The Sun. — London, England, 1823-05-09 00:00:00

~. ` a ; ~.r ~~ ,„„ t "'V • '. '''. 'I. 4 ' / .sr 4. --- Vi — : r!, •:' 1 1 s K'' .:.: 4 1 A --:- vo _t y k s ,, , . 4 (.7:, ..// ~(, 4 9 , '( 7 Z? , )`-f t - 12/(4 ,7t4 ...„, . , ----N tv: %., A it, : ... „ 7 ,711.1 1- 1 /- J Az -A./ :,:tg et• k .4 2 ,a r . 1 i t ..2 C . firg a l " 1 ~ . , , ~,, t Jun k / Ir ; k Oi; Ott tip sr, -A - - . I 0 Nu MEER 9581. FRIDAY, MAY 9, .1823. PR ICE SEVENPENCIL :'sl l ° ‘ THE PITT CLUB. THE TIUENtiLAI, COMMEMORATION of the BIRTH of the Late Bigltt Honourable WIL LIAM PITT will be celebrated at MbIICHANT TAYLOR, iI4L, on WEDNESDAY, the 2lith Instant. lips Grace the DUKE of RICHMOND in the Chair. Ti ckets, One Guinea each, may be had on application to ill! Committee, at the City of London Tavern, on Monday awl Tuesday, the 26th and 27th Instant, bet►ceen the hours of Eleven and Four. ROYAL ACADEMY, SOMERSET PLACE. TILE EXHIBITION of the ROYAL. ACA DENIY is NOW OPEN. Admission (from Eight o'Clack till Seven), is. Catalogue, Is. e HENRY HOWARD, R.A. Sec. •BACKLER'i GREAT WINDOW of ~, the LAST SUPPER for t h e ALTAR o f HERE '. OeRD CATHEDRAL, from the Cirand Picture by West, ( I :eir P ert Y of hit; Majesty, is NOW EXHIBITED at his No. 18, Newriiin4treet.- - --Open from ten till dusk. Admittance, One Shilling; SECOND-HAND PIANO-FORTES, PEDAL. HARP, and BARREL ORGAN, Good as New. A CABINET PIANO-FORTE, not to be equalled in Touch and Tone usual .rice 60 neat,, for 3S Guineas. One of the best Rosewo p Od Cabinet, very helegantly inlaid, &c. an Guineas, f o r 60 G u i ne as. A Squ a re r ""'f"'le, 95 Gitineas. A Pine Pedal Harp, 75 Guineas, 45 Guineas; late the property of a Lady. Also, a Barrel urtian, fin- Church Or Chapel, 10 , 1 Guineas. To be seen at. JOHN WATLEN'S, 13, Leicester-place. N. 4.—A Double-action Harp, new, cost £190,• for 80 Guineas. • TO BE SOLD BY AUCTION, • Ily Mr. SOTHEBY, at hisOuse, WELLINGTON•STREET, IV :MELO() BRIDGE, S on TUESDAY, the tat h day of May, and follot.ving Day, at Twelve &Clock; TILE COLLECTION of PRINTS of the ,41.- lat e It ICHARD EAR LOM, Es ti. among which will he "und, Ch o i ce PRO OFS and ETCHINGS of all his valuable and admired PRODUCTIONS which were reserved for Its own Private Collection, many of them are now very scarce, and difficult to he met with. To be viewed, and catal ogues had, at the pace of Sale. ( IMPERIAL TWINE CLOT[ - l. BY HIS MAJESTY'S LETTERS PATENT. Na coot enent pas de lin, mail en possedent les rternlens• LIE above desirable CLOTH for wear in li,dh the Indies,• on the Continent, and in the cold inuates, is Sold riclusively at the Patentees, MILLARE? 4CIIE " ONS, Foreign and British , Linen Warehouse, No: if), APSIDE, stamped with the name, number of the house, by the hingle Piece, mid in entire Cases fur Exportation, and tau where else whatever. Families from India will find it the hest to adopt on chang e of climate, as well as for its economy, as it p0Ag......11 the advantages of the India Ma 'lntl Cloth with that of Linen, ami where they can - eA,:oangar Any stiperfittous number of India Shawls to the ereattsit ad: '' h antage for every des cr ip tion o f t h e ehoictst Forties% and Vltish Line ns , Damask Table Linen, shawls, ...tench Cambries, the various articles for fashionable even .l4 and mornintc dress, and lied and Drawing-room Fin ture s , by the Piece, Dewy, &c. at the wholesale prices. THE GRAVEL AND STONE, LUMBAGO, &c. lIICKMAN'S PILLS are allowed to ,be the and most successful Preparation for effectually r emovin g Preventing the future recurrence of those Disorders i "t"ch arise from an imperfect action of the Urinary Orpus, !I Grav e l and Stonegaimbago, Pains in the Back and Loins, tililsression of Urine, &c. Composed of the most innocent Nredients, this truly valuable Medicine relieves the suffer- Tg,P , rtient front the excruciating tortures of those diseases wit hout any si o l ence or i n j ur y t o the Constitution, and te !u'res no confinement or restraint of diet during it s us e. It i l ll_Ylrv'ns of the oldest Public Medicines extant and its pecu irtues and efficacy have uniformly maintained the highest r eputation. Sold 4, c i In Boxes, at 2s. 9th. and 11s. by Butler's, Chemists, R aealmitle, St. Waterloo Regent-street (near the Argyle 5t 6 4 7, 8 . ), London; place, Edinburgh . Saekville '* PUblin; and by the Principal Medicine Venders throughout the United Kingdom. TO T. TAYLOR, Esq. No. 9, New Bridge-street, London. H o Nountai Stn, IREG leave to inform you, that ever since the avh , year 1790, I had been afflicted with the Lues Venereal, p e n,f l om its obstinately resisting every course of medicine it e r "' r "'wed by the most eminent of the faculty here, and un ,ek_going severallevero courses of salivation, and twice dis- C 4 Tged from the Hospital with little relief, would appear to of the most inveterate Nature. tic spring of last year 1 1 aisorder had got t o such a bead, as nearly to put a period :o n My existence—l had a large ulcer on the crown of my head, i s e ' 6ll e ach Prm,and my legs were broke out in a frightful :t a - t r uter ; iny right was dreadfury painfli, and had been in a twoeief ulceration for the last seven yes; my left had also ntC krf e "des on it, was very much discoloured, and gave er ' 1 excruciating pain, 'particularly when warm in bed, was sI TY to deprive me of rest; this lamentable state, I great r n u'inded by Mr. .1. Thompson, (who received so whi c h Ire by them here), to take your Leake's Patent Pills, rung ht I began to leceive fo • be gan deo the 26th O. lay; in the course of a little more than a month t benefit—iii he ulcer - t ere soundly heaktt— oan alter,s on my bead ant arms w ever the stores nivel legs healed also ; leaving, how. , conside lahlediscolouration in the.skin, and pain lathe !o lie of th e l eft, which, by the blessing of God, anda little I t rger yet severance in • your invaluable Medicine, subsided ; the "1411 dispersing, the skin regaining its natural hue, and vo ttr l T ct uroal pains gradually going otf.