Star. — London, England, 1820-10-18 00:00:00

'.. .~,.. •, , ~ : . . t : • The Preamble proceeded to state, that this eonduet of her Royd Highness continued during a long period at during her red depee abroad, so that though the continnante of this conduct. was stated to have taken placiabroad, the commencement of it was not specifically ~lie have taken place in a foreign coun-, try.' lie admitted that might be perfectly well understood, but in a proceeding of such importance, a higher degree of certainty ' was required, and it was necessary to chew that they need net proceed by a BM of Pains and -Penalties, when the offers. might be punished by the laws of England. Ile apprehended that no Member of that House, whatever opinion he might en tertain of Bills of Pains and Penakies, was prepated to deny, that if the crime charged vas punishable by the laws of theland, it was not competent to the house of Lords to assume a juris diction, and to proceed by way of a Bill of Pains and Penalties, l under pretence of favouring the accused, and mitigating the cha racter of the offence. This was the first objection; but he had other and stronger objections to this proceeding. It had been stated in argument, that they ought not to proceed by Impeach. rnent, because it was doubtful whether the offence might not ailment to high treason, and if it were high treason, the Im peachment must fell to the ground. Now, he contended, that the very circumstacce of its being doubtful whether the offence were high treason or not, took it entirely out of the cognizance of the House of Lords. He thought he should be able to con vince the House that the law upon this great question was ex treraely doubtful. Notwithstanding all the authot ities, it was yet a matter of doubt whether the adulteries committed by the Queen Consort, or the companion of the eldest son of the King. whether witha foreigner or a native of this country, amounted to high treason. Ile was aware.that there was the authority of Lord Coke for this position ; he had declared, in his Commentary won the Statute of Rdward 111. that if the Queen Consort con seated, she was equally guilty with the adulterer. He had looked into the two authorities cited by Lord Coke, one of which was the case of Anne Boleyn,. said to be reported by a Judge of the name cf Spelman, and the other that of Quee., Catherine, who was attainted of treason. With respect to the first case supposed to he reported by Spelman, who, by the war, was the Judge who tried Sir Thomas Moore, a circumstance not much in his favour, he 31r. Lockhart) had searched almost every library for it, and he believed that no such report existed, hornet, indeed, mentioned his having seen the common-place book of Spelman, containing the report of Anne Boleyn's case, with some of the leaves torn out. lie believed, however, that it could not he Anne Boleyn 's case, for be could prove to the House that she was not tried for adultery. first of all, the proceedings were suppressed and burnt, and the sentence only remained. Bit it did appear, that before Arnie Boleyn was executed a divorce was obtained by Henry VIII. and sentence pronounced against her declaring the marriage void ab initie on account of a pre contract. If this were so, it was utterly impossible that she could be guilty of high treason, because she was not the wife of the King. She never could have been tried for adultery, and as the Statute was silent upon the subject, the case cited by Lord Coke was no authority to prove that a Queen Consort could be tried for high treason. This conclusion was confirmed' also by the authority of Parliament, for it appeared that the crime with which she was charged was not high treason, but conferring with divers persons to the danger of the King's per son. The other case cued by Lord Cake was that of Qtseen Catherine, and he had been followed by IlaWkins, Hale, • Mr. Justice B lackstone, and all the other text writers, who con curred in declaring that a Queen Consort consenting to the crime of adultery was equally guilty with her accomplice. It was not true, however, that Queen Catherine was attainted 'for the crime of adultery ; and be could prove that it was not true by the best evidence in the world. Ile had been fatroured by the Presideit of Magdalen College, Oxford, with a book written by Mr. Thomas, Clerk of the Privy Council to Henry VIII. and his son Edward VI. It was there stated, that Mr. Thomas being in Italy, and making apologies to divers enemies of the King, who was of course much detested in Catholic countries, among other things bad occasion to ans Ater the charges against him for cruelty to his wives. When he came to Queen Catherine, what did be who was an eye-witness of the proceeding state the charge against her to be? He told them that Catherine was attainted, not for adultery, but for her dissolute life previous to her marriage. Was it possible for any Gentleman to believe, after the authority of the manuscript to which he had alluded, and which was now in the Cotton Library, that Q ueen Cathe rine was attainted for