Star. — London, England, 1817-02-01 00:00:00

- - Honourable Baronet, and the rest of the House, must stay to hear whether the petitions were not couched in language too gros; to be received. He had himself refused to present a petition some time since, uecanse be was nut aegis tinted with the au. thenr;csty of the facts which it set forth, and not on acenunt of any ineir , .eniety in it; wording. Mr. BROUG HA %I stated, that the practice of pre senting petition; to I'mhainent was not submitted to the sameregol.,tions as in Courts of Lase, where tfe facts mutt 1,. a,:certained by the evidence of witnesses. d , topinre the Honourable and 1....!arn0d Genii r t' revioe the new rules which he had laid tiny n hi h ..ea, and adopt those of the 14,, u , r . H e avt ty' • 'en see that he had totally mis conceived t!ie (Int y 4 a Member of Parliament. it WAS eert4inly All evil to present petitions containing ch.ogns agatn,t an ind.viattl—but then he would tee tit • same opportunity of repelling them, and, therefore, even on that ground, no obstacle should be put to the right of petiti , ll. The AT FO RN EY GENERAL explained. Mr. C. W. W YNNE conceived, that if it were the duty of a Member of Parliament to present Petitions, it was also his duty to read them. The House had nn other protection against insult than the confidence it placed in its Members, to judge of what might be offensive. He would certainly allow a very great la titude to petitioners when they spoke of their griev ances ; but, as in the Petition Which had been rqected the other night, the petitioners did nut allude to their own grievances, when they said that they saw con tending factions in that House, , 4 mocking the public by protracted debates." No; they only meant to cause the House to enter upon its Journals that abuse, of itself. It was not necessary to examine witnesses before consenting to present a Petition ; but when it contaieed charges against an individual..every Mem ber would best do his duly if he did not present it, unless the person against whom it was directed should bare been infotmed of it, and should have had time to enable another Member to take his defence; other wise the harm would be done by the publication and wide dissemination of the charges, long ,before their refutation appeared. As the Honourable Baronet said that he had not read the present Petition, the ?louse had no security that it was not filled with un warrantable language. Mr. ABERCROMBIE observed that the question now stood on a totally different ground, as the Spea ker, the highest authority in the House, had declated that the Honourable Baronet had complied with all that was necessary. The SPEAKER begged leave to explain. He bad said, that as to language, no Member could de cide for the blouse in any other way than by his own judgment; but he had never stated that any Member cabld be compelled by persons out of the House to present a l'etition without having read it. Mr. ABERCROMBIE certainly thought that the words which he had quoted as coming from the Speaker, had fallen on his ear; he might, however, have been mistaken. As to the policy of the present doctrine, and the time of adopting it, both were very objectionable. He would go as far as any one to admit Petitions from the People against their grim', Mutes. If they thought the House corrupt, though it might be unpleasaut fur the 'House to hear it, they had a right to say so. lain if they willingly intro duced wanton insults into their Petitions, they should; be rejected, though even then it might be objectime able. But now an additional barrier was put to the. right of presenting Petitions.--(34oun of Hear, hear.) A strict examination was enforced, and every Meta. her who attempted to present one was compelled to - endure a cross-examination, on a manor of opinion only.—(Hear, hear, bear.) —He could only make his escape by.saying that he had read the Petition. The Honourable Baronet had read the prayer and the sub stance of that which he bad to present, and had said fairly, that it be were obliged to prepare every day for such cross•examination. the whole time of the Ses• alit would prove insufficient. The only question, therefore, now was, whether he had read the Petition verbatim, throughout, and tould answer for the pro. priety of its language ? But the character of a Mem ber might.be involved in his answer. The Honour able and Learned Gentleman opposite had refused to present a Petition, because he was ignorant of the facts which it contained; but in such a case, he (Mr. Abercrombie) would act as a former Member of that House (Mr. Whitbread). and