Star. — London, England, 1805-06-26 00:00:00

World he rendered impolllble, and yet in the cation of the recto of to,osol. the criminality would woolly depen i upon the particular rime, beceufe die Bata% would be violated or rerpeeted, according to the period when fuch a tranfaction occurred. The Int tin fubjeft of enquiry would be if Lord Melville did or did not pal ticipate in the profits acquired by Mr. Trot er ? and yet if the precise form and words of the charge did not meet this queflion, his guilt might be of the deepell dye, and he woad escape with impunity. Did Gen; lemon rett-et on the pro. diginus c titplication of matters or account in this affair, and on the necellity of investigating thefe with all the delay and impediment , incident to a court of jullice ? Mr. Trotter, fin filch a purpofe, ought to be called and recalled, examined and re-examined, day alter day, and week after week, and how would it be praCticable to purlite this lubjeet in the contraCt ed period of twelve or fourteen hours, to which loch a proceeding is almuft necefferily reftrieted ? By the impeachment, length of time became of nn moment, and the legal formalities would neither interrupt the Court, nor (Millet the defigns of juflice. If the of fence refpeCting the item of to,ccel. be no crime at common law, it might be rendered fuels under the fandKon of a Parliamentary Impeachment. In this way the wound on public right might be prcbed to the bottom ; and although this mode was more pre judicial to Lord Melville, yet it would be injurious only when a facriace was required to justice ; when a great criminal was to be amenable to the infulted laws of his country. By thefe means alone the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, would be attained. Another cbjeCtion arofe from 1 the prejudices that were telt, from the perilous that were indulged regarding that Nobleman. It was faid, the public had been deprived of thonfends, nay, of millions, by the peculatiens of Mr. Trotter, and his principal ; the heavy burthens on the people were attributed to this caufe, and the acidreffes with which the table of the Houfe was loaded, proved the pre valence of thefe opinions. The perfors who were thus biaffed were to be the judges of the Noble Lord; be did not intend any difrelpeet to the juries of the metropolis, but it was to be confeffed they were, tradefinen and fhnpkeepers, who were net competent to decide en criminal cafes conne&ed with the great pnliticnl interefts of-the empire. He fhould now ad vert to the salt particular, viz. on the propriety vf refcinding the refolutions of the Houle. About 450 or afro Members had voted on the queflion ; the principal enquiry was not which was the better mode, but whether it were right or wrong to profecure ? Were Gentlemen, he would ate, direeting their at tention to the preferable method exclurively, or did they know the only precedent was that of Lord Ha lifrx ? It might be laid, " Why did you vote againfl the Inieeachreent ?" No doubt this was momen tum ad ..'weire,n, but it was leis a matter of personal delicacy than of public dirty, and it was more con fident with the dignity of the Houfe to correa an error than to perlevere in it. He had now per formed the talk impaled upon h:m ; he had no ac. queiritanee with Lord Melville ; he had no private inter ell in the event ; he only wifhed -that fubitantial juitice might be done, and that the guilt or inno• ce nee of Lord Melville might be impartially exa mined and faithfully determined.—Mr.Leyceller then concluded with the motion hated in the exordium. Sir It. BUXTON role to fecund the motion. He lamented that the impeachment was not ref - lilted to in the first instance (1 try of Bear! Hear! hang_! front th e oppofition Emthes) ; he meant inttead of the origi nal relithrtions. In there latl he concurred, becaufe he thought they infliele.l a proper piinithment on Lord Melville : after that, on the fame ground, he voted for the civil prolecmion. This latter step Wits retraced, and refeinding the direelion to the Atterney General was no more inconlident than withdrawing the civil proceeding. Mr. juaice Blackstone had laid, that in criminal cafes a Nobleman Ihruild be tried by his Peers ; and the reafon he ailigned was, becaufe the people Mere not impartial judges; it was, he added, one of the great judicial regulations of Magna Charta. On there arguments he fhould fuppnrt the motion of his Honourable Friend. When the queflion had been put by the Chair. Mr. BOND rote—" Whatever ingeninus reafon ing may have been employed by my Learned and Hon. Friend, there is one Hid ground on which I