A SCENE IN THE HOUSE.

New Zealander, Volume 9, Issue 763, 6 August 1853, Page 3

A SCENE IN THE HOUSE.

The house having resolved itself into a committee of ways and means, the financial resolutions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to the income-tax were taken into consideration, when Mr. Lawless proposed that Ireland should be struck out of the resolution.—Colonel Dunne said he would vote for the amendment if carried to a division. Mr. V. Scully opposed the amendment. Mr. Duffy supported the amendment, observing that the grossest corruption ever practised in the worst days of the Walpoles and the Pelhams had taken place under his own eyes in corrupting the Irish members of that House by the Government. This announcement provoked a perfect storm of indignant cries of “ Name, name,” from the Irish members on the ministerial side of the bouse, which was met by counter cries of “ No, no.” After the confusion had in some degree substded, Mr. J. Ball moved the offensive words should be taken down, when a scene of great con-fu-imtook place. After the storm had somew' at bsided, the chairman read the words, asking if they were correct —Mr. Duffy said they were—Lord John Russell thought if the words were meant to assail the honour of Irish members, they should be treated with contempt. Mr. Lucas thought the words only went to say that corruption had been practised by Government against Irish members. Mr, Phillimore said that magnified the offence.—Mr. Ball, amidst gievt uproar, contended that the explanation. of Mr. Lucas was correct. —The Chairman wished to know whether the words were to be taken down, lie thought they imputed corrupt motives.—Mr. Disraeli said they were a direct charge of corrupt motives against a minister of the Crown—Lord Palmerston said, if it were so he defied tire honourable member to prove it. Mr. Lucas, amid cries of “ Spoke, spoke,” reiterated his former conviction as to the words spoken. Mr. Duffy explained that he had been somew hat misunderstood. The phrase “under his own eyes” meant, whilo he had been in the house. Another thing was, that he was instancing the corruption of Ministers, and he wished to convey to the house that the present Government did operate upon certain Irish members, by the same means as had been used to influence votes by Walpole and Pelham, (Name, name.) He would name if it was the wish of the Hou<e that ha should do so. (“Name, name,” ‘‘no, no,” and pproar.) If the will of the House were expressed that he should give any further explanation of the reason which influenced him in making the 3 f atemeat be would do so. «(“, Name, name.”) If it were the wish of the House he would do so. (“ No, no,” ‘‘ Yes, yes.”) After some remarks from Mr. Bright, Lord J. Russell said if the hon. member left the matter as it was, he should conclude that the hon. member Lad brought a charge which he had neither file's to prove, nor manliness to withdraw. (Hear, hear.) The Speaker then look his seat, and the words having been reported, he inquired if fhe hon. member had any explanation to offer. Mr. Duffy said he had substantial grounds for his statements, which he was willing to lay before a select committee. —The hon. member was then ordered to withdraw, and having done so, Lord John Russell suggested that as the words were a charge against Government, an independent member should suggest steps to the House. Mr. Disraeli thought no committee ought to be granted. The honourable member might be summoned to his place and state the names of the members whom he alleged to have been corrupted by the Government.—Mr. S. Wortley thought Mr. Duffy ought to retract the charge, or move fur a committee to investigate it. He hoped the honourable member would relieve the Hou-e from the difficulty of its position by conferring with his friends as to how he should proceed ; with this view he would move the adjournment of the debate until that day at four o’clock,—Mr. Moore seconded the motion ; and after considerable discussion and conference, it was agreed to, as was also another, requesting Mr. Duffy to attend the House at the time named.— Adjourned. Next day, on the order for taking into consideration the words used by Mr. Duffy on the preceding night, the speaker having first ascertained that Mr. Duffy was in his place, read the words it had been reported that he had used, and said, if the honourable member had any explanation to make, that was the time to offer it, and trusted that he was prepared to furnish an ex plana'ion or an apology that would be satisfactory to the House. Mr. Duffy detailed the circumstances, which, he said, attended the occurrence of the preceding night, observing that he had not avoided, and did not wish to avoid the responsibility of proving what lie had said ; that he did not mean to convey the meaning that money had been paid, but that certain Irish members had abandoned solemn pledges and accepted places; that he considered this had been done for their own personal advantage, which he could on'y regard us political corruption, and he could not recede from this opinion. If, in stating this opinion, he had violated any rule of the House, it was contrary to his intention* and if he had offended against such rule, he regretted it. Lord J. Russell said the form in which Mr. Duffy now put the charge, altered its character. His (Lord John’s) belief was, that the Irish members referred to, instead of being actuated by corrupt motives, had acted in a manner highly honourable to them. The allegation which had been made in Ireland, of pecuniary corrqp. tion, had now been abandoned, and there was no reason to induce the House to carry the matter further. He moved, therefore, that the House do pass to the other orders of the day.

Transportation, —ln tbe Lords 2nd May,* Grey said, tl.a* feelmng the importance of there bein'* a fuller discussion upon the important subject of transportation than there was on Thursday night, he should on Friday next move that a humble address be presets ted to her Majesty, praying her Majesty to be graciously pleased to give directions that the regulations with regard to the punishment of criminals sentenced to transportation, in force in IBJ2, might be changed in such a manner as not to prevent the removal of such oflmders from this country until Parliament had an opportutii'y of considering those measures. (Hear.) The motion after some discussion, was fixed for l uesday, 10th May, ' *