The Sun. — London, England, 1814-04-23 00:00:00

Itight lion. Cent. in citing Mr. Onslow'sspeecb• it was known that Mr. Onslow had inteoded to. tnake a certain speech, Which, however, be did not blake . although I prepared it. . Now., al , he had _. , .. . .. tha.. e -ecru this speeCh was, cited as a constitutional t, authority, it was not unlikely that Mr. Onslots %tight have been prevented from-delivering it, be cuse ehe, on anature . crnistrie ra ti on ,.mi g ht 'have ! tim eght it not quite r coustitutional. He might lave. thought, that to deliver - it — might have been - Iheousistent with his duty, seemed to .- This p rece d en t then, on WhiCh the Right• Hon. Gentlem an . 'ave laid so much stress, he should dismiss as ie . telcvant. As to the other precedent from the other ''ale of the water, he should offer a few observe.- thtiohs• Wi t h all due deference, he did not find at the speech of M. Foster was at all similar to thit spoketi ' by the Right Hon. Gentlemao at t t he end ol th e last Session. The Right Hon. Gen ,l"'"" aPpearing as the representative, and sup- Fig the diguity -of the third estate, stated w. the the House had not done, and ,assigned t h le reasons why it - had not • agreed to certain • i, l a e r a i sur es• He would maintain, that the Speaker If ' l ° tight to report the proceedings of the use i ll a Committee ; and . the proceedings the thats Particu lar'Continittee had been such, that trt, ite i r , h ad net infdrmation of diem. The clause. • 1 :„1 "ill which the Right 11(inourable Gentle stated.l:ll I,!'ul to contain concessions incompatt e e Pth the maintainanee of the Protestant as ite•Ru4ucY, waslost by a majority of %lit n n. (-2 _ . four, and the Geis had been instrumental in ixts logs and when he took the Chair, no report ittaS. Made to him from that Committee. 1 , R ight Henn to Gentleman had referred them to the n e :P r e eeh of the Speaker Lenthall, during the mh o A l' Charles I. He would particularly refer t ‘ l i e s Pecch of the Speaker of the same : 1 " be came into the House .toMonarch,the demand la IL there of five of its Members. Mr. Leut a rs fo e h l ' B aid, that he had neither eyes to see, a 4 ea ri but as the House should direct. H i e lo w r o e t a ild c ,e...itltat the Ri g h t Hon. Gentleman had eves to . ears to hear, as a Mem er of the House, I n an d t hat his tongue had given utterance to seati airjs which were not those of the House. . 0 01 1 1,, ue great events which had been descanted . 14 , t o li n e , fight Hon. Gentleman, he had nothing *lie — Paill, and could only praise the eloquen ce e c ow , Ixinich they were treated, and also th In" in g d eSeription which had been given of so,ne to -11-4.sUres, which was infinitely !uPeaur even th . 1 ,,' in which they had been characterized b y c :poser of them. As the Right Hon. Gentleman pre terniPaned of not having had a direct chari , u ti r .` 4 ! against 'him, he had embodied . a ch arge tld n ow ic ' e ntiY set iota in a liesoluticiu which-lie , o , d illc ive as an amendment to that of the a N w s -o o ei b i le . low s ..--''rhe Resolution was in substance f 1 " Th at a the lote o , „L aPpear s t o the Hous e that : ‘ lr. Speaker, . tr,lTtliese_.n,Xetoliirsdts,Sessionspof e P h or to lia t m ii :ut, at the Bar of at t he Royal Highness the :n, 4. c.:Z„g,'nt r a teid cep a rt . :c e rtain - proceedings of t he 14 7t s t e le' - .::,, 444 3 4 -- ;Zof th e ° in whole House, on a subje4 i 1 . ? . . 4 " dol, - " t e b itc'rttan Catholics, ,which did not terminate tl , : ii ii le 's 0 f t . _ l / . this H .ves OUsC Royal ; o l , nd be tt p ia r t es h u e me in d f t o o rm ha e v d e l a n e s tuaed 4 4 "at i f itY°f Z n a ' ti ' o i r l i l'e. *-4:' ''' C" '"a r"ti • wb that Committee ; that by su doing t of the trust reposed in biro, a nd e o n f Giihr,j iiiii ° the privile g es of the House, of which he is c os NrEy Thj 3 Aill endine n t was seconded by Mr. Cana 1, kr n 4 , le m A tcxEs was ready to combat both the grun t utitms, which had been proposed by valid ar aPect'lt,s ', L b " he should first say a few words re asppeeeici,, a,tuttel last of them, because it was the mo re substantial of - She two. In it t he City h e ' . was charged with a gross violation of h i s qti, - "Y , t he speech which he delivered of the Bar Ie I,l' ot her House at the end of the last Session.. *leli vi s , eu nceptio n , it was proper that the speech.. ' tie ol ' r ett on such an occasion should be an expo': th, , 1 of the di ff erent matters which