The Sun. — London, England, 1819-12-11 00:00:00

alarm t o t tied out to be unfounded. Recurring to the Bill before the House, loi'S Lordship seemed to think that What related to - religious considera7 lions had better he kept apart from the sedi , 'jolts part of the measure. With respect to• the late prevalence of anti-religious publications, he alluded to the conduct of some of the Reverend Prelates, which be did .not approve of, but he panegytized the condoet of the Diocesan of Lon don as dignified and exemplary. The Bishop of LANDAFF (Dr. Van Millerol addressed some ohservatioas to the House on the subject of Blasphemous Publications, and those imbued with tie character of Infidelity. These publications had of late years assumed kl very dif tereot, and he thought a more dangerous, cha racter. Formerly they were calculated for the meridian of persons Of education, and rather a bov e the middling ranks of ; latterly, they were adapted to the lowest understandings ; rea ' ,on aml argument were totally disregarded ; the , lower orders were alone addressed, and in a way in which they could not he met . by fair argument or diseossion. Those whose. business it was more especially to attend to such considerations were by no means deficient in the performance of their duties, and they exerted themselves accordingly, but under the peculiar circumstances of the case, .sonie legislative provisions were necessary in aid of the steps which were taking, and it became necessary to visit the repetition of the offences with some degree of increased severity. Lord LILFORD argued at some length in sup port of the Bill. . He contended for the necessity of some provisions of the kind, and voted va. rious extracts from the evidence before the House in illustration of his.argutnent. The Earl of CARNALtYOI4 spoke shortly in re ply, after which the question was pot, and his Lordship's motion negatived without a division. The Bill was then regularly passed, and order ed to be sent to the Commous for their concur reuct!..—Adionmed till to-morrow — When the Training Preveutiou Bill will receive the Royal Assent by Commission. PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF LORDS, FRIDAY, Dec. 10. The Training 'Prevention Bill was brought up from the Commons, who had made certain amend nwnts therein, to which they desired their Lord- ships' concurrence. The said amendments were afterwards taken into considefaiion, on the motion of Viscount SIDMoUTH, and agreed to by their Lordships. SEDITIOUS AND BLASPHEMOUS LIBELS. Viscount SIDMOUTH ntove►l the third reading of tlie Bill for the better prevention of these publi ca►ious, which accordingly took place. The Earl of CARNARVON, pursuant to his no tice, rose to move a proviso, for rendering the measure temporary in its operation. He depre-, catch' the bringing forward - a Bill so destructive of the liberties of the Press, before it was fully tried whether or not the existing laws were suf ficient for the purpose. There eras no evidence whatever that such offences had been duly prose cuted, inasmuch as the return of the Ex-officio informations in 1818, was positively " Nil."— Neither was there any indictment preferred in that year. On this principle be felt it Isis duty to subm►t a clause to render the Act temporary, as they should not, under the pressure of tem porary difficulty or local danger, effect a perma nent change in an established him of the country, and in the best bulwark of the liberties of the I►rople. He concluded by moving the introduction of a proviso to limit the operation of 'the Bill to two years. Viscount Si ()MOUTH felt it his duty to oppose the clause propbsed by the Noble h:ori. The sub ject had undergone close and repeated discussion, and it was already repeatedly decided upon by the House. It was not under the pressure of temporary difficulties or local dangers that the lull was proposed, but as a permanent regolation tor the better security of the Re heion of the Country, and the Constitution of the State. The penal enactments of the Bill were by nn means so severe as the inflictiOns of the Libel Ltw were before the abrogation of the pillory.— . The Cotton Factory Amendment Bill Was read Thete was no accretion of puuishment uow pro., a second time, and ordered to be committed on voted, except upon a second conviction. He yin- Monday. (heated the line of conduct now pursued ,hat his The second reading of the Penryn Bribery Bill Nliajesty's Law Officers, either with respOt to was postponed to next Monday. their using or declining progeamtions, according Lord A. HAMILTON gave notice that on Tuesday to their couceptions of the nature and merits is• se'unight he should move for the revival of the the respective cases. 