Star. — London, England, 1821-06-15 00:00:00

this mane into the commission of crime, would not be entirely loss upon such Gentlemen of that House as happened to be connected with the body in question. A person !limed King was the man whose Petition he was about to offer, and with him, perhaps, the House were not entirely unacquainted, from some circumstances of publicity which had lately been given to his case. Mr. King was a news-vender in Chancery-lane, and the misnamed Constitutional So ciety had thought proper to prefer an indictment against him for selling a libel. Mr. King had no notice of any proceeding until he saw, by the public papers, that the Grand Jury had thrown out the Bill. He then set some inquiries on foot; and, on referring to the indictment, he found that theie was endorsed only the name of one witness; who was called Ho ratio Orton. Indignant that a criminal proceeding of so much consequence to himself and family should have been set on foot, supported by such testimony, Mr. King laid his whole case before the Public, through the medium of the newspapers. A reply • was challenged, and a reply came forth : Orton pub-, lished an affidavit, which contained, as he (Mr. Hob house) was led to believe, nothing but the grossest falsehoods. He could not say that perjury, in the legal sense of the word, bad been committed; but sure he was, that, in the moral sense, Orton was guilty of wilful perjury.—For what were the facts ? In his affidavit, Orton stated that when he called at King's shop, and saw the book on the counter, being ignorant who was the publisher of it, he had asked king for information : but Oi top could not then be ignorant of the publisher's name, and for this reason: this, according to his own account, took.place on the 15th; but, on the 17th, an indictment was preferred against Mr. Dolby, as publisher of this work ; so that, as Orton was a confidential clerk in the office, and per haps a witness in the case against Dolby, he could not be ignorant that such a thing was in preparation.— The name of the publisher, ton, was on the back of the pamphlet; and it was after having seen the pam phlet (and, it may be presumed, the back of it also) that he swore he was still in ignorance of the. pub lisher's name ! The first part was purchased with the publisher's name endorsed, on the 15th ; Mr. King was then applied to to procure more numbers. It was from comparing these facts with Orton'saffi davit, that he (Mr. llobliouse) was induced to think that some one had suborned Orton to commit per pay, and to seduce King to the commission of an offence. One thing, at all events, was clear—that when Orton called at King's shop, King then bad committed no crime: on the 15th he bad not the' book in his possession, and it was not had till the evening of the 16th. If Orton had never called, King, perhaps, would never have had the book in his possession; and did it not follow, therefore, that Orton was sent. to betray him into the commission' of an act for which he would have become amenable to the Society's prosecution ?—(hear, hear). —The object of King's Petition now to the House was, that he might be enabled, through its interference, to get at the names of the Committee, from whom he would seek legal redress; for, as to Orton, he looked upon him only as their agent and tool. And the House o'ight not to overlook this atrocious attempt at ruin• Lig an unfortunate man, by la) ing a snare for him to commit a crime for which he would be brought before a Cow t of Justice, and grounding an infa mous and ruinous chargo•of libel against him—not for having the libel in his possession when called for, but for procuring it at the earnest solicitation of a stranger, who afterwards turned out to be the agent of the prosecutors—(Hear, hear, hear.)— I Was the country still to bear with an Association, who, if they did not find crime, would make it?— (near, hear.)—The efforts of individuals, indigent, generally, like this poor news-vender, were not able to cope with the a•tacks of a great and wealthy So ciety ; and a prosecution, whatever might be the fate of it, would ruin them. It would be seen, that the Society for the Suppression of Vice stated, that the prosecution of Davidson cost them £l7O ; and if a prosecution cost so much, what would a defence cost? hear).—There were also disadvantages at tending a prosecution by this Society, which did not exist io other cases. By the law of libel, the Law Officers of the Crown were obliged to withdraw a prosecution after a year; but that law not applying to this Society, an unfortunate mall might have in dictments hanging in Lerrorem over his head almost for ever. Neither were the Society obliged to fur nish the defendant with office copies of all papers against him, as the Attorney-General was obliged to do by the new Acts: and this was a dreadful hard ship—for these office copies, in some cases, cost £2O. hear).—The House would see the dreadful effe- cts of this, whilst the party might still be acquit ted ; and lie was sure, whatever difference of opinion might exist on politics, no Gentleman of English feeling would give his sanction to so much injustice hear).