The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1807-01-24 00:00:00

Unit of time, to state of *Rion, against the return of a Member who has beset eleited the representa kir. of one of the largest county towns in this king. dem, without any opposition whatever. Under these circumstances, I shall certainly never shrink from that inquiry into the sentence of the Court Martial, If there be found any precedent to justify such an investigation at this distaste of time. All the in fiances Which Fhave read or heard of, justify the proposition which I have laid down in regard to the established law of the land. Several of them must be in the remembrance of most Gentlemen here. • We have a precedent in the case of Mr. Wilkes ; in 1711, the case of Mr. Walpole ; and in 1698, we have several other cases, which tend to show the impropriety of the present motion. The Hon. Mover insinuates that he means nothing personal towards me, that he entertains no animosity I therefore take it very kind in him the bringing for ward of this measure. I will not state what I for merly stated, as I am now in a very different situ ation. I was then certainly both more impressed and oppressed; yet if I had known what I know now, I should not have then taken up the time of the House in making such a defence as I did. Had I known the opinion of a great Lew Officer, high in authority, to be, that he thought the decision of a Court Martial too flimsy for the House of Com mons to form a judgment upon, I should certainly not have troubled the House so much upon the former occasion." Lord HOWICK — " Sir, not having been con *Pious, that there would be any opposition to the present Motion, I did not conceive that it would be necessary for me to speak upon the subjeß thereof, upon the present occasion ; but what has fallen from the Member opposite, who has just now delivered his sentiments, occasions me to state, that I think he has fallen into some mistake as to the na ture of our proceedings. It is not the intention of my Hon. Friend, who has made this Motion, to try tie ca,e again ; he merely means to ascertain, by the judgment of this House, whether a person la bouring under the stigma of such a sentee.ce, pro ' neunced by a Court Martial, be a fit person to sit at a Member amongst us I whether or not the House ' has the power to exp. I him? and if it has such a rower, whether or not that power should be exerted in the present instance? Such, Sir, is the state of the question at pr-sent before us ; and I con ceive it to be one of the utmost importance, both as affeeting the character of the individual against whom it applies, the eharafter of the House of Com- Nam s, and also as it afTeCts the principles which Ttavern the rights of the Electors of this Kingdom. here can be no question more deserving of the most adive attention ; and it is, indeed, a great satisfadion to observe, that, u;.on one of such a nature, involving considerations of the importance I have described, there does not appear to relit any mixture of passion or party spirit, as might be snp posed likely to arise on such an occasion. My Hon. Friend who has made this motion, has evinced, as I indeed expelled, from a knowledge of his cha racter, the greatest temper, calmness, and pro priety of conduct. He has not sifted like a person inclined to oppress, bin as one who entertains a conscientious regard of ss hat he conceives to be the interest of the public, and the honour of the House. His ext:nple, I hope, will be followed throughout ghe remainder of this discussion, in order to form our decision upon such grounds as will be coosist ent with all the interests involved in it. With that view, I shall so far agree with the sentiments of the last speaker, as to Idlow up the present motion with aionlier, for the r.urpose of ascertaining what precedents can be found upon our Journals, ither similar or analogous to the present case, in order to instruct us in our judgment upon the sublet. It was my intention, I say, not to have spoken upon this motion, Ear to have interposed another one for the appointment of a Co.nmittee to search the Journals for such precede is as might he found to apply to the pre sent case. lam not, however, aware Sir, of any being to be found exactly similar ; but I arts sure that there are many ansligous to it, even widen the reenlicllion of the House. It must, sursly, be the wish of the House to proceed to the examined m of this question, with our minds as well informed upon the subjen as possible, from our Jonrnals...— This proposal appears 'o reasonable, that I am not ' aware of its being necessary to urge any thing fur ther to show the propriety (3: it, No obit:A:on . can be stated to it, even by the individual most mateti• ply interested, that it should be condated upon ciinsti:utional principles. Some delay may, by tw.de, he occasioned, but it will be very rooo..o.eralsie ; but should it lead to come qiiences disaareeable to the individual most into. rested, he rnii , t recoiled that he had only himself to blame, Cat e le led himself into that situ aeon in which his conduft must again become the subjed of public diseussim. However much the consider ations of inconvenience may intervene, we must not extend them so fer as to prevent our takeeg such steps as may appear most consistent ith the regu larity of our proceedings; and, therefore, after this motion has been agreed to, / shalt submit a merlon to the purport I have stated, as being one of the best fitted to the general interests of the House and the . Country." Mr. SPENCER STANHOPE said, that he had seconded the motion of his Hun. Friend with the intention of following it up with one similar to that now suggested by the Noble Lord. Whether they should find precedents or not, he thought it was proper to adopt that course, although merely pre fo-tan, it being the mast regular and consistent mode of proceeding to express their opinion upon the subject. Mr. HERBERT:—" Sir, I do not conceive that this can be a question which can at all rest upon precedent. 