have engaged thisatteution of the House during its sitting. Ott a ell rint he conceived the authority of Mr. Hat atito ° be ro e best. Nothing could be more ab tie ,(.,,than suppose that the Speaker, on taking ‘vh,, h , air, was to become at once ignorant of t i ii 41. h e had been witness of, or had participate( ie,, ui ng in a Committee. Besides, the proceed , th;„: 3 f the Committe e were recorded, and r p t tha'tc records the Speaker had access. He thotiO n I„estPrCeedents not only justi fi ed . the speec h at i .. t e(t i 1 10 u but would sanction even greater 1 i ti Do l After the House negatived both Resolu tivesielloped it would come to some affirma ,...! _isioe o n the subject. otr. m,r ' le fa y W. WYNNE spoke at considerable length w hi ,uur of the motion of the Noble Lord— be feill''i observed, fully'vitidicated the privileges the,„ th e Attire ; but, at the same , time, vindicated a ),., .4_ the mildest manner possible. - co n . i • 11 " E could not but think the subject of tos".lerable importance ; nor could he refrain, alZeuil:stauding what - had fallen from so many ii,,, u a'acters, from offering his humble opt ' th.oagliPtott'i it. That the Noble Mover had also ( Was evict 'e topic to be,one of great magnitude, tit wl:icheillt frOni the early period of the . Session himself. l i s l e had given notice o f his motion. For w hat thae ha d hp hesitation in declaring, tha t forr nab is - Speaker had Said appeared strictly eon in all e tO the usages and customs of that House ' t hene, Peritu l 3 . If Mr. Hateell's entries and state tß"--.Cati be supposed to bepreeedents, as they r e l y °` be denied to be, the Houk may safely elli; i °II t h em. The Learned Speaker bad in ',NI to measures which had been defended that the House ; h e would not undertake to say fl ee , h e bad spoke n on measures which had been ~,,i i on, nor would be enter on a discussion i v ether it would not have been more safe to.al tt;'e to the latter than to the former. But would thatY body say that it is not notorious and certain, When the Speaker. goes up to the House of "rtis, the Sessio n is at an end ? Among the e r eced re st ents to whi c h he had alluded, we those u f H 1720 and 1721, when the ouse . occupied Wi th the S outh Sea Scheme. When was the Parlia • ine rt met in • 1721, the Speaker mad varety Zt observations at the Bar o f tile Upper House , , on Subject which occupied every mind ; he had no autleorit.. f or . y what he said, and it turned out that be Was eatrentely wrong in his surmises ; but his con ct'lLlct was not called in question. Would any Gen , e mail saY, that it is imprudent in a Speakee :s ° inform' hinaself of, what is going on in . the, oose ? Is not the minute-hook in his poseesSioe 9r this very purpose ? Certainly this is the Use he might be. expected to make of it. He (Mr. n.) - erratid see no analogy whatever between Mr. Pitt; ita 1 737; taking notice, of what was passing at the, very time he spoke, and the present - Speaker weedy adve.rt ing to what had gone by. On the whole, it ap peared to him, that in what had been done by the Right Hon. Gentleman in the Chair *la implied no deficiency of deference to the House, nor was it otherwise than strictly conformable to his du ties in Parlament. He trusted that it had been made clearly to appear, that - the usage was esta blished, and if so, nothing could be more uttne. cessary than a vote s of censure. Mr. F. - DOUGLAS argued against the original proposition as well as the amendment, and quoted Mr. Speaker Onslow, to shew thatllle Speaker had not exceeded the line of his duty. He Con tended for the ttuth and propriety of the para graph alluded to, and pronounced an- eulogy on the conduct of the Speaker. • The question, before the House was one in whiCh its dignity was con cerned ; but the doubt was with -him, 'whether they should so well consult their dignity by ad hering to forms and precedents, and thereby risk the loss of one whose character had given weight to the decrees of the Legislature.--(Hear, hear V. After some oth;r well-turned compliments to the Speaker and the 'House, the Hon. Member con cluded by declaring he would vote against thewo tion and amendment. Mr. W. WYNNE ,and -Mr. Rosa severally ex-. plained. • Sir JOHN 'NEWPORT- thought the subject should be viewed in a serious light, us a Waiter which, in. the fuo.re deliberations of that House, might lead to serious inroads in its customs. If this sort of conduct were to be sanctioned, there would be but one step more to strike at the independence of Parliament : even the grounds of and motives for the opinions give❑ in that House, and individuals marked out for the displeasure of the Crown. .It would be very easy to introduce the SoVereign into - that House to overawe the debates !