The Sun. — London, England, 1819-02-27 00:00:00

wiss given away. Now, "for i.e nimt the House, that the Hon. Member, in his /Wiener, had said, that when threatened with the hsTge of guilty, he might 'have averted it by giv ing his son the office---now he could prove by the dates of the letters, that when it was written, The office had actually been given away. He now held the letter in his hand, and with great respect te must insist that there was not 'one word in it amounting to a breach of privilege. Mr. WYNN submitted whether it Was not too much, that, after the House had voted, nemine tontradicente, that the letter was a breirch of pri stileg.!, and come to the vote in the presence of the Hon. Member himself, that be should now be al:owed to contend that it was no breach of Mr. LIIITCHrNfON said, though he had been in the House shortly before the vote, and soon after it, he was not present during the vote. Ile sub - - mined whether he ought to be prevented from tending the letter. Mr. WYNN said, that of course he could not chi( ct to the letter being real!. Mt. ihrrcntresoN then read the -toter of the IStil of October :—" Sir, Underneath yon have a copy of a letter written by me t.O a Member of the Opposition, with whom I hale been for week, and who has furnished me with clot acts (rum the Cism mons i) urn Ids applicable to your conduct, and to whom I have cot»mittiUl myself. I deprecate every idea of a threat, hut I offer you advice, and I advise you to restore my son to the office torn which you have deprised him for life, and that before the first of Janstaty. I wish a reply, stating, that -take it, or no answer in ease you refuse. But yrmr an!. ever, or no an swer, will not be requisite if yon do not agree to this,"—Was these Any thing in this letter reflect ing ;Too the Hon. Member ? It was distinctly tussled, that his Pdtliamentary character was not affected, and what did it amount to ? NVhy-a char re hAd been made, and had been contra dicted, and the copy of a letter stated to have been acithessed to a Member of the Opposition was mere statement of the accusation to be preferred against him. The Hon. Member for Dover had said, What ! will you release a person on iday vvl7o was committed on Wednesdvy ? Certainly, If, as he trusted, the House on reconsidering should be convinced that no offence had been committed, they ;could take the earliest opportn nit!, of restoring him to liberty. With these im pressions he should move—" 'flat Thomas Grady be brought to the liar of the House forthwith and discharged." Sir R. WILSON rose to `second the motion.—He thought the House had proceeded with too much precipitation in committing, Mr. Grady. He re minded the House that all parties in this case were judicially innocent. They were persons of rank and consideration, and their reputation and for:tles might be now at stake. Surely, there fore, the House would not proceed so as to give any of the parties cause to say that they had been found guilty breartse they were not allowed fair means to prove their innocence. It was also ►necessary that he should state, that since he came into the !loose, he understood that Mr. Grady bad written a very humble and submissive letter to the House, which he had sent through the only channel by which it could not be conveyed to them. Under all the circumstances of the case, he trlsted the House would see the justice of agreeing to the motion. Mr. COURTENAY rose, with much reluctance, to oppose this motion. It was from a strict and con scientious feeling of duty, and not from any hos tility to any party, that lie did so. At the same time he must say, that it the House had hied.; vertently been led into a mistake, or, acted with undue rigour, they would ❑ot, he was sure, hesi tate to retrace their steps. But he did not think that the case had been quite fairly stated by the Hon. Member. The offence was deemed a breach of privilege; not because Mr. Quin was a Mem ber of Parliament, ►tor because of any personal affront. Ihe proceedings of Mr. Grady were un• doubtettly an offence against the House. The writings complained of could not be considered as of an anonymous nature. The author of 'the correspondence had been clearly made out, and therefore, as Mr. Grady had been allowed to be the writer, he was liable tretbe consequence. With permission of the Hon. Member, he wished to ask, who gate him the paper ? • Sir Roaetia. Wasote answered—lt was given to me by IheTetitioner. Mr. CovaTeNav thanked li 7 m for his informa tion. On looking- at the manuscript of the sum awns and that of the letter, he found that both were the stove handwriting►. When the Hon. Member moved, that the Petitioner (Mr. Grady) should be called to the bar, he 'never had any idea of the consequences. it was never his, in tention to commit him to Newgate. tie merely wished that he should enter