'file only questions herr, ee, whether t! e I louse can, in any use, have a pi iniery right of expulsion ; and, if it has that right, whe ther it cin also have the right of re-expulsi:ln It it be eitehli.hed that this House has both of t!..3e right;, then the fir xt question is one of prop. i,:y ; or, whether there be a case before the 'louse which affords to irs sufficient grounds to justify our excl.- ' citing tl at .liscretiooary power. I do not, by any means, think that the right of re-expulsion is a moon which can be determined by, or depend upon, pre. edent ; and as to expulsion, I do not think that any t; ettentan will venture to deny our right It is ;Jr I conceive to stand admitted, 0. 1 %d I , wfr7 . . . . therefore imagine, that the other trust follow of course. The question immediately brf ire the House for discussion, is nut, therefore, a question of pre 4etient, but of principle. The right of expulsion, I say, eisists in thitt Home, for the proreltion of its honour, safety, respettability, and dign;ty. I know that some individuals its this Heuse are determined to argue, that :question of this nature does not fall to be discussed here; but that it depends entirely upon the Right of Eleaors ; or that the re-elettion of a Members after the original expulsion, has given aim an opportunity of readying Lis incapacity, and fitting him to sit in the House cf Commons. I do not, howevee, conceive that such a sight can be vested in Eleaers ; they have no right to enforce what the House of Commons has formerly disap proved of. It is peifeelly ridiculous to say, that there can be sent back to Parliament a person whom they have formerly declared to society, and to the world, to be totally unfit to• sit in i:. I too am anxious that aucla a delicate question shoula be argued with the utmost calmness and lenity towards the individual so implicated. Upon the ground of its being a question which ought to be argued upon principle, I shall not resist the 'tuition which has been made " General GASCOYNE—" Sir, in tang to deli ' ver my sentiments upon this subjeift, I declare that I have as little personal motives as the Honourable Gentleman who made the motion, or the Noble Lord who succeeded him. After what I have heard fall from that Noble land (Howick), the searching for precedents, would, I think, only tend Ito unnecessary delay. That Noble Lord has told us, that lie . does not believe there is any prece dent exa&ly similar; if is, where is the necessity j of seeking for information, where none is to be I found ? If any precedent be wanted to regulate ' our proceedings, have we not a precedent in the case of Cawthorne being expelled from this I louse, in the year I '79:_i ? Have we not, Sir, this precedent, that this self-same individual was exts:lled from amongst us, for ungentlemanlike and highly re prehensible crindat ? Yes, Sir, this I conceive to he a precedent, than which, we could not possibly desire any one more similar. I am sorry, Sir. to say any thing that may hurt or would the feelings of any mate;; but when we find 1 that the individual alluded to, persists in sitting here, as a Member nt this House, I think that he himiwif is the original cause of it. If. Sir, there was aelually no preeedeut, would this House, I would ask, upon this occasion, make one so int-A mong, as to pass over such a subje& in silence?— No, Sir, I trust, if we are to snake a precedent, we shall make it for the punishmeist of miscondudt, and not such a ore as will tend to cover it. It is ler the glory of the British Nation; it is for the bon :ur of our Senate and our military establisiiment, that even where there is no case diteSly in point, effec• foal measures may be adopted to prevent the recal -1 rence of future evils . If the Nola'w Led, by his I intended motion. means inly to crest? dr,ay, I can not see that it will answer any purpose; bur it may be thence presumed, that it was meant to throw the broad shield of power over the so'-jeer in qiiestion, in order to silence it ; and fur that reason, I should rather wish that the Noble Lord ensuld see toe pro priety of withdrawing his intended motioe " Lord FOLKS l'ONF.