The Sun. — London, England, 1840-03-07 00:00:00

tIVENINC , ON. Friend, respecting to resolution nil 835, as to the sale I of papers. If his Right Hon. Friend meant this Bill ought, itself to contain tonic regulation er legislative enactreeet en the subjset, ho said he entertained the • mess decided objection to any legislative interference on the mode of publication. But if his Right Honnur- i able Friend proceeded to alter the resolution of 183.5, ' he said that, so far as the resolution itself went, be felt the strongest possible objection to the continuance of that resolution. The alteration of the indiscriminate sale regu lations might do much to remove prejudice from the public i mind, but it was not necessary that the House should con sider that as a condition or precedent, because even if the Hoe-se did alter them (and it was admitted there ought to be no legislative interference on the subject) the House might alter them again, and so the principle would not be affected. He hoped his Right Hon. Friend (Sir E. Sug den) would not persist in a motion for a Committee espe cially to consider those regulations. In the Committees already existing on the subject there were considerable checks upon the publication and defamatory matter by the House.—(Hear, hear.) There was no reason, however, why those checks might not be made more effectual ; but he hoped the introduction of this Bill would not be opposed by those Honourable Gentlemen who had disapproved of the course taken by the House, but who yet would, he should think, gladly consider any measure which would relieve the majority from resorting to those unpleasant pro ceedings that had lately been adopted, and which, while pro tecting the privilege would remove the necessity for those preseedings at the bar, which, repeated night after night, could not fail to leaver the character of the House. — ( Hear, bear.) He most cordially supported the motion for the introduction of the Bill, and he trusted he should be enabled to support it in every stage.—( Cheers. ) Mr. C. BULLER said he considered the question as to tke sale of the papers had nothing to do with the matler.—( Hear, hear.) In an action for libel, it made not the slightest difference in point of law, whether the papers complained of were distributed by sale or other wise.—( Hear, hear.) If he published a libel on his Hon. and Learned Friend—which he hoped there was no chance of his doing—( A laugh)—would his Hon. and Learned Friend consider it a justification that the libel had not been sold, but only distributed to every Member of Par liament ?—( Hear, hear.) He thought it worthy of con sideration, whether persons complaining of having been libelled by publications of that Honse, might not have the same remedy against the party libelling, as persons had who complained of having been libelled in a Court of Law.—( Hear, hear.) He supported the Bill because he considered it the only practical step which had been taken towards supporting those privileges which he had always maintained.—( Hear.) The object of the Bill was to protect the privileges in a more efficient manner than the roundabout means, which were attended with hardship to individuals. It was repugnant to the public feeling of the present day, that the House should be engaged in a contest with the Courts of Law, and should send innocent ipersons to prison. The mode of supporting the privileges of the House which were formerly resorted to, would net i be looked on with approbation in the present day. In contests with the Crown formerly, it was the practice to stop the supplies. Mr. H UM E— Aye, and a very good practice too. 1 Mr. BULLER—But no reasonable man would say that a vindictive measure towards ihe public creditor was an ex- Fvdient means for supporting the privileges of that House aaair,st the Crown. He thought that the Bill did not go far rnougii in extending their privileges, but he would sup port it for the purpose of putting an end to an unseemly sriaabble with an obscene bookseller. Mr. GISBORNE had hitherto abstained from occupy ing the time of the House by say observations of his own in this discussion, because he thought it might be more tr•e'uHy informed by others. But they were now in a dif- ferent positi on —th e y wer e no longer a united body. He - ! was surprised that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Sir W. Follett) should say that the House was degraded by the exhibitions which had taken plane at the bar, whilst he t:irnself admitte-d that it was the improper decision of the Court of (411 , Q11'3 Bench that forced these exhibitions upon the House. When the Noble Lord Russall) invited thcin to go to the House of Lords for assistance in main -, tainin their privileges, he must say that former times af forded-hat little encoaragement. In 1807, after the violent and tyrannical conduct of the House, in the ease of the :Middlesex election, popular indignation was roused, and a Bill was sent up to the House of Lords to restrict the pri_ vleges of the Commons, on the ground that the latter was defici-ent of public virtue; bet he believed that it would love been much wiser, rind quite as easy, for the House to remedy the acknowledged grievance by its own act, es it als:, could in the present instance. He agreed with the Hor.:urahle and Learned Gentleman (the Sclicitor-Gc noral) that the House should have used the great powyr to vindicate its own privileges Which it po3sested. Every lawyer in the House allowed that the Court of Queen's Bench was w: - ong, and the Court itself seemed to hesitate in its course. He agreed with the Solicitor ' Genstral, that if they legislated upon that privilege they would be compelled to legislate upon every other. A G;ilant Colonel opposite (Col. Sibthorp) cautioned the supporters of the privileges as to the reception they would meet at the hustings, and spoke of the feeling that eli-ts abroad upon the subject. In the case of Mr. who was not a more distinguished person than Mr. Stockdale nlmself, there was a very loud and general ex prcasion of feeling against the tyrannical and corrupt con elect of the Houle of Commons, but there bad been no meeting now in favour of Mr. Stockdale, except one at the I?, cemason's Tavern, which was professed to be a public meeting of the county of Middlesex, but to which otte was admitted without a ticket, the room being half %vita at•orneys, chirks, and Lut - nbailiff.i. There had been ten or twelve meetings since the confinement of the Sheriff 4, and not a word was said at any of them upon she subject. lie admitted that the House had difficulties to contend with, but he would not agree to appeal to any \ - other power for ass stance, and he would oppose the Bill in its present stage and every other stage. Sir ROBERT PEE i.. had from the firt, foreseen that the Ilestse must resort to legislation before it could effec tually ocure its privileges, hut at the same time he was most anxious that every meaeure should be resorted to for that purpose before they proceeded to legislation, He certemls had at first suggested that a Bill should originate in the House of Peers, but siren then he had changed his minion. He tees most anxious to support every privilege oF. the Howe without legislation, but the great difficulty with him was, how they acre to be defined. And if the other privileges which the House possessed were invaded, he would be the first to advocate the adoption of the most effectual measures to protect them. Ho believed that the power of publication was absolutely essential to enable_ the House to perform its duties to the public, sad he believed that a more unwarrantable judg ment than that which was attempted to be set up against the privileges of the House had never been given, or one more irreconcilable with the reasons that were• stated for pronouncing- it. He would not state more noon that subject, because he had it from his Right Hon. Friend, who bad been Lord C'eaneellor of Ireland, and f;ors his Hon. and Learned Friend, who was one of the greatest ornaments of the profession, that the House of Commons was possessed of the power, not liable to ques , Vert in any Court of Law, of publishing its own proceed iers.,...._( ilea:, hear.) Ile was glad that the House had not resorted to legislation in the first instance, but had takete every step abort of it which they could to assert their privileges. The course they bad adopted had done this goo.l, they bad by it shown that they had the power of i.e. :Isieonalent—nnd the Court of Law had been cora peied to recegiese that power. If he thought that that power would maintain the privileges of the House he would go on with it without resorting to legislation, but he felt convinced that it would have no such effeci. He thought that the attempts which the House had made to vindiseee its privileges would have great effect in fortify ing them. His sole reason for listening to the attempt at legisletion was his firm belief that the powers which they poesessed at present were incomplete. With respect to time, it was true that they could menace for the future, but the Cee.stitution deeied them the power of exercising the single penalty which they could inflict, tamely, im priersanent cater prorogation ; so that during the recess, teleen Parliament was not sitting, the printer of the house would be liable to be harrassed by individuals bringing ac tions against, hie. Was that decent? And was it not a great indignity to the House of Commons that parties could pursue such a course ?—( Hear, hear. e He had been told that they hal a remedy by adjournment ; instead of prorogation. 'Wes it right, he would ask, that the Remo should go to the Crown and ask it to not pro rogue, but to adjourn. Was it not far more fit to make an attempt to provide a legislative remedy. The Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter had said, " Why did they not peal from the Court of Queen's Bench to a Court of Error." For his (Sir R. Peel's) part he thought the esearso they had adopted was far preferable, and that from the dispeeition which had been shown by the Judges since, 1 he thought they would be more successful in appealing now ) than t th e y wou l d in the first instance. Another point watch persuaded him that it was necessar for j i the H ouse to legislate upon this subject 3' was, that the power wh'.ch they now possessed did not preve n t i the pl a i nt iff f rom getting all that he want ed —namely, the II getti ng t h e d amages that were awarded in his favourst that ga ve an eueouraeement to his going on. Inthe:inpadree; \ sent ease M r . StocOale had h a d t h e money, and 1 the conviction th at b e wou l d be liberated at the end of the ' Session, h e h a d no d ou b t that Mr. Stockdale was well I s p)eased with the terms he had made with the House. Mr. Stockdale having the money, the House at the latter end of the Session, would be called upon in the miscellaneous - estimates to submit itself to the degradation of voting a sum of money, for the purpose of satisfying the Messrs. Hansard. The Howse had no other course to adopt but that, because there could be no doubt that the greatest in s Just • ' ice had been done to them, as their good s h a d b een i seized and exposed to sale.