'I hose Wes , we r e opposed t o . Committee on Scotch Bergh*. his Niajesty's Government were, on vsrions occa- MALT DUTY. &tons, prone at some times to censure the conduct Mr. LosniNGTote having brought up the Re of Government, institutiog too .many prosecu- ;sort of the Malt Duty Bill, tions, awl at others too few. He particularly le- Lord A. HAMILTON complained of the manner 'erred to the occurrences in these respects, in the in which its provisions affected Scotland. They year 1792, and in some preceding years. That had the effect of raising the ditties on Scotch bar directed against Paine's " Rights of Man " had Ivy to about the same price as the barley itself, or been partietdaily reprobated by them. The mea- 1 within a shilling of it. This was putting the two sure before their Lordships, he must contend, was 1 countries on an unequal tooting, and ought to be lieculiarly applicable to meet the new shape and corrected. This arose probably from the existence character the evil of dangerous libels had asstun- of two Bills upon the subject, the one permanent - ed, and he should therefore resist the Noble an d the other annual. He should delay further observations till the permanent measure should be The Earl of RossevN briefly supported the ar- Uetore ode noose, ...nest too should eallita tots n . gotnents of his Noble Friend, and insisted that no tion to the gross injustice which was thus done necessity was proved for such an alarming inno- to Scotland. vation'itt the laws militating against the liberties Mr. LUSBINGTON stated, that the correction of the press. In the course of the present year, of any ctror which might have been committed some libels of a dangerous and malignant tender- I would come more properly in the permarrent cy appeared, and yet Ministers did not think rro- The subject should be investigated with the per to institute prosecutions in the view of re- greatest care to ascertain whether any error piessing them. existed, and if it did, his Majesty's Government Lord EUSKINE eOusidered it as appearing that would be most willing to correct it. of late Ministers were culpably supine with respect The Report was then agreed to, and the Bill to prosecutions ; they should have showed by the ordered for a third reading on Monday. failure ttt prosecutions rendered, that this new and .1111.EACII OF PRIVILEGE. ' dangerous accession of power was necessary. No Mr. Costal - as:AY assured the House, that no than was more opposed to libels of every descrip- one could contemplate with more pain and Lion that, himself ; yet lie thought these restric- 'reluctance than he (lid, the task which he had rive laws would fail in their object, and he argued undertaken ; and that nothing but a strong. and that a more liberal and. enlightened course of po- 1 conscientious conviction, that after what had pass licy would be more effectual in conciliating the ed within the walls of the House, he should be affeetions of the people, instead of alienating them wanting in his duty if he remained silent, had en from their Constitution and Government, as in the gaged him to otter himself on this occasion. case of the Americans. The Noble Lord quoted Having made up his mind to think that some no largely frotn some of Mr. Burke's productious at tice ought to he taken by somebody, he had been the time, in support of his arguments. induced to take that notice.,because he had, per- The Duke of WELLINGTON observed, the Noble haps, heard more distinctly than other Honour- Lords opposite seemed to have mistaken the actual able Members the passage which had been read provisions of the Bill. The real question was, in the House. As he was totally unconnected whether the House should pass a law to enable the with any of the parties, or defy of the - oh- Court to inflict a severer punishment upon the jeers which they might have in view from the na ptablication of the second libel. The cause which tore of the seat which he occupied, he had he conceived had not a little contributed to pro- thought that it would not he improper, however duce the present Bill, was that which lately oc- unpleasant,_ to take upon himself the duty which tarred in the City of London, where a person was he should now , endeavour to perform. He was convicted of a blasphemous libel, yet he conduit- disposed to agree with an Honourable and Learn ed to sell the work after his conviction, and not ed Gentleman opposite, in thinking that there only that, but he published a second libel in ano- might be many cases in which it might be more ther form, before sentence was ptissed. He wool(' consistent with good sense and prudence not to remind the Noble LordS that the increased punish- take any notice of what had been done. But ment under this Bill only applied in the event of with regard to the publication in question, there repetition of the crime ; and the effect of this his 1 was a manifest distinction between it and till Grace conceived to be the only question before the nothers that had ever fallen into his hands. Th e House. House had been placed iu a situation of extreme delicacy by having such a pamphlet read and com mented on within its walls. li e l im j never met with any publication which appeared to him to contain, not merely so 'gross a libel on the House, but direct advice to the people to abrogate its ex istence, to resume the power delegated to its members, and by the use of " brute force" to ef fect that change in the Constitution which the writer conceived it required. The flotase woald recollect that for some time past a number of pub lications of a seditious character had been circu lated. it would also recollect that the language held on that occasion was this :—" You with whom rests the power of suppressing these publi cations, do encourage them, by taking no step to put them down." With what tenfold force would such argument iu future be used, if time House, having Such a tvink as the present submitted to its notice, should taken() measure consistent with its dignity. to bring the writer to an account ? He need ant take up the time of the Hoose with a search.for . precedents. Whenever the 1 - louse had telt it necessary to vindicate its honour and its character, it had proceeded against the author of the publication by which they were' as , ailed. It could not he forgotten, that in many cases pro ceedings of this nature had been set in motion by those Statesmen to whom the canon was acet4.