Star. — London, England, 1819-06-17 00:00:00

I 't • , , .4 . i i ~ • 1 ...- I • " 1 'I , , 1 1.. '‘ r l' . 4 . p 1 ,i . ' if . M r;; • 1 t 1 : I i . 1 I. : ' _A I 4 , ;. i,. .: t.l i. li ~...i; 1 I . t ..the Bankip Ale any ordinary . purchases of Exche quer Bun fit the Market. Mr. F. LEWIS thought this was not the proper time for erneiing into a discussion of thiallill. But at the same time be could not refrain from expressing his satisfaction at the general objects of it, Ile hoped that he would never again see the Government and the Bank in the situation in which they had lately been. If advances were to be allowed by the Bank to Govern.i.ent without controul, the effect would be to give the Bank the power of calling for re-payment, or for a renewal of the Restri:tion Act. Mr. HUSICISSON thought that this conversation chewed nothing but the expediency of waiting till this Bill was really before the House.' Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. sauisnusur raw SCOTLAND SILL. On the motion for the third *reading of the Banish- Ment from Scotland Bill, Mr. J. P. GRANT objected to the power which was given to the Siteriff . Substitute by this Bill. The LORD ADVOCATE said the power' was given to prevent the delay of justice in sue the She riff of the County was absent, or prevented by illness from ezetuting the duties of his office. Mr. BOSWELL wished to know whether the effect of this Bill would not be to impose an additional ex pense on the county ? The LORD ADVOCATE said there was no rea son to apprehend that this Bill would occasion any additional expense to counties. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. EXCHANGES TIETWEEN ENGLAND AND IRELAND. SirH. PARNELL rose, pursuant to his notice, to move for leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the rate of Exchange between England and Ireland. The variation in the rate of Exchanges was a great ob struction to Commerce, by making it impossible to know what quantity of a particular article could be bought by a certain sum at any given time.. Ano ther very important object, was the equalization of the currency of the two countries..— The best precedent on this subject was what took place at the time of the Union with Scotland. At that time there was the same difference between' the coin of England and Scotland, as now between that of Great Britain and Ireland. The benefits which had been produced by that change were so great as to induce the House to make the same change for the sake of the same benefits to Ireland. Indeed he did not ap prehend that any opposition would be offered to his motion on principle. Nor did he think there could be a better time for adopting such a measure than now, when the finances and currency of the country were undergoing a thorough arrangement. Ha Com mittee was now appointed, although the Session was so far advanced that their report could not be ob tained this Session, they might do so much as to be able to conclude their inquiries next Session. He concluded by moving that aCommittee be appointed to enquire into the means of assimilating the currency of England and Ireland. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ob jected to the motion, on account of the late period of the Session at which it was brought forward. The Honourable Baronet himself admitted that there would not be titne for the Committee to make any adequate enquiry this Session. At the same time the financial arrangements, and the others respecting the currency alluded to by the Honourable Baronet, were of such a nature as Would make it very desirable to suspend the appointment of such a Committee at present. The expectation of such a measure would excite alarm and apprehension. He therefore trusted the Honourable Baronet would nut press his motion at present. But being convinced of its inexpediency, he felt it his duty to move the previous question. After a few words froth Mr.Gaetireu. and Sir H. PARNELL, the motion was withdrawn. PRIVILEON. Mr. W. SMITH presented the Petition of the Re porter of the Times who had been committed to the custody of the Serjeant at Arms on the preceding evening, for having committed a breach of privilege. He had, he admitted, been of opinion, on the occa sion of his commitment to the custody of the Serjeant at Arms, that he had committed a very gross of fence against the character of an individual, and a high breach of the privileges of the House; but had in the vote of last night voted for his being visited with the mitigated punishment of commitment to the custody of the Serjeant at Arms, rather than subject him to a higher description of punishment— namely, commitment to jail. The petitioner, he un derstood, indeed had satisfied himself, was not only a young Gentleman of most respectable character, but of considerable attainments, as might, indeed, have been collected from the discussion of last night. The Petition prayed that he might be discharged out of custody upon payment of his fees. Sir FRANCIS I3URDETT could not permit the proceedings of this night and the last night to pass over without entering his protest in the most unequi vocal manner against the line of conduct pursued by the House. The facts now were, that the House had charged with libel, and also found the petitioner guilty of the fact, in a case where there had been no opportunity