Star. — London, England, 1817-03-29 00:00:00

such an extent, at least, as to induce the Honse, in maintenance of their ancient privileges, altogether to reject the measure thus amended The SPEAKER had no difficulty in replying, that in the sense in which that House understcod the term Money Bill, the Bill then below them was eat a Money Bill. In this Bill, as well as in ether Bills ?Mt ACM 4117 Money Bills, these might be clauses se lating to nvincy, to which the House could not per. mit the Lord. to make any Amendments. In fact, in the very first clause of the Bill a penalty hAd been extended by the House of I.. , :rds, and therefore when the .Bill COIN ender the co,lsideration of the House, b e gaud., segeest to them the expediency of :ejecting that Amendment. The Order of the Day was then read. The PEAKER then observed, that it was his duty to call the Attention of the Housl to an altera tion made by the House of Lords in the Bill, pr. 3, 1. SS. As the Bill passed the House of Commons it was declared, that any person refusing to deliver a paper to a Justice cf the Peace should for .it £5O. The House of Lords had extended the Penalty to any person refor.ir.g to deliver the paper to a Justice of the Peace, " or the Mayor or head Officer of the' County, City, Towl, or Place resrectively." This was an Amendment to which the House, consistently with its privileges, could not agree. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER in consequele.e of what had fallen from the Chair, moved that the House should disagree with the Lords in this Amendment, which motion was agreed to. On the next Amendment, pr. 4, 1. St and 35, being read, viz. " after holden' insert " and such notice so given by such means as aforesaid, shall be as effectual to ad intents and purposes, as if the same bad been given by public advertisement Mewed in say such newspaper as aforesaid." Lord COCHRANE protested that lie lit he should abandon his duty it' he failed to take the sense of the House on every one of the Amendments made in this Bill. It was so essential to the best intetests and privileges of the couetry that the Bill should not pass into a law, that he held is to be an indispensable duty to object by every means conformable to the customs and rules of the House, not only to the ie gore, but to every alteration that had been made in' it. With respect to the present Amendment, it Wnb not only unnecessary, but actually destroyed the sealed the passage in which it occurred. He should take leave therefore, to divide the House on a Motio n for leaving out of that Amendment the words by suck means as aforesaid." _ The gallery was then cleared for a division, but the Noble Lord had not even a fellow teller in fav o ur o! his motion. On our re-admission we found Lord COCHRANE declaring, that in his opinion the measure was uttcrly indefensible. He adverted particularly to the extraordinary clause which bad been introduced in the Lords, stating it to be highly illexpedient that public meetings or assemblies should be held near the [-louses of Parliament, or near his Majesty's Courts of Justice in Westminster Hall. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER spoke to Order. That clause was not then under the consideration of the House. The SI'EA KER observe,i, that the several A mend ments in the Bill must he considered in their turn. That before the House was pr. 6, I. `2B, to leave out 0' being" and instit " shall be." Lord COCHRANE fdt it his duty to state at once the general motives wl.ich actuated his conduct on the. present occasion. That su • extraordinary a proposition as that to which he bad just adverted' should be entertained, and mg adopted, could not astonish those who observed how that House went on. Why was any mention made of danger to the Courts of Justice in Westminster Hall ft inn public meetings? Was there no: equal danger to Courts of Justice in Guildhall from public meetings there ? The fact was, and. he said it without hesitation, it was chat House which was afraid. It was the Ministers, who felt that they deserved the reproach, and perhaps the —(The Noble Lta made a pause for a quarter of a minute, and then added) —indignation of the people. He told ihe Rightlionourable Gentleman, and he told his Majesty's Ministers generally, that the consciousness of their bad measures made them afraid to meet the people. They were afraid to meet • the people in the place in which the people had been accustomed to meet—and in Westminster Hail too, for a thousand years. They were afraid to meet the people, because they knew the general indignation elated against them by their wicked and abominable Measures, and by the determination which they bad Manifested to establish a military despotism in the country, and put down freedom here as they bad al ready assisted to pat it down all over the rest of Eu rope. The assertion about the Courts of Justice was a mere false pretence to cover these apprehensions. A Noble end Learned Lord in another place had stated— The SPEAKER informed the Noble Lord, that it was contraty to the rules of the House to allude to any thing that might have been said by a Member of the other Housead Parliament. Lord COCHRANE said, that he had used the words another place." The SPEAKER observed, that the rules of the House must be