The Sun. — London, England, 1806-04-18 00:00:00

~,--.._ HOUSE OF PEERS. THUP.SDAY 3 4 . lritlL 17. i IIIPERL4L PARLIAMENT... • -IN the Appeal, Griffith v. Hatton and Others, Mr. Fonblanque was heard in reply.. The- Lord Chancellor deliVered his opinion on the case, and moved to. affirm the judgment. of .the Court of Ex chequer Chamber in Ireland; which was ordered. The Irish Treasury Bills Bill, an 4 the British. Fisheries Encouragement Bill, were-read a third time and passed, and . a Message sent to the Hous;.-, of Commons to acquaint them ,therewith. Sir J. T. Duckworth's Annuify Bill, and the Trea surer of the Ordnance's Regulation Bill, were read a second time, and committed for to-morrow. The 20,000,0001. Loan Bill pissed through a Committee, and was reported. In the Appeal, the Countess Dowager of Lincoln and Others_ v.' the Dike of Newcastle and. Others, the Duke of Newcastle was admitted to be of age, and the farther consideration of the Appe4 was Post ` pond till to-morrow,in order to give time for fram ing a dire&ion to be attached to the Decree of the Court of Chancery, which is affirmed. INTERCOURSE BNETWEEN THE WEST INDIES AD AMEKICA. Lord AUCKLAND moved the second reading of the West India Indemnity Bill. It was not intended, he said, to introduce any clause into this Bill relative to the future trade between the West Indies and America; that would become the subje& of a separate Lord 11A11/KESBURY expressed his satisfa&ion at what had fallen from the Noble Lord,. but at the same time he could not help declaring .it to be his opinion, that it would be touch better to postpone the discussion of any prospe&ive regulations respeer ing the trade between the West Indies and America till another Session. This opinion he was the more inclined to press upon His Majesty's Ministers, as no ,pradical inconvenience would arise from the delay, xtrhilst, on the other hand, much time would be required to pay due attention to the great number of important considerations which the subje& involved: If, hoWever, it was determined to bring in a Bill for the purpose_ of making prospe&ive enaettnents upon this subje&, he Iloped that the Bill would be printed after the first reading, and that sufficient time would be allowed for the consideration of so important a measure. Lord Ave :LAND explained. The Bill was read a second time, and committed fur to-morrow. Lord 14QL,LAND said, notwithstanding the ad, Mee given by his Noble Friend, he had not altered his opinion upon this subje&. On the contrary, it 'was his intention to present to the House a Bill for the future regulation of the Trade between the West Indies and America, and he now gave notice that Le should bring in such a Bill on' Monday next..... Another part of the adviCe given by his Noble Friend he certainly intended to adopt, namely, to move, alter the first reading, that the Bill should be printed, and then to give ample time for its consideration 'previous to the second reading. Adjourned till to-morrow (this day). HOUSE OF COMMONS. tHURSDAY,, APRIL 17. On the Motion of the SOLICITOR GENERAL a new Writ was ordered , fer,.the Ele&ion of a Member. for the Borough of Kin'sge, in. the room of ainuel Campbell. Rowley, Esq. who had accepted the Stew ardship of the Chiltern Hundreds. Mr. FRANCIS, previous to the Debate on the Bill relating to the Debts of the Nabob of Arcot,. wish ed ,the Gentlemen of the long Robe, and particu larly the Attorney General, to consider how far the East India Company was, consistently: with the Aa of 1784, intitled to appoint such . Commissioners as those to. whom the 'Bill before the House re lated. • On the Motion of Sir JOHN NEWPORT, the se cond reading of the Irish Butter,l acking Bill was put off till May 1 ; and the seoond reading of the.lrish Bank Note Bill,.and the Irish House Tax Bill; till tomorrow. T . , On the Motion of Sir P. STEPHENS , the House Vent into a Committee on the A&s relating to the • discovery of the longitude. A resolution granting 10,0001. for the purposes of the A& was agreed to ; the report to be received to-morrow. - - - Mr. VANSITTART brought in the Appraisement Duty Bill, Which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time to-morrow. Mr. ALExANnExt brought up the Report of 'the Committee of Supply. The grants for miscellaneous services were agreed to. - Lord OSSULSTONE informed the HouSe, that His Majesty had given orders to lay before the House, pursuant to Address, a Copy of the Capitulationof Tobago. L WITNESSES' tILL. . .. . • . . . . were prescribed- by no Statute ; .they ,arese, out of the common law itself, and were in many, and'theso the most -important points, coeval With- it. The dotariues of equity were 'thruparatively rriOdern.