Star. — London, England, 1810-03-13 00:00:00

Lora ARCHMA.LD whatever might be' the Hon. Baronet's /e m ei shillings damages might be given could , • ,urt of Record ; the argument came into the if • s yllogism, and the necessary conclusion was, I e e • 'le pow er of fine and impritortment wits not in 1-I.le se. No right to flee was assumed. Why C „ t he greater power ret ained, when the Smaller :s admitted to be illegal ? Why was the maxim - • a nd re ason violated ? " Cui minus non con - Val t Ci MajUS non convenit." The warrant of com. oitta l w as illegal in all its parts, but eminently so is • onclusior. legal warrant most conclude c l id, t he words, "till the party be delivered by due coi ...t: of law :" this warrant ends with the words • d u ring the pleasure of the House." He (Sir Fran- B ur dett) valued the rights of that House ; but from whitever part of the Constitution an exertion of arbitrary power came, it was his du t y , it was the so lemn and lofty duty of every Englishman, to avow himself hostile to it. There were, in a matter of this two obvious questions of justice. The first, Crime, or no crime ?" The next, " Committal ?" The House, by such proceeding, involved the as and Leislv sem p t ion o f Judicial, . Executive, powers • but this was in the very. teeth . of l g aw. ati In e P° 9 t he due administr ation of the law, st typtrided th a t the same men shall not take two steps together ; one set find the bill, another decide on the fact, another the law ; but that House, which administers no oath, which squares itself by no form, which makes no pre vious examination of the fact, jumps at once . upon its ' dangerous and most alarming sonclusion, stud finds the accused guilty. What magic was them to Tie wad p r ivile g e, to make the forms of - the - wise .and guarded laws of their ancestor s worthless, to g ive them an instantaneous and institutive. knowledge of the truth of the case, which might have been unheard of b y t h e majority. of the House till the moment of , the charge, which was also the moment of judgment, and the moment of condtelition. Who was to de file- who had attempied - ter define, the privileges to which the House laid claim; or what was the value or the cogency of undefined privileges ? How was Lie accused to avoid his crime if the definition of Pri vilege, if the line that marked off vice from virtue, was allowed to be so =dilute, so wavering, so shadowy as to be indistinct to the legislators themselves. The prerogative of the Monarch was infringed by this as sumption. Whatever encroached on the liberty of the subject was an infriarment of the prerogative that was bound to protect it ' • and it ill became that House to give even a colour for insulting the popular liberty, or acting the oppressor when the power was in their hands; but it was fortunate for even that House, that there was a superior wisdom to correct the obit quities into which the possession of exorbitant power might betray the best 01 men ; the law of the land was paramount, no resolution of the House could be valid, where it was incoosistentwith the recognised law. A distinguishedlalyer had smitten an occasion where the authority of the House was brought forward, that *he cared no more for the resolutions of that House,' than the decrees of a parcel of drunken sailors." If it was to be contended: that the ,yones pf .tie House were valid against all sense. end. all authority of law, then Mr. Jones must remain in prison ; but if they could be convinced that they had exercised power be yond privilege, they would be eager to retract the measure in which they were implicated, and agree vith him in the motion which he would make, that elk. John Gale Jones should then be discharged." Mr. W. WYNNE could not help taking notice of the inconvenient situation in which the House was placed by the Motion of the Honourable Baronet. Had a proposition been made in the Lintel way, a pressive of the contrition of the person who was under the censure of t'he House, he should feel no difficulty in agreeing to his discharge. . But he could have wished that that proposition had not been prefaced by such a. speech as that which had fallen from the Honourable Baronet. It had been contended by the Honourable Baronet that the House had not the right to commits an individual for a libel ; and any imprisonment by their minim . such an offence was unconstitutional, and contrary to the due course of law, and became more aggravated from the time of coutinement not being distinctly defined. This argu meat was, however, in direct opposition to the prat. tice of every Court of Justice, every one of which re served to themselves the power of committal for any contempt that might be shewn towards their proceed ings, and on such occasions it was pot at all customary to stipulate the time of confinement. The Honoura ble Baronet had. also argued, that the House had no right to commit any individual, except one of their own. Members, for a breach of privileges : there were numerous instances, however, in which recourse was had to such a practice, and more especially in early ' times.