substantially attended to. .Lord COCHRANE bowed with great submission', to the correction of the Chair, but continued to main tain that the Meetings in Palace-yard could neither directly nor indireealy disturb the Courts Of Justice, and therefore that the introduction of Courts of Jus tice into the clause was timely a cover for the real apprehension. There was no pretence whatever for removing the Westminster Meetings to the distance of a mile from Westminster-hall (with the exception of Covent-garden), where it was well known no public meeting could take place without the sanction. of the Duke of Bedford. Were they afraid that the people would meet in Witcerlooplace, in front of Carlton-House—and were they afraid their griev e's-ices should reed: the ears of his Royal Highness the Prince Regent ? He was convinced that Ministers, with all the military force in the country, and with the Gagging Bills at their backs, could not long pursue the present system of governing the coun t r y. He should have thought that the page of British his. tort' contained sufficient warnings a the subject.._ It was there recorded, that whenes sr Ministers set themselves in defiance of the people, to bear down Muir rights and liberties, such proceedings alrays ended in their disgrace and ruin, if not iu : cir- eumstances which it was painful even to re t. In former times, bad Ministers had l ost theirld. when they made such flagrant attacks on the rights and liberties of the people. He had theeght it his duty, at the very commencement of this discussion, thus fully to state his opinion. He had also thought' it his duty to declare, that lie would take the sense of the House on every one of the amendments ; but as on the last proceeding of that nature he had not been so fortunate as to have a seconder, he should not per. severe in his intention ; it appearing to him probable, consideting the great majority opposed to his single opinion, that in that particular he was in error. The Amendment was then agreed to ; as were se veral others. Mr. BROVGHAM wished the Right Honou rable Gentleman oppos;te would explain which of these amendments were merely verbal, and which substantially altered the Bill as it left that House.— He had not he time to cast his eye over them, and for aught be knew they might be passing new le gislative provisions, when they conceived they were merely making verbal alterations. The fact vies, that the chief amendment. the clause prohibiting a Meeting within a mite of Westminster Hall, was a new legislative measure, which that House was about to diepose of by a single vote, instead et its passing through the vare-us stages—the three readings—the Committee, &c. by which a n ;let scrutiny of eveiy measure proposed was occasioi.cd. Mr. BATHU I.,,t.eived, that the clause to which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman adseited, was the alteration Goat had been made in the Bill. The Hthtl amendments merely tended to gibe facility to the operation oft ti c Bill. After a conversation of some length on the mean ing of the amendment introduced by the Lords into that part of the Bill which related to the Proclama tion by the Magistrates for the dispersion of illegal meetings, Lord FoexsTona ccntendmg that by the amended, the Magistrates were directed to disperse themselves—(a laugh)—and Mr. BATHURST maintaining that the meaning was intelligible. Mr. raouc HAM representented the risk which Parliament was about to run, of adopting a measure nut only without due care and circumspection, but on the very phrate.rlogy of which such great diffe. rences of opinion existed. He was persuaded, that the (illy satisfactory proceeding would be to print the Bill as amended, continuously, and then the House would have an opportunity of comparing it with, ti.e Bill, as it left them, which it was impossible to do without confusion at present. Unless this was done, it was -very probable that they would not merely commit tautology (it was too late in 'the day to complain of that error in Acts of Parliament), but enact rank nonsense, on silk!) no Court of Law could subsequently act. Lord COCHRANE pointed out some further errors in this amendment, and maintained that from beginning to end the Bill was a mass of blunders .; — and were these to be tolerated in an Act imposing the penalty of death on his Majesty's subjects? Al though the Home had been lately accustomed to think lightly of jails and chains and gibbets, he did hope that they would not persevere in this most hasty and ill.judged proceeding. Some discua-ion took place between the Soeictroa GENERAL and Mr. PLUNKETT on various verbal mac-, curacies in the amendment. Mr. BROUGHAM again urged the necessity of inquiring, with more accuracy, into the precise na lute and expression of all the amendments. Several pieces of nonsense had already been detected in them, and who knew whet o'hers might remain undiscove red. The House, for the sake et it► own consistency and dignity, and the interests of the country, ought, he repeated, to have the Bill printed as amended by the Lords, and not be satisfied with the amendments by themselves (which. were scarcely intelligible) and in order to allow of this being done, he would move that the further consideration of the amendments should be adjourned until Moaday. Mr. ABERC ROM