—(Loud cries of Order ! order !).—Gentlemen might cry out• for order as much as they pleased, but in his opini9n it would be more orderly to preserve the rules and privileges of that House, and prevent all innovations, which, if once suffered to grow into custom, would soon abolish all freedom of debate. Mr. J. P. GRANT said, he should give his vote in favour of the Resolution proposed by the Noble Lord (Morpeth), conceiving that that in troduced by his Hon, Friend (Mi.. Whitbread) went furtherahan the occasion called for. He was sitt4fied, .that the Right Hon. Gentleman in the Chair bad not, in the conduct which he had pursued, been actuated by any improper mo tive, but had been betrayed by his zeal beyond what his duty to the House and the Country war „ranted ; and therefore it was, that he (Mr.- Grant) was desirous of coming -to some vote which would prevent that conduCt from being drawn into 'a precedent in future. . The Catholic Question- had not, on this occasion, been touched upon ; in fact, it had nothing to do with the sub ject under dismission. Jut he solemnly declared, however 'attached he might be to that great and important .topic, that if the communication to the Throne had been- 'directly the reverse of what it was, he should have-come to the same vote, from a conviction, that, unless the constitutional privi leges of the House were preserved, the freedom of discussion, to which 'they had hitherto attached so much importance, would be completely saeri-• ficed.--(Hear !) __ _ _ " The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he should have no hesitation in giving his negative to the-motion of the Noble Lord, because he con ceived it was one which Was by no means called for through what had taken place. The Right Hon. Gentleman then took a brief view of what bid been said by the Noble Mover, and observed, that no man was more disposed to enforce - the privileges of Parliament than himself. But he saw no breach of privilege committed in the sub- ject now brought before the House ; and as the precedents which had been quoted, they ap peared to go far in justification, particularly that of Speaker Onslow, which went into long di s sertations upon alliances and subsidies, and' these. sheaved to what a length of discussion that Gentleman thought himself entitled to go. Yet was Speaker Onslow .censured ? Never. The :light Hon. dentleman thought the speech of the Speaker in Ireland, in 1792, a very .fair precedent, and observed, that he had received the .thanks of the House for it. As to. Mr. Hatsers book; which had been treated lightly, he was disposed . to pay . very great deference to it. It was almost needless to say, 'that he thought it his.duty to vote against the motion and the amenduient. • Mr. Rut taK Err said, that if the House bad come to any resolution on the Catholic Question, even though that resolution might have been favour able to the Catholics, yet he should have Highly disapproved of the unconstitutional manner in which he (the Speaker) bad conveyed it to the . Throne. if he had. done an . act which might have tended to destroy parliamentary freedom ; and if any man in that House, through delicacy, esteem, friendship, or any other cause, held back from giving his vote against bu n, he (Captain Plunkett) would say, , that no word was - too strong„ no stigma too great, to' reprehend his pusillani mity. For his own part, he consider ed the speech in question to be one of the most unconstitutional attacks ever made on :that House. .All proceed ings in that House shonld have full freedom and latitude. There .is no question about which .so anxious a feeling prevails, as in'the guarding the preceedings of that House against all interference on the part of the Crown. Some communicatinu between .Parliament and the ,Crown was neces,_ sary, but the 'manner in which it ought to be made was so clearly defined and ascertain ed, that no doubt could possibly exist about it.— The ways were either by a speech from the Throne, or .by an address or resolutions from that House, and.these were always for purposes equally well•understood. • They were not for the purpose of asking advice of the Crown, because we ar4 the advisers of the Throne..