The Sun. — London, England, 1830-06-05 00:00:00

timate. The non. Gentleman had said that 8,1391. the amount charged, wai not taken upon the expen diture of •last year, but was the average of the three preceding years. Now the Hon. Secretary for the Treasury was exceedingly unfortunate in that state ment, for it appeared that the amount of fees charged in the three preceding years was as follows :—in 1829, 2,189/. ; in 1828, 2,819/.; in 1827, 2,7001.; so that he (Mr. Gordon) was perfectly at a loss how t o make out that 3,139/. formed the average amount of the fees charged in those three years : f 0 much for the arithmetic of his Hon. Friend the Se- cretary for the Treasury.—(A. laugh.)—A word now as to his Majesty's Attorney-General,if indeed, so humble an individual as he (Mr. Gordon) was might venture to say anything in the presence of that personage. The Learned Gentleman had com plained of his having used the word " persecutions," and he had maintained that it was unfair to apply that epithet to what were only prosecutions. Now • he (Mr. Gordon) would venture to tell him, the Attorney-General though he might be, that as long as he (Mr. Gordon) retained a seat in that House, he would never fail there, as well as every where else, to call those prosecutions " persecutions; '— (Cheers.)—He would do so, and he would not be put down by His Majesty's Attorney-General for calling them so.—(Repeated cheers from the oppo sition benches.)—The Learned Gentleman corn plained that he (Mr. Gordon) had preferred an ac cusation against him in reference to these prosecu tions, but could he say that he accused him in his absence ? The Learned Gentleman was present, and he had every opportunity afforded him to answer for his conduct, If he had not been present, then he might have justly complained that he (Mr. Gor don) had been making charges against him and at tacking him behind his back. But he (Mr. Gordon) had pursued an opposite course, and he had stated fully and fairly, in the presence of the Learned Gentleman, and beforethe House, that he considered those prosecutions persecutions. The Learned Gentleman had talked about the propriety of his (Mr. Gordon's) bringing forward a specific motion on the subject, and he raid that an opportanity alight be easily found in that way for arraigning his con duct, when he should be prepared to meet whatever charges might be preferred against him. Why the thing had been done already, and what was the re atilt ? A majority of that House, which his Ma jesty's Attorney-General could seldom fail of com manding, pronounced a decision in his favour. At present, indeed, and for some time past, he (Mr. Gordon) had indeed heard rumours of other mo tions on the subject. The Hon. Member for Newark had been whispering about a motion of the kind, but he had never brought it before the House. He (Mr. Gordon) would tell the Learned Gentle man, that if he had been more constant in his at tendance in that House, he would not have heard now, for the first time, that accusation preferred against him of which he so much complained.— During his absence from the House on various occa sions, Hon. Members on that side of the House had expressed an opinion similar to that which he (Mr. Gordon) had expressed with regard to those prose cutions ; and if he had used too strong a word, in calling them " persecutions," he was sure that his constituents and the country at large would sympa thize with him in that feeling.--(Hear, hear.)—He should only add, that when the House resumed, be should take advantage of the facility offered by the Secretary for the Treasury, to move for a detailed account of the charges incurred for those prosecutions. Mr. D. W. HARVEY said that the Attorney- General had stated that they would speedily have laid upon the table of the House a return of the fees paid to the law officers of the Crown, and that it would be seen from that the Attorney and Soli citor-General were very moderately paid. It would be well for them to have such a return laid before the House, for it would go far to remove the erro neous impression which prevailed throughout the country, and in which he (Mr. Harvey) would con fess that he participated, that those parties were not too much employed for the emoluments which they received. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman hail stated truly and candidly that the whole of the fees paid to the law officers of the Crown were not so great as were paid to Counsel when employed by in dividuals. But still they were paid in many cases for doing nothing, and that was a great tax, and a great hardship upon the public. He would refer the Learned Gentleman to the case of charities Before any individual. could present a petition under Sir Samuel Romilly's Act to file an information, it must first be considered and approved by his Ma jesty's Attorney-General. He could speak of one individual case, and there were, no doubt, many such in which:the Attorney-General received his fee to give his fiat to a petition for an information in the case of a charity, and he finally determined that no informa tion should be filed in that case. Here was the At torney-General of England enabled, in his private character, to act the party judge, without the re sponsibility which attached to the discharge of the judicial functions. The Learned Gentleman, though he disapproved of the information, was enabled to retain his fee in this instance. This was conduct which he did not at all mean to charge as peculiar to the present Attorney-General. It was the line of conduct which had been uniformly pursued by his predecessors in that office, but it was at the same time a great blot upon the administration of justice in this country, and one which ought to be removed. He (Mr. Harvey) would in a few days have a petition to present on the subject, and as the Attorney-General had stated that the Law Officers of the Crown were not over paid, he (Mr. Harvey) would agree with him that they were not over paid for what they did, but he certainly thought that they were over paid when they were paid for what they did not do, as in the instances of charities. The system with regard to them was a cruel one : in all instances of charity cases in the Court of Chancery the Attorney-General was not present, and yet in every one of them he took a brief. It was no wonder, then, that the impression prevailed in the country that these officers were rather well paid. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said with re gard to the subject of charities he had this to say— the power of investigating and regulating public charities was vested in the Crown, and that power was delegated to his Majesty's Attorney-General; and whether it .were right that such a power should be so delegated or not, he would not now say ; but this he would say, that so long as it was vested in him, as it was, he would keep that right, and he would not allow the Hon. Member or any other person to take it from him. If the Hon. Gentleman should choose to apply to file an information in the case of a charity, and have the certificate of a counsel in suppoit of it, and if the facts should not after wards appear to warrant such an information, he (the Attorney-General) would only do his duty in preventing him from filing it. He felt that he only did his duty in that way in regard to the case to which the Hon. Gentleman referred. There had been sent to him (the Attorney-General) from seve ral quarters copies of a circular letter which had been distributed throughout the country amongst the trustees of the various charities, of which let ter probably the Hon. Gentleman knew something, and which was to this effect—" You (meaning the trustees to whom it was addressed) are in the re ceipt of funds for some charity, and we are desirous to have an account from you as to how these funds have been expended; and we are ready to impart to you important information with regard to the cha rity in question." The letter concluded with a threat that if it were not met in a corresponding spirit, they would file an informationagainst them at the suit of his Majesty's Attorney-General. Such a circular l e ssee had never been authorised by him (the At , .tornersGenehl) nor by the Charity Commissioners; and if any individual entertained such a mistaken notion, he wished to take this public opportunity to disabuse him of it, and to set the public right upon thst matter. If any individual, a party to this letter, filed an information, as a kind of adventure to bring arson into Chancery, and that he (the Attorney-General) should discover that the infor mation so filed was a wrong one, it was his duty to keep the proceedings in his own hands the au- thority being vested in him. He had done his duty in cases of that kind to the best of his judgment, and if similar cases should occur again, he should endea vour to examine them to the best of his ability, and not to allow any man, under any pretence whatever, to take from him that power ;which had been in trusted to his hands. Mr. D. W. HARVEY said that the Learned Gentleman had made a strange exhibition on this occasion. To any gentleman who heard him it must have been evident that the Attorney-General appeared to be under the impression that he was in a court of law, and not in that House, for he seemed to think that he might _deal out to indi viduals here the same treatment which he did to the unfortunate parties who came under the lash of his forensic talents in a court of law. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had complained of what he called the sarcasms of the Hon. Member for Cricklade. He (Mr. Harvey) would not accuse the Hon. and Learned Gentleman of employing sar casms against him, for that would be givinghim credit for wit which he did not possess, but he had certainly dealt out a great quantity of coarseness against him. It was rather odd that the Learned Gentleman, who put forward assumptions to a purity of intention which he would not concede to others, should have on this occasion so completely perverted the spirit of a printed letter which could scarcely have been misunderstood if it had been read to the House. In doing that, the Hon. Gentleman, with his usual dex terity, had diverted the attention of the House from that point with regard to which he (Mr. Harvey) had required an answer from him. He alluded to the amount of fees charged for these suits with respect to charities in Chancery, in which suits the Hon. Member had been in the habit of taking fees for doing nothing, though it had been recommended by the law commissioners as one remedy for the abuses of Courts of Justice, that Learned Counsel should confine themselves to the Court, and not go into other Courts to scramble for fees for doing nothing. That was what the Learned Gentleman (the Attorney-General) had done, for he had taken fees in those suits in Chancery where he could do nothing, as his practice did not lie in that Court. But the lion. Member alluded to a circular letter which had been sent round to the trustees of charities. He (Mr. Harvey) gloried in being the author of that letter. He would venture to say that the Attorney- General would never be the author of suchaletter. —(Laughter and cheers from the Ministerial benches.) He was glad to hear that cheer before he assigned his reason for the assertion he was about to make, for it proved that it was given with out any reascn for it. He would say that the Attorney- General would never write a letter in such a spirit —it was not a letter written to bring fees to him (Mr. H.) for doing nothing. He had never made to the amount of 6s. Sd. in that way by it. His intention in writing it was to call the attention of the trustees of the different charitable corporations in the country to the plunder and waste which was made of those funds which were destined for the poor. The country had paid from 200,0001. to 300,0001. for commissions of inquiry on this subject, arid now he, Mr. Harvey, could not file an information where he had discovered an abuse in the management of a charity, and wished to apply the remedy to it, without obtaining the leave of his Majesty's Attorney-General. He could refer to many cases to show what he had done to remedy such abuses. He should instance one which a worthy Alderman opposite (Alderman Thompson) must be aware of—he meant the case of the Ironmongers' Company. The funds of this corporation amounted to upwards of 400,0001., and 100,0001. bad been left to them originally to be applied to the rescue of English slaves captured on the coast of Barbary. Happily for this country such a condition was not now required to be fulfilled ; and the question was, whether this money should not be applied to some charitable purpose, instead of being left to accumulate in the hands of this most famous toast-drinking and turtle-eating com pany in the city of London. It was for that purpose that the inquiry had been instituted with regard to the charitable funds vested in that company. It was fora similar purpose he (Mr. Harvey) had written the letter which had been mentioned; and he should continue to write letters in that spirit, however they might be characterized by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, who would no doubt con tinue to receive his large fees in the Court of Chan cery, where he never practised, and consequently where he did nothing for the money which he re- ceived. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, if the Hon. Member were prepared to bring forward any motion on this subject, he should be prepared to discuss it with him on the proper occasion. The Hon. Member said that he had written the letter in question, and that he (lid so through the purest motives. Of course every gentleman in that House would give him credit for such motives when he claimed it. It might so happen, however, that the letter would be the means of securing to him some profits. At all events, lest it should be misunder stood, he would repeat that no such letter had been authorized by the Commissioners of Charities or by the Attorney-General. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL hoped that the House would allow him to say a few words in refe rence to the case of the Ironmongers' Company, to which allusion had been made by the Hon. Member for Colchester. He begged leave to say that as to the result of that case, the Hon. 'Member appeared to be entirely mistaken. No pretence existed to justify any one in stating to the Commissioners that there was any intention on the pact of the Iron mongers' Company to mismanage or misapply this money—(Hear)—on the contrary, it was shewn that all their regulations with regard to it were framed to meet the intentions of the original founder. The only difficulty was with regard to the applica tion of the money, so as to comply with the condi tions specified by the founder. He must say, that it appeared upon investigation, that the money had been managed by the Ironmongers' Company in the best possible manner. With regard to the controlling power possessed by the Attorney-General, as to the filing of informations in cases of charity,he would observe that when the Legislature thought proper to confide that power to the Attorney-General,without the authority of a rdator in Chancery, it was done so in order to guard those individuals who might be connected with charities from any improper bills being filed against them. The Hon. Member for Colchester expressed a wish that this state of the law should be altered, and he (the Solicitor-General) had no doubt that there were many others who shared in that opinion. But if bills could be filed in any case without such a controul, the number of such bills would be vastly increased, and the public would have to lament the result. He did not wish to im pute any personal motives to the Hon. Member for Colchester; it might be quite true that he had written this letter from the purest motives, but one object of the letter which had been sent out would appear to be to get cases.-,-(Hear, hear.) —He did not say that there was any thing wrong in his doing, so, but he did not see what right that Hon. Mem ber had to get up in that House and assume to him self the credit of nothing but pure charity and be nevolence in writing the letter. The fact was, that the Hon. Member who had written that letter had filed more informations against the trustees of chari ties than any solicitor in London.—(Hear, hear.) — He (the Solicitor-General) must object to that Hon. Member's bringing his private business in this way before the House. What was his complaint against the Attorney-General ? That in the execution of his duty he had taken an information off the file, by which he had suffered great loss. The Attorney- General, seeing that the information was an im proper one,would not allow it to be proceeded with, and it was natural that the Hon. Member for Col chester should feel sore upon that point. It was to guard the trustees of charities against the filing of vexatious bills and informations against them that this controuling power had been confided to the Attorney-General. If such a protection did not • exist, it would not be po,sible to get gentlemen throughout the country to undertake the office of trustees to charitable institutions. He contended that the chief inducement to any man of professional! eminence, in taking office; was not the pecuniary remuneration, but the rank and station which he derived from it. Pecuniary remuneration there cer tainly was for the office which he had himself the honour of holding; but he assured the Committee that he should receive two.fold the pecuniary remu neration which he now received as Solicitor-Gene ral if he were to give up to his pris'ate clients the same amount of time which it - was now his duty to devote to his public functions.—(Cheers.) Mr. Alderman THOMPSON defended the eon , duct of the Ironmongers' Company, and contended that they bad not been guilty of any misapplication of their funds. _ Mr. lIUME said that if any person was justly liable to the accus• tion of irregularity upon this oc casion, it was his Majesty's Attorney-General, who had introduced a letter into the discussion which had not the slightest connexion with it.—(Hear.)--- The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had been asked, why he condescended to take fees for suits insti tuted in his name in the Court of Chancery, when he never went into that Court, or took any pait in conducting them. It was a plain question, and ad mitted, as he (Mr. Hume) thought, of as plain an answer. But the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, instead of giving the Committee a plain answer to a plain question, did not vouchsafe to give it an an swer at all, but endeavoured to divert its attention to a very different subject, by going into a letter of which he hinted more than stated the substance. The Hon. Member for Colchester deserved well of his country for the exertions which he had made in behalf of the defrauded poor of this country ; and the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite would therefore have acted more prudently by assigning to him the credit which he deserved, than he had done by loading him with misrepresentations, which had much better have been spared, and by talking of a letter which he had never seen. All that rright serve very well to take the attention of the Com mittee for a time from the subject regularly before it—(l-fear, hear) —but he trusted that the Com mittee would not be deceived by so stale a ma- nceuvre.—(Hear.)—For his own part, he must say that he entirely concurred with the Hon. and Learned Member for Plympton, in considering the late proceedings against the press not so much as pro secutions as persecutions.—(Loud cheering.)—He was at a loss to conceive how the Hon. and Learned Gentlema►► had been able to justify, even to himself, the institution of them. His ima gination must have been strangely perverted, his views of public events and of public principles must have been marvellously altered by the change of situation from which he took them—(Loud cr►es of Hear, and laughter)—for he (Mr. Hume) recollected well that when the Hon. and Learned Gentleman sat upon the opposition side of the House, he was ac customed to admire the Hon. and Learned Gentle man as a friend of freedom and an enemy of op- pression. Every speech which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had made from that side of the House tended to produce that impression upon his mind : but his actions, now that he had changed sides in the House, were all contrary to the character which had gained him his present situation—he meant the character of a generous and liberal Whig, who had deserved and obtained a leading influence with his party.—(Hear, hear.) —He appealed to the Whir, if a Whig were yet to be found in that House, and he asked such of them as had formerly been the associates of the Hon. and Learned Gen tleman, whether they were prepared either collec tively or individually to approve—he would not say to applaud—his conduct in the late political prose cutions.