—(Hear.) Another point 1 which persuaded him of the necessity for legisl a ti on ' was the time that had been wasted in discussing this ques tion, and which! no doubt would still be wasted unless ( some measure settling the question was passed. The House bad relied on imprisonment for the preservation of lits privileges ; but he ( Sir R. Peel) doubted very much Iwhether that would prove effectual, as it had hitherto not ibeen so.—( Hear.) L'pon these grounds, therefore, he should gi ve hi a cor di a l assent to the motion of the N o bl e Lord, for leave to bring in a Bill, reserving to himself the right, if he found it necessary, of altering the measure in its details. It had been said that the House would compro mise its rights by lousing this Bill, becaube by it they called upon the House of Lords to assist them in stating what their privileges were. Ile could not see how their right's would le: compromised by the course proposed to be adopted by the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) But even if, when the I Bill Rent to the House of Lords, that House should require 1 concessions which th e H ouse of Commons could not agree j to, it would be in the power of the House of Commons power t s o . i reject the Bill and f a ll b ac k upon their original nal iH se Lie trusted that the Ho use o f Lords would the practi- I eel embarrassment in which the House was placed, and I would sent back the Bill in suc h a shape as would enable I tl - ,e House to receive it. He had sa id originally Bill ought to have originated with t h e Houseo;h that the but be had changed his opinion in th at respect, thj e o k r i d n s ; that it would be much better that the Bill should now or,- ) ginate in that Muse. He was clearly of opinion that the poster the House at present possessed was incomplete, and being unwilling to do that which was alien from the spirit • of the present age, namely, committing the Judges. he ! should give his cordial support to the Bill of the Noble Lord, believing that unless some effectual measure were adopted the House would come into collision with the Judges. The House of Commons, the great inquisition hr the country, the great inquirer into and corrector of buses, ought to have the power of publication. For le i year:, they had published the grounds of the decision they came 1 to in legislative measures. He did believe that the sound public opinion of the country was with them upon the main question, but he thought it was m ost important that their privileges should be placed upon a permanent and a sure protection by law, and not go on vindicating their own privileges themselves, setting the example of lower ing the Judges in public estimation. On these grounds he thought that the House decided wisely in submitting to the House of Lords a law not involving the privilege but the right of publication. By so doing they would avoid 1 drawing into question thei r other privileges, which were equally essential to the fulfilment of their functions. Mr. HUME was very sorry to hear the Right Hon. Baronet drawing back from that high and manly tone which he had assumed on the opening of the session. If it was necessary or wise to pass such a Bill as proposed by the Noble Lord, why not at once take the proper course, and bring in a Bill defining all the privileges of the House. The Sergeant-at-Arms had an action brought against him ; would the present Bill stop that action.-- ( Hear.) It was declaied upon all hands that in the decision in the Queen's Bench the Judges were wrong—they had every reason to believe that the Chief Justin, and other Judges, had common sense. Surely, then, when they found that their conduct was unanimously condemned, they would review their judgment, and finding themselves in error they would retrace their steps. By legislating at all they were departing from the high ground on which they stood. Were the privileges of the Queen's Bench defined?—were the privileges of any of the Courts of Law defined ?—did they not exercise their powers with out any statute law ?—was it not degrading then to that House they were appealing in piece-meal as it were—to ask for protection of their privileges by legis lation ? If it could be said that that House was unable to maintain its privileges, let a Bill be brought in alto gether defining their privileges, and legislate upon the whole matter. In his opinion there was no ground what ever for appeal. What would the House do? The Sergeant would soon be in a situation to claim their pro tection. Would they bring in another Bill to provide for that case. Suppose a Committee upstairs were to sum mon a party to give evidence before them, and he refused to attend. What power had they by statute law to com pel him. Would they bring in a Bill to define that pri vilege also? He protested against the shilly-shallying conduct which the House was about to pursue.. He was sorry that they had embarked in the cause at all, if they were determined not to carry it through, for they were retreating without being vanquished. They ought to proceed as they had begun—follow the ad vice of the Solicitor-General, or answer his speech; let them contradict his arguments, or they were bound to go along with him, in maintaining their privileges to the utmost extent. He should certainly give his vote against the Bill. Colonel SIBTHORP—They were told from high authority " that there is joy over one sinner that re penteth."—(Lauglitcr.) It was with much pleasure, therefore, that, from what bad fallen from the Hon. Mem ber for Kilkenny, be learned that he regretted all that had taken place. He had no doubt so also did the Noble Lord who had introduced—he meant no offence, but he must call it a most nonsensical Bill. Many people had shrewd suspicions why some measure bad not been brought in before ; probably it might be in order to give the Right Honourable the Chancellor of the Exchequer time to bring in, to prepare, a better Budget than he was now able to do.—( Laughter. ) They had now honourable gentlemen suffering punishment —gentlemen as honourable as any that he saw on the oppo site benches; nay more so. for the Noble Lord, considering his public conduct, ought to have been on the treadmill fur the last ten years—.(Loud laughter)—and they were pu -1 nishing those gentlemen because they would not violate their oaths end disregard the Queen's writs. Then Hen. Gentleman had said it in the House. and belied said it out of the House, that he looked with the utmost suspicion on everything that emanated from the Noble Lord and his colleag,ues—( Loud laughter)—and he must confess that he considered the present embarrassment of the House hod been got up in order to screen the Noble Lord and his colleagues from the odium which would naturally attach to them in consequence of their conduct. However, on the present occasion, if bethought that the Bill introduced by the Noble Lord would release those Hon. Gentlemen who were now in prison, it would meet with no opposition from him. In fact, for such a desirable purpose he would agree to ehnost any measure. Lord HO WICK thought that those who had attended to the speeches of the Right lion. Baronet the Member for Tarnwoith, and tho Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter, must have conceived that they were called upon to support this measure upon the plea of the utter incom petency of that House, by its own authority. to support its own privileges. It was that recognition of the inahility of the Louse to. support its privileges, that was the great reelection to the Bill.—( Hear, hear.) By this Bill it wag for the first time to be recognised by express legislative enactment, that the House of Commons was subordinate to the Courts of Law and the House of Lords. Of what avail was it that they should be the judges of their own privileges, if that judgment was to be a dead letter? By this Bill, they would have to hold that the privileges of that House were to be subjected to the control and deci sion of the other branch of the Legislature. The Learned Solicitor-General had clearly shown, last night, that they had power to call witnesses to the bar, and power to call cur the production c: papers, but it might be said tha• those poivers and privileges rested on such clear evidence, on long prescription, on grounds so clear, that there was not the slightest chance of their being impugned. Before the case of Stockdale and Haesord. he should have thouelit the same might have been said of the pi ivileg it , that was now questioned.—( Hear, hear.) He would ask, did the right of compelling the production of papers from the East India Company rest upon any ground but the ground 'at publication —and upon what was that right estfiblishe I ? Long exercise and acquiescence; and yet, if the Etrt India Compeny refused to produce papers, and the House proceeded to compel the production, the matter, according to the doctrine laid down by some gentlemen, would come before a Court of Law, upon an action rf trespass, er in some other shape. The question of the right of the House of Commons to publish, had been decided by the Court of Queen'sßeneh totally contrary te the recent - decision. He alluded to the case in which . I ,lr. Herne Tooke wished to proceed against a publisher for re-pubiishing a report of that House. Thu Court of Queen's Bench then deter mined, not only that the reports of that House could not be libellous, and that the authorised printer of the House could not, upon any con. struction of the law, be held to be subj.mt for proceedines for libel, but they said that an unautho rised reprint by a private individual could not possibly be regarded, even as against that individual, a libel. There , furc the House had no security either from previous de cistens or acquiescence. The Right lion. Member for Tarnworth, although be acknowledged the right of the House to publish their proceedings, and the necessity for so doing, yet wished them now to lay down their arms and confess themselves powerless. Where was the evi dence that they were powerless?—(llear, hear, hear,) If the liou:c resolutely exercised its powers during its sittings, his opinion was that there would very speedily be au end of all endeavours to queseion their privileges during the recess. He behoved that if the House bad not shown symptoms of yielding, no doubt or hesitation had been expressed as to the course that ought to be adopted, that even in the present case the Sheriffs would have paid the money to Me. Hansari. But if they hail not done that he was satisfied that future Sheriff's would have been very cautious how they made a similar levy. Then it was said they were putting the Sheriffs to extreme hardship. He thought that argument was conclusively disposed of last night by the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire. If the House acted with that decision and resolution which became tlam in a matter of such high importance, the Court of Law would most grossly violate its duty if it attempted to punish the Sheriffs. It was an acknowledged principle of law that no public officer could be called upon by any Court to incur risk and damage which that Court had not the power of redeeming him from. But assuming that the Court of Queen's Bench was disposed to punish the Sheriff, the House could pass a Bill for the purpose of relieving the Sheriff from the hardship. By so doing they would not touch one of their privileges, and he ( Lord Howick) would be most happy to support such a Bill. He was afraid if this Bill were passed they would have questions of privilege constantly before the House. He would take leave to ask the Noble Lord (John Russell) and the Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel), why they had incurred all this evil and mischief if they were to make a concession, which they might have made in the first instance ? Why did not his Noble Friend bring in the Bill on an earlier day ?—( Hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet said they had gained something by the discussion —that they had enlightened the Judges and the other House of Parliament as to the value of the privilege of publication. The Right Hon. Baronet had passed air extraordinary compliment upon the Judges and the other House, if he thought that common sense and common reason required so much hammering in order to penetrate their heads.—( Cheers and laughter.) He (Lord Ilowick) thought all these benefits of discussion might have beer, attained by the earlier introduction of the Bill. He ac knowledged it was a very painful duty to inflict Sheriffs punish ment upon the Sher iff s, w h o m he acknowledged had be en guilty of no mora l cr i me .—(Hear, hear.) If no object as obtained by their punishment, it was mere gratuitous c rue l ty; and in such a case he thought the were much-injured individuals. He bad stated his objections to the measure, even supposing it should pass s h ie t ad h he shape atth it e could Noble paio Lordin that wis shapehcd but a whatnd if assu ranceit did not, in what a situation would it leave them I The Right wwe e nl y e skt i t d rn hhea i n e g no o d h t t Hon. Baronet said that if the measure failed , they would be in no worse pssition, and the people wulelbecome more reconciled to the measures the people would become more reconciled to the measures th t o h f em th s e el q v u e e s s t t h io a n t . ha l - d le m t a n d o e ug th ht ern it neces sary to adopt. He (Lord Howick) ether divisionsi tea f ra e td e eH i t i h t i aa increasedamong the difficulties of their position, would have great legal authorities against them, d t t h ak ey e had every reason to believe that discussions place there, and that they would meet, not with wdo:ufld and be but with the most determined assailants. By bringin g ener ; ; such a Bill they gave proofs that they distrusted C e i rou - 1 3 1 powers.—( Hear, hear.) If it failed, they would be obliged to resume the struggle, with crippled means and infinitely weaker powers. What prospect did the Noble Lord hold out that such a failure would not take place ?—( Hear.) ' Indeed, he had already seemed to doubt very much its success, and, so far as he (Lord H.) could collect the in dications of opinion from the Hon. Members who bad spoken, it seemed probable that that House would not support it without far greater concessions than his Noble Friend was inclined to make.—(Loud cheer ing.) He did not hesitate to avow his opinion, that no small share of the opposition they had encountered arose from the dislike to a reformed House of Corn. ' moos, and that there existed in the minds of some parties a wish to degrade and humiliate it.—(oh, and cheers.) Why there were Hon. Members opposite, who would hardly venture to assert that they would have given the sante votes agalnst an unreformed House, of Commons.— ( Caters.) It appeared as if they regarded the present House as being too closely identified with the people, and as having too large an infusion cf democratic principle, thet it would be dangerous to confer upon it any increased powers. He (Lord Howlett) had heard that very argu ment used.—( Hear, hear.) If such a feeling existed in the House, could the Noble Lord give him any assurance that it did not exist, even in a greater degree, in the other House.--( Hear, and cheers.) In the whole of that pain ful struggle nothing had been so mortifying to him as to see his Noble Friend, after the noble, the constant, and firm support he had received—to see his Noble Friend, who had introduced the Government measure of Parlia mentary Reform, bestowing, with his own hand, the mortal wound that was now meditated against their privileges and dignity.—( Cheers.) If there had been no wavering en, the part of the Noble Lord he was satisfied that the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth would not have deserted him. It was owing to the Noble Lord that the House of Commons, after having threatened and blustered, was now humbly about to recede from its lofty pretensions, and obliged to come for assist ance to the other House. He certainly should not be a party to a measure which was humiliating and degrading to the House of Commons, and he should certainly record his vote against the Bill.—( Cheers.) Mr. MACAULAY would not detain the House by any lengthened remarks, but he was exceedingly unwilling that the question should go to a division without ex plaining to the House the grounds on which be should give his vote. He would not go over the ground which had been already so ably occupied by preceding speakers—he would merely observe that he believed the House of Com mons was, by the law of the realm, the sole judge of its own privileges. He believed that publication was, by the law of the realm, one of the privileges of the House, and that it was essential to the due administration of its func tions, and he believed that the Court of Queen's Bench had decided the question that came before them, in a manner which was founded neither in law nor in reason.— ( Hear, hear.) If the Bill now before them was to provide that these privileges should henceforth belong to the House, he should most decidedly oppose it, but such was not the proposition of his Noble Friend ; that would raise the question of their privileges, and he would not consent to their being questioned; but the object was merely to provide a new remedy for any infringement upon their established righs. Let them take an instance from the com monest case that could occur at law. Suppose a party held a Bill of Exchange for good consideration, and that an Act was proposed to entitle him to an action against the acceptor, be should certainly object to such a Bill, as being calculated to derange the whole established system of their paper credit; but if the proposition was to give a further remedy by distress, as in the case of a landlord, would any one say that that was bringing the value of the security at all in question ?—( Hear, hear, hear.) What was now proposed was not to declare •that the House had the right of publication, but simply to add another to the former remedy for a breach of their privi leges, leaving the former one altogether untouched. If, after the passing of the Bill, any party brought an action for libel against their publisher, he would, like Mr. Stock dale, be liable to imprisonment for such a breach of their privileges. The ground on which the present measure rested was, that the former remedy was in some respects inconvenient and insufficient. There was not a single Member of that House, who would not admit that there oas inconvenience in the present remedy. Had the House been unanimous in its assertion of its privileges, the pre sent difficulties would not have arisen. But it was obvious that a large number of gentlemen were opposed to them on the question. Their debates on the subject had occu pied more time than was likely to be devoted to the union of the Canadas, and much more than they bad spent unon the Irish Municipal Bill.—( Hear, hear.) The remedy they at present possessed was singularly likely to be misconstrued and misunderstood by the people. The Noble Lord admitted that they had been compelled to imprison the Sheriffs, but, et the same time, he ac quitted them of all moral guilt.—(Opposition cheers.) Was not a remedy inconvenient which punished by impri sonment men who were declared to be free from all moral guilt ? Look at the case of the Sheriff—he filled an office of ercat trust and importance, for which he was not even paid—lie was placed between two opposing powers, and whichever he obeyed he was sent to prison by the other. Was that a state of the law which they should any longer peimit to endure ? He admitted that which had been done was necessary ;n self defence. It was analogous to tae case of war, where the innoeent too frequently suf. feted with the g uilty. IF a sentli power, which wished to stand neutral, happened to stand; between the two great contending parties, it was impossible to prevent its being attacked and injured by both. Daring the late war, it was well known how little the poor Hollanders loved the system cf Buonaparte—they detested it, but yet the people of England were not tle less forced, from circa:este:Lees, to blockade its ports; and treat it with severity, as the on;y way to perm - it and obstruc , the operations of the energy.—( Hear, hear.) In a case like the present, where a party was placed between two con tending authorities, neither of which permitted any appeal to the other, legislation was absolutely necessary. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, the Solicitor- General, had told them to trust to the power of imprisonment, which had never yet failed. He believed that might be true, if they exercised it unsparingly and mercilessly ; but neither their own feelings, nor those of the people whom they re presewed, would allow them to do so.