—"'Flie two Hon Gentle men who haSe spoken last, seem tolnive mistaken the real queitien At present before tlie House; the only matter before us is, Whether the proceedings of the Court Martial in 1;96 should be laid before them. Since, however, the suisjea of precedents has been touched upon, 1 must observe, ht answer to some observations which have just fallen from the lion. Gentleman who spoke last, that it is ex ceedingly material that a watch 'hyoid be made ; for granting that no precedent i.; to be found, would it not be a strong argument for resisting any sub sequent procedure which may be yet proposed up on the ease now before as? With that view I shall support the proposition of the Noble Lois'. I can not, however, agree with the expression which was wed by that Noble Lend and the Hon. Gentleman behind me, as to the individual implicated having himself only to thank for the disagreeable feeliogs which this discussion may give rue tic I think it is rather uncanclid to say so, or that it is a reproach to him that he Las put himself again into this situa tion, when be is confident he has a right to sit in Parliament by the suffrages of his Constituents. It is indeed a matter of regret, that the business has already been delayed s's long after the riveting of Parliament, but I think no greet additional delay will originate from the mode of prucedute which has been sufeested." The Al FORNEY•GENER A L—" Had not the motion now under consideration been to be ac companied with the o:w which the Noble Lori& has prcposed, I, for one, aru perfectly disposed to state, that I would have given it my decided negative, undismayed by any menaces which have been held out, as to our ditty to the public, the law of the land, the honour of the Constitution, the rights of Eleelors, and the dignity of the llou-re of Com mons. The reason for such a negative w.suld be, because I am at It I'M to conceive that any minims to be laid before the Heuse can be made the ground of any proceeding to implicate any person eleded for this Pailiament. I should be dispi:se.l to be extremely guarded against any prnduftion of this sort, or of adopting any measures that were not to be regulated by law and precedent; or in which I was not to be left at liberty to consult my own feel ings in regard to the situation of any individual Member whose conduit was to be the subjed of dis cussion before the House. Ish ;old, least of all, be disposed to do so upon the sentence of a Court Martial laid upon the table ; not that I have any dis- respett for such a Court, believing it to be the best, as constituted by law, fur the trial of off ewes put cly military ; but to ask me, without basing any pre cedent, to put a man upon his ti ial before those who are neither jut> , nor judges, and to iaflia a punishment or penalty, a power which was never attached to any Court of common law, is what I never 0111 consent to ( 4 cry of Hear Aids I Mar Aim !). 1 should think the mo- tints, without the appendage, quite inadequate. —1 have troubled the house thus early upon the sukied, principally on acennut of what has fallen tram two Honourable Gentlemen opposi.r. The Noble Lord near me I Lord Howick) has been can:ioned not to throw the broad shield of pilwer over that MesuStr, ..41.vse coudua is auw under I consideration ; upon this, I have to observe to the Hon. General, that the Noble Lord throws out no • shield of prole lion, but the shi.ild of the Conititu non, as he has always done over every Member, / and. I trust, he will yet do, and even extend its pm teetion over that Hon Member who has made such an observation. Another Hon. Member has allud ed to die terms, honour and dishonour, expressions which may be known in a Military Court, but can not he known in any other Court of Justice ; and, therefore, he must know, that the House cannot proceed upon such phrases, nor can there be any thing in them, which can so afreCt public feeling, as to discourage Lie:'tors, possessing sound sense and reason, from exercising their eltaive franchises, in choosing a Representative, whom they think a true friend to the Constitution of their country." Mr. BRAGGE BATHURST—' , I should not have deemed it necessary to have said any thing upon this occasion, had it not been owing to what has fallen from my Learned Fliers,' on this Bench, in regard to the proceedings of a Court Martial, or the evidence taken before them, being not a proper ground for the House exercising thier privilege of expelling a Member; n 3 such opinion was ever before maintained in this House. It does not ap pear to me that such a queston as the present one' ought to be entirely disentangled from all legal niceties. If the House be satisfied, by evidence upon oath, that there is such a body of criminality proved to exist, as to justify their procedure, they ought not to hesitate a moment in the ex:elion of their privilege. When the Learned Gentleman talks of a Xlilitary Court, he ought to distinguish at the same time what he denominates purely military questions. This Court Martial had not to investigate a crime merely of a military nature, thire was a charge of more tut pituJe than mere military delinquency. Ile matter at issue, ie. the present instance, was not entirely a question of military honour, upon which Parliament had tormeily decided. There was such a eurpus alatai, as fully justified them in the measure they formerly ad-pted It would be a m'nnrous pn. t ,nsiuon t‘. s..y, •‘ t..ke this before a 1 jary ;" a thing that can lot he done, it having been a question already tried. The competency of jurisdiftion etnnot be brought forward, nor can any (Air:lion be stated as to the evidence which took pl ice formerly, and upon which a former Par. liament decided. If it be fit to exercise