Star. — London, England, 1811-03-05 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 4. The Coroner of the County of Surrey, in compliance with the Motion of Lord Hot.t.neo, anti the Order of their lArtishipi, presented a Copy of the Proceedings of the INuest on the body of William Cullom, who died in the Marshal•ea prison, in con ociliseme, as it was said, of the ettseme want of the necessaries I.le. . BERKELEY PEERAGE. In a Committee of Privileges it was moved. That an Address i be presented to the ° Prince Regent, praying Ilk Royal Highness would be graciously pleased to appoint a Law Officer of the Crown to attend to the interests of the younger brother in this Important cause. The Resolution was afterwards reported to the liaise, and att Address moved accordingly. IRELAND. Lord DARNLEY, alluding to certain documents which bad been moved respecting the revenue, and other circumstances of kellomd, wished to know when these documents would be pro emial? Every thing wl.ich regarded that part of the Empire, 4tined, in his opinion, the most serious attention of their Lord '-illaps, particularly at the present moment ; and he should feel it bie duty to bring these circumstances under their Lordships' con alaersOon. , I The Earl of LIVERPOOL acknowledged, that the affairs of Imiand claimed every attentions on the part of that louse, and pearlised to inquire when the Papers referred to by the Noble bad Would be ready to be laid on the table. Lard DARNLEY could not now fix the particular day on alias he should bring forward a motion on the subject he had alluded to, ba . it would be some time atout the dose of the en- NOM woel. INFORMATIONS El OFFICIO. Lord HOLLAND rose to bring forward the mo-I tien of which he had given due notice, respecting the increase of the number of informations filed ex ea* by his Majesty's Attorney-General in cases of libel, :VChat taken place within these few years, and, in , in his opinion, there might be just grounds of I appicion, that political partiality and bias bor e no • spell share. When he ventured to give that notice, be Conceived he was acting a .part perfectly confor , liable to the spirit of the Constitution, and indeed so concordant to parliamentary practice, that he, by no means, apprehended that his motion could meet with any opposition, " But he had since learned that it was the intents= of same Noble Lords to oppose it ; and therefore felt himself under the necessity of stating. more at length than he originally intended, the ,grounds upon which he had :o rest the propriety of Isis motion. When he considered the nature of that motion, he certainly was at a loss to conjecture the sort of objections that could be urged against it. For' in-the first place, it did riot go to pledge their Lord ships' House to any particular opinion whatsoever ; but merely called for the production of documents re lative to the administration of justice in cases of libel ; documents which, in his opinion, should be open to every one, and which should be inspected with vigilance at id j;ralnusy. At the opening of every Parliament, * Committee of Justice were appointed, and to every case where the rights and liberties of the subject! were concerned, the attention of Parliament was di rected, not occasionally and accidentally, but uni formly and unremittingly. In cases of libel these rights and liberties were affected, and therefore it be hoved Parliament to inquire into the numoer and na ture of the informations filed in the lower Courts, and into the proceedings which had been had in conse quence. There was a Committee now sitting on the nature of the Revenue Laws, as far as they might affect the life of the subject, in order to gain informa tion how those laws might be amended. In the same manner he thought there could be no impropriety in instituting an inquiry into the object of his present' motion, without making any reference to any parti- Ida alante.alt was well hnown, that not later than . two or are, years ago, an Act was passed which al tired the' fthidatnental laW at the land in matter of libel, which altered the uninterrupted stream of preCe; dents upon which all law was founded, and which gave to the will, to the simple conviction and conscience of, one man, all the force of a regular Bill of Indictment, without the necessity of offering any reason for such a mode of ptoceeding. The only reason which he could see to justify such a practic,e was, that it might maw; tile the Attorney-General to hold the accused person to bail, and thus secure him until he could be conve niently brought to trial. Has this authority and power recently invested in the Attorney-General, tended to prevent libels ; or rather, has not their number in creased i This was a point he should not now dwpll deon ; nor would he proceed on the narrow ground oi the late alteration in the law. He might be ac cused of presumption in calling the attention of their Lordships to the administration of justice in this par ticular, while persons so eminently qualified for such an undertaking, persons so fully and correctly con versant with all the proceedings, persons who equally enjoy private respect and public admiration, see no necessity for such an undertaking. It would indeed be high presumption in him to risk such an attempt, if he was not countenanced in it by the -opinion and authority of the most distinguished Lawyers, who contended that no class of persons should monopolise to themselves the observations that should be made -for the improvement of the law ; and he would not hesitate to speak his mind to that effect in the presence of a Noble and Learned Lord (Ellenborough), than by whom