Star. — London, England, 1818-02-28 00:00:00

not extended nor ramified ' the Committee had to ptanoance on the exercise of an ianna o r into other places.—ln a most dangerous authority, upon the nature e the d iff er n: consp i raci es , teclcase tance it was extended through various arrests of a number of persons, many of whom were 0 6,2:1t 1115 and for all the characters of a ' discharged without trial, and manly of whom, he • c.i, e country, too inthe most pops- would fearlessly repeat, were arrested on the testi :al°. im•arrection, prevailing ~-:, of the country, and with respect to these mony of informers, and by the artifices of miscreants, must'ar-svain contend the measure produced the most though he was ready to say the Noble Viscount could • e ffects in preventing the farther delusion not have known of such machinations, or he would ''forttinato. numbers, whom the temporary di? not have countenanced their authors. In this Com 'of the t ines might have rendered the more fa- mittee, in plain fact, the Government sat in judg. ° ' b i ees for those traitorous agitators to practice ment upon its own acts ; and was it likely the court - The verdicts of Juries in many cases, though try would be satisfied with any recommendation of , night not have attached upon the accused in- an Act of Indemnity emanating from such a source? k , d „,i s , yet, combined w ith what elicited upon If ever it fell to his lot to be put on hit trial, all he ':' roved th actual existence of dangerous con- should say was, that he hoped he would see on his '7 ;i . What had actually appeared p roved the jury as many friends as the Noble Viscount had on : * * l ,., a' an extensive and regularly organized his Committee. Under such circumstances, an Act -,;',„ ~ and for objects upon which no rational of Indemnity would do nothing, unless it was sane cold be entertained. The whole formed a tiened on clear grounds. What would be said of the ‘ ,..: .c 1.,, in the deliberate and wire decision of proceeding if the Jury at Derby consisted of the as rar:ilment called for the vesting of Government sociates or the p arties on trial ?—( Hear, hear, hear) • , ~ 6 extraordinary powers; as the ordinary —would this be called a fair tribunal?—if it would ~ o f;.:%:s were held by it to be inadequate to not, on what pripciple could this Committee be so [,, ~,ression of so dangerous and extensive a con- described, composed as it had been ? He spoke in ~..: A v icw of the actual slate of the Metropo - the language and spirit of the British law. Last F:4: e:-1v in November, until nearly July , w as year hetothe Ministers that if they let the law take i. ‘„.n - ,(. al , orr oboration of the conclusion which its course, the accused would not have the 1: •! , ,:eleot .:ad formed. With respect to a certain ben efit any indiscriminate popularity on their rd iw i:l l, ea whose conduct much stress at different trial, but that there would be rather a disposition to i m , h a d been laid, particularly with references to favour Ministers, if the people saw them inclined to vcc ,-.-:.7tences in Yorkshire, he would observe, that pursue an open and candid course. If they could ~ b e ir nothing of that person until the month of have established the existence of these insurrectionary -'ocreas the conspiracy, in all its parts and meetings, aid the dangers to be apprehended from .:, had existed for weeks, nay months, before them, then the question and Petitions of Reformers ;mind ; and with relation to Scotland, the ob- must have been for the time set at rest, to await xe was easily refuted—the ordinary operation of calmer and more tranquil moments, and a spirited 1.w , , w:lich were very different from those of and vigilant Magistracy would have preserved the :land. were there found sufficient for the purpose public peace. The Noble Earl had alluded to the lie suspension was therefore unnecessary.to be ex- trials at the Old Bailey in 1793, and said that then led to that part of the island. As to the idea that indeed there was no open spirit of insurrection, but persons of property or considerable influence were an infected and poisoned state of society—so much iplica:ed in these transactions, but that they were the worse, for then Government were exposed to the alined to individuals of no property, he believed odium of arresting individuals at random, instead of, hen the dreadful transactions which took place in as it appeared (if their information was correct) lately ondon in the year 17S0 (and of which a Noble and having had the means of putting their hands on the earned Lord opposite had reason to know some- chief and most active leaders. If the Government hi7g) which all proceeded from persons of no pro- had proceeded with a vigorous administration of the eery, or a low description, were recollected, not existing law, though some might have been acquit itch strez could be laid upon that argument. They ted, yet the people would have at least given them ,;.1 the sad experience also of what occurred in credit for the sincerity of their alarm. The trials Tine at the early periods of the Revolution, in might indeed have found some persons to abuse them, rich those who had nothing were embarked against as - Mr. Windham had done after the former Old 1, , ,-ae who had every thing ; and in some degree of Bailey trials, when he called the accused i , acquitted rill; took place in Ireland ; to decide their judg- felons," though the proceedings of that day were al penis as to such an objection, and they had wisely ways most fairly aid candidly spoken of by the No ' ed not to let it militate against the adoption of ble Lord on the Woolsac k, who then conducted policy, which was no less guided by the principles the prosecutions. Such things might have happened, justice and hemanity than it was directed to the but indiscriminate enthusiasm would not have taken my of the Laws, Constitution, and property of the place of sober and rational law—(Hear, hear).