• Beyond this there was no constitutional channel of communi cation between the Parliament and the Sovereign, save, however, the presentation of Bills which had passed that House, and were taken to the 'Throne for .its dissent or approbation. Except on this occasion, the Speaker had no right to Make any speech to the Thrtme ; and if no such Bill had passed, hii speech would ha•ie been a perfect intrusion. He was willing ttr do, theßight Hon. .t.;eutleman• all possible justice, on the ground of ills universally admitted talents and tin. questioned ; stioned -virtues but to say th a t h e had a right to justify the conduct now-complained of ; was what he would not cease to contest, if a mea sure had passed in Parliament, that, measure speaks its own language, and the House is an swerable for the fact ; but to comment upon what has not passed, and thus to throw some indirect censure upon those who have brought forward the measure that has tailed, is what, this House Will not submit to. As to precedents, the thing was totally unprecedented. Hatsel's book was, no dOubt, a very respectable work of explana tions ; but Gentlemen were to be told that they were to take their knowledge of the Consti tution-from this outline of the customs of Parlia ment. But even in this, there is nothing appli cable to the case in question. This Was' stranger than if it related to a rejected measure, because it had not' been rejected, hut was perfect, unfinish-' ed, and intended to he receiyed. The CoMmittee had agreed that it would he Advisable to adulit the Catholics to the enjoyment of certain advantages. Why, every thing of which the speakercould take -cognizance was done; No he thinks to pass over that which lie has a right to know, and only to touali upon what was against the Catholigs; so that what the Right Honourable Gentleman had chosen to report to the ITouSe, was absolute ly a misrepresentation of what had passed in the Committee. Other parts were never pro posed ; and they only afforded him a surmise of what might be passe'd. In the Commit tee, the qiiestion eras opposed on various grounds. Some opposed it because 'they thought it would be better to wait till peace ; others, because the Pope was in jeopardy, and the Catholic Church, had - no ostensible bead : ho.v, then, could the -Right Hon. Gentleman assign his own reasons as the reason; of the Cominittee As `Well might he, as the Member for Oxford, complain of himself, as the Speaker, for misrepresenting his own opi nion ; for in ,the Committee the Right Hondur able Gentleman had said, that any Catholic Offi cer in the army might be safely trusted : and not only had the Right Honourable Gentlemen mis represented his own opinions, but also those of the majority, of whom it was evident that not any ten coincided. On the whole, it appeared to him, that this part of the speech was totally un called for, -as nothing had happeded which re quired any allusion of the kind,: 'Tin Honour able Gentleman concluded with an eulogy on Lord Wellington and the Irish soldiery, in ,illustrfltion of * the latter having deserved the fullest extent of civil liberty. Mr. CANNING said, that, as one of the Members who had takin a conspicuous part in the discus sion of the Catholic Question, be felt a peculiar interest in what had come this night under dis cussion. He could not but admit that be had a friendship growing out of thae question, which some dine or other, he trusted, would meet with success. .He, therefore, felt himself called upon to assign his reasons why he differed from the ma jority of those wbo bad spoken this night. • lie shouht not join wtth any of those who had pro posed motions implying censure, because he did not think the conduct of the Right Hon. Gentle than deserving of being brought before any sort of tribunal. It had been said that his conduct was an act which originated from his sense of discretion ; ,and this very term implied an acquittal front all reprehension. If the motion were intended to supply a preventative, it fell far short of effecting that which was its object.— Ought they, if the discretion vested in the Speaker were objected to,, merely to prohibit from ebnunenting on what was not carried through the House, - and leave to him the right of animadvert ing upon, and of construing that which was enact ed ? 