—(Here the. Honourable Gentleman cited se veral precedents. ).Till the period of the long Par liament, the right of the House in such cases, and the due limits of its authority, had not been ascertained. From that time it had been established, that the power of committing to confinement any person who had been guilty of a breach of the privileges of th House, was necessary to the very existence of Parlia merit, for the preservation of its authority,.and as a safeguard for its Members. The Honourable Baro • net had also observed, that the privilege of the House ought net to extend beyond the preservation of its servants. A libel on any Member, for any thing he had done in the execution of his duty, was to be con , sidered equally culpable as an assault on the pemon . ot tie !Amber, and was not alone an offence against the individual, but against the whole body, conse quently a sort of contempt of Court, and liable to be punished in the same way as in any of the Courts of Westminster, whicha.sitting, would not proceed by action, as sug g e s ted by the Honourable Batotiet, but b _ y its own authority, and corninit the offender witout hesitation. The Honourable Baronet said 'he wished t to put th e individual, the subject of his remarks, com ?kitty out of the question. It was to 'be regretted be had not done so, and reseived his observations tar after the enlargement of the offender. And even now , it was to be hoped he would, in: 'the fu's(instAticti: move Jolt ve for the discharge of Mr. Gale 304 end substitute th#4l some Resolutions deOaratory of the plinee2 Ales he wi s h e d to inculcate . "Whatever might have ' been his (Mr. W.' s ) opinion if another Motion had been made, die ade in the pr ese nt case he must give his vote Resolution, which after the :Sentiments ; th • *it had been uttered by the Honourable . Baronet, wuold only-go tosithvert those :principleiwhich had mr s practice for three hundred Yeats, wild th-cerepni.nvriesgPeesnastYthe6"."firtullse7:f P2tllll°re"ittlel4: tiuti ..61* any personal or casion. There 'Justice hid given . opposition - opi nion of the House. Hie recollected an instance in the Court of King's Bench, where a decision was made on a question on the right of voting, and that right had been substantiated in opposition to the opi nion of the Parliamentary Committee. Notwithstand ing this, however, he was not so fully convinced of the justice of the Hon. Baronet's remark, as to be in duced to vote in favour of his Resolution. Tho ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that the Hon. Baronet had stated two cases, in which Courts of Law had determined against the authority of the House of Commons ; those cases, however, were not at all analogous to the present. The first was, as to the validity'of a. patent, in which a bill of exception had been tendered to the Judge, which he refused to sign ; he (the Attorney-General) could not, however, see how the refusal of the Judge to sign the bill could be considered as a contempt of that House. It was true, there was an Act of Westmin ster that required bills of exception to be signed, and a remedy was given if not signed. But as the judge had refused to sign it in the execution of his judicial duties, that circumstance could not be considered as' a violation of the privileges of the House. Another case which he had cited, as bearing on the present ,question, was the Banlauty case ; but he did not state to the House the reasons why it did apply. The facts were, - there was an indietent preferred against Ed ward Knowles,, for murdw. when a plea of abate ment was ma de, on the ground of his real title being the Earlof Banbury. The Attorney-General brought the.question before the House of Lords, wl.en it was deplored that he (Knowles) had ho right to the title. A replication was then made, which was demurred to, and the . Conn of King'4ll;e-nch decided, 'that the replication was . bad, and the demur . gocid. This was not, however, in contradiction to any accredited de cision of the House of Lords. A Committee had been appointed, which made a report, that Knowles was entitled to the title of the Earl of Banbury.-.