The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1821-02-24 00:00:00

F. 4 7 . 1.=1 ... persons. He qtioted several cases to shirr that Judges, although they had frequently punished contempt of - Court, had never in any case inflicted punishment or fine for that offence on a defendant in the course of his defence. In sbine instances the aefendantlad been subsequently pitnished for very • . . . • _ cies. Sada ,rip. reign &lard' (-Wei *le ewe b 1 see Bruce, in she Verito wit tried before • Judge ---w mivgev . .bTee..-VM-461-"Chtset or Exthequrr. The defendant being •Istleerii guilty, uturrvedo that the Judge bad o ptima Hies object, namely, the . ruin of the defendant. •concerning which he, the defendant, must thi ck of some way of resentment. .The defendant was subsequently indicted, sod called to answer fur his words. But the Judge bad not thought fit to impose any fine is the cootie of the defeuce. The case of William Nan was still swore in paint. He was fiord forty marks by the Recorder of London fur not taking off Its hat. Hy was grossly insulted by the Judge, who also imprisoned the Jury. But even 'Jefferies had not thought of fi g the defendant. Surely that .which was too bad for Jefferies, ought not to be considered good enough for • Judge of these times. He observed thst the practice was not idly at variative with the principles of common blw, but that, if persisted in, Mr. Fiss's•Libel Bill, which gave the Jury the power of deciding on the law as well as the fact, would be rendered nuga. tory ; because the Judge would he enabled to in flict severe penalties on any defendant, whether - riubeequently convicted or 'nor. 1e remarked on the.erseit of Eaton, tried fora blasphemous publics. rims. whom Lord Ellenborough had interrupted in his defence, and then allowed him to go on Isis own way, observing, that it would perhaps be better for the ends of justice. As to the stuthority of Judges, he observed, that the grossest infringements of jus tice ever practised in our Courts had been nrigi hated chiefly by Judges ; and since the Revolu tion it was hardly possible to lay the hand upon any Urre Judge who bad not at one time or other said or done something hostile to the constitutional rights and liberties of the subject. He seconded the motion. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did net understand the Learned Mover to dispute the legality of the coarse pursued by the Learned Judge iii the case of the - Petitioner. The Honourable and Learn ed Member doubted the legality, but had not de nied it in round terms as the Hom Seconder had dour. The question, however, had, contrary to the statement of the Hon. and Learned Member, been. discussed in the Court of King's Bench, and the judicial propriety of the conduct of the Learn ed Judge now tinder discussion confirmed by the united judgment of that Court. The Petitioner had been indicted for a libel very peculiarly foul and Istisphemous, a part of which he would teed to the House-- Lord Juno Husain!. enforced the order which prevented Members from reading printed papers siithont special leave being granted by the House. The Hoir.iud Learned Gentleman must excuse hie. bit as it did not appear thst the original libel waiter all in question, there could be no necessity for troubling the House with the contents of it. Mr. Hoauouse, as seconder, was about to disown any participoit" in the sentiments of the libel, but was called to order. _ The, i'li4La‘ admitted that the Noble Lord WAS iioote. and expressed his fear of the effects which suight.arise by p departure from the rules of the House. , Jf there were any Members who objected -to the.reviding of the paper, and the Right Hon. and lloaroied Gentleman thought it necessary to his purpose that the paper should he read, the ouestion must be formally determined by the House. The ATTORNEY-4.IIINICRAL by no means wished to prejudice the case of the Petitioner, nor to dis gust the House bis object was to explain the nature of the case brought before the Morse, which he could not do without reading n short passage running thus—f Load cries of " No, no")—then he would quote it from memory. _ T.T . n0m4....a.m0nl --~- himself so, not only on this occasion, but also on the trial of Sir Francis Burdett. In &elite might say, he was the oily Judge on the Deitch that could be called * political Judge. He recollected very well when he was in the House. and there woe no party with whom he did not occa sionally act; he travelled from one side to the other, uutil lie had worked his way to the situation -• be now holds-- Mr. Se►jeant ONSLOW rose to order. He con ceived the course the Hon. Gentleman was now pursuing was quite