The Sun. — London, England, 1834-07-01 00:00:00

ROYAL MUSICAL FESTIVAL.-(THIS DAY.) The familiar adage, " last but not least," may be well applied to the doings of this day in and about the Abbey. The crowds of loyal subjects anxious to snatch a glimpse of their Majesties in their progress to the Festival had thronged the streets long before the hour of their arrival, but the excellent arrangements adopted by the police and the military prevented the slightest confusion. An alteration for the better was made in the removal of the mass of police and the military as soon as the procession had passed, instead of keeping the latter un der arms four hours as heretofore. The Abbey itself was literally crammed ;at half-past ten o'clock there was not standing room, yet the least fortunate of the audience were sa ,t,i36ed if they could obtain an aperture through which '`'e3' could thrust their heads, seeming to be consoled e u nder thei r uneasy pos i t i on b y t h e i n fl uence o f th e strains that It and anon poure d forth softly sweet in Lydian measure." I! is said that hundreds of persons would have purchased tickets if they could have been obtained. The King looked extre me i y ... well, and the Queen appeared to be highly pleased with the animat e d sce ne. Their Majesties came in state as o n the former days, and arrived shortly before 12 o'clock. The spl en di d musical performances at W es tminster Abbey have closed this day, with Handel's chef d'ceuvre, the oratorio tothe Mes s i a h. I t i s i mposs ibl e f o r imagination to conceive e effects that have been produced by the powerful band, h as in its ranks the elite of the musical profession, that 'as been assembled on this occasion. Many of the chorusses, Z ell 4 . " Worthy is the Lamb," " For unto us a child is born," 2 ., appeared to acquire new beauties. In fact, well known every composition in the Messiah is, they seemed now to have a charm o f f res h ness a nd novelty about them, from the '; l '2 7 great a d vantages un d er w hi c h they were now heard. • e Messiah is a long, and in parts, rather heavy, oratorio ; it contains, however, so many points of surprising beauty, that it i s ' always i t listened to throughout with untiring interest. went off, both at the rehearsal yesterday, and at the bo o —l.fer naarlee this day, far better than the selection f Saturday, and, as it turned out, was judiciously ch osen for terminating the festival with eclat. We may men tion that the oratorio was played, not in its original state, as co mposed by Hand e l, but with the wind instrument accompa niments that were added by Mozart. This gave a life, variety, and brilli ancy to many of the compos i t i ons , an d re li eves !T i t from th e h eav i ness w hi c h, to an ear accustomed to the i emle rnents of the modern school, often accompanies the ear ing of old music, however good the groundwork of me odY and harmony may be. These accompaniments, which we scarcely need say, very beautifully played by the ; till eiPal wind instruments of the orchestra, produced effects ltr aordinarily beautiful, exquisitely as they are fitted and dovet ailed, a s we ma y sa y, int o the original harmonies. The l eader of the band wax F. Cramer, and Mr. Knyvett took the g at t• Of th e f orm er, we may say that he took much pains C : id in making the whole go well, by occasionally giving time to the chorusses, without—like the leader ~ the preceding performance, making himself offen rel, Prominent. Of Mr. Knyvett we can only say that a laPeared the least efficient of the organ players at the fes tiviti• W e heard him, as we think, commit a blunder or two ; a nd besides the pedals were useless to him, he seemed totally unacquainted with their management. i Mr , graham gave " Comfort ye my people," at the open .ng of the oratorio, with " Every valley," the air that follows 0 , 4 l erY beautifully. His voice appeared to be as powerful as passages and under as much command, and the execution of the 0 7 8 agea as perfect as ever. The only defect that we could , ge rve was, that the pitch of his voice was flat as compared "'th that of the orchestra, but this is a fault that was obser vable occasionally in Braham in his younger days, to quite as rte ,!t an extent as now. . he recitative, and air which follow it, for a bass voice, An d who shall abide," were very finely sung by Mr. Machin. 114 gentleman possesses a voice of great power and richness of tone, and is evidently advancing rapidly in public favour. b y %%Oh, then, thou tellest," was very chastily and neatly sung 'qr. Hawkins, although deficient in power. The accom kihnents of Mozart, before alluded to, were very effective in this piece h Ile Peopl e th a t wa lk e d in darkness" was splendidly sung it 7 Mr. Phillips. 'this piece, again, the wind instrument ~,acarnPaliiments were very beautiful, moving in chromatic pas --ges, in Mozartls peculiar style, and blending richly with the voi ce . fi - The chorus, " F or un to us ," almost electrified the auditory, , "ra the immense power of the band, now heard in all its chest combinations. The pastoral symphony which followed 4ad not the e ff ect i nten d e d by th e com pos e r, from not bei ng I : l4 Yed in a styl e su ffi c i en tly s u bdued. It was altogether too loud throughout, T he Hallelujah chorus produced an effect which no one could ‘°llll the most distant idea of without having heard it. " Rejoice greatly," by Caradori, was greatly admired. In 'act, it Was sung very chastely and beautifully. h Miss Shirreff was much admired in the songs assigned to The and acqu i tte d h erse lf i n a manner hi g hl y cre di ta bl e . 'et sam e ma y be said of Miss Clara Novello, who sung 4 1-I °W beautiful" vet:) , charmingly indeed. 1 ,7, Why do the nations so furiously rage ?" was given by Mr. - "lips in his very best style ; it is a remarkably fine song, and exactly s u ited to his powers. In this song, again, the e ditions of Mozart contributed much to set off the beauties of t he older master, and gave life and vigour to the composition. The whole concluded with the Amen Chorus, which was Pla Yed and sung with a power never we should think heard except on this occasion. The intention of continuing the festival, by giving some additional performances, has been abandoned, the Dean having refused his permission to make use of the Abbey for that pur pre ose. The c ont i nuat i on o f t h e f est i va l, h owever , we are g i ven resuriderstand, was a mere scheme of some of the leading pro fessional Parties, and would have been attended eulty to bring it to bear properly. Thperformances . 0 4, d not have been an exact counterpart of those we have 34sat beard, but must h ave b een f rom t h e arrangements i n f er i or. t ert airnateresent have ept ch thg, and Pd with eclat, k perhaps it is aracter quite as rou well hout that the ter stops where it does. COURT CIRCULAR. , vise gave audiences yesterday to Earl Grey, Lord Hill, and The°tiThe kinnt Duncannon. Primph of Gloucester, the Princess Augusta, the Princess So. ma '', the cess Sophia Matilda,• and the Duke of Sussex, visited their 4., ei h ti es Yesterday at St. James's. lent K ing had a small dinner party last evening. There were pre wyn`c Meet their Majesties the Princess Augusta (attended by Miss etld "l. d) he f , the Duchess of Gloucester, and Prince George of Cambridge, tari l lowing—the;Duke of Argyll, the Marchioness of Wellesley, N h an d Countess D en bi g h, E ar l and Countess Brownlow, Earl and Of if in te " Howe, Lord James O'Brien, Sir Henry Wheatley, the Dean R i „.. b ed, and the Rev. Mr. Wood (Preceptor to Prince George). panhKnYal Highness the Duchess of Kent entertained his Serene “ites the Duke o f Saxe Meiningen and a large and distinguished t dinner yesterday. • coe, e puke of Cumberland honoured the Earl of Kinn ou l w ith hi s I , l ) l a nY at dinner last evening , at his residence in G reen - s tr ee t. e buke w en ` of Saxe Meiningen, accomp an i e d b y t h e P r i nce H o h en l o h e, HiitlnYesterday to Bushy Park and Hampton Court, where his Serene *am, i Pnseeted tbe Royal stud. Their Serence Highnesses after_ The through Richmond.park on their return to town. sad fou pincess ugusta took an airing yesterday in a carriage 11 112 Pri ncess Lieven visited her Majesty yesterday. Governor ofPatches were received yesterday at the Colonial O ffi ce from the Ceylon. ASHIONABLE INTELLIGENCE. Th. .. ARRIVALS. marchioness of Lansdowne and Lady Louisa Fitzrnaurice, at 44T/he House, Berkeley.square, from Tunbridge-wells ; Lord and Gre, ls 'I ". in Dover-street, from the Continent ; Sir Roger and Lady Captain at their seat, Drakelow, Derbyshire, from the Continent ; Chipp, h nd Lady Elizabeth Fielding, at their seat, Lacock Abbey, arid th;T u n, Wilts, from Bath Mr. and Mrs. Austin, Miss Sky ring, Seven,„'tigsell Cook, at Syniraons's Hotel, St. James's-street, from liot e c A ", Kent ; Sir John, Lady, and Miss Palmer, at Crawley's i heard ^lbe itarle-street, from a tour ; the Rev. J. Dodd, at ditto, from Itarq uii ; Ca Ptain and Mrs. Knox, in Regent-stre e t, f rom Bath ; the 1'1% 4 " W aterford in Charles-street, St. James's, from Curraghmore at th e 6"uritY Waterford ; Sir William and Lady Cum m i ng Gordon, S treet, f l . al ; en dow Hotel, from Scotland ; Colonel Barnard, in Clifford- Admiral‘",,T a tour ; Sir Hyde Parker, in Pall-mall East, from Suffblk ; Jaines, Lady, and Miss Whitsbed, in Clifford-street, from B roo k Sussex ; the Earl of Mount Edgecumbe, at Mivart's Hotel, taro t , a ree t. from Surrey • Lord Farnham, at ditto, from a tour ; R ens nd Baroness Dimsdale, at ditto, from their seat, near Hatfi!ld, balm l'adY Longhorn, at ditto from Surrey ; Lord and Lady Fitz rf",at dit to, from a t our ; R. Sneyd, Esq., at ditto, from Cheverells, street, the Ron.h Misses Monson , at Patterson's Hotel, Lower Brook. T he Blab 'DEPARTURES. Pala ce 0 1 3 of Lincoln, from Warren's Hotel, Regent street, for the th e i t ' I3nrkden ; Colonel and Lady Peel, for their seat in Suffolk .; etre et e :' 1141 r• and Mrs. Musgrove, from the St. James's Hotel, Jerm ou yn n. tee, Linde ` r Ramsgate; J. A.ustin Esq., from ditto, for ditto ; the C _ A.O y, for her seat in Lincolnshire ; Lady Kiuneir Macdonald, rn Rae , den , f l?et a Hotel, Dover-street, for Warfield, Becks ; Captain Rams_ li d Mtn ditto, for Brighton ; Captain Mortimer, from ditto, on a tour ; r Aire and • R m . ta .