—(Hear, hear.) —He had never met with any Whig who had not condemned those proseca dons, and who had not lamented, in the most poig nant terms, that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had become, at the close of a long life of honour and eminence, the persecutor of those liberal opi nions which he had for so many years so warmly supported.—(Hear.)---He would avail himself of the present opportunity to ask whether the Lord Chancellor had paid the expences of the prosecution which he had instituted against certain persons in his individual capacity, or whether those expences were included in the sum charged in the estimates for expences incurred in carrying on public prose cutions ?—(Hear.)—That was a point on which he thought it most essential that the Committee should forthwith receive some distinct information. —(Hear, hear.) —He repeated his declaration that the prosecutions recently instituted against the press were persecutions, and said that the best proof of that assertion was to be found in the fact, that they had not ceased until the ruin of the in dividual against whom they were directed was com pletely effected.—(Hear.) —He had heard that such an intention had been avowed on the part of the Government. Now, if such an avowal had been made, how satisfactory it must be to the Govern inent,—how gratifying it must be to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman and his liberal associates,—a satisfaction and gratification, however, which he did not envy them,—to find, that by bringing all their combined influence against an obscure individual, they had at last succeeded in effecting his ruin, by the numerous prosecutions with which they had over whelmed him.—(Hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, who spoke in a lower tone than is even usual with him, was un derstood to say that he should confine himself to a simple answer to the question which had been put to him by the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, inas much as. he was convinced that all who were ac quainted with his private character would do him the justice to believe that he was not likely to feel gratification at the ruin of any man. The expences incurred in the prosecution instituted on behalf of the Lord Chancellor, after it had been taken up as a public prosecution, were, he had no doubt, in cluded in this item. He could not positively say of his own knowledge that they were, becau , e he had not the drawing up of this estimate. To the re mainder of the observations made by the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, he would only reply that he (lid not know till that evening that in prosecuting the individual alluded to, he had been prosecuting an individual who advocated liberal principles. Neither did he know that that individual was a Whig. If he was, he had taken a most effectual mode of concealing it, by pouring the most unquali fied abuse upon that party at all times and upon all occasions. Mr. DAWSON rose for the purpose of stating that the expences of the ex-officio information filed on behalf of the Lord Chancellor were included in this estimate. Mr. D. W. HARVEY denied that he had made any such attack upon the Ironmongers' Company as justified the remarks which had been made upon his conduct by the Hon. Member for London. He believed that the members of that company thought that they had (lone as well as the members of other companies of " the great corporation ;" and he did not mean to say that they had done worse. All that he had complained of was, that they had had a large sum of mcney unemployed for years, or if em ployed, employed on no visible object save that of eating and drinking. It appeared to him that the Learned Solicitor-General had upon this occasion run wild very unnecessarily.—(A laugh.)—The Learned Gentleman had accused him of adopting his present course for the purpose of gaining popu larity; and if he (Mr. D. W. Harvey) might judge from the exhibition which he had just seen, was rather envious of the honour which he fancied him (Mr. D. W. Harvey) to have acquired in his cha racter of a reformer of abuses. He (Mr. Harvey) certainly did wish for a share of popularity, and he believed that the Solicitor-General, much as he dis guised the fact, was equally anxious to obtain it; else how was it that he had read an inflated account of certain journies made from Lincoln's-inn to the Fleet prison, and of certain accounts, then and there taken, of the sufferings endured by a certain class of prisoners 2—(Dear.)—He repeated what he had said before, that so far was the attempt to remedy the abuses of charitable institutions from deserving attack in that House, that he believed that who ever made it was undertaking a work of great uti- lity. The twenty-two volumes of hepo - rts on Cha ritable Institutions, which had cost the country up wards of 300,0001., showed the perversion of funds amounting to 1,000,000/. per annum, although the commissioners had not yet extended their investigations over half the country. It was well known that the sums set aside annually by our public charities for the relief and education of the poor amounted to more than 2,000,0001.; and yet almost half of them presented cases of perversion, which required immediate cor rection. In spite of all that had been said to the contrary, he would still contend that the man de served great praise who redeemed a single charity from misapplication. He never said any thing against the lawyers, but he expected to have a hard run made against him by the whole body of them in the House ; but though he might get crushed between the heavy waggons of the learned Attorney and Solicitor-General—(A laugh)—the anticipation of that fate would never deter him from getting up to attack those Learned Gentlemen, when he consi dered their conduct to deserve attack, or to vindi cate himself when he thought their aspersions ren dered his vindication necessary.—(Cheers.) Sir E. KNATCHBULL rose for the purpose of re peating the question which had been already put by the Hon. Alember for Montrose. He thought that he had heard that question answered in the affirmative. If it had been so answered, he, for one, must have a further explanation.—(Hear.) Mr. DAWSON repeated, that the expences incurred by Lord Lyndhurst in prosecuting an individual for a libel against him as Lord Chancellor, had been defrayed under the charges of law expences for the last year.—(Hear ) Sir E. KNATCHBULL wanted to know the grounds on which such a resolution had been adopted. A great constitutional principle was here at stake.