irregular. There was before the House a Petition from a person of the name of Davison, and the Hou. Gentleman has thought tit to bring forward charges of a most serious iti ture against the Learned Judge, s Gentleman whom he was proud to call his friend, whom he had known fur near thirty years. He wished to know whether calling that Learned Judge an intemperate and a political Judge, and that he had travelled from one side of that House to the other, could be considered conformable to the rules of the House. —(Hear.) • The SPEAKER felt great difficulty when called 1' on upon an occasion of this kind. He confessed that when he had heard the Hon. Gentleman making these observations, it did come across his mind that he was out of order; but on subsequent consideration, he could not consider himself .justi fied in calling • reference to the Learned Judge disorderly, particularly when it was the gist and gravamen of the Petition. Whatever the House may think as to the propriety of the language used, he certainly would not be warranted to saying it was disorderly. Mr. CREEVEY resumed. He contended that he was justified in saying he.. was an intemperate Judge, and that the act complained of was at least contrary to the usual practice. He concluded by saying that lie should support She prayer of the Petition. The SOLICITOR-GINERAL trusted the House would indulge him while he offered a few words in reitly,to the lion. Gentleman that just sat down. That Hon. Gentleman had taken town' himself to say, that the Learned Judge, in the course he pur sued. was actuated by motives of resentment (Cries of " No, no")—and when an Hon. Mem ber maker such • grave and serious charge, he (mien at least adduce some proof inatapport of it. —(Cries of " No, wo.")—lf the Hon. Gentlemen wa s ready to retract the charge, he was willing to allow liitu.—(" No, no.") Mr. CREEVIT- 4 * I 'alit no such thing; I said he was an intemperate Judge. I will retract no thing." The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (with mach empha. sio)—" Am I to understand tbat the Hun. Gentle man retracts the charge 1—(" No, no, no." ) Retraction I call it—f" No, no. no")--for I do contend he said that Learned Judge was actuated by motives of resentment."—( Loud tries of " No," from the (Ipposition.) Mr. J. SMITH rose to order. When a Gentleman gives all explanation, ambushed been given by the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Creevey), he thought it was quite disorderly for the Hun. and Learned Gentle man opposite to persevere in the term refraction. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR wished to restore regula rity. Ile had b•en present the whole time his Hon. Friend was speaking, and, as well se his memory setved him, he did nut hear him make use of the word " resentment." And lie apprehended it was quite incompetent for the Hose and Learned Gen tleman ' he had ted his, _ should never be mentioned in a criminal way, with out being followed up with proof. He was of opi nion that the Learned Mudge del, upon that seer- Dion. set in a - most inelciful manner. Here he adopted the arguttient of the Solicitor-General. What wee he to do? Could any man doubt that open contempt its facie curia, was punishable by fines or imprisonment ? Li any point of view, lea the Judge allowed the Court to be reviled, and himself insulted, he mu.t have imposed these fines, or else tell the Jury that they must proceed with the trial as if no defence had been attempted, and had he pursued this course he would have given a much greater ground of compleint. Mr. SceitLarr regretted that engagements in another place had prevented him from having the advantage of the arguments of his Hon. and Learned Friend who presented the Petition. His own opinion was, that any defendant defending himself in person, who is guilty of contempt of court, deserves to be punished. He was one of (hose who thought he should be allowed the utmost possible latitude; but is.a defendant to be allowed to violate both the law and the gospel, and openly insult the Court, and then soy lie cannot proceed with his defence unless he be permitted to do so? Undoubtedly he was of opinion that a Court had the power to punish for contempt, by imposing fines, es well as imprisonment; and this he thought necessary to support, what lie was always anxious to do, the dignity of a Court of Justice. Hr allowed there was a species of cinvempt which occupied a good deal of public attentiou, on the propriety of punishing which he had some doubts : he meant the publishing the proceedings of a Court of Justice. It was a question on which he had great delicacy in giving an opinion, but he thought that when u man