The Statesman. — London, England, 1821-05-12 00:00:00

•11 , .1,. - ~ spect to what was called party feeling, lie no man was to be blamed for writing fairly party ; but attacks upon private character in of either party was to be thoroughly condemned. Ile (Mr. S.) had no time to read newspapers in g is* ene usa*. ral; hates .the.. Noble Mammas had admitted alma midr of• this Newspaper; be (Mr. S.) would re- Militia the writer Sad' in one of his papers beasted-eil keeping. tom all w ith persons of the most craned tillt...4llear, bear The object of the 'writer In tha paer was to write down the press. The House COuld t not p haye foremen that under the reign of Augustus all libels were declared High Treason. in consequence of the attacks made by an individual upon lll‘sttious women. He trusted, however, that the atempts of this writer would not have the desired effect. The paragraph in the Times Newspaper, which was under the consideration of the House in July 1819, and which was referred to by the Noble Marquess, consisted of a misrepresentation of the speech of one of its Members. Whether that case w as parallel to the present was for the c onsideration of the iln. The present libel smelt of blood. If the writer wi sh ed to bring the parties to extremities be wished to bring a man into the field, he c ould not have tak en a course more likely to prove elfeetryd than that he had taken. In all cases he thought the public would respect those papers the nase:t which abstained from attacks upon individuals 1, , .t certainly , u p on a view of the two cases, be thought the case of 1819 would bear no comparison with the present. The Marquess of LONDONDERRY was sorry if ;toy thing haul fallen from him which might have the ap pearance of warmth. Ile however could scarely re vret it, as it had occasioned an explanation from the llonnerable atilt Learned (lentleman which removed asst' impret riots whih might have existed as to a •I l qw.aeal tolerati hy his Majesty's Council, or the I...essieil of the Nation, of the publication in ques li•vs. Ile cold , ' not recognise the distinction which hail beets 'lieu n between the two libels. That of I -419 had led to a m essage from his Right Honour .tle Friend to the Ilossousalole Member for Ahertleesi, %% lath plo: liteed an honourable and manly explana- Cm. Ile thouglit the House would e xpose itself to a s ospiolusi of partiality by pronottuLing a judgment rtiffer•olt from th st of Sir It. FEROCSON explainetk—The Noble Mar ilee:as opiiasite bad attributed motives to him ; but he thou;!:. the Noble Marquess had better l ok to o his op u , Ile (Sir It.) had o ily expressed what be tirvanglit r.as b ea:o seing indignation ag ainst attack., upon defeucel.:ss %town. 'the Marquess of LONDON DF.RRY appealed to the tlosise setether he L ad imputed any m otives to the !,,.pant lienera.ll. Ile only regretted that the indigna tia,as of the House had not been as strongly marked its one LASO as it appeared to be in the other. Mr. lY YNNE said, that in all cases like theooke pre sent he had taken a n e q ual coarse; an d bad ld I only to the moor of the House. He thought that in the s our,; of the last a utumn libl•le bad been issued ae wool, sipaus one side as on the other ; libels disgraceful a til t the press and to those who had to a dminister the course of justice. Had they occurred duringf the the sitting of the Ho use, be thou the v engeance o ght Hosea: otti;lst to have been visited upun the authors. Tl.e libel which bad been brought snider consideraion two •:ears age , was, he thought, a most flagi ti ii us libel. it vatted, as a part of a w eeds, that which had never Le. or s polaen, and marked the part by the supposed pi abation of the house. The writer, on being called to the Bar, said lie hart tuistalreu the lauguage, but he (Mr. Vi . .) thiiught it scarely possible. however, as a 6iewL:r hail intimated an u piniou that th e writer usiAst have been mistaken, the pursisluneut was usiti ga;e!'