—l thus became, by j ar liberal advice and medicine, perfectly free from all my li t te rne r em plaints—have recovered my former spirits a . nd eim :Nth, and ant become jony and fat, in which state hayisig H..inued many month, to the astonishment of all who knew itM at loss in what terms ts exp . ress my gratjtude, but ttis sg Toll, fin - the good •of other suffering to to make ".Y case as public as possible, as I shall on every occa ol in so doing you will greatly oblige, *; 11. , your graterni, obedient, very bumble ser van t, ALEX. NI ULMER `lvtttt l s Cl , ,se. 1-stree t. t Edinburgh. i Wit nestles tot he above Core L lt►h • worpson, No. a, New Poultry Marliei, Edinburgh, P 3°hn Wititosb, Old Assembly Close, Edinburgh. t r ,, r ,elAtred and sold by the solo Proprietor, THONIAS TAY n, Member of the Royal College of S u rgeons, at his .co ris s ," , No. 9, New Bridge-street, London; whine, after as re r o, ll 'll residence of more than 40 years, in a practice ;mai jot . .I - 1y directed to the cure of Venereal Complaints and those secrecy to the Parts of Generation, with that inviolable zuc t i e cY which men of his profession 4hottld always observe in fuell.lte haters himself the advice and asiistance he adMinisteri to persiins taking this Medicine, will 4t - I Tt Lined, hy a dicvrning . Public, as-an advat.tage seldom l '%bable, and void of all ambigttity. sPld by his a ppoiotinent, tor the convenience of those 1, / ,',llLat aistaiwi„ al l the Toysbop, No. 103, Oxford-street; Eish-street-hill; Mr. Baxter, ~ etjtn, hridtc, Edinburgll; Mi. Callwel.'s, Dublin; and of pets 11 ..:v . vrV rOnsuleruble town in Great Britain and r '' l a~j, b d . ( my gs od eaethstamped, and sealed up viti ht . • .• •••' ' II and pluin directioni, whereby persons, of either "IN Clll theatselyes with easf, speed, secrecy, and safety. PARLI AMENT. HOUSE OF. COMMONS', I‘l,lY 8. Several public accounts and other papers were presented, and ordered to be printed. BULL-BAITING. Mr. 11. SUMNER (for Mr. It. MAR N) gave notice, that, on Monday evening next he should move fOr leave to bring in a Bill to presi6nt BulLbaiting. SLAVERY. Mr. BIRCH., pwented a petition from Nottingham, in fa vour of the Abolition 'Of Slavery; Init added,lhat until he knew what was the nature of the measure about to. be proposed on this subject, he could. not pledge himself to support it. Ile believed much misrepresentation and rancour had been disse minatetton the subject, to the injury of those who had property in the 'West Indies. Mr. DEN MAN supported the prayer of the petition. So long as the Negro population were left in the power of their masters, he thought it impossible to suppose that they could. be Well treated. Mr. SYKES also spoke in favour of the petition. Mr. GRENELL said, the mere question of property could .not be fairly brought forward on the consideration of the alr &tract question, whether slavery ought to be allowed. The main question being disposed of, he Should not; perhaps, object to the principle of allowing compensation. After a few words front Mr. Bincn, in explanation, who :said he had not expressed himself decidedly against the aboli. don, the petition was ordered to be printed. ! Mr. MANSFIELD presented a petition from Leicester, Praying for the abolition of slavery. • Similar petitions were presented from Stoke-upon-Trent, by LiTTLriori from the Arehtleaconry of Leicester, by kr. LEGH KECK ; from Salisbury, by Lord FOLKESTONE; 'from Pembroke, by Sir JOHN OWEN ; from Hull, by Mt. SYKEs; from Warrington, - by' Mr;' SLAcxnunarE ; from Yeovil, by Mr. Dicxxxsox; from York, by Mr. CHALONEII; and Retford, by Mr. ifivANs. • •• Mr, DENISON presented a petition from Epsom against the Coal Duty: - • The above petitions were ordered to be printed. Mr: 'Alderman WOOD presented a petition from Cornwall against the Coal Duty. TITHES. Sir J. OWEN , presentea a petition from Pembroke, praying for an alteration of the present system of Tithes. Mr. HUME supported the prayer of the petition, which, ho said, did, not propose to take away a single shilling to which the Clergy were cntitled.—The petition was ordered to be printed. SI4LILL DEBTS. Lor ALTHORP presented a petition from the Inhabitants of the town of Leicester, praying for a legislative measure to facilitate to recovery of Small Debts, l'hey stated two in. stances of enormous costs being incurred in the Courts at West. minster, in actions for the recovery of &hall Debts.—After a few observations Trom the:Noble Iprd, in support of the peti tion, it was ordered to be printed. • CARLILE'S Mr. If UM E _presented a Petition from Mr. Carlile, now con. fined in Dorsetshirepok He knew that the grossest prejudice existed against this individual. Until the distresses 0f.1916 he was an industrious mechanic r but the distresses of the times compelled him to seek a. livelihood as a render of pamphlets. Ile ,Mr. H.) boldly defied any one to state an in i s so ta ,uanra n oo e se e pixiiec o new f ilol i then m ns - i . ih m nue o si i r b l e Inl cf i n oa d fn u d c t a o n n sthte prosecutions' partb exemplaryorft lYel;.uhebe head i ao l tf e i 0 n ‘ a o l f r e e fancily. li w g a he had to state the act, that until Carlilewas prosecuted for sell ing Paine's works, the sale was very trifling ; ; but the prosetu lion of himself and his family caused•asaleoflo,ooocopies. His weekly publication of The Republican was by the same means raised t9aittds of . 