BY thought that the Bill should be reprinted with the amendments. Mr. STURGES BOURNE observed, that the printing of Amendments was only a practice of mo dern times. It was too much to say that the consi deration of the Amendments ought to be postponed in order to adopt the novel come of printing the whole bill with the Amendments of the Lords. It surely could not be difficult to alter the latter part of the clause, so as to make it grammatical. Mr. PONSONBY observed, if the printing of Amendments was a modern practice, he believed the returning a Bill of no great length, with no fewer than fihiy•five Amendments, was a practice never known before the present day. He did not believe that on the other side of the House there was at that moment one man who would not in his conscience be better pleased, if the House were to adopt the, course proposed by his Hon. and Learned Friend. Surely there was no pressing necessity for this law ; and having already obtained the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, they might wait a little while, that the House might give the Bill that attention which a sense of its own dignity required. Mr. CANNING thought the insertion of the words to command's in place of the word s' com manding" would obviate every objection. Sir M. WHITE RIDLEY saw no necessity for hurrying on this measure w►th such undue baste, es pecially when he called to recollection what was now taking place in another part of the country, alleged to have been in a disturbed state, namely, Manches ter, where persons were committed under the sth Charles the Second, which prohibits Meetings for the pprpose of petitioning to alter any thing by law established, without the consent of three Magistrates, on a requisition signed by twenty householders, under the penalty of 8100. Mr. CURWEN hoped Ministers would not press this matter to a division. Mr. BATHIIRST observed, that a slight verbal alteration was all that was now requisite. Sir CHARLES MONCK wished to knop whe ther the words " or Magistrate," introduced is the, amendment of the Lords, would make any substan tial alteration in the Bill The House then divided—For the =Genii of ad journment St—Against it 77—Majority 16. The Amendment was afterwards agrdbd to, with the alteration of the insertion of the woods " to come mend" instead of commanding. - Several other Verbal Amcndmgßts wen, abet some conversation, adopted by the Roue. On the question for agreeing to the Ainendment ' on the clause, declaring it lawful to disperse meetings held under any notice, " wilds shall express or pur port that ar.y matter, by law established. may be al tered, utberwise than by the authority of the King, Lords and Commons, in Parliament assembled," to which the Lords had added, 4 ' or to such rthet," Lord FOLKSTONE observed, that this was an Amendment of a most sweeping nature, as it left to Vie interpretation of a Magistrate, nut only whether a notice rurported the. alteration of the Constitution, but whether it was "to such effect." They bad lately heard ct a Requisition attic!: had been sent to the Mayor of Bristol to convene a Meeting for the purpn.e of retitinning for Parliamentary Reform: the :elayor h id objected to such a meetiog, because he conceived that under reform was meant rebelli in, and i.e was supported in this construction by many Reverend and Leaned Persons; and there were few pulpits in Bristol front which the Sunday before the meeting exhortations were not put forth that people should nut atter.d the me..ting, because tebelitan was the object. They had heard also of a requisi tion to the blietiff of Cornwall, signed by some of the most respectaltio Gentlemen of that county, and the Sheriff had refused to call the Meeting, because he was persuaded it could mean nothing less than, the overthrow of the Constitution. When they knew that such a construttiLti had been put upon the most innocent requisitions by some Magistrates, it was too much to give them a right to interfere with meetings called by others, by words so sweeping as those iv troduced sy the Lords' Amendment, and to dissolve any meeting, persons disobeying their commands being subject to the renalty of death. lie should propose therefore to amend the Lords' Amendment, by fray /Pg nut the words " or to such effect." Mr. I'ONSONBIr said, he hoed objeeted to the clanse as it at first stood, but it was now telidned doubly objecti swine by the Lot Js ' Ameni!inetit. The IslaAistrates would now have the passer of dissolei;sg :besting* not only in consequence of words, •' which tend" to the sitheer stool of tile Goveinment, but for words which have " such etkit." Could there Le any thing so louse or inaccurate as this ? It was surely not fit that Parliament should give a discretio nary power wider words so extensive and vague to a single Magistrate ; for if such a clause wore passed, he could hardly conceive that any political discus sion could take place, or that any public meetings could be held. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that it the Right lion. Gentleman wrio had spoke last, had attended to the place where the Amendment was introduced, he would have per ceived, that it was not open to the obktions he had made. The Riftit Hon. Gentleman was inaccut ate in else supposition, that the Amendment alluded to +words spoken at a public meeting, as it only re:erred to the words in n written or printed notice, which of course would be the subject of more mature cgcside ration than words spoken at any meeting could be. Neither did the Amendment refee to notices we 'eh shall tend to stir up the p!ople to hatred or contempt of the Government. dm but merely to notices pur porting that any matter of law can be altered craw . by authority of Parliament, to which the Lords had added, or to such effect. The Amendment had un doubtedly eateildcsi the biome of the °Liege, to.pre vent the poslibiiity of notices impeaching the anther rity of Parliament, even though they might nat do it in a direct manner. Mr. PONSONBY observed, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not answered his objection to the laxity of the words introduced. The looseness of the expression to such effect was surely highly objec tionable in a penal law, and a law SU highly penal, in which the utmost attention should be given that the offences created should be as accurately described as possible—(Hear, hear.) Lord COCHRANE wished to know whether the words C:overtursent and Coaaiisaion, in the clause be. lore the House, were synonirnous, or whether it was penal to bring his Majesty's Ministers into contempt? If that were the case, he thought the Gentlemen op posite him (the Ministers) would fall under the pe nalties of the law, for no persons laboured so inces santly and effectually to bring the Government into contempt as they. He agaia assured the House, that he had that morning given his undivided attention to the Amendments as they were printed ; and he could not yet understand in what places they were introduced. He implored the House, if it regarded its own cha racter, to abstain from hurrying through the Bill in that most indecorous manner. The murder of the indi viduals who suffered under the Bill, it it passed, would be on the head of his Majesty's Ministers, for the measure was not deliberated on or discussed as it be came the House, but hurried through for temporary purposes, and fur ends not the most honourable" to those who lair:posed it. Mr. ABE RCROMI3Y said, the clause before con tained the words " shall purport," and the Lords, not satisfied with those words, certainly extensive enough, introduced others of much greater latitude. The words " to such effect," might be construed ac. cording to the pleasure of any Magistrate • and, to use the instance of his Noble Friend (L ord Folk stone) if a meeting were called for the purpose of pe titioning for Parliamentary Reform, a Magistrate might possibly imagine that such a meeting came within the loose words of the Amendment. Because therefore it was thus vague and uncalled for, he should oppose the Amendment. Mr. BATHURST said, the Lords had, by a pre 'ions amendment, substituted the word " express" fur the word " purport." Some word of larger ex tent was therefore required to take in notices, which might not in an open, but in an indirect way, im :e.ich the authority of Parliament. It was to be oh served, that it was much more likely that the notices which had for their object meetings to impeach the authority of Parliament to enact laws, would be given in an implied rather than an open manner. But was it to be supposed for a moment by any one, that a meeting for petitioning respe c ti ng Parliamentary Re form, or even to draw up Resolutions, (though he did ' not see how such Resolutions could be framed with out involving a petition -to the Ki ng or one o f th e Houses of Parliament) would come within the clause (Hear, hear, hear.) 'What the ultimate effect of Par liamentary Reform might be, was another question (Near, hear, hear.) But suppose notice was given that any question should be ds:cussed, not in wctds expressing that the power should be taken out of the heads of Vattamett i at,.. for instance, • whreas the time was ripe for the people to take the GoTeter.v?.l into their own hands, it would require the r Mit c! the clause to comprebend'such a notice. Ileac:wry. ledged that it the clause had stood as it origina:lv had stood, viz. with the word " purport," he should not have objected to it ; but the intention (.1 tFe Lords' Amendment evident') w.IS to /nevem Tw i ce , i bring issneJ, which, though net in words, i.o; meatiitig and intent, impeached the authuti.y ot F a r. liamrnt. Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, th it the Leids h a d not struck out the .vord pu.rport," but had , tided the word " express" to it, so that they had given it all the latitude which would fair!y t,e contended for, 'even by those who approved of th,; clause. They had, however, added the wrr,ls " or to slch effect," which in effect would give the 1.