—(Loud cries of " Hear")—and he should like to bear some satisfactory reason, if such a reason could be given, for so unprece dented a proceeding. Sir C. WETHERELL said, that unless some of his M..jesty's Ministers explained to the Committee, before this estimate was put to the vote, why Lord Lyndhurst's application for a criminal information was abandoned, and an ex-officio information filed in its stead, he should move that so much of this estimate as contained the expences of prosecuting that ex-officio information to judgment should he disallowed. The Committee would recollect, that he had expressed his opinion that the Lord Chancellor had done right in applying to the Court of King's Bench for s criminal information on his private suit. He had also sated, that if originally an ex officio information had been filed for the libel against him in his public capacity, that course would not have been objectionable. But he had also contended then, as he contended now, that the change of the former of these proceedings fir the latter was at once oppressive, illegal, and unconstitutional. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then rose to address the Committee under feelings of strong excitement. He was not always audible in the gallery, but spoke, as far as we could hear him, to the following effect :—He hoped that the Committee would feel that he was now most un expectedly called to address it at some length upon a sub ject that was pointedly personal to himself. He had had no previous notice given to him that a question as to the propriety of his official conduct would be that evening raised in Parliament. Not one of the Hon. Gentlemen who had that evening thought fit to pass such sweeping censures on his conduct, had had the courtesy to intimate to him that they intended to bring under the notice of the Committee of Supply, that part of his public conduct which had already undergone discussion once, and which was to undergo a discussion a second time, whenever the Hon. and Learned Member for Plympton should think fit to bring it on by moving for leave to introduce a Bill to Prevent the recurrence of such conduct in future. He had promised the House, that whenever his Hon. and Learned Friend should be ready to renew his attack, be would be ready to mist it—(Hear)—and to vindicate himself, as he hoped he had already vindicated himself, 'o the satisfaction of every just and honourable mind (Hear, hear)—for be felt that upon this subject, at least, he had a conscience void of all offence.—(A laugh.)—lf he were now addressing himself to the judges of his con duct, he trusted that they would act with the impartiality of judges, and listen to his defence before they proceeded to condemn him. He complained that it was a strange and cruel proceeding for hitn to have to rise in his own de fence in a Committee of Supply, without any previous notice that charges were to be made against him.— (Loud cries of " No," in which the voice of Sir E Knatchbull was particularly audible.)—What was it that the Hon. Baronet meant by that cheer? Did the Hon. Brronet mean to say that he had had the courtesy or the candour to give him a previous notice of his attack ? If a question were to be raised upon his conduct in the Com mittee of Supply, surely, in common candour, he ought to have bad some notice of it.—(Great confusion in the Ilouse, mingled with cries of " Order.")—He did not know from what part of the House, or with what inten tion, this clamour was raised ; but he did hope that Hon. Gentlemen did not come into that House with an inten tion to stop their ears against the claims of justice. He took it for granted that the expenses incurred in prosecut ing the ex-officio information filed for the libel against Lord Lyndhurst, were included, as soon as that prosecu tion was made a public prosecution, in this estimate; and he took it for granted, because it was quite clear that they ought to he so included. It was now proposed by his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Plympton, that they should be disallowed, on the ground that the filing of that ex-officio information was iilegal and unconstitutional. Now it was necessary to remark that that information was conducted by the public prosecutor. Was it usual, he would ask, in Committees of Supply, when Members were called upon to vote the expenses of the Government, to ob ject to them without previous notice, on the ground that the purposes for which those expenses were wanted were unconstitutional? He requested that he might be pro perly understood. Such prosecutions as those now under discussion might be unconstitutional ; but was it usual to object to them as such in Committees of Supply? He well recollected the time which his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Plympton had occupied in making his accusations against him, and also in replying to his defence.—(Hear, and a laugh.)—He well recollected that at half-past twelve o'clock at night, and not till that late hour, be was called upon to reply to his Hon. and Learned Friend's prolix charges. He might deceive himself as to the effects produced by the defence which he had then made; but he thought that he had satisfied not only the House, but also his former and his present associates, if the Hon. Member for Aberdeen must draw such a differ ence, that he had not acted in these prosecutions either oppressively, illegally, or unconstitutionally. Since that time he had been waiting for the further explanations which his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Plympton, and another Hon. Member, his ally, had threatened to make upon this subject. His Hon. and Learned Friend, the blember for Plympton, said that he had not foregone his avowed intentions upon it,— that he had prepared a Bill, involving the principles which he had propounded in his speech, and that be now had that Bill in his pocket. If so, why did not his Honourable and Learned Fri nd bring it forward at once ? After dilating upon this point for some time, the Attorney-General proceeded to observe, that he had not heard one gentleman, either in that House or out of that House, declare that the libel on the Lord Chan cellor ought not to have been prosecuted. He knew that there were many gentlemen both in and out of Parlia ment, who disapproved of all prosecutions for libel. As suming, for the sake of argument, that the opinion was right that there ought to be no public or criminal prose cutions for libel, he would ask Hon. Gentlemen to con sider whether, as long as such criminal prosecutions were the law of the land, they ought to let that abstract opinion to influence their judgment in deciding upon this, or upon any other particular case? lie next came to another class of reasoner', who thought that no ex-officio informations ought to be filed. He would not enter into the discussion of that question at present—they might be right, or they might be wrong; but so long as the power of filing ex - officio informations wa s a ll owe d b y th e prac ti ce o f th e Constitution, ought they to quarrel with the exercise of it in any particular case ? He now came to the consider ation of what that particular case was. He requested the particular attention of the Committee to what he was go ing to say, premising, at the same time, that as he had been unexpectedly, without any previous notice, called upon to make a defence a second time— Mr. BARING rose to order, but was so inaudible, that the Members themselves called upon him to "speak out." We understood him to be protesting against