afforded of proving the fact of his being the author of the libel. He regretted to say, that such was the opinion entertained of its privileges, that the House might at any time convict a man upon his own confession of the fact. Such was the nature of the Law of Pgliament, as explained by the expounders of the present day. He deeply regretted, for the sake of those whose representatives the Mem bers of that House were, that such was our Law, which in its nature involved a principle equally dan gerous as that Of the judgments of Ithadamanthus, who was thus described in the ?Enid— " Castigatque, auditque dolor." First, the House punished the offence, and afterwards it determined that the crime had been committed for which the punishment had already been inflicted. It was excessively dangerous to avow a principle own ing a power so dangerous in itself and in its, con sequences. There had already been sufficient evi.' deuce before the House that the offence charged against the individual had never been committed, and that the statement mad; in the Newspaper, that cheers bad been heard in the House during the speech of the Honourable Member for Aberdeen—(Cries of tin, no' from the Treasury Bench.) He did not contend that the precise words had been spoken, but he had been informed by several they had been very nearly such as had been reported by the prisoner. For his own part, he was not surprised with respect to the facts alleged respecting Reporters occasionally varying ia the detaaricif the proceedings of that. House—he was only surprised the Gentlemen em- . ployed on the daily press could give these reports with so much fidelity and accuracy. If any misre presentation had taken place, it, had been proved and not denied that it was merely a mistake; or, in other words, that the ancient maxim had been applied to the mistake by the Members of the House— " Actes non fecit rerun, nisi mens sit rea." All malice in the report had been disavowed and dis credited by the House. He must therefore contend, that if RO intention had been manifested of offending, if words extremely similar to those which had been published in the report, had been heard by various Members of that House, and if the cheers described in the report had been heard by several, which last had been merely added for the purpose of scenical effect, that the Reporter should not have been appre hended on the former night, and that at least the House should, on the present occasion, in justice to his conduct and thai-acter, come to a vote dischar ging him out of the custody of the Serjeant at Arms without paying his fees—(Feat.) Lord C A STLE It E AGH confessed he was altoge ther at a loss to divine in what-character the Hon. Baronet had appeared this evening. If as the advo cate of the person committed, he must salltbe priso ner shared the fate of many whose Counsetin a Court of Common Law often endangered the Wells liberty of those whom they were bound to protect, by to line of defence they injudiciously adopted. He was glad the conduct of the Gentleman concerned, when brought up on the former evening, had been very different, and marked with more consistency and propriety than that of the Honourable Baronet : that defence was short, and upon the point of malice, de nied it was done to in:aka. lie should, on this ac count, vote for the motion. Mr. COURTENAY considered that it was not at all difficult for the prisoner, or iudeed persons en trusted with so arduous a duty as that imposed on Reporters, and who were selected for their talent and acquirements, to, perform a task of unparalleled dif ficulty, to prefer a statement at the Bar of the House which should lead many to think his case was one which entitled him to peculiarly indulgent consider- , ation—(Hear, hear!) Mr. HUSKISSON regretted the absence of his Right Honourable Friend. He was satisfied that on a similar occasion, when words might have been put by a Reporter into the mouth of an Honourable Mem ber, reflecting in such strong terms on the conduct or principles of the Honourable Baronet, that no such proceedings as the present would have been instituted, but that it would have been determined by a very different issue —(Cries of " Order!") Mr. HUME was sorry to think the Honourable Baronet was not convinced he (Mr. Hume) had not made a mistake with respect to the extent of the re marks he had made upon the conduct of the Right Honourable Gentleman. He assured him he was un conscious of having even made use of words of the calumnious nature attributed to him. He-believed, from the conduct and testimony of the Gentleman now in custody, upon his examination, that there WAS no malice in his representation of the debate of that evening. Lord BINNING regretted, that, from some obser vations dropped in the course of former night's con versations on this subject, the Public should very generally enter into an idea that the words re ported in the Times Newspaper were not so unlike those spoken by his Right Honourable Friend. He had not the slightest doubt of the correctness of the assertion of the Honourable Member; and it was re markable, that upon his waiting on the Honourable Member, although occupied in his Parliamentary business, for his avowal or disavowal of the senti ments contained in the report of the speech attributed to that Honourable Member, he