The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1803-03-29 00:00:00

en place not long 4:1(.6, for a man was ecervicted that offe.-ce Lek assiees. Mr. HOW lOUSE send, Hs c ony::!ion was nn eonneo.4 with the present subjtet. 'lle report was then ordered to be Won into consist:nation on Friday next. G e eealeial Whale Fishery Bill - was teed a third time :sod passed. On the motion of the MASTIt the ROLLS, 'the Roman Catholic Oath Bill wile read a second time and ordered to a Committee of the whole I louse to-inoetail - • . • bathe motion of qr. IsEE the Consideration of .the rept t of the Itch Law-Courts.Bill was deferred AO Monday oat. . Lord EIISTON moved the order of the•day for having James Trotter called to the Bar. The SPEAK ER. " Before I put the question, I wish troretr;nd the House, that the Course of pro ceeding when e prisoner is.brought to the bar is this, that no question can be put except from the shale. I therefivre wish that ally I Member who has any question •to propose will instruct me on the subject rrevious to the prisoner's being called to the Der." • The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he conceived the lion. Gentleman who moved for the pi isoncr's beinx called to the Bar, should have given some prey ions instructions to the Speaker. Mr. I'IERNEY said. he was aCtilated by a wish to hear what the Prisoner had to say in his defence. Ile era% not brought there at his particular instance, but also by the Noble Lord who aaed as Chairman on the Committee. The CHANCELLOR of the F.XCIWQUER explained, and the Prisoner was then ordered to be !nought to the Bor. The. Prisoner having appeared at the Bar, in cus tody of the Serjennt at Arms, • The SPEAKER said—" James Trotter! a Selea Committee of this House, appointed to enquire Into the merits of a Petition complaining of an .undue Eleection fir Dunfermline, have reported, that you having been duly summoned to attend as a 'Witness en the Selefl Committee, have disobeyed the Warrant of this House. I therefore ask you, what you have to say in your defence ?" The Clerk was then ordered to take down and read his answer. The Prisoner said, he was not at home for ten days, from the time of the first notice haring been served, as he was absent on private business. The SPBAK E R. " HaS the Prisoner more to of fer in his dole ice ?" The second time the notice was served, he went army early is the morning, and was not informed of it hr his family. He was extremely sorry to have Life stied the Hense, and he did not know of the dmgerons consequences. or he should have cone" up • a: his own expense. The Prisoner was then ordered from the Bar. Lord EUSTON said, he conceived it was the pea lice on those occasions to have the pri soner reprimanded and discharged on paying his fees and the expences of the m?ssenger who was (Rs . remind Lo Sceelend for hint Ile therefore moved that James Treater be brought again to the Bar, for • the purpose( being reprimanded and Xscharged on paying his fees. Mi. TIER *.I• said, the Noble Lord had. sup pared the measere in the Committee. The only precedent the Meese could have was the case of Alex ender Nleurice, in I7eti, who was committed to Newgate for a similar offence. And the only thing that could justify ' the Neble Lord is the motion he hail made, was 'what fell from the prisoner in hi.; defence. If the House was satisfied with v. iiet he stated; for his own part he could have no objec tion, but he thought it a strange defence, when the .priumu:e had taketi . seven weeks on his journey, ill obedience to the orders. of this House ; he therefor.: would muve to have the minutes of the Committee • rend. . . Mr. W. TnINDAS said, it was irregular to al lude to the proceedings of a Committee. , Mr. 'FIERNEY said, he was not surprised at the Right Hen. Gentleman's starting up to opeose him on the occasion. SPEARTR said, no papers could be read • hut what were first laid on the table by order of the House. Mr. Ti RN E V . ; in explanation, was called to order by Mr. lie AGUE, who said, the danger of suffering Members to read what passed on Committees was too obvious to require comment. Mr. TIERNEY contended he had a right to read n 4 thin:4 he pleased as a part of his speech. He tiara ) . wished to go on the relent of the Committee, which expressly mentioaed that the prisoner was duly served. the Report of the Committee was then read by the Cite k. Mr. TIERNEY' said, he felt himself in a very disagreeable situation. He wished Geinlemenwould tell Lim how to proceed, as they were so prompt to oppose him on the grounds of irregularity. He then allude.' to the case of Alexander Maurice, who was committed to Newgate to a similar offence. Now the House should consider the differen. e of the . eases— Mitur;ce was in embarrassed circum stances, which prevented him from attending : this man was not so eircimeseinced. Besides, • the Speaker's warrant, wheaever issued on a par ticuler occasion, W.LS Si) universally known, that it must he a matter of ruituriet in his neighbocr hood, of which he could not be ignorant.