Star. — London, England, 1810-04-06 00:00:00

. ..- -p t, .• ißanbury case, in the I tizn had been decided b I_ The House Might state •, privilege, which a Cour ..•.. such.. It .on-s the opinic Grey, that whateverml House of Commons, unl . within the walls, it wa The HouseofLords,too, that the House of Comm individual to • prison, own boXi, and who wa own jurisdiction.. It wa! of the people, that such exist. It was•also a 1 . • of the Honourable Bar • unfavourable view, th; justly be called, was cot • 7 not punishable within. •'' . any Member of . tie E . ' the right of committal it be a fair argument, t practice the rightshould was only a part of the L gate to itself a power es-1 leetively, namely, King Crown did not assume tional, therefore, that a , . tune should. Many pre 1 mer occasion, by those( tended for tie privilege ed it so indispensible ti t the power of commi question which inyolt merit, the period of a time so replete with d' I not be quoted as a fait to draw our present c concluded by express; principles laid down I he thought were supp were best calculated truth and justice. H the right of the Hone nion on such a subject Sir J. ANST RUT fer : in ,toto from the. not attempting to yin rity to which that H it was necessary that to defend itself and d between- the people popular encroachmi The present clues' ion tion were a libel, and mitment were in that the les a libel becat It commenced by a willing to make Ma this question there bring Parliament ar together ; because . time when the Grea statement of the poil Legislature—a Cony so—was to be cal . person who chose ti to be denied to it vi Ccort, to even a rer..n:••il‘g obstt ticti , I jog ? But was it tc l actual pc:.:;• - mill oh! Was th-r,: no obs . ... - , t, cr in terrl f : .: •••••••••• V , / .0, •• ~..15 el 1... c. rd Stta•To• . d House st•CrO nr-t it C 77 ac*.lllCt them, 7 r: •* , ,ii••n S!raf'.l , - .. ... ~ .a,.; a . .. .ire was i . ; - übiication , . unsiructive. 61'4 • • ...tt 1-louse to be fr terrified away till t' process of indictor( portance to the F. rights, was, that it ptivilege and what pendence could no i 1 This was no peculi public right of every contempt, and the . ty or its exertion ',y powers, and so mi he abused. The three or lour hund this supposition ; t the n arrowest.limii the general rights said that contempt Could i u undersea reason for not ails , thing, might be co; est vation did net ~ nee new Priv liege, The* calumny was 1 - abetted aod led or that, side ; hut lit . . the House on the pOse a libel issued i i t correct himself, tl i tO.llave •come fror rected himself ag 1 ;.: 4.11)1. ).1 f ' any•n who wished to co was it to be supp Were now so loud • 'press the exertio 41:timed td itself think the right 1( . • sect back many y been probable, -ti s w 1 ,401e, he must a want of distinctn able Mover; Ith . • ' . meaning erobjei i c ourse of The:ifel gg - - Was - atternpied 't snenti*Of tli€: - oth t. lie, for one,- woi parliament. T been touched of case where the ] . • valued for the a .. House of Lords, this ques. by the Court of King's Beno. ....rze many things as a_bleach of Court of Law would not, hold as 'lion of L6rd.chief Justice be might be 'the privileges of the unless the offence was - committed: /as not cogniaable .by sheitt. oo,haddeelareditastheiropinion , Imons had no right to commit an., , who did not belong to ).he'd was not immediately within thell* was inconsistent with the liberties a right should be allowed to material argument in -favour laronet, who stood rather in an that the libel, if libel it could ..ommitted out of doors, and was It had not been asserted by, House on a former night, that :al did really exist, nor • would that froM the notoriety of the exi4.' The Honse of Conimons Legislature, and should not arro vhich belonged tOthe whole eel -Ig, Lords, and Commons. The to any such power: . it was not ra-J : any other branCh of the Legisla.! ? recedents had beencited on a for !se Gentlemen who so strongly con-- leges of Parliament andwhoesteem to the dignity of.the House that mittal should exist. But in ,a lved the Prerogative of Parlia the reign of Charles the First, a dissention and disturbance, could it and proper criterion by which conclusions. The Noble Lord .sing his full approbation of the by the Worthy Baronet, which ,ported by those authorities which :d to give them the currency of His Lordihip also contended for lourahle Baronet to-state his opi .ct to his Constituents. . • 'THER followed. He must dif. . Noble Lord. He (Sir J.) was indicate all the exertions of autho... House might feel competent , but it there should .be a power there, defend the subject : its place was. and the Crown, equally resisting melt •nd regal prerogative.