•. Miss Eyre, from the Burlington Hotel, for their seat in street , Mrs. Stewart Hall and Miss Gubbins, from Batt's Hotel, Dover and_ , for Bittern Manor.house, Southampton Mr. and Mrs. Moore, 511:to, for ditto ; Goldingham, Esq., from ditto, on a tour; Mr. 41 , 14 ; !Ir Power, from Brook-street, for their seat in Essex ; Sir Hussey the t.LarlY Vivian, from the Sackville-street Hotel, Sackville-street, for Z.l.?ra ditto ; the `, 1:1,11 Hospital, Dublin ; the Countess Selkirk and the Ladies Doug. ;4.. Irmo ditto Rev. H. Hallet, from ditto, for Oxford ; the Rev. .. tew itr, from ditto ; the Rev. Mr. Bayley, from ditto ; J. Burton, ; I di t torphcen from ditto, for Leamington ; Miss ',olle Johnston, from , for ditto: The BishopOlii:sidi;;;;;;It much indis- Pond 4t Clifton* COURT OF KING'S BENCH-(THIS DAY.) (Sittings at Guildhall, before the CHIEF JUSTICE and a Common Jury.) ROGERS V. DICKENS. This was an action for the recovery of a sum of 14/. 3s. 6d., brought by the plaintiff, a butcher of Shields, against the defend ant, a coal-merchant residing at London, and part owner of the ship Shakspeare, for which vessel meat to the above amount had been supplied. A sum of 4/. had been paid into Court by the defendant. _ Sir JAMES SCARLETT appeared for the plaintiff, and the ATTOR NEY-GENERAL for the defendant. _ . The defence was, that up to July, 1832, the amount of the plain tiff's bill for meat supplied to the ship was 41., which the defendant acknowledged himself liable for ; after that period the plaintiff had sold his share in the ship to his partner, Mr. Wm. Clark Wright, and was not liable for any goods supplied to the vessel subsequently. Sir JAMES SCARLETT contended that there was no evidence of a bona fide sale of the vessel, and the verbal agreement between the defendant and his partner to that effect, not having been corn mitted to writing, did not release the defendant from his liability. Lord DENMAN left it to the jury to say whether they believed that a bona fide transfer of the vessel had taken place previous to the goods having been supplied. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff-101. 3s. 6d. WRIGIIT V. BENNETT. Mr. CLARKE said that this was an action for the recovery of a sum of 781. 15s. 4d., the amount of two bills of exchange passed by the defendant to the plaintiff. He believed there would be no defence, and it would be only necessary for him to prove the de fendant's signature to the bills. Lord DENMAN said, although no defence was made, it would be necessary to prove the consideration that had been given, as that would be a question for the jury. Mr. CLARKE—We can prove, if necessary, that the consideration was money lent and goods sold. The two bills were put in and read, and their terms being " for value received," Lord DENMAN said it was unnecessary to prove consideration, the defendant having acknowledged under his hand that he had re ceived value. Verdict for the plaintif-781. 15s. 6d. SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DAY.) cFROM LLOYDS.) DEAL, JUNE 30.—Wind N. E. , strong breeze.—Sailed the Corn wall, Beet, for Madras. Arrived the Henry, Turner, from Sheer ness for New South Wales. His Majesty's ship Castor remains, with a brig (yacht), from the westward. Po RT SMOUTH uNE 30.—Wind E.N.E.—Arrived the Ca tharina Maria, Kraeft, from Memel. PLYMOUTH, JUNE 29.—Wind E., strong breeze. FALMOUTH, JUNE 29.—Wind E., fresh breezes. POOLE, JUNE 29.—Arrived the Neptunus, Kreplin, from Mernel. DARTMOUTH, JUNE 29.—Arrived the Vantery, Galt, from Ja maica ; Jacob Perkins, Shoof, from Havannah ; Sackville, Matthews, from Sierra Leone ; and Oscar, from Quebec. BRISTOL, JUNE 30.—Arrived the Feliza, Forster, from Trini dad ; and Emma, Brown, from Sicily. BELFAST, JUNE 28.—Arrived the William IV., Cahill, from Si, Andrew's ; and Ardent, Smith, from London. - ABERDEEN, JUNE 28.—Arrived the Arkwright, Bennie, from Savannah. _ . HULL, JUNE 29.—Arrived the Judith, Kelsey. from Riga; Ariadne, Ohlman, Argo, Schroder, Marianne, Lindensbrages, Heinrick and Robert, Dahneke, and Earnest, Stratford, from Memel ; Christiana, Wilkie, from Wvburg ; and Royal William, Joy, from St. Petersburgh. HARWICH, JUNE 30.—Arrived the Stranger, Dense, from Dantzic. LOWESTOFFE, JUNE 30.—Arrived off port the Betsey, Heron, from Memel. _ _ - -...-.. LYNN, JUNE 29.—Arrived the Anna Maria, Milne, from St. Petersburgh ; Karen Ludeving, Refa, from Copenhagen ; and Argo, Armes, from Wyburg. LIVERPOOL, JUNE 29.—Arrived the Pactolus, Wise, from New Orleans ; Eagle, Rowett, and Indian Lass, Slabb, from Newfound land. GREENOCK, JUNE 28.—Arrived the Mariner, M'Donald, from Miramichi. DUBLIN, JUNE 29. —Arrivedthe Alert, Snowden, from Liverpool. IMPORTANT TO ALL OVERSEERS. In consequence of a difference of opinion which exists as to the mode of publishing the lists of country voters, the following correspondence is presented to the public : it COPY OF A LETTER FROM MR. JAMES STEVENS, PLY3I I ;UTH,-• TO S. M. PHILLIPS, ESQ., SECRETARY OF sTAIE'S-OFFICE;' WHITEHALL, JUNE 12, 1834. "Sir—The circular addressed to all overseers of the poor in England and Wales,' dated Secretary of State's Office, Whitehall, June, 1834, has reached my hands, as clerk to the overseers of the parishes of St. An. drew and Charles, in this borough, upon which I take leave to remark that last year, in snaking out the list of the country voters in these pa. riches I followed strictly the 38th clause, 2W. 4., c. 45. I first made out a separate list of the names of the claimants, and then a list containing the names of all persons who shall be (were) upon the register for the time being as such voters, and also the names of all persons who shall (did) clahn as aforesaid, to be inserted in such last mentioned list as such voters.' The power of objecting was exercised by the overseers, as well in repect of the registered voters, as of the claimants, and the list was so published, that is a list of all the voters in the respective parishes, the names of the claimants being amalgamated in alphabetical order, with the names of the previously registered voters. " The instructions of the circular alluded to limit the operation en tirely to the list of claimants, and leave out of the question altogether the register of voters for the time being. I beg leave most humbly to submit that it is not possible, by confining the duties of overseers to the publica tion of the list of claimants only, to carry out the literal meaning, and what would appear clearly to be, the intention of the-wording of the 38th clause. And that, with a due observance of the said claus, it is im possible to comply with the instructions. I take the liberty to draw your attention to this, and to add, that last night, on reading the words attri buted to lord John Russell, in a speech on the registration of voters, should only be called upon to make a list of the new claimants, as the overseers at present had to perform for the COUNTRV VOTERS.' I was struck with the apparent discrepancy before I received the circular of in structions. lamat a loss what plan to follow in preparing the lists for the present year, and shall therefore feel obliged for further information. " I am, titc., (Signed) "JAMES STEVENS." COPY OF MR. S. M.__PIIILLIPPS'S REPLY TO MR. STEVENS, WHITEHALL, JUNE 14, 1834. " Sir—l have submitted to Viscount Melbourne your letter to me dated the 12th inst., and I have received his lordship's directions to call your attention to the instructions to overseers, contained, in page 3 of the printed paper to which your letter refers, viz., that they (the overseers) must make out an alphabetical list of all per . sons having the 101. qualification in any such borough.' This list must therefore include, as well those persons who were possessed•of the quali fication at the period of the last registry, as those who may since that time have become possessed of a qualification.