- After which the House had nearly cometo a contra ry resolution. The House of Lords afterwards ar raigned Lord Chief Justice Holt for his conduct, when he refused to assign any reason, asserting . that he was not bound to give reasons for any opinion pronounced in a Court of Justice. If so minded, the House of Lords might have sued out a writ of er ror ; but a judge being appointed, he was not bound by law to assign reasons for his decisions. And this was the ground on which the Hon. Baronet con tended the House had no right to commit from their own authority. That they had such a right, however, was not without positive authorities, which .had been derived in Courts of Law. Supposing this per , son (Gale Jones) had no other remedy than by a writ of Habeas Corptir, and was brought up to the Court, the Judges would not decide what were the privi leges Of the House, but whether the 'House had a right to commit to confinement any person infringing these privileges ? If they did not recognize that power, trey would discharge the prisoner ; but if they did recognize the right, then of course they' would confirm the authority of the House. They could no more question the right, than if a man had been committed by the Court of Common Pleas, Court of Exchequer, or Court of Chancery ; and having decided the right, which in these Courts was -.indisputable, they could not question the ground of 'committal. The case of Mr. Wilkes too, to which ithe Honourable Baronet alluded, when Crosby, who was Lord Mayor, committed the servant of the House to prison, and was himself afterwards committed for' a breach of privilege, was not at all applicable, as Crosby was nut committed as a Member of the House, but as an individual acting in a distinct ca pacity. The argument which the Honeurable Ba ronet had also used, comparing the House to a Cor porate Body, acting under byoaws of its own, was equally fallacious. Mr. Crosby, acting as Lord Mayor of London, committed a servant of the House -uilt breach were to prison, and was, consecp ty; . guilty of 3 - of privilege, for which he was hitnielf committed. He afterwards brought the subject before the Court of common Pleas, when Lord Chief Justice de Gray gave it as his opinion, that in order to see the autho ! rity of the House of Commons to C011)141% persons to confinement for breaches of privileges, recourse should be had to Coke's Report, which stated that such assembly had authority to commit, and haid a right, without doubt, to commit to prison any person guilty of prevarication or any breach.of privilege. It is stated also that Arthur Long, a Member of that', House, was committed to the Tower for a libel on the House, and that it was laid down at the Law of the land that the House hp 4 the power of committing perions guilty of any descrioion of contempt. Nothing could supersede theirnnthority, nor could any Cori* discharge or bail the person under the adjudication of the House of Cdllllll l / 1 1S. In the case of Crosby, the subject was argued most warmly, and every possible objection was taken to his commitment, which volt pre4ely the same words 4 those used in the, tpse of Gale Jones, namely, " YOu are to receive into !cur custody the body of whom you are to keep In safe custody during the pleasure of the House„ itch" the decision of the Court was in confirmation of House. Adorer any, maintenance of its privileges; witlitifit,a k of its dignity and a dereliction of its duty. well knew the consequence of confiding such 7 ; into the hands of an General. He knew it lime,' experiende. He had - once the honour of being api :pointed Chairman of a Committee, in order to assemo. tarn who was the author Of a libel against the dignity of that House. The libel proved to be the production of Mr. Reeves, a friend .of his own, and vent the length of stating, that the-. Monarch was the chief prop and strength of the Constitutiehi the root on which its vigour depended, and which might remain fsgslii and vigorous, though .even the trunk and bronchia; were demolished. This he •in the House moved ten . be a gross and scandalous libel, mid was proceeding to take future steps in =sequence, when one of the Gentlemen opposite thouglztproptr to suggest, that the. further prosecution ibisild be handed over• to his Majesty's Attorney C.Oesetal.. The suggestion was adopted, and the antbevot What hadleen , Mously condemned in the House as a gross and scan- Mous libel, was =quitted - 3n Court ? This .was the tonsequenee.of tranzinittin the defence of their insult ed privilege:into the handsof an Attorney.-• He was still more averse doctrine which he heard Hon. but le :ton the proceedings of the . . In the taw thnt night promulgated by the .. Baronet, ..o King Benjamin Florer....l4e.res,guirty of libel; did not hesitate to call the House of Commons an infe against a Member of the Souse, 0d who was fined nor branch of the Legiblitturei Many opinions might £lOO, and ordered to be ged six months, and certainly exist est.