—(Hear, hear.) The moment the health of a prisoner began to suffer—the moment confinement began to operate upon those wbo were weakly, or robust, or apoplectic, they would be obliged to give %\ ay. Under these circumstances, it was clear that some other remedy was absolutely necessery. The Noble Lord asked what, if this Bill were carried, would he its effect, and what would be the effect if it were lost? He hoped rise Bill would be carried, and that the other House of Parliament would interfere to save the country from the direful consequences that must result if they drove the House in absolute self-defence to use the whole power which it possessed. But if this Bill miscar ried he would say this—they were absolved —they would Eve none to the other House, not in an humiliating mar nc would heve said they did possess the power of :indicating their privileges—that they had the power of throwing the whole country into confusion—of stepping the supplies—of stopping the Mutiny Act—that there was no potver which any public body could possess which that House did not possess—of imprisoning every man who vio lated t poz li s e e i s r s i t i h ri e se p le r g iv e i s le — ie of o i f m Peerage, P C i')niig and every ministerial otaer who should execute the sentence of the Court ; but as it was not their wish by means like these to enforce a most necessary privilege, they applied for a new remedy—not because they had not remedies stringent and efficient, but because they were such as could not be applied without a disedution of society, and the most cruel pressure upon individuals— that tncy had severe remedies, but asked for mild ones— that they had a remedy disagreeable to the great body of the people, but asked for one the whole people would unite in approving. He believed, if they went in th et manner, they would have the port of " no mean suitors." He believed that it was not degrading to bring forward e measure on the subject, which would secure the privileges of the people, and enable them to act leniently towards those whose misfortune, rather than otherwise, it was to have vio lewd them. He believed that if the House of Lords rejected such a Bill it would be firmly supported by public opinion— that they would be supported in measures much stronger than any they had taken—in ire asuree much stronger than any the Hon. Member for Dublin would suggest— that they would find a support they had not yet received, if, having proposed such a remedy, they sheuld find it impos. eib:e to obtein the assent of the other House on the only terms on which they could accept it, consicently with the honour of the people whom they represented. Lord MAHON said be was under the painful necessity of set inp; a few words, ,es he felt himself reluctantly bound to differ from the opinions expressed by his Right Hon. Friend the Member for Ripon, whom, with the greatest regret, be heard last night say that he should vote against the Bill cf the Noble Lord. On the contrary, he (Lord Mahon) felt himself bound in conscience to give every fa cility to it. The question was not whether the Bill was A good one or not. The practical question was, whether they would have a Bill at all, and to that he felt bound to answer in the affirmative ; and, further, that he should con sider the Bill of the Noble Lord with the most sincere desire to be able to . concur in its provisions. The Noble Lord ( Howick) said that this Bill was supported by the minority, because it has a tendency to degrade the re formed House of Commons. He could assure the Noble Lord the information to that effect he had received was not well founded. There was no privilege the House pos sessed, up to the period of the resolutions of 1835, he ,would not now support. What he opposed was the claim of privileges they had not previously possessed. - With re spect to the power of publication he was most desirous to secure it. He could give reasons why, for if at an elec tion his constituents objected to him for some vote he was supposed to have given, was ho to lose his seat because he could not send for documents necessary to convince them?—(Hear, hear.) The main obstacle to the settle.. ment of this question was the resolution of sale—this was the practical cause of all their difficulties. This was the opinion of the Right Hon. Members for Ripon and Exeter, and of every lawyer in the House—but he might be told the practice of sale prevailed before the resolution—then why pass it? Till the resolution of sale they sold by connivance, but since by authority. — There always was sale, but no direct authority to coun tenance it. Then, in his opinion, this legalized sale constituted all the difference. He admitted the necessity of sending these publications to constituents, but there was a great difference between doing this, and their public sale. Let them repeal that resolution, and they would get rid of the difficulty. Then, to avoid injury to individuals, what objection could there he tolintroduce a clause into the Bill that persons giving false evidence before the House should he subject to the same re nalty as persons committing perjury i n a Court of law ?—( Hear, bear.) He should support cheer fully the resolution of the Noble Lord. He thought some injustice was done to the Ministers on that question, in underrating the painful nature of their feelings in dif fering from those with whom on all other occasions th e y was painful o tdiffer from them on to them to do so, c b o u r t d b ia e l l l i y ev c in o g -op it er to ate b d e . their lt d done so. this question, they laad, pa inful as it was to them, reluc tantly Mr. BERNAL thought it was a p it y the Noble Lord should have ransacked former debates for the purpose of alluding to the question of sale, which had nothing to do with the present debate. The Judge s had held that the question of sale bad nothing to do with this question—they i said the question was one of publication, and if the Report in question had been sent to Mr. Stockdale to be bound, that would have been a sufficient publication, according, to the doctrines of the Queen's Bench, to entitle him to bring his action. With respect to the present qu estion ho would ask his N o bl e Friend, who stated that this Bill was an evil, if he saw anything in this question but a balance of evils, and this he (Mr. Bernal) thought the least evil? cote the this committalmeasure. o lf necessary His Noble Friend the Memb er f or St rou d had not shown ,any wish to l ower t h e dignity of the House in bringing forwarde fo r the Judges, Judges,h( u h t l n h thoughte ern a wouldI) t! o, every means should be taken to avoid such an occur rove. TEE, SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, MARCH 7, 1840. With reference to rescinding the decision of the Judges, he would ask how was that to be obtained? Would the House go to the Exchequer Chamber? \Vith regard to the ' case of Mr. Howard, the Court of Queen's Bench bad recognised the right of the House to commit, and if he were to bring his action for false imprisonment, the Court of Queen's Bench would scout it. What, he would a sk, was there in this measure that savoured of degrada tion ? The House of Lords had an equal interest in this measure, and he saw no reason to look for any factious feeling in that assembly against them; but if such a spirit should be exhibited, he would be willing to act with others to the fullest extent necessary for the vindication of their privileges ; and when he saw the perpetual attempts at raising discussions on this subject out of doors, he considered that they ought at least to adopt the course proposed, as likely to allay that irritation. He did not think this Bill would add at all to the force of the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench, but that it was a moderate measure likely to appease these irrita tions and do away with these difficulties, and he consi dered that any gentleman who had voted for the committal of any of the persons now in custody might vote in favour of this measure without the least inconsistency.—( Cheers. ) Mr. HOPE could not agree that the question of sale was the main question of this case—it was the question of publication. Ha could assure the House that he had never heard, until he heard from the Noble Lord, that those who swelled the minority had been actuated by a desire of elevating the character of the old House of Commons at the expense of the new—and for himself he denied being actuated by any such motives. Sir STEPHEN LUSHINGTON would vote in fa vour of the Bill proposed by the Noble Lord, and he did not consider that in so doing he was guilty of the slightest inconsistency. He considered the present measure a most momentous one, as it was the first time the House had ever resorted to legislative measures for the vindication of its privileges. He had, therefore, considered well the course he was about to adopt—be knew he was about to make a precedent, and therefore he had well weighed the consequences likely to ensue before he came to a decision. The question divided itself into two parts; in the first place they should consider what would be the probable consequences that would ensue in the event of the Bill passing ; and, in the second pla ce , w h at m i g h t be the possible effects if it should fail. It was essential that these two parts of the question should not be confused together, and addressing his utmost attention to this sub ject, not shutting his eyes to the dangers that might occur as a consequence of legislating on this subject; but at the same time weighing well the almost certain consequences that must arise if the question were permitted to remain in its present state, he felt bound to give his vote in support of the Bill of the Noble Lord. At the same time he could not consent to put the introduction of this Bill on the principle advanced by his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Exeter. If his Hon. and Learned Friend carried out his principles, they would go to the extent of the destruction of all the rights of that House, and in case the Bill were rejected, would tend to fetter still fur ther their proceedings. He had said that he acknowledged their right to this privilege, and that it ought to be maintained, but he had also said that he would advise bins to submit that right to the judgment of the Courts of Com mon Law, and finally, if necessary, to the decision of the House of Lords. He utterly dissented from that doctrine, and if it were acknowledged by the House it would not only strike at the root of that privilege, but at that of every other privilege which they might hereafter have to assert ; aed for the future, if this doctrine were once ad mitted, no more committals for contempt—no more vin dication of their privileges, by committing those who were guilty of a breach of those privileges to the custody of the Sergeant—their business would be to go to the Courts of Law, and seek redress there. He (Sir S. Lushington) would at once repudiate such a doctrine, and while his Hon. and Learned Friend told them to go to the Courts of Law, he would contend simply that the House of Com mons was the sole judge of its own rights. Neither could he accede to the argument that they had tried the whole effect of their power in vindication of their privileges. He believed if that power had been exerted to its fullest extent it would have attained its object.—( Cheers.) But he believed that if it were to be exerted to its full ex • tent, it would produce consequences at the contemplation of which he shuddered. Put it to him that it was utterly impossible to maintain the privileges of the House of Com mons without a collision with the Court of Queen's Bench, and he should feel it to be his duty not to shrink from that collision, be the consequences Is hat they might.