—l am, &c. (Signed) " S. M. PHILLIPPS." COPY OF A LETTER FROM MR. STEVENS TO MR. S. M. PHILLIPPS " Plymouth, Jutuils, 1834. " Sir—l have received your prompt communication of the 14th inst. I was aware that what yuu do me the favour to state, as to. the borough lists, is the correct mode. • " I submit, first, that according to the clause referred to'in my letter of the 12th, the list of county voters to be published by the overseers, must contain as well the names of those on the register for the time being, as the names of new claimants; and secondly, that the instructions referred to, relating to the registration of county voters, do not embrace my posi tion, and that they are consequently not in conformity to the Act. " I shall be happy to be corrected if I am in error, and have the honour to be, &c., (Signed) "JAMES STEVENS." COPY OF MR. S. M. PHILLIPPS'S II PLY. Whitehall, June 17, 1834. " Sir—l have submitted to Viscount Melbourne your letter to me, dated the 15th instant, and I have received his lordship's directions t o in form you, that the overseers of each parish or township must make out an alphabetical list of all persons who are now upon the register of county voters, and of all persons sending in claims to them, according to the form prescribed. All overseers will, in the course of the present week, receive more explicit instructions on this subject.—l am, &c. (Signed) "S. M. PHILLIPPS. " To Mr. James Stevens, Clerk to the Overseers, &c., Plymouth." Since the dates of the above correspondence, a circular has been issued with amended instructions, with the follow ing note : • The enclosed page, containing instructions to overseers, as to the list qf voters for COUNTIES, is to be substituted for the instructions contained in page 1 of the paper before sent. Ihe attention of the overseers is par ticularly directed to the words printed in Italics. (Signed) " S. M. PHILLIPPS. " Whitehall, June 16, 1834." SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. COODWOOD •OLD CU?, A great many heavy engagements were entered into on this event, but chiefly on the 14 and 15 to 1 horses ; the gelding out of Liston's dam was backed to a large amount at 14 and 15 to 1 in the early part of the afternoon, the close of the betting leaving him at the latter price without backers. Nonsense was in demand, and, after three or four hundred pounds had been laid out upon him, rose to 13 to 1 takers. Colwick and Glencoe fill the same places they held last week, bat all the others retrograded. To our usual list of the prices we add the ages and weights to be carried by the horses in betting -9 to '2 agst Colwick, 6 yrs, 9st. 21b. (take 5 to 1). 5 to 1 agst Glencoe, 3 yrs, 7st. 41b. (taken). 10 to 1 agst Mr. Theobald's Rockingham, 4 yrs, Bst. 101 b. (taken.) 10 to 1 agst Glaucus, 4 yrs, 9st. 71b. 13 to 1 agst Nonsense, 4 yrs, Bst. 101 b. (taken). 15 to 1 agst J. Day's g. - Liston's darn, 6 yrs, 7st. 91b. 16 to 1 agst The Saddler, 6 yrs, 9st. 121 b. 16 to 1 agst St. Giles, 5 yrs, Bst. 131 b. 25 to 1 agst Carnaby, 4 yrs, Bst. 101 b. (taken). 25 to 1 agst Rubini, 6 yrs, 10st. Even on four agst the field. GOODWOOD DRAWING ROOM STAKES, P.P. 6 to 4 offered agst Shelalah (taken 2 to 1). NEWMARKET JULY STAKES, F.?. 4 to 1 agst Kate Keerney (taken). 10 to 1 agst Martha filly. The attention of all the principal speculators is so much engros sed by the Goodwood Cup that little is said and scarcely any thing done in this race. LIVERPOOL CUP, P.P. 3 to 1 agst Chancellor. 18 to 1 agst Chancellor winning this and Glencoe the Goodwood Cup (taken in fifties). DONCASTER ST. LEGER. 2 to 1 agst Plenipotentiary (taken) 8 to 1 agst Bran (taken). 20 to 1 agst Billinge (taken). . _ DERBY, 1835. A day or two back 3,000 to 100 was laid agst each of the fol lowing horses in one bet :—Angelica, Magnate, Ibrahim, Dario letta, Stockport, Silenus, Augustus's darn, Dromeo, Curtius, and Belus. LATEST BETTING AT MANCHESTER, P. P. The Liverpool Trade Cup.-7 to 2 agst Chancellor (taken), 9 to 2 agst Physician, 7 to 1 agst Giovanni, 7 to 1 agst The Danc ing Master, 9 to 1 a gs t Ll ewe ll yn , 10 t o 1 ags t S a t an ( ta k en ) , 12 to 1 agst any other. Liverpool Two-Year-Olds.-3 to 1 agst Verbina, 3 to 1 agst Jupiter, 7 to 2 agst any other. Liverpool St. Leger. -3 to 1 agst Billinge, 3to 1 agst General Chasse, 7 to 2 agst Worlaby, 9 to 2 agst Powlett's, and 6 to 1 agst Touchstone. (Doubtful whether Worlaby will go.) Tonyngham will ent e r i n t o th e du ties of Marquis of e hisnewappointment as Postmaster-General on the sth inst. Yesterday morning Mrs. Fry, accompanied by two ladies, had an interview with Mr. Secretary Rice, at the Co lonial-office. POPULATION OF PARIS.--On the 15th of March, 1827, the population of Paris was certified by an ordinance of Charles X. to be 890,431. On the 11th May, 1832, another census was taken, when the returns made out but 774,338, being 116,093 less after than before the revolutio n . Out of the whole number only one in every 172 of the inhabitants voted at the late election. " ---r " TI AV- JULY 1, 1834. §tlN, LONDON, ..1.*Ur.4131,1-3.., IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, June 30. Their lordships were occupied during the morning in hear ing appeal cases. Soon after four o'clock there was a very full attendance of their lordships. The spaces below the throne and behind the bar were crowded with members of the House of Commons. -.- But of conspiracy that one man printed what another wrote. the case would be very different if two or more persons laid their heads together to compose a calumny to the _injury of another. _ . . _ Earl GREY observed that the question he proposed was, whether any other person gave the article in question to the individual at the bar? _ _ _ ---- The LORD CHANCELLOR contended that in what ever way the question could be answered, the same result, that of making the situation of the witness worse, must be the con sequence. He then told Mr. Bittleston that if he had any thing to state he might then state it. Mr. Bittleston then addressed their lordships as follows. Before he had got to the end of the second or third sentence, The LORD CHANCELLOR said, Perhaps you will al low me to remind you that you are in a situation of great dif ficulty. You are addressing yourself to this house. Take great care that you say nothing to aggravate your offence. Mr. Bittleston—l thank your lordship. "My Lords—l trust I may be allowed, in the first place, to state to your lordships that I have been advised that since I am not entered at the Stamp-office as in any way connected with this paper I might with safety have declined to answer any questions put to me to-day. But it seems to me, my lords, that I best show how little I have been influenced by any malignant motive when I come forward to give to your lordships all the information which I -can give, consistently with my duty to my employers,—justifying where justification is possible, apologising where apology is mani feStly due, and professing my readiness to submit to punishment *here no justification can be attempted and no apology received. • "My Lords—l cannot for a moment dispute that a breach of the privileges of this house has been committed, because I know that any mention of the proceedinws of this house in a newspaper is a breach of those privileges. But I trust that the observations which the indulgence of your lordships allows me to address you will, in some respects, materially alter your impressions as to the nature and extent of the offence. " My Lords—The paper which your lordships have pronounced to be a libel contains two allegations respecting the noble and learned lord on the woolsack. The first allegation is, that as a judge he has reproved and punished parties for following a course which, as counsel, he recommended. The second allegation is, that upon the discovery of this circumstance an improper inter ference took place in the entry of the occurrence upon your lord ships' minutes. I beg to remark separately upon these two allega tions, because the defence which I shall respectfully offer as to one ot them would be wholly inapplicable to the other. " Beginning, therefore, my lords, with the first allegation, that which imputes to the noble and learned lord the condemnation of the course he had himself advised, I beg . to recall to your recollec tion the case upon which the allegation is made. - The case of So larte v. Palmer was tried before Lord Tenterden nth year 1828. It was afterwards taken by a bill of exceptions into th Exchequer Chamber; and finally brought by a writ of error before your lord ships "My Lords--It was always perfectly understood that when the judgment of the Exchequer Chamber was pronounced upon the bill of exceptions the noble and learned lordoccupied the situation which he now occupies ;_ and it never was suspected or insinuated that the noble and learned lord on that occasion advised an appeal to your lordships against that judgment. "But, my lords, it was asserted that at the trial' in 1828, in which the noble and learned lord was concerned as counsel, lord Tenterden clearly expressed his opinion that the point raised was so doubtful, and the sum disputed so considerable, that the question ought to be brought before the highest tribunal in the country, by which he can have meant no tribunal but this house. And it was further asserted that the noble and learned lord at that time, and on that occasion, testified his perfect acquiescence in the opinion so expressed by lord Tenterden. The course, my lords, pursued by the parties was, as I am instructed, the