° the policy until he paid the fine ; he' 'brought up to the; of improving the Representation, b P, King's Bench by a Writ of i'fakas Cellos, when his ' ment ; but that sitting as they dr appiteatiOn for discharge was refused, atid it was tint- • si c knowledged.Representaiives nimonsly agreed that the House of Commons hacttbri should be deemed by the / power .to commit for,ogrenges against themselves and inferior importance, was a!7 tt waijaid down As A maxim, that the adjudication, garprixed.hira. Proceeding.from c'it the Hence orris Com Mens vies a conviction, .` it .did, it.could only have been ne Court eotlld discharge Or bail the offender. The offence of Mr. Jones ought - Under these circoteiterices - he, the Atterney ttjetrenti, dered. What was the nature trusted the 3.-1011 W would negative the Resolution of seemed he was unaninvinsly the Hpaciniable EaFongt, no w,indeedithe entire feeling . U CREtVEt r. - . hisinvonr,provided , he couldbe. by which the motion *as his offencel—Why, stitjcct to be' mooted er• dcrtairr. conduct • itaa Ibsen or bad . nnd. ininakikx .of MAK: Grii1141146,.. ' at the - detriteiif an which lin auld not thin degree %leen-ar r . To lutve houghtiteard the opening of the •stamier, one . would have tb wus most ezmezne: 1 46- itead - r oe " (says the Elm. Member for Cambridge-. he indeed, shire, turning to the Clerk), ..e is not now, . ~ Member for Cambridgeshire (said Mr. SHZIIIDAN), . and I hope, for the hostour of the people of England, decisions of that House, either to the disinislon of ' I lie will not be again reterned-- 4, Read me a certain an ale-house; or the bye--laws. of a Corporation; het Liege of a certaitOchapter in the Bill of Rights.' had merely alluded to what was matter of historical I Now the. poss.age which he had desired.io pompously fact by way of illustration. The. Attorney General Ito be read, merely directed that no proceeding of had said, he had not heard the former part of the 1 that House shouldbe questioned in any Courb or dis.t lioepusable Baronet's speech: one would have ima- i cussion out of doors. Was this meant to bar all dis gined, indeed, from his misrepresentation, that he 1 cussion, all consideration of politics out of doors?. bad jest heard as much of the beginning as the end. ' Unless it meant this, it colld mean nothing ; it • Although he was disposed fully to vote for the ac- i must prevent a report of any of their proceediugs ; quittal of Mr. Jones, still he certainly was not proc- ' it' must cant the Order to its utmost extremity. pared to go the whole length of the principles-of the Nov to prove how conveniently it might be on. Hon. Baronet. He could riot, certainly, say that cos* onally • relaxed, he would merely state. the, the House had- no right to commit fora contempt.— "oontents of a requisition which an Hon. ' Ba- He confessed, at fl st, when he heard the doctrine, I ronet had shewn him, ' as having been served he was inclined ' utterly to reject it; but, on reflection . on him, requiring his attendance it a Court of Com since, and a serious search into cases, he was much ! mon Council—he did not think it would be disorderly shaken in his first opinion, and not disposed so deter- : to mention the name of the Hon. Gentleman, not minately to entertain it as atefirst. The Noble Lord certainly as a Member of that Honse, but as an Al. here quoted many cases, to shetv that there had been. derman—he was a very constliutionar Man ; it was Si; many commitments for libel before the Revolution. William Curtis. (if loud lanh) The requistion de- On a commitment then, however, the general way ' sired his attendance at a Court of Common Council, )iflisi, to direct the' Attorney-General to proceed by I to t , consider of the prodigal and i)ro,fligate expendi. ,:process in the Courti against the offender. The right i cure oldie public money by the House of Commons, 4.. cciiiririittal had been 'urged as a necessary pnvi, ' in the gutut of an annuity to Lord Wellington."-- ` e; to pteirent the interrnptinn -of public business.{ Now if the Bill of Rights was to be so closely adhered othil SPAS it good.reason. • Ile hoped the House rto in every ease, why seas such a notice as this made -*Amid see whether the case in question Was one in"' public with impunity ? What, shall that House vitsich the Mel vies likely to interrupt a MeMber in i thunder its vengeance on a • poor debating club, when the disehargeof his duty. If nor,. though the privi.: lit would not dare to raise its arm against a ' wealthy l iege certainly applied peremptorily,. still the punish- . corporation ? If this distinction is to be practised and ment should be proportioned to the offence. endured, h..... there be an end then to all that gives • ' The SOLICITOR GENERAL maintained that. our Coostitution value—repress all discussion—pro the' privilege of Parliament was a part of the law of - Whit any County Meetings—silence every controul the . land, as • recognised by Magna Chanta.