. L was his firm belief that the remi lib ss ion In• ls. of the on that occasion had encouraged e %Led, lac considered the lenity of the Housesuen bad been the taa.taken on th at occasion. If the antendt of hoble arquess wee adopted he thought it would be wolth nMo M e mber's r while to, make any complaint to the House. Ile had seen many wilful t uisrepresenta in•e:i of the debates of the House ; but in the present .tT.C, he looked to the question i ttttt sediately before him. If the person who bail been examined at the 1:..r Lad shewn any dispositiou to tell the truth, lie • si, odd have been glad to lay bold of any put circunssntance w airls could be o ff ered iu mitigation of ishmet ; lb.o as he considered the present a libel of the grossest .1, sea•iption, he should vote fur the original motion ; lir he thought the support of . the privileges of the ilause, nearly connected with the liberties of lie the d not The peoplot e. The Marquis o f LONDONDERRY said a r leasied the a trocity of the pro.ent libel. Ile merely wished se to have regard to its formerjutlg tu euts in Ili the house miler cases. Mr. WARD said he should always support an equal distribittiou of justice, for he considered that nothinw tauld bit ware injurious than an opinion that it would b.- safer to attack a gentleman of one party than of aeotber. The lion Member then referred to the libel tit 1619. It stated (profeising to report a speech of C.a Hon. Member for Aberdeen) that Isis Right Hon. Friend had rendered himself indifferent to the objects k e gs of Isis fello w creatures, by usaking them -of habitual ridicule. This was a general attack upon • tit a n ' s whole life; and was more di ffi cult to answer titan a specific charge. He thought j he House should act con sistently, awl give tbe same udgment on the present occasion, as it had given in the year 1819. - Mr. WYNNE explained. Lord J. RUSSELL thought, that in cases of privi lege the wilder punishment was always the best. Oa the occasion referred to by the libel of 1819, there -certainly had been a laugh, and this bad given rise ht lion. Member to an erroneous op inion that the Rig alluded to bad turned the sufferiags of his fellow-cres tures into ridicule. He could lot recognise the dis tinction which bad been taken betw Noble the two c u e s Haft insta n ce, a probe accased.th tduq of cruelty chitin his GovernaMat in Ireland. it refer - red to a prt of his public cambia. and was capable of contradiction : bat this was very different from the case in whieb an attack *as made span the females of **loftily. • Charges of sack a description were al theWort painfal.aboagb y were es false es hell; for • theft *as a &Buoy aloft thifeasala diarists,: wlieis ' *nide* pubile.wftko. TIN libel. titakidgaseat upon 41'18111:st bemeoUoi as a p _coald not be COSI • Simla tehiehttpeared is the owe paper Wore the lismeit; tit 110 regraisd that he no# not acquit tie Mateo/ Goescowearef the charge Of *muftis( tire popir• lio bad bees 'gives to as- —ne josses correct in his foreign pediries , was is his Irish information.—(4k laugb.)--lf the No ble Lord would satisfy hint that any person in his office inid circulated this paper in the way to which the Noble fiord had alluileil, that person should he im t - mediately discharged.—(llear, bear.)—Witls respec to female honour, lie knew not whether he might ven- ' ture to rival the No ble Lord in this respect.(he %l ov A lngh.) —but he could a sEnre the Noble Lord that ed any attack upon female honour with as much indigna tion as himself. Libels however of the most atrocious descriptions had been circulated against the highest characters, and bail been but too generally encouraged. Even Majesty itself had been attacked in the most daring manner; and be should be glad to know whe ther the Noble Lord himself bad never taken in Mr. Publication.—(Cheer.) Mr. COURTENAY said, the attention of the House ought not to be drawn into a general discussion, when the immediate qu estion arose out of a distinct para graph, Ile thought the analogy of the two cases per fectly clear. The libel ;vas equally fa stributelse in bo d th wi c th ase an s; and justice, he thought, should be di equal hand. Lord JOHN RUS`IEI.I., in explanation, observed, that lie could not say that he had taken in Mr. Ilune"a publications. Mr. W. SMITH said, be would never give his ante for bringing a Printer to the Bar of that 'loose for what is called a political libel. The present case, however, was that resulted from a false accusa tion against a Member of having told a falsehood froth fear. The acrusatiiiii might have led to a marderous quarrel, and lie tliwiOit to punishment too severe for it. The libel of 1819 involved a q uestion of i i iterest. Ile'thought the person who was called to the Bar of the House in 1819 had not misrepresented wilfully. — The present was a wilful and malicious andlie therefore should vote for the severer punishment. It really messed that his Noble Friend (Lord Nugent) wished this delinquent to escape. merely bte4use he was a mean, dirty. prevaricating Mr. C. HUTCHINSON protested against the com parison of the two cases. This he thought was eon fonnding innocence with guilt. 