gave these prnceeditigs with fidelity, that it wits not contempt. It appeared to him that a Judge might us well issue an order that uo man should rend the pro ceedings when published, or that no min present should commuoicute what occurred in the Court when he went out, by parole, un mote than by written communication. It was really a matter of deep importance, and he thought that presented great necessity of inquiry. He could not conceive on what principle a Court of Quarter Sessions, ''one to try offenders, are authorised to issue such The 4 couldosot issue such attachment, -en's attend:and in Court, end ho • 'eel , they were justified in The Right Hon. Gentleman being about to read the passage, was again reminded by the SPEAKER, that he was transgressing the rules of the Hulse by readifig • piper for which he bad nut obtained their permission. Mr. gERNAL trusted that the Attorney-Ge vend-would be su ff ered to take his own course. ' T, T /TORNEY-GENZIAL was willing to bow to 04' ratan or the House, if it were so necessary, t fort, e gist time he had ever witpea•ed ir, rigidly iF to n orce the order.—(" Go ea," I,' Need, read.") ' .—['Tit risagt being read, proved to be some fool isriadvice'of the defendant to throw away the Holy' Sc.ritnees; and take up P.ine's .dge of Kenyon in their stead.]- 7 -It had lately become a practice for defendlint:. to repeat the blasphemies with whirls . th4.i,ece Clirirged as part of, their &fence. The' JOtrg, 4 . )_ i the preien t . cope rebuked thAdefendont fox rei , tiiiiiiiiir the blespheinies, mid told him that be Would be, under the necessity of imposing a fi ne tin iii . fir COntetupt if be . persisted. He did persist, suit was fined,el. lle repeated the same °Wetter, aml. Afiki again cautioned. Ile then tmentnenced an atfrick un the whole profession of the law, ,and beingigain interrupted by the Judge, held .--V a * It key, and void, " Here ti" the key of the , uni‘epu, send rte' to it at *new, ford am deter toed ~ l io to so through with, my,„defence," Upon Via the,,joilgerhno spin. He proceeded *ill. ii,loal&writtera . 4411E4, which rehearsed some of the bleailitinies,,ipthl . which lie was chorged, and he was 644, A.,,thjiil tirsie, The man afterwards pleAml ' i tlSsf ,Ite f hail . a wife and a low family, "10 • the "4 . 1141 iii, remitted the finea before slimming 4 Ilie gAsg was brought before the Court of "Alves flinch, on a role gnint . e.l fur, the purpose, and so 1.4 r r f o r it not, baring been , heard Jim, 3ir. sped, , As boo been Assumed . by the, Ocut. owl I, ! ay, o 4o , llle . mli . t,e,:iliiim . werg long plrothuss upon " ' i n C1 114 ".? 0 .I. Y i "tOta h i s ."/°] IPPI i -PFent had" flit-, Whed)uoi wititO slioTf yote 4 ,what took plikee i :— c read the OPiniops qt the 4 1 1d g es up" the cps!. H e tiny i ow %lotion, whir.ll might \ i) be, thrown on the coOlioe,t or the,,l l eopied Judge w iio tried the'petiiiipoir it. _.)o4t ( whg. Ronlo,l* the efect.of the . doctrine met pp by tt sl y er r. anal 6e. CO 44 ,' Were defendant* rainy, tg, lie.esetopt (rig( sll;centrok and to be allowed to,asy any thing they Fleirea ? That was the fair infervnue from the doctrine assumed, that defendants could not to say retrsc —expression. &fie, n few words from the SPEAKER, the SO LI- C rroit-G EN ERA resumed. The Hon. Gentlemen has taken upon himself to charge the Learned Judge with intemperate couduct, a n d not in this case solely, but he referred to • trial of an Hon. Mem ber 0111;6 House. This he considered a charge of • moat serious nature ; but he would ask what there was in the conduct of that Learned Judge to justify such u charge t And if such a charge could with propriety be brought against the Judge, how will that Hon. Gentleman justify himself to the country fur rest &minding an investigation into such an offence ? Let them only advert to the circumstances of that case, and see what there was to justify such •n imputation.— Oil the libellous character und nature of that letter, all the Judges unser l i 11l onsly c yawed, not even excepting the Learned Judge (Bayley), who dif fered from the others on • technicril point. But even Judge Bayley declared that it was a most ma lignant libel, end tile majority of the Court coo firmed the dicision of &Ir. Justice Best. Yet the Hon. Memobe► for Appleby (Hr. Creevey) charges the Learned Judge.with intemperance on that veil'. ; and he prayed the House to consider what Wa3 the character of tire mail Il i 11l self who made this charge. With respect to the present case, • uo reasonable , asa.a could entertain • doubt. Davison hail Nen iridictril for two libel'. of a, !post blaaphrnions nature. lie that erne ruanced.potb a I uulotuitletl