0,000 per week. He (Mr. 11.1 entreated facts. The subject, howevii., - 51"0/"InuSeatitin. , ....tix. rheas principally a complaint that lie had been interrupted in his de fence by the judge who tried him, The Hon. Member, at some length. contended, that this was an improper practice, and de structive of the tights of Englishmen. The sentence upon Carlile was, that he- should beimprisoned for three years, pay a fine of one thousand five hundred pounds, and find sure ties for his good behaviour for life. On the same day on' which, sentence was passed, all his property was seized, and detained unsold for three years. This, he contended, was illegal ; and he complained too, that the property, if sold to fair advantage, would have produced between 4,000 and 5,000/. ; and yet, notwithstanding all this, he was kept in prison for the fines. He thought that conduct 'like this was not to be exampled in the worst times of the Inquisition. It discouraged respectable booksellers from publishing works of .controversy. The conduct indeed displayed towards this man was most cruel and oppressive. His property hail been seized, his wife and family turned into the streets, and himself thrown into a prison, where lie now remained. His petition prayed for the interference of the House to address the Crown for his discharge, and he trusted that that prayer would meet with the attention from the House which it deserved. The Honourable Member concluded by moving that the petition be brought-up. . • The SOLICITOR.GENERAI. , took a concise review of all the proceedings in the case of Mr. Carlile, and reminded the House, that the libel of which he had been convicted, had been the subject of successive prosecutions from the period of its first publication. But were it even the 51st prosecution, the Court always allowed the defence to be conducted with the same freedom as though it were but for the first time brought before the Court. The defendant, as had been stated, was not interrupted in his defence—if defence it could he called. —So far from it, that his address to the Jury continued for ' three days, nearly eleven hours each day. — (Hear , hear !) It was to be recollected, that Mr. Cathie himself had de clared that nothing should deter him in the course that be had marked out--that his wife would follow in the path and glory in the martyrdom—and that his sister would con duct the business should the wife be convicted, He went still further, and threatened, that should all his family suffer the penalties of the 'law, it would then be easy for him to ob tain for hire persons to carry on the business effectually.— The House, at least such Gentlemen as attended to the history of Mr. Carlile, were aware that he had kept his word , and that a prosecution against one of his agents was yet actually pending. It had been stated that the levy on his goods ought not to have been made until after the imprisonment had ex pired, This levy was legally made, but if it were not so, Mr. Carlile had his remedy—he might applied to the court to set aside the writ. Mr. Parkins, the Sheriff : , might hare acted irregularly in not selling the property after it had been seized, but for that his Majesty's Government was not responsible.— From what hail passed in court on that part of the subject, he believed the Sheriff did not wish to risk the selling of such a quantity of libellous and blasphemous publications as were comprehended in the property seized. He had understood that a Learned Friend of his, Mr. Starkie, had been called upon by the Sheriff to peruse the 50,000 volumes seized, with the view of enabling him to sell that part of it which was not subject to that charge, That residue was sold, and produced not more than 351. With respect to the inability to pay the fine, there was this inconsistency in the statement of the Honourable Member, that if 13,000 copies were sold, on the most moderate estimate of profits Mr. Carlile must have gained considerably by the sale. Mr. LENNARD considered the sentence passed on Mr. Carlile as one of very unconstitutional severity. That severity he looked upon as one of the signs of the times. It" did appear to him that the supporters of the Six Acts having failed in their efforts to procure the punishment of perpetual banishment, as was contemplated, had still contrived through the agency of the Judges to supply that deficiency by sentences which amounted to perpetual imprizonment—( Hear hear 1) Mr. HUME explained theinability of Mr. Carlile to pay the fine t by the fact that he had invested the profits of his former sale in the expence of the works which were seized under the levy. Mr. DENMAN observed, that the proceedings in the case before the House proved that irreligion could also produce its martyrs. Such were the effects of that reaction which . the operation of the joint stock purse of the self-called Constitu tional Association produced. Ile understood that the funds of that purse were exhausted, never, he trusted, to be replenished. The punishment he considered to beexcessive. Had the Judges been aware of the inability of Mr. Carlile to pay the fine,, at the time judgment was passed, he was sure they never would. have passed it. Therefore he trusted the Government would interfere and modify it, to the actual circumstances of the de fendant. . Mr. Secretary PEEL said, that Carlile had distinctly, on his trial, admitted the sal. of 3000 copies of the work, for selling which he was prosecuted, at half-a-guinea each. This led the Court to a belief of hiS having realized at least 1,5001. by his sales. He was not, however, kept in prison now entirely on account of the fines, for a part of t h e