'flte individual (Mt. Collier) who was at the Bar in 1819, was a gentleman of high respectability, and belonged to a most respect able estisblisloneut. That g entleman h d a no infe r no ntion to the feelings of any one, and lie believ one at their Bar had ever couiluctril himself with no s o touch propriety and warmness as Mr. Collier, and man bad ever Iv 'en s ubjected toed he censure of the House more i miner ily. The prnt, o n the o ther hand, was a case of a ;Joss, m alici.os-, awl unmanly libel. Ile was generally inclined to leitimit ptinislo ment in ail cases ; and , his object in risito; bad been principally to do joisti;:e to it Must r.:liectable Mr. WILMOT sa id lie sLaultl soopport the motion for the severer punishment , as he the ailalogy which had beets drawn between the ta ca..e., was com pletely destroyed. Mr. BARING said that morn of party fe.li!.% been exhibited in the debate than lie count{ have %Oiled; hut lie trusted lion. Members I ilieist themselves of this feeling on coming to the ..iste. He regretted that the Howe conlil coaie to an ummituous decision. Mr. BANKF,S b• gged soggest ta his Noble Friend (the Marquess of Lonionderry), that lie should withdraw lilt: Amendmen t ,' a considerable part of the Howe was opposed to it. The Marquess of LON DON JERRY said, that what lie hail heard in the course •if the na l mslew om thof e two ca ses had certainly altered his origioa l'o 19 present question, and he thought the precedent of had better be broken than observed. Ile therefore should certainly withdraw his Amendm en e t Noble Mar . Sir .1. MACKINT I /Sll said, that as th quess had withdrawn Isis Amendment, in eiinsequenee of what bail passed, lie presumed liis Noble Friend (laird Nugen t ) would fr !WIPP .fil:fitai feel himself pressed to withdraw his Amendment, whirl% was for the mildest punishme nt of all. 'llse paper in quest stilityion lie thought was dir ected by the must s avage ho , and hail a tendency to harbarixe political %carfare. Lord said, thit feeling that withdraw of motion. Mr. BROUGHAM said, that as the case of hi s r. Collier was so t ouch alluded to, ho rose to state M re collection of the circumstances. After alluding tn . those circumstances, the lion. and Learned Gentlenits' said, that the ease of Mr. Collier was not one of wilfil misrepresentation . When called to the Bar, his manner was such as made a favourable impression, and was no, doubt taken into account. The consiltency of 146'1 statement was also considered, and there WAS also the evidence of a Member of that House, who hail soli that, to the best of his recollection, the lion. Membe for Aberdeen bad made use of wo rds similar to those; which were rep orted by Mr. Collier. T here wal another piece of confirmatory evidence, namely, the evidence by Members of that House of the respecham) tabi. lity of Mr. Colli er ' s character. if he (yi r. Broug thought that Mr. Collier had been guilty of putting into the mouth of a Member of that House malicious falsehoods, in ord er to g ratify his own malignity, for , that were he charge against the young gentleman, no considion of lenity would induce him to rote in that case for a lesser punishment. The tase of Mr. Collier was entirely digereut from the case before the House. There was nothing to exculpate the party, but, on the contrary, there was the absence of every extenuating circumstance. lie believed that he would concur with the sentiments of the majority of the House, by voting for the more severe punishment. Lord NUORNT said, that though be withdrew his Amendment in deference to the House, he did nut at the same time surrender Isis own opinion. The House then divided on Mr. Daring's motion, when there appeared--• For the Mottos 106 Ageism It ............................. Majority►fer eh. • modem for comialmleg Cooper to ile!gate • ... 96 • thqing tbttr exclusioeu of stra ngers. we un derstand lint ifs. W. 151111tfi Moved. that Robert `sore, Thomas iirreti sm ith. and Wm. Slacken, had guilty of gross rossrleation is giving their eek it the Bar of the geese. Auk Perriftalite•Nleat they had (long._ of en exinainatioa. Attie Oat: of that_ Haase into their private concerns. .14Est..eicatoinatert.