'The existence of the power to comment on and to construe the enactments of that House were not' denied ; when this was admitted :without meaning to defend such, power being . given to ,the S&aker,he.co4lit not see any good likely to re sult from curtailing it in one instance, and not the other. The Right Hon. Gentleman then took an. enlarged view of the course pursued respecting the measure which had been brought forward for the relief ,of the Catholics. A Resolution in the Session before last had been come to by the House, iii . which they pledged thethselves early in the.next ensuing Session,. to take into -con , sideration the • Catholic , Claims, with a view to relieving them from the disabilities 'of which they . Complained. This resolution was carried by the Commons to the foot of the Throne. The supposition that had been urged against the Speaker, that by communicating to the - Crown that Which was in the contemplation of the House,. the Sovereign might be enabled to interfere so as to prevent the accomplishment of their wishes, was done. away by this resolution. It could . not beinentioned that the Speaker had. been the first periion to inform the Crown of the intentions of Parliament. The. Speaker had certainly given a colour to their proceedings differing widely from that which he (Mr. Canning) would have given' 5 but should he for this object : to his giving, the v i e w which•he took olit ? .He might think lie saw an error of judgment—he might consider it an unfortunate exercise of the discretion vested in him, but he could see nothing to condemn as an abuse of the advantage he enjoyed—(Hear, !).--- , lt - had been said . the Speaker, as Speaker, could know nothing of .what passed in that House, when no enactment was made. If so, what was the situation in which they might have been placed ? At the end of one Session they bad coin.- municated to the CroWn an intention of taking into consideration 'a measure of great national importance in the ensuing Session,' and at the end of the next Session nothing Would have been said about it. Some Gentlemen. had made the Crown Oise of their drantOtis persona, and represented it as asking questions, and offering remarks. Sup posing, oa such an occasion as that of which be spoke, the Crown had inquired after the measure which had been announced. The Speaker was to know nothing about it. Be cause absent from the Chair, he was to be supposed absent from the Committee; and thus it. would appear to the Crown, that the great weasur.e which they intended .to take into their consideration hart been whollylmt sig it cf, 'rile every man who read a Newspaper knew great ardent disCussions had taken place oil the subj 'The true gnestiOn for the Muse to. consider %vat. / not Nvb was the extent of - the discretion vests!-( in the Speaker, but what eras the - merit of •th.!: personal act of the Speaker in the exercise Of his' discretion. if this were 'adthitted to be the quea tion before them, the greater portion of the ar gmpents used in this ,debate was. at once cast asiefe.He would not say ; if the abstract eitrestiou *ere what ought to •be the extent of . the Speak- ' cr's discretion, that he would vote for'giving it all that' latitude which it at present had ; but ha thought the Speaker hardly treated ; when they visited on him, not only his actual extension of that discretion, but also the will of the original ii.stitition;—(Hear, bear, hear !).---The nautiil and pt per course would be, if the practice were found inconvenient, to enact, thdt in futtire no Speaker Arnold deliver a speech .in the name of that HouSe, which bad not first received its sanc tion. He did not tnean to say this ought to be done, but this, he contended, would be a fairer course of proceeding than that which it had been proposed to take.on this occasion, which went to leaVe the Speaker, in the exercisie of his discre tion, subject to annual reprehension, like that to which be had_ been exposed this nigliL (Hear s hear !).—lf it was thought inconvenient for due individual to endeavour to• collect their motives avid feelings, it would become them to, compel the Speaker to abandon this privilege, and to Make it incumbent on him to Nldress the Crown out of the House, aF.liewould address it within those walls, declaring, " that he had neither eyes to see, cars to hear, nor tongue to utter anything which was not commanded by them." It the argtnnent of the Hon. Gentleman who had cited these words was good for any thing, it went against the practice of the Speaker's addressing the Crown in any way but in,. obedience to the commands of the House. Thistle was not at present prohibited from.doing and though he (Mr. Canning) could have wished' the Speakees,speech at the close of the last Ses sion to be of •a very different nature, he would not, while he claimed a right to act upon his own judgment, blame the Right Honourable Gentle- • ratan for the comcieutious exercise of his. (llear, hear!).