adultery, when the great apologist of henry V 1 IL stated distinctly what her real crime was? This very defence, too, was followed up by an Act of Parliament, declaring it to be high treason if any woman who had been de flowered should marry the King, or if any Queen Consort should, by letter or token, solicit the commission of adultery. Lord Coke, therefore, was no authority to prove that a Queen Consort was within the provisions of the Statute, and there were most serious doubts whether a Queen Consort could commit high treason. The very circumstance of the other House calling upon the Judges, and asking whether the offence amounted to high treason, was sufficient to show that great doubts existed upon the subject. This was a point to which he was extremely anxi ous to draw the attention of the House. If it was doubtful m every reasonable mind whether the offence amounted to high treason or not, the legal mode of resolving that doubt was not to resort to a Bill of Pains and Penalties, professing, as a sort of salvo, to change the nature of the crime by diminishing the punishment. This course was quite contrary to the spirit of the law ; for if an Officer of Justice were to change one punishment for ano ther—if, for instance, he were to substitute decapitation for burning, a punishment now happily abolished, he would, by the law of the land, be guilty of entrder. The Honourable Gentle man next argued upon the great mischief and rashness of crea ting other species of treasons, after the express and definite enu meration of them in the Statute of Edward II I. and cited the famous Weaver case, as it was called, reported by Sir Matthew hale, to show the laudable and strictly legal scrupulousness of the Judges of that day upon this particular. It was clear, in this case, that there being difficulty and doubt upon the subject of nigh Treason, Government had resorted to a Bill of• Pains and Penalties, to try the Queen fur a pretended offence, which the same reasons, and the same necessity, rendered it incumbent upon them to soften down, so as to become the proper object of such a measure. It was certain that the better way would have been by impeachment, which was only neglected because of the probability of failure • and he declared, that if they in any man ner carried this Bill Of Pains and Penalties, they would shake the Statute of Edward 111. to the very root, and loosen. the fouttlitions of civil society; no man could be safe ender such vicious precedentt. It was impossible that he could ever be. hi ve t!le Queen to be guilty, because he and they had seen how the evidence against her was mutilated: how it still, like a wounded serpent, " dragged its slow length along:* unfit to live, and yet unwilling to die. It was not the husband alone, but the King's Ministers also, who had been guilty of such vast Incites in allowing the departure of the Queen. The whole coun try, that House, and he himself as a member of it, had been equally guilty of ladies in that repeet. But what were the cir cumstances which occasioned it? lie recollected the late Mr. Whitbread's asking the question of the Noble Lord opposite, whether it was meant that the Queen should go abroad or not ? And that Noble Lord answered, it was not meant to imprison the Queen. Were they then, after 'hewing themselves so in.. different to the honour of the Queen and to the safety of the succession—after leaving her in so unguarded a situation, totally destitute of protection—were they now to become so careful and watchful? No. if any crime had been committed—and he was happy to say that no grounds had been shewn on which a Court of Justice would believe that any crime had been tom ntitted—(Hear, Aeon)—but, supposing that guilt really could have been proved, still he would say, that, for their own ho nour and exculpation, it would have been much more proper and expedient to have passed it over than to have instituted this proceeding, which could answer no good purpose. These were his sentiments, and be hoped that liouourable Gentlemen would take this opportunity of expressing their opinions (Hear, hear), in such a ins iner as at once to render this iniquitous Bill extinct ' and dead--(Hear, hear.) The Petition was laid on the Table, and ordered to be printed. Lord JOll N RUSSELL brought up another Petition, the object of which we could uot collect. Un the motion of Sir WILLIAM CURTIS, a new Writ was ordered fur the County of Warwick, in the room of Sir C. alordautit, who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds. .Mr. HUME presented a Petition from the Lloyd Burgh of Dundee, praying that the Bill now depending in the House of Lords should nut be entertained in that Douse, merely on the ground of its being an es putt facia law.—Laid on the table. THE lIANUBIJ.L CONSPIRACY. Mr. DUMB said, he bad now to subniit a motion to the Douse on a subject most important. it was to calleSir Robert Baker to the Bar of the House, to answer for his conduct as a Magistrate of Alke. This motion arose out, of a transaction recrtaly before the Public, relating to a certain inflammatory and treasonable publication. lie had traced a manufacture el these things for some time back, and up to the begiwaing of 1818 he IiOUSt OF COMMONS. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17. This being the day to which the House adjourned on the Igth September, the Amara catered the House at ten minutes eo:, lumber of Members being assem- - . four o'clock, and, a ,sufficient nt._ bled, took the Chair immediately after prayers were re a d. A Person from the Court of Requests brought up an Ac count of Fees received in that Court. PETITION FROM LIVERPOOL. Gcnetal G ASCOY NE, in presentiug a Petition from the In habitants of Liverpool, begged leave to call the attention of the House for a few minutes to the statements which i: eintained. lie was aware that one topic occupied almost e xclusivel y the attention of Parliament and the Public ; gill, however,. the state of the country reputed that the House thculd take the subject of this . I'etition into early consideration. The increase of pau perism in the tQwn of Liverpool, which the Petitioners ascribed chiefly to the distressed state of their trade, was truly alarming. So great was the increase, that not more than :20,00t; of the in habitants of Liverpool were rated. The population el that toom was somewhat above 100,000, sa y 110,e00 ; telt of that rumba's he was instructed by the 31.:y0r, who had called the .Meetiag at which the ltesoluttms uison u Mat this Petition was loanded, Were passed, to inform the House, that 20,000 oily were rated, and of these 7000 were incapable of paying the 4- anal rates. The Petitiooers were aware that the House had taken the subject of the Poor I.3wi into' its consideratiusuntul they were perfectly aware also, that their burdens were in no degree diminished by the result of their deliberations. They were of opinion that, the commercial distress of Liverpool arose kern the prohibitions and restrictions upon the importation of other countries, and above all, from the prohibition upon the importation of Corn. They concluded by praying the House t o e s,its attention as soon as possible to this subject. He would only add, that she Petition was signed by , 20000 persons ; and that but for some noloreseen circumstances, it would have been presented at an earlier period to the consideration of the HOLM!. The Petition was ordered to lie upon the table, and to be printed. TI SPEAK ER informed the House, that James Iletsell, tx t Chief Clerk of the house, died on Sundae mornin g - last ; and he had farther to acquaint the House, that his Majesty would, iu a few days, appoint some other person as Clerk of that House. Lord CASTLEREAG II said, that it was a duty which the House owed to the memory of the individual, whose dece..se had just been communicated from the Cbair, to record upon their jnuntals the high sense which they entertained of his me ritorious services. Mr. TIERNEY entirely concurred with the Noble Lord that the House was hound to mark its respect for an individual who bad so long and so faithfully discharged the duties of the situa tion which he tilled in that House. The SNEAKER suggested, that it would be a proper mark of respect, if the Vote of Thanks to Mr. liaise'', pas►ed by the hYouse.iu the year 1797, were now read, so as to form part of this proceeding. Upon the motion of Lord CASTLEREAGH, the Minutes of the Vote of '1 hanks in the year 1797 were then read. They stated, that the Speaker had been directed by the House to com municate to I%lr. Hatsell the high sense which the House enter tained of the distinguished alid exemplary manner in which he had uniformly discharged the duties of his office. THE QUEEN. Lord CASTLEREAGH moved, that a Committee be ap poilited to inspect the Journals of the House of Lords, in rely-' don to the present state of any proceeding had therein, respect ing the Bill, included, " An Act to deprive ha Majesty, Caro line Amelia Eizabetb, of all the Titles, Prerogatives, Bights, Privileges, and Exemptions of Queen Consort of this Realm, and to oissome the Marriage between his Majesty and die said Caroline :this:lid Elizabeth." Mr. TlliltS EY said, that from some circumstances which had come to his knowledge this day, it was of great importance that the proceedings of this very day, in the House of Lords, should be expressly included iu the motion of the Noble Lord. Lord CASTLEREAGH thought it was suiScient to move generally fur a Committee to inquire into and report upowthe present state of the proceedings. Mr. TIERNEY said, that any question not immediately con nected with theiptiocence of her Majesty, but connected with the mani.er in which. the proceedings had Originated, was a fit subject for the consideration of that Uouse. lie should move, that it be au lostruction to the Committee to include the Pio ceedings of their Lordships on this day. The motion, so amended, was put and agreed to. • Mr. flood- DEN, Mr. S. Bousa.x, Mr. Ilusicissoe, and the lion. C. LONG, were of the Committee. PETITION AOAINST TILE PAINS AND PENALTIES DILL. Lord JOIIN RUSSELL rose to present a Petition from the Inhabitants of the Town of Plymouth, against the Bill of Pains and Penalties now pending against her Majesty the Queen. It was signed by t4eoo inhabitants, the largest number of persons who had come forward upon a public question since the Pen tions against the Property Tax. The Petitioners prayed that if the Bill should ever come down to this House, the House would immediately throw it out. 