*:-. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Lord HOLLAND, at some length. supported the arguments of Noble Lords at his side, against the Bill. In his view of the case, the Noble and Gallant Duke mistook the real nature of the goes firm, for his argument, if pushed, would extend even to the infliction of punishment with death. 'Adverting to the conduct of Ministers, on the oc casion of the WI, he deemed them repreliensih!e in not trying the existing laws to the utmost, be fore they came to Parliament for powers of such a novel and extraordinary description. • The Earl of WESTMORLAND briefly supported the. Bill, which in the utmost case did not go to increase the punishments beyond what they were previous to the abrogation of the pillory. Earl Gaosvalloit impirgued . the measure as tenr:iug to convey new and dangerous powers to the Governtneut, and which instead of a sa - 'wary, he conceived, would have an injurious operation. Nothing was more impolitic. at this crisis, than measures tending to alienate the public mind. The Noble Earl adverted to so.,e recent appearances of disturbance which existed in a part of the county well known to him. It was cbidy among the colliers in that neighbourhood the alarm prevailed. Military as. sisrance was proposed; but it appeared that the disputes were soon adjusted, and much of the toured to look up as the defenders of the popular rights. Mr. Fox and .Mr. Sheridan had distill t4iiis,hed themselves by-declaring that the best way to support (hose rights was to vindicate the pri vileges of the Commons. In the present case it wag not merely the character, but the existence of the House, which demanded to be vindicated. The language of the pamphlet was not so much that of violent abuse as of direct threat. It was an exhortation to those in whom the pl , ysical power certainly resided, to use it for the destruc tion of the Commons. In order to justify the course which he meant to pursue, the House would probably expect that he should read a few passages trom the pamphlet, in order to show its. nar,►re. It contained a good deal of argument on the subject of Parliamentary Reform, and com plained that a Noble Lord (Lot d Erskine) had abandoned some of the opinions which he had entertained.—lt thin proceeded in the following manner •-- " ‘Vh - at prevents the people from walking down to the Muse and pulling, out the Members by the ears, locking up their doors, and flinging the key inrO the Thames ? .1s it any majesty which hedges in the Metabers of that assembly ? Do we love them Not at have an instinctive horror and disgust at. the very abstract idea of a borooghroonger ? Do we respect them. Not in the least. Do we regard theta as endowed with any su perior qualities ? On the contrary, indivicioallyt here is scarcely a poorer creature than your mere Mem ber of Parliament ; though in his_ corporate capa city the earth furnishes not so absolute a bully. Their true practical proteciors then, the real eiV dent anti-Reformers, are to be found at the Horse Guards, and the Knightsbridge barracks : as long as the Ho• , sr of Commons majorities are backed by the regimental muster-roll, so long May those who have got the tax•power keep it, and hang those who resio." Let into express the wild notions which they Might entertain in langois4e as cogent as they could command, but lee them not incite the phy- Sledl lion er of do- people to effect any change which they aiight thiok desirable. Such a course Wa's not i.ei ex : )ression Of an Opinion, it was hold iug out directly to the people, that by the exer tion of force alone they cot;id hope to obtain their 'object. 'flie pamphlet stated in express terms, that " nothing but brute force, or the pressing fear of it, would Reform Parliament." Could it be contended that it was possible so to construe this passage as to iimpari to it any other meaning than a direct encouragement to the use of physi cal force? Had he seen nothing else than that very expression in the pamphlet, be should still have said that the House would not do its duty if it suffered it to go unnoticed. In what situation woold the House be placed if this pamphlet were visited with no mark of its.reprobation ? Should any of its Members live to see the practical effects of the advice so given, and the scenes of confu sion and horror to which it would lead, what could they say in favour of the House to the deluded wretches witt