The Sun. — London, England, 1817-05-13 00:00:00

H lllit ilettire . th'e'p eo iee — , e;cl wire'net these 1 044 , 11 , 9P - '.,t, Ee I Must every thing . be I ti laliers i • Why Was the-CnillitiY 1 W he .41-41, l yibust,be-do u bled, b ecause the yen• iil: 4lo ltliers could onlf be trusted ! . Was . Nelt of th at triun li t, in consicpienee t h ey had'carried up Addresses of Con illi " Was; this the consequence of the . I .,llbeasts they had heard of the peaceful r,,,k!li the Noble Lord 'at the Congresel km m y h v ti i iii.., had heard on this subject, were 10 1 4 0 e,ealled urn to vote such , an army i iii • a •,e_ . .I..urd hat proposed to keep up ? ii ir !9tYnow to be Jeered, as they had :161i$11..ehate, when they spoke of the pre ss Olie of profound Peace ? Whatever liti of the additional force required to 'vt : Colonial acquisitions, there was tcthis que st i on from the ground on 44 been placed by hi s 'H on. Fri en d r1)o No good reafion could . be shewn 4 0 Men should he voted i n 1817 121104 e duties which' in' 1792 - it was "I ti tiC no more than 44,100.-- - • 7 4an'td. which had been taken by „Friend, ant i those Opposed to .4tterliPtell to make him b u d ge f ro m , ! eagle' the discipline" of our ariny'had h improved, as he rejoiced to say it `,double _the number-of men were lo rinctpaiticillar service that were for. He should have expected, that titte ntfewer men rathe;-than more wanted The state of profound which- the country was at pre t;ty the call made for a large mil. itiVeivere danger, which be'cle'. teas, let additional constables be t e Pane conaitatus be called out 1. retorted, to, in order . to secure Let Eaglishmen have. recourse tion of their country in time of liished to prove themselves wor 011slitution. For Ireland, it was I force could not be kept up than Sett last year, and which it was 'hands was necessary. He, how' 4:oinon, what had been done to re ?lv* of Ireland since that periOd. S k if nothing could be effected to „,'lt .country hut by means of an "atktinded, t h at by making the pro in matters of religion, much 4* required for Ireland might be "at then agreed to. The other te ft moved, and carried with- wished to know tin *I tohrlng what day the up the Report. 40N replied to-marrow. .„ - ‘ ,.'iersati on took place on this sun " e mietnen of the Oppof ition bay it should be taken on Wecities,.,la,Y' ,l e ttieti that the Report show! the .0 time first meutioned i and r. ' re linneti, it was ordered to be e ( tr ,, y. tial• Is. Committee, , f . 7, DM went through a ... to a llIt or " 116 1) was recei‘ed, avid i i , ) , rt , l , e i t t_ tn 't tee consideration on Lii . ). ii i . A IP r b : e rt af the Day were ti teit disposed te 2410 0111 cl a t half-past Twelve. 11„ - -...641...... ‘kiSE OF LORDS. 1 4 It. 1.......0... 'Lli 1t44, , of Illipi: , Seeing the Noble Secre tary. : t be' !y et ' adverted to his intention o f t l-0 41, ) r, r ; Ninctioi t of the Correspondence , 1 4 14 t1; ) , 11 , 1 tillg Magistrates of the Count ) ); t1, 41 t1 ) ;`able Viscount. He meant n( i,lrinte "'flyer'', but gave notice that he !‘ ) ti k tht4lVll. early day. He would no b % i ik il 14 ir 4 ble Secretary, whether t It 4 tied to had taken place ? ik a tett ov tto+ , !_tt replied 'in the alfirmative. let,illtdu'lqsiled to kn ow , whether ctr_ 1 / 4 4 11 4 h.rt)t been pat by those Magistrates tlit4l of St a t e i . 4tbk o ittehilTst attic!, that some questions viit t i t - put t o hi m b y et. the visiting Ma y were duly answered t., . . 411) 41 110). 1 . 4 ‘, of how ---o QuEsno:sr. at!tivt tigUOtilifoßE re-stated his in -I,"eatt i l :t the Petitions, which he hod '11(t) toil ` '.torn the Irish Catholics, should i t r i t eivl t. , thie ration on Friday next. ii *: ille On presented a petiti o n from a 14: 44111sitil:frlina ii,thabitants of the counties . • 4 1sit tst l '" , which being read, tip i tt4 the enactment of any legisla .4, 4114 ,/,he subject of the Cathode li t h sli tlig the measure of the Veto, • hto it .4 1th the principles of their re '',* 11, 41 t „ I N ' i lv ti, took occasion to remark, that 4 ti klit t i P i li lls MO the concurrence of 44 le met' Catholics. it h „ 4 • d e _ . unit i l . ling such a serious diire that t i le " 14 e an important considera ti. 