Star. — London, England, 1816-05-09 00:00:00

s pe f t, Sommer, to the eespossatio' a nr a tur a y 4 1 p ined by ao actioa for damages, he would certainly . . advise a man to adopt that course, were it not f or a material cause connected with the other method, sa d which formed the chief subject of the question then before the House. He alluded to the prohibi tion of adducing the troth itrevidence, in a criminal tion for libel ; but if that evil were done away, t hen every man conscious of his innocence would, meet the malignant accusations of a libeller, by de mandiag him to prove their truth. Every man would flossess a powerful arm for the punishment of his tra ducer, and a shield for the protection of his own cha. Tote r. He begged to be clearly understood, that he did not wish that the mere truth of . a libel should be goostification of it ; for if malignity or any other im woer motisfe could be satisfactorily proved, punish. ' re nt ought to be inflicted on the libeller. There were' ; s . d ee d many cases in which truth itself might be can sidoced as libellous, especially a: affecting the Go., la ment. Fur instance, it might be true to state ' veil • • s i o ns were dear; but if that statement were made to o multitude in an inflammatory and exaggerated mo aner, it would be a libel. In the same manner, t o address troops upon the subject of their pay, in socha way as tended to excite disaffection or mutiny, would be libellous, even though the matter stated were true :NJ harmless, if stated in a different m inner.— s o , in a case which had been tried, where a regiment em b ar ki ng for foreign service were told that the ship' in which they were to go was leaky, the offence was polished. Now it might have been true (in that paucelar case, however, it was not) that the ship eas us that condition, and yet the exigencies of the State at a particular period of the war might have rendered such a thing inevitable, and the mentioning it in an exaggerated manner would be an offence.--, I n the same way. reports spread with regard to inva. ion, the succession to the Crown, and other State affairs, though perfectly true, yet the law held them to be punishable under certain circumstances. It was, therefore, no part of his plan, either in civil or crimi nal c ases, to make the truth, even when proved, a defence of libel, but merely that it should be taken into the account, that it should be given as evidence, that it should go to the Jury, and come within the scope of their inquiry, when they assessed what they m i g ht think fit and adequate damages. lie would now proceed to argue same of the objections which be anticipated might be made to his motion. In the int place, the ground of a libel was always its alleg• ed tendency to disturb the peace ; but to that an irresistible answer n ight be. given. It was merely a technical formality, a fiction of the law, in order to give the Court a jurisdiction. it stood as wide of thereat ground, as the breaking into a close, or the swritsde of a man's wife and daughter, in action fur Maps or for seduction, were of the real ground span which such actions were brought. In no other sense could a libel be said to have a tendency to break tbspeace. But why not say at once that character vu of some value—that it des: rued protection on its can account, and that an injury done to character was the same as an injury done to life or propert, ? Nay, the injury in the one case was sometimes greater than in the other, for many persons would rather lose eieir property and their lite, than their reputation.— Bat the fallacy of the argument was obvious. A aaa who wrote a libel, %valets Was held to have a tendency to Weak the peace, was sentenced. peritaitie s . b six, twelve, or eighteen months iasprisonrneut, while an actual breach of it incurred only three months. Was the mere tendency, then, to an offence greaser than the offence itself ? But the spirit of the times was, imfact, in opposition to that kind of rigo rous interpretation. For exampie, oue of the greatest breaches of the law was going out to fight a duel, and there was nothing which a Court et Justice pit. sished more severely, when it came under its cogni unce. To send a letter to another, containing as: itiollenge, or language calculated to provoke a cual lsoge, was considered as having a tendency to It ketch of time peat-. •But suppose, instead of sending slater, a man west out to fight a duel, suppose he antoniy went out, .but actually fought it, nay, sup pose turtlivr, tima: he killed his antagonist (he assum- , ed the esti :. to ,t case to shew -.11.,w the spirit of the' isles