen done. I would aek any man, who has influence upon this action, now we have chosen a Speaker, that he should be refused ? Whoever broke the Let Parliament, without the desire of this Douse, or the advire of the l'rivy Council, that man or men, that broke that Pailizu»ent, will break this too, to the utter undoing of the nation." And again he said—" Let veiny man remember the lights of the Coninione of Eng- land." That he (Lord John Russell) said on the preseut occasion. Let every man there consider the yields of the People of Eegland.

Sir Rower PEEL began by professing his resolution to limit his observations to tile sohjeet in hand. I It then stated, that soon after he had undertuken the office of forming a Cabinet, he applied to Sir Charles Sutton to become one of his colleagues ; but that Sir Charles declined, on the ground that having been for eighteen years in the chair, it might lower the dignity of the Chair were he to take part in political contention on the door of the House. Sir Chiles also said, that the impediment of ill health was now removed, and es:pressed his willingness to resume the duties of the Speakership. l'pon receiving that answer, he abstained entirely from consulting Sir Charles Sutton in regard to the formation of the Ministry. The question now was, whether, as Sir Charles Sutton bud professed his willingness to per- form the duties of the Speaker, it HI'S right and fitting that another should he appointed in his place ?

" The noble Lord opposite says that we have a right to choose as horn we please. I admit that proposition to the fullest extent. But I say, that the noble Lord who professes to he lotaleet in favour if the public good ought not to insist upon an abstract right ; but ought to consider, in an instance like the' sent, whether that m Ott can be exercised with justice. The noble lend said that he would bring forward precethets: in all his historical research he could only produce against the conduct of the Reformed Parliament under the Govern- ment of Lord Grey, the example of Lord North in the seseiou when Sir Fletcher Norton was ejoeted—a worthy exemple, truly ! Was that an honest supercession? Were not the reasons aseigniel for it erialogous to this ? " We eau °Maio adraquere by the superceseion of Sir Pletele r Norton on one ground, but we shall assign another ground for depriving you by his means of his hieing of set vice to the House of Commons." In the speech which Lord North made on the occasion, he accordingly assigned solicitude for the Speaker's health as the teaeull I■It I 1.9111:, 1■11.; ;. ;illii ti Liii Li cUt ...Le of his duties. Ile sinight for a pretended reason for his supte cession, and concealed the real teason. 'flue noble Lord has also brought aaother precedene—that of Sir Etiward Seymour. But what were the circumstances in that case? Sir Edward Seymour had been electid unanimously by the House of Commons." A AI estarat—" Against the wishes of the Crown." Sir Roneer l's at.—" I care not who it was against. • 1 Sir Robed here became exceeningly warm, nay, violent ; as the Times report has it, he spoke with " even inore disn his accustomed energy.".] I may he betrayed into warmth upon this suleie.t ; though my situation is too oneruus,.aud the weight of my duties too great for me to set an example of warmth in this House. limit the case quoted by the noble Lord has nothing to do with the present case. The House had unanimously elected Sir Edward Seymour their Speaker ; end the Crown not only refused its sanction, but wished to promote the election of another. The question in the present case is this, awl simply this—nut in the least doubting your right of choosing whomsoever you please as your Speaker, is it just, is it fair towards the individual, looking at the subject as a mere question of common justice and common fairness, to elect any one hut the right honourable gentleman who has been called to that office by the almost totem- mous wish of Six successive Parliaments, and who has performed its duties with credit for eighteen years ?—against whom no charge has been brought— whose health permits him to exercise its most atrium's duties—and who, without one motive of personal interest to gratify, has consented to undertake the per- formance of its labours. The question then comes to this—whether you will permit my right honourable friend to suffer by six weeks of uncontradieted calumny. ("Nu, no ! ") I say, uncontiadieted either by himself or by others, on antlanity, and which calumnies have roused the feelings of indignation which have been displayed throughout the House. Now, Sir, I again repeat, may I ask the noble Lord—and 1 ani sure the candour of the noble Lord will instantly avow it—whether this change was not instituted from the supposition that my right honourable friend had been instrumental in promoting is dissolu- tion of Parliament ?