May repofe ; I mean the grave determination of this Houle. I can, Sir, give full credit to my Honourable Friend for the correetnefs of his motives; no man has purer intentions, no man more equitable defigns; but while I reflect on the views by which he is actuated, I cannot avoid being artonithed at the opinion enter tained by his honourable mind on the prefent fubjeet. It is quite apparent, from the circumltances under which the late motion was refilled, that my Hon. Friend, fupported as he was, had it in his power to have carried the meafure of the impeachment; it is, therefore, molt extraordinary that he fbonld have neglected that favourable opportunity, and fhould now deli e to lubveit the folemn decifion of the Houle, alter a full conlideration of the merits of Lou question. I certainly did not make the propori-i tires which was adopted by the Houle, without an at tentive elimination of the matter before me ; andl after I bed affuluoully fcrotinized into the argetnents l on either hand, I deemed the criminal prosecution the molt expedient in this peculiar cafe. Since the inc. /rent when I intimated my fentiments to the Hour:, I have not charged my opinion ; whatever lights I could derive from converfation, whatever affiltance I could receive from a careful review of the fubjea, have all conduced to emit nt my mind in the convic tion it at tirtt received ; yet whatever additional firength my early imprefliens may have received, I can fnlemnly Acme the Houle, that if the motion for the impeachment had been carried, I would have fup ported, in the fequel, that mode of trial, and would not have oberuded on the Houle my preprifeftionr, however confident I might have been of their accuracy. My refine!" for the Kink would have reftrieted my .aid 1 flu:old have humbly acquiefced in its determination. I will now aflign my reafons for deeming the proc - e:ding by criminal information molt eligible. Parliament had complete authority to proceed in either ef Ode forms ; there was nothing in the principles of the common law of the land to oppofe its eldtive pow er in this particular ; yet I Jo admit to Learned Friend, that in the refearch I have made, ( - :t find any instance of retorting to the method lined, except in the cafe of Lord Halifax. Thus far the argument of my Honourable Friend Rands upon a folid foundation. But, Sir, was there, in that. , inflance, any breach of ptivile?e even al ledged4 The Noble Lend, inftead of contending for any Rich rights, dillindly laid he had•no privilege, and infifted on no privilege of peerage as applicable to his fituation at that time. Although the decifion proceeded in that cafe on the mere form, as has been juftly Rated by my Learned Friend, yet the Court advanced as in a regular progrefi of legal jurifdic tion ; and the precedent is not the lets to be regarded on aconunt of its confiflency with there eflablifliel formalities. Then, Sir, there is nothing proved to be irregular or uncontlitutional in this mode; the pre vailing sufage, it is tine, is agahla it; but there is not a tingle example to be produced, by which it is (hewn to he in any one tepee diforderly. " The ground on which I maintain the fitnefs of the criminal information by his Majeßy's Attorney- General may be briefly explained. I prefer it, be caufe I approve a prompt, vigorous, and efficacious proceeding in a court of law, to an expedient poffef fing none of thee important recommendations. I confider the ordinary forms of legal enquiry in all cafes eligible where the jury is competent to decide on the condo& of the party; and alone where it is not within the grafp of their comprehenfion, can 1 deem an impeachment defirable. In the latter cafe, various miles of delay are rapidly fucceeding each other; they daily rife into notice and °Miro& the coorfe of *lattice. In the forms on which the Houk has deci.ted, it will not be poflible, perhaps, to accelerate the trial before the fall of the year, but the proceeding by impeachment would be much later. After it thould he commenced in this way, doubts will arife, very naturally, if all public bufinefs he to be furpended for this tingle objed, and the de triment from perfeverance in it may, 'ander many prob title fituations and circtimltances, be incalculable. My Hon. Friend has commented on the inconveniH ence which arites from the general ferment this boar nets has excited. If this he injut lout, the fooner the decition is made, the earlier will the public mind be tranquillized ; and this, with him, therefore, will be an argument for avoiding the orocraltination incident to impeachment. If the (prelim before the Court