justice was never more purely or ably ad- Ministered. He should now state the line of his mo tion. He should not meddle with the law of libel,' still less would he attempt to define what a libel was. In the nature of thing s such a definition wasl very difficult. The law of libel, with the exception of trea son, staid: on more difficult grounds than any other, because how can libels well be separated from the political feelings of the day, or from the existing pre judices with respect to the persons whom they may . Uffect ? This influence pervades even the Juries, and • even those who bring such offenders to punishment may be considered as so biassed that they are led al ready to hold the accused in the light of a criminal. For in cases of libel as well as of treason, it is na tural to feel unfavourably with regard to those who would stand up in opposition to power ; and men art • inclined to consider as libeflous those who attempt at free discussion, and to treat them as such, chiefly with a view to stifle free -discussion. It is impossible so anxiously to guard against such a disposition, as would check the discuasion of public affairs, and prove fatal to the liberty of the press. In what he had to off-:r on these points, he should be guided by the highest law authorities, nor would he deny, that, in no case, and under no necessity, were informations s ir officio legal. Their Lordships would recollect the /rising of Lord Hale on this sobjectiwhieh was after. IN .rits adopted by Claf Jaatice hlalr, visa that it Wrif' PARLIAMENTAR7' PROCEEDINGS. I the abuse, and not the legality of that was to be questioned, allowing or necessity of the existence of such did he wish to suppress that power, ercised with a view to the constitution. abuse of it, which he dreaded, and he propose inquiry, in order to detect abuse, if it existed. If he looked to later authorities who disapproved of the power assnmed by informa -1 tions cx officio, he had on his side Mr. Wedderburne, and Mr. Dunning, whose acuteness of judgment and knowledge of law was only equalled. by his love of liberty. Now there were two modes of proceeding against libel, the one by civil action, the other by in dictment—the former was only as between party and party—ln the latter, no man could be convicted of libel or misdemeanour unless grounds were proved befere twelve men upon oath.—But in the cases of whit!' he was complaining, when an information ex officio was filed against an individual, he was brought to trial as if a Bill had been found against him by a Grand Jury. To the highest authorities which he had already cited, he might now adduce the autho rity of Judge Blackstone—Blackstone was not a man remarkably strong in his animadversions on the abuse of power. His book, equally conspicuous for the soundness of his reasoning and the elegance of his style, might rather be considered as a panegyric on the Constitution and the Laws of Great Britain. Judge Blackstone declares,indeed, that the Attorney-General may proceed by informations ex officio, but that then only should he proceed when the misdemeanours againit which he is proceeding are so.enormous, as that they threaten the destruction of Govern ment, and so urgent and' dangerous that not a moment's delay Should intervene between the sup pression and punishment of them. What do these ob servations imply ? They imply indeed the necessity of the existence of such a power, but that when it is exerted for any purposes short of the suppression of dangers nf the most fatal magnitude, and of the most urgent emergency, the exercise of it is a most flagrant,' abuse. Now who will hazard theassertion that thelibels, against which informations ex ?Pio, have lately been fr l i filed in such numbers, were of the description of that ' urgency, and that fatal magnitude to the State, which these great authorities allow may justify the exercise of such a Power ? . On the contrary, was there I any thing in them which carried with it any of the characters of such urgency and enormity of an evil which was immediately to be suppressed by such an' extraordinary exertion of power ? and if these cha- racters did not justify it, are not we warranted, with Blackstone, in describing it as a most flagrant abuse? Now, it not only appears Irons the best authorities, that this power is liable to abuse, but that such a mode of proceeding is less favourable to the accused than any other mode of prosecution, and that therefore it is ir reconcilable with the spirit of our laws. If the mere liability to abuse ought to be guarded against, what ; ought not to be done if the power should be perve rte d Ito the worst of purposes ? Is it not clear that such a power may be exerted with a view to extortion, op. , pression, and influence ? That it may extend wive city even beyond the crimes which it is employed to' punish. Even in case of a libel, what delays haver been allowed to intervene between a conviction and . the bringing up for judgment ? He hoped theis‘ Lordships would reflect how enormously this evil has increased for the last three or four years: Since 1806 no less than forty-two persons have been proceeded against in this manner—and out of those forty-twoi only sixteen have been convicted. Were their offences then, of that description of enormous misdemeanors, the punishment of which could not be allowed to stif.' fer a moment's delay without imminent danger of destruction to the State ? Have thirty-six of these i enormous crimes been suffered to go on unsuppressed and yet no danger has accrued from them to the power and security of the State ? In what absurdities 1 , would such doctrines and such practices involve us ? It is also to be observed that the number of persons proceeded against has increased ; so also has that power been most pointedly directed against tho se who rare engaged in the press. With what purposes then Is not this power of information ex officio used, if not for the purposes of terror and influence ? He was one of those who did think that some distinction should be made between the malicious intention of the maa who uttered the libel, and the situation of the person who, without ever having harboured any such inten tion, might be entangled in the consequences of it.