— Though the > Bill - . was necessary, it was better it should not pus-, than to pass clogged with this pro viso: It was true a Court of Equity would not compel a defendant to disclose anj thing that may invalidate bis title, in case of purchase, for a.valua ble , consideration, without notice ; but the geheral rule of equity was, thnt no man could refuse answer . mg on the ground that the answer might involve him in civil suits. The Judges at Common Law were often called upon. to decide nice . points inci dentally, and on the moment, and he thought it wrong to shackle them with references to the prac tice of .a Court of .Equlty.. He allowed there were exceptions to, the rule, but the Bill did not go to take them away. The Clause was unnecessary and inconsistentwith . the spirit of the Law of England: The ATTORNEY GLEN RAL defended: the Bill on the ground that it had received, the ,sanc tion of one of the branches of the Legislature,. and the highest Court of Judicature in the Kingdom, in which every thing had been done to render- it perfe&. He, however, thought the Amendment made by the prOviso desirable. The Bill could not be said to be exaaly'conformable to the opinion of the Judges while no notice .was taken of the ex, ceptions they-made to the rule. It was the objea of the proviso to attend to these • exceptions. The exceptions, if they were ,exceptions in law, were not,on any legal-record, neither were the rules to which they applied. There was no - reason to think the: rules ofevidenceobserved in Courts of - Law coeval with the embarkation of .Richard I. for the Holy Land, the era of the Code of Common Law. These rules were not fiitnid in any book of law. They could not, therefore, be'' said to be anterior to the Courts of Equity. On the contrary, it was notori ous that many of the rules of evidence were of late invention ; and that some of them had been esta , blished by a Chief Justice who had presided 30 years in the Court of King's Bench, and who was in theyemembrance of many of those who heard I:irn (Lord Mansfield). All admissions that may, involve penalties, and forfeitures by law, were necessarily ex cepted. The other exceptions the Judges may have thought necessary, and therefore he supported the. proviso. , • The MASTER of the ROLLS agreed, that.the Courts of Law ought hot to refer to a Court of Equity for rules of - evidence ; but when they took any principle from a Court of Equity, he thought they ought to take it with all the . I ...mitations , and qualifications the pra&ice of equity had annexed to it. Chief Baron Parker had allowed' the right to demur to such - questions as would not be insisted on in a Court of Equity. Lord , Kenyon 'denied the rule of general obligation to answer ; but in the case of admissions ; before arbitrators; he allowed the quali fications established in equity. According to the old law of England, - no man_ could be called upon to. make any admisSion intplicatihg himself • in the smallest degree ; no more to make an admission in volving a pecuniary loss than an 'admission involving' the penalties'of felony ; the law of England abhor ring reducing a man to the alternative of-committing perjury or doing himself an injury. A legal penalty. of 51. was allowed to he a g!od consideration forre fusing to answer; Why then should not a witness be exempted from admissions .that--may involve the annihilation of his whole, property ?: It may be' said the interests of justice required the admissions. en joined by the Bill ; but the interests .of justice re quired equally.theconfession of a Murderer called as a winless against. a person falsely accused of the crime, of whose innocence this confession would be the fullest 'testimony.: Yet, this confession was not required. It was-not theinterest of justice 'that was in question, but thrprote4ion allowed by the' 'law for -the security of the sublet% In every other coun try a debt may be put.without any evidence 'to the oath of the person in charge. In this country that could' not be done. The principle and the train of cOmpurgation it involved were easily got rid of by our Courts. Formerly, every aa that gave rise, to a civil action ; involved a penalty to the 'Crown ; for withholding the just demand in cases of civil action; and for the offence vi et qrnai's, in cases o 1 trespass, a capias was issued on the amerectnent, till the time of King William s when it had been done away. From all this he was convinced that there Was no, thing in the common law to compel witnesses to' answer questions involving civil anions, any' more than those involving pecuniary and corporeal penal ties. It was only from the-Courts of Equity 'that the rule was taken, and the qualification existing in those Courts ought to be taken with it. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL maintained, that the Judge was at liberty to decide on the legal ex ceptions without the proviso. The Bill went 'to enaol, that witnesses could not refuse to answer, on the sole ground 'that their answers Might involve them in civil suits. That was the principle now in force in the Courts of Equity. Omittinethe proviso, the point would remain as it was before. He under stood tint the Judges were very ronch averse to- the introduCtion of the rules of the Courts of Equity into the Courts of Law. It was the opinion of ten of the great law authorities, that witnesses were bound to answer without respect to civil suits. Now, that so great a law authority had questioned the opinion of the Judges, it must appear to all particularly neces sary. to.settle the point in question. Mr. PERCIVA L was. sure it was intended by the Judges to make exceptions to the general rule they bad laid, down. A proViso. similar ttl that now pro posed had been tirgedin the .Lords, and agreed to in the first-instance; but the Bill had been sent down without it. He did not hesitate to say, however, that without the proviso the Bill ()light not pass, and that the_ questions arising ought to- be left to be determined in a legal way; . The question before the House was ,one of which the House ought not to take cognizance. Certainly it was one that, ought nut to be decided on in haste. The Attorney and Solicitor-General were in direa opposition upon it. He could not:say, that the pasing of the proviso would do ,away his obje&ions altogether,; but cer tainly, , without passing the proviso, his obje&ions could not be overcome. Mr. Secretary FOX pitl, he had not heard of the propriety of passing the Bill. Notwithstanding his high opinion of the Hob. and Learned 'Gentleman on the Bench be4oW him (the MaSter *of the Rolls), whose distinEtness of expression evinced the clear ness of his mind he was not satisfied that this Bill was On the Motion of the - ATTORNEY-GE-NERAL the House went into a Committee on the WitnesseSY Liability Bill. The MASTER-of the ROLLS complained, that while the Bill pretended to be only declaratory, it in ' reality ena&ed very largely and very illegally. The opiniQD which the majority of tne Judges 'expressed, but expressed with much limitation and qualification, vas/generally, and without exception; established as law by the Bill as it stood. He wished to guard against this excess by alloWing the witness - to objeCr, and the judge to allow the objeaion, in all cases in which a defendant to a bill in equity would not be bound to answer. in allowing to a Court of Com mon Law the same power over witnesses that a Court of Equity had over defendants, he did not 'wish to make those powers compulsory, without the :exceptions allowed in equity. 'Me therefore moved a proviso, by which the witness should be allowed to-plead an exception' to the rule laid down in the Sal, in all cases where such an exception would he allowed in a Court of Equity ; and that the Judges should be at liberty to alloW, that exception in the same manner as if this Mt did not exist. . The SOLICITOR-GENERAL .had..always less • confidence in his own opinion,.when it differed from that of his Hon. and learned Friend ; but if. this proviso were to pass, it would go to the establish ment of a new principle unknown to the' Law of England, that of regulating the rules of 'evidence in the Courts -of Law by the practice of a Court of Equity. The rules .of evidence in common 'law iC"\ t • 2. Y ; - e peecontorma l elete the opinions df .ilie iratiOt;l:i 0 ( fiurcli an argerresete in the eiseeent s cSjiicekl atteo; . the Juhass. ;Ille Jilt WO ! ildeeraark; beeatie4tne leeifairs, agniust-tr;:iiie. and:. 2 , laai'ehtdoUil .