sentence was , th at h o should find seelOrityfor his future gOod behaviour; and from his subsequent and his preient conduct in prison, there was every reason to believe that it would be extremely hazardous for any one to become security for him. All the circumstances considered, he contended that the conduct of Covernment in not extending mercy to him was completely justified. Mr. HUME moved that the petition be printed. Mr. Secretary PEEL opposed the !minting, as reference was made in a margin to a list of blasphemous publications, which though the order of that House, would get currency amongst the people. hir: HI'ME had no objection to separate the margin from the petition; the latter was couched in unobjectionable lan guage. Mr. Secretary PEEL felt that it would be equally objec tionable to print the petition in a mut ila te d ' st a te , an d there f ore he submitted to the Honourabl e M em b e r not to press his Motion. ..Mr. HUME withdrew hit motion for_the printing, men' ing to himself the right of bringing thetilbject forward in an other shape. EAST INDIA SUGAR. Mr. DENMAN presented a petition from Nottingham in favour of the equalization of the Duties on East anti West India Sugars. • - • BREAD. Mr. HUSKISSON- presented a petition from the Master Bakers and FlourAealers of Liverpool, praying for the ex tension of the London Local Bread Act to Liverpolil. Honourable Ilemberstook the opportunity of stating, that, he had recommended, instead of a local, a general measure of legisl After a few words frorn Mr. GRENFELL, which was not understood, the petition was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. ISLE OF GUERNSEY. AIL BENNET rose to ask a qumtion, which, during every Se :Won of the last five years, he had ineffectually put. fla wish. e$ to know What proceedings had been determined on, in con iiirinity with the Report of a Commission which had been made years ago ? Great complaints had been made, because that Re port had not been attended to. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL answered, that certain al terations recommended in that Report had been adopted, and others were under deliberation. • APPEALSIIN THE HOUSE OF Lorms. Mr. A BERCROM RV moved, in the absence of an Honour ' able Friend, for a Conimittee to inspect the Journals of the House of Lords, and to inquire into the beat means of facilitat ing the administration of justice as it was connected with the hearing of appeals, writs of error, and other judicial proceed ins in that House. • - The Committee was thereppon appointed. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. Colonel BARRY rose for the purpose of calling the atten tion of the Clouse to an article in a Newspaper respecting the pending imptiry into the conduct of the Sheriff of Dublin. He felt reluctant to propose the bringing a Printer to the bar of that Rouse ; but the object of the paragraph to which he alluded was so obviously to impede the course of publiejnatice, that he felt obliged to notice it. The obscurity of the paper in which it was contained might have induced him to pass it by in silence, were not its wickedness and falsehood such as to make it unfit ,that„ even upon the End ted number of the natters of that paper, such an impression should be suffefed to remain. He then pro ceeded to read an article from a Morning Paper, animadverting upon the conduct and character of the Orange party in Ire land, and commenting upon the evidence given in th e Ho use of Commons. The lion. Member then referred to the case of !Sir Elijah Impey, in 1788, in which the House had recom mended a prosecution by the Attorntv-General ; and concluded by moving that the Printer of the. Paper should be called to the bar to-Morrow. It LI - WRY thAstrihr thot at .1.4 character of any Member of the Hone, although its insinua tions were injurious to the characters nf. others, enough had been done in the notice which had been , already taken of "it. As those tudividuals,. who br some accinnt obtained a knowledge of the proceedings of the House, had in general properly abstained from connventing u p on ' the inquiry, be would suggest to the Hon. Gentleman the expediency of with .drawing Ins motion. Colonel BARRY had no abjection to adopt the course recommended, if the House were of opinion that the article which he had read was_ an instance of gross injustice. Ile did not wish to being the House into collision with those people " But unless something be done," said the Honourable Member, " . the press will become our 'masters, instead of we being their's." Mr. C. WYNN said, that witnesses and even culprits charged in that House were under its protection. He, however, thought, in the present instance, sufficient had been done to prevent a repetition of the offence. Mr. ABERCROMBY thought the newspapers had, in ge neral, been so well advised. as to refrain from commenting on the inquiry. The Hon. Gentleman (Col. Barry) wished to draw forth the House as to the paragraph he had just read ; for himself, individually, he had no hesitation in saying, he thought it was highly coloured. Ile would, however, take this opportunity of stating, that he had received a heap of news ' papers and pamphlets on the other side of the question, and particularly before the motion of the Hon. Member for Ar magh, containing much more exaggerated statements relative to the conduct of the Attorney-General. fie did not, however, feel it necessary to take any notice of them, because if the House should enter into a contest of this sort, they would not easily, get rid of it. Mr. PEEL added his advice to that which had already been given. His Hon. Friend's (Col. Barry's) character was proof against any insinuations