tell the petitioners that be would not support their Petition, but thought it his duty to lay it Wire the House. He thought that the Honourable Baronet had stated all that was re quired, and that no reasonable objection could be snide to the reading of the Petition. Mr. CANNING did nut mean to enter into the Merits of the question, whether it might be right to ascertain tie facts contained in a Petition before presenting it, or to prrs,nt it without any such pre vtous inquiry ? On that point every_Member might Act according to his own discretion. But when the . authority of the Speaker, the first authority in the House, b ad laid down the rule, that no Member could present a Petition without having read it, there was no cross-examination; but to every Petition which the Honourable Baronet presented, any Member had a right to ask him whether he had read it ? and if be said tin, the Petition could not be received. Sir GILBERT HEATHCOTE contended, that it was mere matter of opinion. Mr. CANNING explained. Sir FRANCIS BUItDETT said it was extremely possible to imagine that a Membei of Parliament could not read writing—(dlevzh.)—Tbere certainly was a time when many Members who sat in the House could not; and if the present do:trine was to be en forced, it would be necessary to make reading one of the quAltfications for a seat in Parliament. All he mould say to the Right Honourable Gentleman was, that he would not answer any questi.in he might put to him --(Hears hear, hear.)—He stood there to re present the grievances of the ccuntry—grievagces so enormous, toat they could no longer be borne.— (nar, hear, hear.) —He spoke the language not of himself. but of hall a million of Lnglianen— (Hear, h ear , tear) —and was the Houk prepared to say it would not listen to that voice? Was it to be endured, in such a moment, when the nation w as complaining of its wrongs frum one end to the other, that lawyers should get up and truss-examine any Member who , in the exercise'ol his duty, laid before Wane dity La be them the Petitions of the Pimple ? told, one day, that tke names of peititiuntra must ap. .pear upon the parchment,. and another day, tharMent bers must read every petition they present, ark would be rejected?— Ober, hear.)-Were such formalities to stand between the People and their Representa tives ? and if not complied with, were the former to be dismissed without a hearing? Was that a time to erect such a barrier ?—(Hear, hear.)—He had already Isaid, that he had 'mused extracts from the Petition, and that he knew its purport; but - he was sure, if either himself or the House must read every word' contained in the Petitions he had to present, it would occupy the greater part of the Session. He should say nothing more than merely to move that the Peti tion be Jsrcugbt up. Mr. CANNING.—'" In order to explain clearly 1 the nature of the present question, and that the House may distinctly understand my motives in the course I mean to pursue, I request you, Sir, to lay d••wn again, as explicitly as before, the practice of Parlia ment upon these occasions." . The SPEAKER.-46 I am at all times ready.to obey the wish of the House. Ido undoubtedly con ceive it is the bounden duty of every Member who presents a Petition to this House previously to read it, that he may know its eontents."—( Wear, km..) Mr. CANNING.—"" Then, upon that ground, Sir, and from a complete conviction that we must abide by our rules, that we must uphold your authotity, if we would not compromise our own dignity and, ho nour, as well as the safety of the Commotion, I inert unwillingly, hut forced to it by the Honourable Ba ronet himself, object to the bringing up of this un read Petition. Mr. BROUGHAM—se No man, Sir, haspore re spect for your authority and your decisions in this House, than I have • but I implore you, as you value the privileges of Par liament, and the integrity of the Constitution—as you value the regularity of your own proceedings, to pause in the course in which'the zeal, , and, I will say, the presumption of.the Hon. Gentle man has hurried you. He haw appealed to your ' , dictum, as if it were one of the Standing Orders of this House. But, Sir, notwithstanding the respect duly paid to your high authority, he ought to have known that the mere dictum of an individual can have no force till it has been put to the vote, and sanctioned by a majority of this House. Bat thea the Right Hon. Gentleman began with a questions whi-h shewed that he was completely ignorant of the mode of proceeding in such a case. The manner, too, in which he spoke was to be noticed. “ I give you