only course by which they could, in compliance with the opinion of the Chief Justice and the advice of their counsel, bring the case before this house. " My Lords—The fact that the noble and learned lord did on that occasion testify his acquiescence in lord Tenterden's opinion was not first. stated in the Morning Post. It was stated in other papers, and by the solicitors for one of the parties in the cause,who vouched by the addition of their names for the truth of their asser tion. Before the statement was repeated in the Morning Post every effort was made to test its accuracy. The short-hand writer's notes of the original trial were referred to. The impression on the mind of the eminent counsel who were employed with the noble and learned lord was ascertained. My lords, after making every inquiry, there seemed no reason to doubt that the fact was as it was stated to be. . Lords-" 14 3. —I understand that it has been urged in aggravation of thee i offence that the truth of this statement was re-asserted after the noble and learned lord had denied it. In the re-assertion of it there was not the most remote purpose of imputing a wilful sup pression of the truth to the noble and learned lord ; and I very humbly hope that your lordships will not find anything in the para graph referred to which demonstrates such a purpose. It was imagined from the first that , the noble and learned lord, when he moved the judgment of your lordships, did not recollect the opinion he had formerly expressed as counsel in the pause. It appeared that in moving the judgment of your lordships, the noble and learned lord treated the point railed as one of clear and indisputable law, without any allusion to the circumstance that he had formerly con curred with Lord Tenterden in a very different view of it. It ap peared also that the noble and learned lord assumed the case to be entirely and absolutely governed by the precedent of ' Hartley v. Case,' without any allusion to the circumstance that Lord Tenter den had suggested the reference of the case to the highest tribunal in the country, expressly that the precedent of tlartley v. Case' might be reconsidered by your lordships. These circumstances, my lords, induced a belief that the memory of the noble and learned lord was inaccurate in this particular. Confidence was placed ra ther on the notes of the short-hand writer, and in the recollection of other individuals concerned in the cause. My lords, I most re spectfully submit that a suggestion that a noble and learned lord does not distinctly remember in 1834 all that happened in one of the many causes which engaged his attention in 1828, even if it can be construed into a breach of privilege, can scarcely be held a very ma lignant libel; and I am bound to say, however reluctant 1 may be to incur your lordships' further displeasure, that I have not yet seen reason to alter the opinion which, supon such testimony as I have described, I could not hesitate to form. "My Lords—l have dwelt thus long upon this allegation because I should regret much to be supposed to have wantonly aggravated my offence by a repetition of it, after it had attracted your lordships' notice. I humbly assure your lordships that, in re-asserting my belief in the statement 1 , hich had been made in other papers and transferred to the Morning Post, I had no suspicion that I was repeating any part of the offence of which the noble and learned lord had complained. 66 My Lords—lt had appeared to me that the second allegation in the paper before you—the allegation that the minutes of your lordships house had been garbled—was the allegation which had a subjected iy me to the displeasure of your lordships. Lords---I shall say little upon this point, because lam aware that it is impossible to justify what has been done. I had information from an informant on whom I could perfectly rely, that a judgment had been affirmed' by your lordships, and that it was entered as postponed sine die.' I confess it did not occur to my mind that any existing usage of this house could by possibility an idea had occurred to me, I should have undoubtedly made fur ther discrepancy between the fact and the record. If such Isuffered myself to suppose that the minutes of this inquiryl h n i e s i h e o th us theee before had been garbled. But having ascertained the cor rectness of the facts, I thought the inference drawn followed o f nec essity from them. My lords, I understand that the facts are actually true • that the printed minute of your lordsh vote differs from the written minute ; and that ip s' neither the printed m i nute nor th e wr itten minute records cor rectly the vote actually passed. lam informed further, my lords, that the facts by which I was misled, misled also many of yourlord ships ; and that the inference which I improperly drew seemed to some of your lordships the only inference that could be drawn. To the. a nd lear ne d l or d I h ave a l rea d y t en d er ed the apology, which noble iehis the only atonement I can offer for my attack on his cha racter ; an d I desire to express to your lordships the sincere regret I feel for the violation of your privileges, which that attack involved. ca m y . Lords—l have already trespassed long upon your lord ships' time. But I beg to be permitted to say further that I have been for man! , years in various situations connectedwith this paper, and that during that time I have so conducted myself as to fear no inquiry into the motives by which Ihave been personallyinfluenced. Since I have had the exclusive responsibity of the Morning Post, that journal has been severe in its strictures upon the public cha racter of public men ; but it has never violated, by calumnious scandal, the sanctity of domestic life. It has frequently urged di rect accusations against many individuals which might be met and disproved ; but it has scrupulously avoided dark inuendo and ambi guous insinuation. In the very example before you, the distinct ness with which the facts are stated and the inferences dra wn is surely a proof that the facts were believed to be true, and the infe rences supposed to be correct. And, my Lords, whatever may be the legal interpretation of the offence for which I now await the censure of your lordships, I trust I may without presumption re mark that it is not possible you can attribute a desire to infringe your privileges to the conductors of a journal in which those privi leges have been uniformly supported with humble ability indeed, but with conscientious zeal." At the conclusion of this address, which was listened to with the utmost attention, the Duke of WELLINGTON, Earl GREY, and other peers on either side of the house coming - down to seats near the bar, that they might the better hear it, The LORD CHANCELLOR resumed his seat on the woolsack. He wished to say a few words to their lordship; before they proceeded to take any steps with regard to the in dividual before them, who, of course, was supposed to have withdrawn, (Mr. Bittleston was permitted to remain behind the bar to the end of the debate.) As few of their lord ships were acquainted with the course of proceedings in the appeals he was anxious to state that the attorneys in the cause on the losing side had put into the hands of the individual at the bar a letter which was calculated most grossly to mislead. He (the Lord Chancellor) could not believe that Lord Ten terden had doubted at all in the matter of " Hartley and Case." That decision in that case had never been doubted by any ' judge, and it was the decision of Lord Tenterden himself. What probability was there then of his having doubted it ? He (the Lord' C'hancellor) argued it, and Lord Tenterden gave judgment for himself and his learned brethren. It was not the practice of the noble and learned lord to call for the reconsideration of a case involving no principle, but merely a question of practice. Supposing, however, that it was true that that noble and learned lord recommended the reconsidera tion of the case, that was not after it had been argued in the Exchequer Chamber. If it had come at once to that house upon the recommendation of the noble and learned lord should he have visited the party with costs ? Certainly not. The reason of his indignation, and which he still felt, was that a vexatious, unnecessary, and most costly writ of error was brought into that house after the opinion of the Exchequer Chamber was given. Not satisfied with the opinion of all the judges who decided the matter in the Exchequer Chamber, and upon the authority of " Hartley and Case," which was di rectly in point, the parties insisted on coming to that house, and for what ? For the purpose merely of having . the same judges, who had all unanimously, unhesitatingly, given their opinion in the Exchequer Chamber, step across the hall, after two years' delay and a great expense, to repeat their opinion. And this the gentleman at the bar, who was evidently a very acute man, with all the attention he had given to the subject, could not see. He could not see that the only result of the proceed ing would be that the learned judges would step across the hall to deliver the same opinion in that house that they had delivered elsewhere two years ago. If the object of the ap peal had been to obtain a reversal of any judgment in Chan ceryand that upon a matter it might be a different thing ; but who could not see the absurdity of expecting that the learned judges would one day entertain one opinion and the next day another, That part of the 'dwide of the question, ~, matter, therefore,. was and had do with it. He could not help ter— „dining whatever to had heard from Mr. tter of every-day common law practice ? . • .. mo rking upon one statement which Bittleston with great astonishment. He had told their lord `l.