from Such a quarter as this newspaper. When the liberty of the press was abused, its licentiousness carried its own antidote with it; for it was the natural conse quence of disgraceittl exaggerations to lessen the credit of the source from which they proceeded. Colonel BARRY then withdrew his motion. THE SHERIFF OF DUBLIN. On the motion of Mr. J. Wita.rasta that this Inquiry be resumed, Mr. WETHERELL rose, to renal the attention of the House to the subject of the discussion which had been left un finished yesterday. He was proceeding to state that he had found his opinion backed by legal authority, and that all to whom he had spoken had become more confirmed in the view which he took, cm. that the (hand Juror was warranted, and even bound at the instance of the House to reveal what passed in the Grand Jury Chamber. Mr. WILLIAMS suggested that no practical result could prozeed from discussing this question at that precise time. An. other opportunity might arise when it would be more proper and convenient. After a few words from Col. BAARY and Mr. WETUEREL L the House went into the Committee. On the motion of Col. BARRY, who stated that he called this witness to disprove what had been stated by the Attorney• G eneral for Ireland. Henry Handwich, sen. -was called in and examined. iSAIIRY—Q. Are you in any way related to Sheriff Thorpe P---A. No, Sir. Q. are you father to Henry and Matthew Handwich who were lately tried P—A. Yes, Sir. Q. Are they any way related to Sheriff Thorpe 1---A. No, Sir, by no means ; but there is a branch of the family related. Upon Henry Joseph H. Moore being called in, Mr. PLUNKETT said, he thought it absolutely necessary the House should decide before the examination of this witness commenced, whether grand jurors should be questioned ix to' what passed in the grand jury chamber. lie apprehended that it could not be left to the willingness or unwillingness of the juror. —(hear !) ' Mr. WYNN said, there was a ease on the records of Par 'lament deciding the question in favour of a grand juror to give evidence of that nature. Besides this, the wording of the oath itself, in his opinion, decided the- question in the same way. Mr. A BERC 01%1 BY quoted the inatance of Lord Chatham having declared, that were he in the place of Admiral Keppel, he should have stated- to the House what he wished• to state, notwithstanding his oath as a member of . the Court Martial on Admiral Byng, simply because the House of Commons was the proper place for making the communication. He contended, therefore, that if Admiral Keppel, upon his 9wn approbation, could infringe his oath to that house, it was in the power of that House, engaged in a public inquiry, in call upon mei n_ hers of a grand jury to reveal what had passed, in the grarid jury chamber. AI L Secretary PEEL strongly doubted whether It was 100d' policy to hold out to jurors or others, that any power on earth, but their own conscience, could absolve them from the obliga tion of an oath. The oath in itself was, that the swearer called upon himself the vengeance of Heaven, if he ever revealed what he swore to keep secret; and that being the case, how, he asked, was it poastble for that House to force a witness t o forego his oath, if be thought it binding ? It must under that view be left to the individual himself; for if not, the }louse would be obliged to send him, if he refused to answer its de mend, tatiewgate ; and that he believed no one in that llouse could desire. Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH, contended that religion, in cases, of oath-taking, only lent, its aid to a civil obligation as long as that obligation in a civil poiot of view continued bind ing. The Right Hon. Gentleman, however, was of opinion that an oath taken to promote civil matter% could not be ab solved, even when those very mattersrequired it. No one ever thought therewas any thing irreligious or:criminal in man and wife living separate, when the law had, absolved them from those obligations they had bound , themselves by, in the name of religion, at the altar of God. An oath was the creature of the law, and was therefore subject to the lave. If the Right Hou. Gentleman's (Mr. Peel) motion were well founded, then it was not in the power of law Makers to alter the law ; other. oaths. Ile was, howeve r , of o pi n i on t h at no j uror s h ou ld he wise those who swore allegiance to the laws could forego their would not But allvh-e science hisa brought to that bar, and examin e d, w h ose scrup l es o f con ; h eo inl uid to no t t e a v b eal stai w n i fc a o t m h p e o l i i n e t u i d ng nut; s‘'cre under that if oaths were as binding as the Right Hon. Secretary seeme , i to think, the whole of our Protestant ancestors, at the time of the Reformation and at the Revolution, were perjured;. for they had not hesitated to break their allegiance to oaths by which they had before bound themselves. Mr. WETHERELL considered that the oath wasaltegether a civil obligation, with a pledge to the Deity as to its observ.. ante. The State and King were those to whom the security was given, the Deity being a third party. An oath Was not according to the view of he who took it, but of him who ho. posed it. The law writers said it was scrunduntanimanz hnpo nepttis,-!--it was taken quoad Dean; and this was the opinion of Dr. Paley. He was rather disposed to think that the meaning of an oath of a Grand Jury was that he would maintain secrtey till the ends of justice were answered, vie. till the delinquent was tried.—(Hear!)