Star. — London, England, 1810-05-11 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS, THURSDAY, MAYI S. The House, in a Cammittee of Privileges, was for a length of time employed in hearing Counsel, on the claims to the Banbury Peerage, and the Judges attended to deliver th e ir o pi n i on o n a point of law. Several private Bills were brought up from the Commons, and read a first time. Lord BORRINGDON moved for a number of papers Madre to the late Campaign in Spain and Portugal, The papers were accordingly ordered. The Bills on the Table were forwarded in their re.rectlve stages, after which the House adjourned. greater, expedieney of proeeeding by trial in cases similar to those to which it alluded, it prayed for the liberation of Sir Francis Burdett and John Gale June's, The Petition was ordered to - lie on the table. Mr. SHAW LEFEVRE then rose, and said hi held in his. hand another Petition, which he begged leave to offer to the House. It was voted at the same meeting, and transmitted at the sane time with the petition just received, and prayed for a reform in the representation of the United Kingdom in the Commons. House of Parliament. It was couched in decorous and respectful language. .It stated that the 'necessity of reform was more than ever apparent, since the commencement of the present war, It adver ted to the opinions expressed in former petitions and discussions on the subject, and also to the opinion ex pressed by the Speaker on the point of obtaining seats by purchase, and it prayed for the establish ment of triennial instead of septennial Parliaments. He moved that the Petition be now received, Mr. SIMEON seconded the motion ; but begged leave at the same time to observe, that although the requisition to the Mayor for convening the meeting at which the petitions were voted, had been signed by a number of respectable per Sons who were voters, yet the meeting consisted of the inhabitants at large, whether voters or not, who were very numerous ; so that the voice and opinion of the real electors might be completely drowned by the voice of those who had not the elective' franchise, which might mislead the ' House. There was nothing to guide the House but the names subscribed to the Petition; and here there were 'mly twelve names subscribed, though he did nett doubt but there was a numerous meeting of dif ferent descriptions, and many other voters amongst them. Those who had signed were very respectable in situation and character. He had noticed this dis' tinction. the rather because those who were in general the secret engines of these meetings (he did net say that was the case here, the requisition to the Mayor having been signed by a considerable number of vo ters) were desirous, for their own purposes, of bring ing in a multitude of persons, whether electors or not, to carry a favourite point ; not considering, or else intentionally concealing from the real Cectors, that it was an act of political suicide on their part to suffer their opinions to be swallowed up by a slew of hands ' of every person present, of whom, pe T :islp s , pine tenths might not be voters. This was an intimida.. tion of the real voters, who ota!taps durst not ex. press their opinions upon popular subjects, urged by artful demagogues, for fear of the multitude th:tt tar rounded them. He admitted, and gloried in the admission, that the humblest peasant as well as the wealthiest gentleman should be the object of our care and attention ; and that the property, and privileges, and life of the poorest man was as much entitled to protection, and had a right to petition this House, upon every thing he felt to be a grievance, as the richest : all he meant to argue was, that those wno were the legal electors were the constitutional judges of the conduct of their members, and of the represen tative body which they had elected : and that their political opinions, for the sake of themselves and of their own independence, ought to be kept separate, in order to preserve their character and weight in the Constitution ; for they would speak with more weight when they were to speak the pure voice of the consti tuent body. Mr. WARD said, it was impossible to suffer this petition to pass without some answer to what had fal len from the Hon. Gentleman. Was it possible that any Member of that House could say there was any man in this kingdom who had not as good a right to discuss and to sign a petition of that nature praying for a Parliamentary Reform, as any freeholder or bur gher in the kingdom, however legally authorised ?----- If any one argument could be stronger than another for Parliamentary Reform in the conatitution of that House, it would be the denial of that right to discus sion and petition in the persons who are not I reeholders nor butters in corporate towns. Would it be said that the inhabitants of those great and wealthy ruanu• ! facturing towns, Manchester, Birmingham, and others he could name, had no right to discuss nor to petition Parliament for keform, or for any other purpose in which their interests were concerned ? Mr. SIMEON rose to explain. He had been much misunderstood by the Hdnourable Gentleman. He had particularly guarded against the construction which had been put upon his words ; for he admitted in the fullest manner, and rejoiced in the right of every one, even the humblest Find lowest subject of the realm, to petition the House upon any subject of grievance, whether he was an elector or not ; but the opinion of the real Electors upon the conduct of their Representatives, or the House, for the