imputation on the geittlelneta . of the her, upon which the Learned void to compel a was at a loss to know t►ow issuing such an order. Lord Csret.exttscu was sorry to call the Hon. ■nd Learned Ge►►tleman to order; bet he was quite sure his own discretion was equivalent. He could not conceive how a question of contempt, that hats been slresdy deviled, could be brought within the regions of argument on the present question. Mr. 5C.1111.677 would not detain the House longer, but he hoped it was unnecessary for him to assure theou, that it was far from his intention to speak with irreverence of the decisions of the Judges. Sir FRANCts BLAKE thought that the right of petitioning one of the most invaluable privileges of Englishmen, and that they should be expressed iu hold energetic terms, and the bolder the better. (Hear, heat•.)—Tliese were his sentiments and opi nions, and it was in the spirit of these feelings, that be prayed the attention of the House to the petitions of the people. They should be granted every indulgence to express their sentiments in strong but constitutional language. Mr. COURTEMAY addressed the F-louse, hat we could not hear to what points he referred. He was called to order by Mr. Curwen. Lord CASTLIMEAGH thought that after the mat ter had undergone a solemn decision, it was not com petent for them to interfere. They all knew with what extreme propriety the judicial functions were exercised, and although an individual hail re sorted to abuse, the greatest liberality was allowed him, and he did ►tot think it would become that • House to infringe on that indulgence. He thought the House ought not to 'auction such a flagrant violation ,of the right of petitioning, by allowing that Petition to lie on their table, unless they were prepared to go the whole length of saying, tort any tndv►dual, aguiast whom the SeIIiCIICC of the law bad been pronounced, has a right to redress from the House. The House may depend on it, the right of petitioning can never be distroyed in this country but by its own Attie ; and this he co►. ceived to be one of the greatc.t abuses that ever was presented to the House. They could not de ceive themselves, nor could it be concealed from them, that there was a growing disposition iii the country to agitate thepeople with Petitions, and th•- this disposition is supported by Members within ~",~ gor:'l c. "" 7 " 7 " 1 " -- 44 (!( ..• close; 'and he'ltad tie 4 ilebbt thsit the te- too much time h3l been consumed in-attending to was desirous of heinrcommitted, foe he I the Petitions 4.f the people. not aware that the Corset had the power of Lard Cssmeess•N explained. "The Hon. end Learned Gent. then went I Mr. GRANT resumed. He understood him to detail of, the proceedings at that triiil.l say, that the House should remonstrate and sit granted to whew cause why a new trial monish the people on the subject of their Petitions. . be had. Alt ids& /silent coUltdo for He thought thetif rhOtt Petitions were cc/itched in done with respect both to the ruesSts ofid decent and respectful terms, they should he re , ', awl after a most vile delitierationotoo• eeived. And he thought it was the duty of the site* to what results it IrMild lead. He concluded lemn decision was pronoitteed - by the Court 4114 House 'to keep • careful watch over the Courts of by observing - Wet there were no grounds fur enter- there wire no grounds for a new trial, 'awl ;hat the Juoice, no matter how dignified of exalted they tenting the prevent Petition. 'Judge was justified in ithposing those fines. He may he. From what he had heard or that Petition. My. CRIME`, observed, that the circumstance therefore apprehended that unless' that Honest br- there armoired to him to be nothing to which the of the "Judge having acted legally seemed to be catne a Court of Appeal, they could not receive the House could object. what the Gentlemen pppoiite founded their argu- Petition. Mr. BRIGHT was astoniihed to hear the matter molts on. But that was not precisely the point : Mr. LOCKHART stated, that when the Petition treated as a question of law. It was not strictly the questifits is, whether it was not coutrsry to the was Am read, it was his issferstibn to support it, not so, it WAS a( 1 Aebt.loll of wrong. The real question usage and practice of the Courts The Petition I from any doubt he entertained as to the power of was, whether that House .superintended the Courts was most properly introduced, for it was a questibn the Judge to impose those finer, but from the idea of Lew, and whether British subjects did not that reqvired the most serious consideration of the that St least it might be considered a stretch of i suffer a grievance under the appearance of law. House. For the talents of the Learned Judge in Power . ; but since the very clear explanatiou given This was one of the first principles of the Con question he bad a great respect ; but This h e mus t by the Solicitor-General, his mind was quite ratio- stitution io the best of age., and we are come pay, that he was an intemperate Judge—and he fied, and he thought that the name of a Jody , - to an end of it when these things sr/moot be spoken - - - hid 'hewed of in the House of Commons.