—He • would be as unwilling as any Hon. Member to urge measures of severity, but he was confident that . this man's absence was a wilful one, and he was strengthened io this opinion by what appeared from • the evidence of two witnesses, that he had otlered bribe of 3 301. He thought it unnecesser y to dwell • on the ktrocity of the offence.—As a petitioner could have no new trial, and his tights would be entirely lost by having a witness secreted. Every one knew that it could be no punishment to be con ' fined under the roof of the Serjeent at Arnis, where . every thing cianfortable was provided. lie there fore moved that the prisoner be cvmmitted to New , gate, as in the case of Maurice. Tha SI'EAKER said, the original question was not disposed of,and must he Mr. stlE R 'DAN said he Aleuld give his nega tive to the motion. N.) reasonable excuse had been ffeied, and perhaps this man's expenees would be &flared from the election purse. The LORD ADVOCATE of SCOTLAND said, the poor man's disobedience was we wilful, and that he was already poi:is/red by an absence from his farm, and a very expence. Ills case was differentfrom that of Maurice,- who Tired in town, :tad had the choice of two evils either of in e y /. 40 the displeasure oft. . I louse, or fa in in the•sly of eretlitorie AWKIN'S BliOW4.`.lE laid the only ques tion was, whether the offence was wilful, or pro ceeded from ignorance ; at the same great respea was due to the report of a Committee. Mr. WILLIAM DUNDAS disclaimed the im patience imputed to him by the Hon. Gentleman, to start forward in this poor man's defence, who was already too much punished, and wished to ask how the House could ceensistently commit this poi son to Newgate, after having so lately dismissed Shuttle , Yorth, (who was guilty of gross prevarica tion) with a reprimand. Lord DI LO etid, that though he was as sen sible as any Member of this House of the impor tance of the sublea, yet as the man confessed his offence, will the House wish to push matters to se verity, after the punishment already infliaed by so long an absence from his family ?—There was, he said, a case in point won the Journals, which was that of one John Tyrwhit, who had not been examined before an Eledion Committee, because lie did hot appear pursuant to his summons. This man had been taken into custody on the ‘.llst of March, and discharged on the nth of the same mr.ath. Upon the whole, it was a circumstance which was not likely to occur often, as since the rear 771, there appeared no more than three of them upon the Journals. Mr. FOX said, that be certainly would not will ingly be disposed to be on the severe side of this or any other question ; but at the same time he must feel that it would not he of trifling importance to any person who regarded the privileges of that House, and the justice, fairness, and impartiaiity of the proceedings of Election Cemnsittees. If the Motion made bv the Noble Lord this evening should he assented to, he did not hesitate to think that these was at once an end of justice and fair trials in mat ters of Eledion. If there was any t'o iht as to the merits of the case, then it would be right to have the minutes of the proceedings on the table, from which the House would he enabled to form a conchs sive judgment. Attempts had beenmede to compare the present ease with those of offencesof prevaeicatinn. He had no objection to do so. They were not, in deed, to be compared on any principle of moral, right or wrong; for perjury was in that view infi nitely more wicked, immoral, and infamous than simply staying away ; but in point of effect there were many cases in which the latter were mischiee. ous. A man conviaed of perjury had other courts to appeal to, if he thought himself aggrieved; hut here there were no other laws and no other courts, and if the House of Commons did not punish, no body else could. He repeated, that this offence was not so disgraceful as wilful and corrupt perjury, hut it was one which teemed with injustice, and would pass with impunity, if the House of Commons did not denounce its vengeance agaisea it. The prisoner seil, be did not know the consequences; but he (Mr. Fox) wished him to know, and all the people of England, Sentient!, and Ireland, to know, and culprits to feel the severe and dangerous conse quences of an offence so flagrant; but none of them ever could or would know it, if in the pre cent instance this man were suffered to escape.— if it be true that there is such a thing as corruption praCtised at Elections , (and he feared it would scarcely admit of much doubt), hose easy would it be for the persons exerting influence, or exercising corruption, to indemnify a person so absenting him self, tram all expences, supposing there should be no other kind of punishment attached to tt The of fenders, in that case, may go back by no means stig matized, and even receive the thanks of the person who employed them. Let it but go forth in the world, that persons in this situation are to escape, and the House may as well say to candidates, " You have only to calcuiete how much it will cost to keep away a witness-201. travelling, 301. fees," &c. for it would be as much a snhjed of calculation as any other that could be stated. He said, he never heard any objeaion made before to the equity of the mi nutes of Committees. If quotations were displeasing, and the Gentlemen were not satisfied, and could not make up their minds from the Report, and the de fence they heard at the Bar, he had no objedion to the minutes being laid upon the table, though for himself he confessed he did net think it necessary. As to the defence, he mast suppose it to have been well considered ; but, notwithstanding any ingenuity it may possess, the House had yet to consider whe ther it may not he prejudicial. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he felt . some degree of anxiety upon this sitb jed. He was not. disposed for rigor, but at the same time must wish to support the authot:ty of the House. If the case regarded the punishment only, he should refer to the opinion of the Committee ; but as the House had the opportunity of referring to the same materials, he wished the decision to be postponed till there should be time to consider of them. The precedents already referred t, he did hat think stridly applicable; for there was this dif ference, that the former prisoners pleaded igno rance of any crime, and the present prisoner inno cence of any punishment. He wished the present motion either to be curtailed or withdrawn, and the minutes of the proceedings to be laid b+re the House, Mr. ROSE thought it sufficient, tha! the Report stafed a matter of t.ta. It wa, a principle cf juc tire, that no rarty s!tould benefit by withdrawing a witness. Perjury was indeed morally worse ; but this he contendcQ to be more peinicious, as the truth may be extrwied from a- perjurer, by the counsel who cross-examined him, but nothing could be ex tra&ed from the man who staid away. A corrupt man would not fear risking 401. or 501. by .staviug away, to benefit a Gentleman who might give him ' 5001. for that service. Ile had long wished that courts of justice had more power to punish perjury ; and he thought the present offence should be marked in order to deter others. Mr. G. VANSIT FART said, that the recom mendation of the Committee was made before they had heard the inconsistent defence of the Com nuttee. Mr. T. GRENVILLE: hoped the House would not be pressed to come to a speedy decision. It was impossible for 'any reasonable man to doubt of the prisoner's guilt, and if the I louse determined in the affimatire of the present Motion, the right of elec tion was absolutely at an end. lle never knew a grysser trespass than the present, and the mischief would indeed be great, if posterity was to hear that the House, after entertain:ng the present question, should dismiss the rights a f roppesentAtiou. /met .~ r 7 it . S 4 I I ' f• • t . .. • . 4.- -mgr.- therm TAR 4S:tc would 1i tie Cotiseauctue,:frels should rentain up on their barb, and glom . . be produced as a precedent He asked, what would then become of the fights ex elettions, iii support of which so many provisions had been made ? fie hoped and trusted the house would rescue itself from the disgrace of such a proceeding. The question was then put for the Motion to be withdrawn, and immediately negatived.' The next question was, that James Trotter be called to the bar, in order to be discharged ; which was also negatived, almost unanimously. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER th e n m oved, that the Minutes of the Proceedings of the Dunfermline Committee, as far as regarded the summoning of James Trotter, be laid halve the House. Mr. TIERNEY thought this would not he suf ficient. With regard to the summons only, it was sufficiently proved by the Report. Mr. S. DUNDAS said, he must objet to the produaion of ex pare evidence given in the absence of the prisoner. If they empiired into corruption on the one side, they should also enquire into it cn the other. Mr. TIERNEY di-xi:limed any idea of having evidence brought forwa: d, with a view to proving corruption, or to revise or investigate the proceed ings of the Committee. And proposed, as an amend ment, to add the words—" as far as they relate to the conduct of Mr. Trotter." The Lord ADVOCATE of SCOTLAND (in his maiden speech) contended that the report of the Committee was no more than prima facie evidence, which could not authorise the infliction of punish ment. Suppose ..`.fr. Trotter, instead of confessing, had denied the whole of the charge, and put him self upon the issue, he would wish to know by what analogy or law of the British consitution could they pettish the defendant ? It was now proposed to punish Mr. Trotter, and to aggravate an offence by other accusations, which the Committed had not charged upon him. As to what had been said of his offering a bribe of five hundred pounds, the louse had nothing to do with it. If the Committee had believed that evidence, it was to be presumed, that they would have made it a subjea of accusation against they or at least would have applied ao the I muse for leave to adjourn, till Trotter could he found, as such testimony might infallibly have gone to affea the scat of one of the candidates. To try Mr. Trotter now for perjury, he considered as anomalous, in the laws Of England, that Trotter should incur all the circumstances he had noticed upon a charge of bribery. Mr. HOBHOUSE said the present objet was not to lay a foundation thr a charge of bribery, but to discover the reason why the contempt was prac tised. Lord GLENI3ERVIE was strenuously for going so far into the enquiry, as related to any thing that could throw a light upon the motives of the pri soner, for witholding his attendance. Mr. W. DUN DS contended, that it would be unfair, as the evidence alluded to was nut given in the presence of the Defendant. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER obviated this difficulty, by observing, that it could affea the prisoner in nothing else but his contempt of the warrant. Mr. SHERIDAN adverted to what was said of the Committee, not having believed what was stated by witnesses upon oaths. But if the evidence should prove Trotter to have been a mere agent, and af terwards to have absented himself—when this was compared with his defence, it might prove his mo tives; though not aggravate the fail. Mr. TIERNEY said, that if the evidence was thought to go in aggravation, so may the prisoner in mitigation if he could. For instance, if he could prove, that at the same time he received the Speak er's warrant, he knew there was an attorney looking out to execute a writ upon him, it would certainly go something in the way of mitigation. Mr. BR AGGE said, there was already ground for a greater punishment than that proposed by the Noble Lord (Euston) ; but when more aggravating circumstances appeared, it was right, at least, to exa mine into them. The prisoner himself acknow ledged, that he would have come, had he known that he would have been punished for staying away ; but it should be a great aggravation, if, after saying that it should appear that, as a principal agent, he had known that the offence was punishable. Thee prisoner would have, if he pleased, an opportunity of applying to the House to send for witnesses to enable him to repel any aggravating circumstances ; but at all events he meant to submit to have his case judged of by the whole of what was against him. Mr. SHERIDAN explained that his wish for looking into the minates was nor to aggravate the offence, but to discover the reason of his unwilling ness to attend. Mr Wm. DUNDAS also explained that his rea son for objeaing to the ex parte evidence was chiefly that it might Implicate the charatier of the sitting Member without giving him at least an opportunity to rebut it. The ATTORNEY GENERAL thought the question to be whether the prisoner wilfully absented himself or not. Ile had no conception of aggrava tion without guilt, and could not find deeper guilt without aggravating the punishment. The Question was then put on the amended Mo tion for the pt odution of the Minutes, as far as they related to the condua of Trotter, and agreed to. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he rose in consequence of notice, to move for a Committee to enquire int, the expenditure of the United Kingdom for a certain period. Ile thought it highly important this subject should be thorough ly understood. His motion was, that it should be referred to a Select Committee to enquire into the Ex penditure of the United Kingdom, from the sth January, 1801, to the sth January, 1803, and that the and Committee should report their opinion to the House.—Agreed to. The LORD MAYOR postponed his Motion re specting the Tonnage Duty till after the Easter re cess. MIMI SALT DUTY. General GASCOIGNK rose, in pursuance of his Notice, to move for leave to bring in a Bill to equalize by Weight the Bushel imported to that Part of the United Kingdom called Ireland. He stated, that notwithstanding the Aet of 4th Annc, c. 14, by which it was.enafted, that all salt, sold retail or wholesale, by the bushel, there was a dif ference in. imposing the duty on salt imported from fordgn cod:lm es.' Ale Hon. embet read the anise in the AR of Queen Anne, direaing the Mode of selling salt he the bushel of nii lb. and 84lb. He (rusted the Chancellor of the Exchequer would fulfil the pledges he had given at an early period of the Sessions, of reducing the ditty on salt, provided the circumstances of the country would - admit of it. Agreeing with him in the impolicy of the tax, he hoped he should not find any objeftion urged with regard to the reduaion of the duty on articles so important to the prosperity of the manufaaurieg interest of Ireland, and so material too in another point of view—the curing of Provisions. Theo could be no objection he was aware of to the Propo sition, except with reference to the Reventia. Hr had considered its elle& in that respect, and he had found that the duty amounted to no or !aooool. ; The diminution by the adoption of his proposition wouldonly be about 13,0001. which, putagainst the in crease of the trade, and the relief the measure would give to the lower orders of the people in Ireland; he thought too trifling to have any weight. He would not do the Chancellor of the Exchequer