—The House of b'enimone, by the Consti tution, had an unlimited tight of power of inquiry ; and it seas therefore impossible that the same Constitution could give another man the means of defeating that power. The way to examine all obligations was by inquiring quis itniaLtrat quo aninao. To the first must be answered, the Government ; and, to the second, it was impossible to answer, that it Was even with the intention of checking. its own progress, of defeating its own objects, and prejudicing its own interests. If this were not the true way of regarding an oath, all the .Members of either University must be prejudged ; for they were bound by oaths to go to bed at ten, and put out their fires at eight at night, and amongst other things not to pay more than tivopence a pound for their mutton.—(baughter.) With respect to oaths of this nature, it was always considered that the founders of them were present in all time, and that their will was to be interpreted as conceding . to the change in the timer', those changes which the times required. He believed it had never been solemnly decided in Court, whether or not, in a case of perjury or fraud, a Juror could be examined, touch ing what had passed in the Grand Jury. The case of Sir .1. Fenwick was wholly a party affair, and,' under all the circum stances, he did not think any thing turned on that case at all. 'An, allusion was yesterday made to the oath of Privy Council lor, but a Member of the Privy Council stood in a peculiar situ ation, and one materially different from that of a Graud Juror. The religious scruple which the latter might have to disclose what had passed before him, he considered to be founded on no correct principle, but to arise from confounding civil with religious duties, and he therefore had no doubt of the House to examine the witness touching whathad passed before the Grand Jury. Mre BRIGHT considered that the House had power to pro. opinion, diet weeeninti i lloil of the Grand -Jurgen, and was.of on with th e in "es eo they could not satisfactorily go. Mr..l3A R - • e. thou 1 pee the • an oath might be lightly death wan. I' fE Weft h.trtittt. &rolrr appear of that importance which coujil make it expedient to run that risk, and if the oath taken by the Grand Juror was understood to bind him to perpetual secresy, it ought not to be held that to aid an inquiry in that House lie might honest. ly disclose what he had previously sworn to conceal. Mr. DENMAN concurred in the view which his Hon. and Learned Friend (Sir J. Mackintosh) lied taken of this sub. ject, and denied that our ancestors, who 'bad distinguished themselves in the part they took in the Reformation and at the Revolution, ought to be held to have perjured themselves. The oath taken by a Grand Juror did not prohibit such disclosures as were now required. To act on the supposition that when persons had sworn falsely berme. a. Grand Jury, the Jurors were hound by oath to conceal it, would be to permit perjury, and to deny themselves the power of punishing it. He did not understand that the oath of a Grand Juror bound him never to disclose the evidence given before him. The meaning of the pre cise words used in the oath was now lost in remote antiquity, but he considered it to have been intended to bind them not to disclose what bad come before them while the proceedings were still in progress. It appeared to hini, that in a case like the present, the oath of the grand juror did not restrain him from giving evidence, as he was not bound by that oath to attempt to defeat the ends of justice. Ile was surprised to hear this question treated as it had been by an Hon. bleinber as ofedight importance. Ile was decidedly of a contrary opinion ; and, as an individual, felt persuaded that the question which had been objected m might properly be put. Mr. Secretary CANNING conceived the House, in consi., tiering this question, ought to• bear in mind how it would be popularly viewed out of doors with respect to the obligation of an oath,' and with respect to the authority . of that House.— If there. were in the minds of the people in general an idea that the oath of a grand juror bound him for ever to keep secret what had passed before him in 'that charactir, sonic respect ought to be had for this feeling, and even if an erro., neous construction were put upon the oath, be thought thei error rather furnished ground for a new enactment, than for taking a particular course in a case which had already oc curred. The practical question before the House turned on two points. The first of these was—how far was. the House authorised to examine a grand juror ; the second, what was the discretion which they ought to exercise? The power of that House to absolve from an oath on certain State emergen cies ;was a question, the discussion of which, on the abstract principle, he really thought would be attended with more dan ger than advantage. It would be better that 'they should de. fer coming to a decision on it, till a case arrived when such de cision became absolutely necessary, than that they should - do so now. It seerneesehnitted on all hands ' that the refusal of a grand juror to answer questions, whether from consider:l64m for tenderness of conscience, or from a view of the discretion which the House ought to exercise, would not he visited by. the House with the extreme severity of sending a witness to New. gate. Was this then a case in which it would be wise to exert their authority by examining a grand juror at all? He could not see the benefit of doing so, if, before the examinations were entered upon, they told each witness, " if you withdraw your self from die questions which may be put to you, the House will 'not use that power by which it might compel you to answer." The examination of such witnesses would probably be worse than useless. The House intended to mark its regard for