•t he was misled by the entry upon their minutes ; but ships • Sneaker of that house had garbled the why suppose that tu... _ .4,4 - uction surely was an minutes? ( Hear, hear.) That nt s on- uncharitable one, another being: open. (lei.; tent with that false construction, t _ ue said that many ot lordships fell into the same error. (Cri.l s of " No, no," min gled with cries of " hear, hear.") He Bittleston Chancellor) and the Lord Chief Justice had heard Mr. ittleston so express himself, and he thought he ought to have an opportt:.7 it Y of explaining if there was any ground for doubt on the subjec..: If lie had said so, it was supposing that some of their lord ships were not only uncharitable, but that they were not very wise. He would explain how this was. Mr. Biddleston said that he must have garbled the minutes, and that some of their lordships were of the same opinion upon the same facts. Now, the same persons, if they saw one of their lordships with another's hat, would conclude that the noble lord had been guilty of larceny ; but in his case the conclusion was much more illogical, more foul, slanderous, and uncharitable. Mr. Bittleston told them that because the minutes did not appear to him to correspond with the acts done by their lordships, he was led to imagine that he (the Lord Chancellor) had been guilty of the baseness of garbling the minutes. He would show their lordships that such a conclusion was not wise neither. He wondered it had not struck the author of this coMposition, that of all the follies man could commit, none could be equal to that imputed to him ; for the judgment was delivered not only before several of their lordships, but in pre sence of the parties in the cause against whom the decision was, and whom he had severely censured. Most wicked men, he thanked God, were foolish ; but here would have been such a mixture of folly, meanness, and wickedness as it would baffle the keenest ingenuity to say which predominated. With these observations he would leave the matter in the hands of their lordships. After a considerable pause, in which it seemed to be the expectation of the house that Earl Grey would rise, Lord DENMAN rose. Earl Grey rose at the same time, but gave way. The noble and learned lord said he addressed their lordships with great reluctance, but it was of great im portance, not merely to themselves as a court of judicature, but to every court of law in the country, that such an outrage upon the course of justice as had been committed by the per son at the bar should not be passed over. If it should be, there was not a judge in the land who would not feel that he had no protection against the foulest and the basest calumny which it might please any disappointed and interested party to disseminate. ( Hear.) He knew that all persons in official situations were exposed to such attacks. Society swarmed with disappointed individuals, who, from various motives and causes, were ready to turn the virulence and rancour of a disappointed renegad*into the channel of the money-making libeller, who dealt forth his daily venom against those who were the objects of his spite. He believed that no judge would willingly exercise the summary powers he possessed for his own protection in cases of this kind, and he trusted they would ever feel that the best security they had against slander was in the character they maintained and the conduct which they observed. ( Hear.) In the same manner, if their lordships as a body should become the object of the most virulent attack, he should recommend that it be passed over. There would be no safety for the liberty of the press if observationS upon public men were weighed in scales toy nice and critical. But, he would ask, in what situa tion would they be placed in that house as individuals if they were to be subject to such attacks as the one that had been made upon his noble and learned friend ? If such attacks were to be permitted to pass with impunity, made upon grounds the most false, the most foul, the most ludicrously trifling in themselves, but the most awfully important in their conse quences, and levelled against the individuals who undertook the judicial duties of that house, who would undertake that responsible business ? He spoke for himself in this matter, and he wanted to know in what situation he would be if an in dividual were to choose to impugn his motives and falsify his acts in that house. He humbly asked their lordships to tell him what was to be his fate if, in consequence of a recommen dation made by him to their lordships, he was to be accused of forgery ? He knew that the remedy was at best invidious and unsatisfactory, but it was their only course. In this case how completelyithe blind malignity and vile party spirit of the libeller, mixed up with his folly, had led him into error. (Hear.) Good God, did ever calumny cut a more miserable appearance ? He (Lord Denman) was supposed to have given a hint to his noble and learned friend on the woolsack in the nature of a doubt which he entertained upon the deci sion arrived at. He candidly stated that at first when he read the case he went to his noble and learned friend, and, speaking from a faded recollection of the facts, told him that he thought it might be decided either way. That was perfectly true ; but what he asked was this, was the Morning Post there to report what he so communicated to his noble and learned friend ? ( Hear.) Was some one present on the woolsack to hear and report—was the Lord Chief Justice to be reported by some listener in making such observations to the Lord Chancellor ? ( Hear.) At all events, if it was right to report it at all, it should have been reported that what fell from his noble and learned friend completely altered his opinion. He begged leave to say that he did not believe Lord Tenterden recommended that the opinion of another tribunal should be taken in the case of Solarte and Palmer. Unless he saw it under his own hand, or heard upon ,some credible testimony, he would not believe that that was the case. That noble and learned lord entertained no doubt whatever upon the subject. He had decided another ease upon the same ground. No principle was involved in the question, which was merely the cc,59 of a bill of exPhange, the question being whether due notice or the dishonour' of a bill of exchange had been given by a letter written by Sola:te to Palmer. The sum of 3501. costs had been given against he appellants, simply because S. there was no point of law, and tht: case was perfectly clear. He knew it was the habit of judges tti say, " If you doubt my ruling go to a higher tribunal if you plea;..":" The parties did go to the Exchequer Chamber, and Sir Nichori" Tindal gave a very luminous judgment, in which he pronounced the unani mous opinion of all the judges, showing that there was not the slightest pretence for the appeal. Yet, after that decision, at the end of three years the losing party staved off their oppo nents, and at a considerable expense brought the case up to their lordships. His noble and learned friend had given a very proper decision on the case ; for if ever there was a case in which the appellants deserved to be visited with costs it was this ; and if they absurdly attached any weight to the part of his noble and learned friend having been counsel in that cause, that was only an additional reason for such a decision. The judgment could ndt'be recorded on the minutes until the costs had been ascertained. Then he understood that some of their lordships thought it strange that there should be a variance between the minutes and the facts. (Hear.) Rut how, he asked, was the Morning Post to have access to their lordships' minutes ? This was not unworthy their lordships' attention. Was his noble andlearned friend on the woolsack to be crushed beneath the chariot-wheels of this Juggernaut of slander be cause the Morning Post could not understand the entries made upon their lordships' minutes? And were the officers of the house to be supposed to be the ready instruments to commit a forgery of the minutes to screen the Lord Chan cellor ? When the gentleman at the bar said that he under stood some of their lordships entertained such an opinion he must say that it was a libel upon any gentleman to think him capable of so condemning the great organ of justice in that house upon grounds which did not justify even the most remote suspicion. The circumstances were open to the most easy ex planation. The person who had put these misstatements forth to the world was then at their lordships' bar ; and although he (Lord D.) felt at all times extreme reluctance at troubling their lordships upon any subject, and particularly that his first motion in that house should be one of this kind, and God knew without