'flay wcie of opinion that this pro ceeding, whether considered in a judicial or political view, was calculated to bang the administration of justice into contempt, and to endanger the security of the counay—(llear ' hear).—As this Petition had been entruste d to him, he felt it his duty to present it to the House, and, for his own part, he had no hesi tation in declaring that he entirely concurred in the sentiments of the Petitioners—(llear, hear, hear);—and that if ever this Bill should come down from the other House, as he sincerely hoped it would not, he should be ready in his place to oppose it in every possible way. Without entering into the merits of the evidence which had been delivered before the House of Lords, he might be permitted to say, that the result of that evidence was not such as to make the people of England believe the Queen guilty. If the pretence tor this Bill were a tender re gard fur the morals of the country, he conceived that the whole ground of it was taken away ; if it had been entertained as a public measure, in order to prevent the effects of a bad example, it was quite clear that if the people believed the Queen to be virtuous, the public morals could not be affected. Ile concluded , b; moving that the Petition be now brought up. ' Mr. LOCKHART trusted the House would pardon him if he ventured to occupy a short portion of their time in delivering his sentiments upon this Petition. Ile concerred entirely in the sentiments of the Petition. lie could not bet regard this Bill of Pains and Penalties as a gross violation of the fundamental ws of the country, endangering the safety of the middle and lower ranks, and striking at the life and honour of the highest. It was a direct • .alation of the Statute of Ediv. 111. called the Sta tute of Treasons, and a violation of Magna Charta, the memo rable words of which were, " Nallusliber lain eapiuhir,a4 iet joise-neidr, out diva =who ticartiatnr, nisi per judiciuua puny's, eel per [(gem terre."chis * Bili of Pains and Penalties was a sin nal instance of the aligns mamba destruendi, without the &gale juiliduin. He trusted be should be able to convince the House that the Statute of Ma. 111. had been compktely'violated. The Bill, iu point of fact, charged her Majesty with an offence which amounted, or was supposed to amount, to High Treason. Ceder the pretest of charging her with a high crime and miscle sneanour, the Bill itself, however carefully intended to be • drawn, did, in fact, charge her with Iligh Treason, or, at least, it did not point out a crime which was not High Treason. The general reason assigned why the offence did not amount to H i gh " Treason, was, that the Queen was incapable of committing High Treason with a foreigner in a foreign country. What would the mouse think of the accuracy of the Crown Lawyers, or the persons who drew this Bill, if, after all, though it alleged that the offence was committed with a foreigner, it did not allege that the offence was committed in a foreign country? if he had a correct copy of the Bill. Ile hoped that he was in order in going into these details, for they were now dis Cussing a Petition which related.to a proceeding, a very itiC.,Oti.Ll part of which was the form of the accusation. It stated, that IVi t ereas her Royal Highness, while the said Barthulomo Bergatui was iu her ssrviee, lulus unmindful of her exalted rank -tfid station, and wholly regardless oil her own honour and ch.. aster, conducted Jlerselt towards the said Bartholumo both in pou lic and private, in the. veri.nis places and eo‘ittsies where her Royal Highness visited, with indecent and offensiv.: familiarity, ' and carri.o on a licentious, disgraceful, and adulterous inter course with the said Bartholumo Berg:mi." 'fhe [lse would see that the o ff ences were allege d to have rgkee plac ou e in rariuus ,loses and repottric., bin it • waslillt alleged that thus," places were without the realm. It would be observed, too, that the clause in which the adulterous intercourse was charged, was an inde pendent s eetence, and it wai not stated whether this adulterous lilterCOUnt: was carried ou iu any particular place whatever. • could prove a 'Keen at the head of it of ilee Sane of Forbee, I. Wt. G. ERN NET said, that the assnranceevihich the Noble or Fletcher, or Franklin; for he passed under all these tfiffemit 'Vrd bad given, with respect to him aced his colleague, the appellains. When it was et:marred how 'meh the ' hilobie liee use was, of course . Wand to believe. Hut after such as. Lord and his Colleagues bad dwelt on these publicationsstu?nces, he could not forbear from expressing s at last. at reason for