Star. — London, England, 1819-06-16 00:00:00

CASTLERZ AGII slid, that if' he had ' seed ;lei a doubt as to the course which The House pursue , the speech of the Hononralde Mern ilk. Phillips) would have relieved him from it— u hear).—Ele knew unfair imputations had cs Oil his. Right Honourable Friend (Mr. Can a treating with improper levity descriptiinis ; but it was not to be b, Mite thkt on that out individuals shou l d follow' their own anodes, lublish similar calumnies, only with . t hi s excuse, t hey heard them from a stranger in the Gallery li g r, hear. )—What was the question then before .Moshe ? The Resolution went to condemn the rrm • cu t in question es a gross And calumnious libel t Member of that House. Were they then to he in pronouncing this statement to be a libel ? would be glad to know in what situation the :1„,, would stand if, after having entered the corn , ; ;I t of the Right Honourable Member (Mr. Can on the .Tournals, they were to pass to the Order Day—(No, no),—after having reprimanded au thor of such a misrepresentation, on an expla. ~,a which. was not entered on the Journals. If ° fending party were committed to prison, he have an oppcttuty of petitioning Parliament, t: ' ctatin.; the reasons why he gave such a Re t' .c House would then have grounds for ex ch_lneticy. It was for the dignity of that sach a line of proceeding should be otherwise they would be at the mercy of who thought proper to enter the Gal . and :Owe reports of their speeches. The House :.t w vindicate its dignity by shoving that such !iota would not be al lowed to pass with impunity. 1:t. 111iLurs explained. He did not attempt t!.e tnistatement. He only wished to pre :. t!te a ‘h.pticnt of an expression which implied an 0:1 the part of the Reporter. In what he I the Eight Honourable Member (Mt. Can he w ',Led no more than to express what he , aignt a vet y natural reason Why the Report should .e taken the tendency it did. , 4 113ERCROMBY supported the Resolution, he thought the House would act wisely, and in tice to :ts own character, in discussing this ques .: with temper and with mercy. He fully agreed ~I!. the Honourable Mover of the Resolution, that. t ' , statement in question was a serious offence, but he considered the conduct of the Gentleman s .gin called to, the Bar, when he heard the explana t a which was glven, he bad no doubt but he (the ontleman who reported the speech) felt a convic ta at the time that the words had been used. It :Teased from the account of the Honourable Mem , r (Mr. Hume) that up to thp period when the in? Ta ption 'o°4 plice i n the gallery, report of speech was perfectly correct. character of Paper in question was much improved in his es ;nation since yesterday; as it appeared that the .kor, or other managing persons on that Es tablish. 'had not seen the Report in question before it a put into the bands of the printers. From what e House had heard, it was impossible to believe I at the Gentleman could have come into the gallery ,tilt a determination, with malice prepense, to mis ii.resent the Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. tuning) or any other Member of the House. The Lase was, however, to vindicate its dignity, but to hoped that the punishment to be inflicted would ac slight as svas coosistent with the support of that t:gnity—(Hear, heal. Lord COMPTON alluded to a misrepresentation' 'Lich had occurredin the last Session, of rathei an qgravated description, and said that the lenity which lad been extended to the Editor on that occasion, contrary to his wishes indeed, had the effect, of pro :ring a very mischievous carelessness. He con cluded by saying that, he thought so gross a misre resentatitin should be visited with some severity. Mr. PROTH:EROE complimented the delicacy of '3e Bight Hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Can ning), in absenting himself during this discussion.— He felt convinced, that if the Right Hon. Gentliman lad been present at what took place this evening, he would alter his opinions as to the conduct of the writer of this mistatement. There was no Member •vllo did not now see that the Gentleman had been mistaken in his Report. The witness said, that he heard allusions made to the smiles on the Ministerial Botches. The Honourable Member (Mr. Hume) had not mentioned this, but some Members near him (Mr. "rutheroe), distinctly recollected the allusion having ban made. He hoped the Resolution would be so modified as to meet the feelings of the House ; he for en felt himself bound to vote for lenient measures, HUME then said, that feeling himself called be an allusion to his report of the speech, by the Hor.ourable Member who had just sat down, he :bought it but just to avow that he now recollected ;here was a smile upon the faces of Gentlemen on :Ile Ministerial Benches to which he frequently al- Laded in his speech—(llear,hear.)—He certainly felt loneuhathurt at these indications, and possibly some iag might at the moment have escaped him, which night render the mistake excusable—(Hear, hear,) Mr. RA.THURST also bore testimony to the cor -ctness of the report, inasmuch as there actually was a smile on the faces of Gentlemen on that side of the House, byt it did not occur at the vet y period of the honourable Gentleman's Speech noted in the report. hear.)