A Member called—" Don't answer."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL-.-" 5Iy impression extended no further than that be formally attended the Councils in the formation of that Government ; which, from its position, could do no otherwise."

Sir ROBERT PZIEL—" The noble Lord has publicly stated that it was not because my noble friend attended this or that Privy Couucil, but because he was a party to the diseolutiter of the late Parlimie.it. Tha, was his ground for voting against him. Now, if I can convince the noble Lord thie he has taken to oppose him otI other gi,anuls, I hope that they will relinquish their °lipoid- thin, if the la incipal objection be proved to be erroneous."

Sir Robert then went on to argue against tlie principle that the ma- jority shoal i name the Speaker.

" Let us see what are the arguments a h'ch have been used in favour of the other side of die question. One honourable gentleman says that the Speaker ought always to be the representative of the majority of the house. Is that a good pi ineip1,2.? Is that a principle which ought to be estalilielied ? Is it wise

that a Speaker should be seeking favour with a majority of the House of Cont. mons to secu•n his election ? Is it net infinitely wiser to look to his integrity,

and at his qu difications for afiee, rather than to look at his political opinions? But that quediun was decided by the first Reformed Parliament. Loral Grey and his adherents, having a great Majority, thought it right to elect the right

honourable pmtleman whom the same party now oppose. You had the power

then to enforce your (Tinier's, for you then haul a majerity ; and why did you depart front the principle you now lay down? The lost decision of the Re-

formed Parli iment carries this conclusion, that the House did not feel itself

called ueon t i elect a Speaker whose opinimis were in accordance with the ma- jolity of the House. The noble Lord says, we wanted to avail ourselves of

the advantag, of the tight honourable gentleman's character, abilities, and

experience; and therefine we elected him. But that man has served us ; he has done his weak • he has answered our object ; and, with signal Merida title, I must say--4 Loir:1 and repeated eheeriny)—you will now disidiss rum, alter you had established the principle of electing a Speaker not of your OWB opi- nions, when you bad the power to reject I . After we have availed oureelves

ot his services, and after he has cooperated with us in cetaldielling die chalacter of the first Reformed Parlianwrit for decorum, we will unfairly avail ourselves

of the very first opportunity to subject him to disgrace. ( Cries of" No, no !") No, no, indeed ; for no disgrace can be heaped upon a man who hag dime his

duty. It is beyond the reach of a majority to do that ; but it is not beyond the reach of a majority to injure the chalacter of the House. The honourable gen- tleman who seconded the motion, with so much ability and candour, has re- marked that it is of great importance, as there is a probability of two or three stormy debates likely to arise in reference to the present Government, and the dismissal of the lest, that we should have an impartial Speaker. Look, then,

