, after the order of the day for going into a Committee on the State of the Nation had been read, expressed his wish to be guided by the course which the gentlemen on the other side intended to pursue, whether to propose that the House should meet to-morrow, or whether they should adjourn till Monday. The next business would be, to agree with the other House in appointing a Commission to open the Parliament. If a Resolution to that effect should this night be adopted by the other House, they might meet to-morrow. But if gentlemen on the other side meant to debate the question at any length, they were all aware how inconvenient it would be to have a long discussion to-morrow; and in that case he would propose to adjourn till Monday.

, as no other gentleman had risen, stated for himself, that he did not intend to go into the subject at length. After the discussions which had already taken place, he should, as far as depended on him, think it sufficient to protest against the measure, and declare his dissent by his vote. Being on his legs, he wished to ask, whether, in the Bill which he supposed would be brought into the House, in the early part of next week, the right hon. gent. meant to make any provision for conducting the government in case of the recurrence of a similar calamity, that the country might not be again placed in such a situation as that in which we had been for some time past? The right hon. gent. would probably recollect, that he (Mr. W.) had given notice of introducing a measure of this nature, whether his Majesty recovered or not.

suggested, that it would be totally improper to introduce such a measure in the present mutilated state of Parliament. What might be the inten- tion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he knew not, but he had no doubt as to the impropriety of introducing any such provision at present.

said, that his hon. and learned friend had misunderstood him. He had merely asked what might be the intention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, without saying that he would concur with him, if he had proposed to introduce such a provision in his Bill. But it was proper that the House should be fully aware of all that the right hon. gent. meant to bring forward in his expedient.

said, in answer to the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that he could not answer for the intentions of other members, but he thought it likely that some would wish to enter their protest against the measure. For his part, he should feel himself bound in consistency to repeat the opinions he had formerly maintained, upon what appeared to him the greatest and boldest inroad upon the constitution which it was possible to have been attempted. At the same time he could not say, that the debate would be of such importance as to call for an adjournment to Monday.

observed, that as the right hon. gent. had signified his intention of making a stand against a measure which he described as vitally and fundamentally wrong, there was no knowing to how long a time the debate might be protracted. He would therefore propose, that the order for going into a Committee on the State of the Nation should be postponed to Monday next. Before he sat down, he would answer the question of the hon. gent. opposite. It was never in his contemplation to introduce into the Bill which was to be brought in, for the purpose of meeting a particular necessity, any provision of a more extended nature than the case itself demanded. He agreed with the hon. and learned gent. that there would be an impropriety in bringing forward such a question at a time when parliament was not complete in all its parts. When it was whole and entire, it would then be competent to make such provision as was deemed expedient; but, until that was the case, he should forbear from offering any proposition not strictly within the necessity upon which they were acting.

expressed his surprise that the right hon. gent. should postpone the Committee to Monday, upon the ground of his statement, when his statement bore directly the contrary way. He had said distinctly, that, though it was probable many members would enter their protest, yet no debate would take place which could justify an adjournment to Monday. The right hon. gent. had said there was no knowing what debate might ensue, but he (Mr. S.) would take upon him to say, that if it was protracted to any length it must be by the answers of the right hon. gentlemen opposite, not by the protest of those upon his side. Upon the whole, there appeared no pretence of such a postponement.

felt himself not only justified in his motion, but was convinced, that he would have acted with precipitancy if he adopted any other course. The right hon. gent. had represented the intended measure as fundamentally wrong, of course, he could not prescribe the number of those who should succeed him, nor appreciate the force which his own arguments might produce upon the judgment of the House.

The question was then put and carried without a division. Adjourned to Monday.