( ..er to Maeistrotes to prevent meetings at all. There were Tel few p o pulous places where one :twice n. Pe..ee might not be found to dis trot tve of o•ly tuervng of the people. This was nil merely his t!ictit v there aas an H") t w io h : t i ) ra h b a i d e a s y aid on try a r i ttj f p n e i c c ta ttili,lemil.e tight, lttie„ri,ol; to theecn. the House, duct of the Maelstrom of Gitsgow, that be thought no popular meetings at all should he held at th , s time. It was ottet.ly asclets to itursduce the words " t.o siiLli ttE ct," after the M.vd pur;mrt," it were intended to countemioce the :toTosition on the part of M 4glittAtt'i that :C. should L: held tor :toss. polo !cal , nirpose wh.,t:,f%ver Mr PLUNKE I T's . ••l,l tha: c.mcntre,l his Right Hutioutahie Fuend N.zepoit) thinking that the A MellJtllvtttb 01 Men highly improper. It the word 4• pat all which " such effect" could c . u litter words were useless, and, it useless, Ste. t . I..tticct. (Mar, hear, hear) For if words wi.re sturtutuceJ. , , express notices which hail been already sufficitetty provided for, elEcious persons, or persons ut heated imaginations might be found, who might say, that something further was meant than the first words could be et:moiled to signify. He was hiendly to the uleimire bo ot e t h e Huose. Though he was not litesent when it was first introduced. he should no: now shrink twin the responsibility ill supporting it ; but when penalties such as those inflicted by the 13.11 beture them were introduced, it was the duty of the lionse to see that they were involved in no ambi guity. buth was the titude, laxity, and unmean ingness of t;:e words introduced by the Lards, that he w..s compelled to object to it. He could not ton• ! sent to allow any Magistrate to act tauter a dis.:re !, lion so wide and unlimited. Mr. W. ELLIOT objected to tile Amendments of r.f the L•nds, as entirely unnecessary, and tending ta t titer to impede than facilitate the mention of the law. I Mr. wiz...11-JERI:IA, said, the words introduced i by the Lot cis Mete tieniy ”nonyntouso those whiz% before stood in the clause; bit ee sani no objection to their remaining, as they werso4oids usually serted in legal instruments.—The Qnesticm having been put, and a division being called tor, Mr. BROUGHAM said, the arguments again!: the Lords' Amendment, and especially those of hi; Ilotioer..ble and Learned Friend (Mr. Pluukett) re mained neantwtred. The insertion was, as had be.l well observed, utelesr. ; and it useless, pernicie.:s ; And it tenaaioed to be shee n that the word "pt:TY:' meant something term than "to such effect." .1 Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bathurst) had pt 4 case, it a meeting were called for the purpose of dis cussing whether the people should take the Gm:t alent into their own hands, would such a notice been oomprehended in the original words a Clause ? Most certainly it would. It would ice a pre position to alter, not any thing, but every thieg, wi, - out the authority of Parliament. Did the Honourable Gentleman seriously mean to say that a proposition for the people to take the Government into their own hands, and consequently out of the hands of the Parliament, did not purport—nay did not even strictly express an alteration of the law Without the authority of King, Lords, and Comment Art Honourable Member had said, he saw no übjec• t:on to the words " to such effect," because the %cr.! " purport" had been admitted, which meant just the same thing. The reason why he objected to the words " to such effect," was just precisely becauu the word " purport" had been before introduced.— He would ask the Right Hon. Gentleman op t icsi.e (Mr. Bathurst), whether, if a meeting were called t, pass resolutions on the distresses of any district with out mentioning Petitions to the King or Parliarner, it would not be taken to come within the Clause a; now stood ? On the answer to this might depeA some of his further arguments. Mr. BATHURST said it was not very regular to question any Member on his opinion as to the 'pc ' ration of any clause. If the House understood that the word " purport" would comprehend all notict in substance as well as words, impeaching the ; 4)• thority of Parliament, the amendment of the Lords would be surplusage ; and if so, he acknowledged i: would be mischiev , ..us. (Hear, /.ear.) The motion tt.r leaving out ttie wilds " to such effect" was then agreed to, and the amendment dies amended sera alterti to. Lord COCHRANL said, he wished to knew whether the Constitution, as by law estabiishe-i, nie::nt the 11w worth had been tecently passed, by which all the best parts of that Coratitution had Iwo. suspended, whether a Meeting to yetition.ig.ent: those laws might be dispersed by any one .lostiee,? Several verbal amendments were agreed to, as also the first clause introduced by the Lords. Upon the clause prohibiting all Meetings in Fa' lace.yard during the sitting of Parliament, of c' Courts of Jostiec, which we gave at full :ere, our Paper of yederday, being read, Mr. CUR WEN rose an-1 said he fe!t it 'As dull to give his opposition to the Ciauw. COvstq . he thought should understand the I.vh , le purport :4 the Clause, which he conceived to h: rceria - t 1116 danger to the Constitution of the House, as wet at to the rights of the subject. The Bill bet ire t.ens had always been represented in that House as a meg. sure of necessity, and which should not be tarried one iota further than the necessity required. Suet was the universal consent of all parties in that i:oiten and the only question was, whether any necessity ex isted ? It was also declared to be a meauute to re" vent illegal, but not at all to encroach on legal : ( let; inns. Such were the principles which had ~sided that House, but had they been acted on by :5:: et:1 1 House of Tatliament No.—Ott the contrary had pa:Acti tut Clause now under cons'ectemit