that right, which Parliament exercised before, there can be no ilifblulty in rec wring to that same evidence which is recorded upon our Journals. I: it was not bad at that time to proceed upon, it is not bad now. It is not necessary, Sir, that we should he bound by pro• cedents, nor to say, that to re-exael depends upon' the circumstances atemding the previous expulsion. Such a question as the present one is never to be decided merely upon the principle of adhering to what had been previously done." Mr. HERBERT, in explanation, said- " This is a question which must rest upon its individual merits It is not one which can be regulated by precedent. I apprehend, that the Right Hum. and Learned Gentleman was wrong, when he inferred, that the House has not a right to challenge the proceedings of a Court Martial. Unless it can be alleged, that the former proceeding of the House upon this subjeft Was s.h flagrantly unjust, V.at it ought to be expunged, there can be no occasion for appointing a Cominitiee upon the buerness."- General GASCOVNE, in explanation, said, that he nev. r meant to inter, that it was aftually the inten tion of the Noble Lord opposlie, to proteCt a cul prit with the broad Shield of Government, he had only observed, that his conduCt might be so con strued by implication. Lord WILLIAM RUSSELL delivered his sen timents; but in such a low tone of voice, as to be pettedly inaudible to the Gallery. Mr. BR.V.*GE BATHURS and the AT FOR NEY•GENERAL severally explained; and M. ROBERT WARD said a few wo:ds. Mr. All M--“ Sir, I conceive that the motion, as first ni.sle, was perlealy regular. temperate, and constitutional; hut the debate which has ensued, has not been condo:led• with the same propriety ; and, therefore, I am anxious that the Hoist should he biouyht to that state 'in which it originally Corn. menced. The only ohj•rd at present is, what is that line of conduct whiel will be most consistent with justice. equity. And certainty t It is said, by some, UP be a question of principle, and not a ques ti , n of precedent. lem not sensible, Sir, of any di,tindi , m. In a Colin, constituted as this is, it ap pears to me that principle can only be understood by having recourse to precedent. There can not, therefore, be any reasonable Ojedion to search into precedents ; because, although I may have an opinion upon the subjed, it is not to be fixed, but merely to be guided by such in quiry. We have, Sir, the precedent of Wilkes, in the year 1764. for the publication of Tile Norti Bri -147; and in 1779, for a libel, of which he was con viaed in a court of justice. lam old enough to remember the debate* which took place upon those occasions; and I was one of the minority, when the question was moved every year, in the then mane. Certai.4 moles:sons were thee expunged by the subsequent decisions of this House, as not being consistent with the sound letter of the law of Parliament upon that subject. I think that what the Noble Lord has proposed is perledly consistent with the law of justice." Mr. HURS I am much astonished, Sir, when I bear an Honourable and Learned Gentle man say, that he perceives no distindion between principle and precedent. In my opinion, Sir, I thick them as diffetent from each other, as the Southern and the Notthern Poles. Precedent ought by no means to constitute principle. I have no ob. jedirelso agree to the Motion of the Noble Lord, as I slunk it is necessary that Parliament should see what has been done upon a former occasion ; but if no precedent is to be found, will it be said by the Learned Gentleman who spoke last, that we are not then to resort to principle We must then, adopt that which will be a precedent in future. I merely ro,e to express my astoni ? hment at the Honourable and Learned Gentleman not being compe:ent to make that distiodion." The Motion was then put horn the Chair, and agreed tn. Viscount HOWICK next rose, and in conformity with the sentiments he had previously uttered upon this sullied, m peed, "That there be a Committee appointed to ezatuitie the Journals or Records of which M I Housed s.m. ;Ouse, and in view, appeared in hi errninarinn d", prefetAbie MeV ue uu t but aft~rw~~,~ iguishing ctliei, a question where the particular privilege s if House were interested, and where the prieileyei the people were constitutionally involved, it b-c4m a duty to obtain the fullest and must complit, formation that it was in the nature of the eve t admit. A great stress had been laid by a larahle Gentleman, on the preference of precittlei-, principle, in order to arrive at the most corner e: cition in th;s inquiry. Tu that opinion he not willingly subscribe, convinced as he w.s. the combination of both was most likely to pio,:c• the fullest and best tegillated judgment. Lord I. 01, S I ONE thought the Metion s! e not only extend to the precedents of expukina, the return of expelled Members, but that the (' nuttier should be instruacd to search for precede : . in cases of re-ezpulsion, if any buds had ever hc..ti red. Lord HOWICK cnincidel with the opinion the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Wakes( unix* too narrowed construdion a the Motion lie IWO , honour to pr pose. He therefore had no objeatoo adopt the principle of the I fonourable Gentlemo, and conceived that ohjt.6t answered, by inseni ti