---( Cheers. ) But he felt it equally his duty, if any means existed of evading that conflict, to endeavour, if he could possibly, to find some remedy which should at the same time maintain the privileges of that House, and avoid those consequences from the contemplation of which all sober-minded men must shrink. Their power of commitment had not been carried to nearly its full extent. He would advise them riot to recede one iota from anything necessary to main. tain their power-4 Hear, hear)—to confess no weakness, to g:ye up no atom of their authority. It was possible if this Bill were rejected that they might be called upon to exert it to the fullest extent. Let them look to what would be the case in the event of the Bill passing. His Hon. and Learned Friend, the Solicitor-General, had said that it would not relieve them from their difficulties ; he ( Sir S. Lushington), on the contrary, contended that it would re lieve them from all their difficulties incidental to the pre. sent question. It might not perhaps relieve them from other difficrilties, but why, because it would not relieve them from °thee:difficulties, should they refuse the relief which it offerodlhem from their present ones? It had been said that it wold affirm the judgment of the Court of Qat:en', Bench. AO was sure that no such consequences could ensue ties passing this Bill ; he would not allude to the centre:Arne:es of leaving that judgment unreversed, because whether the Bill passed or not that judgment would remain as it was ; but by passing the Bill they wcuid nullify the consequences of that judgment. But suppose that they tailed in car rying that Bill —suppose it should be rejected by the House of Lords —would they not be enabled to g., to the country, and say that they had exhausted all reason able means of avoiding the conflict—that they had been disappointed in receiving that aid 'rem the House of Lords which they had a right to expect ? If they then re sorted to extreme measures, the public would say that trae "lse necessity of the cave—that the House ha ) cly r i e cl d de t d he to public blie opinion, and had sought, by a legj latiVe measure, to avoid going too far—that they had beet: defeated ; and the question would then be, should the people of this country be shut out for ever from obtaining information from that House; and in that case public ',pinion would go with them, and uphold them in the contest. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in reply, stated that he could not altogether pass over two o r three arguments which had been made use of in this discussion, and which appeared to have produced considerable eff2et—first, as to the argu ment of his lion. and Learned Friend the Solicitor- General that, by the introduction and passim). of this Bill, they would be confirming the judgment of m the Court of Queen's Bench, which had been so often called in ques- tion, and which the Members of that House and of the learned profession, were almost unanimous in censuring. /le did not think that argument well founded, for, be it observed, that although it had been stated, by way of in ference, that such would be the effect of the Bill, it had not bzen stated, nor could it be, that there was any other plain or direct way before them by which that judgment could be reversed, or its consequences annulled. But the argument itself rested merely on the inference that might be drawn from the Bill, and there was nothing in it which went in the least to confirm the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench. The Bi:l maintained in the preamble, and throughout its parts, that they should have the power of directing their own publica tions, and that those publications could not be questions in any Court of Law. There was, therefore, nothing in its practical or general provision, that couht coin cide with the judgment that had been given. But it was merely inferred, that because that judgmant had been lett on record—because in legislating on the matter they did not immediately interfere with the judg ment of the Court, it was therefore said that they were not opposed to it. He did not find that opinion at ali con firmed by what had occurred in other cases of privilege. One would suppose, from the statements of the Solicitor- General, and those of the Noble Lord the Member for Northumberland, that in all cases of privilege, their privi- leges had been maintained, without obtaining any assist ance from the other House of Parliament, and by means of the sole power of commitment which was vested in the House with the unanimous consent of the Courts of Law. But was that really the case ? Now the highest, perhaps, of nil their privileges—namely, the liberty of speech within their walls, had been confirmed by legislation. Sri John Elticit had made a speech in Parliament perfectly jestifiable in itself, relating to the state of the country and the arbitrary power of the Crown ; and had, for that speech, been summoned before a legal tribunal, and was sentenced to a fine of 2,0001. Of course ho did not wish to allude to that case as if a similar one could occur in the present times. After the Restoration it had been thought necessary that some proceedings should be taken with regard to that judgment, and that proceeding was not one of commitment, but a resolution of the two Houses of Parliament condemning the judgment, and a writ of error was afterwards brought to the House of Lords by which it was reversed. Would any man say that the privilege of speech was injured by that proceeding, or that it was in anyway weakened or impaired by that decision of the House of Lords in the reign of Charles the Second ? No, certainly ; for they still enjoyed that privilege. They enjoyed it by various Acts of Parliament, as well as from the judgment of the Lords. They enjoyed it by the Bill of Rights likewise, and yet no one would contend that it was not one of their privileges, and that it was not as full, entire, and complete in its present shape , as if there never had b een such decision on it by the House of Lords. There was another privilege of the House —namely, that what had been done by the Speaker should not be called into question els ew liere, and that privilege h ad not been wea , tened by a judgment in the Court of Law. A judg ment had been delivered on that subject, and a Bill had been introduced into the House of Commons to re verse that judgment. That Bill had failed, and had J dt ud h g a e t s whoh had p r onounced the decision yet that was ex ac tly the history of the case of the ve r ai " King V. Willi ams ," That judgme nt, however, was not good now , a nd they bad tha t on the autho rity of the bd Pattesonin the case o f S toc kd a l e . Lord Denman h ad said that " if that judgm e nt were n ot bad in law it would on other grounds b e wort h y o f t h e severest censure." Mr. Ju st i ce " he agreed that the case was not to be relied on," and in addition that it could have no authority as a solemn judgment of a Court." They had, therefore, instances in which attacks had been made by Parliament to confirm their privileges by legislation, and }et in which those privileges remained unimpaired. Might he not therefore be justified in saying that if an A c t of Parliam en t were passed in the present case it would only afford them greater facilities in the use of their privileges ? and even though they should fail in passing such an Act those privileges would yet stand upon the same basis on which they now stood.. Ho believed that the whole of the arguments of the Solicitor-General and of the Noble Lord the Member for Northumberland, rested on this, that by introducing a Bill they would con sent to legislate on their privileges, and those privileges wenld impaired n-ors?r. IT,. fur -, Lust uc did net see, in anyLiliil6 , :1 • ' how their privileges could be injured by the proposal to legislate with regard to them ; but after what hed fallen from the Noble Lord the Member for Northumberland, he was anxious to state what was his paramount reason for in troducing the Bill. His Noble Friend had said, that by legislating on the matter, they would admit that their pri vileges were weakened by the opposition of the Court of Queen's Bench, and that they had, therefore, recourse to other :assistance to maintain them. Now he ( Lord John Russell) said no such thing. He merely said that they were engaged in a conflict of considerable difficulty, and that he had no doubt, that if they were driven to ex tremities, the House would prove itself superior to every other authority. Their powers were now, however, very imperfect, and they were bringing them into a conflict which it would be most desirable to avoid. That, he thought, would be generally admitted ; for his Hon. and Learned Friend the Solicitor-General had said that they were arrived at a point which would soon bring the ques tion to a crisis; and the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had said that they should soon come into collision with the Judges. He (Lord John Russell) did not consider much as he might be taunted on the subject—he did riot consider that that was a question on which the only qua lity that could be shown was the quality of courage.— ( Hear.) He would confess that when great public evils were to be avoided, which might be done by legislation, a little prudence would be as necessary as courage. lie trusted he should not want in courage, were it abso lutely necessary—which he should regret, to enter into col lision with the Judges; but he should say as to the cou rage of entering wantonly, illegally, and without an abso lute and overpowering necessity into a contest, which would lower the character of that tribunal—which would divide the people of the country into hostile parties on a difficult question, and which in the end might injure their best interests—which might manifest the power of the House in that particular instance, but which would impair the progress of legislation for the whole Session—he should say as to that courage that he could not lay claim to it.—( Hear, hear.) If the House were now prepared to enter on the question with temper and forbearance, there was a great prospect that they might soon arrive at a settlement of their difficulties. His Noble Friend the Member for Northumberland, had said that if he (Lord John Russell) were prepared to legislate on the subject, he should have done so long before. He (Lord J. Russell) believed, however, that the delay which had taken place would be attended with the best results. He found that Hon. Gentleman had lately ex pressed opinions on the subject, and he trusted that if a case should come before the House of Lords, it would be found this discussion had thrown much light on the case. He would say that if this discussion had produced this fact—q it had produced from all the leading Members of both sides of the House, from Members who had been in the Cabinet of the Duke of Wellington, in that of the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite (Sir Robert Peel), in that of Lord Grey, and in that of Viscount Melbourne—if it had produced from the Law Officers of the Crown, and other gentlemen of high legal reputation, an opinion in which they all agreed, that the power of publication was necessary to the House, it had produced much good.