— )11 was, first, whether-the publica id next, whether the power of com a House ? The publication was not :ause it involved a greater offence. asking, Whether the House were Magna Charta null and void ? In was a Fbel. It was absurd to Ind Magna Charta on the carpet Parliament did not exist at the -eat Charter WAS given. The real oint was, whether a branch of the art, though perhaps not technically Ilumniated with impunity by any to asperse it ? Or was that power which was granted to every other common club, namely, that of :tions to the object of their meet to he asserted that nothing but an ,bstruction could require removal ? is t r uction in impeding the judge . r:ng the minds of the Members ? the case in die impeachment Members coming to the nine(' ; out there was a popular placards were posted up nick n !tans there were, it must be and hissing used on that occasion, ; no doubt on his (Sir J.'s) mind, like the one now in debate was a .rtrut•lion Were the Members of frightened by alarming papers, and they could he righted by the slow :ment ? But the object of most im- Hance, for the mair.tenance - of its : it should be the judge of what was iat was not ; without this its inch.. lot exist for a single hour. (Hear.) liar and invidious claim ; it was the :y Court to jtrdge for itself in acase of acre was no revision of their authori ,on. The House might abuse its might every power entrusted to man to history of the House for the last \dreel years was the best answer to they scarcely ever stepped beyond !its which the public interests and .s marked out for them. Et had been pt was not a Breach of Privilege; he ;Land the argoment, and that was his iswering it. It was . said that any :onstrued into Privilege, but this ob- It apply in fact; the Fuse wanted. it had enougb.Alo,adY. (Hear.) As now on. the popular, silk, and was fm by a. man who stood :high upon ibels had once been levelled against e 'hie of Prerogative. . , (Hear.). Sup- NI from the King but no !I he must that was impassible ; .bnt, suppose it -out the . Ministers, (here Sir John cor again, and found that equally -man could be found in the : Ministry :ortail the rights 9 . 1 the House, (hear) !posed those Gentlemen whose voices d, would. be . equally active to sup inn o f the powers which the House ? (Hear.) .He (Sir J.) di d aatig less .real because it m i gh t not l.,etra years. The injury could not have -till- printing became common. Oni the acknowledge himself surprised at the tale's in the resolutions of the Honour ,:ho seemed not ckternrined as to the ,jest of even his' own motion. I n t h e 4:-.ilebate, the. history. of their privileges 'to be der.jueed from the aelcnowledg :her b ranches of the Legislature ; .lent would only look for them in the law of The case of the King v Flower, had upon ; but let the sceptics look to the Lord Mayor of London, when com arrest of a Messenger of the House, . - • ..., I . • - ".•-•„ i 7 %; :•'"..'", A lap I. • ..4: - : •••: ..' .4 ---- - L y. .* •-\'• ''' .7.1 S . _ _".'' • '.( ditiltali 4 iliipeas -arte.* the Chierlust,toe p- i•- • r !was .cif • • • 4,.., t resisting isy. the wise of the piee- e , DeiSitet e t in fiiik• Chien, on the Plain grouniltintt:. , tithing but a forced conetrtlimion could ma ke a ny it, ' of committing for contempt; r every -ourehaci a power that each Court ;enlist be the ;le . of what was con - an authon•ty than the late 'Lord Chatham' had .used . . Wept t. 4141 that as the conte nt time when 'the ii ts might vary, name- i much stronger expressions at _a gl3 1, 'thit not iseingibitinipt-of the Court at D urham 'of th at House had been discus s e d in courts of law.