--This, however, was antecedent to the ost offensive part, which was giving it a character 1 " loud cheers." He repeated, that it was correct far as regarded the mention of a smile—(//ear.) Mr. C. H. HUTCHINSON said, that if he had any cluebts before as to the vote he should give on this they were totally removed by the speeches e two last Members who addressed the House. .: requested the House to recollect what had fallen `tom the Right Hon. Member for Liverpool yester "Y—thilt Right Hon. Member had then said, that if there was any Member who could put his hand to his breast, and declare upon his honour, that he.bo sieved that Ns as not a wilful and malignant misre t?cientation, he would give up the question altoge. t -cr. He (Mr. Hutchusson) now solemnly stated :post his honour, that from the statement of the Gen tleman who appeared at the Bar, he believed the mis-statement to have been the result of anuninten !toaal mistake. He could not COMMA to give his vote fivour of a motion which went to imply intention. '; 11 the part of the Gentleman who reported that 'Peech. He begged at the same time to state, that 40 Member in the House was more anxious to defend Lle privileges and dignity of Parliament thanhe was. : , Ir.BRAND hoped the proposed Resolution would not be adoptedo as it went to impute intention to the offending pithy. If the House wished to have ;heir debates sent before the, public, they ought to furnish those Gentlemen who so diligently collected theM, some more accommodation than they had at present, but with an understanding of additional responsihi litrop their parts. • Mr. W. WYNN said there was nothing in the wording of the Motion . which irr.pited intention to ihe•Gentleman accused. It only stated that this paper was a misrepresentation of the proceedings of the House —..that it was a calumnious libel on one of its Members, and that it was an aggravated breach of the privilege of Parliament. " He appealed . to the House how it could be urged th at t hi s contained any imputation of intention ? He considered any report of the proceedings of the House a breach of privilege.' If this Resolution werc adopted, it would be for the House to say what further steps they would take on this occasion. Lord BINNING said, that Mr. Canning bad de clared last night, that as far as he was concerned he was satisfied by the statement of the Honourable Member (Mr. Hume), and that it was for the House to decide what line of conduct they should adopt in vindication of their privileges. He therefore declined any further interference with it. The Resolution was then put and carried. Mr. WYNN said, it was now his duty to follow up the Resolution just carried, with proposing the pu nishment to be inflicted for this breach of privilege. He was willing to make every allowance for what' had been urged in favour of the witness. It was just, when an accused person was called to the Bar, to al low him to enter into a justification of his conduct, as far as he was able so to do. He found it difficult, however, to imagine how such a mistake could have been made, and ow the witness could • have added, " continued- cheers," without having heard those cheers. He ought not to have depended on the in formation cf a stranger, as to what hail passed ; his more obvious course would have been to have ap plied to the other reporters, none of.whoni had given the speech in the same manner. He bore ,testimony to the accuracy and fidelity with which the debates were generally given, considering the very short time there was allowed for writing them. He felt the proprity of- having the debates published, but he could not see the necessity of -having them published at so early an hour. Every purpose of publicity would be equally well answered by having the papers published at two or three o'clock in the day, as by having them published at nine or ten in the morning'. If this were done the reporters would have sufficient time to attend accurately to what they had to write. What he wished the House to do was, to impress upon t'abse who undertook to report the dcbatos, that they - did sb at their peril ; and that if this.toleration was abused the offending parties would be visited with the utmost displeasure of the Parliament. •He made every allowance for the proper conduct of the Gentleman when he appeared at the Bar, as well as for the manner in which he accounted for the. mis-. statement ; but at all events he was guilty of very culpable negligence, and for this some punishment ought to be inflicted. The. Honourable Member Occluded by moving, that the Gentleman who had' acknowledged himself to be the writer of this breach of privilege, be committed to his Majesty's Jail of Newgate. The _question being put, Mr. GURNEY said, that he had entered the House' on the evening when the Honourable MeMber (Mr.i Hume) delivered the speech in question, and just at the time when the Honourable Member alluded to the smiles on the Ministerial Bench, he had heard re peated cheers. He mentioned this with a view to shew, that that part of the speech where the words " repeated cheers" were, inserted by the Gentleman, could not be considered as any invention on his (the Reporter's) part. Mr. BROUGHAM observed, that the circum 'stances of extenuation had been so fully entered into as