— He had with him in this opinion the authority of one Attorney-General (Sir A. Pigot), a man of the most constitutional principles, of the most unvarying stea diness of character. During the period that Sir A. Pigot held the high office of Attorney-General, he filed only one information cx ojcio for libel, a libel of the most atrocious and dangerous nature, calculated to produce no less an evil than mutiny among our . troops. There indeed was an evil that m i g ht p rove destructive to the State, and subversive of Public Authority. How did Sir A. Pigot act in that'case ? He wished to get at the real author of the libel, and no sooner was the real author of it given up, but a soli proupti was issued. He (Lord Holland) was always anxious to see that principle of Sir A. Pigot's acted on. The real author of a libel is the person you should endeavour to get at, if indeed he can be produc ed. It was remarkable that the newspaper sold off by Sir A. Pigot was the Morning Post,distinguished fur its al most unvaried support of every Ministerial measure ; yet, though judgment in that case was suffered to go by default, the offender was never brought up for judgment. The Administration, indeed, shortly after changed ; and, although it is the no rare practice of the Attorney-General to keep judgment hanging over the heads of those who have been convicted, almost the only exception was made in favour of that Paper, with which the Attorney-General was politically con nected. It would not be simplicity, but stupidity on his part if he did not suspect to what extent of abuse such a power might be carried. He should not enter into an examination of any of the particular cases , which had recently occurred. It was too obvious, however, not to remark, how, in some instances, the punishment seemed to be pointedly aggravated. No doubt it was right that the Judges should have the power to confine persons in different prisons for very good reasons; but the reason, ceased to be a good one, if they were so confined with a view to the gravation of the punishment. Nor was itele alum of the libel only, and tht'proprietor of the pfeer that contained it, who were esas punish/a, titsprinter and publisher elf if likewise. Was tenet st Wet ag gravation of their punishmat this VI 111.16.1.'41 _ . distance far from their trade and oe. consequently far from the means, not resent, but perhaps of their future sub ippon.? The Noble Lord next mai ' - r the employment of Special Juries To them the same remark might Hale applied to informations es . eficio—They were less favourable than the ordinary course ofjustice; and consequently not so conforma ble to the law of the land or the spirit of the Constitu tion. They were not allowed in capital cases, nei ther should they in cases of libel. Here again was an abuse which ought to be inquired into—for inqui ry should be instituted were it only to prove that no such abuse existed. He was far from wishing to throw out any ungrounded insinuations against the administration of justice; but this he would say, that it should not only be pure, but that it should not even I be suspected. The only object of all punishment was ' example—but, instead of deterring by example. it now often happened that the evil consequences of a libel were aggravated by the notice taken of it, when, perhaps, it might be more wise to have left it unno ticed. The notice taken of it, only gave it a more , rapid and extensive circulation, and thus increased I the evil consequences of the libel itself. Such abuses were obvious, and they fully justified the propriety of his intended motion. His wish was, to prevent the filing of informations against periodical publications, after a certain time had elapsed subsequent to. the publication of the libel. It only went to revive an evil that had already ceased to exist. He should therefore move a resolution to compel the Attorney. General either to prosecute forthwith, or to enter a Rai itrosepi. He should move that judgment be prayed against the individual in due time after his conviction. Those also had strong claims to redress who were exposed to heavy expences ; and after not brought to trial. All these were -points which re. quired to be investigated, and room should be given to point censure against those who may abuse this power of information ex ojicie, and who, for that pur-1 pose, skew a disinclination to let the law of the land ' , have its course. Much had been said of the present licentiousness of the press ; and, if our best, our me* ' classical writers were examined, they would perhaps be found to contain much stronger censure against public men and public measures than what is now looked on with such horror, and punished with suds severity. Who would now venture directly to allude , to the harsh administration of justice, and have an in dividual in his eye, as Pope had when he wrote the following line— " Hard words and hanging, if your Judge Le Pans ?" Such practices as those which he had been condemn ing were only calculated to degrade the press. Our anxious efforts should however be to preserve it pure, and rescue it from the corruption of venal hands.