mi.isirti.:4l the letter of the law), yet, unless there was soniethinaz untair in the transaction, he who killed another was sine to get off free. Nine out of ten, indeed, Were never brought to trial- Yet a man writing all!) CI was sentenced to twelve of eighteen months imprisonineat, for what was riclich- Ludy called a tendency to break the pe Ice. by the , Inewat administration of the law no witnesse , Wil.C. ever were called on the part of the defendant, weliCh *(1 well known to his Honourable and Learned Fraud to be the case. Yet the Counsel for the de fendant mi g ht eas ily ta k e a d vantage by g iving hints. ' , re prosecutor's Coonstl knew very well that often titstatement he madi-, did not contain one word of drib, a circumstalici'-.which Oh' Counsel f it the de *hot was prepared -to - talita advantage of. He illintrated this by the CobJaet of ti , e Attorney -Gene "ii whose appoaament to the high situation he at Pretest held hid ;martially been a loss to defeadants i ato the well known in , tft. he d - I.iyipd in their !.,eti i , isp . belUil• He could easily hint to the Airy, that had any such crime as *•/as charged been committed, the P l isitutqr would not have brought an indictment, but would rather have raised an action of damages. Now the plan he (Mr. Brougham) proposed was time hest that could possibly be suggested. as it placed the prosecutor in a situation of vindicating his elm "el', and thus blessing the day such a change had lotroduced into the law. It was by no means per to exclude evidence from being given as to , truth of th e lib e l on t h e part o f the defendant.— l a man was tried and found guilty, and afterwards ought up for judgment, it had till lately been ge eun II Y the custom to allow him some latitude to Lic it" h imself, by producing some facts in support of 6 l i bel• although that had been denied in the case lt,. • Finnerty. It was absurd in the extreme to eno distinction between a man who libelled 4 : 1 1 tenth and a man who libelled on mere down 'lllte falsehoods. If truth was not to be regarded at thy alleviation of circumstances,it was surely %amt a ll 1 . 0 a the g:ounds he had already men tilled, he decidedly thought that.. the measure he mei% so t h e far from doing any harm, would, on Cont r ary, b e 'freedo productive of the greatest good to m, and particularly to the purity of the 11 k„ .. _ which was the best and surest foand_ation for omi t ,' ru , u cr . ma dam — f i x ; in the first place, it would do away 'arrente which at present exists liFtwee"ral nos 'fere lip• 11 rt. :.:~- , - • zd a gv i rittee• slander. By the patient gate% wit , to whatever extent it might be cosimitted. was overlooked, whereas when it wits' committed to writing it because the proper object 'or pettish merit, as when they thus became punishable they were considered as constituting an indubitable' offence. Seditious words were doubtless an 'excep tion from this. Besides, he thought the fact of the libel being published by the'party in cognizance of the facts, was worthy of going before a Jury..- -And he doubted very much whether, if such evi deface were presented, a Judge would hesitate to ad-1 mit it. The evidence to the material circumstance of the truth of the facts, was also fit for the attention of a Jury. It would be necessary in, this cast for the defendant to give proper notice to the prosecutor that such were his intentions, in order tp prepare the. prosecutor for meeting them ; and he would extend the production of such evidence to civil as well as criratinal cases. He apprehended the House knew well the cause of ex- f informations being vested In the Crown. in point of fact no such delays existed as they insinuated. The Grand Juries sat always six times a-year, and particularly in London and Westminster. It WAS impossible gravely to hear the doctrine advanced of these cases, which came under the Crown, as admitting of no delay. He did not see why one law should exist for the corporation of the country, and another law for the subject. Was it because the character of the (me was more valuable than that of the other I He did not like the idea of thus personifying the State, of describing it as pos. teasing feeling, &c. which tended in fact to produce much confusion. The true cause of this dislike on the part of Government to go before Grind Juries. was, that they were sure of losing their oiiject. He would ask, why was this the case ? Why did they always lose their object? Not cert iinly because they were always wrong. This country had a Govern ment acting in a free manner, and carried on by in dividual's, who as iudividuals