to leave him but little to say, yet much still rested on the statements of the witness as to the origin of the mistake. He had a right to assume that this statement was fully credited, as no Member had at tempted to put a question intimating a doet of its ' truth. For instance, any Member might have put the question who were the Gentlemen who sat near the witness when he received this communication from the stranger? But no such question was put. Ile would himself have put it if he had any doubt of the testimony which had been given. The Honour able Member then alluded to former mis-statements, in which he himself had been made to use language foreign from his feelings and his opinions. On those occasions the parties had been allowed to depart without punishment. He observed, that this leniency on the part of the House contributed in a great de gree to mislead those Gentlemen who gave the Re ports, to make them careless of the responsibility under which they acted. But there were other breathes of privilege of a more serious nature which frequently appeared in the public prints, without having the excuse of the great haste with which Re porters were obliged to write the debates. . He could state several instances of observations of the strongest nature being made by writers in the public journals. There was an article in a Paper of. yesterday, in which. the speech of an Honourable and Learned Friend of his was spoken of in terms which ' could not be considered in any o ther li g ht than that of a gross Breach of the Privilege of Parliarrient. Those observations were not made m the hurry of re porting, they did not appear until five days after that speech had been delivered. The Journal in question said, speaking of his Honourable Friend (Sir J. Mackintosh) that he had made a shameless and impudent attack on Ferdinand. That an attack. and .that too an effectual attack, had been made on Fer dinand, he admitted, but that it was a shameless and impudent one, he left it to the House to decide—(Laud cries of hear).—After some other observations the Honourable Member concluded by hoping that the House would be satisfied with reprimanding the Gen tleman who had been guilty of this offence ; but if the sense of the House should be otherwise, he begged to suggest that he be taken into the custody of the Serjeant at Arms, instead of being committed to Newgate, and that his confinement be for as short a period as possible. Me. BANES said, that in all cases of a Breach of Privilege like this, the invariable pri.i.tipoiiisio commit tbe. Offenders to ISevolatc,... .• Pik ,(of 'Cambriagel said, there was, a precedent SikithibY Mr. "Petir'Sfutir of Vie Oracle Newspaper, was, for a libel, committed to the custodyt u 4 sin o l ft7 Serjeant at Arms. He recommended. course should be adopted on the pre sent occasion. , . He fully subscribed to the terms of eke - Motion; cifs6ibed the Mere of this par ti o n e o x i te t r e a k ti n bet t r h ti t tlp par ticular offence; but bethought that the minter urged the individual complained of. Could consistently afford (Hear). Mr. WYN N said, that the old place of committal was to the Gate-house, but in' ater times it was to Newgate; and in selecting that prison, perhaps they would be consulting t he Convenience of the individual, and avoiding for him the expense which being in the custody of the Serjeant at Arms would induce. He had no objection to frame his motion either way. Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH entirely concurred in the terms which had been applied to this libel, but from the statement made by the Reporter at the Bar, he was fully convinced the error, great as it was, was unintentional—(Hear.) He fully acquitted the individual of wilful intention, and feeling this, he could not but vote for the lighter punishment. The appearance of talent and education which the witness at the Bar sheaved would, he was persuaded, induce the House to select that sort of punishment which would convey to such a Gentleman the least feeling of disgrace. As to attacks upon himself from any part of the public press, he should ever treat them with indifference—in such a case as that which was represented (for he had not seen it), to have so calum niously reflected upon him, with contempt—(Hear.) He also felt himself bound to express his opinion in favour of the generally improved character of the public press, for whatever political bias particular newspapers may have and may exercise respecting the several parties to which they were attached, he never recollected a period in which their columns exhibited more general decorum, more general abi lity, more exemplary abstinence from all attacks upon private life, and from those disgraceful inva sions of the privacy of domestic character which were once so much indulged in —( Hear, hear). —This great and valuable improvement in the public press, I had arisen from the superior talents, the judgment, and character of the proprietors, and the improved advantages and better conditioo, in every respect, of the Gentlemen who are employed under them. On this account alone, even exclusive of the demeanour of the Gentleman whom they had heard just at their Bar, he should strongly urge upon the Home the propriety of abstaining from any, degrading penishment— I (Hear, hear),—the