had, without even consulting his memory, at once denied the fact, and stated upon the day after (Sunday) what were the precise observations made; the tenor of which had been corroborated subsequently by the recollection of an Honourable Member (Mr. Littleton) in a con versation upon the subject. Mr. LITTLETON corroborated the statement of the preceding Speaker. Mr. HUTCHINSON had seen the prisoner this morning, whose only feeling of regret appeared to originate in not having had any opportunity on the former evening, or during this day, of convincing the Right Hon. Gentleman alleged to be misrepre sented, that he had no intention whatever to calum niate or misrepresent him. He felt it his duty to complain of the language used by the Noble Lord this evening, who had stated he considered the Ho nourable Baronet had lent himself as a tool, for the purpose of keeping up the impression already afloat in people's minds, that the words imputed td►the Honourable Member had been actually uttered by him, although he did not choose to allow them.— This was a charge of a heinous and certainly of a most unparliamentary nature, and not to be listened to with indifference by those who were anxious for those privileges, the preservation of which was the subject of debate. Of this species of language he would complain, nor should he flinch from discus sing most minutely any question of the privileges of that House, which the House ought by this time of day to have learned were not granted to them 'on their own accounts, but for the sake of the public, whose interests were here discussed with greater fa cility by those means. He should on no occasion of this nature be intimidated from entering into a ques tion of privilege, fully and radically by any lecture from either of the Noble Lords, who had assumed the task of administering advice to Honourable Mem bers, and most unpalateable doctrines to their con stituents. He hoped the present doctrines as to pri vilege had had a sufficiently long run, and that they would not be strained to any greater pitch. As it was, lie felt it his duty to protest against the conduct which had been pursued, so far particularly as re lated to the wording of the Resolution of an Honour-' able Member, respecting the offence alleged to have been committed by the prisoner. He had hoped, after the decorous conduct and serious disclaimer of any intention to offend on the part of that Gentleman, that the Resolution would have beerrvery different indeed. It only proved to him that the Resolution had ►een penned previous to the examination of the petitioner. After what had then transpired, hevertainlphought lit would have been sufficient if the Petitioner had Neen reprimanded and discharged. If such, however, was his opinion, he witrnet to'be called, by either at She Noble Lords, to an account for bolding thole sentiments, or pointed out as a Suspicious person in that House. He would now fearlessly avow, that on this occasion the Commons had exerted their privi leges with very great severity, on this as well as on another late occasion. He hoped what he had said would not be of prejudice to the cause now before' the House, more particularly as the circumstance of the cheers, of which so much had been said both by the Right Hon. Gentleman now not present (Mr. Canning) and others, had already been authenticated by the evidence of two Members in that House. He also should vote for the enlargement of the prisoner upon this ground, that there never had been a more ample case made out for the proper exercise of cle mency on the part of the House than on the present occasion. Lord BINNING disclaimed any intention to make any allusion, in what he had said, personally offensive to the Honourable Baronet. The Petition was then read, and Mr. W. SMITH moved that the Petitioner be discharged out of cus tody, on payment of his fees, having first been re primanded by the Speaker. The Petitioner was then put the Bar. The SPEAKER addressed him, and stated, that having confessed himself, in the Petition now pre sented to the House, to have been the author of al paragraph in the reports of a Daily Newspaper, which. had the day before been declared to be highly defama tory and libelous, and a breach of the privileges of that House, he had been ordered to be taken into the custody of the Serjeant at Arms. Grave and serious as the offence had been, the conduct of the prisoner when examined ar the Bar, and the assurances there given that be had had no intention whatever either to misrepresent the sentiments of the particular indi vidual concerned, or offend the dignity of that House, had given him a claim to the mitigation of the pu nishment usually attendant on such an offence as had not hitherto in any case, nor scarcely could be ex perienced. The application of the Petitioner to the House had been heard and examined with the utmost attention to its spirit and contents, and had induced the House to consent to the Petitioner's being solely called to the Bar of the House, and upon being re- primanded, being thereupon discharged. He trusted the present mitigation of punishment would not be misunderstood ; and that as the opportunity of abusing the liberty granted to persons in his situation, bad originated altogether in the indulgence awarded them in the exercise of their professional duty, through the bounty of the House, they would be aware that the offence was necessarily aggravated by the facility which the House had granted them, by a departure in their favour font its established rules and orders. Lastly, let them be convinced, that from the view the House had been enabled recently to tale of represen tations of this nature, every future offence of this description would be considered a wilful violation of 'the privileges of the House, and be treated with the most severe infliction of punishment on the part of the ,Hotise.