passing the restrictive Bills it became s- subject of e the . conclasion to which the Noble Lord had come at last. For - the utmost inmortance, and most desirable to be aspired Into; 7 as the Noble Lord was so conscious of his own innocence and It ought to be recollected, that oat o e a etain ioitammatorif that of his colleagues, with respect to the release of Franklin, handbills, publisolied at Glasgow in August last, Inching the i why oppose the motion for calling upon the Magistrate who had People to resistance to his Majesty's Government, arose the ' granted that release in such an extraordinary way , to explain his disturbances at Paisley and other places. The handbill to ' reasuae for so doing? The Noble Lord had intimated that this whiCh he had now to caU the attention of the House, was one I Alagistrate might be called to account in the Cuurt of Kiti's tending to implicate the Queen's Plate Committee • and to Mt i Bench; but t how was teat to be done? Why, only through a Cri active and intelligent individual, Mr. C. Pearson , a and ! minal Infortnation, which could only be moved fur, much los that Corrintittee, was it owing that tb discovery had been made: ' obtained, upon a sworn charge of cornmeal. Ile was no: pre- Mr. I'earson traced this handbill to Franklin, rifles Fletcher.— pared to accuse Sir R. Baker of corruption, but he Woeld not lie [Mr.Home then entered into a detailed narrative of all the facts skate to charge him with a most irregular and extrajudicial act. connected with this transaction, which have already appeared in Ile therefore was an advocate for camlling unicati upon on whim, thee!! to lain& our Police Reports.] The conduct of Sir Hobert Baker had in whether be had any, and ithome this case been most extraordinary, fur he had suffered Franklin 1 Office, previous to that act? The Foreign Office, althitiigh the to go at large without taking hail for his future appearance ; and, I grant of a passport to Franklin seemed rather mysterious, s hit under all the circumstances, he could not but think the Home although the getter of• the Noble Lord, afterwards, to call aft. ()Mee must id some way or other have had a knowledge of this l the machinery of foreign Courts into action, far the ezrreet or man, and he was now desirous to have Sir Robert Baker to the l an individual charged merely with misdemeanow f was certainly. - liar to explain his conduct and the motives of it. Ile understood extraordinary, was still nut proved or charged to have beesis that when applied to by Mr. Pearson, I.ord Sidmouth said be did i guilty of suclr acts AS were notoriously committed under thai not consider this as a stibject worthy his attention. Such had ,• auspices of the Home Department. To the purity of this °dice, not always been the practice of Government, fur in 179 e, the I the Public. must look with suspicion, recollecting its conduct with publication of a placard at Denbigh, not one hundredth part so respect to Castles, ()liver, and Edwards --recollecting that it fed inflammatory as this, cslled forth from the Duke of Portland a and clothed the first, that it panegyrized and rewarded the Royal Proclamation, offering a large reward for the discovery , second, and that it patronized the latter, while it was e:'y of the authors. Now, in the present case, which was thought , obvious that he was furnishing his companions with the t a aa.. not worth notice by his Majesty's Ministers, he should, he be - ! terials for emumitting crime. With such circumstance; in lieved, be able to prove, by the affidavits of the printer, that ' his recollection, he felt tt impossible to look to th it 01fize Franklin ordered the printing of the hills and paid for them. Ile without suspicion. livery transaction, indeed, in which that Would prove, that without any visible means, he lived likes Gate took a part, he could butt help deeming impure, not front Gentleman, that he even dined with the Ministers of the Crown any airy fency of his own, from the established facts which occasionally, and was intimate with Mr. Denis (Ylkyen. lie served to illustrate Its character. Now, it appeared that Frank . Lid also been seen to get Litt) a hackney-coach in Howland- din had been fur above two years actively engaged in jrculating street, and after various turnings and windings, he was lodged the most sedition* and treasonable placards, while he was per at a great house in Hauling-street, where a sentinel paced con- petually professing loyalty, and his sons were enjoying the re -8 before the door—Ukase hear, hoar) would now ward of that loyalty, by holding appointments under the .Id read two or three of the bills traced to Franklin ; and Hon. ministration. Yet when this titan was under arrest, he was Member then read the handbill already published; and the a permitted to escape, in the most extrajudicial manner, by the davit of the printer, swearing to hit having been employed by (wad Magistrate of the Police, who, be it remembered, was Franklin. The affidavit further stated, that Franklin had em- promoted to that office • by Lord