—(Near.)—Where have been many instances on record of Judges doing wrong, and of that House righting it. He did not mean to say the Learned Judge could not justify his conduct by argument, but certainly not by precedent. There war no precedent that could be found of ■ Judge threatening to tine a defendant three times in • day and then withdrawing them.— (Hear.)—He would slot only vote that the Petition be received, but that it be printed, meld a Com mittee formed to consider what steps should be taken on it.—(Hear.) Mr. C. H. HUTCHINSON could not suppose he had understood the Noble .Lord, if so, he held doctrines that must give offence to every man who bud the principles of freedom, or one single spark of liberty in his heart. •He was disposed to believe that he misunderstood the Noble Lord. He said that he had not heard the Petition read, but that he ' had heard enough of it to induce him to say, that it was such a Petition as ought not to be presented to the House. For aught he knew to the contrary, it miet be sn, although he could not think that the Hun. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Denman) would present such a Petition to the House. But was it to he endured that the Minister of the Crown, after having extended the yoke of slavery from England to the Continent, should come down to that House, and tell them, on the statement of the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen who acted in office under him, that the Petition was such as should not be received- - -(Hear) —and what does be say ? he charges the people with disloyalty and disaffec tion ; he does all he can to drive the people to madness, .asid then he tells them they shall have no redress, and that their Petition shall not be heard. Lord C•STLEREAGH rose to correct the mistate memo, lie would not call them misrepresentations, of the Hon. Gentleman. He was there us Minister of the Crown, and was responsible for his conduct, but he was also a Member of Parliament delivering his sentiments. Lord ALTHOItr was always anxious that the Petitions of the people should be beard, and lie hoped the Noble Lord would not persevere iu his opposition, Mr. WYNN stated that it would be quite irregular for the House to interfere. Some time since a person applied to him to present a Petition to the House, on a decision iu the Court of King's Bench, and lie told him he could not do so, for the House of Commons was not a Conrt of Appeal. If so, every man agsinst whom a decision wus pronounced may apply to that House for redrew. Mr. BERNAL thought the House should throw open their doors to the petitions of the people, for it was pregnant with danger to refuse them. Mr. flusgtssott would suit delay the House. He was anxious that the petitions of the people should be heard, but he thought the House should not en tertain what might be considered a libel on the ad ministration of justice in this country. Sir R. C. Feauttsots could not have thought that a Minister of the Crown would have dared to come down to the Commons of England, and tell them the Petitions of the people should not be received. He said dared, for he never heard of an instance of it before. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman who brought forward the Petition, stated nothing in it that was improper. Mr. BANICES thought that from the *hewing of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who brought for ward the Petition, that it was such a one as should not be presented, until the Hon. Member who it it up would declare that in his opinion it brough! J opin, was fit to be received. Ile objected to this Peti tion being brought up, not only on the ground of expediency, but also because it contained an alle gation which was false, cud which the Hoo. Mem ber who presented it declared he himself did not believe. He objected to this Petition being brought up, if for no other reason but bemuse it brought the name of an Honourable turd Learned Judge be fore the House in a manner extremely derogatory and improper. The Noble Lord (Castlereagh), as he understood him, objected to the Petition being rearl, because he knew enough of the contents to judge it would be improper