Star. — London, England, 1809-03-01 00:00:00

• PAR.L.M. i/L A f .4RI PROCEEDINGS. 1.101 - :=E O 1 LORDS, TUESDAY, FEB. 28. Mr. Jot::. - . flom the I.nnt'on rick Company, presented a • Report, and oan account of the Receipts and Disburiements of the said Cowl . ai.y, fr,mi Nov SO, 1507, to Nov. 30, 1803. C Min; ELL'S DIVORCE BILL. After Prayers were read, the further consideration of this Bfil w.e; resumed, and Counsel (Mr. WARREN and Mr. YaTes) and evidence in support of the Bill were called in. The first witness called was Mr. EDMOND Pvsnv LYON, a Barrister. and Agent for the Island of Ja maica. Re was brought forward with reference to tl - .e validity of Mr. Campbell's marriage, of which satisfactory evidence had r. at been adduced when the 1: ill was list under their Lordships' considera - :en.— Ie stated his opinion, that the law of marriage in the Island of Jamaica, was precisely as it stood in Eng land before the Marriage Act. There was a law of the Assembly passed, inflicting a penalty upon the Clergyman rf 1001. currency, who celebitated the mar riage I ices without being licensed as prescribed by the Act ; but this only attached upon the Clergyman, and did not go to render the marriage void. The second witness stated, that marriages were frequently solemnised in private houses in Jamaica, and that in the case of Mr. and Mrs. Campbell, a ne cessity existed for such a mode of proceeding, as the parish church had been recently destroyed. What appeared in evidence seeming to satisfy their Lordships as to the validity of the marriage, the House proceeded to hear evidence as to the other parts of the case. • The Record of the Judgment (which had been suffered to go by default) was the first, from which it appeared, the sum of £l5OO were awarded as da mage_ to Mr. Campbell. The Solicitor of Mr. C. stated, that proceedings were had in order to enforce the payment of the money. In consequence of which a baii.bond was' given on the part of the Defendant, Mr. T. Sheridan, either to pay the money, or sur render the person or the Defendant within the given time. The bond was signed, besides by the Defen dant, with the names of Richard Peake and Thomas Spring. An application was afterwards made to enlarge the time, on which occasion new sureties were given on the part of the Defendant ; these were Lord Kinnaird and the Hon. Mr. Berkeley Craven. Mary Brotherly, a middle-aged woman, of decent appearance, was brought forward to speak as to the fact of the adultery. She described the length of time she had lived in the family of Mr. and Mrs. Campbell, and her situation therein in Yorkshire, in London? and other places, previously to their going to Edin burgh, where the facts complained of took place. Mr. Campbell had been for some time to the West-Indies; and had returned previous to the affair taking place. Early in the year 1604, when Mr. Campbell and the family were in Edinburgh, Mr. Campbell had gone. to London, and the Defendant, Mr. T. Sheridan, fre quently visited in the house. One night in particu- 1 lar, she believed it was towards the end of February, in that year, she recollected that her mistress order ed a more than usual quantity of night linen, and said she would, as Mr. Campbell was from home, lock the door herself, and dismissed her for the night. On the same night, about ten o'clock, she heard the street door opened and shut without having been knocked at. It was her usual custon to look into the different rooms in the house before going to bed. She iastended to look into the room where Mr. Campbell slept, but she found the door fa .t, nor could she open it by her efforts. She then went down, and some time after heard a noise like the doors Opening, and going up a step or two of the stairs whence she could see the door, she observed a gentleman in uniform, whom she had no doubt was the Defendant, .go in at the door of her mistress's room. Not long after, she went up, and endeavoured to get in, but it was fast, and she tapped several times, and requested to be admit ted, but could get no answer. In the morning after her mistress had risen, in consequence of a remark made by one of the female servants, she looked at the bed, which had every appearance of two persons hav ing 1 tin in it over night. On that morning she had SC me, interesting conversation with Tier mistress, in shish the latter stretched out her hand to her, and said she hoped she would be her friend; to which the witacss said, she answered she would in every thing that w;.s right, but in nothing wrong. • She remained a considerable time after in the service