Selmeuth. .th..r sIICII :13 ployed him so print 48 bills, which were to be sent to the Jury escape, he really believed that there was no individual in ik: en sir Francis Uurdett's trial, at Leicester ; and be afterwards country, Lord Sidmouth alone excepted, who would hesitate to obi rind, bi the reports in the public prints, that they were so give any assistance in his power, whether by proclamations, by distributed. —Mr. noose also read otherplacards of a most pecuniary sacrifices, or by personal exertions, to facilitate the Inflammatory description, and the affidavit of the printer, stating, apprehension of such an artful and abominable incendiary. But that he was employed by Franklin to print them. ale had also what rendered the conduct of Sir Robert Baker more extra one manuscript uf Franklin's of a handbill, dated September, ordinary was this, that usually no Magistrate released a prisoner, ltilis ; and this was a hill of the most dangerous description ; even upon bait, without consulting the Magistrate who grnito.l since it represented the middling classes of the community as the warrant fur his apprehension, or the party by whom diet 'equally objects of popular odium with the more elevated inem. warrant was obtained, and that custom was founded upon this tiers of society. He had compared this manuscript with a letter reason, that it did not follow, because only a certain charge was proved to be the harai-writing of Franklin in the Court of Kings alleged in the warrant, there might not be other charges against Bench, in an action for cries. con. brought against him by a Gen- the prisoner. Here the Honourable Gentleman h a occasion tlemao named Goodall, and had no doubt of the hand - writing to contrast the manner in which th e principal in this ease wee bring the same. He had also the affidavit of the printer, stating allowed to escape with the manner in which his miserable in that Franklin had at length acknowledged that his name was strument was treated—that instrumeet, a poor hoy; who could not Franklin, but Fletcher, and that he was officially employed, not read, having been finch nod committed to prison for three endehat the printer afterwards traced him to Downingotreet, mouths by a Magistrate, who mocked corrunon sense while he and to Denis O'Bryen's. Having done this, and when he con- pronounced the sentence, by the pompous profession of Mane.. sideral the conduct of Government to Castles, to Oliver, to nity. But the Ministerial connection of Frazikda, notwiteeend lidetrards,and, lastly, to Franklin, alias Fletcher, and when be ing all the Noble Lord's lofty language, it was uht thincult to recollected that Lord Sidmouth had called Oliver a much -injured imagine. Ile was traced, it appeared, into the peruse of Air. Individual, he could nut help suspecting that at least there was Denis O'Bryett, whose intercourse with some of the Ministcrs connivance; and the House would be guilty of Treason to the the Noble lard would hardly venture to deny. Yet Fraoklin People, if they did not call Sir R. Baker before them, and en. was the connection o f . this pereon, who had aggravated the tur deavour to probe this transaction to the bottom. •He would Pitude of his apostiey by the foulest and most unprincipled at. now move that Sir IL Baker be ordered to attend the House tacks upon the character of. those Gentlemen with whom be was forthwith, to be examined relative to the discharge of William in former times permitted to enjoy some society. while. • :., Franklin, alias Fletcher, arrested on the Bth of October, on a fected to concur with them in political opinion. Two ac • : charge of being concerned in fabricating a certain treasonable letters, which were some time since addressed to • . handbill or placard. * • williem, in The Jfarning hot, and which he was sorry the - . Lord CAS'ILEREAGII was surprised the Hon. Member's Lord had not prosecuted, lie understood, could he fully proved' motion should be so little commensurate with his opening. ale to have been the production of this O'Bryen. Of such a luau, had concluded with moving for the attendance of a h!agistrate, Franklin was a worthy colleague in this base confederacy, the • to give an account of the discharge of a prisoner, after an open- Main object of which had for some time been to deprecate the fug in which he charged the Government with every species of tharacter, to wound the feelings , * to aggravate the sot!, rings of a crime and eorruption. Mee Hon. Member was certainly in the woman, and that woman a (liken—(Hear, hear, hear). I le did habit of drawing pretty largely on tbe• patience of the House ; not mean to charge Ministerg themselves with sanctioning such but never had he drawn so largely at sight on ti th e redulity oe a system of publication ; but there were notoriously some mater the House as at present—(Hear, hear). —Surely e thing car- agents, who had long pursued that system wills a view to aims timorous people into a belief of the existte , .. of a base and bieck tied folly in the face of It. Was there such a want of libel in the country? Were