—( Hear, hear.) fle wished to say a word at present with regard to the re solution respecting the sale of their publications, which had been formerly passed ; he did not deny that it might be con venient at present to change the order which had been made; the orders of the House, however, in the matter had undergone various alterations since the year 1817. He could wish that the Committee which might be formed, should take these various orders into consideration, arid introduce as much of them as possible into the New Bill. He trusted that the House would give him permission to bring in such a Bill—he trusted that they would decide at once to proceed by legislation on the subject, without entering into further considerations with respect to it, and before he explained to them the Bill hich he meant to propose.—( Hear, hear.) The House then divided For the 13111 203 Against it 54 Majority --149 THE SHERIFF. Sir J. GRAHAM then rose to move as an amendment on the Order of the Day for a Committee of Supply, that the Sheriff be liberated on bail, to be approved of by the Speaker. He rejoiced that, by the result of the di vision which had just taken place, a decided advance had been made towards a satisfactory settlement of the question—(Cheers)—and he was de sirous of removing every obstacle to the completion of such a settlement. He had hoped that the Noble Lord the Member for Northumberland would have brought for ward this proposal, because the Noble Lord had himself stated that he foresaw danger to the Sheriff's health from protracted close confinement. It was a sound principle in regard to punishment, that there was a point beyond which if punishment was carried, it _only ex cited commisseration in the public mind, and revulsion from the offence was lost in pity for the offender.—( Hear.) No doubt could be entertained that if the House thought the Sheriff, or even Stockdale, suffered serious danger from close confinement they would be disposed to enlarge them. It should be recollected that the Sheriff had in curred no moral guilt—that he had been placed in a situa tion of great difficulty between two high contending bodies —and it was natural that he should take as his guide the judgment of the Queen's Bench. Up to this mo ment he (Sir James) hai resisted every attempt to enlarge the Sheriff. But he was bound to say that after an attentive consideration of the evidence of the medical gentlemen, he feared the Sheriff's health was in great danger from a continuance of his close confinement. And pure he was that every Gen tleman in the House would deeply regret if a continuance of that confinement should unhappily prove fatal. Now he had searched for precedents, and in the reign of George 11. he found four- —particularly he would refer t o the case o f Sir Alexander Murray, who ia 1750, having been committed by the H U3C for obstructing the re turning officer in the Westminster election, was liberated on bail to be approved by the Speaker. He thought these precedents laid a strong and safe ground for the proposition to enlarge the Sheriff on similar terms. If there were any course calculated to effect this object which would be more preferable to the House, he would gladly adopt it. It might undoubtedly be important to secure the attendance of the Sheriff again at the bar during the Session. But for his (Sir James's) part he was quite prepared to liberate the Sheriff on his parole, and without bail at all. At all events, he could nut anticipate opposition to the motion he now made. Mr. P. HOWARD seconded the amendment.—( oo position laughter and cheers.) The House had, upon the medical evidence, discharged the other Sheriff—( Laugh ter)—and it ITould be only justice to discharge Mr. Evans on the same grounds. He was as desirous as any man in the House to support their privileges, but he agreed with the Hon. Baronet that there was a point at which punish ment assumed the character of persecution.—( Hear and laughter.) As he thought the Bill which had been just brought in would be sufficient to protect the privileges of the House, he felt bound to second the amendment. Lord HOWICK said that as the Right Hon. Baronet had alluded to him he thought it necessary in a few words to explain the great and obvious distinction between the suggestion which he had made the previous night, and the present motion. He ( Lord Howick) had only proposed that the Sheriff should have some freer indulgence of his personal liberty, but should at the same time be restricted to a particular residence, and continued in custody. But the second examination of the medical witness seemed to him to cut away the only ground on which he could make the motion.—( Hear, hear.) But the motion of the Right Hon. Baronet would relieve the Sheriff from all duresse, upon the single condition of his giving bail for his appear ance at the bar when called upon. That motion was per fectly idle and nugatory.—(Cheers.) Bail was required only for persons whom it might be supposed difficult to find ; but there was no likelihood that there would be any difficulty in finding a gentleman of Mr. Sheriff Evans' station and occupations. He agreed in what was said by the lion. Member for Tamworth, that if they wished to discharge the Sheriff, they should do so at once, without reference to his health ; but if upon such evidence they allowed the plea of ill health to be taken, as a ground for the discharge of the prisoner, they would establish a pre cedent extremely injurious to the administration of justice in the country. In fact, the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Duncombe) had this evening presented a petition from a friend of Vincent's, now confined in Monmouth gaol on a charge of sedition, calling on the House to order the liberation of Vincent upon its own principle, that ill health was a sufficient plea. If that principle were admitted, very few people would remain in gaol. He was bound to sav, however, that after the decision to which the House had come, he did not consider it of much im portance what way the motion was decided, or if the House ordered the Sheriff to be discharged forthwith.— (Ironical cheers, and cries of " Move, move.") He cer tainly would do no such thing.—( Cheers and laughter.) He would take less interest in the question than he had before taken, but ho would still vote against any such mo tion.—( Cheers.) Mr. H. KEMBLE trusted that as the question was coming to an amicable decision, the House would unani mously concur in a motion that the Sheriff be forthwith discharged. He bad expected that the Noble Lord (Howick) would vote for the motion, as he heard him say that if the House agreed to the Bill, it would acknowledge that the Sheriff had been treated with injustice, and he expected that he would have the Noble Lord in the ma jority if the Right Hon. Baronet had moved for the im mediate discharge of the Sheriffs.—( Cheers.) He had heard it said that the minorities in previous votes upon this question were influenced by a desire to bring the reformed House of Commons into contempt. For his part he repudiated the idea of bringing into con tempt any body to which he had the honosar to belong._ (Cheers.) He hoped that night would not be allowed to pass without a unanimous vote being come to for the libe ration of Mr. Sheriff Evans.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. HAWES hoped if the House came to any decision that night it would come to it upon clear and intelligible grounds. If Mr. Sheriff Evans wereto be discharged it must be upon one of these grounds, either that he had purged his contempt, which he had not, that he had sufficient punish ment, or on account of his state of health. As to the latter, those Hon. Members who had heard the evidence of Dr. Chambers, he thought, must be convinced that that ground had entirely failed.—( Hear, hear.) For his own part he thought it would be more manly to discharge the Sheriff without any reason at all, than upon the ground of ill health. He thought that Gentlemen who moved for the discharge of the other Sheriff should make out a case for doing so, which the Rtht Hon. Baronet had failed in doing. Sir T. COC HR ANE supported the motion of the Right Hon. Barone, the Member for Pembroke, consider ing, after the evidence given by Dr. Chambers and Mr. Freeman, that it was the bounden duty of the House to discharge Mr. Sheriff Evans immediately. Mr. WAK LEY wished to address a few words to the House upon the amendment. The amendment did not meet the necessities of the case. He thought the House would exhibit itself in the face of the country as one of the most paltry and contemptible bodies that ever existed, if' it retained any one of the pa, ties in custody a single minute after the decision to which it had just como.—( Cheers, c: 7 • kT .~ ;,, 1 dale and the other parties had pursued —( Hear, hear.) I They had decided that the Courts of Law had been al right, and that the proceeeings of that House had been wrong.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) By the decision to which they had just come, they would hiferrn toe country that they were no longer prepared to support the privileges of the House, but that they would succumb to the Courts of Law, and a ere prepared to go prostrate to the bar of the House of Lords.—( Hear, hear, and cries of " No, no.") He trusted that some lloa. Member would move for the discharge of all the parties, and he would support it.—( Cries of " Move, move.") He could not make such a motion then, because there was an amend ment before the House; but if no other Member did, he would (nettle first opportunity,because nothing could ha more unjust or preposterous than to retain those parties in cus tody after they had acknowledged by their own proceeding that evening that those parties bad been right, mid they had been wrong. The House had been placed in its pre sent predicament through the vacillating weakness of the Government, and their own turbulent and factious con duct.--( Cries of " Oh, oh.") As Conservatives he did expect they would have yieleed obedience to the laws of their country.—(Hear, hear.) Did the law of Parlia ment constitute no portion of that law. —. (Great cheering.) And was the law of Parliament of less importance because the rights and privileges of the people were involved? Yet, when acting judicially, what had been the conduct of the minority of that House. Why they had invited the people to violate the law. Even an Hon. Gentleman who, out of the House, held a judicial situation, when the Sheriffs were brought to the bar, jumped from his seat with the utmost animation, and cheered most vociferously as a Judge, a person who was at the bar as a culprit.—( Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh.") Suppose, when the case of Frost -and the other prisoners was discussed, the other day before the fifteen Judges, the six Judges who were in a minority, had said " this is tyrannical, unjust, cruel ; we advise the Chartists to resist your decision ; it is infamous ; you ought not to adopt such a course; it is contrary to all law.''—( Cries of " Oh, oh," and Hear, hear, hear.) That was the conduct which a minority of that House had pursued—(Cheers)--and by that conduct they had invited the opposition out of doors, which had laid that House prostrate before the Judges and the House of Lords.