— tmhichmightbe contempt of th eC ourtof King sßench, .He ha d . said" in the.Honse of Lords; that if they meant unite 'the nation, they must convince them that addndieni no juelgenent of .the point conld Ede given to . . . , .... : tint of the Court e ev e heieAkciffe,nee We's 'offered: The , their claiinswOuldbe regarded . but if a cOntrneycolree . ..same envier was•gift on successive applications - to ; was to be pursued, if thebreaches, of the Cepstou , the Courts in.:. .. • on,, till the whole of the twelve 1 tion were not to be repaired, if mei:liberties' were to 4udges had * SeicliheilopinionAte same side.. ;be surrendered “ to a deen v :tic Minister, ." may . di . s- . 7adge I,)e . fr` -- , s langu a ge *ate " have a right . cord, " sai d h e, prevai . r ever !". pis Loedslhp. 'to :couterilt, beianse it is necessary** they should ' further added, that in thiecase he allude to, he hoped leave the right." If this jtiagment "pi given up, they ' to see the question brought to issue,'' and fairly mutt bedependent on the people Ortir,) or rather on tried !. .Such were the 'Words of the great -Lord .Cle.t I - • le' the mob : 'he might remind the. House of -Murray ' s them I. it mattered .la 0 i ndeed, whether . the fiber e ease, where Chief Justice Wright and Mr. Justice ties of the people were tetrendered to a despotic l'eli- L Foster remanded theparty on• the simple ground, that nister,.or, before othe House klif Commons. With suet he had been committed by the House. He would go authority e them, the House niud Ise slow in Jack no farther than to the Kentish Petition in 1701. straining the interpretation of the Honouruble Barn.: The six pe rs ons who presented it were committed.. I t net ' s expressions. Another complaint was,, that the . .was a Tory Ministry. Before the nett Session, that Bill of Rights was called; a Bill of Wrongs; but the, Ministry and Parliament were succeeded by a Whig Honourable Member read only a part of the. `pas Miinestry and a Whig Parliament ; yet even then, sage . . [Here the Noble Lord quoted the wliote pa s- With all the spirit of contention strong in both par- sage as it standsin Sir Francis gurdett's Letter :3 • • . ties,. they, loch agreed in the commitment, and even order that nothing may be wanting to re nder trul y embodied the princiPle• of the proceeding into Reso- ludicrous "Eat in v" e 'part of: this proceeding, which inverting thr. faiv; lutions which were put upon the Jottrnals. Judge of tiaedra e ma,as well as all other • laws, begins with a tarce, aiid ends, with a tragedy ; the House of Vonimbris imprison' Mr . .! ; ' Halt's authority had been brought in opposition t o Jones—undefthe sanction of what law, think ye i-. 4: f ho Bill of 1 . the doctrine of privilege ; but that opinion Met been Rights. Wen m d ig in ht t Paln n e i c n a s i t l rg it hi ti t i n e i g .tb ill o of .ie V ss r;rig n l, d i e lc io c y ou tt l le 1 given in contradiction to the sentiments of the other , be . t hus rties c o o f n t v h e e rt p e eleven Judges. "The Honourable Baronet talked in aum eople o : - those liberties for which It was erprelsly ' framed, claimed, demanded, and insisted upon to protect., Mr, strain of superciliousness of all authority, which was I Yorke has discovered a new meaning in the Bill bf RiPt . s; aad not directly in favour of his crude conceptions. He . because the Bill of Rights declares h tit.:4 t o a f Member rliaie o n f t ra o ru r l w l' o lt r .°t spoke of " Mansfield , Kenyon , and su ch others ;" cannot btheeoreuiensti h ° e ae has sa y pi w ently re eo o ncluded, P that n f the tient& are but even in the case when Holt's authority was cited,i i pro hibit e d from exercisin g their understanding, for the purpose ot the principle did not apply ; he had only considered Gentlemen who sit i n discussing or censuring the conduct of the the excess of power, leaving the exi stence of that that House," &c. power out'of the account, and • in fact taking it for With these observations, it might be true, that .granted. The pamphlet of the Honourable Baronet Mr. Yorke might have some reason to fi nd •fault ; I appeared to him a feeble work ; it w as a bad ar g u- but it did not appear that the House had any •such ment, and the Srgument was bedly handled. This reason. Another paragraph had 1. en much ipsisted was