the words, Such Meurlsers as were expelled, 28 4 for %hat causes ; also such Members as we el* pellet', and again returned, and to report the pia ceedings thereon to the House" With tesp4t col what had fallen from the Noble Lord (Follcsrufiql that objet would be elucidated by the procrediqi, which. in former cares, the House had adopted le the return of any expelled Member. The hit ot ; e4 so amended was put and carried without a thanks It was then resolved, that the following Memhets compose the Committee, Lords How iek, Heury Petty, Castlere3gh, F.4kstone, sod train Gower; Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Perceval, Mr. Gilt-, I Plainer, the Attur.ity and Snliettor Gener.,l, Mr. Fawkes,! Sharpe, ke. he. and t hve constitute a Quortllll. Lord GEORGECA VENDISH—" Mr. Spezia, I hold in nay hand a Petition from certain LltZion of the town of Lancaster: It has been given to ne for the purpose of presenting it to this House silks 1 came in this evening. With its nature I von, until within these few minutes, totally unacquainted, and when' acquaint the flouce, that 1 had the bo omx of being a member of that Court-martial which sat in judgment on the condo& of the Gentlemen ire mediat. ly implicated, it will be naturally stnpased, 'hat I am alltilleFlCed by no improper bias. The House will consider the Petition itselt, whether it il presented at the proper time. and whether it is couched in the terms consistent with the honour sail dignity of the Assembly to which it is addressee. As far as I understand the object of its pisytr.t is, that, whatever I•ne of jaroc.:Jure the House mar think priper to adenr, the Petitioners humbly hope their eledive franchise will not be negleded." The pe.ition being read by the el rk, and it having submitted to the House thoopinion at the Petition ers, that the House emeld not, without a violatia of their tights, disqualify Colonel Cawthorn, Mr. HERBER rose to cleave his surrrise how such a petition could be received. In fact, di paper presented to the House, could not be called I petition; it was more in the shape of a dictatorial summons. The patties who have siened it, avow their knowledge of the fads which had occurred; they never attempt to deny them; with an admitted knowledge of the intamaus crime of whids the perse n whom they have chosen has been convidts; with the knowledge that he was rendered incapable of ever serving His Mal-sty in any military cap city; and that horn the na•ui• of his clime, br was deemed totally unwortl:y of any trust stint. ever ; these Petitioners pray to be he aid in kis* half, at the bar of the House ; or rather would chef to dictate their opininits to tills House, in a style and manner, which, perhaps, would render it the duty •tf some to move tar the disfranchisenseat of the Borough. Ao ! ! from ag aides gi to There was another consideration for rbs House, before it received the Petition, to be egoista that the persons who had signed it west: actually Elcdors cf Lancaster. Lord GEORGE CAVENDISH assured the House, that from a perusal of the name' s he knee them to be Electors of that Borough. Colonel CAWTHORNE said, that be obtained this day an alphabetical list of the El•rdors of Lan caster, and nu every inquiry, it would he found, that the persons who had signed that Petition were of that body. It was signed by respedalsle Gentle men and Magistrates, with whom the Noble Lord. who had so kindly presented the Petition, mole from the extensive estates he possessed in that nee4L• bourhood, be acquainted. Lord STANLEY thought the Petition wrier.? dictatorial, at the same this." lie entertained a different opinion as to the prop icty of disfranchis;; , e the Borough. By such a procedure, the innocent would be confounded with the guilty ; not that he could ennsido• the Petition actually in the hands ce the Noble Lord, for the purpose of being mesented, before the grievance which it states could possibly be known, by soy means such as the House should receive. Mr. STURGF.S BOURNE rose to enter bit protest against the dodaine laid down by Cie Hoe. Tslember opposite, and the Noble Lord who just sa' down. When Gentlemen talked of Motions to din franchise boroughs, Ise really could not retrain expressing his stapri,e. To di.tranch:se—fie• ol.at cause;-1 or the Eleaors basely exercising their en. a free judgment and choice. Into the propf:et, (' that choice it was unnecessary to enter ; liom et • a discussion be should cateltiliy abstain ; but should Ask, as precedents were: so much the they..' of observation this evening, where existed the Pt: . cedent for such motions 44 west recommended b' some lion. Members? The trims of the Petiins were also animadverted upon, yet they wtre 111 .9 IParliament for Precede's , " of Cages, in wh bets who have been expelled from this H Men again returned, Anil to report t h e r with tbe proceeding, had thereon " • Mr. HAKES stibiomi;ed to the 1101111 Nvile Lor (Howick) , Wpsposite, whether notienviarineikore effeflually the ohjec't in extending ibse '4exestrof the Motion a forattlear decskiph.?, At least it appeare, that,gnailheramoild be no dcterminatir from casei n it would be.a preferabl of wordin c Motion, SO as to embrace the instances of former Members expelled, such Members as were expelled, and after turned, distinguishing the one from the c