to be received and laid oo the table, and for that reason he must also ob ject to ir. Mr. CURWEN said, that long as he had sat in that Ilium, and singular as the doctrines were which he had sometimes heard, the sentiments amid opinions of this night surpassed them all. Ile thought that Members were bound to present Peti tions, and the House to receive them, if they were expressed in decorous language. He saw no evil arising from it. It was true the name of the Learned Judge had been introduced in the debate, but for his part the discussion hail convinced him that the . Learned Judge had meted perfectly right. He regretted the oppo,ition given by the Noble oy tilt . _.. , .. ~ Lord, which if he persevered in he (11c. Curweile would feel himself bound to vote for receiving the Petition. Fur tt.e..oug.. I h hr f rom what he had heard he might be iiatisti• d that no improrr motive could be imputed to the Le.telied Judge, yet he thought .. . ` evsentud it . to hear the Petition read, He 10..ked with great jealousy on any thing like narrowing the tight of the subject to petition that House. There watt u poiht when it become virtual's mid tight to *gist the Government, though no moo would soy where that point was situated ; yet rejecting the Petitions of the people had a fatal tendency to illustrate a subject which, every one must wish to be kept in obscurity. ; • • - • +~"' ~ ' i. i~ . . . Mr. C. Lows would not have r i ven but to justify his Noble Friend (Lord Cebtlereagl.) (Kim the imputation of having uttered tiny thing like a general sentinrent against receiving Petitions. which the 'Gentlemen opposite repeated over Rini over spin, notwithstanding eve►• disclaimer. The argument of the Hutt. Member (Mr. Citroen) war a • little Angular. He professed himself satisfied that the Learned Judge had done perfectiy right, and yet he declared he would vote for the Petition being brought top, thoogh it contained a libel on the •Jiitl‘te. It teas argued on the other stile as if every l' , lcutott put jut° the b.& of Hon. Members must he brought up.; if that were the ease, it would be high tune to alter their rules ; but there was a question always put which satisfied him that ouch was not the cash It was said that the language only must be decorous, but he contended tlta► the matter also might be a groand fur objecting to a Petition being brought sip. Mr. J. P. GRANT and Mr. C. LONG exp l a i ne d. Sir JOHN NSW PORT said the question lay to ii very narrow compass. The question was, " shall the Petition he breeght up ?" The House at pre vent were ignorant of the contents, and even those who bad opposed it seemed to be obliged to crier hints, and pick up matter UV they went along. lle could not conceive of a Petition were decorously worded that the rule of the House seed go further, and that he believed was the extent of it. What was the reason that at the commencement of every Session the House appointed a Committee of Jus tire to sit, e-xcept it were to take cognizance of the conduct of Judges, should any occavion arise? At any time the House ought to be guarded against shutting their chorr against Prtinoo•, but mere particularly in times of weld public distress. He could scarcely conceive tiny thing more injudici ous Ilidit refusing to hear the Petition read. The CHAticiti.Loa of the EZCNRQURR said, that on looking to their Journals it would be found that there were frequent instaincra of Petitions bring rejected not only for the language, bi t also on account of the matter, and one of the most common instances was where the Petition contained a libel on any individual. 'Chi, Petition, it was. acknowledged, contained a libel on the Learned Judge.—(No, no .I—lt was acknowledged by the Learned Gentleman who had the Petition to pre seid, that it contained an allegition which was false. As to the question of the leg dity, it had al.. ready been decided in the Conic of King's Bench_ Mr. DKNMAN said he was aware he had no right to reply, but as the whole of the argument on the other side had proceeded on a mistake of what he had stated, he thought be was entitled to explain. He had not said the Petition contained a libel, but a charge against the Learned Judge ; neither had he said that be knew the imputation to be false t on the contrary, he had said he knew nothing about it, as he had nut attended the trial. He had indeed stated, from his knowledge of the character of the Learned Judge, that he dill not believe it. It had Oro been objected that he had not stated him , *elf to be prepared to found any measure upon it; but, on the contrary, he hiss stated that it might either be referred to the Grand Committee of Jena lice, or to a particular C mittee to be appointed for the purpose, or the House might adopt some legislative measure, with a view to limit the power of contempt, which bad been of late so very largely exercised. Mr. R. MARTIx opposed receiving the Petition on grounds of expediency. The House then divided, when there apneered—• For receiving the Petition 37 Against it - . 