the slightest personal feeling against that man, and without the slightest communication with his noble and learned friend on the woolsack, but perhaps actuated by a feeling of sympathy at the consideration of what might be his own situation hereafter if such libels were permitted to pass with impunity, he felt it to be his duty to move that that per son be taken into custody. The LORD CHANCELLOR put the question that Tho mas Bittleston be taken into the custody of the Usher of the Black Rod, which was agreed to. The LORD CHANCELLOR then said that he had lis tened attentively to the dignified and impressive statement of his noble and learned friend. He agreed with him in the absolute necessity of protecting the judges of the land, and the judicial functionaries of their lordships' house, and those on whom the duties connected with those functions devolved. But, although he was duly impressed with these s entiments, and was of opinion that as against their lords kip s a grave, unjustifiable, and unpnlliative offence h ad he craved their attention to a single observa tionbeen col:qu itted, owr i i r behalf. He entreated their lordships, as a in his personally, he being the individual against favour to himse.' ach of the privileges of the house had been whom this gross bra the the only person individually aggrieved perpetrated—he being' 'her member of the house his mouth —and if it had been any o.__ s the only one attacked, he would be sealed ; but, as he :Va. sable solicitations that no preferred to their lordships his 11,7 further punishment might be visited :` 1 1)9 1 the ineiividual i n custody. In making this request he wou.4 enter allow ;sit° a so lemn engagement that if they would grant 11:;a!uit, d the individual to be repri man d e d and discharged, in no c.:*se in which their privileges should be again violated , eitherii his person or in the person of any one else engaged in the judicia't duties of their lordships' house, would he beg off the offender. He entreated their lordships to consider that it was the request of the party sought to be injured, he would not say injured, that justice might be tempered with mercy, and that the of fending individual might be discharged after being repri manded. Was it the pleasure of their lordships that Thomas Bittleston should be brought to the bar, reprimanded, and thereupon discharged ? Earl GREY was ready to pay every respect to the appeal of his noble and learned friend in mitigation of punish ment. It was with great reluctance that he appeared to ad dress their lordships in aggravation ; tint considering how grave was the offence, and still more the manner in which it had been attempted to justify it, and agreeing entirely in the character which the Lord Chief Justice had given to the offence, he thought the house ought to consider, setting aside all personal feeling, and desiring only to maintain its cha racter, and, alarm all, the interests of justice, whether it could possibly allow this case to pass over as proposed by his noble and learned friend ? (Hear, hear.) He certainly was not indisposed to deal severely with persons in the situation of the individual at the bar, and lie should be ready to bow with de ference to their lordships' opinion ; but, referring to former proceedings of a similar nature, he must say that he looked upon this as the most aggravated case that had ever come before them, because it was an invasion of the administration of justice by that house. For these reasons he did not think it would be right for them to dismiss the person at the bar upon so slight a visitation of the displeasure of the house. He thre,w out these observations for the consideration of their lord shis. He doubted the propriety of adopting the cou rse pro posed by his noble and learned frien d on the woolsack, BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.-MORNING POST. The Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod reported that Mr. Bittleston was in attendance, in obedience to the order of their lordships. By direction of the LORD CHANCELLOR he was placed at the bar. The LORD CHANCELLOR, having quitted the wool sack and taken his seat at the table, put the following ques tions : What is your name? Thomas Bittleston. Of what profession are you ? lam editor of the Morning Post. Are you the acting editor? A. lam the acting editor. Now, in answering the questions that I or any other peer may put, you are to understand that you are not bound to make any answer to such as may tend to criminate you, or subject you to any proceeding either at law or in this house of a criminal nature. To any question the tendency of which may be to make what you say in answer actionable you are bound to answer ; but to such as may subject you to any cri minal proceeding, either by this house, as for a contempt, 'or' at law, you are not bound to answer. Do you understand? Yes, my lord. Were you the acting editor of the Morning Post last week —on Thursday and Friday last week, for instance ? I was. In consequence of your situation as the acting editor do you see the matters published in the paper before they are inserted? I do. _ Before they are printed ? Yes, before they are printed. You are not the printer, I believe? No, my lord. Have you the power of inserting, rejecting, and altering ar ticles for publication in that paper ? I have. Do you possess that power generally without control ? Generally. Did you insert all the articles that appeared in the Morning Post of Friday last except the advertisements ? For the most part I did. Do you know the leading articles, those that are in larger characters and wider lines ? Did you see these articles ? Yes. Did you read them ? I did. Now, remember the caution I gave you, that you were not bound to answer questions that might criminate yourself. If you say " No" to the next question nobody can injure you, but if you answer in the affirmative you may be injured. Now I have given you a fair warning. You say you read the leading articles. Did you understand them ? I did. Very well. Could you have suppressed or prevented their being printed ? I could. Were those articles inserted by your authority ? They were. Now, have you anything to say respecting the article in the Morning Post of Friday which the house has thought proper to declare a gross breach of the privileges of this house ? You are aware of the vote of the house I suppose ? I am. Was that article--and for the third time I - Caution you that no one can injure you ; it will be no contempt in any way if you refuse to answer the question I am about to put—did you write that article, or get it from any other person ? I object to answer that question. Very well. Do I understand you to say—mind I do not blame you—that you decline giving any further information, not only as to who is the author, but as to the hand from which you received it ? I respectfully decline giving any further in formation, excepting that I admit my responsibility for the article. That is a conclusion in law; but you decline answering the question ? I do. The LORD CHANCELLOR—Before any other peer puts any question to you, I ask you whether you have any thing to state to the house respecting the article upon which the house has expressed an opinion, with a view to alter that opinion, which you may be able to do, notwithstanding the vote of the house; or, if you have anything to offer in exte nuation•of the offence? Mr. Bittleston—l thank your lordship for the permission ' you have given me to address you in extenuation ; but, as in the painful novelty of my present situation I cannot trust to my own self-possession, I hope I may be indulged in the liberty of referring to written memoranda. The LORD CHANCELLOR (concurrently with several peers)—Certainly. Perhaps it would be more advisable, if any other peer has any question to put, that it should be put before the gentleman proceeds with his address. Earl GRE Y—l find in the paper the following passage : " The Morning Herald, which contains the fullest report of Lord Brougham's speech in moving the judgment of the House of Lords upon the case, states that Lotd Brougham concluded in these words I move, my lords, that thejudg ment of the Court below be affirmed, with costs not exceeding 3501. And the Morning Herald proceeds to tell us that the judgment of the Court below was ' affirmed accordingly.' " The Morning Herald is not alone. The solicitors, the short-hand writers, the peers, all concur in asserting that Lord Brougham moved, that the judgment be affirmed,' and that the judgment was affirmed accordingly.' " Now, I wish the witness to be asked if it is meant that the information here alluded to was furnished by certain peers? Mr. Bittleston—l do not understand it sc . ,. The LORD CHANCELLOR—Do you mean that you do not think that is the meaning of the passage ? . - A. lam sure it is not the meaning of the passage. Earl GREY—You say that the meaning is not that it was founded on the information of peers ? A. lam sure that is not the meaning. Earl GREY then said he concurred entirely in the pro priety of the practice of cautioning persons under examination that they were not under the necessity of answering any ques tions tending to criminate themselves. It appeared, however, to him that the person at the bar could say