—The Society were also more terri ble,- because they were invisible, and therefore not amenable to the tribunal of public opinion, which nes er failed of having some effect on the worst men. The person who was called Murray, was a person of to consideration : it was little satisfaction to an in j:n-ed marl to have Murray as a mark ; he would wish naturally to come at the fountain-head. if a man was prosecuted by Government, the thing would be neither so galling nor so unsafe, for Government have responsible agents, and sometimes a regard for public opinion !—(Hear).—Another disadvantage at tending defendants prosecuted by this Society was, • that it having been held that, under the 60th Geo. HI. cap. 9, clause 16, the defendant was obliged to give bail, not for his appearance alone, but also for Lis good behaviour, there was the greatest difficulty in obtaining bail. Many a man would give bail in £lOO for his friend's coming forward, who would not tun the risk if that sum was to be forfeited in the event of . a second indictment being preferred against lii:n. It, then, all these facts were true which he had stated, surely the House of Commons were called 1. ; v on to put a stop to such unfair and oppressive pro secutions by these individuals, and leave that task to the Attorney and Solicitor-General alone, if this was' a free country. With regard to the illegality of this Association, he would now take an opportunity of adverting to what fell from the Solicitor-General in a. former debate. That Honourable and Learned Gentleman, on a former night, had said, that the dodges of the Court of King's Bench pronounced this Association legal. This was not the fact; the Learned Judges did not say a word as to its legality or ifle- gality; nor, indeed, was the question brought beroie them. A Learned Counsel, Mr. Blackburn, did cer tainly move in that Court for a list of the Associa tion, but he, properly, did not call it an illegal As sociation, for the Judges would then answer, that they could not call upon any men to criminate themselves, as they would, if they were members of an illegal So ciety. The Learned Judges, therefore, did not say a word respecting the legality of this Society ; and the lion. Solicitor was incorrect in saying they did so.— But this Association had been likened to a Society for prosecuting Felons, which was a fallacious mode of arguing. In no respect did they resemble each other. Where a felony had been committed there was clearly a corpus delicti—a crime was committed, and the question was, who was guilty? Ilere the crime was to be first established, and then die identity of the criminal; and surely no man, no set of men, were ever yet allowed to come forward to prosecute a rob ber, or a murderer, when they, or their agents, had seduced him to the commission of the crime— (Hear). It was clear, too, that the objects of the Society were directed more to punish one class of men than to sup press libels. If their aim had been to suppress the work for which King was indicted as a vender, surely the prosecution of Dolby, who was the publisher, might have effectually done it. But ruin was their watch-word—they should have venders and pub lishers, and involve them all in indiscriminate de struction. There was also another rigour in their, proceedings which he would notice. In prosecutions by the Crown there had been a fortnight allowed for striking Juries ; but in this case they required the de fendant to strike the Jury in forty-eight hours after. They had also prosecuted the editors of two or three newspapers, who had published some speeches made at a Reform Dinner ; but even if some intemperate language was used there, it was hardly a subject for prosecution. The Law Officers of the Crown had not thought proper to take any notice of it. He (Mr. Hobhouse) wondered that they did not prosecute him, for he was Chairman of the Meeting, and he wished they had done so. But so far from that, they had asked him to become a subscriber, and he .did not know whether this was a hoax or not. The list of subscribers was certainly large, and there were se veral anonymous contributors to the .funds of the So ciety. But then there were inducements, and the tide of "Loyal Constitutional Association," together with 4n alphabetical arrangement of the names, made many join the ranks. Amongst others there was a widow, who had sent her mite of 1.:30. lint lie was sure those Ladies and Gentlemen would not subset ibe if they thought their money would be applied to carry discord into private society. Ile was sure the Duke of Wellington, who enjoyed a great share of die money of a generous people, would be far from turn• ing that money ag ainst the people themselves. The Honourable Mem ber concluded by hoping that the Petitioner would obtain some redress at the hands of the House, otherwi,e " thc•re would be a wrong ss it 110144 a remedy," %%Lich was contrary to the maxim of English law. The Petition sr.; then read, and its ,übstance corresponded with the statement ra.td: bi the Honourable Member.—lt Wai ordered SCOTCtt BURGHS. Lord A. HAMILTON brought up the Report of the Select Committee on Scotch Burghs. The Noble Lord said, that this Report was neither concocted by nor concurred in by him. He had been induced to bring the matter before Parliament originally, in consequence of Petitic,ns from Scotland, the most numerous that ever were presented on any subject. His complaint was, not that the majority of the Com mittee had dissented from him, hut that they had not gone into what he considered a full and impartial in quiry. The Committee had decided, but not inquired. Ile was tot prepared to say that there was anything false in the Report, but they had not taken the proper steps to inform themselves fully on the subject. He would state bow he did not agree in the Report.