— It is idle to say, that since the French Revolution the I licentiousness of the press, whirl; then produced such fatal effects, should be cautiously guarded against.— No doubt the licentiousness of the press may be pro ! ductive of great evils, but among them will never be found the evils of diminishing the will or the means. lof a country to resist a foreign enemy. Has the 11. centiousness of the Press in France enabled the Noble I, Secretary (Lord Liverpool) to march to Paris ? No. ' It has always been the means of defeating the at tempts of the coalitions to subjugate France ; and it I will ever be found an engine, a powerful engine,! against the aggression of a foreign foe. The Noble' , Lord concluded with moving for a list of all the in formations which have been filed ex officio, from the Ist January, 1801, to the 81st DecemberlBll,-.liii gether with copies of the proceedings had in sequence. Lord ELLF.NBOROUGH said, that such a motion as that urged by the Noble Lord, which was for a list of the 'es officio informations, in cases of libel, du ring no less an interval than that of ten years, should by accompanied by some grounds, why such a pro ceeding were necessary, some instances of abuse of power, ,which would appear by the production of such documents. He had listened attentively, and indeed somewhat painfully to the statement of the Noble Lord, but was unable to find any one instance duced of any act of: severity on the part of the Law Officers of the Crown. The only precise spe cific instance referred to, was on the contrary, an act of lenity, in the grant of a moll pronfui in the case of the Morning Post. If the Noble Lord felt in his own mind that any case of severity occurred, let him move for that one document. But why should the files of the Court for the long interval of ten years be ran sacked, and their contents emptied on the table of the House ? If the Noble Lord desired the produc tion of any particular document, on the grounds he had stated, be could easily have procured it—no as. sistaace on his part should be wanting. Indeed there existed too great a facility in the procuration of those' documents from the Court, and very often a painful facility to the applicants, some of whom hoped to be refused, in order that a pretext might be afforded to them to make the application in another manner.— He differed from the Noble Lord with respect to his reference to that great Law Authority, Lord Hale, who never spoke on these points in the manner quoted. The power of proceeding by information was as an. cient as almost any branch of the Common Law ; and this abundantly appeared from the respectable authority of Stower. If the Noble Lord questioned the legality of that mode of proceeding, be might as well question that of the Sovereign of the Realm to wear the Crown. He deprecated any d scussion which tended to impress the public with the idea that there was any thing illegal in that mode of proceed ing. It was as much a part of the Law of the Land, as that by which the Noble Lord held his Estates, or enabled him to sit and argue in that House. Refer ing to the observatiot s of the Noble Lord respecting the persons held to bail under the Act, his Lordship contended, that since the notice had been given, he was anxious to know how many instances there was of individuals being held to bail, when it appeared! that there was but one solitary instance. This was the ground laid for a Legislative interference—this . was the practical instance of these mighty abuses,l which were to render it a matter of indifference to Englishmen, whether they were subjects to George 111. or to Bonaparte! He must again contend against the practice of their coming forward with discussions upon trivial or no grounds, and thus mischievously inoculating the, public mind with opinions for which there was no real foundation ! He repeated, that ifl any information appeared to the Noble J,.ord to pro- NO upon 'frivolous or vexatious &tonna, no assist. r~ ,~ since should be wanted upon his part towards bring. ing such a case forward. He felt strongly on those points, but it was from his love of justice And of real liberty, which he always discriminated from licenti. ousness. Nothing wystild- tend more to th e p reset .. ration of the liberties of the country, than to defend those laws which protected them from the effects of unfounded clamour and rash assertions. Finding that the Noble Lord had in fact produced but one solitary instance, and that one of lenity, instead•cf severity, he felt it his duty to resist the Motion. Lord HOLLAND, in explanation s tappealed to the justice and the recollection of their Lordships, that he had not questioned the legality of the pr,,e e , dings in question, as the Noble and Learned Lunt seemed to impute to him. Lord ELLENBOROUGH shortly explained. Earl S'rANHOPE spoke in suppnrt of the argo. ments of his Noble Friend In the present instance, . he did not mean to attack the Learned Lord Chef justice, nor to give the Noble . Lord on the Woolsaik a trimming, as he had oftendone before. (41:usa.) Referring to what had been said of the colistruiti, a of libel, he observed there were two species of lib e l, one a speaking cowardly scandalous °nonce. against the characters of individuals, against' which it was the duty of Government to protect them. Of this many instances occurred, where retirees was imprac. ticable ; but the reason uhy these, in-seessresses, were regarded as libels, was their tendency so a breach of the public peace. A curious in-recce happened is, the case of the late Lurd Chesterfield, where