sake of their own weight and consequence in the State, ought to be exercised as purely and distinctly as their. franchise was exercised in giving their Votes for electing a Member of Parlunent, and' that those who for pri vate purposes called in persons' who had no vote to mix in tic deliberations of those who had a vote,'de stroyed or lessened the consequence of the real Occ urs, and wisLl-to govern by a mob. The sePara tion did not deprive those who had no vote of the right to petition, or lessen it. With the greatest re. specs to the Petitioners, he was bound by his Consti tutional duty as . a Member of this deliberative Assem bly, to suspend any opinion upon the important sub jects to which it alluded, until after he bad heard them debated. Saving, therefore, to himself, such opinion as he was bound to form and ace upon, after hearing all the arguments that could be urged upon lany proposition that might be (*red for the public good, he was happy to second the motion for receiv ing the petition offered to t h e H onoura bl e C o ll eague . The Petition was accordingly brought up, and or dered to lie on the table. • LON DO% DOCKS. The Order of the Day being read for the third read ing of the London Dock Bill, Mr. H. THORNTON rose, and said, that the former Bill passed undet an express clause of making reasonable compensation to all persons sustaining in jury from the buildirg of those docks; and he was himself one of the committee appointed to investi . gale claims, and to settle compensations. But he was sorry to observe that a great number of persons, who had suffered losses in their property and interest by the formation of those docks, so far from being com pensated, were totally 'ruined. He thougl t there never was a case to which justice more strongly at tached the principle of compensation. He understood that an application had been made upon the subject - led of the . great PARLMMENTARr PROC.EEDINGS, Iby Jury, in cas HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. WHITBREAD gave notice of a motion for Monday next, for the production of a Copy of the Corrocpondence between the Treasury and the Stamp Office, relative to the new arrargements at that Office. Mr. DUNDAS gave notice of a motion for some fatther'papers with regard to the Government of Madras, to which an Honour able Gentleman (Mr. Creevey), whom he did not then see in his place, had thought proper to call the attention of the House.— This motion we understood the Right Hunourahle Gentleman to say he would bring forward on an early day. General LOFT poStponed his motion relative to the subjecting of certain offices to the payment of the Income Tax, in conse quence of the thinness of the House. The Report of the Committee of Supply of Wednesday was brought up and agreed to. The House then went into a Committee on the Embezzlement Bill, when a clause introduced by Mr. Rose; instr.ad of the first clause in the Bill, for the purpose of affortliox greater security to those who might become bound for the Collectors, &cc. of the Public Revenue, was agreed to. Report to be received today. Mr. WHARTON brought up a Bill to Prevent Frauds in the transporting of Malt from one part of the Kingdom to another. Also a 13i11 for discontinuing the Bounties on Brimstone and Oil of Vitriol. Read a firs: anti ordered to be read a second time. The Order for the attendance of Mr. Hunt was postponed till this day se'nnight. The Scotch Decrees Abridgement Bill went through a Com mittee. The LORD ADVOCATE for SCOTLAND gave notice, that he should this day move for leave to bring in a Bill for Repairing Highways and Bridges in the Highlands of Scotland; also a Bill for continuing the Act of the last Session, for rendering the pay nient of Creditors more equal and expeditious, in that part of Great Britain called Scotland. • HEADING PETITION. Mr. SIMEON said, that he had great pleasure in offering to the House a Petition from the Borough • be bad the honour to represent, which formed a strik . big contrast with some, which, on account of the language in which they had been conveyed, had been rejected. The language of this, thongh firm, as it ought to be, was respectful, and exhibited a good il lustration both of the freedom of the constituent and the true character of the Representative Brady, which as its power was derived from the people, could never be better exercised than in relieving its grievances, and receiving with open doors its complaints, when properly and respectfully conveyed. The Petition (which prayed the release of' John Gale Jones a nd Sir Francis Burdett) admitted the right of theliouse to commit, not only its own members but also any stranger, for any bleach of privilege, where necessity required it; but that'such necessity was confined to the ease of obstruction merely. The same necessity, in the opinion of the Petitioners, did not exist in the case of libel upon the House and its. members ; and therefore, in their opinion, libel ought.nnt .to. he pu nished by the House ; but eonsidering that freedom of person and fieedotn of the press were so essential to political freedom, such complaints ought to be prosecuted at common law, and brought before a Jury. Mr. Simeon said, he had the misfortune to differ with the Petitioners in this distinction ; ufter the maturest consideration, and looking into the Re cords of the House, and after hearing those able ar guments which had employed et) much of its time.