of the family. —With a view to account for the difference of her statement now and on a fo-mer occasion, and also for her not disclo•sing any thing of the affair until a very long interval—she said, in so doing she had com mitted an error of the head, but not oldie heart—her reason for not disclosing it to Mr.Can:pbell was, that on reflection she then thought she had not sufficient evU:nce as to the guilt of Mrs. Campbell—that she had lived long in her fa:Ay, :and was very much at tached to them—it was nearly (as we could collect) three years before she communicated the circumstan ces to Mr. Campbell, which ..he did in the presence of Mr. More, his so'sicitor, and also, she believed, of the clerk. Their LordsYps, about this point of exaniination, adjourned their proceedings ; and, on the suggestion of the Lord Chancellor, ordered the witness to att2nd again on Thursday next, when the consideration of the Bill will be resumed. BANBURY PEERAGE. The ATYoRNEy GEKERAL was heard before a Committee of Privileges, in reply, respecting the• ad missibility of licAray evidence of relations and others, in cases of pedigree. The LORD CHANCELLOR entertained same doubt as to th..! extent of admissibility relative to bills, and the tkpositita:-, of xvitnesses in Courts of Equity, being aftf..rwards te,ottcd to as competent vidcnce in C( tarts of L l.aw.. In the present instance, before 'the C,.nonittee, the doubt raised by the Counsel at the b:lr wLetl , :m a bill Ilk Li in a Court of • 11 4 (tity, in lfi t(), and the depositions Of witnesFes on the t to prove the legitimacy of the person then c r....hied to the title of Earl of Ilanburv, should nn y i Le addi..r , d as evidence in favour of the present ,; : ruant ? There appe2.vd to him no strict or defi role I,Cd ‘l;nvn in the books, and ;ale: all he had h c „ r d !*;:n.. Cie Counsel, he thought it a 1. - apertarsce, so much ro, that he 'should a question for the opinion of the Judges.— I 5 • teat; the proposed question, which itu 4 45 w t . ytu-po:t, Whether c.r not, in the -case of an i•t..,• • thc Courts below, a bill filed in a (2..: , urt v of Equity, and the cchsequent depositions of witnesses at some former period, in respect to the riabf of the lessor, or if not the whole of the proceedings,. theft if' any, and what part of the same, could be received in evidence, at a subsequent-period, on the trial of that ejectment ? Earl STANHOPE, at consider-able length, stated his opinion on this subject, and contended, that ne bill filed merely could be evidence afterwards, because it alight be filed without the knowledge of the party. — He recommended a dilerent mode of proposing the question, in order to extract from the Judges what was the principle of the law respecting the admissibi lity of this sort oleviderce ? The best opinion was that c f Lord Mansfield, who had laid down a wise and correct maxim ; namely, that the common law of England was not a law of case, and,precedent, but a law of principle. He therefore should, without ob jecting to the Noble and Learned Lord's queStion, propose other questions of his own : one of which was, whether, in any case, generally, such evidence was admissible ? He also proposed that it should be submitted to the Judges, that rules in cases of this description ought to he clearly defined, in order to be consistent with the principle of the common law. The Lord Chancellor's question was agreed to as were, with the exception of the last, those of Earl Stanhope. Further proceedings on Friday. Adjourned till To-morrow. HOUSE OE COMMONS. . Mr. PETER MOORE presented a Petition from the likiso• ners for Debt in the Jail of Coventry, pr.Pying relief by an Insol vent Act. The Scotch Law (respecting Child Murder) Amendment Bill was read the second time, and commitr-d, at the instance of Sir SAMUEL Komi; I.T, for this day se.'nnight. Mr. WHARTON brought up the Report of the Oommittee of Supplies, and the various resolutions were agreed to. Mr. DUNDAS moved to recommit to the same Committee the Petition of J. Goodie, a Clerk of the House, respecting an error in the engrossed transcript of the Distillery Bill last dered. NAST-INDIA PATRONAGIL Mr. BANKS, Chairman of the Select Committee on Abuses in the Disposal of East India Patronage, moved to rescind the order for taking into the custody of theSevieant at,Arms, John Annesley Shee, alias Calvert, as that person had aipde surrendered himself.