into sonic security for his appearance when the inquiry commenced, and not be permitted to withdraw himself till the House were-satisfied. At to the minute of con versation so of'en referred to, it had nothing to do with the present case of Mr. Grady. Mr. Ca mew Smith, who, according to information, was a respeable Gentleman of Dublin, became impli cetettit the affair. It was ridiculous to maintain, tliat,4ii'catise young Grady was only 23 years old, he was wholly incompetent to officiate as Clerk of the Peace. It was a very strange degree of in competency indeed. But what was still more strange, the young Gentleman had held the office 23 years Mr. Courtenay concluded by saying,. that they would be acting with ',justice to them selves, and derogating from the character and dignity of the House, if they suffered the present case to pass' with indifference; be should there fore vote against the Petitioner. • Mr. BOOTLE{ WILBRAHAM said, that as he wall not a party to the vote by which Mr. Grady bad been sent to prison, he should resist his enlarge ment, merely upon the petition he had since pre sented, and the documents that had been publish ed. He contended, that neither submission nor contrition bad been shown by the prisoner, And the appeal he had made was couched in terms scarcely.lespectful. He was not, by airy means, ttiaposed to .be unnecessarily severe, but no suffi cient claim► to lenity had been established. Mr. N. CALVERT acknowledged that be had bet a a►bseat whathe petitioner was called to the Ile :wit AVelik to s:etre ; but he could not help saying, the correspondence so often alluded to W 39 not characteristic of Gentleman. Mr. BENNEt said that he was not in the House at the time when the petitioner had been commit ted, or he should have entered his protest against so rash a measure. However, as be bad not been present, he could only endeavour to persuade the House not to keep the petitioner in Newgate for an act which no two lawyers in the kingdom would allow to be any offence at all. It it were supposed that the letter was written by Mr. Grady (of which, though' it were not proved, he should not affect to doubt), what did it con tain ? It stated acts of a corrupt Member of Parliament, and detlnced inferences from those facts. Now whether the alleged facts were true or not. was not the present question ; but if they were (roe, be would himself subscribe to ever) one of the conclusion; deduced from them,and say that they called loudly for the justice of the House, and the indignation of the country. It had been said that the letter contained a threat. He had carefully read the letter, ad could not find that it con tait!od any threat. That was to Sly, any threat which could warrant the House to inter fere. The letter recapitulated a corrupt offer wh;ch had been made to the f.ther and 501), and the wtiter of the letter spoke to this effect : " You have 'lowered yourself so tar as to make an offer ti) me which would have induceddlme to call tor punishment on the he4d of any other man. 1 hive heel' connected with you for 13 years— trace hack your steps, and 1 will not proceed against you." Whether the facts were true or not—whether the offer were made or Ho—such was the natural and liberal interpretation of the letter. The House had committed a man, 60 years of age, and an invalid, at a time when there were about 50 persons in the House. With all the respect he had for the privileges of the House, be could not approve of such a measure, bad however satisfaction in stating, that this Gentle man had all the accommodation in Newgate which persons committed for such offences were entitled to. He had gone to Newgate for the purpose of ascertaining the truth of the Petitioner's state ment as to his eye-sight, and certainly it was im possible for any person not stone blind to have more defective vision. The Petitioner had writ ten a letter to the only ;Member of the House who could not read it to them (the Speaker).— Mr. Bennet then read the letter to the .House, which expressed a hope that if his Petition was not couched in the most respectful terms, it would not be attributed to the most remote idea of ques tioning the justice of the House. It disclaimed any intention of infringing the privileges of the House, which were the best bulwarks of the liber ty of the people. The writer stated, that his son was pledged to prove his case, under the pain of the heaviest punishment ; and as be bad no one about hint capable of assisting him, the writer was desirous of obtaining his freedom, without which he could not have unrestrained communi cation with him.