- - The House having no public legal organ of its own by which it amid prosecute, must depend upon the Crown for ite permission to its Attorney-General to prosecute. Pending prosecution, if commenced, the Attorney-General might stop the prosecution by nolli posequi at any time, which made the popular branch of the legislature depend2nt upon the Crown, and might be attended sometimes with the danger of com promising part of the liberties of the people, or of the privileges of the House (which was the same thing) as a price of prosecution, or endanger a feeble and inefficacious prosecution by the Ceown,. if it had any interest which was in opposition to the privilege con. tended for, as might frequently happen. Now sup posing the Crown to lend its aid, and to do its duty effectually to the prosecution, the wholp must tui-n upon the construction of the libel by the Jury, which might be contrary to that of the House; in which case, the third branch of the Legislature, consisting of 658 persons, comprehending as 4 body the great bulk of the property, talent, and education of the nation, and exercising practically and in effect the largest share of legislation, would be subjected to the judgment of twelve Jurymen, whose opinions upon the construction of a written paper might leave the House of Commons u nd er s uc h contamination of cha racter as to expose them to the contempt of the na: don, and to the triumphs of the Crhwio No man had a more ardent love ler the trial by Jury than he had': considering it as the palladium and shield of the public liberty, and that the freedom of the press was equally essential The only objeCtion could bea fear of trusting the ‘ House of Commons with diiepower, lirhich, however, it had exercised for hear - tWo cen turies at least ; but considering the trust reposed in the Crown, in the exercise of its prerogative, and the trust reposed in the other House of Parliament, which was the ultimate and final Court of Judicature, bind ing finally by its decisions the property, the liberties, and lives of the subject; he could not think that 'tlie cool and judicious part of the nation would be afraid of trusting to their own elected Representatives a power to commit for libel, which, es tending to vilify the Commons! branch of the LegiAature, undermined' . the true freedom of the public, and opened the way to all the bloodshed and miseries of anarchy and con fusion. He concluded with moving that the petition do lie on the table. Mr. SHAW LEFEVRE seconded tlie motion at 1 his Honourable Colleague, and said, he felt great satisfaction that the Petition was so pure and the , language so respectful, as to defy even' the most fas tidious to raise any objection on that head. If there was any thing exceptionable in the prayer of the Pe tition, another opportunity would occur for its discus si'rn. For the present, he would only say, the Meeting at which this Petition was signed was called by the' May.): ; it was most numer ous ly an d resp e ct abl y at- ) terdA ; and the dt cision was unanimous. The motion passed, and the Petition was received lition to the opinion it express- and read ; and, in adili to his Majesty's ChaimMr of the Exchecitier, whn, he understood, had not yet had time to make up his mind on the subject. He hoped that Right Hon. Gentleman would now support him in a motio n to de fer this Bill until Monday, in order to allow him time to form his opinion upon some plan of compensation. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he should have no objection to defer the Bill ; but the subject of compensation was one so compli cated, that it would he quite impossible for him, con sistently with the various avocations of his public duty, to form any opinion on it in so short a time. Sir THOMAS TUKTON said, there never was a greater mistake than that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on this subject. It had been stated that 8750,000 had been applied for over and above the original grant ; but the fact was, it was 5c900,000, and would be the total ruin of all the wharfingers and warehousemen on the 'river, The Right Hon. Gentleman was, from his situation, bound to protect the public from mischief arising from honest and in dustrious individuals being crushed by the power of great public bodies, who expended such large sums more than they first applied to Parliament for to gra. tify that cruel propensity. He was therefore fur post poning the third reading to Monday, Mr. MARRYAT observed, that there would be na extension of the original plan, but rather a dimi nution. Compensation was a different question—but he thought the House would not be the faithful steward of the public if any further compensation was granted, Had it not been for the. Company, there could be no doubt that a great many additional ware houses would have been built by individuals, which would have interfered with the present proprietors of wharfs, &c. as much as the Company had done. The previous.compensations, he contended, had been libe rally awarded. _ _ _ Mr. ROSE said, that k was absolutely necessary for the Company to erect more warehouses upon the old plan, as at present property was often left exposed for want of them. Mr. WHITBREAD was decidedly in favour of delay. He said he held documents in his hand which clearly spewed the Dock Company had been guilty of the grossest partiality And tyranny, insomuch that several merchants had brought actions against them for having acieJ directly in breach of the Act of Par liament under which they existed. These actions they had defended to a certain stage, and then they had come into Court, and paid taxed costs to the amount of a:7SU. If these things were true, this Bill