the irregu larity of this discussion. The committee had already lost more than two hours in the discussion of a subject which had nothing whatever to do with the estimate then before it. In former times it was not usual to talk so much : the consequence was, that they did more, and proceeded with out circumlocution to the business of the state. The single question before the committee was this,—were the ex penses of prosecuting the ex -officio information filed by Lord Lyndhurst against the Morning Journal included in this estimate? A reply had been given in the affirmative, and that had led— Mr. BROUGHAM also rose to older. He was sure that hie Hon. Friend the Member for Callington, could ••• not have heard or if he had heard, could not have attended :o the whole of this discussion. He agreed that upon this occasion the committee had wandered widely from the real question before it, and he was sorry to observe that that was a practice which was daily becoming more pre valent, both in that and the other House of Parliament. If, however, his Hon. Friend had determined to call the House back to the question, he thought that be ought to have carried his determination into effect before his Hon. and Learned Friend the Attorney-General had been put upon his defence.—(Hear, hear, with cries of " No, no." )—He contended that his Honourable and Learned Friend the Member for Plympton, hail put his Hon. and Learned Friend the Attorney-Ge neral upon his defence by his mode of proceeding, that night.—(Hear, bear.)—The question which his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Plympton had raised was this,—" I will not vote the expenses of filing the ex officio information on behalf of the Lord Chancellor," — for the private prosecution instituted by the Lord Chan•- cellor he (Mr. Brougham) took it for granted would be paid out of the Lord Chancellor's private funds—" I will not vote the expenses of the ex-officio information, until I hear the Attorney-General explain why be changed the one proceeding for the other." That might be an incon venient mode of proceeding for the Committee,—it might be an nadir mode of treating his Hon. and Learned Friend the Attorney-General ; but as it had been adopted, he did think that his Hon. and Learned Friend ought not to he interrupted now that he had been put upon and bad commenced his defence.—(Hear, bear.) Mr. BARING—If there be any question of constitu tional 11w at issue between the two Learned Gentlemen, it is hard upon the Committee, which has met for busi ness, to have its time wasted in settling it now.—( Hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL proceeded to state that no one felt more strongly than he did the inconvenience which had arisen from the irregularity of this discussion. He understood that this vote was objected to on the ground that the expences to be covered by it had not been regu larly incurred. He was going to discuss that point at the very moment when his Hon. Friend interrupted him by calling him to order. lie was going to state why the pri vate information filed by the Lord Chancellor had been adandoned, and why the ex-officio information had been instituted in its stead. The Lord Chancellor was a high officer of State, an attack was made upon him for his con duct in his office ; a charge was preferred against him that for a sum of 30,0001. he had appointed the present Soli citor-General to his office. On consideration of the mat , ter, he thought that this charge was preferred against the Lord Chancellor in his public capacity ; and thinking so, he felt it to be his duty to file an ex-officio information against the person who preferred it. That many of his predecessors had exercised the same power was a matter too clear to he denied. He agreed that this was not the best time to make the explanations he had stated to the Committee. But he appealed to their candour and intel ligence.—(Hear.)—The Committee had been invited not to pass this vote without an explanation from him ; and be had explained that the transaction was a fit subject for a public prosecution, and lie therefore did not think it to be his duty to leave it in the hands of a private prosecutor. Having stated this, he left it to the consideration of the Committee to deal with the vote as they thought proper. Sir E. KNATCHBULL said, as to the propriety of the prosecutions in question, though he (Sir E. Knatchoull) had an opinion of his own, he expressed none. All he wished to know was, whether those prosecutions were con ducted at the public expense. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had referred merely to that on behalf of the Lord Chancellor; but there were several, and he should be glad to know if those other ex-officio informations \vac at the public expense. On the general question as to whether the expenses of prosecuting libels on high public officers should be defrayed by the public, he alight have something to say ; it was a question of much importance —(Hear).---because, if they were to be so defrayed, he did not know how far that circumstance might not operate as an inducement to an Attorney-General to file such informa tions.—( Hear, hear.)—That was a constitutional ques tion, which admitted of discussion. But he confes.ed that he was not satisfied with the explanation of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in answer to the question proposed by the Hon. Baronet, stated that the ex penses of all the prosecutions were included in the public estimates. He begged it to be understood that no informa tion was filed by the Lord Chancellor ; his (the Attorney- General's) judgment being that he ought not to proceed in it. Mr. WIGRAM could not vote for the estimate; the Lord Chancellor, in his opinion, was in the same situation, when attacked in his private capacity, as another indivi duol, and should defend himself in the same manner. Mr. O'CONNELL hoped that the Hon. 'and Learned Gentleman (Sir C. Wetherell) would bring this question to a decision by moving his amendment to strike out of the estimates the expences of the Lord Chancellor's pro secution. It was a most unnecessary waste of the public money, not because a foul libel had not been published, but because that libel had been put in a way of being pro secuted. The Lord Chancellor had been foully libelled, and he proceeded to prosecute the libeller. He obtained the answer of Mr. Alexandir upon oath, and after he had put the defend ant to the torture of this proceeding, what occurred ? Why, for the first time—for no case had been cited where an Attorney-General, after a defendant had put in his answer on oath, had commenced a second pro secution—for the first time, the Attorney-General, avail ing himself of the di , coveries contained in the answer, acquaint;ng himself with the man's defence, files an ex officio information at the public expence. He (Mr. O'Connell) opposed the vote—first, because the proceed ing was totally unnecessary; secondly, because it was un constitutional, and was a double prosecution for the same offence. Was a British subject ever—he would not say exposed to such persecution—but placed in such a predi cament before? It had been said by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that the person thus prosecuted had not advocated liberal opinions. What did he (Mr. O'Connell) care what his opinions were. He had as much right to his opinions, be they what they might, as the Hon. and Learned Gentleman.