— cmary. On these great and saving principles, On the subject of the data on which the House was extraordinary powers were entrusted by Parlia- now called upon to proceed, all he would say was -..: to the Executive Government, which upon the this, that if they had no right to examine the evidence El !I examination had decided that the. Govern- on which Ministers rested their defence, they had Ipri II r.: had exercised with justice, moderation, and in sv lif.ir called for tud justified by all the circum aces of the case. The Committee, it was falsely kged, was composed solely of the friends of Go =Nit. The fact was notoriously otherwise. His i;esty's Ministers were anxious that their conduct wild be fully inquired into by individual Peers, !Members of both parties—and their deliberate isinn was what he had stated. No apprehension unnecvsarily taken place—they were all on the eves cf different insurrections, and the conse ',lost salutary. All they asked for now is, that c.o. a fair view of the whole case, (not sing the I:.caFure upon any particular precedent), a was estanded, in the way of protection, to the tuts so acting, and as circumstances avowedly argued. It was not individually wanted for them ins, but on these obvious grounds and principles ?on which measures of the kind proceeded. Lord LANSDOWNE said a few words in expla ttion. He wished for adjournment, on the ground ha the provisions of the Bill of Indemnity had not kit long enough before the House to be suifici ilwn. frd kr'o ERSKINE agreed, that whether the Act of Corpus had been suspended on just grounds loose grounds, or on State necessity, or without could have no manner of application in the pre . t consideration. The question of the Noble Mar- Ills was not whether the Bill of Indemnity should passed or tot, but whether it should be carried o effect now, or considered a fortnight hence. If be decided that the question was to be narrowed in manner contended for by the Noble Earl, he ould say, with due respect, that such a decision aid be most preposterous as well as dangerous— Sr, hear most dangerous indeed it would be to .1 these who had been ruined in health and fortune a creel and unjust imprisonment, that they had W - ight to apply for redress to that Government in Rise name such injuries had been inflicted—(hears ktr!—Was any man who had so suffered through be villainy of a malicious informer, who had im- Psei upon the Execative Government, to be shut t in this summary manner from the protection U:ch the laws from time immemorial shed round is liberty, and told he had no remedy for his inju- Is? Against such a doctrine he would enter his , kran protest—;hear, hear)--With respect to the 'cater of the Noble Viscount (Sidmouth), who was !nvc!ved in these transactions, and who was h:s trial, he should only say, that he would ~) come forward as a witness, and bear his .nony to the Noble Viscount's character -2:tinny and kindness. But though he said this, te nut rake leave to add, that were the Noble Vis- F t " . ' l !h 3l trother—the twin com p an i on o f hi s birth— fie W011. , 1 refrain from giving him a verdict of ao- Fadl.unsi! he heard the evidence on which he must !z:: this verdict.. The charge against Government 'tz!, that they had listened to the evidence of rnis- Eltlxi, of hi re d sp i es, aga i nst persons who alleged / ;' 7 .. iaTt.)...en ce , and loudly demanded a trial (hear). Ids Lis: House see what was asked of their Lordships, ta by %%hor n that was asked. When the late Secret s'arnittee s4t to co ns id er o f the matters referred t o 6: tiluagh h e t h ought that Committee might been b etter arranged than by ballot, yet their r 7 l udera:ion was a ve r y s i mp l e one, an d per h aps re !'!,l to hive been consigned to other hands. It Z rit be sa id , i ndeed, that it was composed of Par ',,tentary Peers, who are more attended to, and b eater `'cunt in the Houle than others ; yet ZIC2S rcre !!'t still less a right to decide upon what they did not hear.--(Hear, hear.)—The Report of the Committee I contained no new information (he spoke from news paper information, not having an opportunity of coming down to read the Report.) It was stated as the opinion of this Committee, that they had " the satisfaction of delivering it as their decided opinion, I that not only in the country in general, but in those i districts where the designs of the disaffected were most unremittingly pursued, the great body of the I people have remained untainted even during the pe riods of the greatest internal difficulty and distress." I Was this a proof that the Government were justified in- resorting to extreme measures against a whole po pulation, for the acts of a few ? The country did not require this testimony to its character. At the period of the melancholy and lamented death of the Princess Charlotte, were not the whole population of the coun try pressing forward to manifest their grief and sym • pathy, as if the child of one parent, shedding teats of pity and distress for the loss of a beloved object ? This shewed the loyalty and affection of the people, and rejected the calumnies that had been so unspa ringly heaped upon them. ( Hear.) The great in surrectionary movement that had been dwelt upon, was put down by the interference of an active Magis trate, aided by a Captain of Dragoous and eighteen soldiers 1--(lsear, fir.)