—Mr. B. concluded by stating that be should support the motion. Mr. BATES OW:light that there was no ground for differing from their former proceedings. The Hon. Gentleman who spoke last had, no doubt, a right to question the proceedings which bad taken place on a night when he had been absent from the House ; but be was surprised that any Hon. Gentleman who had seconded the committal should do so. He was surprized -that an Hon. Gentleman, who was then present in the House, should now object to the proceedings which had taken place, aohoogh he did not do so on the former night. The Hon. Gentleman who had brought forward•this question expressed great re gret that persons called before the House were not put on their guard against committing tbeinselVes. His reasoning un the subject might be good ab stract reasoning, hut he would not be able to find any thing in the precedents of the House which would support his argument, for they had been in the habit of summoning persons before them, and of insisting that they should answer to any questions which might be proposed to tl►em. The Hon. Member who spoke last had said that it would be almost impossible to find. t Tv° Lawyers who would agree in the justice of the committal, That Hono►,rable Member, it is true, had stated that he was not in the House on the former night, and be should therefore tell him that there was one no inconsiderable Lawyer (meaning fir. Breugham), and one, be shoull suppose, of no small authority with the Hon. Gentleman, who gave his reasons at large for the committal. There never was an individual, to his knowledge, dis charged by the House at so short a time after committal, as it was now proposed.—(The name of Mr. Fuller was here mentioned by aflember on the Opposition Benches.)—Mr.Fuller certainly was immediately discharged, but it was in con sequence of having made an ample apology to the House. He (Mr.Bankes) had heard many loose applications for liberation, but he never heard any so loose as the present. in answer to the difficulty which the petitioner had stated, namely, that his son woald labour under a disadvantage in pleading his cause, as he was pleased to say, unless be should be liberated, it might simply be stated, that the House would not suffer the father to ap, pear at the examination, and that, let the guilt or, innocence of the Hon. Member accused be what it may, the case could not be affected by tl►e presence of the petitioner. He objected to his son's incapacity, although he had exercised the office of Clerk of the Peace during many years, an office which was - important, as connected with the administration of Civil and CI iminal Justice. Sir Hoßaal. WILSON, in answer to the last ob servation ckf - the pt ecedin,r speaker, remarked, that the younger Mr. Grady bad exercised the office by deputy. Mr. Alderman WOOO declared that he was one of those who bad voted against Mr. Grady's be ing sent to Newgate. if it was considered as a great breach of privilege, there were many other breaches of privileges ; but there were shades of breaches. 11 Gentlemen looked around theta, ►hey would find themselves surrounded with %% hat might be con trued into breaches of privilege.— The Hon. Member (Mr.Caurtenay) had confessed that when he was the means of calling Mr. Grady to the Bar, it never was. his intention to order hint into custoily, far less to be imprisoned. Tbe 4 4 PS Lie I.i)ah ; thol•tore, nolien Nit the tionse would !Consent to relax somewhat from their usual rigour, by the speedy release of the prisoner.— " To Sbe.sure (continued the Hon. Member); one cannot but say that he (Coady) was the miter of the letter ! I told him so in Newgate." The worthy Alder Man then appeeled to the Member for Limerick (Mr. Quin), if the prisoner were not released, that a wrong impression might be made on the public Mind ? It would do no injury to his cause to consent to his release, and prevent all idle clamour. That the accormoodation of New gate had been much improved could not be de nied ; but then it was still Newgate at best ; and if any Hon. Member were sent thither, whatever might be his accommodation, he would certainly wish for a speedy release, The Prisoner was a Barrister, aged, and the adviser of his son, who could not proceed without him. Under all these circumstances, the worthy Alderman implored the House to consent to his release, as the Prisoner had already been sufficiently punished. Mr. MARTIN (of Galway) recommended the Hon. Member to withdraw his motion, and hoped that lie himself (Mr. Martin} would be the last speaker on the subject. To avoid any misunder. s funding', and to prevent vexatious insinuations, he earnestly urged that Mr. Grady might speedily be the Prisoner at large !" And he hoped that either he or his friends would present a respectful Petition. Two New Members followed in snccession ; but their rt , ltnes could not be learnt, and there lute it would be needless and unintertving to re• cord their sent intents. Mr. I'. Mooas apologized for the vote which he had given when this subject was last discussed. Had-he seen the papers which he had since -ex amined, he would have voted differently. Poit he considered himself perfectly innocent, and only under the temporary guidance of misconception. The letter from the Honourable Member (Mr. Quin), which he had that day read, was a complete release to Mr. Grady. It appeared to him (Mr. Moore) an amicable adjustment of all differences. The Prisoner ought therefore to he released. Pt sufficiency of punishment had already been in flicted on hire.