had respectable,private characters, yet, why don't they never chaise to risk their cause to the oaths of twelve men? It WAS not surely because they were more reproached than other Governments, tor he believed in this point the mea sures of Administration were less questioned than those of foreign countries. It was not because the Jury were corrupt, but because the truth could not be given before a Grand Jury, and the Grand Jury were there. fore very cautious how they pot a man on trial when not one word could be proved against him. If evi denCe into the truth of the libel was gone into, he believed there was not a Grand Jury in this country who would feel the slightest indisposition to bear it. He detested ex-offich informations, as giving Go vernmesit a grievous power of hanging accusations over the head of individuals, and thus keeping them ht a dismal state of suspense. The individual had no, power to force on his trial, and many cases, it-was well known, had been put on the file which had never beer tried. He could particularly specify twenty four, nut one of which had been tried. It was a, power which he deprecated, as creating endlessl anxiety to the rich, and producing misery to the poor by bidding them with expenses. Th.s power might{ also 'or used as an engine for political purposes, use 1 instance of which he mentioned, respecting an inclf. vidual oho had been charged with addressing a num ber of troops going abroad,- as 4 stating that the vet seta is which shay were to sail *eve not sea worthy.: This statement was hounded on foul falsehood ; ne vertheless the prosecution was not persisted in, and why ? Because the man was stated to have given up his author! 1--(llear, hear) All was quashed, though the person spoken of as the author was abroad. He mentioned this as an instance : of the power being abused. He meant not to say such had ever been done by hil - Learned Friend, the present At. torney General ; and he trusted that his Learned Friend would believe him sincere, when he st?ted i his warm approbation of the manner in which he 1 ha4l anhtys exercised his aothorrty —(Hear, hear.) , Durinthis otEdial appointment Only one information' had been filed. Now was she proper period for dis.l cussing the improvements be had propre.ed. At pre. l sent - there was no convulsion whatever in the coun try, but a profound calm. We had now a favour able °ppm milky of coming to the discussion with our minds unruffled. He trusted that opportunity would i not be lost. SrMie privileges on the part of the i Crown hck woold now shortly advert to, as he SAW no 1 reason whatever for their continuince. The tight of replying on the part of the Crown appeared to him to be. another abuse, Ville), tOi, Ott %van, propriety be al.' tired, as a rt main, .4 . 4iarbgous jurisprudence.— With revect twayr . thied 7 pritrat in the measure he should Aposi to' iritP,al4E, be conceived it sufficient' to state, that,itirfilieriOs of ,libel prosecuted by in. formation ex dfieia, Ake C r ifista never went -to trial without a Special dory. - All other crimes and mis. demeanours, felony, and even the highest Ilium known to the law, high treason, were always tried be. fore a Common Jury. He saw no reason for giving to the Crown in the inswfice of libel, a right of se lection which !. did not. possess in any other case.— It appeared to him, therefore, that the only argument,' . which could be urged 9n the other side, was one, founded on the aversion to inndvate at all on the legal institutions of the country. Excellent, however, as the system was, the lapse of time had introduced blemishes which it would be.more beneficial to its in terests to convert into beauties, than to regard, as parts of its perfection. With these views he begged to move for leave to bring in a Bill for securing and extending the Liberty of the Press. (Hear, !sear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL felt no. disposi. Lion to refuse his Honourable and Learned Friend an opportunity of bringing into die House a Bill, the object of which was to secure the Lilierty of the Press. But at the same time be WAS obliged to enter his protest against all and every of the changes pro:. posed byJiis Honourable and Learned Friend. He therefore reserved to himself the right of discussing , the question in the progress of the Bill. Ple then replied to the arguments of the Hodourable • and LLearned Gentleman on the subject of en-ofria infor mations and Special Juries. As to the fiat, he con tended that it was absolutely necessary, for the 'seco 4ity of the State, in troublesome , times, that there ishould be the power