—But at the time when this took place, the Act to prevent tumultuarT and sedi tious meetings was in full force, and Magistrates had the power of suppressing them. If Ministers, as they said, had taken up no person but on information upon oath, they were fully armed for any emergency, for the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act did not give them greater latitude as to the rounds of ar rest than they previously had. The circumstance of unnecessarily departing from the due course of law, had created a greater unpopularity for the regular authorities of the land than they had encountered at any former period. It had been asked, whether, with a knowledge of the Noble Viscount at the head of the Home Department, they had any right to suppose that the powers intrusted to Ministers had been abu sed ? To this he would only reply, that that abuse was charged against him, and he had a right to meet it by an open defence. This indeed would be re deeming his responsibility. If their Lordships passed this Bill of Indemnity, without adjourning to hear all the evidence which the case required, they would lzeitiir:wn this maxim, and he spoke it boldly—that er the oppression or injustice be committed by the best or the worst of men, by Government or by informers, still the utmost confidence must be reposed in the Government who countenanced such proceed ings. There was greater danger to the Constitution from the mode of inquiry adopted by Ministers on this occasion, than from any thing they could appre hend from the evils of which they complained. The people had shevrn no irreverence to that House ; on the contrary, they looked upon it with proper respect. Would it therefore repay this consideration by allow ing itself the extreme Court of Appeal to grant a Bill of Indemnity to men who declared their inno cence, but who may be guilty ?—(hear.)—The Bill professed to indemnify Ministers, Magistrates, and others—against whom ? Against those who were un justly imprisoned ; who were imprisoned without in formation or suspicion to justify their imprisonment. He should most deeply lament it, if their Lord:hips should not accede to the motion of his Noble Friend, to take all the Petitions before this and the other House of Parliament—(it was not regular to refer to the other House, but the Petitions before it %-ti Ald be presented to their Lordships)—he should de eply 1 .a.• ment it, if their Lordships should not examine all those Petitions before they passed a Bill of Indem nity. If they once passed the Indemnity Bill, those Petitions could not be examined or taken into consi deration. What then, he would ask, were the people of England to think of their Lordships, if they passed a Bill of Indemnity against charges, the extent, proof, enormity, and wantonness of which they refu sed to inquire into ?—(hear.)—Let them beware of venturing beyound the endurance of a free people.— A free people must he governed on free principles. He would, therefore, support an adjournment of the subject—he would do all in his power to procrasti nate, to retard, and, if possible, to prevent a measure which, in his conscience, he believed to militate against every principle of freedom and justice. (hear.) The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that when the question for the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act was debated, it was hardly possible to suppose that there would not be a Bill of Indemnity. It was about a century and a half ago, in the reign of Charles 11. that our ancient rights and liberties were secured by this Act ; and he would say, that the his tory of the country, since the Act of Charles H. had proved, that in order to secure our liberties, it was necessary that that very Act should be occasionally suspended: He knew that the great body of the people were sound ; but would the Noble Lord say that the people were not sound in the time of King William? and yet the Act was suspended three times in that reign. If the Noble Lord would take the trouble to look at the Act of Indemnity of that reign, he Would find they contained the same words.— These Acts admitted that there had been a violation of the law in suspending the Habeas Corpus Act, but they justified it on the exigencies of the junc tures ; and though individuals might complain of l hardships, which those exigencies rendered unavoid able, yet good subjects were not to be put to the trouble and expenses of law suits, who had only done their duty to their country. Those rights and liber ties were secured by that Act of Parliament. Simi lar circumstances occurred in the years 1715 and 1745, and in the whole history of the country there were established proofs, that where the public safety and necessity required it, Bills of Indemnity might be granted ; for " Sales populi supremo lex." Nothing had occurred that would not justify it in this in stance. The Suspension Act that expired in 179 d was not followed by a Bill of Indemnity till 1800; but not a single person had thought proper to bring any e tuit, till, m 1800, all those who had been silent came forward with their complaints, and Parliament thought proper to indemnify the Ministers. It had been acknowledged that this was a Parliamentary proceeding, and we were now under the same cir cumstances. He could therefore see no reason for postponing the second