(- 1 i•-•-n • —e• ,--, • e- • - • n r-ent • • v. io' it itfvolehil . waa de:ly fippeeable, haehvery - mite- I - e;S tint. in ihe tanoh. An ClnieEliari: Might:, • ft&lheY riai dltlerenCeS ei•isteal . npen, it. ; Wlien the .great a s ljeanade tcrifhia Motion, en the score that those edi-n -lath 'authorities differetl It waS.MoSt essential to . set I munications hid been prjvate; and ;hit tihsde ‘;rith , a the peint at rest. . The Irlng - h•age of the indges . , 1 View tit. their thei'iting tlie. public , ii.,; . e Such , ath too : - ' in saying, that • a witness ~ e 'es generei 3 . , , o'- as jcchon would noid good against tile .produaiori -of some expressed, it, generally speaking,' bound Many documents - of different descriptions ilisit itefeen to answer, though what they .inny answer May quently becathe necessary to call for. If it Were in I involve them in a civil suit , w+ s- precisely, ConH this instance to be •adrnitted, he trusted that Ministers to the liirignag - e of the Bill before the • Would ,take care that the opinions Whieh he viii ilia: to House, which lahent to establish that' i . \vitneaa may procure-Should come before the House in 'some sk-pe . not refuse to answer solely on the ground e that his which•they might considet less .exceptiounble.. This answer - May inYolve him in iheivil suit. - ~The queS e . 'objecl - Might be effe&ed by calling for a ReportfriiM tion was, whether the uncertainty existing should be the General Offieers,pr by examining Lb. m either decided by an Act of Parliament, of e left to. remain at the Bar of the House; or in a Secret C mmittee, . with the increased force given to it by the differepce as might he deemed advisable. 'He never; how-. - of the great authorities this • day ) A great part of ever, could admit that it woald be prudent ta'pre what had been urged against the Bill went to arraign need in the Military arrangements which were then the opinion of the majority *of the Judges, to which tinder the conSideratiOn of Parliament without bay he would, nevertheless, adhere as the best' standard • ing first obtained the sentiments of general and ex- • • of the laW. He could not think the caSeaaf a wit , - perienced Officersewho.were not 'merely Soldiers in • ness in laW convertible with that of a defendant in theory, bUt who had commanded Regiments' and .equity,. or that the same rules were applicable to seen service. And here he would take the liberty of. . both. .The question in that - case would be, whether. guarding the Right Hon. Gentleman against the the Judges . should :06 inquiring into the ' practice in - error of listening to young and inexperienced' men, Chancery, When a point of evidencewas before them. in preference to veterans who had established their The indecency of such a proposition was obvious. . claim to esteem and confidence. It was for the pur- A reference to, the practice of the Court of Chancery pose of obtaining the opinion of such men that be . - was had in no Court of Law but tie Court of Ex- proposed this Motion, hoping tis it if the ' • ' opinions as . chequer, which was partly a Court Of Equity as well • they now stood were deemed unfit for the public as a Court of Law. The Judges at common law ' eye, they might be communicated to the House in foupd and established their rules of evidence by ana- some other shape. If any expedient of this nature • logy ; they did not 'borrow them from the Courts of were resorted to, he trusted that the opinions of such Equity. He was sure that not one of the Judges, men as Lord Cathcart, General Hutchinson, General not even those who were against the obligation to Prescott, &e. who had been forgotten by some .acci answer, was favourable to this proviso. He consi- dent, would not be omitted. M. Yorke concluded' dered the adoption of the proviso by the• Lords, in by moving; that there be laid before the House a the first instance, as a proof of their disposition to, copy of all such mintary opinions, in writing, as may give•every thing in the irature of amendment due, have been giVen on the subject of limited service, - in • consideration. The rejecting of it after. was a proof consequence of aiiy requisition from GoVernment to that, on consideration, it did not deserve to be - re- that etfe6t. ' , . tamed. General WALPOLE obsen'ed, that the enlist ment for limited service had been repeatedly and Mr. TERMS, on the best consideration tie could e give, thought therAmendment made by the Atto /I' successfully tried in the British Army. Particularly ney-General, on the first commitment, sufficient to in the seven years' w ar, and in the American war, remove all objeCtions to the Bid. The situation of men-had been enlisted for a term of three years only, • a Witness at La w , and a Defendant ii Chancery, d I ati tie number of men raised after the adoption