Untitled

Lyttelton Times, Volume VI, Issue 382, 2 July 1856, Page 8

The proceedings in the House of Lords in the case of the Wensleydale Peerage have -been brought to a close. In our last we stated that Lord Grey had given notice of an amendment oa Lord Lyndhurst's motion, declaratory of the right of Lord Wensleydale to take his seat in the House. Another amendment was subsequently announced by Lord Glenelg, proposing to refer the whole question to thejudges. 1? 'The debate, if such it may be called, was opened on the 22nd by the amendment of Lord Glenelg, which was opposed by Lord Campbell on the ground that the question did not come within the province of the judges, and by Lord Brougham from a consideration of the delay which would ensue from a reference to the judges. Ministers supported Lord Glenelg •, but were defeated by a majority of 31. Lord Grey's amendment was then put, and, after a di-cu^sum in which Lord Lyndhurst bore a principal sh^re, rejected by a majority of 35. Kothiug. then remained but to pass the original motion, which was agreed to without v division. By this decision the House of Peers has declared that Lord Weiiskdale is not qualified to take his seal in the House, or to exercise any of the rights of a Peer of Parliament. The Eoa?e has, in fact, erected itself into an irresponsible tribunal, deciding on the acts of the Crown ; and, as Lord Grey observed, being quite uncontrolled, it will go far in the exercise of its new fui cliuu to destroy the balance of the Constitiilioii. It there was an excess «n the one hand in the use of the Koyal prerogative, there is now an excess on the other in the assumption of a right of control over the Sovereign. But the danger of abuse is considerably greater in the one case than in the other. The prerogative is restrained within a fixed limit—but the power asserted by the Lords has no limit.

Much curiosity was felt as to what course Ministers would take under these circumstances, but it has rapidly subsided, Lord Granville announcing, on tlie part of Government, that Ministers would not attempt to reverse the decision of the House. The whole matter has since merged into a proposal made by the opposition for strengthening the judicial tribunal for appeals—thus getting rid of the difficulty by a side-wind. But, in the meanwhile, what is to be done with Lord Wensleydale, and what becomes of the question between the Crown and the Peers? At present both are in abeyance.

The Lord Chancellor has introduced a mei\sure to assimilate the commercial law of England, Scotland, and Ireland, with the object of facilitating the removal of many useless forms and perplexing varieties of practice.

In the Commons, the Supplies, the Monetary System, and the Local Dues on Shipping Bill have furnished the principal items of discussion. Mr. Miiiuz moved for a select committee to take into consideration the whole of our monetary system, with a view lo effect some theoretical improvements. This is an old subject upon which Mr. M..ntz has . exhausted a »re;it de;il of laborious zeal in vain. Upon the present occasion he met with no better fate; and, after a debate in which he was strenuously opposed by Government, his motion was defeated by a majority of nearly two to one. The supplies have been voted in all cases, to the credit of the patriotism of the House, although not without a little clamour and a cross-fire of small protests. Mr. Lowe's speech on the Local Dues on Shipping Bill in some measure contributed to the defeat of his own object: The proposal to abolish the dues was treated by several influential members as an onslaught upon " properly'I—and in some instances it was evident that the special rights guaranteed to particnlar corporations, such as Hull and Bristol, for instance, had not been sufficiently considered. Mr. Lowe, in his reply to these statement?, betrayed rather too much vigour; andj losing sight of the advantage he possessed in standing on a just principle, he gave-way to some fierce declamation not very well calculated to conciliate his opponents. Compelled to acknowledge, however, that there were exceptional cases which had not been duly provided for in thebill.it became obvious that the second reading' would place Ministers in a difficulty. Lord Palmerston prudently evaded the dilemma by withdrawing the measure, and proposing to refer it to a select committee. But in escaping defeat, he did not escape the sarcastic criticism of- Mr. Disraeli, who availed himself of the opportunity of stating that this was the second time Ministers had been beaten since tht opeuing of the session.