— About three weeks ago, the House would recollect, he asked leave of absence for ten days. Another G.ntleman filled the Chair. in his absence. He had engaged to write the Report a week after his return, but he was surprised to find that a Report had been made out in the meantime. It was unusual for a Chairman, in presenting a Report, to dissent from it, but lie felt it due to himself to state his views on the subject. lie did not complain of the Report so much for what it contained, as for what it omitted. If there was no objection stated, he said, he would move for the production of the Minutes of Evidence taken be before the Coinmittee. The House would be then enabled to judge of what had been done by the Com mittee. The N. bye Lord concluded by mc. - aig, that the Report should be then read. Lord BINNING said, he had no objection to the production of the minutes, and the Nc,ble Lord might have them if he pleased ; but they u'ere harmless and useless. It the Noble Lord had confined himself to calling fur the evidence alone, he (Lord Ruining) would have assented to their pi oduction, and no more; but when the Noble Lord thought proper to arraign the conduct of the Committee, he (Lot d Binning) was obliged to speak in his own defence. The - Noble Lord could not expect that a Committee would stand still whilst he absented himself from its meetings for a fortnight. But, at all events, the Report was not the Report of the Chairman, but of the Committee. In fact, the Report was not brought forward till the Noble Lord's return. There was great difference of opinion is the Committee, and some Members went so far as to require that evidence should be gone into for each town ; but this proposition was not accepted. —The Committee had now concluded, and they thought that if the Report which they had made was acted upon, it would afford an effectual remedy for 1 , every grievance. Mr. ABERCROMBY said, he agreed entirely with the Noble Lord who had brought up this Report.—' ' The Noble Lord near him had been intrusted with the interests of a great number of Petitioners, but.he found the Committee decidedly against all fair inquiry. The Noble Lord opposite had said, that, if the mi nutes were produced, they would be found harmless and useless. But why were they so?—Because the Committee had taken care to shut out everything that was useful—(Hear, hear).—The Noble Lord was under a necessity of going to Scotland, and the Com mittee, in courtesy, ought to have waited his return. This was the practice in every case, but it ought to have beew stronger in this; and indeed some Gentle men had gone into the Committee who had already pledged themselves in the House to oppose this mea- sere. From a Committee so constituted, it could not be expected that much inquiry would take place. Sir G. CLERK spoke in defence of the Committee. , Sir R. FERGUSON detailed the circumstances relating to the Committee appointed in 1819, to in- , quire into the abuses in Scotch Burghs, and said, that the Government took the question into their hands, and placed official men on the Committee, whom they knew to be devoted to their interest. It was but justice to such men to say, that they had at least the merit of consistency, for they uniformly de fended every species of abuse—(Hear, hear). Mr. K. DOUGLAS vindicated the conduct of the Committee, and said, that if the measures were adopted which they had proposed, every practical evil would be remedied. Mr. HUME contended that his Noble Friend (Lord A. Hamilton) had not been fairly treated with respect to this question. Ile (Mr. Hume) had been the only Member of the Committee who was in a minority.— His friends were so disgusted with the want of cour tesy shew•n by Ministers towards his Noble Friend, that they went off and left him (Mr. Hume) to stand alone. The Honourable Member then commented on the obstinacy of Ministers and their adherents, in keeping up the old order of things in Scotland, where the system grew worse in the exact proportion that it grew older. Mr. W. DUNDAS deprecated any discussion on the subject before the Report was brought up. The Report was then received, and on the question that it do lie on the table, Lord A. HAMILTON rose, and observed in reply, that his object was to call the attention of the house to the Report, and to procure the production of the Minutes of Evidence.—The Report was then ordered to lie on the table, and be printed. LONDON WATER COMPANIES. Mr. MUM A NTLE said he now held in his hand a Bill for regulating the Water Companies of the Metropolis. This Bill was now brought in in pur suance of the recommendation of the Committee ap pointed to inquire into and investigate this subject at the early part of the present Session. It was not his intention to press this Bill through the Howe in the present Session. He defended the Report of the Com mittee, and contended that the Public ought to be satisfied with it. Ile saw no use in publishing the evidence taken before the Committee ' because it would only Wad to endless discussion. It would be found full of dry calculation, and could not be de cided by any other than practical experience. It in cluded more than I ,(xX) folio pages, which would put the Public to an enormous expense to publish.