'l.4.the Petition, with the names of t t rein t, ~ , 4,, .ue plaited. .1141.11/4`iirsteriC4tel,l s tiell tt proceeding ; the tip Nii,. 4 t hitely tile , o ono meastwe content th„litt ~ ante would he sent up from 16 t h l e ' h e genet , )tition, it w aa avowed, ' 'vli 1, t i i 1d sense of the Eng hi di Ni ri ilt 1 hat o . N I 1 0 44 ~ ?Lan to present any new it, 1144 leis year, as they had for ,t isl e , !i ld 4 1Ir ett 'dy adherence to their last •n ° tint " to the ' I the 81 . . approaching ge.Jr N ot) i It Ueet, which would be able Lords to deliver their _ li ‘e 't Pu t ikt o . 4 4, 1 th e ..Rt./. 0 ,, there vas no ypti J0i,,,, - st ated t titrd 'ills ktuv, a 411, Ufa petition i 4 lt 14 4 "bAerved lo that 41 4 file e Q f the that it was ty Mteifi I'llt eii L e g islature r' , to con -9i t i lt )r th e b. tonle and salutary to ii : h'ire , " elfB re and I, • i e t th e "Peci a ll., 0 aPPnless ‘ et ver.. . I, y il u measure Ni l ta e. 7 vt Ala of the Cm). ti lt vtsa t i o _ ii,__, 11. enStieti '." 04 b o . n this sub. uoughmore and Lott!' tbe. spe(tri,• which 1)41.6(311o . restill. CIRCUI.4WLIO;TIiIt OF VISCOUNT sitimourt - r. Barf GREY, rose to bring forward leis promised motion relative to this subject (he prefaced it with a speech of very extraordinisry . leugth, but of which our restricted limits confine us to a very brier and general sketch), observing, that what he had to submit to the consideration of the House, though • merely a legal question, was one which involved -points of the greatest constitutional importance, its seriously rtffectiug the freedom of the Press, and the personal freedom of individuals. He re gretted, that with reference to topics of this kind, the character of Parliament had materially changed • from what it formerly was: of late years it seem ed more anxious to add to the power and influence of the Crown, the increase of the Revenue, and of the military force. Adverting to the particu lar subject of discussion, he said that the opinion of his - Mijesty'SLaw Officers, as refer-red to in the Circular Letter of the NOble Viscount (Sid mouth),•bad very propel ly been communicated to the House ;• but lie would now move, .in order to complete the'conimunication, that a statement of the case upon which that opinion was founded . , should also be laid before their Lordships, in or der to Strew upon What gronnds such opinion was called . for, .and if the real case was fairly brought before the Law Officers of the Crown. lie had to request the most serious attention of their Lordships to 'what would transpire in the - dis cussion, as it may constitute the foundation of some future proposition to be submitted. The proceeding which , gave rise to the present motion he could. not , but regard as a most extraordinary procedure on the part of the Executive Government, as directly instructing the Magistrates as to the pertormanee of an important part of their jadicial duty. As the Noble Earl proceeded in his discussion, he referred largdy,and read copious extracts from the writings and decisions of the most estOblished English law &uthorities ; the general drift of his legal argu ment being to establish, that the ordinary Ma gistrates or Justices of the Peace possessed no such legal power as they were assumed to be vested with in the Circular Letter of. the Noble Secretary of State. .Even from. the opinion re ferred to itself, it appeared that, previously to the 4Stli of the King, there were strong doubts as to the existence of such a legal power even in a Judge. He felt warranted in contending, that the Act in queat ion did not give such a power ge nerally to the Judges, and still more, he must protest against the existence of such a legal power, as was claimed generalls for all Justices of the Peace, to