of filing estifseis informations, and the Honourable and Learned *Geiitleman had .not shesen that it would be better to' vest this poser fin an? other Officer than .the .one by whom it 'Was -now eseteiseck..As to the other ifaitst—Special Juries, i he maintained that Common Juries. were -not A0113•' posed of men who could be :opposed capable . of 11213 , 11Iftemtjadgmellt on direnice eloatrnotion in a • Byis -particular detail of the *Mee id which Special Juries are chosen, be totally sehtidthe.audaclotts calumny, dot it • Was usual to pia Juries., • •The SOLICITOILGENERAL begged to be al- Jewett° tate.this opportunity of entering his protest against • the alterations in • the law proposed by•his Hi.noarable and Learned Priem!, whose motion was betore the House. As to this proposal of allowing the truth of a libel to be given in evidence, he thought it would. prove destructive of social comfort. It . would allow a man, who had committed a wrong, by publishing what he had no right to publish, if Called to account for this, to put his accuser on his defence. There was no min who might have been guilty of any imprudence in the course of his life, of which he might have well repented—who might have by his future conduct retrieved his character--and who might be worthily enjoying happiness in the bosom of his family, who might not have his de servedly re-established character destroyed—and his fortune ruined by aeirtnelicious person in a pamphlet or newspaper, bringing up this circumstance forgot ten and repented of. When such a libeller was brought I to trial, he had only to prove the truth of die libel, according to the proposed alteration, and then he would come off victorious. And this libeller might day after day, or year al:.r year, repeat the publica tion of the libel, and when called to account, get off by proving the truth of it. Would not such a case shew the impotice, the injustice of such an alteration R ii►the law? The Honourable attail Learned Gentle man then shortly replied to what was said by the Mover on the subject *of ex.?ffitio informations and special juries, and concluded by s3ying, that lie would nut oppose the bringil)g in of the Bill, but reserve the further discussibn of it till its ptugress t rough the Hons... Mr. MARRY ATT noeced one kind of libel, which in its effects might he much inure anschieveus to in dividuals by ruining their character, their fortune, perhaps even affecting their lives, which did not seem to have come within the view •of the Hon. Mover ( Mr. Stougham). He alluded to expressions used in that House towards individuals, in which their characters might be unfairly attacked, and when the .pens ins so aggrieved dentanded satisfaction,' they were met by the person who assailed their character with assertions of the privilege of Parliament; and, instead of that atonement which was usual in private life, the assailant would have the Speaker of the House for his second, and the Seljeant at Arms for a bottle. holder !—(4 largh.) The Honourable and Learned Gentleman must recollect some such case as that to which he thus alluded. Mr. BROUGHAM begged to be permitted to say, a few words, is consequence of the most unpreceden ted and unprovoked attack which he conceived had just been made upon him attack' which had as link to do with the subject of debit,: as the remarks of the Honourable Gentleman, who could have no possible concern with the measure under considera tion. lie (Mr. Bronfrham) wsfil recollected the cir. curastance to hich r4.lerence had bees' made, thongh it would have been much better it toe Honourable Gentleman had been contented with plain terms, in ! stead of resorting to a metaphor couched in lissiguage stied and delicate, VINT the House WtHild Afi g , spew with in . retetftiort. ' With regard to 'the tact, it was necessary to remind the House of some circumstances unconnected wish the question before it.— (Cries of Question.) 'He hat a tight to be heard in reply to the charge of the lion. Gentle. man, who had nut been interrupted while mak.ng one ut the most irrelevant and disorderly speeches ever heard within the walls of Parliament. —(Hear, hear.) —ln the course of an inquiry four years since, • in a Committee of the whole House, a witness had been called to the bar and examined, upon whose testimony he ('Mr. Brougham) had made such remarks as ap pealed necessary : in doing so he had consulted no man—least of all the witness himself, and still less than least of • alb—if such a degree of comparison could .be allowed—the Honourable Gentleman who had now elosen t. interpose. The opinion which lie (Mr. lcrcugiilto) had