effect of which must be to have a tendency to take away that sense of 'self-respect and independent character which it was' so essential to cherish in persons of this description—( Hear, hear). Mr. W. SMITH joined in pressing upon the House the adoption of the lesser punishment. Allusion had been considerately made to the expense which being in the custody of the Serjeant at Arms would entail upon the Gentleman who had been examined, but he could assure the House that he knew the family of that Gentleman, who were of great respectability ; he also knew the individual himself, who had always borne the character of being a well-behaved, an ex cellent, and an intelligent young man ; and that from his knowledge of them all, it would, he was convinc ed, be a great relief to their feelings that the com mittal should be to the Serjeant at Arms, instead of to Newgate. Mr. WILLIAMS said, that in explanation of the misrepresentation which had given rise to the present proceedings, he thought himself bound to state, that on the evening of the debate he had sat behind the Honourable Member for Aberdeen (Mr. Hume), and that he had a distinct recollection of the following expression :—" The Right Hon. Gentleman and the Honourable Gentlemen around him may smile."— Soon after this there certainly were several cheer's, although, no doubt, a few sentences intervened, which Were lost in the gallery. The error therefore of the Reporter, was in this respect natural enough, as far as respected the words in the parenthesis (Continued cheering). Mr. BENNET rose for two purposes--Ist, to con cur in intreating the House to adopt the milder pu nishment, and abstain from exposing a cultivated mind to imprisonment in such a place as Newgate ; and he rose, 2dly, for the purpose of exposing a ca lumnious statement not in the reports, but in a com mentary upon them, which appeared a few days ago in a Newspaper.—CHere the Honourable Member read a long extract from a Ministerial Morning Pa per, which reflected, in very coarse terms, on some Gentlemen at the Opposition side of the Housel Mr. PROTHEROE also preferred the moderate punishment. To men of education and literary ta lents, naturally imbued with the feelings of gentle men, a punishment of the extreme kind would be keenly and severely felt. If, therefore, instead of there being a precedent of committal to the Serjeant at Arms, there had not been one, he thought this was just the case in which they should make a pre cedent, for inflicting the milder punishment—(Hear.) Mr. WYNN said he did not feel the least difficulty in acceding to what appeared to be the general wish of the House. He was therefore ready to alter the words of his motion, and he trusted sufficient would be done to warn the daily press against a repetition of the offence which brought the individual in ques tion under the displeasure of the House--(hear.) The Reporter was then committed to the custody of the Serjeant at Arms. CESSION OP PAIIGA. Lord CASTLEREAGH, in presenting Papers or dered by the House, respecting the Cession of Par a, g denied that this country would have b een justified in resisting by force of arms, the Turks, in support of the Parguinotes ; besides, it ought to be consi dered, that the lonian Islands did not grow corn or other provisions for more than nine months consump tion in the year ; so that in the event of their rupture with the Turks, a strong force would be necessary to secure, by artificial means, their regular supply.— Neither neutrality nor sound policy to the Port; would have justified this country in taking any other part than it had taken respecting the fate of these unfortunate people. • . Sir C. MONCK condemned Government for de ceiving the Parguinotes, who had'always believed themselves under the protection of the former. Thel Honourable Member endeavoured to prove, that the Cession was contrary to the faith of treaties ; and that as by one of the treaties Parga was described as a dependency of the lonian Islands, it consequently tagtls nadir the protection of alit Width (Guyanatenn o f et was impbuibk tee). -itap dice:maim that night • r - .s there was no motion before them which afforded such a scopes But he believed he could at any tinse l; provesthat she Parguinotes bad a claim upon our jus t .„ ;l tice for protection against the Turks. The Noisier; Lord had forfeited the affections of the Greeks Ix' giving up the mouth of Albania, whence pro;visions of every kind were produced. The British Artily, on the commencement of a new war, would not be able to maintain itself for want of provisions of every kind. Ile lamented the receipt of the calamitous news concerning the cession of Parga. Mr. FAZAKERLY regretted the cession of Parga as a violation of faith with the natives of that un happy country. Mr. GOULBURN vindicated the conduct of Go vernment and that of the gallant Officer under whose direction the cession had been carried into effect. Sir C. MONCK said, that the Papers now before the House ought to have been produced sooner. , • Mr. GOULBURN observed, that the soil of the Island of St. Maura (whither the Parguinotes were removed), was similar to that of Parga, and fully equal to 11at which they had left. Sir C. MONCK Maintained, that it was very rocky, and very barren, and he believed without