—(Hear.)—That man was now in gaol : no wonder, if lie was prosecuted at the pub lic expence. He (Mr. O'Connell) did not complain that he was prosecuted. Let him be prosecuted ; but let not the public pay for the prosecution. As to th • want of notice, was not the vote itself a notice? Sir 11. PEEL said that whatever might be the opinion of the House on the question now before it, he was cer tain that no other Member would he prepared to give his vote on the same grounds as the Hon. and Learned Member for Clare: Ile had said that the prosecution was vindic tive : if so, let the House mark its sentiments by repro bating the conduct of the Attorney- General ; but let it not degrade itself by such a paltry mode of reprobation, as that of reducing the votes on the estimates.— (Ilear.)— Was there ever such a miserable mode of dealing with a great constitutional question?—(Hear)—was there ever an instance of an attempt to subject a Lord Chancellor and an Attorney-General to censure by diminishing a vote of 1001.?—(Hear.)—And what if the Lord Chancellor had paid out of his own pocket the expences of the prose cution instituted by the Attorney-General ? Would not the Hon. and Learned Member for Clare be the fist to charge him with vindictiveness on that very ground, and cite that as the strongest instance of an unjust and vindic tive feeling?—(Hear.)—He (Sir R. Peel) had never yet seen a gentleman placed in such a situation as his Honourable and Learned Friend .beside him. When he had been expressly challenged to justify his conduct, he had been called to order by an Hon. Member, and told that he ought not to proceed in his explanation, in which he had been taken quite by surprise. He must say that his Hon. and Learned Friend had not been fairly dealt with. He was called upon, without any public notice, or private intimation, to vindicate his conduct in these prosecutions ; and lie would ask whether this was a convenient opportunity for discussing this subject ? A mo tion on this question had been made by the Hon. and Learned Member for Flynipton, who had protested against a private prosecution being changed to a public one. The House had decided against it.—(No, no.) Well, the House had given no vote upon the subject ; but the Hon. and Learned Member had given notice of a motion which would bring the whole subject before the House. Not content with this, the Hon. Member for Newark had also given notice of a distinct motion to a similar effect. Neither had persevered in their motions; and was it therefore probable that his Hon. and Learned Friend was prepared t., enter into the whole question now ? Although it was competent for any Hon. Member in a Committee of Supply to introduce any qui stion he pleased, yet as a matter of convenience, it was desirable to limit them as much as possible to pecuniary questions, unless distinct notice were given. A pecuniary consideration certainly arose out of the question of the lion. Baronet, whether the expenses of the Lord Chancellor's prosecution were de frayed out of the public purse. If they were, they were defrayed by the vote of last year. He hoped they were, for lie thought it far better that the charges of such prosecutions should come from the public funds rather than from those of individuals. He would say that although his (Sir R. Peel's) name had been intro duced into an information, he should not pay the expence of it. The Attorney-General had instituted that prose cution not out of regard for his (Sir R. Peel's) private feelings, but because he had, as Secretary of St ae, been unjustly libelled. He had done so without communicat ing his intention to him ; and could there be any thing mor,l absurd and unjust than for him (Sir R. Peel) t) required to pay the cxpences of a pro , ecution in respect to which ho was not even consulted? It was the duty.of !he Attorney-General to protect public servants from at— tempts to run them down whilst in the performance of their p ublic duties; end he hoped that the Lord Chancel— lor soul I refuse to pay the expences of such a prosecu— tion. He should propose that, before the report be con— sidered, and before agrant be made to defray these ex pences, in order that the House should not adopt a pro ceeding implying the slightest censure on the Attorney- General, or on the Lord Chancellor, or on any individual connected with those prosecutions, an inquiry should be made, and the facts fully stated to the House, as to whether it is usual for the public to p•iy the expenses of such prosecutions. If it be the practice, and that prac tice be wrong, it was certainly competent f.ir the House to a'ter it. The course he proposed, therefore, was that the vote should pass, and that, prior to the report, the facts should he fully stated to the House. Sir E. KNATCHBULL was satisfied with the propo sition of the Right Hon. Gentleman. It would then be for the House to decide on the sufficiency of the explanation. Mr. SADLER stated, that the reason why be bad not brought forward his motio❑ might be seen in the state of the vote paper. The Hon. Member was proceeding to refer to the subject of ship-money in the reign of Charles 1., when he was interrupted by violent coughing. He observed, that if lion. Members were so impatient he would take the liberty of exercising their patience. Sir C. WETHERELL would withdraw his intended amendmen►, as the proposal of the Right Hon. Secretary he thought was a far one. The information be wanted was, whether any instance could be cited in which a pri vate information had been commenced and abandoned, in order to give an opportunity for the institution of a public one. The Hon. and Learned Gent'eman, and the Rig" Hon. Secretary. seemed rather to be retiring from this question. He (Sir C. Wetherell) maintained that no such instance had ever occurred in Westminster-Hall, and if no such case was brought to light, he should persist (as we understood) in proposing a reduction of the vote. S;r R. PEEL explain-d. After a few words from Mr. BRIGHT and Mr. Huma, the resolution was agreed to. The n-xt resolution, which was for a grant of 107,986/. to defray the expenses to be incurred on account of con vitts at borne and in Bermuda, for the year 1830, was agreed to without any discussion, as was also a vote of 35,000/. for captured negroes. On the resolution for a grant of 18,7001. to defray the expences of the Commission for Preventing the Illegal Traffic in Slaves, Mr. HUME wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite whether he could not make arrangements to do away with the expense in part, if not altogether. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Commission grew out of treaties made with foreign powers with a view to abolish the slave trade, a circum stance which constituted the difficulty of receding..--- Agreed to. On the resolution for a grant of a sum of 28,000/. for omissions to the New States of America in 1830, being proposed, Sir J GRAHAM observed, that this vote and the next to it were liable to great objections. He hoped, as it was his wish to take the sense of the House on the subject, that the Chairman might be permitted to report progress and ask leave to sit again, reserving the discussion upon these items or an earlier hour and a fitter opportunity. Sir R. PEEL had no wish to press these particular re solutions at present, as they were objected to, but trusted that Hon. Members would allow the subsequent votes to be proceeded with. Mr. HUME said, that almost every vote that followed would be objected to. The Resolution was postponed. On the vote of 16,6001, for the Common Law and Real Property Commissioners for 1830, Mr. HUME objected to going into the Resolution at that hour, on the ground that the vote was likely to entail upon the country a perpetuity of expense. Mr. BROUGHAM denied that such was the fact, and stated that the Commissioners bad not been appointed quite two years, and were within a year and a ball of the final close of their labours. Mr. HARVEY said, that although the Commissioner s had made several Reports, no practical good had as yet result,d from their valuable labours; however, this was not the fault of the Commissioners, but of the Government. Sir R. PEEL having agreed to postpone the remaining votes, the House resumed, aid the fu►ther consideration of the Resolutions was fixed for Monday. Mr. GORDON understood that the Forgery Bill was fixed for Monday, and expressed a doubt whether (such being the case) it would be possible to go into Committee of Supply on that day. Sir R. PEEL said, that it was intended t i go into Committee of Supply at five o'clock, continue it ill nine, and then take the Forgery Bill. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the Exctiz- QUER, it was resolved that the House at its rising ( i v ad journ till Monday. SALE OF BEER BILL. _ . On the question that the House do resolve itself into Committee on the S ile of Beer Bill, Mr. BRIGHT objected to proceeding further with the present measu e till the nature of that for effecting an alteration in the system of Excise which was connected with it should be before the House. He called upon Mi nisters to say precisely what that measure was, and to what extent it tv,,uldtake off the burden of the Excise. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER objected to entering into a discussion of one measure at a time when another measure was before the House. When the p esent Bill should have been disposed of, he would go into the other, and afford his Hon. Friend an opportunity of discussing it. Sir M. W. RIDLEY asked whether the publie-houses, now in existence, and licensed according to the present system, were to be put under the direction of the Excise in the same manner as was provided with respect to the new houses to he opened under the authority of this Act? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, the law would be, that those who sold beer only as provided by the Bill, should be licensed by the Excise ; and that those who combined with the beer trade a trade in wine and spirits, should continue to be licensed as at present. Mr. BROUGHAM said, it appeared to him that those who had the spirit licences would theieby possess such A preference as would give them a very fair chance, h e m i g ht abrost say a certainty, of keeping their ground. After a few words from Lord MILTON, the CnAscst , LOB of the EXCHEQUER, and Mr. Baron; the House went into Committee. As the clauses were put Ly the Chairman, several were objected to, and some amendments were made; hut, as tar as we could gather the purport of the observations of the Hon. Members who took part in the discussion, the amendments were only verbal. On the clause being read, restricting the brewers Of porter and ale from using any other material in the process of brewing than malt, hops, and water, Mr. BRIGHT proposed, as an amendment, that duals should not be thus restricted. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed , that the great object of the Bill was to supply the public with a wholesome and nutritious malt beverage ; and it was evident that that object would be defeated, 'if indivi duals were allowed to concoct liquor from quassia, coculus indicus, and other deleterious drugs. The amendment was negatived without a division. Sir T. FREMANTLE proposed a clause to enact that, any person applying under the Act for a licence , sho uld' give a notice to be put up for three successive Sundays on the church-door, containing his name and address ; and that it should be lawful for any thi ee rated parishioners to apply to a magistrate, and give security to enter an ap peal against the granting of the licence ; and that the ma gistrates should not be authorised to grant the licence, if the applicant had been convicted of a felony, or was a man of notoriously bad character, or if the place where the public-house was to be kept was 100 yards front any public road. After a short discussion the Committee divided— For the clause Against it 72 Majority —3o. Some other clauses were then added, and the House having resumed, the report was brought up and a greed tr, and ordered to be taken into further consideration co Thursday, and the Bill, as amended, to be printed. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and at Half-past Three o'clock the House adjourned till Monday The Court Journal of this day contains, we understand, an entirely new and important feature, in the form of an Original Sporting Communication, and tvr'' most piquant Fashionable Ai ticles, growing out of The Manners of the Day" (from a high quarter.) One i 3 en' titled, " Secrets of the Boudoir," and the other is a Ile' troipective Glance at the Fashionable Parties of the pre' sent Season. There is also an admirable Patrician PortraJt of a Great Ex-Dignitary, probably Lord E.--rt ; Second Number of " Portraits of the French Peerage" 1 a great variety of Court Gossip—some important Origio a t Foreign Correspondence—and a variety of other piquao and interesting matters, more or less connected with the peculiar object of this Journal that of reflecting t he manners of Highs Life as they actually exist in the proem.. day. Gana stoc Per Cent Per Cent „ r Ce 4 .0 tpoeßed. tP lr Cent Di ur tts 195 tto 5o y Di tt6 SO y n t! lia Btoc Bon ••••• Melts Austrian :Brazilian _Buenos A Chilian B Celornbia Ditto, ISt -Danish Greek Bo 13 itbo, Guatimal Mexican Litt(, PRI trazilian trarilian tLitto c Mr itican United iv. 'Bank Sio Consols, Gov. Stni Ditto, N 4 per Cer Gov. Del Royal Cs Grand C City Del Ballast ( Arrived O A O B O C 1 D O F O F 0 G ..--__. Morning 1 1 allay ing; h prival more authc JEST has NI ands th e n regpit but li Mon vidu by ti and this of truer got man quei co►u ust Di Fr;