ten derness of conscience; but persons whose consciences were not tender might profit by their determination. He therefore thought that if, while they asserted the right of pressing their questions they declined compelling answers to them, they svuggested a reason for abandoning the examinations alto gether. The talking of such a course might be made sub servient to purposes directly opposite to those of justice. Much evidence might be obtained on one side from those who were not scrupolous, while none might be procured on the ' other, on occount of that tenderness of conscience which they agreed to respect. Instead of getting at the truth, by going on with the examination of grand jurors, their doing so might cause the House to come out of the present inquiry with a false view of the merits of the ease. To him this appeared so con. elusive, that if it came to a vote, he should give his vote against 'thus potteecuting the inquiry. He would rather reserve the ewe don till sonic special case should call for its decision from the Muse of Commons. He judged it to be' their duty to guard against anything that might lower Grand Juries in public mi. matron ; and above all, to avoid Seeming-to sanction the vio ' .lation of the :sacred obligation of an - oath. It had been at tempted to 'compare the midis of the Grand Jury, by comopar. ing them to the ridiculous oaths taken- at the.Universoieie To do this was not to raise the character of the latter, but to bring the former down to theirlevel. Wialiing, then, to - shuo the die cussion of the abstract principle, but at the same time gulrd - ino themselves against giving: up the: power which the flou.;1. might claim • on .a future einergeney, and . considering .eti4 case, though important, not of such magnitude, •as to ,r, quire their immediate decision on the point in question,- hoped it would not be their pleasure t exercise that authority, which, if exercised, would in the presehf instance be fruitkooly employ Mr. WETHERELL wished it to be reniernbered4. - that th ridicule which had been thrown on the University Oaths bra. longed to the eminent writers he had quoted, and not to . Mr. Secretary CANNING said he did not recollect that • Paley had compared the University Oaths, which absolved selve by their own absurdities:with the., substantial oath w;iicii bad hitherto been considered entitled to reverence as taken by. the Grand Juries. Mr. PLUNKETT submitted to the House that if it was cols. sidered unjust to pursue the examination of the Grand Jurors, justice ►could require that the.whole of the evidence which ap plied to them, which had been already received, should be ex punged from the minutes. .Mr, BROUGHAM azreed as to the practical result almost entirely with the Right lion. Gentleman. lie thought the dis cus,ion of the abstract principle might be postponed without pe rious injury. The question then was, could the inquiry go cn with advantage without investigating what had passed befoge the Grand Jury ? Il e did not see that it was necessary for the House to know all or any thing o what had passed be fore the Grand Jury. Th e charge against the Sheriff was that he had packed a Jury He adinuted that the conduct of that Jury might bring confirmation ,of the packing-,might prove that he bad found tooLs fur his purpose who performed the work in an indecent manner. Ilut if the conduct of the Jay had been good, that would not refute the charge of packing. .11is conduct in the Jury would aggravate the offimce of the sheriff, but their good conduct would not acquit him of the charge which had been preferred. Tins enabled him to conclude watt the Right lion. Gentlemen that it IV( tad be desirable to avoid coming to a decision on the %leaden. H e was sorry to h ear it contended by some Gentlemen that perjury before a grand jury could not be proved. if this principle were admitted, it' would be in effect telling the malicious that they might pursue their n eighbou rs . to death with imp un i t y, as t h eir perj tit les, could not he punished. A ease had occurred where a man was on his trial for a capital offence of a very grave nature, in which a Learned Friend of his was engard. While the trial was going on, a note was flung down to bun from the gallery,which stated a witness to be then swearing the contrary of what he had worm before the grand jury. Mr. justice Buller held it to be clear that a and jury ought be examined on this sub.. jest. This accordingly took place, and he (Hr. Brougham) understood that the witness was afterstiards convicted of per jury on the evidence of that grand juror. To him it seemed' absurd to say, that perjury before a grand jury could not b r. punished. he oath Oa grand juror hound hint not to chatter at an alehouse or at a gentleman's table, where a gran d j uror ' was Illepit likely to be found in the afternoon, of what had come before him in the morning, but it did not enjoin him to perpe tual silence. They had sworn that they would not idly or ma liCiously disclose what had come to. their knowledge, but not that they be silent in order to defeat the ends of justice. ,lie' would have all respect for, tuderness of conscience, reservitg: in particular cases the right o T determining whether or not the party took an erroneous view of the oaths by which he had oon. sidered himself to be bound. Colonel BARRY said, great delinquency had been charged against the sheriff, and the charge had been sustained by re. ference to the conduct of the grand jury. lie therefore should exceedingly lament the gtand jurors being prevented from giv.' Mg their evidence, which they were all ready to do, as it was only by them that a contradiction could be supplied to what he must call