nothing that could criminate himself more than what he had already stated. He admitted that he was the editor, that he had the general super intendence of the paper, and directed the publication of all the articles that appeared in it ; that he had the inspection of all, and approved, rejected, and inserted at pleasure. He had fur ther admitted that he was fully responsible for the publication; and it did not appear to him that the house could desire further information to criminate the individual at the bar. Under these eircumstanges, he wished to put it to the house whether this individual could claim the benefit of the rule of exemption, upon the ground of not criminating himself, to the question as to whether he received the article voted by their lordships a breach of privilege from any other person, an d f rom w h om . The LORD CHANCELLOR admitted that his noble friend had, as he always did, very fairly submitted the ques tion to the consideration of their lordships. He differed from his noble friend ; and it was his duty to give their lordships his opinion as a lawyer, which he did with all possible deference and humility. If he could see that the answering this ques tion could not tend to criminate or injure the witness he should say that his protection was at an end, for it was clear he could not refuse to criminate another, although he was himself pro tected. No person was protected there or in the courts of law from disclosing the authorship of others. Although entitled to protection for himself as a witness, no individual was en titled to extend that protection to another. Now, if their lordships would attend to the tendency of the course of exa mination proposed by his noble friend, they would see that the witness would be entitled to claim his exemption as to it. The witness had avowed his responsibility. Quoad hoc, then, he was answerable and punishable, and no disclosure of any other party's culpability would relieve him, for his hand had given. the article to be printed. But there were two things to be determined : first, whether the party at the bar was guilty or not guilty ; and next, what ought to be the amount of punish ment. Now the question proposed by his noble friend could not be answered either one way or the other without bringing the witness within the scope of the second head of inquiry, viz., what amount of punishment was to be inflicted upon him ? For, suppose he answered the question by stating that he alone was concerned in composing the article in ques tion, suppose he said that he himself wrote it, that would be an answer in aggravation of punishment, for he would avow him self to be the uninstigated author of a deliberate and wilful act in violation of their lordships' privileges. He hoped their lordships followed him in this argument, for he confessed he could see no answer that this individual could make which would not come within the. rule of exemption. If, on the other hand, then, he disclosed the name of one or more per sons as partners with him, then would his conduct fall within another description of offence. He would then stand at the bar of their lordships' house as having confessedly conspired with others to violate their lordships' privileges,and conspiracy was always an aggravation of every effence. The mildest form of that offence, in the present case, would be that the individual at the bar had printed what another had written ; but even that would be a grave offence. If the witness said that he had written the article it would be an offence that he had written the libel, and punishment must follow ; but if he said that he had partly composed it with another, then be would appear as having embarked in a conspiracy with ano ther wilfully and scandalously to violate their lordships' privi leges. The mode of further examination proposed by his noble friend was not such as ought to receive the sanction of their lordships. If his noble friend, however, thought fit to ask if A. B. gave the article in question to the witness, that was a different matter, and that question h e cou ld s a f e ly an swer. But that was not the nature of his noble friend's question. Earl GREY differed from his noble and learned friend; but still he would not press the question, as it appeared to be his opinion that he ought not. He was in :candour bound, however, to state that he was not convinced by th e argum ent of his noble friend that the course of examination he had pro posed was not such as he might with propriety follow. The person at the bar having avowed his responsibility for the ar ticle which had appeared in the paper of which he was editor, he merely wished to ask him who was the writer of that article, and he could not see that the question of conspiracy could be brought into the matter at all, in the event of the answer being that he had received it from some other person. As to the particular mode of putting the question prescribed by his noble and learned friend, he should be sorry to suspect any man of having furnished that article. ( Hear, hear.) To ask whether any particular person had furnished it would, he thought, equally involve the question of conspiracy as the more general mode of putting the question proposed by himself, but objected to by his noble and learned friend. He would not, however, persevere in putting a question which his noble and learned friend had stated to be an improper question. The LORD CHANCELLOR feared he had been ill understood. There was a difference between the conspiracy of two persons to- commit an offence and the commission of that offence by concert between two or more individuals. If his noble friend asked whether John Nokes gave the'particular article complained of, and the answer was in the affirmative, that would not prove a conspiracy. It would be no conspiracy according even to the technical, refined, and subtle definition Fit'Prrficrtt he should be ready to concur in any decision their lordships might be disposed to come to. The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that as he was the person who, upon a former discussion upon this question, had given his opinion respecting the manner in which the records pf that house were kept, and particularly upon this subject; and SS this point had been adverted to by the gentleman at the bar, who had been misunderstood, he asought, in that part of his address (Hear, hear), he would ventte - e. to offer a few . observations to their lordships. It would be recollected that the appeal out of which this question arose was one which at- • t ;:acted particularly the attention of their lordships. The report of the judges, as their lordships would recollect, bad been recen c . ed by a noble lord who did not belong to the legal profession, ant: that circumstance had been adverted to by a noble and lea. -ned friend of his in that house. (Hear, hear.) The subject, therefore, had attracted the public at tention. When he first saw the paragraph in question he confessed he was much prprised, and he was induced to make inquiries. The result of those inquiries was, that, although he found the Lord Chancellor had moved the house to confirm the judgment referred to, and although particular proceedings were had upon that occasion, yet not only was there no written record of till"se proceedings giving an accurate account of them for the inform.'tion of the house or the public, but there was a printed record sves:4ch did not give an accurate account. Both these records, the written and the printed, differed from each other, and both differed frees the fact. (Hear, hear.) He did not mean to blame the noble P., nd learned lord on the woolsack in this transaction, neither did Le blame the gentlemen at the table of the house, but he coed not help observing that such a state of things was productive of great inconvenience. He meant by what he formerly said to observe that this state of things might have misled the gentleman at the bar. He understood that gentleman to have referred in his address to what fell from him on a former evening. He could only say that if he had been instrumental in misleading that gentleman to form an erroneous judgment, he regretted it. Nothing was further from his intention than to cast any reflection on the noble and learned lord. If he had entertained any opinion of that kind he should have said so without any hesitation ; but he fully acquitted the noble and learned lord upon that subject. He must say, however, that the mode of keeping the records of that house, both written and printed, was any thing but satisfactory. The LORD CHANCELLOR wished to explain on behalf of the clerks of the table. He need not remind their lord ships that whatever had been done in this case as to the mi nutes had not been done by him. (Hear, hear.) The mode might be right or it might be wrong ; but he was not respon sible. The noble duke, perhaps, understood that, but others did not. Upon this occasion, as upon all others, he gave no direction either to write or to leave out any thing. But the mode complained of was not peculiar to that house. The same practice was followed in every court in Westminster Hall. They must, therefore, think twice before they altered it. The judgment was never regularly entered up on the postea until the costs were taxed. The case might