- Mr. Fuller's case was widely dif ferent... The Prisoner had been pacific; but Mr. Fuller's passion against the House was so inflam ed, that had his eccentric mind not been artfully subdued, be would have knocked down the Speaker !—(Laugh.) Mr. MASTERTON URE.—I think the dignity and consistency of the House is materially interested in the decision on this question. On a former night the petitioner was, after an examination at your bar, declared guilty of a high breach of privilege, and in consequence sent to his Majesty's jail of Newgate. The House adopted. this -mea sure unanimously, on such evidence as to them appeared proper. The petitioner now arraigns t h e rtl of the [loose, and the evidence on t. hick it was founded. We cannot therefore com ply with the prayer of this Piitition, - Without im plying a censure on our own cleciiion. And after the sat*stactory manner in • IA Weil fife letters al luded to have been proved, 1 think the Horse is bound to refuse the petitioner's liberation.• he comes before the House and states his eoutrir tion for the offence, it will then be the proo!:r . time to extend the clemency of the House to him, if thought right so to do; the AN n ew most a N n l x F i m o s E B s ' e l , ' a l? i d s not ‘' name ttai be learnt.. Mr. LAMETON thought the best mode would be to withdraw the motion, and comtmine with the Gentleman who was tie subject of it. after which a more respectful,Petition might be framed and presented. In avoiding any share of the last discussion, he hail yielded his opinion to th ose who were much better acquainted with the rules and usage of Parliament than he cou;d pretend to be. The letter might certainly he construed into a breach of privilege ; the Gentleman had already been sufficiently punished. Mr. Aldermah %VAITHMAN respected the privi. loges of the House. BUt if it should turn out that the allegations if the Petitioner were well-founded, G ent l emen would form a very different opinion of the tile 11 (w: t e l. o tr n o o ti t hld the merits of the case. It appeared to him that it was a bargain ; that it was an illegal bargain ; gone iio (.t farthera and but wel i t toha that proceed :en pu nishment. Mr. 11t.rcluNsow did not deny that the letter of Mr, Grady was an offence against the 1.10.u5e.• The'Petition might he construed into an offence also. But what evidence was there against him ? The evidence of the Hon. Member himself (?Jr. Quin), who was a party in the transaction. The act complained of deserved the most serious in vestigation. It was a great constitutional ques tion, and ought not to be passed over with indif ference. In tl►e mean time, however, he would consent to withdraw the motion, it being under stood that a becoming,, a co►►trite, and a respect ful Petition, would he presented, praying for Mr. Grady's release. The motion was withdrawn accordingly. LAWS OF SETTLEMENT. Mr, BOURNE gave notice that he would on Thursday next bring in a Bill for altering the p e sent Laws of Settlement.' USURY LAWS. The Report of the Committee on the Usury Laws Repeal Bill, was ordered to be taken into consideration on the 26th of April next. POOR LAWS. The Ho'use went a into Committee pro forma on the Poor Laws' Amendment Dill. The Report was brought up and ordered to be taken into tur ther consideration on Thursday next. STEAM VESSELS. The House in Committee took into considera tion the Steam Vessels Tonnage Bill, and the 'Report was ordered i(3 be brought up on Monday. FEMALES REFUSING TO GIVE EVIDENCE. On the motion of Sir J. STEWART, three females, Anne Hail,. Martha Stout, and Saudi Greenaway were ordered to be taken into custody by - the Serjeant-at-Artns, for having refused to gise evi dence before the Committee appointed to take into consideration the Petition respecting the Election of Members for the Borough, of Wootton Basset. SLAVE TRADE TREATY. Mr. LUSHINGTI.O - N brought iu a Bill to curry die tate 'Treaty tier o,,vertmr ne of the Neiherlands, - respecting the SlAve which was r ea d the first time, twit ordeied f or g second readin g on Monday. Traded LAND TAX COMMISSIONERS. Mr. LUSHI NGTobt brought in Bill for the 04 1 pointment of certain Commissioners of the b an d Tat, ‘vhich was read, and then ordered to be res a second time on Monday. CHELSEA NEW CHURCH. A Bill for the erection of a new Church in parish of St. L u k e ' s , Ch e l sea , f or t h e accotnni v dation of it s i ncrease d inhabitants, wa s then rea d; nd aat half -past e i g ht o ' c l oc k the House adj ourn' ed until Monday next . tlif ROMAN CATHOLICS. PETITION AGAINST THE D M EANDS OF THE , - ROI MAN CATHOLICS. The following is a Copy of the Petition afire id t to at the P rotestant M eet i ng i n William stree s To the Right flancurable and Honourable the Lords St i fr o teal and Temporal in Parliament assembled ; the bu w Petition of the undersigned Protestants . Slieweth, That Petiti oners ' have obser:elli with anxiou s a l arm , t h e reiterated demand 9 °` ells r Roman Catholic inhabitants of this kingoll it „'„, i .