—The prisoner was then taken from the Bar and discharged. Lord CASTLEREAGH moved the reprimand, given by Mr. Speaker to the prisoner on this occasion should be entered on the Journals of the House, which was agreed Id. PETITIONS AGAINST THE FOREIGN ENLISTMENT BILL. Sir FRANCIS BURDETT presented a Petition from certain inhabitants of Liverpool against the Fo reign Enlistment Bill, which he considered as a dis= grace to the country, contrary to the genius of the British people, and totally inimical to the interests of freedom and trade.—Ordered to lie on the table. Mr. WRIXON BEECHER presented a similar Pe tition from Mallow, and in presenting it, he begged leave to say, that the proposed measure met his de cided disapprobation. He had heard nothing what ever in all the arguments which were used to recon cile him to the measure ; but much on the contrary to fortify his reasons for disapproving it. It was said to be rendered necessary in compliance with the terms of a treaty with Spain, but that he could scarcely be induced to credit. At all events, the laws of the British Empire should not be altered merely to suit the wishes of that country. The ingenuity of a British Government might be thought to he better di rected than in arranging, or raking up, or new mo , delling laws for the purpose of repressing the strug gling exertions of a people anxious to be free.— He gave the Government, however, much more cre dit for the candour they had displayed, than-for any sound political judgment they exhibited on the ques tion ; and he thought they should scarcely be sorry for its failure. The measure was an odious one viewed in any light, but considering the consequences to which it would lead it was doubly so. The dis tresses of the country were now become so great, that emigration was deemed a blessing, and when such a field for exertion offered itself as South Ame rica, he could not perceive why the Government should so pertinaciously pursue it, in contradiction to the universal opinion of the Empire. The only advocates the measure found were in the House; the sense of every man without it was in direct hostility to its letter, spirit, and its ohject.—(llenr,hear). Ordered to be printed. Mr. PHILLIPS said that he should in a few days have a similar Petition to present from Manchester, and he hoped the Government would in time aban don a measure likely to prevent the progress of free dom, and cramp the exertions of the manufacturers throughout the country. The interest of Spain should not be preferred to the universal spread of Liberty, and to the prospect of enlarged trade which South America held out to the 'British trade in particular. DISSENTERS-MARHIAGE ACT. Sir J. MACKINTOSH presented a Petition from the Dissenters of the 'Borough of Southwark, against the Martiage Act.—Laid on the table. A Petition was presented from the Dissenters of York against-the Marriage Service.—Ordered to lie on the table. A similar Petition was also presented from the town of Maidstone.—Laid on•the table. Mr. W. SMITH, in rising to move for leave to bring in a Bill respecting the Marriage Service Act, did not in the least intend to make any alteration or change in the service as now performed, so as to al= felt the privileges of any class of persons, to narrow the jurisdictiosi of the officiating clergyman or his , . ! , . 1 , . , ' .il 4, foes, to prevent the marriage frrth talcfng nh ee churches as was now the practice, nor to make Ow least alteration that could affect the descent elrirrt.. petty. .11re Dissenters,. whose cause he reid sented, complained. that they weie obliged to sit tq a ceremony, a Ott of which was repugnant M their religious scruples, ond that they were so obliged to submit, without thefering attty benefit on the `zi=te, or inducing them to think the mare of the obligation which they incurred. Ip.Scothuid the marriage et. remony was merely considered' as n eyed contract; in the greater part of the Protestant States of Pm* it was considered in the same light; and it was only within a period of seventy years, namely, since ti-e 26th of George H. that it was looked upon differently in England. Tile principal objection of the Diner tens to the ceremony consisted in this, that theywer e obliged to believe' in the Trinity, contrary to their conscientious conviction of its impmprietv. About five years ago, an Act' was certainly passed to relieve them from penalties for not believing it; bat still they were subjected to the unpleasant operations of their consciences, without the atttinnment to society, to religion, or the country, of any one advantage. Quakers and Jews were exempted from the marriage ceremony, as practised in the Church of England, by a clause in the Act c,e the 2!ith cf Clerrge IL but he believed they were so, because of their having