the only fault which he (Sir John) was inclined to upon, at p:vge 55 ,ending by saying . (peaking of The find with the author ; he would haa;e let it die—(Hear) House of Commons) that they, " inflated with their he would have left it to ' perish among the common high-blown fanciful ideas of Majesty, and tricked pamphlets that every day saw perish ; the arguments out in the trappings of royalty, think privilege and were old sand had:been exploded long since ; it co , n- protect i ons b eneat h t h e i r di gn ity ; assume the awerd tamed false stateniente and Misquotations ;he silo= of prerogative, and lord it equally over the King and traduce his Own judgment in thinking it mischievous. the People." Now, he must say, whatever might (Hear.) The first page contained a quotation from be attemptelin the way of ridicule, that,he agreed Blackstone, as if he had been in favour of its princi- with an Honourable 'and Learned Gentlethan below pies . ; bite it should be remembered that Blackstone him (Sir Samuel Romilly), that he did : not clearly was one of those Judges who remanded Crosby. He understand this passage. Yet, whatever these words expressly stated,. that the Courts of Justice had power were, every one of them, lie believed, had been before over all commitments but those of the Houses of Par- used by the Honourable Baronet, in his place in thot liament during their sitting. The Right Hon. Gen- House, when he moved for 'the liberation -of Gale tleman then declared himself perfectly indifferent as Jones. He was sure they had been used by him on to what might be the pleasure of the House in its fur- other occasions. He did not state that as a justific:ae ther proceedings on the subject, considering the pub- tion, but only as to the fact of their not being unpre lication of the Baronet as a very dull pamphlet. He cedented. As far as lie could make out their mean did not often intrude upon the attention of the House, ing by the context, he presumed that by " assuming hut he could not forbear expressing his opinion on the the sword of prerogative, and lording it equally over present occasion, holding the privileges of the House the King and people," was meant the power assumed to be essential. They had exercised them hitherto by the House of Commons, of punishing where the according to their discretion. In individual cases, law did not order it, and of doing acts beyond what sometimes the offending party had been reprimanded,' the King or the people had the power to do. That and at other times committed. The- Honourable . was the best interpretation that he could put upon it. Member who brought forward this business seemed The passag e might perhaps be o ff ensive ; and they; not to have made up his mind as to what ste p s he were told, that it was the more injurious as it was ought to take ; but without meaning to cast any re- unintelligible. There might really be some inge flections on that Honourable Gentleman, he must say chitty in this reasoning—but he could not perceive that before he-brought such a question as the present why the House should be the more inclined to punish into discussion in the Hhuse, it was his duty to con. when.sitting in judgment on a passage they did not rider it, not only in an abstract point of view, but in all clearly understand. It was called scandalous and B its circumstances ; and what was 'his ulterior object. bellows. He spoke in the hearing of learned persons He should, for that purpose also, have consulted with when lie said he believed, that to be scandalous, it other Members, of experience in the practice of Parlia must be false, and to be libellous, a bad intention menti of full knowledge upon such subjects, and who must be shown ; which he had not yet heard urged. could look a little farther into all the probable conse- He could see no right to infer any bad motive in this quences of such a discussion. By such means a wiser publication, unless it were put on the word " /?eiht," mode of proceeding might have been instituted , and for which, he declared, lie could tied no ground.