—He differed from the Speaker in the view which he took of_theCrtthetic Question; as much' as human opinion could differ from human Opi-, Dion. He fondly lOoked forward to the defeat o that speech—'to thethne „when no S:)eaker should be able to make such a one. The period, he ' hoped, Was nearly • arrived, accelerated in its course by events unlocked for, and, he _might add, Anwislted for, as they so greatly exceeded our mOst, sanguine hopes. He trusted the day • was not fai' (114:111L when:this question would - no longer afford a refuge for discord, driven from all the rest Of 'the world. (Hear, hear !).—He hoped this would not much, longer remain an excep; Lion to the general harmony of manbind. B with thesefeelingi, he could not consent to viit the Speaker for that which he had conscientiously done, though he thought the Right lion. Gentle man had formed an erroneous estimate of their proceedingson the subject of the Cltholic Claims in the last.,Sessiou _of Parliament. He was sure the Noble Lord bad been actuated by no per sonal feeling in bringing this Motion forward, yet there was one part of it more severe than any thing contained hi the amendment of the Hon.-Gentleman. -He alluded to the words . pro the Speaker frcrii addressing any thing to the Sovereign at the Bar of the House at Lords, or " elsewhere," which he was not ii.- structed to say by the House. Froin ill a distant age, it might be sopposed, that tlr present Speaker had 'been a sycophant or cour tier, Who,:nottontent with the access be bad to the Crown, in a regular way, gought. other' opportunities for poisoning his Sovereign's ear. - - lf this were meant to be insinuated, it ought to be fairly and openly stated: If it were not intended, then the motion contained a surplus age of words, pregnant with mischief. These taken away, would still leave a censure on the Speaker's conduct, to which:lie would prefer that contained in the amendment, which distinctly' set forth the amount of his offence. He, however, eon- • sideringthedangcrs apprehended by sotne*Gentle men - from the precedent to be visionary, and.con sidering the inimense latitude taken by' some of his predecessors when addressing the Crown, - could vote for neither. If, the, discretion of the Speaker sere restricted to enactments, some new mode would be devised for representing failures to ;the 'SiiVereign. This would probably •be 'an Address fram the majority of the. House ; -and could 'any one think, 1 that toad this course been adopted last year ; after the fatal failure of the Bill; that a statement, very different from that offered by the Speaker, would have been tirade Having; briefly reeapitulated his . priticird mcnts, he ioiicluded hv' declaring it to be hi,; (Ty:- 11;017, lintr - liCreare - haritreen - made out to' emit for the special interference cif the House. General IVEA.Tnew snppotted the Amendment. Mr.' BATAURST asserted the privil,-ge of the Speaket, and the example of former SpeakerS 2'o thotised all he had said. The Right Bon.-Gent e man.had said l i e was willing to have lit'apeak • ;ln Om'ator,but he Objected to his being inutlistOri.,ln. 'The latter-character, rather than theformer, he proved to. be that which, in the diseliarge of tidy, he was obliged to sustain. He eon:hated with much ability the statements Made with r, , spect to the.inconvenieuccs and, dangers anticipates! by 30 meGeotlemen as the Jesuit of the line of conduit pursued .by the Speaker. Adverting to the ,contiact of the Spealwr. of - the Irish House of „Commons, which had '.been refer;el to, he argued- from the proceedings whichfoil.owed in the hist] Parliament,. that the Address of the Speaker to the Crown bad not that-importance which, on the present occa sion, it had been attempted to shew, attached to it. It rested entirely with the Houre, When the subject came before them again, to curry the measure recommended or not, as therthisw:ht proper. What the Speaker bad said, could not at all interfere. with their deliberatons. Where no intentional offence was imputed, the mildest construction ought to be put on the words used. The Speaker bad only stated mVhat had been the conduct of the majority of the House, taking the majority, as of course he must, as the whole body of the House, it was sad,