—The Motion then passed. Mr. BANKS then moved a Resolution—That the said John Annesley Shee, alias Calvert (reciting his offences) be oomntitted to his Majesty's Jail of News - ate ; and that the Keeper shall to morrow, and from time fo time, bring up the Prisoner, as often as may be necessary, to give evidence before the said Committee. —Ordered. . _ WIDOWS OF NAVAL AND MARINE OFFICERS. Mr. W. WELLESLEY POLE moved for leave,l to bring in a Bill for the more convenient payment ofl the annuities and other allowances, to the Widows of Naval and Marine Officers, and those on the Compas sionate List. ' About the year 1732 or 1733, a fund was established by the Government of that day, for the Relief of die Widows of the Officers of the Navy, 'towards which it was deemed expedient to levy a de duction of threeftence in the pound, upon the ray of all Commissioned and Warrant Officers, and also to es tablish an allowance from all ships in .the service, un der the denoMination of Widows Men, i. e. the pay of one man out of every hundred men in each ship's company, was to be appropriated in aid of the said ' fund. After some years had elapsed, this was found insufficient, and the pay of an additional Widow'sl man was added. In this way the fund had proceeded up to the present time, but occasionally it had been found inadequate of later years : however, it had con siderably increased ; so that the fund was now rich, having a stock of £170,000, in the 3 per Cents, and the number of widows relieved from it in the last year was no less than 1800. The rates of allowance be- gan with £BO a year to Captain's widoWs, and de scended in proportionate gradation to those of War rant Officers. But it had been found, in the manage ment of this fund, that great inconvenience and dis tress had arisen in consequence of the widows being obliged to apply annually in London for their allow ance. One of the objects of his Bill, therefore, was to enable the Court of Assistants to pay them quar terly at their own houses, wherever resident, in the, same manner as was settled for the more convenient payment of the Widows of Military Officers, by a bill passed'about two years since. He had much convt.r.' nation with the person who managed this business at the War Office, and found there would be no difficulty in assimilating the disposal of the Naval Fend. It would be desirable also to extend this mode of reliet to others who were objects of the charity, though not exactly in the same way. The Board of Admiralty had addressed his Majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to order, that the donations to per sons upon the Compassionate Fund, should, in like manner, be paid quarterly, to , those appointed to re ceive them, at their own houses. His Majesty was pleased to approve of this ; and it was another , pur pose of his bill to enable the Board of Admiralty to Felect such Objects as were properly entitkd to aid from the Compassionate Fund ; to allow them such sums as they should think fit, and transmit their al lowance quartely. These sums to be charged yearly in the ordinary estimates for the navy. It was also intended to transmit the half-pay of marine r , fivers to them in the same manner as to those of the army, and therefore the bill would enable them to receive it at their houses. He thought it fair at the same time that he proposed to include the allow ances of the Compassionate List in the annual esti mates of the navy, that he should abolish the allow ance called indoors' men, which were now regularly charged in the accounts of every vessel in, the service. He concluded by moving for leave to bring in the bill. Mr. R. WARD szconded the motion. Mr. C. POLE regretted not to have heard from the Honourable Gentleman in the detail of his intend. ed bill, any provision for a purpose which he conceived to the full as important as any other object it had in view, namely, a provision for the orphan children of Naval and Marine Officers, and their educati"n. Mr. POLE replied, that the provisions intended by his Bill, were the same as those for the families of de cea:-.ed Military Officers, namely, for the widows and orphans, who were to remain on the fund so long as they continued objects of charity. Mr. CA LC R A F'P asked the HonourableGentle- Irna.‘whetlicr the NV WOWS of Marine o:3cert were nol. eat t3..i to some from the funds of Chelsea 11.,5p1t.11, ch as Marine Officers were obliged to cootr:bute :o that fund; as well as to Greenwich Hospital ? Mr. fOLE said he feared i that be was not prepared to answer sat i sfactorily the question so unexpectedly put to him by the o lienourable Gentleman. 'But he- tbeeibt the contributions of Marine Ofwers to Gt eat liOlgo wick . 