64 Majority GRAMPOUND. The further consideration of the Report on the Grimpound Disfranchisement Bill was postponed to Friday next. The House then went into a Committee on the African Company's Officers' Allowance Bill. Se veral Resolutions were agreed to, and the Report was ordered to be received on Monday next. The Nova Scotia Trade Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday next. NEW SOUTH WALES DUTIES BILL. Mr. Gotaituars then moved the Order of the Day far the second reading of the New South Wales Duties Bill. Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, l►e recollected that the public had on one occasion suffered a great loss from allowing a public acountant to draw on account without inspecting the balances whi c h he held in his hands; as the same system was pur sued at New South Wales, &c. he therefore cau tioned the Right Hon. Gentleman against a system Ly which the public had already suffered so se verely. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER EA. that by the arrangements now adopteal no such misfortune as that alluded to by the Right Ho nourable Baronet could again occur. lONIAN ISLES. Mr. Husie rose to make the motion of which he had given notice. He conceived that the Colonial Department offered better means for reducing the expenditure than any other Department of Go vernment. By the . Treaty of Paris, the lonian Islands were constituted en independent Slate un der the protection of Great Britain. By a Con vention subsequently made Intwern this Country and the lonian States. it was provided that all the miltary expense. so far as related to 3,000 men, should be defrayed out of the revenues of the islands; but Ent one shilling had been paid hitherto. —ln 1817, 145,000/. and in HIM 120,000/. had been paid by this country. end the complaint he made was, that the Lord High Comm-stonier hail squandered away the revenues, instead of spplyisig them to the payment of the military garrison.-.- FWm 1800 to 1807, Whfigt under the protection of Russia, the revenues amounted to nearly 400.000/. per annum : he would not he precise at to the amount, but whatever it MOP, it aussered all the purposes of that Government. 'rise Honoura ble Member complained of the appointments made of useless officers at high ralarirri, and instanced particularly the appointment of six Inspecting Offi cers of Miliiin, one of shorn the Hon. Col. Stewart. had been in the country for this lied IS months.— lie maintained that the sularies of the several. officer* were- excessive, aid oaght to be reduced; it woolathe foetid That they had all been increased since the Republic • cote. Under our protection. The Chief of the Setiate had a large salary, for. be 'ptinished qie any thing raid fry them in their *cessity, elos defence by shy process st fendant was Mr. Hottkonss—" I bee pardon: I said quite was not se thi'conirary, sod quoted eases to strew that de- Btwug. •[T fendant (Order oiler:) into • detsi The ArroitstY-dissaiL benr, d pardon. But A role war suppooing the Flom Member to hare wanted that should not defendants were Not punishable in any way 'Mr hicq was dot their co.,duct its their defence, he was shout to the law, tai ~~ chat doOrs; srith:tot the customary practice of retnon strafing with the PetitiWters on the impropriety of the language they address to' the /louse ; and really whets tilt Howie cams to conside, the slumber in telikh • they — hed been employed fir last . .. . Judge interfered, owl .. he could not allow him since the opening of Parliament, . the . I to pursue ihat course. Up on w hi c h h e replied, month :418104 the whok attention and time of the "if your Lord•hip lira your duirron ready, I will House bad been occupied in discu*sions on Peii furnish you with the key," Tee Learned Judge eons. —( Lord cries of hat.; from she (Ipposition.) thi4.Poid. .1. will line you twenty pounds for that He thlieefreselmiperl the House would not sanction contempt of Court." What was the Learned . duel] an ibresof the right of petitioning. Judge to do ?. Whist. tim .defesdasit oftrrod that 1 4 frV ' 'Mr: J. r:llFlltitd, ittet:fhi Noble Lord bad insult to the Court, what woe he to d o ?• If lie made use`of • awe'observation, which ha-could' not imprisoned the defendant, the tri a l m os t, of no- puss without notice. The Noble Lord stated that II 111 ) ~~ ~,. ~-