ought not only to be delayed, but should not be sof. fered to pass at all. Another Bill ought to be brought in, that the London Dock Company might clear them selves from these charges. Mr. MANNING stated, that the reason the Com pany had not been able to go tQ trial in these actions WAS, that the questions were mixed. If there had beet any appearance of vexation, he would willingly agree to a Committee to inquire into the matter. B.:: all this had nothing to do with the present Bill. He had already delayed the Bill in hopes that a clause of com pensation could be introduced, but that was now hopeless. This must be left till the next Session. — He contended, that not more than £4.0,000 of the mo ney was to be employed in extending the original Flan, the rest beitr , to pay debts and complete the old pl an .. Mr. W: S MITH corroborated the statement made by Mr. Whitbread, as to the actions brought against the London Dock Company. In one of these actions it was agreed in Court that a small sum should be taken as damages, and that a tariff should be settled by three Barristers. After the verdict was given, and the tariff settled under the authority of the Court, the Company refused to abide by it ; and the trial was no sooner over than they not only resorted to their old mode of charges, but even increased, tinder pretence that it was not a prospective but a retrospective rept? lation. He was, therefore, clearly of opinion, that the third reading should be postponed. Sir E. KNATCHBULL agreed in the necessity of postponement, for the purpose of introducing the clause. He hoped the House would have no objec tion, as the period was so short. Mr. HAWKINS BROWNE thought that the -charges were delayed too long ; that they were of such a nature that even if the Bill was nut thought of they ought to have been produced. Toe sum pro. posed, he was convinced, was not more than adequate. Mr. WHITBREAD did not believe that next Monday would afford sufficient time ; be rather thought it would be necessary to postpone it to Mon day se'nnight. He said that there WAS i Gentleman in the lobby by whose authority he had it in his power to contradict the accusation of the mixed nature of the charges. Mr. PETER MOORE observed, that if this mea sure was adopted, it would be to estab ish a second Custom-house, more intolerable than the old ; if so, then the peOple might truly whistle for justice.— (Laughing)—ln a word, the great end of the whole seemed to be private interest, which; it was the duty of the House to prevent. Mr. MANNING thought, that if the Committee was revived, it ought to be unshackled. Mr. JACOBS said, that this question deserved the mature consideration of the House ; he would there fore vote for its postponement. A division was then called for, when there appear ed s: -For the postponement 27—Against it 35—Ma jority 8.--The Bill was then, of course, read a third time, and passed. bIR FRANCIS BURDETT. The SPEAKER acquainted the House, that a process had been serveA upon him in the course of the day, at the suit of Sir Francis Burdett. The process being read, It proved to be a notice of declaration in the ordinary form, upon a plea of trespass, and the damages were laid at 430,000. This instrument was signed ELLIS. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved, that it be referred to the Committee appointed to consider the subject to which it referred ; and he took this opportunity of stating, that the Report of the Committee would probably be brought up to-morrow, when he should move to have it taken into consideration. —The motion was agreed to. The SPEAKER also informed the House, that a proem upon the same grounds had been served upon the Serjeant at Arm s , w h o was rea d y to state t h e particulars. The CHANCELLOR of theEXCHEQUER, ap prehending that this process was csf a similar nature to the notice just read, saw no necessity of roving the reference of it to the Committee.. Mr THOMAS TURTON did not oppose the Lion, hut entered his individual p rotest against whole mode of conducting th e b us i ness. Mr. WHITBREAD was of opinion, that th e S er , jeant at Arms should be called to the bar to state " case referred to, and asked whether it was the im tion to have the Report of the Committee disea se d on the same day it was brought up! • TheC HANCE LLO R of the EXCHEQUER no objection. to the proposed examination of the , jeant at the bar; but his reascr. for thinking it unti e . cessary was, that the Serjeant had been this day ' fore the Committee, to whom lie had stated the of a second notice being served upon him. As to consid !ration of the Report of the Committee, as as it was presented, it would be for the House to tide, whether that consideratiOn should be gone or . postponed. But he could not help expressing surprise, that those who were in the first instance adverse to any delay upon this subject, should no: anxious for farther postponement. Mr. WHITBREAD, having expressed no opini whether the Report of the Committee should b, .promptly considered or not, was surprised at the Right ,on. Gentleman's concluding remark. As to *other point, he required the statement of the &team 'at the bar, in order to have the case regularly referred to the Committee, to which nothing should go to the subject but through that House. The SCRIM:CT being called in, stated, that a notice of declaration had been served upon him—which . Lice was read. The damages were laid at e 20,001), CAPTAIN rOSKLTT. • Mr. TXTTLETON, putsuabt to notice, rnse move for the production of certain papers relating Captain Foskett. His anxiety on this subject did iilow from fears for the fare of his motion ; but if had any, it was because an illustrious personage implicated. When he first introduced this sub), it was not with the intention of creating a military cussion in the House; the ground; he acte d on had well examined. He had wished the Hon! enforce a standing law, not to make a new one.