delivered, was strong and voluted agaiiist tale conduct of the witness ; that opi- Moo he was•now ready to repeat, if necessaty : and he was not to be deterred, either by the conduct .01 the Honourable Gentleman's Friend cut of doors, or by the still less regular proceeding. of the Honourable Gealleman withal, doors. He had spoken at that time sitting at a Judge upon the conduct of the wit ness; but soon afterwards he received a letter from that witness,enclosing a copy of his ( Mr. Brougham's) speeco, printed in one of the Newspapers, and re questing him to state if it were accurately reported.. le declining to give an answer to such a demand, he was persuaded he had only acted • as every other Member would have done ; for !ie was yet to learn VIAL the privileges of-Parliament were so completely at :mend, that, alter having retired from the business of the Session, and after having discharged important public duties, a Member of the House of Commons tirasagrise .sompclied to become a corrector of the Newspaper Reports of Deliares.-e-(Hear, hear.) — Whew was the boasted f reeslom of sllseessioe, if Mem bers were (wind to answer such interrogatories ? As the desire, however, was conveyed in civil terms, the refusal to comply with it was also civil, but short.— Near the close of the Session he had, however, re ceived a letter from the-same witness, very different from the former, containing the most foul and unfounded aspersions upon the character of Member of Patliament, and making as deep an in road into the invaluable rights of Members as could be fotind on the Journals at any period when the Fri vilegesof Parliament were at die lowest ebb.. This letter repeated the former demand, accompanied by a threat, and' the reply to it was a repeated refusal, with the addition of a piece of advice for the govern iment.ed the miter of the threat; recommending him to tate care how he proceeded fu: ller in the line of conduct be • was pursuing, since if. he persisted he might find it somewhat inconvenient to bimself. He • (Mr. Brougham) heard no further_ upon the subject until thiee weeks afterwards, when be was two hull dra Miles from London, cin.protessional busirmis : the Nritness took that opportunity of publishing the correspOndence, but, though strongly advised by his friends to 'bring the Genilmissa to the bar of the wove, he hid not thought it r ight t 9 proceed to that utrell44 t be now regretted his forbearance, partly on account of - Circumstances that bad since happened, and pertly on 'gouge of the most jedscica, conduct of the nonontable Gesdosia, whop an gal 'night stood forward as the friend of the *mess...—. He had been induced not to call the witness to the bar by several circumstances, and mainly by one which the publishers of the letters had duly consi. dered, namely, that the Session was within three or four days of its termination, and the imprisor; ent which the House could inflict would, theretore, only be of a very short duration. The lionourAble Gen tlemin had thrown out a hint, which was easily un derstood—that, instead of resorting to the House, be (Mr. Brougham) ought to have given another kind of answer to the invitation sent—( Mr. Marryat shook his head.) It was vain for the Honourable Gen tleman to shake his head ; not a man in the- House could mistake what was nieant—ani, shout.! he select his elegant phraseology from all quarters of the town it would be impossible for the Honourable Member to convince the House that he intended to convey any other meaning.. If ever he (Mr. Brougham) was prevailed upon to give such a reply as that al luded to. it would be after considering well his own and the feelings of the indivitinsl who supposed him self injured ; but there was one species of person et!to never should possess the smallest influence over Is;s conduct in this respect, because the least wort'ay of such an answer—a man who took upon himself the part of an interferer for the sake of rene wing and pro. (noting personal altercation.—( L. u:Lix-s.) Mr. MARRY eiT denied that he had either said or intended that the flonotirable•Gentleman ought to have given the personal satisfaction required ; but after it had been publicly and unfoundedly asserted in the House, that ..n individual, scum employed in. t.is' manufactories 2000 workmen, had stated that break: and water a as food go:)d enough for the lower classes, it would have beer. hut fair for the Member who had made that asset t;ott to explain or retract it. (Hear, hear.).