'sal had nothing to clo with the Widows' Funch Isli the money paid to Gfeenwich was at the , -,disposar o that Corporation, and subject to no inter feitnee.from the Board of Admiralty. Leave was given to bring in the bill. . . NEW DOCKS AT PURFI,ELT. A Member tnovedlor leave to bring in Bills to confirm an agreement between Govirnment nod Simnel Whitbread, Esq. f o r certain lands purchased of hits at Purfleet ; and also to make compensadon for certain other lands and hereditaments, purcha sed In tke same plow for the purpose of having Docks there.— Leave given. • CALL OF THE HOUSE. Lord FOLKESTONE, pursuant to his notice of yesterday, rose tulnove that the House be called over on Wednesday the Bth of March. The question to come before the House that day was of the utmost importancei and therefore he conceived that the fullest possible attendance of Members was necessary: With that view, and with that only, it was, that he should now move for a call of the House on that day. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that he should not have thought it necessary to make such a motion, when he considered the tranaer in which the House hid been attended during the whole of the time when the important subject alluded to by the Noble Lord was under investigation ; and therefofe he had no doubt of a full attendance on the day appoin ted f or that most important subject again *ran question, as the Noble Lord had justly observed, was of the utmost impor tance, and it was his own wish that in all its parts it shOuld meet the most 'grave and solemn considera tion before the fullest possible attendance cl Mem bers. He therefore abstained from any resistance to the motion, feeling as he did, that however unneces sary he might conceive it to be, yet any opposition to it on his part would be subject to animadversions not of the most liberal nature. But in giving his assent to the motion, he trusted that the question of that day would not be further delayed. The Mo tion might have the effect of securing the attendance of all Members in town or within a short distance. But it could not be expected, that in so short a notice as eight or ten days, any thing like an effectual call of . the House could be had. But it was not because the call could not operate to its fullest extent that it was not therefore to be adopted. Lord FOLKESTONE assured the Right Ho nourable Gentleman, that he had no intention of further postponing the business, neither was any such intention entertained by his Honourable friend (Mr. Wardle). - Mr. BRAGGE BATHURST thought the call of the House equally unnecessary and improper.— He should, think it quite impossible that in so short_ a period as eight days, it would have any effect in bringing Gentlemen from the remotest corners of the United Kingdom. It would be merely a call in name, and not in effect. From the full attendance of Members during the whole of the inviry, there could be no doubt of a full attendance on the nig_ht of discussion ; and althoUgh a tolerable opinion of a subject might be formed on written evidence, yet per haps it was going too far to call on Members com ing from a distance, who would not have time to ex amine and consider the printed evidence, after their arrival in town, in order to form their opinions to de cide upon so solemn a subject, perhaps, the day after. M. CHARLES ADAMS approved the motion for a call of the House, and thought, that although it could not be expected to procure the attendance of Members from Scotland and Ireland, yet if it only ob tained that of half a dozen additional Members, upon such an occasion, even that would be of some importance. General GASCOIGNE also thought the call could I not be effectual. It appeared to him that to attempt enforcing this call at so short a notice, -.vould be an abuse of the power of the House, and tend to defeat its authority on future occasions. Members at a dis- ; tance would suppose it a serious call, and no doubt expect that they would.be allowed a subsequent day / to offer their excuses ; so that the object of the pre a sent call would be defeated. Lord FOLKESTONE said he felt the call could not be so effective as was desirable, upon so short a notice ; and was' himself - very sorry it had not oc curred to him to move for it at an earlier day. He hoped, however, e.....: House, in justice to its authority, would enforce the call for the Bth of March ; for how- e'. er it might be afterwards disposed to excuse thOse Members who could shew reasonable cause, for their non-attendance then, he could hardly suppose that some question would not arise out of the proceedings of that day