- Having gone thus far he would not again have come forward had not aspersions been cast on the charar , of Captain Foskett by Gentlemen on the other sir' the House. He now conceived it to be his dut Captain Foskat, and to an illustrious personage, call for official proofs of those accusations. papers he held in hi; hand - .•••ere complete—it was , his intention to enter into their military character. their authority was well grounded.. Oa the merit of the case he had no disposition to descant, the pap, he only intended to use as defersive weapons to tect the character of Captain Foskett front the ton attacks which had been made. He intenticti them for no other use ; he therefore moved o - there should be laid before the House copies of morials and other papers from Captain Foskett, of I:th Light Dragoons, to the offices of Cowman, in Cliet and Adjutant-General, from May 4, to I'-bruary 11 4 IS also the various answers the sair...." thoi N‘ nnt: he I,l. 7 itdi E i i ß notl S ie.o. S di y uco 7 observed, mieo tntlt Gentleman that m : 12tien a reed d o n O i i a N s b m h e : 1 1 ' still he thought lie had not advanced uffi • t s cien ground' for the introdu4ion of those papers which were such a nature as probably to be productive of , eniev ‘ ins consequences. When the petition was . preomted to the House, he conceived its only &est to be to eh trge. the Commander in Chief with a rect bresich of die law. If persons disappointed promotions were thus allowed to appeal to the House, and ranssick the Offices of State, it would go to . a version of the system under which the Army is. so properly conducted, and in the end produce great and general mischief. If these papers were oil:y the purpose of elucidating the article of war, they should be produced ; but as it was impossible make things clearer than they were, h 2 did not any occiison for introducing them. The fir:t plaint in the petition is of a junior being promoted ,befere a senior officer. This was redressed ; too, of not being sent to Spain, was on the poini being redressed when the regiment itself retui home. With respect to not being promrte in It the Colonel of the regiment cannot be blamee withholding. what he had not ; indeed, he thought hardly possible for any person to say that promotien was a matter of right; that length of time, and merit, was the foundation of this right was never quiesccd in. There was, therefore, no ground Parliament to sanction the production of these pers ; ahove all he hop: d that the House would be established as a place of appeal for the army. refusing the production of these papers, he was vinced he would not so much incur the clispleasui the friends of Captain Foskctt, as that of the Ii trious Personage and Commander In Chief, whom would prevent from obtaining a complete justification. Mr. ABERCROMBIE said that it was impossible for the House to take any step inconsistent with character : it would rather be his duty to consult s safety of the Army, by not countenancing sech mea• sures. However he admired the theory of promo tion by seniority, the practice he believed to be idju. rious.. The course he should have preferred would be to state to the House the various allegations the officers on this subject, and then have moved , solutions against the responsible person. If the state meats of the petition on the table against the Dui. of Cumberland were true, he was certainly deserving of censure. The House should observe the situation it was in. If the system of appeal was encouraged, it would lead to injurious consequences. Mr. LYTTLETON, in explanation, said, that had already stated it was not his intention to make sinister use of the Papers. . Mi. MARTIN supported the motion of his Hon. Friend. The charges exhibited against the Cor• mander in Chief should be either substantiatedor sified. As the House had received the petition, did not know how it could refuse the papers now question, and on this principle he gave his vote. General CRAWFORD opposed the production of the papers, on the ground of the whole proceeding being fraught with danger. He was perfectly yinced that the Duke of Cumberland and the Com' mander in Chief had no objection to their bcin - duced ; but he must nevertheless object to their, duction, feeling as he did, that the more detailed More objectionable would the question appear. mitting these facts alledged, what th en was wa f uel with the papers I The only cause which *appeared was, that a clause of the Mutiny Act, had not bo to e th e men. sued t had S et , min e . I be. t fig to tee ;Sony :o Alt. • into g hit ce lab. )iftinn Id b e Right D th e jeaot 'erred upon notice h no. • )00, ti ng d ttnt if ! WaS bject, on he its.t to ne.-- come ratter ;ide of aty 1,1 70 to The is Ta i t neriii lapera ) pro. wan. mica 's that fine- of Oa 'ander IKk, ers to iougu n the fousc,. ounds ere of f s first o'iject a di• red i 2 louse, a sub. snow great r fo they le to )t see corn• noted that nt of aimed 1809 6 e for ; F :ddc o r h t nni i t ;i: n ico; i n tri : Ia cc'- • ire (.4 Illus- m he ;ale h its It the mea- roma- inju. could as of dre state. Duke rring Avon aged, at he Ake a E on. ,!4 r dalr lt tbo :o a: e o. c 7 cOP- d. axed .aced • beco