any im mediate elect from a libell.ius insult was neatly par. Tied. His Lordship was met one dry by a fellow is the street, sklio pushed him from the wall, saying. he never gave the wall to a sc,amdrel. On. which his Lordship pullisd off his hat, and, making a low bow, said, " I *twits do." The second species was dust directed against the Government of the couutry, or those who Were entrusted with it. "On thi., head, it should be recollected that such topics weie fair matter for discussion. Much had been said ou the po',nt, ,rwhether truth was a libeL In this view,he observed tbat the people could never be Informed, or able to budge of the conduct of their governors, except cit.. cumstances were allowed to be published ; but he well knew that the licentiousness of the press was 10 ften encouraged by the worst enemies of its liberty. He remembered, in the instance of a worthy and in. titnate friend of his, a striking proof of this; they had frequent arguments respecting the liberty of the press, which his friend was hostile to, and he always &deo. sated, they were nevertheless friends. KW, years ' ago there were some very scandalous stories in the papers of the day respecting a Noble Earl and an 11. lustrious Personage, both now no more. Of this scandal he highly disapproved ; but his friend, con. ;tray to his expectation, was not equally indignant at tit. His reason shortly came out, " Let them go on, (said he) they will proceed to such a length that the ;evil will carry its own retnedy with it ;" and there .were many, he believed, who connived at real licen tiousness in the press on the same grounds. Be should support the motion of his Noble Friend. Lord ERSKI/sIE entered into a discussion of some I length, upon legal grounds, on the leading topics is question. He entirely agreed with what had (Ales from his Noble and Learned Friend opposite (Lord Elienborough) whose judicial character he highly pa negyrised, upon the legality of the great point at issue ; it was as ancient as the Common Law itself. It was at all times one of the pr:rogatives of the Crown. No doubt existed on the point, and such was the opinion of that excellent writer Lord Hales. He observed, that even were the list called ior to be laid on the table, and were it to contain five hundred cases or more, still it would furnish no evidence of abuse to the House, because there may be a proportionably great.nOmber of offences which called for such an in. terference. Abuses, however, may exist. The Noble and Learned Lord then took a copious view of the modes of proceedings with respect to cases of high treason, and of the advantages those afforded to the accused, in comparison with what these were allowed in ordinary cases of offence. For the latter, where the Crown was the prosecutor,.some improvements ' may be suggested. The statute of the 25th of Ed. 1 ward W. had long met with false constructions, and the Legislature more than once interfered to bring it back to its letter. He descanted on the modes of process in cases of high treason, and dwelt on the ad vantages afforded thereby to the accused, as the neces sity of producing two witnesses,* ahe least, a gives interval of notice before the trial ; the privilege of making $5 peremptory, nay capricious challenges of Jurors, and as many more as they could shew jog cause for, this proceeded on the ground of the gigar• tic power, of prosecuting—the Crown ; and he seemed to think that it may be expedient that tome degree cf reform, in other cases, where the same power prose cutes, might advantageously be adopted to secure the affections of thegoverned,thattlielaw should berendr ed popular. .He agreed cordially with what had beta said of the wide distinction between the licentiousneo and the liberty of the press, a freedom sthich se greatly tended to secure that of the Government we had the happiness to live, and which fabric mJy best be preserved by securing it from the evils ti licentiousness, and made toendure to thelatestpostesity. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he should de. min their Lordships but a short time on the present occasion. The motion went by a side vote, to affect the character of the administration of justice, and nineteen-twentieths of what was said, did not apply to the real point in question. He felt the justice of what was stated by a Noble and Learned Friend, on one of the most important parts of the law of the country, and of these benefits he trusted they would not be deprived. If any thing was meant to be ar gued by analogy, as an improvement in the mode of administering the law, in the cases more immediately in question, that proposition should be directly stated —but in examining this part of the law, upon gene. ml principles, he thought it would not be advanta• geous to part with that species of prosecution. With respect to the .4 trimmings." which a Noble Lord had boasted of his having inflicted on him, lie had received that sort of discipline so often from , luau, that he was grown so callotts as scarcely to feel them (Alasrgb). He had much official s xpericnce in the kinds of prosecutions in question, namely, for wcr tious libels, and could say, those he had co encounter were calculated to overuses the Government of the country. Much had been said of the supposed rigour of prosecutions on the part of the Crown ; but lie could confidently aver that it would be found that of such informatio and send them a dis s o l the expediency eupatibn, and cons a power—neither only if their preseni when it was.ex- sistence and suppoi ion. It was the madverted against therefore would on such occasions— ect and punish the be applied as Lord 1, f