reading. Parliament had passed the Suspension Act under great ani serious considerations, on the Reports of two Secret Commit tees ; and nobody who recollected the contents of those Reports could believe that there were not strong grounds for giving such power to the Ministers of the Crown. The Noble and Learned Lord then pro ceeded to justify the proceedings in the formation of the last Secret Committee, arguing, that there was no way so satisfactory to the feelings of Ministers as to form it by ballot. When Noble Lords argued that there had been only little riots in Spafields, and . insignificant disturbances in other parts, they seemed entirely to forget what had been prevented by the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, with which it might have happened that some of those persons of high rank might not have been present at this time to debate the question before them ; for, as was well known, an open enemy was not so dangerous as those who planned their designs in secret. That man must have a stout heart, who would say, that is No vember, 1816, he did not see in London cause for very serious alarm. As to the second meeting in Spafields, although he was not inclined to say that those persons were guilty of treason, yet he would say, that those Ministers who had not thought pro per to submit the case to the decision of a Jury, would have been guilty of a great dereliction of their duty, as they would if these in Derby and Notting-- ham had been left at large. Were those persons suchi as wanted Reform in Parliament ? No ; it was no thing less that they aimed at than the destruction of all the constituted authorities of the realm, and their object was to march with arms in their hands to the execution of their purpose. Then to what was the present state of the country owing ? Those who had formed a true opinion knew that its tranquillity was more the result of the Suspension of the Habeas Cor pus Act than of any other proceeding, and the ope ration of it had been mild, merciful, and preventive of mischief. After farther arguing in behalf of the second reading of the Bill, and sheaving why the in formation received by Government ought not to be exposed, the Noble Lord concluded with contending that the proceedings were in exact conformity to those of Charles 11. and that this country would not have been the great and powerful nation that it is, if it had not had the good sense, on different occasions, to make a temporary sacrifice of its liberties for the general welfare. Lord HOLLAND said, he would not confine him self to the question, whether the second reading of the Bill should take place that night? but would state the nature, character, objects, and motives of it, which he could not do without feeling indignation and abhorrence of the principle on which it was founded. The precedents quoted by the Nobli Lords were at complete variance with one another. The arguments of the Noble Lord who spoke last had tended rather to entangle than to elucidate the sub ject. The Noble Duke who brought in the Bill had `thought proper to give it a title beforehand, and to call it a Bill of Indemnity. This reminded him of an argument of Tristram Shandy, on the propriety of christening a child before it was born. If no men had been wrested except on information upon oath, it was clelr that no Bill of Indemnity was necessary for Ministers ; for if they had not exceeded the powers given them by the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, they incurred no penalty. To say that the Bill was for the purpose of p reventing them from disclos ing evidence, had no meaning. But it was not for the Secretary of State for the Home Department that the Bill had been brought forward—it was for the protection of Mr. Oliver, and those men who were to be secured from the concequeaces of the law ; for that wmt , h, in particular, who was to be secured by Site sLidd of power, and in whose behalf all law was to be trampled down. The Noble Lord then went at considerable length into an examination of the precedents gamed by the Lord Chancellor, con tending that they were mostly periods of civil war, and consequently the Ministers thought themselves entitled to have recourse to a measure which he was far from approving. Viscount SIDMOUTII declared that he had no wish to ask for any indemnity on his own account, for he knew that he had conscientiously performed his duty ; white in the situation in which he stood, it was not for him to take a part in the debate.— There was no situation in which he could be placed, affecting his liberty or security in any way, that could induce him to betray the confidence that had been reposed in him. The Noble Lord had certainly used the greatest number of opprobrious epithets to wards Mr. Oliver that he had ever heard applied to any individual. He denied that Oliver was to be pro tected by this Bill. No steps had been taken on the evidence of that man under the Habeas Corpus Sus pension Act ; it was therefore impossible for him to come within the scope of the present measure. The Noble Lord who had last spoken, had been pleased to draw a most degrading picture of those to whose care the internal tranquillity of the country was in trusted. The . House, however, would remember, that the. Magistrates performed the duties entrusted to then% and instead of deserving to be treated with such severity, they were entitled to the respect and gratitude of their countrymen. With respect to what the Noble Lord had said on the subject of spies and informers, what had fallen from him was justifiable if be could believe the statements which had gone abroad. In the course he had taken this night, he was perfectly consistent with himself, fot he believed it might be said of the Noble Lord that he had never yet supported any law that Ministers considered ne cessary to preserve internal tranquillity. He dis dained to encourage a system of espionage, as much as the Noble Lord could do, but if he had opportu nities of possessing himself of information which he thought important to the safety of the countty, was he to accept it, or to reject it because it was furpished by informers? Could the Noble Lord say that if he were in office, he would avail him self of no intelligence that might be so procured?