the false testimony which had been given. lie iin. plored the Committee to proceed with the inquiry. Tits A TTORNEY , GENERAL had foresen, two nights. ago, that the Hous e wo u ld b e pl ace d i n t h e s i tuat i on in which it now stood, and had, therefore, entered his protest against going into the condUct of the grand jury at all. But he was. met by the argument, that their conduct would make against the high sheriff. lle was surprised to hear the Honourable • and t , ,,,utht_ that if the conduct of the agree that the sheriff' could not be exculpated in me one ease,. hut might be inculpated in the other. To him this did not. appear consistent with even-handed justice. The Learned. Gentleman proceeded to explain his view or the oath taken by grand jurors, and contended thlit the I louse ought to have rer gard to the feelings of the parties by whom it w a s taken. HO i regretted that the nfinity with respect to the grand jury had; been entered:upon, and contended, that it' it were not now pro. secuted, all that related to them ought to be expunged from ti, minutes. He hoped what had occurred in this-instance woold prevent their again deviating into extraneous matter in . rho - course of this inquiry. . . Dr. LUSHINGI()N requested that the question which heat been objected to might be read. The question was accordingly read. Dr. LUSIIINOTON then applied himpelf to the question whether a grand juror under the oath which he had taken was at liberty to state to the House' what had passed before him in that character. He (Dr. L.) was clearly of opinion that the House had authority to compel an answer to the question, and that it would be no violation of the oath of the grand juror to give all the information demanded from him. if he saw that the Legislature had imposed an oath of -universal secrecy on an individual, he should then say that the party could only be re'. leased from that oath by. the power which had imposed it, namely, by an Act of the whole Legislature, and not merely the decisions of one branch of it. But he did not cOnsider the oath to bind the party to perpetual silence. He was of opinion, when that House called for the evidence given before a grand jury, that the jurors were as much bound to disclose what had passed, as they were in a case where individuals hail sworn falsely between them, which it had been generally ad mitted they might do without perjuring themselves. Un doubtedly the House had a right to put this question ; but the expediency . of doing so, involved many considerationi.sr At all events, it would be disgraceful to the House not to sift the truth to die bottom. He regretted that the inquiry had taken so wide a range in its objects. .' Sir J. NEWPORT said, that the best way of proceeding Was to expunge altogether from the Minutes every thing which had passed within the Grand Jury Room. He should 1110V010 that effect if it were the sense, of the Committee.._ Colonel BARRY said, that such a course would be a grO4s' 'dereliction of public justice. They had suffered all the (saint:- nies that could be heaped upon the Shand Jury toga forth to the world, and by adopting such a proposition they would pre vent those individuals from taking the only means in their power of sending forth the contradiction to those calumnies. . Sir J. NEWPORT had only thrown out the suggestion for the consideration of the Committee, anti he should be the last man to propose any measure which would stand in the way of justice being done to the Members of the Grand Jury. Mr. DAWSQN had come doily to the House impressed with the conviction that the House could not proceed to put questions to the Members of the Grand Jury upon matters which an oath bound them to keep secret. The discutisiOn which bad taken Place had, however, convinced him both as to the power of the House, and the expediency of adopting such an examination. He trusted, therefore, that the House would not stop, nor confine itself to narrow limits of inquiry ; because justice could not be done unless the Investigation were compre— hensive and perfect. Mr. G9II.IIiBURN said, that when the inquiry was first proposedrhe had pointed out that the Minim either could not proceed in it to any satisfactory issue, or that it must findititelf in the situation of calling upon grand jurymen to make publie that which they were bound b oath to keep secret. He still adhered to the opinion he pot forward last night, that to release a juryman from an oath solemnly taken, was to violate the emost sacred principles; and roust be productive of the worst possible effecta, by leading the people of this country to wider value the high character of such an engagement. He had htard a great deal of learning, and ingenious argument advanced that night, but it had failed to alter the opinion which he previously entertained. For these reasons, if the 'question tame to be th— cided,he should vote against putting any questions to the rural jury as to what took place in the Toom • Sir N. COLTIWIIST contended that the w messes woo bald t l , i ohl e tie e tyr n me nfittiee been et eri,x, l ll:t l a yreo fi rniyln t g it : lslo o r,: i; feurvx t i r tur e on a dro t i : ti n t : e t itoa l :t,t,shlttythlwre the m. t p sv eose, ‘te:en e d .uti Jury aei4.l,istvla t ru ts 1 1 : 11 ,0 1 , IVIr. Secretary ,AN NINO said it_ was it!, ex stv as to put An end to the doubts and uncertainties h t. ;t, the course the Committee intended to pursue. Ile question, Wtetttftrerilt:crichthlnvel rrsedotectettratTnatt;-abi7u6-1411Zottetr• 1 ;11. till , fter ugh as ri"• Nur vt'Or oho toil, t1)0 1014 LCCd 'Oh 004 osti -0011 f j►A4t 0 101 1 , 0 'd• Lin" Il 3° it ; 6 oPcs° cc en. o terr. t hoif to , ac ed. " r „hilr, ,00.0