whom has he proposed ? I took down the words—‘ It is of importance to have an impel tial mediator to stiil the raging storm which may be raised by the conflicts which are likely to ensile between exaeperatell parties.' And whom have you selected? Have you selected one who kept aloof from all party naive- meats? No ; but one who was a distinguished member of the very Government whose principles and removal are to come under discussion. If impartiality is the object, select whom you please, but, at all events, tiot one of those whose conduct is to be canvassed. There are two candialates,—one, the late Speaker, who served the office for eighteen years, during seven Pediments, and who de- clined office because it might have a tendency to lower the authority of the chair ; the other candidate is a member of the late Government, of whom I will not utter one disrespectful word, Inif of whose impartiality we have not had an op- portunity of judging. Can you doubt to whom you should give the prefe- rence ? If you wish to express a want of confidence in the present Government, mark that want of confidence ,• but in doing so, do not an act of injustice to an individual by selecting him as the victim. ( Cries " Au, no! ") . . . . The only objection made to the appointment of Sir Chitties Manners Sutton is that Ile atteutled certain Councils which were instrumental in dismieeing the old Government and in forming a new one. All the teetinionies that have been given of his tried impartiality and his abilitits remain quite ummmiumipcached. But if he is to be blamed fur acting in the capacity of a Privy Councillor, the 11BUSO should make a rule disqualifying him for that office.. A great mistake pervades the public miud as to the duties of a Privy Councillor. It consists not merely of the members of the Government ; others besides are called Oil to anew! the Council. No advice is given in it. But if the Speaker is in town when a Privy Council is convened, and his advice is asked, what right has he to refute such advice ? It is erroneous, however, to say that the right honourable gentleman contributed to the formation of the present Government, on the dismissal of the former one. I shall vote for my right honourable fliend because I think that the precincts of the chair of this Howe ought not to be invaded to try the strength of politieal parties. I shall resist the motion to appoint the right honourable Member for Edinburgh, not from a doubt of his qualifications, hut on the ground that the 'Member for the University of Cambridge possesses supe- rior qualifications, from his lung practice in the duties of Speaker, and because his rejectiote fur the .reasons advanced against his appointment would tend to disparage the just authority of the chair. Mr. COBRETT said, that he would not detain the House two minutes. The last words lie heard from the lips of his constituents were expres- sive of their thanks to the Kirig for having dismissed his late Ministers; amid his first net should not he that of a vote tending to force those Ministers back again upon the King. With regard to the Member for Edinburgh, for whom, personally, he had a very great respect, he would not vote for him, because he had made one of a Ministry who hatched, brought in, pushed on, and procured to be passed, the inhuman Poor-law Bill. [Mr. Cobbett soon afterwards left the House.] Lord MoarErri defended his consistency in voting for Mr. Aber- cromby now, though he had proposed Sir Charles Sutton at the last election for Speaker. lie referred to a passage in the speech he de- livered on that occasion ; from which it append, according to the ex- planation he gave, that he oily voted for Sir Charles Sutton because Mr. Abercromby was not a candidate.

Lord DUDLEY STUART, amidst much interruption, declared that he felt bound to vote again for Sir Charles Sutton, as no misconduct had been proved against him since he was last elected.

A Member on the Opposition benches (said by the Chronic& to be Mr. AsekasTE1N) spoke for some tittle; but was quite inaudible, owing to the noise and confusion in the House, which bad become very great and general.

Mr. G. R. ROBINSON, amidst much interruption, and loud cries of " Oh, oh !" was heard to avow his resolution to vote for Sir Charles Sutton, although he was sensible that in doing so he ran the risk of losing his seat. He denied that the question of who should be Speaker could fairly be called a party question.

The galleries were then cleared, and the HouS'e divided on the ques- tion that Sir Charles Manners Sutton do take the chair. The Ayes went to the right, the Noes to the left of the chair. The Members were counted with unusual precision, each one being touched by the wand of the Teller ; when there appeared— For Sir Charles Manners Sutton .Against bins 306 316

l . Sir RoBERT PEEL then said, he should bow to the decision of the House, without calling for another divisiou on the question that Mr. Abereromby do take the chair. He thoi congratulated that gentleman on his election.

Mr. A BERCKOM111" was led to the chair by Mr. Denison and Mr. Ord; and, when there, addressed a few words of thanks to the House.

In reply to a question from Mr. IlumE, Sir RouEnT PEEL stated that if a sufficient number of Members were sworn in on Tuesday next, the King would open the session on that day.

The cheers within the House, when the numbers of the Opposition were counted to 307 (being one more than the Ministry and Sir Charles Sutton had mustered), were loud and joyous ; and before the whole $16 were counted, they were reechoed from the anxious multitude from without.

On Friday, Mr. A BERCROMBY, accompanied by a number of the Members of the House of Commons, appeared at the bar of the house of Peers, announced his election to the Speaker's chair, and claimed the privileges of the Commons, in the usual form. The LORD CHAN- CELLOR assured the Speaker of his Majesty's approval of the choice of his Commons, and confirmed all the privileges and rights granted and confirmed by his Royal predecessors. The SPEAKER then retired to the House of Commons; and having informed the Members of what had occurred in the House of Peers, expressed his hope that the support of the House would be conceded to him in the execution of his duties.

The swearing in of the Members was then proceeded with.