warning." said that Right Hon. Gentleman, a that you may come with petitions from 504000 persons, but before you present them I will put corms ques tions to you." Now he (Mr. B.) would say. slsat.the Right Hon. Gentleman could not put any question to a Member. (Hear, hear!) He might inde.d apply to the Chair to put a question, and (ben if the House' pleased the Speaker might put the question. (Hear.) It was for the House, and not for the Right Hon.' Gentleman, or any of his various colleagnes—(hear, luar)—or any other Member, to pit a Tendon ; and he believed it would be the rst instance on re cord, of a question being put to a Member, even from the Chair, when that Member was not before the House as a witness. But even after all this, the Right Hon. Gentleman would pot another question, which might be well called the cross question, 4. Have you read the petition ?" By what right could such a question be put ? Where was the authority I— ' Where .was the precedent for it? A greater inno vation never was timelines& (Hear, hear, hear.)— 'When this question was allowed, another naturally followed,"Does the Petition appear to be in proper language." This most extraordinary innovation, in troduced at such an estraqydinary time, when by far l th e greatest proportion `e whole population of the kingdom was a t Jahn the House with the detail of their. grievances —when, above all other times, the doors of that House ought to be thrown open to receive the complaints of the people, was a matter of moat serious consideration. And he im plored the Speaker and the House to pause, before the introduction of a new practice was permitted, of which there was no trace to be found in the Records of Parliament, or the Standing Orders of that House. Mr. B. BATHURST.—The Honourable and Le rrned Gentleman who spoke last, had treated the question in a very extraordinary way, and had en tirely departed from the original question, which was .imply--. 4 That the petition be brought up." It was said that a question to a Member was to be put by the order of the House from the Chair. In strict formality this was certainly true. But was it abso lutely necessary f %Vas it not one of those forms which might, without the slightest loss of dignity, and with much convenience. be dispensed with ? Was if any novelty to dispense with it ? The no velty w.ts, that any Gentleman presenting a petition, should make it a part of t.is speech on the occasion to say, positively..." I have not read this petition." (Hear, hear.) This was really the only novelty. An Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Abercrombie) had al luded to the opinion of Mr. Whitbread, that in pre senting petitions a Member did not make himself an swerable for their contents. For his own part he could only say, that he never had heard Mr. Whit bread express such an opinion. But he was Very end fident that he had often heard him say, on presenting a petition to that House, that he had looked it over, and found nothing offensive in it. And the same thing was always expressed or implied by any Mem ber who presented a petition to the House. But it was said, forsooth, that there was no written law for this. Was it necessary that every rule or regulation should be written ? Were those laws only to be con formed to which were written laws ? Where was the written law to be found that the eldest son should in herit real property ? and yet upon the principles of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Brougham) this was an innovation, because it was not a written law. (Hear, hear.) Where were we to look for laws but in the immemorial usage, the experience, and the wisdom of slur ancestors ? In common pat lance it Might, with perfect correctness, be said, that a question was put by one Member to another, although in point of strict, though (in com mon cases) unobserved formality, it was supposed to be put by the House theaegh the Chair, at the sug gestion of the Member ; and thif might be correctly said iu the same way that a Member would—“ I win not have a division." and so on. When it became the practice for Members to get bundles of petitions wholesale, which, when they come to pfrisent to ties House.. they say they have pot read, by such t tee. Itssion they not only shewed disrespect town* the ~, but also towards the . House. It was [iighly proper that before receiving a petition the House should have the sanction of at least one of it, Members, that it contained no improper matter. He denied that any thing was said or done whit' spewed that the House was not inclined to throw its door s open as widely as possi