petitioned to be so exempted, and also becinise th.v were more easily defined and designated than tau Dissenters, who then more or less acquiesced in the measure, but had now felt differently on the suhjec t . In former times the marriage ceremony was consi dered in England as a civil contract, as would evi dently appear from the 12th of Charles H. and as Act of King William, by which it was held neces sary that a certain ceremony should be performed ; but then its object was directed rr.oi e to the rais i ng of a revenue, than to any kind of feeling of religion. The whole of the marriage ceremony was not even now required to make a marriage valid ; and the re medy he proposed to ease the consciences of the Oh. seaters would be, to omit certain words after these— " I pledge thee my troth," together with the whole of the preceptory or monitory part, a:id the leseons. This omission only to take place at the request of Ow parties to be married, and signified in writing to the regularly-offioiating Clergyman. Ile did not %rids to detain unnecessarily the time of the House by entering further into the question, and after a few observations, tending to shew that less breaches of the marriage vows occurred in States, wherimar riage was merely regarded as a civil contract, Ulan as a religious ceremony and a sacrament, concluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to alter and amend the Marriage Act, relative to Protestant Dis senters—(Hear, hear.) Lord CASTLEREAGH wished that his not oppo sing the motion of the Honourable Member might not be construed into any acquiescence with the pro visions it was intended to include. Of these provisions he of course knew nothing, but would take an oppor tunity of declaring his opinion upon them, when they came regularly before the House. Mr.WILBERFORCE had no itNectitm to the Bill being brought in, but hoped 'at they brae time that nothing would'be done upon the 'object that , could lessen the respect due to the cerenury. He considered it as a religions knoititittion, and an insti tution to which Eutope was entirely indebted Ember superiority over Asii and other otiartielo tithe Wqrid. He should be gladie ease the sent any cofisCi• entious individuals; het he could not do so at the risk of lessening the influence of that ceremony Which held society together. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. ARRANGEMENT OP PUBLIC Rusis:r.ss. Mr. BROUGHAM put smile toestions to Lurd Came- IMAGU across the table, as to the order of procedure of the pub lic business, when the Debate on the New Taxes was filo] .f,>r Friday; that on the Foreivi Enlistment Bill (third readin,) Monday ; and that on the Charitable Abuses Bill, for Tuesl.l next. ACTS IN DESUETUDE Mr. BOSWELL, in Moving that the Report of the Scotch Acts in Desuetude Bill be brought up, ob served, that he was constrained to admit, that al though the Statute Law of Scbtrand might be abro gated by contrary custom, this principle could not apply to Acts of Parliament passed since the Union, and extending to Scotland. If the present mere were an improper one, he should be the last person to regret that it was checked in its progress ; but he was convinced that it would be attended with great benefit to Scotland. With the view he entertained of Statute Law, it was a very loose obligation that was to be binding on people only so long as they pleased. Ile conceived that the best justification of die measure which he bad the honour to have kap duced was, that no writer had laid it down as a prin ciple, that the Statutes of the British Parliament could not fall into desuetude. Mr. J. P. GRANT thought a declaratory Act un necessary upon Acts wherein there was no doubt: and though the practice was in Scotland as in uncial& Rome, that when the custom to which the law owed its origin became obsolete, the law should be inope rative, yet_ a Court of Law was the fittest place to determine that. He was sorry to see Gentlemen liave such a passion for legislation upon every trifling doubt which might possibly arise, and not referring to the proper tribunal to expound their. Under these circumstances, he felt it his duty to move, that this Report be taken into consideration this day six months. A Mr:maim, whose name we could not learn, said. lit v. as better to set the question at rest by an Act of Parliament, than leave it to the discretion of any law tribunal, even the High Court of Justiciary of Scot land. He supported the Bill. Mr. St'AßLE'rr said, it was quite novel to re move doubts in Acts of Parliament by legislation, and as yet no judicial authorh:v had, as tar as be understood, expressed any doubt upon these Acts. It would be an anomaly in the Legislature to declare that certain Acts which emanated from itself should he in force here, and that others should not be‘ond the Tweed. Ile could not recorcile it to himself to support this Bill until a formal doubt bad teen raised by some high legal authority. Mr. HUME thought thcre was no necessity for Legislative interference. Air. BOSWELL, in reply, - said •11 is only °hien w - 14 to correct an inherent principle in the Scottish Lau which went to establish, that etiroto was sufficien:.: o abrogate certain Laws, 'without Legislative in:c rence, and to fir 1 period to when it should °P er4:g ' about which there was no d;...,bti as Mr. Barr;. l"