were, the political conflitution of Government; the relation of our foreign potTefilims to the parent flak, with which the expedience of peace and war, of tight and liberty, tyranny and oppreflion might be blended, I would not recommend the trial by jury; but none of thole enquiries were necelfarily conneaed with this affair; no matters of a nature In complicated would be fubjed to invelligation. My Hon. Friend (aid, it I would be unavoidable to examine the Rate of Mr. ITrotter's accounts, and that filch a review wool • :ad to great intricacy. to which a Jury would be incom petent. How is this required ? The doubt is not as to the quantum purloined from the ',girlie pule, hot on the ad of put ; h is not a calculation of pounds, fhillings and pence, but a determination on the fad 'of ctiminality. What is the nature of the offence charged ? It is the milapplica lion ot the public money. Is this a rotation on the Rights of Nations, on lubjeds of political difquifition, which legiflators ale to de-1 cide ? or is it a matter of fad which a few re.ifortable men, in the exercife of a plain and found undo-Rand- I iag, can del ermine ? But my Hon. Friend fays, a Jury is compofed of a few vulgar fhookeepers. Whatever I may he my refired for this defcription of perfons, to `them the refult will not be committed ; it will not be a common ti ial, it will he a trial at bar, on the Ate of which a fpecial Jury will he called upon to decide. i 'lt will be conduded before four molt learned Judg es, [one of whom is a Peer of Parliament, with a mind as capable of forming a corred opinion on the great maxims of political philolophy, as any member of 'the hereditary knee. Such is the atliflance to be given on the contirodion of the laws; and the mat ters of fad arifing on the tetlimnny will be afcer tained, nor by a band of fhookeepers, but by a jury compoted of refpeftable Gentlemen of the county. I &odd be glad to knt,w, while we airtime a fort of legiflative importance, what is the great difference between thee country Gentlemen, and the Honour able Members who compote this branch of the Con- Ititution, and why they are not as competent as the individuals of this Hoole to decide in filch cafes,when empanelled for the maintenance of public law ? Whatever fentiments others may entertain, for my part, Sir, I flioold confider it a libel upon the judi cature of this country, if it were affta led, that judges filch as thefe, not mote diflinguifired for their erudi tion than for their integrity, were caroled to partia lity by the clamour of popular opinion. This tri bunal then, I fay, where the four Judges of the higheft Court of Law prefide, is fully adequate to the duty you aflign it, and is in its conftrndion as pure, complete, and perfect, as any thing in the hif tory of national jorifprudence. " My Hon. Friend is apprehenfive of Tome em barraffment, becaufe the dates may not be precifely alcertained with regard to the item of to,ooct. Will my Friend fay, that, having received an emolument, the Judges arc not competent to fay if it be illegal under the liatnte ? lam fore be will not think this a fit doubt to rare before the Noble and Learned Perfons, whore province it will he to decide on the application of the law to the faa. in evidence: If Lord Melville thould he pronounced guilty, which [ ardiatly hope will net be his fate, which I can only with to he his tate for the great ptn•pofes or public jultice, I fay, if cunvi3ion iollow enquiry, the pu nithment to be inflioe:l will be de•errnined before the Noble judge who occufies a teat in the councils of the land, who i, able to admit, in favour of the de linquent, every circumflance in mitigation, and who ' will allow every apology that is due to his political fituation and charaeler, to his peculiar temptations, or difficulties as a public Office► of the State. Iwill not fay that the former merits of Lord Melville, what- ever they may be, will he fit confiderations on which the proportion of fight ing fhould depend, but every matter of excufe will he billy and fully admitted.