—This was ail he had intended to state ; and looking at the sort of license which some Geode. men allowed themselves, he must say that the true line to be observed in debate, where the characters of individuals were.involved, was as quid fail diecre au. deat,ae quid yeti non audeat. Mr. BROUGHAM added, that he was not the only person who had misunderstood the Honourable Member who had falsely accused him of refusing to give mire:planation as to the correctness or incor rectness of his speech. The question upon the original motion was then put. Mr. BROUGHAM sail, that he should reserve any of his remarks upon the objections urged to his proposition until a future stage when the'Bill should be before the House. With regard to what had just transpired, he wished to subjoin, that be had on a former occasion given an explanation of the charge he had made a s mainst the witness whose cause was ad. vocated' by the Honourable Member (Mr. Marryat); he had then stated, tf.at a pnt of the speech, as re ported in the Newspapers, was coirec., while another part was erroneous.—Lcave was then given to bring In the Bill. BANK P F.tTrICTL~~I. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the further consideration of the Bank Restric tion Bill. • . • Lord FOLKESTONE felt it his duty to oppose the 'mauve • in its present form, contending diet A clause was resulted tecneo'jx4.ll4,vitgics bank to make orepatations.to resume cash part rents At the end of two years. 13y their silence they had :Omitted that they w..tild do nothing in consequence nt the mere suftgesthes in the preamble ; and his iorthilup was convinced that the desirable object of a gold currency woula never be attained. "Sinai he particularly v:islieci to remind the House Of was, that by this restrictive measure the House. was making the D rectors of the Bank of England its masters, and that the country was perfectly at their discretion, if Parlia ment should suffer them to have the power of refusing to give specie for their own paper. The public, he main .tamed, could be considered as neither.more nor less than enslaved by the Batik, if such power was allowed. It was but abont ten days ago that he had observed in the London Gazette a notice, that the Bank woold, he believed in November, call in the Sr. Ede Batik tokens, and that new tokens would be issued, p tying, however, not less than eight at a time. Such was the notice of the Directors, but what did it amount to ?—a direct order and command that any resent receiving money at. the Wilk should be obliged to take at least eight of these tokens; and he begged the House to consider what an extensive power was thus granted to the Bank; for if at one period the Directors were allowed to issua nut less than eight as a time, it would..sison amount to 80, SW, 'B,Uth), 'or what number they should choose to name. He did not . rest these'opitions merely upon himself, but they were also those of many lionottrabie Gentlemen better acquainted with the subject than himselt ; and lie considered that lie should be wanting in his duty both to the House and to the country, did he not pow move an Amendment, that the report of the Bill be taken into further consideration thil day six remelts. Mr. GRENFELI, thought that the lloose hail had ample And abundant proof of the proilis;aefof the =haute- now about to be adopted by Parliament, and be conceived that it would be a derelictiou oh hie Parliamentary duties if he did not now strenuously resist a system which, in every light, appeared to him most unjustifiable and indecent; and applying, as he did, his observations to the system, he did nut hesitate tont, that that system bywhich the Bank son. ducted themselves to the public, was like an usurious money-lender, who had been lucky enough to get into his clenches one who cared not how or in what man ner his life or his fortune were spent or squandered away. As long as he had the honour of a seat in tee House, and GOD gave him .health, he should enter his protest against a measure which he should always consider as one which took the money out of the pockets of those who could ,but ill afford it, and enrich those who had already amused to great wealth by tPuri , lits mean. Mr. BARING defended the Bill, which gave a direct intimation to the Bank, that it was expected they would resume cash payments at tie end of two years. If the consideration of the Report were put off to this day six months the taxes could not be col. lected, and the whole wheels of the public machinery would be stopped. After a few words from Mr..Hawaseasmirs . The question was put, and the Amendment step. dud without a division. , Mr. HORNER then gemmed *Ada a clause to the Bill to the following effect Piovided'always i • -- - •