water. From a population of 5 or 6000, the people of Parse had been reduced to 3000 only. Lord CASTLEREAGH thought that Gentlemen would see the impropriety of continuing a desultory conversation without any specific motion. Mr. HUME,. *lto had been at the island of St. Maura, assured the House that it was nearly one mass of stone ;,and as to water, they had landed there for the pitirpose of obtaining a supply, but had not suc ceeded. Lord COMPTON lamented the cession of t'arga, as the last remains of the independence of Greece. ,His Lordship noticed that the olive trees amounted fit number to 80:000, in value £200,000. He under stood that the amount of the whole , was £500,000. There was therefore a great difference between that and the sum of £150,000, said by the Noble Lord en have been received. He was astonished kiwi tr Chancellor of the Exchequer could come down 011ie House and ask for an enormous sum to build 'n4i Churches, while the Government abandoned the' fee . quenters-of the Christian Churches of Greece. Lord CASTLEREAGH had every reason for be lieving-that the sum of £150,000 would not be much short of the average stipulated by the Comrnissioneri % Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH was shocked to hear' it said in a British Parliament that any indemnity could be given to a nun for tearing him from his home. Was this the example that ngland was to hold out to the world? Was it proper to say to these persons, " You shall receive every recompense for your trees, your churches, your stones, your lime, &c. but with respect to yourselves, you shall be considered' merely as the dust in the balance; you shall be de prived of your home, and driven into exile, but you shall have no reward adequate to make up your loss" —( Hear, hear).—Such had been the case, and most of them had quitted the soil which gave them birth. The Honourable and Learned Member proceeded ton argue that the Ottoman Porte hid no rights under the Treaty of Bucharest, as in that Convention the Treaty of 1800 was not recited. Both Russia and the Ottoman Porte had forfeited all title by a mast notorious breach of faith. Russia in ceding the loniail Islands and Parga to France—the Ottoman Porte.l4 the violation of all the provisions of the Convention of 1800—by the destruction of the three towns, whose protection and security it guaranteed. 4.1 ' Mr. BRAGGE BATHURST riefended merit for tie generous attentions bestowed on the people of Parga, who had never been_promised a continuance of our protection. The very best terms had been made for•them which could be obtained ; and the Honourable Member considered they hod no other claims on us than what characterized du' cam-. passion and indulgence. Lord JOHN RUSSELL supported the opinions of Sir James Mackintosh. By stipulation, we had not surrendered to the enemy one ntan'only; but a whole people. This violation of faith would excite great distrust on the future protection of the British Government. A MEMBER expressed his regret at the abandon ment of character which the sacrifice of the Pergui nots would display to the- world. British protection would, when offered hereafter, be received with dis trust. It was a sad contrast with the part we had before taken in the concerns of other nations. How' reconcile it with the endeavour to communicate a 'purer system of Religion , through Greece? It was, indeed, absurd to institute prosecutions for anti.reli gioui opinions at home, when we gave our assistance to propagate Mahometanism abroad. But if our Government acted cruelly to the Parguinots..—if their expectations of protection were disappointed, they would at least have the consolation to learn, that their sufferings and their wrongs were neither un known nor unfelt ift this country— Sent hic etiam sua pramia laudl, . " Sunt lacrynue return, et mentem thortalia tanguntr Mr. BENNET complained of the treatment these exiles received.. lie had gu , ,d information on the sub ject, but he begged to assure the House that he would be found ever ready to raise his voice against any op pression towards those - unfortunate people. After a few words from 'Mr. WYNN the papers were laid on the table. BREACHES OF IrRIVILEGR. The SPEAKER stated that the Serjeant at Arms had a communication to make respecting.the Privi leges of that House. It was stated that a stranger was found taking notes, with his bo?I; restingte the front rail of the gallery. When desired' tit desist he refused—he was then taken into custodtandbinught before the House. After an examin:ttidn Of Witnesses and a suitable apology from the prisoner, he was dis. charged on 'the payment of his fees. Mr. WINN called the attention of the House to another Breach of Privilege, which he conceived to have been committed by a *Morning Paper, 'called Ts4 e New Times. The offence of which*he complained Was contained in a letter published yesterday in that Paper. The letter attacked the speech of an Honour able and Learned Gentleman (Sir James Mackintosh) on the Foreign Enlistment Bill, and asked whether Sir James had felt so warmly in favour of liberty- in 1808? And whether he had not then been willing, and long afterwards, to submit to the real •tyrant, Bonaiarte? It then added the following paragraph : A n d yet, if I Am .to boliere the Newspaper reports, • I A ' ~, 1 .I