— Such is the form of pia' I have recommended, and fuch are the grounds on which I conceive the wifdom of filch a meafure is to be fitpported. On fume ac ' counts, 1 confider it the molt lenient proceeding. I do not meals to fay by this expreflion, that if this No bleman is guilty, he is more likely to efcape with im punity, but I contend, that if innocent, nothing can be more oppreffire and harafling than the proceeding by impeachment ; and the humane principles of Bri tifh law have taught me to fuppofe every man inno cent until he is proved to be guilty. It is a fallacy to .affirm that the plan adopted by the houfe is a breach • of the Conflitutirm. Eiery Peer is rubjetied to trial by the common law for mifdemeanors. The preci pitate application of precedents often leads to abfurd and contradidory conclutions. The true way of judging is not always by general principlerr, but by the circomliances of the par tionlar cafe, and upon its own dinina and independent merits it 'horrid nand or fall. Here then we have no pofitive course wailing law, and the peculiar meri:s all direa the proceed. ing now faationed by the Houfe. It was not deter mined by a few members, but at the (Olen meeting within the recolleCtion of any one prefent, and after a notice of four•days. I befeech the Houfe then to regard its own dignity and charaeter, and not to admit the people of England for a moment to fop pofe that a decifion fo deliberately formed, and lo powerfully fupported, is within the ability of any in dividual to (obvert." Mr. LEICESTER and Mr. BOND feverally ex plained. The SOLICITOR GENERAL faid, he had paid every attention to the fpeech of his Right Honour able Friend who (poke fait, and could not avoid exprefling his own aftonifhment, haw his Learned Friend's accurate mind could be brought to form its concluflons upon the ground he had Hated. He Should himfelf fupport the motion of his other Ho nmtrable Friend, and Shortly (late the grounds on which he Should give his vote. In this cafe three modes of proceeding had been proposed to the Houle ; &It, the impeachment of Lord Melville ; fecondiy, civil procefs at law ; and thirdly, criminal information ; and as far as the fenfe of the great majority of the Houfe could be collerled, upon the general ground, it was decidedly in favour of the mode now propoled, and which was the true and conilitutional mode of proceeding. With rape& to the nature of the charg• agi.init the Noble Lord, his Right Honourable Friend had allied, would the Houfe argue againft an Al of Parliament; or would the competence of the Court of King's Bench be queitioned to try the Noble Lord? He, for his own part, believed it would not be argued, that taking the money out of the Bank of England, and lodging it in a private Bank, for naval purpofes, was a breach of the Aril of l'..tliament ; but there could be no doubt, and no man ever urged the contrary, that if the money had been fo taken out, and lodged for purpofes not naval. that it was a breach of the Al of Parliament. His Right Honourable Friend faid, 1:1C Court of King's Bench coil:41 find no diffiCtilty in deciding as to the legality or illegality of the con do& of Lnrd Melville, in this cafe. on account of n•lt being able to afcertain the precife time at which the to,oool. was In taken and appropriated, as it was don: clearly fuhf:rient to the vote of the Hdtife of Commonc, precluding filch an ; this he would not now difinue. but he thould be decidedly againil proceediog criminally againtl the Noble Lord on that arc:mnt, either by imneachment before the Lords,' Or profectition in a Criminal C:urt, as he conlidered the Noble Lord already punifhed by the Vote of Cen lure paired by that Honfe, and the confcquences to wards him which followed that vote. Not wifhing •o trouble the Houfe further on this part of the fun jet% he proceeded to argue, that the declared fenfe of a decided majority of the Houle was in favour oi l proceeding by impeachment, and therefore the Ho nourable Member opponte (Mr. Whitbread), and t 95 who voted with him for proceeding by impeach ment, were, in continency, bound to fupport this ni!tht, the motion of his Honourable and Learned Friend. Of the 258, who, nn a fubfequent night, voted for the criminal proceeding, 5 95 were decidedly in favour of impeachment; Sio that although the Houle never had the: queflion fairly before it at any one time, as to which of the two modes thould be adopt cL!, yet the declared fenfe of the majority was obvi oufly in favour of impeachment. He was ready to admit that the authori:y of the Houfe bore direftly for criminal profecution, yet, upon the molt mature confederation he cuuld give the queftion, he thought with the 595 who voted for proceeding by impeach ment, as the mode bell calculated to attain the ends of titbit - anti:A jutlice—to clear the Noble Lord, if in• nocent—to convia and punifh him. If guilty. kle was ready to admit that the forms of the Houfe flood at prefent in the way of changing the mode of proceeding, and agreed with his Riz,ht Honour able Friend that the Houfe, by fo (Pees* rescinding own resolution, might appear to vaciilate in its Councils ; but notwithflanding the fullnefs of the