--The on the part, of the people, and by that Act deprive I only question was, whether that which Mr. fones t Parliament of the great stimulus by which it is had done was a contempt of the authority of the i forced to do its duty. If this principle of the Bill House ? for if it was, he maintained that .the House of Righti is to he-acted on at all, common justice maintained bed legal power to commit him ; and he kaintained requires that its extension .should be general; and that nothing could be more clear than that the con-. if that is'once' the case, you rob theyeotile of their 'duct of Mr. Jones did amount to a contempt of the oily consolation under suffering--theithest prop and 'House, and consequently his commital was legal. choinpion—their chief resource under all the miseries Mr. SHERIDAN had heard, during the whole of misrule and misgovernment, a free Press. • An at eight, of cases in the earlier periods of our history; in : tempt, of this He h: - of description had been made some time . . the reigns of' the Tudors and the Plantageneti , and. since. _ ' the Henrys, and Edwards, before the Reforma , ' How, but ' tion and after the Revolution ; now. he wished to that the ex . draw their attention to one simple and obvious, case, ed to er that of Mr. Jahn Gale Jana . , ?a langh ). It had been mans ; "aid, that it would be wrong . to think of releasing Mr. a 4T o sion . Jones, on account of the principles contained to the gre7 Cow; speech of the Honourable Baronet,. lest the act of Ii- in os 4u2pi ,- beration might seem a consequentol'ofthe doctrine, or' sot ties, a concession to its validity. Now he sliOuleboertaioly an the t, vote for the release of Mr. Jones;.but he should nut : P411= 1 414 do it by any means on the principles contained in test ; fet if .the Honourable Baronet's speech ; he did not see serable r' .indeed what the abstract arguments of his speech cach 1 had to do with the liberation of Mr. Jones.— well as poor : Why should he be sacrificed to a theory with which 'weak ; if it u he had no concern ? Why should he fall an un- contest against the poor i. date willing martyr to doctrines which he never propa- not commence against a wealthy Corporation. liti gated, nor perhaps entertained ? Did he ever say, ,der thii consideration of the subject, he should move with the Honourable Baronet, that the House had an Amendment. The Amendment, perhaps, had not . no jurisdiction over any except its 'own Members ? .Mr. Jones humbly confessed his guiltrat the bar, ought To this indeed, and to this in its full extent, went the more regularly to have been preceded by a petition ; arguments of the Honourable Baronet. (Hear, hear.) but this, in his idea, was obviated by a personal sub. It was in vain to deny it. What ! said he, condemn mission. He therefore shoved as an Amendment.. a man without a trial, examination, or Jury 1 impri- 66 That Mr. John Gale Jones, having been now im am a British subject without•the verdict of his peers 1 prisoned sin ce the 21 s t of Fe b ruar y , and having ez. 'This was indeed the whole tenor of his speech, bp; pressed his-contrition 4tlhe time for the offence s 0 . 1 Iwlth mach tenor the motion had nothintseltateve! 3p now ,di ... ~ . 4its kit merely west 'to propose the release of liir. The SPA . pit.- before he put the question, eon. Jones, in consequence of his having been eotifiNistil ..sidered it his duty,ito confirm the staters:ilk of the Icing enough for the offence. The Hon.outable 14. Right non, GaqtlesPan, that the uniforms courts ronet had said, that tlier . House &mild have Wore pro- pursued by the House in such cases was not to dis perly desired the Attiarn' evideneralto proceed against charge Any individual . who might have incurred it: the offender by emcee at law - . • This was a practj . displeasure, until he _applied by: petition, expressing he never could give his sanction to; and in the adot contrition for.bis offence. tion of which, he had no letitation in saying he On the question being put on the amendment, thought the House would be dishonoured. It never The ' CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could delegate into - ••7 other hands than its own, the rose to state the grounds upon which he should dis degitati'on - • roam the amend liould a -tryst nui, sent 5.,.._ the original motion, and from .