— the Honourable Member himself, as well as others, Then he came to the second part of the proposition, relieved from their present state of uncertainty. which stated it to be a letter " reflecting on the just Lord FOLKSTONE was desirous of addressing : , ars and privileges of this )louse ;" so that the the House, as, notwithstanding so g rave an maim- i i H ouse were called upon in one resolution net only to rity as that of the Right Hon. Gentleman, he must decide tipon the paper, but upon the justness of the differ from, him, both with respect to the Paper it- rights, against the possession of which the letter ar self, and the question of the right of the Ho use, on 1 elle .Lt Let e . Gentlemen fairly consider the nature of which the Paper complained of trea ted. The Noble I b 'the whole paper. It was written by an Honourable Lord thought he had a right to complain of the Hon. I Member to his Constituents, explaining more fully to Gentleman who moved this question, not having I h ad the nature and extent- of his arguments than he stated his views as to his farther proceedings. At first I had done in his place, or than they could have been he was content with the mere reading of the publics- repotted to his Constituents. He did not know to Lion ; and then h^ appeared much alarmed ; so much what extent Members were to be permitted to publish so, that he said 11;s hair stood on crnd when he read it; 1 their sentiments. The Standing Order forbad the but what crime ii. contained he had not stated. Every r publication of their deba'es ; nevertheless that prac- Gentleman on that side had taken a di ff erent view of .1 Lice had been long connived at. In former times it the matter; nee confessed that the Paper did not in- I could not be considered such a grievance, since /in volve the right of the House, one thought it did ; I drew' lifdrvel wrote a full account of their proceedings others entertained different opinions. Some charged 'to his constituents every week. This ought, there- it with falehood ' • add the Right Hon. Gentleman ', fore, to be taken into view. He should be sorry arraigned' it of bad taste and bad authorship. It was to pass sentence for a libel, merely oh what he called scandalous and libellous ; but no p roofs of this : recollected to have fallen from a person in the were given ; and while its bad taste was censured, t ' hurry of debate—but mieht not a person, in pub was admitted that it could cie no harm. It was lishin sentiments .delivered in the House, supply charged with want of candour ; but that w a s not., h : g what was a little defective, and strengthen What w:‘: sufficient groundfor the House to proceed Upon. Thee too weak,? He must dissent from a decision till he Right Hon. Gentleman should, when he mule that • knew what was the meaning 6f their authority and } lei. charge . have appeared candid himself; but that was vileges. He found privilege derived rronvirivatunt at, rot . perfectly the case, when he referred to one eeeolu- I a priieite law, an exemption from the power of others bon of the House, which the paper stated to have been i —and this must be mosteaccurate.ly defined in its na drawn up by Sir E. Coke, in 1601. One Hon. Member • titre and its extent. What was to be found of privileges had complained of the expresions respecting the legal as anciently claimed Fieedom of speech, and free. power of the Speaker's warrant, and called it a gross don from arrest for Members, and ler their scrvetels, breach of privilege. The jet of the argument lay in when Coining to orreturnieg from Parlkunent, except the merits of that statement. If the Hon. Baronet ing peece. Vrivilege was only exemption, but not power; in cases of treason, felony, and breaches of the (Sir F. Burdett) was at all light in his a rg ument, he 45 object clearly was only to prevent obstruction. If must state what he had stated on that point. Before Gentlemen called it a libel, they sh oul d consult some pushed beyond this, it became dangersons ; -but what aethorities. If they turned to law boo ks, to Hawkins was oow claimed was different, and contrary .to the or Coke for instance, to learn what were the requi definition of the word. It had been, stated, that it was 'sites if a legal warrant, they would ind that it must as necessary to protect the Members frem libel, as from hissing and hooting them; hut hissing and boot :have Itiv:tur