the injustice to suppose that so trivial a consideration as 1:;,000i. would have the least weight. The Honourable Member inferred that the adoption of his propo sition would prevent the enormous traffic of smuggling salt. He believed that one - quarter of the salt imported into Ireland was smuggled. He knew there was no tax which, in its principle, was more objesctionable, than that of salt. He observed, that the operation of the proposition he recom mended, would only be detrimental to Spain and Portugal—powers which, in the present state of af fairs, we knew not how long we might rank among our allies. An I ion. Gentleman, now aasent, had regretted the nesessity of laying a duty which would affea the lower orders of the people ; -but in im posing the duty on salt, he had stated his intention of repealing the tax, whenever it could be done with safety. After some further observations, the Hon. Member concluded, by submitting his Motion in the terms already stated. The SPEAKER observed, that as the Horn Member's motion respeaed a matter of trade, it was necessary to move that the sullied should be re fei red to a Committee. A motion was accordingly made to that effeß. Mr. CORRY replied to the arguments offered' e the lion. G(ntlen.an who made the motion. Ile was of opinion he had taken a wrong method of ameliorating the provision-trade, and the manufac tures of Ireland. He observed, that the curers of provisions in Ireland must necessarily import bay salt, for the purpose of packing provisions dee tined for the Army and Navy. 'Nothing, he said, could give him greater satisfaction than the reduc tion of the duty on salt, but altering the duty for so minute a consideration was in his opinion not tleit wise policy the country ought to adopt. With re gard to the Hon. Member's Motion having the cf fed of preventing the smuggling of salt into Ireland, he believed much more was smuggled from Ireland into this country ; and if be would turn his anention to the prevention of that evil,he should have every assistance from him. He concluded by saying, he thought it his duty to move the Order of the Day. Sir WILLIAM PULTENEY thought the sub jeft required further consideration. A conversation took place between Colonel Bag well, Mr. Lee, Colonel Nereker, Mr. Wickham, the Secretary at War, and General Gascoigne, the result of which was, the lion. Mover of the original ques tion withdrew his motion, upon the assurances that the subjeß would be hereafter brought forward by his Majesty's Ministers. The SECRF.I ARY at WAR moved the third reading of the Militia Officers Bill. After some observations from Lord Archibald Hamilton, Colonel Bagwell, and Mr. Kianaird, the Bill was read a third time. The See ace it v at War. brought up a Clause to enable Lord Lieutenants to appoint persons qua lified in other counties, .to become Officers ; which was agreed to, and added, by way of rider, to the Bill. The SECRIITARY at WAR moved for leave to bring is a Bill to increase the rates of subsistence to Innkeepers.—Leave granted. The Report of the Committee on the Irish M- B:la was postponed till this day fortnight. An account was presented of the Duty on Rock Salt, for the last three years, distinguishing each year. An account was presented of the ordinary Re venues, and extraordinary Resources of Ireland, for the year ending nth January, 1803. Several accounts were presented from the Col lectors of the Customs. The Report of -the Committee on his Majesty's Message, relative to tire Pension of 1,2001 to Sir James Saumarez, was agreed to novine ciminedicente, and a Bill ordered to be brought in on the Reso lution. .The Report of the Committee of Supply was brought up by Mr. Alexander, and the Resolution tin. granting to his Majesty 4,000,0001. by Loan on Exchequer hills was agreed to, and a Bill ordered to be brought in on the Resolution. The 'Woolwich Ordnance Bill was reported, and ordered to be engrossed and read a third time to morrow.—Adjourned at Half-past Nine o'Clock. ..,_ .~ ,~,. g~ --._, 771EATRE-ROrAL, DRURr-LANF.. TillS EVENING Nrll he proAeutdd the Cumetly of THE IiENUX STRATAGEM. - - _ Aimwell, Mr. C. Kemble ; Archer, Mr. TYvvers Sullei, Mr Palmer; Foittarri. Mr. Cherry ; Bonniface, Mr. Hui iileSlNOrth; Scrub, Mr. Bannister, Jun. I.adv• Bountiful, M.s. Sihuki; Dariorla, Mrs. Marlowe; hlrs.Suten, Mrs. Jo:- ; Gipsy, M4l. Sea t; Cherry, Miss Mellon. To which will he added, -• DON JUAN. On Thursday, The Hew of the North, with the Sultan; Roxalana, Jordan. A New Cunsely, in Five A. , zts, v.-11W the Marriage Promise. is in rehearsal, and will Oa proluced on Weariesda : , in. Ester Week. THRATRE-ROr4L, COVENT-GARDEN. THIS EVENING will be performed a New Comedy eallod JOHN BULL; Or, AN ENGLISHMAN', FIRE-SIDE. The principal Charafters Mr. Lewis, Mr. Cooke, Mr. Fawcett, Mr. Johnston., Mr. H. Johnston, Mr. Blanchard, Mr. Emery, Mr. Wocidy. Mrs. Mrs. Davenport, and M . Johnston. Tic Prologye to he spoken by Mr. Brotitimi. ' With a Ls rical Epiblgue by Mr.Johnstotie. To which will be. addzi, THE DEAF LO R. The New Comedy of John Bull wll be perfumed on Thursday, with the Rital SJldterri :