— He could only say, that for himself, he sincerely wished that every circumstance connected with the late proceedings could be fully explained. As to the comolaints of the persons who had been confined, which had been adverted to by the Noble Lord, he 'could most solemnly declare, that of the number of persons who had been detained, there was not a sin gle case which excited in his mind any feelings of self-reproach or of compunction. He had done no thing under the late Act, but what under similar cir cumstances he should feel himself bound to do again. With respect to the treatment of the individuals who had been taken up, he had to say that the statements which had been made were not only gross misstate ments, but were absolutely false, and utterly at va riance with the acknowledgments formerly made by the same persons themselves. The chief purpcsc for which he had risen, was to state that Oliver could not be protected by this Bill, and he defied any one to show that an improper use had been made of that measure, or that the power given to Ministers had been exerted in any way repugnant to honourable feelings, or inconsistent with the true principles of the constitution. Lord HOLLAND rose to explain. He denied that he had passed any such sweeping censure on the Ma gistrates as had been imputed to him. His argument was simply this : that as Ministers had openly en couraged the busy meddling activity of spies and in formers, and as Magistrates were merely men, and actuated by human motives, it was possible that one consequence of the system adopted by Ministers might be, that some Magistrates out of a vast num ber would be induced to act with more zeal than discretion, with more anxiety to please the Govern ment than to keep within the strict limits of their duty. The Noble Viscount could not pretend to say that such an effect had not been produced on some Magistrates. Earl GROSVENOR said, that nothing had occur red which could justify the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. There was nothing that might not have been left to the ordinary laws of the country. The Noble Viscount might be, and perhaps was, satisfied with his own conduct, but his self-opinion furnished no sufficient reason for the satisfaction of the House generally ; the grounds of that self-approbation must be better explained before the House could ratify it by their sanction. The Noble Viscount had defended Oliver, and not without cause • for, if Oliver should turn out to have been guilty of the acts imputed to him, then the Noble Lord himself would be answer able for the conduct of his agent, on the common principle of Qui facit per alium,facit per se. • But be would not now, at this late hour, discuss a :abject which might be discussed at another time, but should content himself with expressing his decided appro bation of the nioeion of his Noble Friend. The Earl of CAERNARVON would not detain the House long, but he could not be content with a silent vote. The Noble Viscount (Sidmeuth) had commenced his speech by disqualifying himself from taking any part in the present discussion, and had fairly avowed what was the fact, that he could not with propriety advocate a measure which was so per sonal to himself ; this was a very correct view of the subject, and he trusted that the Noble Viscount would carry it a step further, and would give no vote on, a matter so extremely personal. (A laugh, hear, hear.) Rut he should like to know w and h aw the Noble Viscount had arrived at this just opinion ? for he (Lord Caernarvon) could not but recollect thit a few days ago that Noble Lord had appointed him self to sit as judge on his own conduct, in conjunction with certain other judges, all chosen from a list furnished by himself. (Cries of hear, hear, hear.) The Noble Viscount seemed to consider that the great object of the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act was to detain persons in prison whom they never had tie least intention of trying; in other words, that it was its object to erect in every county a bastile for per sons who were &noxious to Ministers : he would tell the Noble Viscount that this was an erroneous view of the subject, and he doubted whether their Lord ships would ever have given their consent to such an act bael Ministers avowed such an object. He wen'. d not 'how trouble the House any further—(h. hear, hear), he should have a better orportunity when th: details of the bill should come before Leir Load- k? 1 • l e , • i 1 i . . 1 '• : i . l: . I ".1 R .r i 11 I I i 1 11 • ' ' , 1 7.... •i I i I ! f - i . . 1 1; • • . 'A '1 . • . , 1• ' . • A, 1 7 : 1 k ' 4 . ! ' 1• f , i 1• . • ‘' f ifl i 1 ! , -I . i t ~ 1. t J . N 140 11 F': •i g ' ' If: ' f 1.4 I '• . . . , , . t i . 1 ' t t 1 • , I 1 • - , 1 1 ' 1 l' I , ' i i• • - 1' et 1. li' . 1 i 1 . l l' I . 6 i 1 '