I Hoof when that refolution was palled, he had, he thought, clearly (hewn that proceeding by impeach. ment was the decided fenfe of a majority. He was ready to admit, as his Right Honoarable Friend slated, that these were many pinions out of doors who would be ready cm:ugh to make malicious re prefentations of any vote to which the Houle might come, for 'has rescinding its own proceedings ; but in doing what was now proposed, the Houle would only get rid of a mere point of form, and come to the adoption of that which was the true fettle of the Houfe. Mr. BANKES laid, that before he fhould come to difcufs the queition et Impeachment, he fhould Frii fubmit to the Chair filch ideas as occurred to him or, the point of proceeding. and as to At !tether the lionfe was now in the proper lire. He always under - flood it a matter of Parli..mentary order, that two difre rent proceedings on the cone Inhje,q, ard eu2.trat y to each other, could DOC he entertained at the fame time. This he always underfloo:l to he the zetic::il rule ; and therefore he thought, in the present cafe, the Honk could not come u) the adoption cf a new pro. ceeding, nor entertain a rp:efli•nt upon it, until it lrad fully difpofed of the Fall. On a toll view of the queflion, in one of the ful!eft affemblies of Men.bers that had ever met within thole walls, and one of the fulled difcuftions that ever took place, the Houle had decided to fofpend a civil profeention, in order to adopt a criminal one ; and now it was propcfed to proceed by Impeachment, contrary to In recent and folemn a decifion. He berled, therefore, to appeal to the Chair, whether it was conflflent with Parlia mentary triage to entertain at the fame time two op polite proceedings on t h e c. orne iobj e a The SPEAKER aufwered, that in the manner this queition came before the Ilcufe, it was of two parts. The Houle had already come to a vote upon the fubjee, and the propofition now was to refcind that j vote. In this, as in all other complicated queltions, the Houfe itfeif mutt decide the difliculty, and there fore it was his duty to put the vettion in the way in [ which it was propofed. Mr. DAN KES relinnede and declared his own riri• nion; founded upon akl the eerier-inlet a n d w oe , tion of which he was matter, that two oiff:rere ~, minal proceedings *gond the fate raiheduel, nee one end the fame febjeet, could nor, coetillently wie, legal juflice, or Pelliernentary order, be carried ...-. at the fame time. The Houfe had ;diesels., after te . ,., moll folemn deliberation, and Mien dilcafion, in ere of the fullell meetings ever witnetled, come to a f n . lemn decifion upon this fubjea, arid now, upnn tie fhort notice ot twenty-four hours, or rather forpriz. , the Houfe was called upnn to refcind that decilire, and to adopt the mode of proceeding which it had already rejected. He could not have conceived it poilible, that the Hon, a id Learned Gentleman wies brought forward this motion, could reconcile to hi s own honourable feeling Nth a proceeding as, afor what had already paired, at this lace perior of f!.,j feffion, and after half the Members had left town , their private concerns, to bring forward a ttifitirqi „! this nature at twenty-four hours notice. If die fluid could Infer itfelf to be induced to adopt fuch a IC tion, he fhould not he at all furerized if, in tweity. four hours more, it fhould be again called on to re • fcind that motion alto, and to abandon the proceed= ings againft the Noble Lord altogether. He had un derflood, from rumours out of doors, and fome hints dropped within, that fame attempt would be made, from another Houk of Parliament, to revive the pro ceedings againft the Noble Lord; and that !time. thing in the nature of a conference would be folitited with i that Houfe, touching•fome of the hereditary privileges of the Peerage being invented in 4„ , e „. ceedings of the Houfe againff Lord Melville. Bait without any previous intimation of any ground what. ever, fare the [bon intimation yederday, for the Houfe i to be called upon to refcind its folemn decifion, found. ed upon fo many fucceffive diftuflions on the conduit of the noble Lurd,was the mot indecent attempt he had ever heard of. What, he would afk, would the pea ple of England fay of fuch a proceeding, if theHoufe IShould be induced to adopt it ? What fast of refpete or estimation would the people of England attach to a Parliament thus wavering and capricious in its de cisions? What opinion would the world form of its wifdom ? Betides, it behoned.the Houfe to look with a jealous eye to the quarter whence the propofal came, and lee how far the pure