—( Hear, hear.) Seeing then the contemptible and paltry position they occupied, and seeing to what a low pitch of degradation they had reached, he would ask, were they prepared to add to that degradation, and to bring on themselves a greater degree of indigna• don ? Ho trusted the Sheriff would be discharged, and discharged unconditionally.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) He hoped there would not be a division upon the motion, but that all the parties would after the bring ing in of that Bill, be liberated as a matter of course.— ( Hear, and laughter.) Lord J. RUSSELL must, after the speech they had just heard, say a few words.—(Laughter.) He hoped the Hon. Member in the official discharge of his other duties, charged the Jury with rather more accuracy than he had evinced that evening.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) The Hon. Member had stated that what the House had decided was, that Stockdale and Howard, and the other parties were in the right, and that they were in the wrong. If that was the way in which the Hon. Member generally ;wed the issue for the information of an enlightened jury, he was afraid the Hon. Member must very often mis lead them.—(Laughter.) The question before the House was with regard to the Sheriff in confinement, and the medical evidence that had been given upon his case. He ( Lord John Russell) had doubted whether there was suffi cient to justify him in bringing forward a motion on the subject. As he had stated the other night, the general rule was laid down upon the ground of danger to life, but this case was of a different kind, although he admitted it seriously affected the health of the Sheriff. He could not agree to the proposal that the Sheriff should be liberated on bail—( Hear, 'hear.) If they did that they might incur some danger of raising a new question in the Courts of Law with respect to their powers.--( Hear, hear.) He thought the best course the House could pursue would be to liberate him on the ground of the illness stated by Dr. Chambers, for a certain time, naming a day, say three weeks hence, on which he would be required to attend. After a few words from Mr. PR YME, Captain POLHILL observed the notice he had on the paper last night was, in substance, that which the Noble Lord had now proposed. He objected to the motion of the Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Pembroke because he was opposed to placing the Sheriff in the degrading situation of having to give bail. He hoped the suggestion of the Noble Lord (J. Russell) would be adopted. Mr. GREENE made a few observations that were not audible in the gallery. Mr. HUME wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet op posite whether the course now proposed would uphold the credit and dignity of the House. He thought the best way would be to add to the motion the names of Stock dale and the other parties, and liberate the whole of them. Sir R. PEEL always made a point of answering the questions of the Hon. Member for Kilkenny—( Laughter) —although he never had any other proof of that Hon ourable Member's confidence, except his asking him questions when he was in difficulties.—( Renewed laughter.) He hoped the House would not permit any d fference as to the policy of bringing in a particular Bill to induce them to overlook what was fit to be done in an individual case. He had already stated that he was not prepared to vote for the absolute discharge of the Sheriff, on the evidence of Dr. Chambers, but he thought that there was suffi cient on the face of that evidence to justify them in miti gating the severity of his confinement. The Right Hon. Baronet here read some extracts from the evidence of Dr. Chambers, and proceeded to observe that if after such a statement anything occurred to Mr. Sheriff Evans that House would have little cause of satisfaction. Where the case was one of a prisoner under the preroga'ive of the Crown, he would leave the Crown to deal with it; hut where it was the case of a prisoner of their own, he thought they would be justified in granting some relaxa tion. He thought, on the whole, that the proposition of the Noble Lord to release the Sheriff for a stated period was the best that could be made, because even now he (Sr R. Peel) would vote against the total discharge of the Sheriff, and he did not think that in taking that course they were making the sli g ht es t submission to the Courts of Law.—( Hear.) Capt. POLHILL wished to know if the Noble Lord required the attendance of Mr. Sheriff Evans again—whe ther he would be again incarcerated ?—( Cries of Order.) Sir JAMES GRAHAM had no objection to withdraw his amendment for the purpose of substituting, in confer mity with the suggestion of the Noble Lord, that after a consideration of the evidence of Mr. Freeman and Dr. Chamber., Mr. Sheriff Evans be discharged from custody, and that he be ordered to attend the bar of the House on Monday, the 6:h of April. Mr. HUME hoped that the motion would be for the discharge of Mr. Sheriff Evans, without introducing the pretence of sickness.—( Cheers.) Sir J. GRAHAM thought it was most unparliamentary to assert that he had assigned a reason for the discharge of the Sheriff which was merely a pretence Mr. HUME did not mean to say that the Right Ba ronet was privy to the pretence in any way, but he thought it a pretence, and the public would think the same. Mr. HAWES was surprised that the Right lion. Ba ronet the Member for Temworth should find a reason for the discharge of the Sheriff in the evidence of Dr. Chain hers, when upon that very evidence upon a f - rtner night he had objected to the Sheriff being discharged from custody. lie was convinced that the public would take the same view of the case as the Hen. Member for Kilkenny, and believe it to be a mere pretence ; he hoped sonic one would move for the discharge of all the persons who were confined for the same cause as the Sheriff. He believed the same medical evidence might be obtained respecting each of these individuals. Sir JAMES GRAHAM explained his statement re specting Mr. Freeman's testimony. Lord HO WICK said the proposal of his Noble Friend appeared to him scarcely less objectionable than that of the Right lion. Gentleman. Mr. Evans was not affected by any particular acute disease, but was of an unhealthy etate of body generally—it, therefore, appeared to him that the proposition of his Noble Friend could be attended with no satisfactory effect. His former proposal was that Mr. Sheriff Evans should be kept in custody in the country, but Dr. Chambers said that would be of little effect, because he was suffering in mind. He ( Lord Howick) thought the object of imprisonment was to affect the mind—if it were not it was useless. He wished the Right Hon. Gentleman would leave out of his motion the words " upon the evidence of Mr. Freeman and Dr. Chambers," and he thought the motion was nothing less than for the entire liberation of Mr. Sheriff Evans. Colonel SIBTH 0R P said that if the Noble Lord proposed the Sheriff should remain in the custody of a messenger, he should certainly vote against him. Mr. HUME moved the omission of the words "in con sideration of the evidence of Mr. Freeman and Dr. Chambers," upon which the House divided, when there appeared— _ _ _ For the Amendment 47 Against it Majority -82 On our admission to the gallery we found-- Mr. ELLIOTT on his legs, and contending that as the Right Hon. Baronet did not consider the evidence of Mr. Freeman sufficient to authorize the release of the Sheriff, when it was first given, he was inconsistent in now proposing that release. He contended, that by their con duct in releasing the Sheriff, they were materially altering their position, and he took it for granted that to-morrow they would have some medical man coming and saying that Mr. Howard had a severe run ning at the nose—(Laud laughter)—that the mucous membrane of the nose communicated with the chest, and that if the inflammation of the nose extended to the chest, it might be possible that consumption might be produced —(Loud laughter)—and on that ground they would be quite as much justified in voting for his disc..arge as for that of Mr. Sheriff Evans to-night. They would always have a man committed for contempt suffering from a sore throat, or a pain in his toe—( A laugh)--or some such im portant malady, if by so doing he could obtain his dis charge.—.( Loud laughter.) Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, having from the first opposed the incarceration of the Sheriffs, would move as an amend ment that the direction, ordering his attendance at the expiration of three weeks, be omitted. Sir E. SUDDEN said that he had voted with the Noble Lord for the introduction of his Bill, because he understood that th en . was to h e a compromise on the occa sion. He therefore believed that the motion to give a tem porary relief to the Sheriff would meet with the general approbation of the 1 - louse. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE should say that foe his part he had entered into no compromise witt; any one, and he had coastal:oy voted at - : - a.;141 the imprisonmen't of the Sheriffs Mr. lIORSMAN said that, not understanding the merits of the question himself, he had placed his judgment in abeyance on it, and followed the example of the Noble Lord and the Right Hen. Baronet. He now found that th e y f e lt t h emse l ves p l ace d i n a situation of great diffic u lty, an d t h at t h ey were d es i r ous of retracing their steps. an d, th ere f ore , h e was sorr y he had hitherto trus'ed to the Noble Lord and this Right lion. Baronet. - r -!;2 fit" t EVENING Sir. R. PEEL said that he wi,shcd to allude to the observa.tions hat eco to tho c .urge he :had thou * ht .fit to pursue bY the Nw , : , Lord. the Al , tuber for No: don& Ela hid onj.-tied to the total cbs charge of the SO.t.riff too evidence of Mr. Freeman, and of Dr. Chambers. but he could not oppose the mr , t ion of the Nobio L.rd opposite The Nohl- Lord the Memlyn. for Northumberland had iiitnst‘lf been willing to grant sonic relaxation to the Sheriff, end he had advised the House to remove him to the country, uuder the custody of an officer of the House. What was the course which they bad pursued en the ques tion ? They had pushed their privileges to every wise extretnity, and now that they found them breaking down,_ he thought that they were right in attempting to maintain. them by legislative enactment. Lord MA HON said that he felt convinced that Hon. M, mb2rs who had throughout voted as he had done, would feel it their duty to vote against the amendment of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. Mr. WALLACE said he had supported all along the pri v ieges of the House, on the principle of their being neces sary to maintain the rights of the people, and a convic tion of their necessity. He would unflinchingly continue that course, week by week, or year by year, if necessary, in spite of the farce he saw in sorrow was now acting on. both sides of the House, as if by mutual agreement be tween those who bad been leaders. In that farce, how ever, he would no longer support those who had turned their backs on all they had said and done, and therefore , he would assist the Hon. Member for Finsbury in putting' an end at once to further degradation, by voting with him. for his amendment. Mr. WARBURTON thought the only effect of re quiring the attendance on the 6th April would be to pro duce a triumphal procession down to the House, in order to. an unconditional discharge, which might as well take place: now.