of i this measure fir exceeded what had been raised Were very. different. His Hon. Friends -below-,Thim prior to if. Lie could not therefore see what neces would satisfy the House as to the principle' - of t 4 Bill, • sity thereexisted for calling for opinions on a sub-- The MASTER'Of the ROLLS explained. jeet, the merits of which had been - already decided ' Sir PICA RY GMBS defended his Learned by experience. , Friend behind him,. from the imputation of haYincr • • Mr, Secretary, IVINDILPif, abstaining from any confounded in his view - 6f the stibjeEt a Witne:: diaeuasion of the merits of the : military plan which With a Defendant. He declared that hiS objeCtions - he had submitted to the House, Weeld : confine him to the proviso had been strongly : fortified by what * lf .to a Ihw observations on the question immedi had fallen from the lieeht Honourable Secretary ately before them. He was surprised thattlie:Hba. and the Solicitor-General ; and, lie was decided - Gentleman had not in .the first instance anticipated ly of opinion that it ought not to be introduced - be to obje&ions to his Motion. The effeta of it was, , into the Bill. The Bill professed to da.;lare that to r to put those who dissented from it in the disagree the law which the majority of the Judges had de able • situtttion .61 appearing to be apprehensive, that dared tobelaw, the House was con , ,equently bound 1 the opinions which it teeded to produce' would be to adhere strictly, to that declaration, and not re found to militate against the system which they had fir to any rule of equity, of which .nothing had.been . adopted. This, however, was not a - fair inference. said by the JudgcS. It 'was true, - that the terms of No one knew better than the Hon. Gentleman ()li the opinion delivered by the Judges, 'implied a qua- I lification but the House oug ht , polite, • that ..there were . papers - which it %yea' the tin& nature and complete, exte nt ; ght to' know the dis tof that qualification • dety of Government to withhold, although in a late . act of, the Administration, of which they had fin-meal before they founded a measure on a supposition of what it might be. On the third reading he meant to` --a:part, they appeared to have forgotten that principle. It might be supposed that these opinions were !kept state histobjeEtions to the principle of the Bill : at back in compliance with . the.wishes of GovernMent, present, he should give his decided:, ne g ative to "the but the House would judge whatcredit was - clue to introduCtion of the proposed, clause, because 'the which they this supposition, when they were informed that the Judges had not stated the qualification opinions were so equally balanced, that it meg im annexed to the universality of their rule. .• possible any inference ceuld be drawn from them. • - The question on the Clause was then put, and ne gatived without a division. , • If tile. scale inclined any way, it was in his favour.. .. Opinions of fourteen Geoeral Officers had heen•ob e The House having resumed, the report was or, • . . tamed. Of these six had decided in favour of the dered to be received to-morrow. - A Message from the Lords announced their Lord- . opinion maintained by the Hon. Mover, seven had decided against it, and the remaining opinion was ships' Assent' to the Irish Treashry Bills' Bill,- and . . of such an ambiguous nature, thatit alight fhirly be the British Fishery Bill. i . disputed which side had a right- to claim- it. -So MILITARY OPINIONS. • much for the number of opinions; but if the nature Mr. YORKE had flattered himself that no obe of them were entered into, the balance of authdrity jeaions would be made to the Motion which he rose would evidently appear to be on his side. • Almost for the purpose of submitting to the House—a Mo the whole of those opinions allowed that the system tion which was calculated to put the House in posses sion of information the most material and important of limited • service would give greater faCilities to recruiting, and draw,' out a superior description - of At the' present moment. He tinderatood, however, Men ; the objeetions principally related to the Co that it was probable some objections would be started to his proposition, conformable as it- was to the ge- , lonial Service., There was considerable difference too in these adverse opinionS .as to the extent reran principle, of procuring eVery possible facility or the difficulty ; some thought that it might in judging of a question intimately conne ct ed