—!ta0_,Tertaityi been carried further pan even be a m house ever to bate .gone before, hadit 124 beta fur the obbapty attached-to such an iacerfesimass, should more than ones have stood np for the istetees Lion of the witnessei against questions tending to, criminate themselves. Besides skis, taang Mesabi could MK be prepared se vote ea this part of the qa lion, not having been present during the whole of the evidence. In order to enatfle them to form a judg• went, the evidence ought to 'be printed ; but he was prevented from voting for that, from,a conviction that a great part of the examination bad been. of so iadie; creel a nature on the part of the House, that it woul4 not reflect much credit upon it. Sir J. NIACKINTOSII expressed deep regret that his Hon. Friend who had just spoken should have been able to sit silently by, and witness the continuance of an examination which be considered as derogatory to the House, and dangerous to its reputation, without in terfering. Ile did not know how his lion. Friend could reconcile to his mind, for fear of the obloquy attendant upon interference, to remain silent, whilst a radically unjust and oppressive course was being, pursued by the Howe. When it was too late, and the statement was gone abroad, he could get up and do his utmost to bring the greatest unpopularity upon the House, as far as iu him lay. He regretted shat a man such hstatem e highly esteemed could \ be capable of mak in g lie ',petted als.) that he did not point out in what respects in th:s exatninatiott the House had gone beyond the bounds set by the former practi ► ce of Par liament in similar cas e s . hie (Sir J. Mac k intosh) maintained that they acre to lie guided in this case by the Ira. a rorstreivdo Parliame4ti, and as the Hon. Member hail not pointed out any deviation from that print iple, he would undertake to•be stile to slim, that in the material parts of the examination there had been no transgression of the practice of Parliament hitherto. Besides, he conceived his Hon. Friend had made a direct reflection on the want of proper lance in that Right Hon. Persoo, who , front his office, is the g uareian of the honour and good conduct of that Hou e. Hail his watchfulness slumbered for a moment such an improper course would have been stopped by sonie Hon. Meinber ; for he was sure there were some who would not have silently looked on and suffered the House to cast disgrace and infamy on itself, and then come forward, when too late, to rivet that disgrace the more firmly. He hail before de flared how notch he deplored the litlawartuness of many Members of that House, but now Ire must s tate that if lie thought - there were many who could be guilty of such conduct as this, he should think the Muse near its destruction. Mr. S. BOURN!: in explanation, said he atill never used the words " infamy" of " disgrace" astill less load lie applied them to that House. He ba ll il s tated his fair opinio ns, and lie must say, that Ise st thought that it wa s carrving on examination beyond its just limits, when it went to elicit answers render ing the persons who gave them liable to punishm ent for the office which they proved thereby against them selves.—(Cheers.) —Ile had so often on former occa sion- interf..red to rc;traiii questions without success, th.ot lie confessed he fr!t backward to don self the obloquy of so t ieing w asraw him hen it wto have no effect. Sir .1. M ICK I NTOSII explained. Mr. SU A ItLETT ( Ibsen el, that the length and mi nuteness of exAmination complain ed of by the Right Hon. Menel,er were rendered necessary by the prevari cation of the witnesses, which made it necessary to send for all the others. Sir W. DE URESl'lli's Y made a few o by.ervations , which were not audible in the (rall , ry. Lord NI GENT an d Mr. S:BOUKNI'. mu tnally ex plaided. Mr. WYNNE sail, that the witness Weaver had been clea.ly guilty of prevarication, and it was diffi cult to object to a question, unless the motive of the examinant was known. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that he should not know how to act as to the conduct of the remaining parties at the Bar, not hav H ing heard 11111 whole of the evidence given. Many on. Members must be similarly situated, and unless it were sashimi to give a preTipitate character to th proceedeir proceenodinfurthergs, he thought it would he advisable to till the evidence was printed and in the hands of the House. Sir J. NEWPORT said a few words, which wet* inaudible in the Gallery. Mr. DENMAN said he was in the same situations' the Noble Marquis, and was therefore desirous thetas, L evidence should be printed. Mr. BERN AL thought that after the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury bad cleared up his honour, it worthd have been heeler not to have proceeded with this case. Mr. W. SMITH contended that the House mast hare the power of doming at the truth by examine doe ; and if it possessed that power, it must also pos sess the power of censuring it for prevarication at the Bar. lf the House were to a g ree to come to resolu tions of censure, he thould not wish to go any farther, and it would then be unnecesisryh to pant the of ev this i dence. He m ,ved, s• That it opinion House, that R. T. Weaver has grossly prevaricated in the evidence he has given befUre this House." Mr.g. WILSON said, that having been present durinithe whole of the examination, he was enabled to state that there was more impropriety in the exit ruination of the House, than prevaricatiott on the part of the witness. It did not appear to him that the w itness Wester had been guilty of that prevarication ascribed to him. He believed that Messrs. Sbackell and Arrowsurith, finding the difficulties they were likely to get ipto from the nature of their publication had some titnelleikk made a bawd* with Waiver, that if be would talsi Ihs respousibilittaff &it backs, he should in reit,* become 'proprietor. Cfieldering tfie time they hat already spent In was not dlartrigalra llottsetikitalf. •ir V set So ledefeekit the s►beld'i~ As Kt owd istrialtiiiirelai if *At tv. OW a ilise~.l6o.ldeettlll eledice . . %. • e I j I draw his amendment, s Alt. T. Weavor be ordered into the custody of the Ret icent at Arm; and be brought - to the Bar, to %beef I mended by the Spealser." This was opporied hi r. %tercels, who tuoved, " That R. T. Weave r lt•e at to Nee/gate." •- On this the House divided, 'elm !,the numbers were :—For MY. Smith's motion, t 7.-. Against it, 31—Majority in • favour of Mr. Wyelle's Amendment, 7. . When strangers were readmitted. Mr. BROUGHAM was speaking. H e was net'irv. . . . pared to give a vote on the case of the individualssais before the House, without having the printe tide tA before him. Whether they had prevaricated or not t ha, did not know at that time, and therefore he %fished - the further consideration of the subject to be adjourned: Mr. BARING wad Sir J. NawronY offered a few words which could trot he distinctly heard in the Gallery. - • • Sir W. DE CII;ESPIGNY moved that the eviletee should be printed. Sir C. LONG hearing the whole of Mr. Artemisia''s . evidence, could see nothing like prevarication in it. He had heard nearly the whole of Mr. Weaver's evidence, and did not see that he bad prevaricated. Ile doebted whether, consistently with the dignity of the Rims% they could go further. Mr. BARING wished the %notion to be withdrawn. It did not seem desirable that they should rotted for ther. lie did not know that the parties bad prevari cated. Though their elide:it's was by no meamilear, he dill not think they would be justified iu.doiag ISM than they bud already done. . . Colonel DAVI Ei thought it would appear rather ex t rao rdinary if they wer e now to . stop short and let the . two greater delinonenta escape punishment. It.auight be better not to notice such cases at ail ; but if me taken up, they could admit of no half m easures, and might to go on. Ile hoped the motion would be rm. I vend in. Mr. C. WYNN bad nn floats', and he thonght . t he 1 I House could have nuoe, that the individual on whim case they had now to decide, where the props ietors eldest paper. To Lim it appeared that they n ere wore gellty than the men of straw who bat been already committed to Newgate. Ile did iiw comit•r that it was necessary Ito print the evidence. Ili a case 111 re the present, wheel the offence complained of t eas proved to have been Mee w itted by the par ties brought before them, he thoegk the heaviest punishment ought to he inflicted. Sir W. 1)E CRESPIGNY considered there were sufficient grounds fur moving that the evidence shosM be printrd. The Gallery was cleared for a division, but the Hosts did not divide. We understand the minutes of evidence wer e ord...red to be pri nted ; and it was intimated t =eat li o Messrs. Arrowstuith and Shac kle that they berty to depart. AFFAIRS OF EUROPE. Mr. R. WARD move I.thae the House e houldtadve itself into a Cottinatee of Supply. Mr. C. 111:11 HINSON, thoagh he kad se 110 1 1 addressed the House on the subject of the pre= state of Earope, was desirous of again calks/ the attention of the House to the passing even, which he thought endangered the liberties of this country as well a; rollers, and at least record tie ors intoon the Journals. Ile wished to go at lair into the subject, but feeling for various imam's, did it would be improper to detain the House thee, hi w ould fie a etotion for the first open day, w hich Me Tuesday, time '22J inst. ORDN A SCE. Mr. iII:ME called the e motion of the llouse to tk t r esavag atm e of the Ordnanee estliaitl.lihad been rsloorent. Ile me the more anx ious to du ttii,, tletnan, the Cle rk it sta ted by the llontiurable lien% Ordnance, that the utmost anxiety bad been maillielb ed by the Noble Duke at the head of that departed* to adopt mea s u res of economy in every depa l,32lolrtures& Th e estimate for the present year was This was 53,0001. less than the estimate for 1 but making a deduction, which ought to be takes le the.accontit for old stores, from this apparent krill it would be found that the public paid exactly & same as in 1820. In the three years 1790, 1791, tat 2, the av erage amount of the Ordnance &lime 179 w as 473,00 01 . Their average amount in IS IS, ISM and In2o, was 1,06,6531. being three time as that of the former period. It ought to be km& the House that there was a difference between these' Mates for the Ordnance, and the actual expeadiell.i. amounting to some hundreds of thousauls of pee! To alien this, he would take'three years, 18171 1 16 and 1f419, the accounted those having beets rift From these it would be teen that the total 1111!Ifit the Ordnance Estimates iti those years was .P.12:7i The Espeodi ter e was -- - • Myer — 'Making a difference of -- - - _,alts la the Ordnance Estimates nothing was cb; 6 7; 0 4 Alpe used to carry sores backwards and AM, yet these, it would be found, created s ..... 11,500/. He 'adverted to o ther charge, lb a t la kept out of sight, complained of she mode is . " r e , l the 'accounts were kept, and repeated what b L iv before asserted that so far VMS that departsoll: being distinguished by i:s regard for ec ismi oal o t; the greatest negligence prevailed. It =pliantly announced to the Houle, that GS joi connected with the Ordnance bad been red do Noble Doke (the Duke of reilinKlen) beii.iitlis placed at the bead of the department. Bet it selt. = the Returns lie had =veil for, that sioce 1114" sew appointments had taken place. 11.“!.44.10 do situations of those who were placed on lialf-pse• of these who bad been so lately. appointed, 1 00 W Bpliaiscesereestp:oerrn :11:-epersompriy.solcroi,sfotirriviiioessaygeceeis.01;eadrvireeid..:ili were Wit 17 or 18 years of age, and one 6 wel/ 0 rare end 10 soatbs, Ile tliestkite Seed el Cleaseitee was pet entit.lea to t , Hotter. es aiVey deperrest alight; to the Witenittot stet mpitilennoiste. otateAtisigla 11110001: Writ than -_ .... . f .1 I, . .‘ - Ii• . N, . , • I . . t . —...- - ---- . 11 1 1 N arication, it was in those nitnesses. They all (of tho ..e • . orss.,se . o . . ilsore . re- . mission to the Gal -eau t .. h ose Frouse engaged in a di.cussion as to the mode of dis- them seemed to have some mental reservation, an d i n y frig is sad.rs representing his Majesty abroad. a favour almila•k-i* tht I.llolooearie 4eriltifrisii—eloOkol. 11..in g filig n , togri.:ll4loo4-biste oisterntsp. ever answer sliewed a wish to imbue a different mean- -..--. - - ideusned. p a id for a moral a ssarinaoion.. t am the o n ei; tfrit .4, _ 161 1 ' '•%. 1 ing * from %%hat they in fact entertained. .....gal: The M arq uess o f 4,4,t;))0 ,N,..DE,.....4Rit.ysiestalawilhresigaoshitlee in ili r r. e ' inbermonrvilmismortir fi.; Nir tbsterra•Useurisiornsaaeliehlwas prowielaced .4eTehei(ilitrioskrey.a:estleie.nt,ccituaordederfignor ai d sa ir ose isio can n. tera. • • -----6...uthat thee had donkin the course tion ensued, when Mr. W. Sutra prop rsed to with: . - .. _e_ Armor his amendment, and s ubstitute for it, "That It . - _ 1— ...f al.. IL.. I I filir V olse . 0 4 ti atted 4.0.40 agenda ow's". • 140* st• I ;eOO, m* , and The did a' calla wet , . tint • be c* ernsu unlit Lit T. ! lie Friel 11 1!•1 Thu II ell 1