Mr. Hone, Mr. Wooler, Mr. Garble, and spirit in. the country, .and thus urge sueli • peceie to rally round others, so little known as to leave any one at liberty to suspect, Ministers, although they abhorred their general principles, at for a moment, that Government shculd be obliged to have re- deplored their general conduct. The Noble Lord ought, in his course to such measures as those described by the Hon. Gentle- opinion, to feel obliged to his Honourable Friend for bringirg man, to circulate libellous and inflammatory publications amongst forward the present motion, ekpecially as it afforded the No , the populace. lie trusted the House would do him the justice ble Lord an opportunity of proving that innocence which to believe that he would form no part of any Administration he so confidently affirmed on the part of himself and his which could condescend to adopt such measures. He was con- colleagues. But •ffe could not help observing, that it was latticed he might say as much for his colleagues; and if he could a strange way of proving their innocence, to shut up every imagine that any of those persons employed in the subordinate avenue to the detection of their guilt —( Hear , hear, hear) — departments of Government, would lend themselves to, or inn. and the Noble Lord opposed all inquiry by atoppin3 it in !inset, ' gine a contrivance so base, wicked, malignant, and profligate, he on this occasion. Still be hoped that his Honourable Friend would be the first to give them up to all the severity of the law, would persist in his motion, for which he should certainly vote, and to the contempt of mankind — ( ll cor). — The all y to p ic to if the House proceeded to a division. Sure he was , that it would which he should advert, in answer to the lion: Gentleman's become the House, for the vindication of its own character, to adopt this motion, as the country naturally expected, and must statement, which was a disgrace to Parliament, and to the place where it had been made, was to inquire whether this was the universally desire that such a case as that disclosed by his Ho ttest mode to be adopted for investigating this transaction? Pourable Friend should be probed to the bottom. • aiopsphocardteriosnttohatitiehapdorteonrntioadme Ministers With respect to the transaction itself, and die scheme charged Mr. CLIVE defended the conduct of the home Office. The against Government, such a scheme might have Suited very well with the views of the Radicals, whose proceedings had brought s e t r o s ppin abr g oad rra , ltaconLcbeyivieerito the country to the verge of convulsion and ruin—(lfear, hear).— be contrary to the rules of the Office,.and had been obliged to It might suit their views to bring such a charge to the door of refuse, as the alleged offence had only been a misdemeanour. Ile e respectable individual, if possible; but he would ask whether had never before heard of the name of Franklin, thoughhe had any reasonable being could for a moment entertain an idea that heard of that of O' en. . this man Franklin was an agent of Government? Would any Alr. H. GURNEY thought the letter given to Mr. Pearson, Government, wishing concealment, have acted as the Hun. for our Ambassador at Paris, an extraordinary proceediag. Geutkman had stated ; and by she their agent one driy at Shpuld the different Courts pla y in that way into each ether'. the dinner-table of his Majesty's Alinisters, and the next day hands, in the present state of Europe, it would be .a great Noe. with the printer and circulators of these most infamous produce to tyranny. He should vote for the motion. dons, thus render discovery inevitable ? As to the mution, he Lord CASTLEREAGH stated, that any application to to. would put it to the Bowe to say if here was a conspiracy— reign Powers must arise * frenn particular Treaties that had re (the fashionable word of the present day)--(Hear, hear.)—would reeved the sanction of the'lloase. The Alien Act had no ay this be the Means of tracing it to its source, especially at a time plication to the present proceedings: when the inquiry had already assumed the. shape of criminal Mr. GIPPS could. not vote for the motion. The walls tf prosecution? The Ilonourable Member had read affidavits the Metropolis were covered with the most infamous placar ds, embracing transactions commencing in 1818, and could any and it was the duty of the Home Departinent to cause them tea one believe that a person who could have concealed such things be taken dovon—(, al laugh.). as these for such a length of lime would hesitate to make an Mr. BERN ALL thought a satisfactory inquiry should he affidavit when in danger of being detected, fate and wicked to made into the whole proceedings; and was surprised that at any extent, and calculated to answer any purpose --(Hear)?