ble to the petitions of the people, but it rested with the mover of a petition, if knowing oilers his motion was to be made, and the rules of the Assembly before which he was to ap pear, it rested entirely with the mover by complying with those rules, to have his petition received, or by neglecting them to hav e i t re j e c te d. bit SAMUEL RUMILLY, before the question went to the vote, declared his anxiety to state the ground of his decision. He would, in the first place, contend, that it was the duty of a Member to read, previously to its being presented to the House, any petition that he introduced. Whilst, however, he considered such the duty of the Member, he must still vote for the reception of the present petition, be cause, from circumstances, the rule should nothe in variable. There might be cases, where petitions on subjects of pressing importance were very numerous, where great inconvenience would ensue from reading every sentence as was declared by the Honourable Baronet in the present ease, in which the rule might be related with reasonable indulgence. 'Besides, the Honourable Baronet had also apprised the House that he look7d. over the petition generally, and that he believed it was inoffensive in manner and substance. This assurance he must Lel, under all eirometances, seificiect ; aid !As begged to put it to the House, when it considered the agitated state of 1 the country, and the severe pressure under which all classes of society suffered, and none in a more aggra vated degree than the petitioners, whose prayer was before them—when it was recollected how strong an anxiety was expressed, in the discussion of a for. mer evening, for that House to diffuse and encouraye a good temper amongst the people, whether they ought now to go out of their way on disputable points, par ticularly when aware that such conduct would be re presented abroad in the worst possible way, and thus widen the breach between Parliament and the people, if such breach even now existed.—(Hear i hear.) Lord LASCELLES.—As the present petition proceeded from a part of the county which he had the honour to represent, he expressed his desire to press a few observations. He believed the Honour. able Baronet who presented the petition was placed in a situation by no means sought by him. He was strengthened in that opinion by the manner in which the Honourable Bennet disclaimed the inclination to support any violent language or conduct, under the pretext of petitioning that House. The only ques ties at present arose from a point of form, and in thot view be was-solicitous to state his sentiments in the.most dispassionate manner. In the first place he begged to impress upon its attention, that though the language of dime petitions might be•violent, it was not thence to be inferred as fact, that the real senti ments of those who signed them were equally so. The House should distinguish between the violence of those under whose dictation and controul these peti tions were drawn out, and the want of know ledge of the majority of the persons whose sig natures were affixed t• diem for Abe' truth was, tliat in the present great distress, the sufferers were generally assured that all their evils, all their com plaints would speedily disappear, and &heir situ.ttivo in life be considerably improved, by what was termed Parliamentary Reform. In the present feeling of their distress, numbers were thus influenced to lend their names to applications neither duly considered nor wisely digested. He not only spoke on this subject from his own information, but from that of many persons acquainted with that pan of the county, and, the uniform impression was, that no violence of feel ing actuated die great body f the petitioners. He had hibaself been applied to by letter, to know whether he would present petitions preying for Parliamentry Re ' form. So far as hicoold recollect the tenor of his answer it was,. that he could have no objection to present any Petition to Parliiment that was consonant with its acknowledged usages—that as to the necessity of what they termed Parliamentary Reform, he did not agree with them—and that if they felt that their views would be better supported by putting their Petitions into the bands of other persons, they woulJ exercise their own discreuon-(Hear, hear, hew%) Having stated these observations, arising from his local knowledge, be would feel great regret in seeing the House pressed into a contest with the Petitioners, and in this feeling be was more solicitous, because he was convinced that from the character and conduct of the leaders, that many petitions