of the utmost moment, which would, at i an early subsequent day, call for solemn decision, and I consequently render necessary the fullest possible at tendance of Wcinbers. t Mr. BANKES opposed the motion. He thought that a_call of the House, on so short a notice, was . unprecedented. It was something . so pre,:osterous, that when he heard of the Noble Lord's avowed in tention, he thought it quite impossible that he could ibe serious. The attendance of the House already upon this subject had been remarkably full ; they had ! divided more than a majority of the whole House, and he did not think that at the present season, and I at so short a notice, there was any chance of a fur lther attendance. Besides, he would ask was it a de sirable thing that Members who had never heard a word of the evidence in this case, should be called on to decide upon the question, who perhaps would not arrive till the day before; and could not have time I to read or consider the written evidence ? There I were many Members who did not wislrto interfere on this question. Was it.desirable to bring such men : from the remotest corners of Ireland or Scotland ? ' And, besides, though the House had authority t ' I enforce their attendance at a call on that day, it had O. no authority afterwards to prevent their going out again, or to fe-te them to vote. He. was decidedly opposed to the call, and should take the sense of the House upon it. . !me Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, that the Honourable Member who ha.: all of a sudden shewn so much ten derness towards the Members from Ireland, and re luctance toinconveoicuce them, had asserted, tha t a call . at so short a notice was unprecedented. He would beg lekve, however, to refer him to the Jour 'mils so recently as the 11th of last February, where there was an order that the House be called over on the following .day. . . Mr. BANKES answered, that this was in the case of a Bilge &elm tlectiori Committee, who're' the cill was pending de die in i4ein, Lord FOLKESTONE instanced *nether case ol the Journals during die discpssicin of the SlaveTraii, in 1791, where there was a call of the House 3 , .eight days. a The question was now put on Lord Folkeston.: motion, when the House divided : Ayes 102—Noe; 15—Majority for the call 87. ROMAN CATHOLICS. On retadmissicat to the gallery we found Sir G. F. HILL speaking in opposition to them. tion of Mr. Montgomery for leave to bring in a B ' to quiet all doubts respecting the tenure of freehol( property , by Roman Catholics in Ireland, on th, ground that the Bill was unnecessary ; that it w founded merely upon an objection made by one of Counsel in the Donegal Election Committee, to Vote of a particular Catholic Elector, which obi( tion was unanimously overrAuled by that Committi and consequently could not stand in proof of the 1 cessity of a. Bill which was only calaulated to ext doubts where no doubts existed. ; ir A P THU R WELLESLEY could hate wisl the Honouthle gentleman had submitted to hitn objects of this Bill before he introduced it, in o r , that he might have had an opportunity, of consult those Law Authorities in Ireland; from whom he most likely to derive the best information on its ture and 'propriety. Sir J. NEWPORT decidedly protested against doctrine jiast.stiggested by the Right Honourable eretafy, that any Member of that House, before ventured to propose a Bill to parliament, was bog in the first instance, to submit his object to any ficer Of - the Crown, however dignified in rank or in power. If such, a doctrine were to be once milted, there would he an end to the undoubted vileges of every Munber of that House, ai : the deliberative functions of Parliament. He well aware that ' the Law Officers of the Crown 1 Ireland, and particularly the Judges, afflicted a of jealousy (which the Judges of - this country had thought proper to evince), when any Bill t( ing the jurisdiction of the Courts where they pre, was introduced into Parliament without being viously submitted to their perusal, .or their opt consulted. • He knew they wished to initiate the ceedings in such cases ; but he denied all such cis He wished certainly, that the fullest time shout allowed for deliberation in such cases, and th Bills should be . printed for the perusal ol Judges, as well as of every other class of sul before they passed into law ; but he denied any like an exclusive or peculiar judicial privilei such cases. Sir ARTHUR WELLESLEY explained, said, he thought consultation with the high Lav thorities in Ireland necessary on a Bill which r change the law of the land as it was Opp* exist, affecting a great extent of property. Mr. CROKER opposed the Bill as unnn, upon the same ground with Sir George Hill. Mr. MONTGOMERY' said, it was the opt many eminent. lawyers in Ireland that the lii: necessary, and amongst others, of his Majesty torney-General. Mr. O'HAIt.A explained, that some'. doubt arisen about the legal tenures of freeholds, by ' Catholic Freeholders, who have neglected to before they came to the possessiqn of such fret as by law required ; this Bill, therefore, was move all doubts, and quiet all 'apprehensions the legality of such tenures, by allowing the further time to qualify.