• the repeal of th e f un d amenta l La ws o f the t" -- e stitution of this great Empire ; under the PN tt d ,,,, ing influence of which this land bas enjoyed ° fo rt gree of increasing . pro s p er i ty un k nown in any trier period of its annals. However deeply impressed with (hoe 5e o i mews, your Petitioners, a nx i ous t o avoi" l a ,i v a disturbance of th e p u bli c tranquillity, vcould,rj-ioi abstained from th e ex p ress i on o f t h em , were-1141d for the attempt t o i m p ose t h e sent i ment s a ' t Meeting convened by th e L or d M ayor , as : 13 : - - 4 the sentim e nt s of th e P rotesta n ts o f the _ tactis the liat e l tainsdi that te (tie conviction oi)(m t of hat e b the retittv:6o( t~rity of the Protestants, not only of the t cli ;', • Dublin, but of all Ireland, coincides with Qi,r9i: ihat on the inflexible preservation of !be f u :di hies of the glorious Revolution of 6SS. d e P :- the safety of our invaluable Cons(iuv i° , ; l i l v of Church and State, and th e pernianent stab"' its connexion with Great Britain. a tion 'tire ther e f o r e h um bly p ray , t h at no a fter shaN be suffered to tak e place in the fundo n ' t eu t l i e liws of-our Constit u ti on , which provide tb°- Crown shalt be Pr o t estant , t h e G ove rnmen , ' 5 r 1 . 0 . he Protestant, and the Legislature shall be testaut. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FRIDAY, Fcs' 26. s e At the sitting of the Court a Special Jory c a iri s was tried, which, how ever , exc i te d oo public rest. 61 The Court afterwards proceeded in tli 9 ll: il i g ot (lie Common Jury cases,. w hi c h 'toted C : 4 4 o'clock at higlit, but afforded•no interest wu" ever. OLD BAILEY, FRIDAY, FED. 261 nag , Cob „ t 10 e InouCY ": WasE i n n E d Z i Z o L e g: g u ts:: e — n E ie d z ie z a li r u c g t L i azerence . employers, MeSs . rs. Lewis and Co. dyers, Oxendon-street,—lt was di st i nct l y pro i,ed 1 1 7 4 the prisoner hail embezzled the sum or 4s. was .the principal Collecting clerk of Messrs. Li e ' l e g and was considered as a man of tire hig liest „ r spectability. lie had been with Iris empl° ti considerable time, and trusted with sou" j - 041 large amount. The prisoner had formerlY, the rank of Purser in the Nary.—The Jury a verdict Guilty. „ m ing James Walker anti William Spickford, tor' lads, were Convicted of st ea li ng from the 1 )- l i bc of Mr. James Lloyd. He was returning fra rri Theatre, and found the priioners both picki'g oo ti pockets. He immediately apprehended tben j took them to the watch-house. COURSE OF EXCHANGE, Frunmr, l'4o ' . 26' _ C. F''' Antstet dam Ditto, at Sight ll 4 e J ri. Rotterdam Antwerp ll 9 ' % : 1 1, tio• Fitt urburgb 94 0 C 5 ' Altona Paris, 3 Day's sight es 85 Us' Ditto Ileurittanx, dart Fx• M4 lib' s Frank fort on the Main ~, Matirid (:1 tliz jif f° Bilboa Seville Gibraltar 94 Barcelona Leghorn Genoa... 474-- I VeniLe, Ital. Liv 24 Se Malta... _5O —Naples 4li ',. OP Palermo Lisbon ..... 53 Oporto Rio Janeiro Dublin.— ..,.. 10i..... C0rk..... 10% per Cent. Agio atilt: Bank on Holland.... 2 per Cent. BULLION. r ° I. Portugal Gold, in Coin J.n 0 0 P e Foreign Geld, in Bars • 4 1 6 New Dollars 1:111T-1. On the 23d inst. Mrs.Martindal l e, of Cadogan-place, of MARRIED. Th °l3jil' On the 23tti inst. at Marylebone New Church, s oon' forth Wieitrin, Esq. of Tattingston-piace, Suffolk, elu e fou rtli of the late Avnoiral Western, to 111argaret Letitia, eria ncl'' daughter of William Busliltv, Esq., of Greitt Cumb ',lace, and of Rirlimichael, litanfriessltiFe. DIED. ; thi rd Lately, in London, after a few hours! illness, , daughter of the late Joseph Harris, NI.B. formerly of ,Wood, near Birmingham. On the 24! inst., at Marntadnlie Hart's, 'hurgh-square, Amy, the wife of George Garland, and Poole, Dorsetshire, f ormerly Member for that 13oroitue,sept the mother of Benjamin Lester Lester, Esq. the iP E Member. [Provincial Births, &c. on Monday.] ... - _ _u__ ___---;---- ---- at :.ONDON: Printed by.). B. CARSTAIRS, of Nu. 29, rA' Ormond-strvet, Queen-sluare; and published 4 Y . ..;0 14 SCRIPPS, of No. 7, South 111olton-street, at TtinPojerit Office, No. 112, Strand ; where Advettisernenti) " Letters, &c. (pet-paid) must bs addvesstd.