—( Hear, hear.): Lord G. BENTINCK thought it was wished that this Sheriff should be held as a hostage for the passing of th 9 Bill by the Lords. Lord J. RUSSELL said the effect of the Hon. Mein ber for Finsbury's amendment would be to carry the mi.- conditional discharge of the Sheriff, which he should cer tainly oppose. Sir R. PEEL also declared that he should vote against the unconditional discharge. Mr. D UNC 0 MBE then withdrew his amendment. The SPEAKER put the question as proposed by the Noble Lord (J. Russell). The House then divided, and the numbers wore— Ayes ;18 Noes .3.1 Majority - 87 Mr. HUME moved for certain returns respecting- the pay of Soldiers and Marines, which were agreed to.. The other Orders were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Half-past One o'Clock. CHURCH ESTABLISHMENTS. The first of a series of Lectures on Church Establishments was delivered yesterday at the Hanover-square Rooms, by the Rev. H. M'Neile. The large room, which, it will be recol-, lected, was the scene of Dr. Chalmers's celebrated Lectures on the same subject, was densely crowded, and among the and dience were Lord Ashley, i\LP., Mr. Pringle, M.P., Sir It. Inglis, M. P„ Mr. Gladstone, M. P. , and other distinguishe d persons, with several Dissenting Ministers of eminence, as we If as a host of Clergymen. The proceedings were commence with reading a prayer from the formularies of the Church. The Rev. Lecturer then commenced by alluding to the ge r 1 neral desire now manifested in the country for an extension of the instruction of the people. He said, one party were anxioi to supply the deficiency, which all must admit to exist, by tending the means of religious instruction already largel Y' though inadequately, spread through the country by the mediu of an Established Church. Another party, on the contrar were advocates of a system of universal seem: tr instruction, regardless altogether of sacred subject! g; But the controversy did not end here. There ha 6° been found those who were bold enough to attack once the very principle of our Establishment, and contend 3t was unscriptural and unlawful. Courage was always imposir It' And the constant repetition of this attack, by a band of ant z - Churchmen who made up by energy and activity for what th , l"Y I wanted in numbers, had tended much to weaken the conviis 7_ tions of many friends of the Church, and induce them to se ed to defraud the Church on the comparatively low grourrti public expediency ant popular benefit, leaving out of view th. e scriptural sanction which the Word of God appointed for 1." tional Religious Establishments. Often, and with boastful ri ' iteration, had the advocates of the Church been challenged •:t ° the Bible—and now he accepted most cheerfully and confider &Y, the challenge.—(Cheers.) The Rev. Geneeman procee , Set: with a train of very close scriptural investigation, arguing t be' the Scripture s bore out the supposition, which was th e basis of our Establishment, that there might be e National Church—that is a nation of pr ofessii baptized Christians—resembling the Jewish nation, ali gte c i in their distinction from the heathen world and their mix and mingled constitut.on among themselves; and the id Ns urged by Dr. Wardlaw, that the Jewish nation typified, not• a nation of professing Christians, but the really good and pig' js among them, he treated as altogether unfounded and absuro seeing that it was evident, from the Jewish history, that a e Jews were, just as the body of nominal Christians are toy composed alike of good and bad; and he said that the encic! ' 0 your to unite an outward distinctiveness with inward purity • the Christian world—an attempt that must always prove tz ", terly vain—was the root of all sectarianism.—(Loud che ers : . He went on to argue that there was evidence in the Scrip tures of the existence, under the term " Churches," of gt !`r e graphically divided combinations of congregations under t '0 pastoral superintendence of ecclesiastical officers analagous 1 t our Bishops; and that this was a far preferable arrangenaet f to the " heterogenous patchwork and feudal insubordination e Dissent"—( Cheers,with some hisses)—and moreover that was no trace in Scripture of a number of independent separate religious communities. ADDRESS TO THE QUEEN. TO HER, GRACIOUS MAJESTY, VICTORIA, QUEEN OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, &C• &C. May it please your Majesty, The Presbytery of Coleraine, in connexion with the Syni of Ulster, beg to congratulate your Majesty on your auspicio alliance in marriage with his Royal Highness Prince Albe rt of Saxe Cobourg and Gotha. Their fervent prayer to tl King of Kings is, that your Majesty and your Royal Conse." may climb the hill of life in unity of affection : that, after long and prosperous reign, you may inherit an Eternal Crotarts; and that your descendants may sway the sceptre of this free lir e mighty em,,ire so long as the sun and moon shall shine in tu firmament. Signed at Garva, 18th Feb. 1840, on behalf of the Presbyt elf of Coleraine, J. BROW N, Moderator SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALA FROM THE DAILY PAPERS OF YEsTEBDAY• (From the Globe.) With reference to last night's debate on the motive Lord John Russell far leave to bring in a Bill to gl: / , summary protection to persons employed in the pub lit ' a tion of Parliamentary papers, our esteemed Contempo."loloi the Chronicle, observes, " We deplore the blindness the leaders on both sides of the House." For our par we admire the temper of the leaders on both sides the House; and so far from believing that the Pri // , loges of Parliament, are endange re d by that temper, are confident that nothing could recommend those Ir i ° ; vileges so strongly to the support of public opio (without which, what are they ?) as the calm an ; reacn • able mane , r in whwli they are viedicated by Lord J. g us t i sell, Sir R. Peel, a7,d, we are now happy to add, L o gin Stanley. The mome n to us na t ure o f t hi s di s p u te has bc felt rightly by the " leaders on both sides;" while the rabble of partis,: ns h ave b een , as usua l, una bl e ta feel 3 9; thing but tire an i mos i t y an d exc i temen t o f x. strugg - against adverse partits. . From Stad ) The debate last night the upon n the ard abolition of ital punishments illustrates remarkably tile tendency to : (0 , action in the public mind. A f e w y e ars ago little Vr thought of hanging every six weeks in London eight nine men, women, and boy s , f or p ass i ng f orge d one 1 , )",, m notes, or disposing of washed farthings, or stealing tr ul :s eery articles in a dwelling-house. The good sense unit religious knowledge of the country at length saw the , 1 „ of those atroci , .us blood-offerings to ; M ammon , a nd t i ."" abominable sacrifices have happily be en di scon ti nue d wit: - out any serious diminution of the security o f p ro p er ty. ' a far all is well. It was right to discontinue sacrifices Li n . warranted by the law of Gud, and immeasurably dist, l3 : ° portioned to the o ff e n ce , vis i te d accor di ng to t h e c atcal tions of moral justice ; bust thi s bl esse d re f orm , for such we consider it, is leading to consequences w hi c h we th . i n , !: . it proper to weigh betimes. The change dictated by " tit ;ion and justice is now s oug ht t o b e carr i e d to an cit e which neither religion nor justice will warrant. (From the Courier.) Substituting Act fur Privilege, the House does 13°11 t, claim a power, which at present seems to be extravairt, and which is to set aside rights that have hitherto been 6 1 ; prescriptible. It is popularly s aid that th e p o wer of r an !lament is so vast that it can do anything but make a !t ut a woman. We do not di s p ute t h e ex t ent o f i ts p o wer, f we may be allow e d t o quest i on t h e j ust i ce and poliet:h creating a precedent for the introduction of that seems the most odious and insufferable tyranny under t" guise of an Act of the Legislature. _ the The Speaker will hold a Levee, the last for n ...._ n S I i i r , e a F re ß ve U r3 l , T h S app ; eason, this evening, at te i o'clock, at his house, in Ea t°-.' square. pf BISHOP! C G I toFO re fer ß ourTHEr ea d e ' I. : rt n S to ° a C r r eP °j": r i e i r t another part of the paper, of the utter failure of the first e" fe tter prompted by the insane ravings of the mad Bishop, to opinion, and padlock men's mouths, in the persons of th cS t i e l; cialists • The weekly organ of this body having been prin'•,,, s t set forth by th e Ri g h t R everend Father as an o bj ec t ag 3 oe. which the arrows of the law should be pointed, and the .. je vernment having been twitted with incapacity or indifferen b e s e o , permitting it to pass unprosecuted, our publisher, Mr. 14 %.„, te e was cited before the Magistrates of this borough for the ";. e to of publishing this periodical without having attached tbreor the red badge of Whiggery, notwithstanding that on a f ° tie e, occasion the paper was sent to the Stamp-office for 41 , 1 ) 1 t he and returned as a periodical " not within the meaning, n ° ,4ties Act." Such was the opinion of the Stamp-office lu ta ; fierY then ; and such, greatly to their credit, malgre all tll g _ iis , darts of Father Phillpotts, is the opinion of the Leeds '"7, a , tracy now. The cowed-hounds must now therefore, %hei r wee for their repast. The game has fairly slipped througc,untey hands, and, if they mind not, after laughing at the 1 chase, may turn hunter in its turn.—Northern Star. b o th LEWES ELECTION.--The exertions on rid a sides are continued with increased ardour, but the giv u e gr. ° contest is narrowed by the withdrawal from;the scene i the Sheriff Evans. On Nirednesday ev en i ng a large Me eting . „ et" ory Reformers took place at the Star Inn, over which Mr. t v l o ji ,,b Blackman, the long-tried friend to Reform. presided , at i , t he the greatest enthusiasm was displayed ; and the canvass torories Liberals like with vigour and success. 9 7isco urit do not half their man. They describe the Noble , e ' at as a shocking hand at his work, beinv, able neither t° g. l en vass teranee to his brilliant conceptions in public, nor to Sheriff well in private. The writ was received by the Under the t he yesterday morning, and was immediately proclaimed i f oe , chief officers, who fixed Monday for the nomination, and day fair the polliorr. eS it s EssEx.—The c oun t y i s a b ou t to e%Pr . a on feelings of attachment t o th e Th rone an d the Sev ere y of the auspicious event o f th e R oya l un i on . A good,lY af;:a ~ouisit he mmes of the Magistracy and gentry appear to the : li,c, a ~. -i! - :. i. 7,". , 1 ,r 1 he rn , , , Qtieg, it t6i 1;,.. t,',`l%,