-.... d awn of theßight Hon. Gentleman. He _ not agree in the motion of the Hon,. Baronet, when he Ifiill;lected it with the arguments !Iy*Wlikh it was sup ported ; nor could he concur . ut, the amendment, iselten be considered the circumst ances under which t4e question had been brought forward. Every Ho , pourable Member who followed the ,Holy. Baronet * bad abandoned his argument, and his Learned Friend b4sl clearly ihewn the privilege of thit House as ex ' iced in the case under consideration, was WS con. to Av. Meg. The NIA 'Honourable leraan .Jul shewn his disposition to call upon the House to exercise its right in *Us case of the libel, which .he As brought under its . .C . ozance., °ugh I t i didQQt think it especfient fOkibi ROG= to • ins rein tinonglit for i ward. Si Attar Gentle. men. Cerr a t he -, the result of OW' . .•. l i - th e ca s e *tided .to by . ,light Hon. Gent . . -... by the ac ,quittal of :.the Party, was .a prtashit ihe House did not always come wellUp,r of . siickibusiness. It was iinnOcessify to go, into tie argitment foduded upon che . artiCle of to Bill 'of lights ; fin' though no such article existeicl l i . 4 House trust hive the power of p uj iishinic , sudiQfferKei As had a tendency to bring it :Zito --- The The Right Hon. Gintleman had i,proceed Im. contn;ipt.,, asked wig they tioad. against the Common Council,2 liut that was a Body Assembled. and for a 4gal - and Pali; - would, be scrupulous4—r with of bodies • Lrth s leztA th‘ .HpHoUrahle ' Mr. CitttVrt std • toration histogram down to the Revolutiori;:,;" 4 i ! ` 44 ., se extant el ;. ones imprisonnritt .4111 ,rfmrintstsids ~ hottltvar Biitee Revrittition, lie aud7it . •as a stil tobeq Place. An' • ilie•eigre 4 ' girbvtiter *;•,- iigs Übe Erkigfin‘di timr • Housa . b r n gtlg Awnie girs4:hetst out pi -rapt , . I Pees44 ar sl o ll6ll,**filA .0 4 4 . 1 4:ir 'been' moi 6tfilg gagist iha.gtt: a es. - 111 C irula for She • lib.. chssed'al ration of Mr. Jones. caw MALE/MILTON saia, that Lord FOLIEEern derfnikid *n on :Move? be hia eßinios; of the oi flout havlnkteedutred t%e cases isy the is politics, he must acjuit him' ~of Attoinie, fairtair ac= inappliafile f ; he interested motive on the preient oc, bad only used them in - order Miff aritudents were many cases *here Courts of which, .at the time, had branched out of their tonal- n redress in opposition to the opi. filtration. The Hon. Baronet had pot compared the .• He had not then the honour ofn seat in that but it was it pie close of the American war 4...Pree4t.,vies tried. Lord North attempt. excluae rinkr thelptiblic from the. gouse of Coin. he 1/4 the power s and exercised for above ion an d . Fit half. .N'irhat was the consetjuence Cotnithaaits Parliament, and erry Village f r asi*lel . *.lwaces ; clubs asioN,l4 l and es, sprung .no the discussion pi s te Aghts; he exaininft • ifii4 . , *it grievanCes.,_ . 'rat not pent co mmellfg Slat dantiteinf COn• let ii..n"st.lrtsinfte its ph) :vrith every mi. LP 44); or is deterrmstd=oh Itch deli. letl4 boldly MR Ifs force *List the rich as as the poor, afOkieit the poWerful as well as the ; or, If it does not cid so, let it not wage that st against the poor man's liberty which it dens • • ,•• isibility, and perhaps policy 1 legal purppse s AO Parliament would be serupulous bye reform in Parlia, of iateifeling with the ;clarinet of such bodies in the they then were, the full and exercise of their eonatitutionel franchises. But if they Ltives of the People, •tliey should transgress the limits of their legal function; is Honourable Baronet. of and : presume to condeom the acts of the Legislature. principle which very much • such conduct *count to a gross breach of the ng.from the quarter whence privileges 4f P. .asinvicel. and would be visited by that een a lapse of forgeOulnass. House , against ilOyi bodies whatever. The case of the ought to be candidly cones- 13ritiih40;,ps was-nnt that of Constituted. ire of this offence, of which it body.. ..Theofoezeixo instance of an individual cow. consideredguilty, though m; s ktell:forout.Aretice ammust thn . psi t vligges of due int of the House appeared in House berv+schasged unioss PO kOndascended •to old be abstractedfrons the ar.. p-ese . ut a Ramon, .erfreising his contrition ; and if iiiou bad been ,preeded; but Alta individual to Ape the motions (erred , were to thy. be lead merely proposed, pee int. a pet tioß ,c t .t °sat description roauorrow, he BUIL :itti a . debating society.. ,was not aware..ot . ..g,44sivitren ,that could prevent his t two Members of Abet beiftg4echart •, • - stoti , illlo - offensive she• com st y,Atatest in . fliEPlei.sloo% that tho t oudasteseeioo,. which, .1)&13 OW .. bicif# 1144. s the cOisideratisa e.v this waspi!rr-trio bai!is. of Paslianaentkhasi been votit4V . that Houve.ta be ai evening society. It was a talsP, scafidelous, and oialictous of think severity was in, any Lori TEMPLE, if he could . not ceasent en the t,~t) Tl~l 1 . , ly ,s- that Per' and ty 0 lan( el.• ! E: to TO ct hii ed.— ht be orks ~ a!~ din lop►; Are 0 L 1 d, ba:. ll