with be easily surmounted ; others, that it would be the vital interests of the Country. He thought, inexpedient to make the nttempt in time of war. hoWever, that the -louse would scarcely proceed to Officers on the discussion of the question to 'which he .alluded, • . great objeCtion to the produetien Of those Papers was, that _they had been communicated in con& without- having previously obtained the •opinions o' f the - most able and experienced Military deuce to the Commander in Chief. If an extreme necessity for their produ6tion existed, this delicacy the subject—a subject on which the judgment of ci- Might be .over-ruled ; but he should be very enwil vil men alone was by - no means sufficient. He did not mean to say that the House should abide by ling to do so otherwise: He should be very unwilling to put the Officers into the unpleasant situation of see those Opinions, he only contended that they, ouglil• not to decide - without having heard them. The ,ing their opinions unexpectedly brought forward e and canvassed and disCUSi . ed by the:House and the Pub , 'Right Hon. Gentlerpan opposite had afforded the lie. Sieh a step Would weaken confidence be ' 4-ions . e no information, no authority on, the subjfgA,' tween military men aid their Commanders ; it except his assertion, that limited service 'as the basis of all the military ,s stems of Enrope. It Was might be produelive of many serious consequences. Besaies, after all, these were merely the opinions of highly esirable, that the details of ahte,military sys, military men, and the subject rested -on grounds tems of the greater Continental Powers : should be much broader than military knowledge aloire could before the douse : it `would - then, he believed, be ine`- limited' . funlish. A General might be an excellent Officer , found, that in no country was the ter understood :is it was described' by the Right Hon.: .and yet not possess thateknowledge of mankind which was :necessary •in the form:llion of,: such; a ' Gentleman, but that before these Powers discharg-ed a part of their Arthies, they -dearly ascertained the _system as that in contemplation. After some further sabservatinns; Mr. Windham coticluded by- declaring number of men which they still possessed. Heknew tiler he must vote against the Motion. thatthere ha • d • been in the possession of a very re- Mr. Yortic 'explained. ' spe&able Officer in thiecountry (the Deputy Quar- - 1 ter-master General) a detailed account of the Manner k . GeneratTARLETON thought it would be highly in -which the Austrian Government applied this sdesirable t to know the names, and consequently to principle of limited service .to their Army. He be enabled to estimate the authority of the General wished this account could be laid oh the Tablee and Officers who had.-delivered the opinions alluded' to. the House would then see the difficulties in which He wished likewiSe that_ it should be prevtously as, •the Austrian Government bad 'been involved. Whe- R certained in what way the questions had 'been teat ther, however, that document could. or could not to them, on which - a great deal depended. The be produced, surely the opinions of our own Officers questions•might not • have been fairly stated, and the on this system might. He understood that there answers cduld. therefore not be, satisfaaory. All existed in some, of the Offices, opinions in writing, this it was, .highly 'necessary - should be publicly by some of the_ most respectable and experienced i known. .He doubted nil:etheror not the questions Officersin the--British Anny, given in - consequence • had proceeded from the Commander in Chief, lite of a requisition from Ministers for their opinions on . rather thought they had been 'proposed by ttie*Ad that particular point. It •was 'highly desirable that ministration. , Military - opinions onshi military nub ' these opinions should be, laid .before' the . House, that •• jea were' indispeusible; and the House .ought: to be the House might be in possesiOn of the groUnds very jealous of con - indult - 1g the whole direction of upon which they were fo.inded,. and • : know What • the Army to a eiVilL . military•Gentlenran. • Ile had. variety of sentiments had been expressed, and the •, conversed on the stibjeEt with: some` of . the most ex :general bias of the whole. If the opittions a ,of- the ' perienced Officers in the kingdom, and he had rea - General Officers ltad been very mtiehllivicied, it was i -son to. believe, that the inducelterit of lloited Service ~~~