authority, moat be under ha nd and se a l, i and must he for a lawful case ; and then, when they ing were actual and undeniable interruptions and ob found the present cause deficient in these respects, they structiOns. • The Hon. Baronet had not denied the r could not find any great crime in the statement of right of removing all obstructions. The Learned • the Hon. Baronet. One had laid great stress ou the . Mister of the Rolls lied maintained the doctrine Mie n* of the word 4 . , resist ;" and a string of passages your of the necessity of the power Of the House, but* had been read to put an impropercenstruction on the 130 X q.i a iitivileie. His Lordship wanteil • to, know why Meaning of that word; eif the ceetext were fairly .Lord Chief dustiCie De Grey, too, considered, it Wliiilit Mittt i it was necessary. ar- that the %wird o mos sy , i main ame t • d the • it ' d t enable the House neeess }atm or er o was connected with the words".lega-; . . 1 " and' that •lt . was only by a forced interpretation that any thing etie - - ( yk•Derform its fuse tions 3,444,01x:4y denied. Housewe but legal resistance could be tan as the writer's in- churned of removing obstructions ; mid the had tention. It spoke of legally resisting, of resisting gone on very well without claiming motoupon former occasions so as eras the case in the instance ce Stock dele.and. of Reeves, where no step - of this rt was taken. Another point stated was, thatit wRa neces hary that the House should be the judge of its own • privileges ; but the question was, whether they had a right - to judge whether such and such an Act was a breach- of vtiiiit privileges:rit was argued. that. all Courts had power to punish for contempt, and that, therefore, ,that House had such power. Contempt was Obstreicticki Or contumacy., Lord Kenyon had said that ccuttempts might be. eonsmiti•ed by persees out of the Court, Or its immediate verge • . and lie statedthe-case of one Bildmote, a. Shetifif, ;iho: was punished for contempt in consequence of a neglect cif his silty, which was a different case. tingley, the printer, refused to answer %sections in the Court, he. caukohe held himeelf liable to be tried by big,, s, , :Sid he was. thereupon committed to prison,. eeheee he remained two ;ears, alweye -persevering, tie his causal, and actually publiehingfiF4sh offences - . Yet, finally, the Attorney : General moved for his release oq thegretund that he • had.already suffered a greater ponielement than would hive been inflicted upon him, hasthe•beesi convicted and sentenced ler his offenote•Novi from the co - iiduct ef.Bingley while in e onfineneentehiacontempt and grevegreetee an geoter e e e That i l e -a , a t e h w e i C s o .s u P r in t c o wilat fKinaPg'sl,94eg"'4ecll•tve tlse snlPtitnesaentetl; atad in There were regultr modies.4 pr-oeeeding. Hart anti White, the.printer and editor -of a newspaper rtlle4 ihe Adependent Whig; were not consmittedby . ehe COure of King Deitch for a contempt; they wc-re prosecuted; For a libel on. that Court, found guilty byea. Jury, sen; tented, and penished... In the same way that House had often proceeded. ,It. was said. that tlere was in consistency in Sir Francis Burdett* eoting the committal of Mr.'Heilei.Senelen and. Giaterel Ga. vering ; but in their cases, there-was an evidank 'con tempt and "Obstruction. —pleor, hear.). House was then a Court of Inquiry,. and . penished titem.for their prevarication which was essential to the prow Cation of that Inquiry. He would say,.that their be. ing able to inflict that very punishment furnished- ae argurrieeelu eupportof hiVonslpsion, that their ;sows existed only against obstructiees. Punishment for a specific, time v IL power long sleet given up by that House, and note the cpfineueent ceased at an act jourOnetit : a' proof trial the povier was not for the execution of punishment. eThey had abandoned alI claims to punish' for a yeare or a week, or a day.. A. man - might at the commencement of a Parliament be imprisoned and remain, ltere, : ;Parliament sitting, for some years, if he made no submission ;.if at the end of a.. Session, his confi nement might he but for, a day, hoi , eii.ei;',gteett his effenee or eetitempt might be. This shewed that the Houseleidno power, to confine . 