be de cided and reported in Barnewall and Alderson, or any other reports, and yet the postea not finally entered until the costs were precisely ascertained. The entry alluded to was a mere private memorandum of the clerk of the house, and formed no part whatever of the minutes of their lordships' house. It was only meant as a security that the regular entry should after wards be made upon the journals. The Earl of LIMERICK said that in justice to the noble and learned lord on the woolsack, he must say that the noble and learned lord treated with great moderation the groundless attack that had been made upon him. It did not seem that the noble and learned lord had done anything that was wrong in the performance of his judicial functions. It was the duty of the noble and learned lord to give his opinion on the case that had come before him for judgment. He (the Earl of Limerick) was a great friend to the safe and proper administration of justice, and he should therefore be always ready to protect the judicial authorities of the country in the discharge of their duties. With respect to the individual who had been brought to their lordships' bar, he (the Earl of Limerick) recollected on a former occasion, when a person was brought to the bar under similar circumstances for a breach of privilege, that person declined to give any explanation or in formation whatever to their lordships, or to make any apo logy, and that person had the advantage of receiving a very lenient judgment, as well as having had the advocacy of the noble and learned lord. (We understood the noble earl to allude to the case of Mr. Lawson of the Times.) He thought that the individual who had that day been called to the bar had a better claim to the lenient consi deration of their lordships than the person to whom he had alluded. He trusted, therefore, that the motion of the noble and learned lord for calling him again to the bar, and ordering his discharge after a reprimand, would be acceded to by the house. He should be one of the last men living to sanction the publication of any matter that might be hurtful to the feel ings of another; and in eupporting the motion of the noble and learned lord his only ot'ject was to have justice adminis tered in mercy. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said that he could not see why the noble earl opposite ( Sari Grey) should wish to visit with a different and more severe degree of punishment a person who might offend against the ministerial party in the house than one who might in like mariner unjustly assail an individual attached to the opposition side. ac trusted the noble earl would not press his interference between the genero sity of the noble and learned lord on the woolsack and the in dividual at the bar. He should be sorry to see any difference made between the cases of two persons who had offended alike, because their offence applied to different parties in that house. Earl GREY said that he was sure their lordships would acquit him of entertaining , any other feeling upon this occasion than a desire to uphold the character, the dignity, and the pri vileges of that house. (Hear, hear.) He could have no personal feeling whatever on the matter. He confessed that he was surprised, often as he even had been subjected to the attacks of the noble marquis who spoke last, that that noble marquis should attribute to him the disposition to visit with different degrees cf punishment any persons who might offend agajust their lordships' privileges because they were the advo cates of opposite sides in that house. He did not, he confessed, expect this imputation from the noble marquis, much as he was opposed to him. This was a difference to which he (Earl Grey) never for a moment gave the slightest consideration. In the case that had been alluded to by the noble earl (the Earl of Limerick), as well as in the present case, a breach of the privileges of their lordships' house had been committed, and in coming to a judgment upon either he hoped he should not be suspected of being influenced by any other feeling than purely a sense of justice and duty, and that no private consideration could enter into his mind in giving his opinion. He had but one object, namely, to maintain the character of that house and the proper administration of justice. Nothing . could be more necessary to the due administration of justice than to protect the judicial authorities against such attacks as this that had been levelled at his noble and learned friend. On this ground chiefly it was that he was not disposed to pass over the present case in the lenient manner that had been suggested by the generosity of his noble and learned friend. As to the entry that had been made in the Journals of the house, to which so much allusion had been made, he locked upon it as a question not to be at all consi dered in the present case. With respect to the other case that had been quoted, he begged leave to say that he was not one of those who on any occasion of this nature recommended a severe measure of punishment. But let the house see what was the course pursued in that case. A very atrocious libel had been published on the noble earl opposite (the Earl of Limerick), and it was quite impossible that the offending party could be suffered to escape ; and the course then taken was precisely what he recommended now, namely, that the offend ing party was committed to the custody of the Usher of the Black Rod, and was not discharged until after be had pre sented a petition to their lordships, and had been reprimanded at their bar. God knew he entertained no other feeling or desire as regarded the individual at the bar than to see that the character and privileges of their lordships were main tained, although be certainly looked upon the present case to be by far the most aggravated that had been brought under the notice of their lordships ; and he did not think that it would stand well upon their lordships' journals if it were passed over without the visitation of some punishment. Hav ing said thus much, lie was quite willing to acquiesce in the suggestion of his noble and learned friend on the woolsack ; but he could assure the house that he was not biassed in any opinion he had given by a wish to deal out one measure of justice to one side of the house more than to another. The Marquis of CAMDEN said that he did not consider that so atrocious an attack as this that had been made on the noble and learned lord, without the slightest foundation, ought to be passed over in the light manner that the noble and learned lord had himself so generously proposed. The judges of the land had a right to look to that house for protection, and it would not be maintaining the independence and characters of those high judicial functionaries if that protection was not ex tended to them against attacks of this nature. He did not wish the person at the bar to be treated with any unusual de gree of severity, but be could not suffer him to go altogether unpunished. He should therefore move that he be committed to the custody of the Usher of the Black Rod. The Earl of SHAFTE SBURY—He is already in custody. The LORD CHANCELLOR—Yes, he is already in custody. The Duke of HAMILTON said that he hoped some u1te ,..1/4n measure might be adopted that would accord with the • 'erous disposition of the noble and learned on oolt l get and at the same time satisfy the justice l oft he t ease. s w a n c s k ' a denitted on all sides, that a gross breach of privilege had been coesunitted, and that punishment ought to follow; but, then, their lordships should recollect that they were bound to administer j t estice with moderation and mercy. It was the particular requs Ist of the noble and learned lord on the wool sack to the houso that their lordships would treat the indivi dual at the bar with' as Tittle severity as possible, and he (the Duke of Hamilton) .hoped that the house would accede to that request. He did n;st wish that the house should make the e e k nerous feelings of the any concession that might , leave even the appearance of surren dering any of their lordships' rights or t privileges ; but, as it seemed to be the general dispos:4tio of o. heir lordships to pass over the present offence, he hoped' noble and learned lord on the sveo.'sac would be indulged. publisked every day in newspapers, and He was not the apologist for libels of any description. The most gross libels were this he thought was a sort of mitigation of the offence of the individual at the bar, who certainly was not the only person who sent forth such publications. The Earl of HARROWBY said that he was willing to follow in the present case the precedent that had been quoted by the n oble earl opposite ( Earl. Grey ). In that case the per son in custody was not discharged on the same day that he wa s brought to the bar, but at a subsequent period. He was kept in confinement, and was not discharged until he had petitioned their lordship? house. There was, however, be considered, a great difference between that case and the pre ; tit. In that case the libel, Ocralaable and atrocious as it ;9 a bed. ry, ;ha- I 1$ 5 110 i 5 I 1 0 8- E 0 f Q I 0 r Jo 10 ore ►eU ere 530 230 ing 325 'fin• ited nu the sn en- the rts be of ust nel Lnd tits DSt am wit of i 1~ I ■ 1 E \A‘-'