ends of Mice were aetually the motives of thole who urged it forward.. The Honourable and Learned Member who fpolce lag, and was now fn warm an advocate for impeach ment, had evor until now fpoke and voted againft any ref elution the finufe had adopted, either forthe cenfnre or criminatinn of the Noble Lord, and lied this night juilitied his avertion both to impeachment end criminal procels, upon the ground that the =- fere of the Honk WAS fufficient punifhment. But did nothing new again ft the Noble Lord come out in the fobfequent proceedings ? Were there nn new feat brought to iigie in evidence before the S elett Com roittce ! Did no new instances of criminality and ag gravation come out even in that Houfe ? Let the Houle look a little at the conduct of the Honnnrable Gentleman who was this nit ht fo urgent for im peachment. Did not he, and thofewho aced with him, uniformly oppofe every propofal from the be einnine, for enquiry into the milapplication of pub. lie money, and the criminal conduet of the Noble Lord ? Did they then pmpofe impeachment for the pure ends of fubliantial judice ? Did they not far e the tire refolution of the Houfe on this fohi t e was quite enough ? and did they not a&rt that it was oniutt and cruel to proceed further 1 The cafe Amid jug the lame, and what Paid they now? Why, that criminal prosecution was not the way to obtain fub• Rant; .1 justice, arid that,.by impeachment, the guilt of the Noble Lord, if Cupp°, fed, would be more amply. punifhed. But when he refleeted on theprinciples of action which had heretofore guided 'the Hon. and Learned Gentleman on this fuhjeet, he was not clifpo. fed to quit his path to follow him into new and Mu'. eete ways. He had ne with to violate the privileges of the Peerage, but hews. nnC afraid of any of thole impediments to junice in the Conn of King's Bench, that were not likely to nem bef we the higher tribu nal. He had no fault to And with the mode of ad mininet ing criminal jufike in the Courts of this coun try, and if the Noble Lord (horrid be acquitted by a Jury in his Majefty's Conn of King's Bench, his for mer friends and acquaintance might as fairly confi der his cbaratter vindicated and his innocence proved as if his acquittal Should take place before the Houle of Lords. But as .to the proceeding by impeach ment, the only instance at which the Houk was en abled to look within its own time (the trial of Mr- Haftings) prefented no very favourable espefeetioa that loch a mode was bellealculated to promote fpee dy and cur tain j uflice, or encourage him to prefer that mode of proceeding while there was another tribunal in the country which prefented, in his mind, a more fair and effeetual road to juflice. Upon the journals of Parliament there was but the one folitery cafe in %sleet) impeachment had been followed up to any ere:Cited elite : in every other cafe, Parliament had Wier! on this head, and abandoned the proceedings from fame caufe or other. It was laid again* the trial by jury, that popular prejudices had been es cited by clamour without doors ; he admitted , and I lamented the feet ; but upon Inch lubjeas populer I clernoer was ten clofely ennneeted with the liberty !of the country to be effeetually retrained. bed Melville, however, was not the only delinquent ex. I pnfed te fedi a misfortune ; and it fhou!d he rearm- Iberet!, Colt if he was open to fucb inconvenience, he had tee valuable privilege of chalteneing the pantie', which every prilener enjoys upon his trial ; or of putting off that trial on account ot the termer: exiting in the public mind, as has happened in a thonfand instances, upon all trials where challenges are made against Jurors, either as fupp tied to he favourable for the prifoner, or who may have utter• ed opinions unfavourable to hint- In the ether core, thrift perlms who are the friends and intimates of Lord Melville, may be the peolons to tit in judgment upon him ; while his peliticei enemies, if any loch he had, cannot be prevented from delivering their verdicts againe him, with, tit any power of challenge on either tide, and therefore he thought the proceed ing in the King's Bench the ninft likely to lead to fpeedy and impartial juftice. But what opinion could the Honk form of the mi 'tires and prieciples of thole oho Hi vote against impeachmenti t h en againit preceedine . by criminal prolecution, and new again come forward, and itrenuoully cry out fit impeach ment 1 Would the Houfe tuppofe they were ateated by any with for jultice, or that they had any other , motive than, funteliou or other, to attain their er r hith._ ny L 4 do n now a cr te af li $i