—The question was th and leave given to bring in the bill. DUKE OF YORK'S LETTER. Mr. WYNNE stated, that in consequence passed in the House 'on Friday last, he thou; subject which had been then alluded to was ol turelthat required that Parliament-should expi opinion upon it. He rather wished That the I should have been taken up by some man of experience. He, however, felt so strongly col of the necessity cf some resolution, that he without losing any time, give notice, that it intention to move a resolution, ~ that it was tent with the duty and privileges of that IL come to a determination on 'evidence exam their bar, without submitting 'the case to ar tribunal." Although this question had no nt bearing upon the subject which was 'to be di next week, yet as it might have a collateral ai rect bearing, he wished to defer moving that tion, until the House should come to a decisia question. He hoped the great importanct subject would excuse li'm to the House, foi this notice in a more detailed form than was The SPEAKER asked the Honourable what day he chose the notice to stand for ? Mr. WYNNE replied for Monday se'nnigl The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHF thought, that it would be a fairer way to resolution brought forward before the discu order that the matter might be put at rest, there might not be a- suspicion suspended head of his Royal Highness thAt, in writing ter, he had acted contrary to the privilege! House. . Although he did not wish to mull cussions upon this subject, yet he was persui this was a. matter which could be easily exp Mr. BATHURST agreed perfectly with fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchen , these had been any violation of the privilege! House, the common course was, that comp) breach of privilege took precedence of all cussions. When the consideration and ram party accused were taken into the account, he ' heweyer a great 'deal of latitude and in, should •be allowed. For these reasons, at those which had been stated by the Chancel Exchequer- The SPEAKER here interfered, and sun I it was contrary to the usage of the House into any discussion on notices given. There haps, some little irregularity in introducing with observations,,but there never could be ( upon a mere notice of a motion to be made ture day. The motion was then fixed for Monday se MALT DISTILLERY. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHI after several preliminary observations, mow Committee should be appointed to inquire regulations by which the drawbacks and ( %tailing duties on exportation of spirits betweei Britain and Ireland were regulated; as also out what alterations wet..., necessary in the int • : • wie POO e rn ' h t v Mr. ir;1141 mo. Val It sr" , )al 011 the woo., was it sw.:l E the 11014 the of tist- 'jec. oral ttee, now w ne- and.,l xcite expe4 the tij 'sheJ itt o the wet. ark, icing ! was s to tbs ist the ow! le Se. ire be • .1 . . ound, iy Of- sol C.Ori r high :e ad. rehil d p .. 1%1 ri . and to Tie° f I Le was so wn in one! a sort • Stever Per il cola much. criel resided ig fire- IN 'se pro- form 3aims. cold be im p hat the of the Lol Inca übjects, iy thing lege in else and l egit aw AU. • was to used to 0 1 cessary, sus inion of the Bill was set sty's At- bts had tin Rorsan qualify -echolds, is to re- se rs upon , e parties hen put, I,r th cc of what of iught the st of a na- (press its busines tl f greater onvinced c should, t v. - as his is consis- t") mined at any other a necessary discussed and indi- at resolu- ion on the ce of d rur giving 1 s usual. Nits - nber zht. LEQuER have this ussiots, in , and that, d over the g that - es of that dtiply laded that planted. what had :quer. If ;es of that splaints of other di, Lnk of th; to thought, indulgence as well as ellor of the fated, that e to enter •e was, Per' sg a notice discus,ion de on a fu- se'nnight- HEQUE )ved that a ire into the id counter - ween Grest [so to poitt intercolr:,.e