might be assailing its existence, for not having, in the very first place, shown them that it possessed the power of controlling the ex pression of mischievous sentiments like those con tained in the present publication—selititnews cal culated to mislead indi - viduals, and if ,14,incd acted upon, to effect the destruction of the Con stitution of the country ? Might not the offenders say—" You yourselves have contributed to .mis lead us—you pour out your vengeanc.: upon our heads, and you have taken no notice of the per sons by the delivery of whose sen!imenis we have been made what we are ?" It was evident that this pamphlet, whatever might be its author, was the production of an individual holding no mean rank in life, and who, to the advantages of edit cation, added the possession of ~ onsiderable ta lents. While the House was legislating to re press and punish the writers of two-penny and three-penny publications, should it pass with out notice such a work as the present, because its author moved in the higher classes of so ciety ?—(Hear, hear, hear !)—He did not con ceive that it would be the duty of the House so to act. Should it take no notice of the pamphlet; it would become liable to every kind of misre presentation and abuse. Having once noticed it, the House must proceed to take, other steps to give effect to its interference. It appeared to him that it would he proper to act with the most cautious deliberation, and not under the opera tion of any feeling of the moment which might he supposed to influence the • decision or the House. The course which he should propose would be, to call to the bar of the House the per son whose name was at the pamphlet, its it was possible that the House might thus come to the knowledge of the real offender. He should never he willing to bring a printer or publisher to punishment, if the author could be reached. His motion should therefore be, that Robert Stodart be ordered to attentlat the Bar of the House. In souse cases the House bad crime to a previous - solution . of a particular kind. In others, it had ordered the parties to attend before any resolu tion had been adopted. He should prefer the latter course, as he thought it would be more pro per than calling a person to the Bar and asking him questions after the House had already decided on the nature of the case. He should now deliver in the pamphlet,• anal he trusted that the House woiird believe that he was actuated by no other feeling than that it - should take such notice of this publication as would be most consistent with its dignity, a course in which it would be supported by the good sense of the country. The pamphlet having been delivered in, and the passages alluded to read aloud by the Clerk of the House, COURTENAY moved, that Robert Stodart he ordered to attend at the Bar of the House on Monday next. Sir F. BURDETT conceived that the House was placed in a very awkward situation, by an at tempt like the present to exert privileges con trary to the general feeling of the country. It was but a few nights since the House had refused an inquiry caller} for by the whole Nation, after stating its incapacity to exercise its usual inqui= sitorial functions; yet it was now about to turn itself into a Court of Justice, and to decide on its own case ! Would not this appear extraordinary, after it had su lately declared that it was not cal cuhtted even to illitaitUte an inquiry on a subiect of public importance, that it could not proceedia it without degrading itself, and with the least prospect of advantage to the subject ?. Yet it Wns on a sudden found equal to receive evidences t° determine points of law, and to decide what. Wile or was not a libel without any trial Sods a course, he conceived, would excite great dissatis faction, and create a feeling of injustice. Sur posing even that the obnoxiosts• passage should turn out to be a libel, it would be most repug nant to the sense of the country, to find that the House had become a Judge in its own cause. stead of vindicating its character, it would onif tend to lower it, it it were possible that it shotd& sink lower in the estimation of the conntry.--*-- (Hear, hear !)—He complained that the Honours+ able and Learned Member did not even call opoll, the House to determine, first, whether any offence had been committed before it ordered an individual to attend at its Bar, He also conceived that it would have been but fair to have read the whole of,. the pamphlet, in order to ascer t ain from the context what was the real meaning of the passage complain* ed of. Prom what he had heard, in its detached state,heconceived it might be a libel, for it was true —(Order )—He maintained that it was Roe that': Boroughmongers were as degraded in the opi" nion of the country as the pamphlet represented them to he. He contended that more abusive,. passages than the present against the House of, Commons could he found in the writings of 111 e, Burke and Lord Chatham, As to the privileged of the House, they had been granted in order to enable it to do duty in supporting those of tint! people, and chiefly to put an end to the old prae• tice by which Members had been called to account before the