— 1 le then moved for leave to bring in a Bill for regu lating the Water Companies of the Metropolis. Mr. HUME said, it was not his intention to offer any opposition to the Bill in its present state, but would reserve himself for a future opportunity. Mr. Alderman BRIDGES spoke in commendation of the mode in which London was supplied with water. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill, which was done, and it was read a first time. Mr. HUME, in rising to submit a motion to the House, said he had not heard of any Report of the Committee on this Bill, which shelved that London was better supplied with water, or on that account it was healthier than any other city of the empire. The Report stated that the Water Companies had for feited their charters, by acting contrary to the spirit of various Acts of Parliament; and yet the Bill just introduced was intended to support these Companies. For this reason, he thought the House ought to be put in possession of all the information which had been laid before the Committee. Up to the year 1810, the Water Companies only made a fair and proper profit; but since that time the new Compa nies had, instead of supporting competition, divided London into districts, which enabled them to charge what they pleased ; yet the expense of iron pipes, in stead of wooden ones, was less, and the proprietors were not liable to an income tax on their profits. He was glad that this Bill was not to pass through Par liament during this Session; and he therefore thought the evidence should be laid before the House, in order that a fair judgment might be made of this Bill.— The 1,000 pages would go info very small compass in print. Ile then moved that the Minutes of Evi dence taken before the Committee on the Water Com panies should be laid on the table and printed. Mr. I-lOBHOUSE supported the motion. There was at present a very considerable degree of irrita tion on the public mind on the question, and nothing could appease it but the production of the evidence. Mr. WILMOT was certain, that if this Report was rejected, it would be much more difficult for the Committee to fix a maximum on the rate hereafter. As a Member of the Committee, he had no objection to the printing of the evidence. • Mr. Alderman BRIDGES defended the Report of the Committee, and made a few observations in an swer to the Hon. Member for Aberdeen. The motion was then agreed to. AGRICULTURAL HORSE TAX._ Mr. CURWEN rose, in pursuance of notice, to move for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal the Tax upon Ilorses used in Agriculture. He could not but regret that the lateness of the Session made it impe rative on him to bring forward this motion in the absence of the Noble Marquis (Londonderry). This was a subject most material to the agricultural inte rests, and stood on very different ground now from what it stood when he had formerly brought this question before the House. The proceedings of the Committee on this subject proved that the distress of the agriculturists was great beyond precedent ; and they had come to a resolution unanimously, that the distress of the country was actually proved—(Hear). —Under these circumstances, it remained for Parlia ment to consider what was the best method of re moving that distress. He was sorry to believe that the present Administration had no reeling of sym pathy with the agricultural interests. Indeed, so in different were they on that subject, that an Hon. Member, who usually supported that Administration, told the Noble Lord at the head of it, that not one of the Gentlemen who usually supported them would and his way back to this House if there were now a dissolution of Parliament; at least, so far as the agri cultural interests were concerned. He hoped, how ever, that the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite would even now think it incumbent upon him to grant this boon to the country—a boon which, in its present circumstances, would be very acceptable to it. The Agricultural Committee had instructed their Chair man to move for the repeal of this tax ; but repeated attempts were made, and wishes expressed, to ba , se this question put off to next Session. lie, for 0; . ; could not aree to such a postponement, seeing necessity which already existed for having sonic 4.1'c," extended as soon as possible to the Agricultural rests. If he was told that that could not be consistently with ;he present public expenditwe a ) ; answer he was prepared to give to that was, that they should cut down the whole establishment, beginning with the Crown and going down to the lowest ()eke s in the State—(Hear, her.; ).—lle contended that tie ; tax was particularly oppressive, since it would he equally just to tax the loom of the weaver as the horse of the farmer. It also subjected the farmer to endless vexations. In this department there were Tie fewer than 539,000 surcharges, a stretch of the law . that could never have been in the contemplation of the Legislature—(Hear).— A case had lately corn, to his knowledge which shewed the spirit in which these laws were executed. A poor woman at Ber wick had, at the back of her cottage, a fruit tree, which was at once a source of pleasure and of profs to her. It wanted pruning, and she employed fee paid sixpence for purpose a gardener, to whom she ' for the job. '1 he consequence was, that she wa s taxed as employing an occasional gardener, and, is order to make up the assessment, part of the little furniture of her house was sold—Wear, hear).