were worded with the bupe of their rejection—Wear, hear.) —Whilst, however, he expressed such washes, he would be the last man, though there were at the doors of that House the Same number of individuals as were allu ded to by the Honourable Baronet (Burdett) to ad vise it, to diminish one atom of those acknowledged privileges, persuaded as he was, that in yielding, it would but lead to repeated auression. Under all the circumstances, he trusted the Honourable Baro net would not, and he used the phrase in no invidi ous sense, press the paint with any pertinacity— (Neer, hear, and a:mural call for Sir F. Burdett.) Sit F. BURDE r r expressed a desire, after the candid statement of the Noble Lord, to set him right as to the expression used by him in the rally part of the debate. He did not disclaim any identity of his opinions with the Petitioners—:he never wished to be understood as not bound to support the prayer of pe titions, which he still thought it his duty to present. Whenever the great question of Parliamentary Re form cam before them, he wished to give it the fullest and most dispassionate consideration—it was his aim to afford it a, practicable and efficient opera tion, and he trusted, in concurrence with the gra.tt bulk of the enlightened and eitional who felt it, n - Comity', to discuss the necessity and merits without any acrimonious hostility. With such views, lie mu.t be extremely unwilling to press that Hoare into any: cootest with the peopfe4—she present question was raised because he thought.the principle of petitioning was involved. He had, however, during the debate read the Petition, and therefore the point in dispute was removed—He had answered the Right Hun. Gentleman opposite with some warmth, because he thought him intemperate and unjust in his remarks. ' (Coasideraiis cheerio:). Mr. CANNI&J rose to explain, and said he would not press the reading of the other Petiticipc: he meant smiting personal in his observations. Lord COCHRANE objected to the been laid down, imposing upon a Memi. sity of reading Petitions before he present Cases might occur, in which a Member ceive so many, or have so little time, not peruse them all, and toils the . suffer because the represelitatiees o f l i hot learn their grievances. He could propriety in objecting to Pet lions for the ground that the Commons' House, constituted, did not represent the Nat such allegation could alone justily a call That the House, which was filled wit and Pensioners, should dislike accusation, and corruption was natural I but it wi to hear what their constituents had to them. He hoped the day was not far such accusations would not be brought liament, because such reproaches would He hoped he would succeed in the mot he bad given notice, on the subject of Pensions held or drawn by Members of If Ministers consulted their own credit, be beforehand with him, and accomplish which he had in view, before they were either by a •ote of the House or the Country.—(Hear, hear.) The Petition was then brought up, read ed to lie on the table. Sir FRANCIS BURDETT presented Petitions from inhabitants of the town bourhood of Habra:, two of arm p ra y rQrsal suffrage and annual Parliaments. '- annual Parliaments and suffrage co-e:tens direct taxation.—They were all read, an( lie en the table. } Mr. BROUGHAM had no wish to House from acceding to the proposition the Petition on its taole. But he felt ii every friend to the people —every man the protection of popular rights—every disposed to alleviate the severe pressure afflicted the country, to low no t.me or in counteracting the wild, tl.e mischievois, surd, nay, blundering delusions so unhappily ing a great and respectable part of the e from the true path of relief And safety—( frost all sides). No man could entertain erect for a great proportion of the persons d those Petitions. His co n fid ence i n wine views made him the more acutrl **Union from any practicable course of - they were so blindly pursuing. He felt they were distressed—bow aggravated ings, how natural were their complaim aware that they flew to Parliament. uni and expectation of obtaining real and sui lief. Good GOD, can they anticipate sr from universal suffrage ? The thing wal Me, but were it possible would it be a would be the opening to unparalleled tm so strong existed the delusion, that the vet' before the House prayed for universal the indubitable, imprescriptible right for ancestors had shed their blood. When w 'ever exercised, or where was the theatre Joe? Do they fancy it ex i ste d i n t h e re i hn, vas tstabl-shed in the contest the First ? If any individual can produce out of any history of the country in Nippon a Odic, the., he would ur.! ,, observes wholly escaped his historic research, at feel gratified us being allowed access to the (Hear, hear).