Vrivy Cooncil for their conduct in that Home. He then quoted the opinion of that learned Selden, who considered, the tyranny of the • House of Commons the greatest that could be e);" ereised anywhere. He protested against the course proposed to viudicare the character of the Hoose, conceiving that it would have a control. effect. Having read the whole pamphlet, he dill not believe that the writer intended to advise 1 14 , exertion of force, but that 'he meant to say (hot force alone, and not love, prevented the pen le front effecting an alteration in the Constitution or: Parliament. And was not this the doctrine 'main" tained and expressed by the House itself ? Wee it not the ground on which the present measure were founded ? The writer had only asserted what the House said of itself, for it had declared that it was only by a system of coercion it could retails' its authority over the people N•iv ewe's worser, it was about to make it highly penal to express a' free opinion. He should now ground his opposi' Lion to the motion, on the impropriety of bring' ing up a person to the Bar of tine House, before it had been decided that •he was guilty a an n'f"7 fence. At the same time, he should protest againi t the. assumption., on the part of tine House, a powers which toe fled it into a Court of Justice= and enabled it.to decide in its own case, thus de". priving any person brought before theta of th a poseih:nity of having a fair trial.' 'dr. BANKIIS bad listened attentively to 114. speech of the Hon; Baronet, and bowever attach' ed to the freedom of 'ebate, thought that it con' tained passages which' *would have justified hint interi.osiog. The Worthy Baronet bad not (Of deni those essential privileges of the Hoot' without which it could not exist as a House a t all, but he had asserted that it had lately re' . nonnced its inquisitorial functions in a case is which their exertion had been called for by the whole country. He (Mr. B ) contended, that l c/ doing so the House had b u t used the di sc retiona ; ry power with which it was .invested,—(Heor l y Whether it had used it properly or not was a du; ferent question . ; but it had that power. "r it respect to inquiry, its capacity was not eV/ ~ that of the Courts below ; but he did not see what way the present offence could be investigst in a Court of Law, unless, after evid ence h a d bee - s taken before a Committee at the Bar of t l/5 0 House, it should direct the Attorney-General to institute a prosecution. He did not know o' bil o course the Honourable and Learned Geroletnao intended to take, but there were many precede ° , in the best times for that eviich he had just ol ei c : dotted. Nothing was more conformable 10 lt d r i liamentary practice than that, after an encia / j j like that now proposed, the Attorney-Gen t i . r o should be ordered to prosecute. And could t in be called, on the part of the House, deciding ' to its own case ?—(Hear, hear !)—With resPe et f the passage complained of, he had never read at b thing more gross in its nature, not only as a lii ) t e o but AS holding out unequivocal encouragentet' L .o ,o the people of tine country, by brute force t'' ref out the• Members of that House, and fling ; IS into tine Thames. And yet it was said th a w would be unjust in tine House to take notice cu t. - gross and atrocious an exhortation ! It was (rt , that the House had been instituted for the 15'01 es tion of the people, but it could not contioneri, exist without npaintaining tbe integrity of 0 . 13 0 vileges. Tine Honourable-Baronet anti might think ill of tl , e Constitution of tine countyto but God forbid they should ever be entrusted wt d the task of amending it, He would resist 04'1;1 attempt to produce such a consummation, f or ; eo s country had too long flourished under its Pr e ; it Constitution to justify the wish of a chang e ' da tf would be impossible for the House to do its to tine advantage of the people, if tine public were worked upon by such libels as the p re 'oad It would be a derelic ion of duty on its par t 'l e r an abandonment of privileges which would en` t int ger its existence, and prove of no benefit tu tto ' c lt people, if it should neglect to notice an °veil t like that which had been made, or to against the new sect which had sprung UP , - 11 60 fence of its rights, aunt of those:of the ti • country entrusted to its care.—(Hear, hela. 0 11 Lord J. Husseet. did not pretend to•decivivas; the question of libel, hint considered the e o n proceediog adopted ,as ill-advised tat In t • Se ' libe pi like the present. Why, in a ctowd of tin lect this publication) for tine visitation_ n od House ?—Far grosser attacks had hee" et jole against its character and authority, ant'yfloocelt; served his Lordship) they were left C Why not prosecute tine authors of those tionft passed at public meetings and P o b e y those, wino had subscribed them, not t° s fliA laws passed by the House after th e pr e ' s January ? Mere was bet one way for ta r t end l iou ib e & l ie r i tt) s pr 'll)in tii „ I ge pa t) , T ,1 4 bt l etel m een "40,4 Bien Diehl (li t i t ple a tfi'e Wet, th e hrt, th e ti'ad tall Wed 410„ 4 me C AI ; 11 011 told bar e tvi •