—TLis shewed the spirit in which the laws were colored, and the extent to which they increased the nisei of the country. One of the great causes of the suf ferings of the country at this moment was the sca n ; of employment. He was decidedly hostile to any system which would allow the importation of cons; he believed the People now began to see that cheap bread, without employment, not so desiraYe a thing as might, at the first biitch. he suppmed— (Hear, hrur).—lf the House wished to shew that it was anxious to afford any relief to the distress of the country, here was an opportunity offered for d, , i eg so, and the only opportunity it would have this Sg:,- sion—(lleur).—The lion. Member concluded with moving for leave to bi in 7 in a Bill to repeal so much of the .11d and 42d of George 111. as related to the Duty on Agricultural Horses. • Mr. GOOCH said, that, as the Chairman of t!:e Agricultural Committee, he would second the mr— don, and, at the same time, say that he had beta striicted by the Committee, on a former day, to come down to the House to move fox the repeal of t ip; T. ix in question, but that, in the meantime, the Cien- mittee bad changed their mind. He confirmed the statements of the Hon. Member who preceded him, and expressed his opinion, that since the means of Government were not equal to their expenditure, they ought to cut down their establishments, so as to. square with the resources which they had at their command—( Hear, /scar).—'['hough he differed is politics from the Hon. Member for Aberdeen (Mr. Hume), yet he could not but say, that, in his opi nion, that Hon. Member, by his indefatigable and • valuable exertions, had done eminent services to his country—( Loud chcering).—He did not say this for the purpose of courting popularity ; it was his candid . opinion, and he hoped he should obtain credit for expressing it—(Hear, hear). Mr. DAVENPORT conceived that this Tax was the most oppressive one in existence, except the Salt Tax--(Hear, heat).—He cordially concurred in the I views taken of it by the Hon. Member opposite, and hoped it would be repealed. Mr. COKE declared that it was quite delightful to him to hear on this occasion the language which was held by the Gentlemen opposite; and the cern pliment paid by the Chairman of the Agricultural Committee to the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, must be, no doubt, highly gratifying to him. For himself, he was an old Member of that House ; and be could take upon himself to say, that since he first came into it, he did not remember any Gentleman to %horn the country was so much indebted as to his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume), whose exertions had been as im. ' portant as they were unremitting—(Hear, hear). — But he was perfectly charmed with the language of the Hon. Member for Suffolk—( A laugh, and cries of Hear, hear).—That Hon. Gentleman, who had for so many years always supported his Maj est y : Ministers—who had stood by them imposing every Tax during that period, and in passing every pal brought in by them—was now for repealing the Agri cultural Horse Duty—(Hear, hear). Mr. GIPPS said, that when, on a former occasloo• he supported the motion for a repeal of this Tax, he thought that a substitute might be found for it ins small tax on the transfer of Stock. He was not the. awaie that a Statute was already in existence, which prohibited the imposition of any tax on transfers of that description; and, though he was since informed of the effect of that Statute, lie could not help think• ing that a slight tax might be imposed of the nature he had mentioned. The Hon. Member was proceed ing to make some comments upon the propriety" introducing some measure of relief to the Agricul• turists, founded on the principle of the Cornßill— when he was called to order by Mr. BARING, who said, that the observations of the Hon. Member did not apply to the question mediately before the House. The SPEAKER observed, that it was for the Wm Member to state to the House how far his presee course of argument was meant to apply to the question. Mr. GIPPS was ready to admit that the sulliect upon which he had entered was not strictly aPPI P cable ; and he would of course bow to the judgaunit of the House. He would content himself, then," observing, that if the Agricultural Horse ra Pere taken off, it would be a great boon to the fannle t n and would prove of little injury to the Revenue. Mr. BARING said, that having done his best to press the Ministers to retrenchment, without ttleee!l he felt it to be his duty (the judgment of the Row! having fixed upon a certain extent of experlebteZ not to vote for weakening their resource a s. H her!, astonished at the conduct of those who,after voted for every extravagant grant that Ministers ; e quired of the House, would n ow seek to take at. a part of the resources which were in c ontemple at the time of these extravagant grants , bccansselt: removal of it would be advantag eo us to them —(Hear, hear). He conceived that th ose Gentle after having refused to vote with the Iloriounirat: Member for Aberdeen, c ons whom they praised s° O. upon any one division, would go before their boat tuents with a very ill grace indeed to take to t dd bc or - .—(llcar). liowcTer, opportunivy of their admission favour of his Hono ura ble Friel:ia, {~•