041 punish, except in • cases of obstructions. If stAnis ston were• made, the, party., was generally , released : but it was vexy,.o4C.i4tleeea_eivßeetereleet te . eee . i s h. ment 'foe lihetec.' that itsduration should-he:so un certain, and ill proportioned offence. .4 The House assume (iaid the Noble Lord) - this power, and we dispute it : and we make our stand on the law of the land, on Magna Charm." The latter ex pressly stated, that " No man :hall be Om or imyi toned, or disseised of his freehold, or outlawed, or banished, or any ways destroyed ; nor will we pass. upon him, or commit him to prison, unless by the legal judgment of hit Per', or by the Law of the Land."— He had, therefore, a good right to say to Gentlemen ••••• 44 Shew me the law, and the foundation on which this assumed power stands." It lies with those Gen tlemen to make that clear. He h .d other authorities, and recognitions, besides those he had quoted. He had resolutions of all the branches of the Legislature, the authority of Lord Chief Justice Holt, and even of the Crown, in the opinion of King Charles 1. In 1612 the House of Commons voted, that no Court of justice had any cognizance on matters that came un der their autle)rity ; but this was at a time when they were assuming every other power to themselves. The Noble Lord then quoted the Resolution of the House of Lords, in 1701, understood to be drawn up by Lord Somers, le which the right of creating new pri vileges by either branches of tee Legislature was con demned. He did not go to the Lords' Journals to find the privileges of the Commons ; but it was well to see what their opinions were at that time ; and their decision he thought would he found correct. On what ground was the power claimed ? It might be said of the House of Lords, that it was e Judicial Court, but that would not do ; for they claimed this power in their legislative, as well as in their judici d capacity. The - Commons House could only claim it in the. tormer capacity ; and if both these branches so claimed it, why might net the ether branch, namely, the King ? Were the two Homes to have a stronger defence than the Crown ? They had already the same power to order proses iiions as the Crown had ; and why should they fora grt ater authority than for the removal -of obstructions, ender which head, he thought the case which led to th;s discussion did not fall ? The Right Honourable Gentlentae had said. that the right wal„fotinded on law, and exercised as long back as occasion had called . for the exercise of it ; and so the House were to determ i n e t he law, by a . long and undisputed exercise. lie went farther, and said, it had been exercised ever since libel. were 'written. This the Noble Lord denied. They Might have, been written ever since the art of prin. ting had been discover.el,;' but it was long after that great disCovery before they could find any record of such power being exercised. Th e first record was of the case of 'Hall, in the reiga of Eiizabetle In the cese of Brass Crosby, the Lerd Mayor, and Alderman Ofiver,lviembees of Parliament, the House comniio ed . ifeein both, and the Court refused their a p p ar p t h y had cation. his ß r U i t gh w t h t e: h it is . wHa!thseaais Corpus, nothing, that thes t m n fi p ur nothing, if it were also contended th at he could not have [fie merits of his case argued before the Courts of Law. Wla w that it, indeed, to he deeme d sound aw that the law of Parliarisent,' should be undefined The e n a e n d t t unknown to all except ter Parliament men ? House would recollect that "they attempted in et . to commit Wilkes. In 1680, there WAS a remark . • feet a p is o l w e er i . nsi T ait h c e e H ef o th us e t s 'a ti t c t c l e at ss tionif ethweotedexermcias:roflLbet.lll;s4 and committed one Coleman, of Devonshire. 'found they were, mistaken in the man. in this the right man, one Stowell, who resisted ; and . dilemma they hit - upon the expedient of T oting 1 .2 7 , sick, and adjourned the business to a dis ff tant e d w which never came. Crosby and Oliver's o enc oen i s 4 the release of a .printer.—Virtlkes refusine to a ttend' the House al -erred till Friday, tl.ough ifs a and then took J