—Pln the ancient periods so pealed to, the great body of the people, franchises and vutes, were in a state of holden as beasts of burden, under the et disposal of a small proportion of their Chi people of England, in place of being me+ bitterness of their sufferings with coati,' proof, were enlightened on the prevaili were the true merits of their constitutional plained—and were they rescued from the . leaders, who either from ignorance or worse • were misleading them, the Constitution would true improvement, and the public mind directed to the salutary And substantial their distress—(Rear, hear.) THE A DDRESv. Lord VALLETOR 1 appeared at the the Report of the Ad,tress. On the motion that it be brought up, Sir ROBERT HERON said, ate argument. had been advanced in support of the Ameedale le :tented yet wholly unanswered.—(Heardiere . .. Right Mai. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Cattq had indeed made a great flourish on tae last teg. this debate. At one moment he appeared so t. with the Amendment. that every body *well would have had the bent fit •of his swum hinted at the resignation of his office, probai making a merit of necessity, and wishing to do, is , some degree of eclat, that which he foresaw mast b been the natural consequence of that Amendt being carried. At length it appeared that the Ni Hon. Gentleman's arguments, if such they rook called, were as foreign from an approbation of subject matter of the Address, as they were to ti adoption of the Amendment. In the course et r Right Hon. Gentleman's speech, he seemed it time at a loss where to fix his points, until at I..st struck upon the question of Reform—then he e?: tis element—then he mounted upon h;s • agitated and filled by the iuspiration of his ti,nsi, launched into the ocean of his preqical fancy— , poured feral ensanguined cloud.—cubsoi tray fl a': before his eatrancee vision until twilight n i omentart obscured them—crowds of robbers an d assaasms pe , pled his fertile conception, and were :associated ve; and relieved by Rein: mers and hobgahlins—L ask: Of such materials was the Right Hon. Ceettuetnit. speechfursmed.—.(Hear, hear.)—ln plain truth,. Was evident that nothing could be urged against I strong grounds of the Amendment. Its gateau of grievances was not exaggerated, nor ?ere strong arguments refuted:—(Hear, hear.) —He Robert) wai not a man who wished to press de . r dency upon the people ; but he ceuld not 1j; from expressing his belief, that if th.: Gcveroai; the country persevered in the course they had years pursued, no man could be found b.) st . as to believe that the interest of the.Natto"''l could any longer.be paid : the consequence the) mutter:ince in this squandering system mail 1 7 dunes:is than a national bankruptcy.—Viori r I. such 111 &Litt: of. things, what a just chop e rule dot 1 1 , ober the nee.. wined them, ber mi g h t T . that lie • uhject t• sh-opl c I not sre ae rr Room s , L : as at prefer, ation, becao, ill for R-for m . rich Sinecinists ons nt ven d ii :r was their duty to any aga in& distant as t against be rerno-;a:. °tam of if Pl.tres of the If,x ic t, they sho u 'd h tho se (4 j ert: !re compd td e voice of t'ae ead and order. ted three rein wn and neigh. **lt Int sal. lr and eh e for extensive, sity Ind ordered to to detain the ion for laying it the duty of rt interested 4 man sincerely are that nue K opportitnly terms, the ab- ppily e c•imme-.4 (Hear, 14.2 r, In • higher re. mons who ha in the honest cutely fait redress whi bow severe! 1 their staler lots. He w oder the ho, substantial re such a res as impractic a remedy I. mischiet. very Petition 1 suffrage, a Dr which the. WAS this rip. t of this snug eign of with Chalk nee one proc, ipport of sack that k tou and he wool.; the au:hoi i:y so fondly le, instead. -I of controul !hiefs. If :.e treated in tie lately and rc. ling errors I sal claims el re controls' rorae mauve - would d”si , ' nd • would n 1 remedy t I the Bar: wit guments thi AmeEdnot , t flair, sir rr.) Ir. Cattt4.4? ! last ittg!.t red so saki; y tboryht appat. 1: ce, probato. 4 4 to dot, n'.; aw must ha A mendrue tat the kg . hey could ibation 1,1 y were to tit courtie of t! seemed le: lk ail at I:st ;en he v• at i tii, , vd, his m ils', !, al fancy—lt of day fl momenta assai',illa Fez sociatPel tiS—L ;IS° Grafitti' :tia truth, td against Its ttateinC nor vete ..)—He (. press dep cvcrnme r' t. vatiUrlt 1 molt charge