— reward had been offered by Government ; while, In the CAW 611 With respett to the transaction itself, he amid now take on the Glasgow handbill, a reward of £5OO had been offered. himself solemnly to declare •he knew nothing of Mr. Fletcher, The Court of King's' Bench could not enquire into the conduct of alias Franklin alias Forbes, till the day he' fi rst saw hint re- Ministers. Should the motion be' rejected, a Select Committee corded iu the ' Neterspapt:rs. Ile was authorized to say the same ought to be appointed. for his colleagues, and cantcientiously believed the fact to be so. Sir .la 8E111( IGIIT intwwo rood from calling Sir It. Bette . This declaration would, he trusted, dispose of the crinvivial to the Bar; and thought, that to warrant such a procedure, s part of the lion. Member's statement—the dinner parties--1A much stronger case should be made out- He lamented the ere laugh).— With respect to Sir Robert Baker's conduct , he was popularity of Government; but to him it appearedethat Laos p c :: Government aadwereia not about to advocate or explain it; Sir Robert would , do that who were here called the people had been instigated and excised himself,Robert, i e f x c h e e p could, o b u y ld s , ig a h t t the u p t r ohpeehratidmhee.enllreepdir:lsenntotedkuttrhShirn t iati os i t a w d it ev h Isvnhcahteaverst_(ate,i;hat).they would br as a most honourable man and active Magistrate. The lion. Mr. TIER/slEYthought whatever—(H ear ). that the Noble Lord had treated tie Gentleman had expressed his surprise at the early knowledge motion with a levitynut right. that was tOut of doors dire which the Home Office had of this transaction, and insinuated was a stron g feeling against the Home Department; and a ht. that Sir R. Baker acted upon the orders he had received. The lief that agents wete employed by Government to romoters fact was, that Mr. AlinthuU, the Magistrate, was the 'p e r so n explosion? It was therefore the duty of Ministers to uteet ser a who had given information at the Home Office, and this was a charge as the - present with a sole mnit y due to its im p ortances not done until the Magistrate had liberated Mr. Franklin. But Why t,iim, he asked, had no reward been offered this in • es i 1 then it was said why not issue an order , for artesting Franklin. other instances. The absconding of the party was an implic-- at the out-ports? Ile bad seen the affidavit of Air. Pearson ; lion of guilt, and yet Coveinment refrained from latecterivg.-- it was of a vague and general description, and he could not bur The Noble Lurd had eomplainad that wh h • they hal think the Magistrate had gone to the full extent of his atitlo;- vi stood •' et LI. Pu - • gocUllti steps, or seta they - were sere to meet the dee' rity when he talked of holding him to bail. Suppose an order probation of this side of time [louse; but might nut they un a I had been y : issued to stop Mr. Franklin at the out - ports, why twenty side complain hi the same way that Ministers disp layed most 4.4 Mr. r. 'ranklin's might have been stopped, and none of thorn the when they ought to thew tire (cast, and were the most roma right; and was the liberty of the subject to be thus trifled with when there was most cause far earliest proceedings? He iv ' l ° 4 •--(Hear, hear! fram the Upposi:ion Iterrhes,•?-6entlemen might like to know, if the same ease had been brought by r osoa ,4 cry " Hear; hear r but he would ask them what was their another description, woidd the Noble Lord have treated it si own doctrine ; whether they had not themselves quarrelled with if it were ; plot of the ,l/adicalsr ije could net vote for the and abused Lord Sidmouth's Circular, and denied, in strong present motion, though. it might be that further inveadasti i terms, the right of Magistrates to bold to bail in such CaSc!?— would heti:mond necessary- hereafter. Soak delay might, as de (Hear, hear).-If, instead of this Mr. Franklin, whom they Noble Lord,had itizgested, be expedient, • Lin the thing 11 114 1 disowned, this had been the publication of a pure Iledical, Ana ultimately be thine:uglily inquired into, for these placards Wad Government Go vernment had used any measures for his apprehension, what of the must inflammatory nature; be li id seen mane less so ,1 41 au outcry would have been raised, and the cry would have into green bags! tic had stated thus much, to siiew that it b.en, how determined is Lord Sidinouth to pounce upon this was not iurliffereut to the State of the country, which lie kn.° unfortunate individual. !lad ally order been made for stopping would be •u neas y , unless the whole 'affair was , Fobeti to ti:4 hout-ports, IM at the and any other individual had, by mistake, bottom. With regard to the A iien . Act, whic • h l. had been ° F becis stopped u evoutel the Hon. Gentlemen and his Friends have hided to, -he did not think it to eatirely HZ:Ira:MI as OW 11 ''' 4 failed to come &Wu wall motion alter motion on the 31 hi. II subject. em ..r. e had reason tu behe aye ti. two as eealwal. :: ' ' 1A If ally complaint Were made of the conduct of Sir It. Bai Europe ter, men as any in ' . • mit had been sent away under it, Jo ti the Court of lug's Beech was the isruper triltunal. cetelt virtu) , slender eretelieeded than el.:Mr-but Ozply 5.e.el .sa B: .al 11-1 Own IN whic of zl the 1 tha mil He .29 Ith: rim 1 1 t