decide what was or was not a libel (whien.was the most difficult polio iu the whole system of the law), and upon their opinions of the cases, to exact bail from any titan who was concerned in the publications in question. He had no difficulty in stating, from the best exami nation be was able to give to all the great law authorities of the realm, that,lie could not find any such power distinctly states), as that now claimed kir Justices of the l'eace. No power of the kind was inferable from,;the letter of the commission of R Justice of the Peace. In the opinions of Lord Coke, no such power wits delegated to interior Magistrates, even on suspicion of felony itself ; as it militated against Magna Charta. The au thorities of Hass kins, Chief Justice. Hale, and Mr. Justice Blackstone, were more or less to the same effect : in their opinions, the power of these Magistrates were expressly lintiteil to cases of fe lony, treason, and breach of the peace. The sen timents of the last mentioned were in fact an ex• tension of the opinion of Serjenat Hawkins upon the point, In the opinion of Chief Justice Holt, the powers of those Magistrates, even in cusses of Highs Treason, were nut -given to them by Sta . tutu, butt by Common Law, as authorized Conser vators of the Peace; and Lord Coke seemed to en tertain a similar opinion. But the Noble Lord dwelt with most force, and at greater length, ou the consideration of the celebrated proceedings which took place before Lord Conict), in the case of Mr. Wilkes. The decision of that most learned and revered Lawyer was, lie contended, in support of what he advanced, though the Case respected a warrant of the Secretary of State. He should next state the authority of Lord Mans field. That eminent Judge laid it down that an Act of Parliament was necessary to render Cheats amenable to two Magistrates. But this offence was of the sum'e class as that of libel. He was aware that it might be contended that because the Secretary of State possessed this power it must also belong to the Justices. 8010 prove this, it should be shewn that both offices were synonimotts, as administrator and executor. The fact was, ilow ever, different. The Secretary of State was a high officer, invested with a power of the most solemn and extensive kind, and subject to a rigid Parlia mentary•responsibility. He begged not to be un derstood its deprecatingabe Magistrates of this country. He entertained the highest respect for them, and should always support them in his p l ace j o p ar lhoueut. He most readily con fided power to their hands, but he saw no reason for going beyond the exigency of the time, and the fair import of • the law. A case recently be fore the King's Bench, under the Stanup Act, and, therefore ,exclusively the province of the Attorney- General, yet taken cognizance of by a Magis trate, tinder the instructions, as he understood, of the letter of the Noble Viscount,' proved how liable this power was to be übil,ed• heir Lord ships would remember, when his Noble Friend . (Lord Erskine), and one of the greatest lawyers, not practising the profession, that ever lived, Mr. Fox, laboured in Parliament to carry the Libel Bill. NVhat were the arguments in opposition to them ?—The incompetence of Juries to decide what was or was not libel. Happily this principle had been overthrown ; but be trusted none who employed the argument then wonid now come forward and maintain the competence -of Jus tices of the Peace to define what constituted libel. He wailful appeal to the Noble and Learned Lord upon the woolsack, whether he had not of ten been perplexed in the course of his official life at the bar, to decide upon publications brought to him as fit subjects for prosecution. The dis tinction between the Secretary of State, 011 a Jus tice, is to be found in Lord Camden, when he Observes, that this power olcommitting for libel, came to the furtuer he knew not how -m-not from - - - j .11 arra irl; aro -!ta icas oi tat leaee !!.air power, hot osi-. ginally„ in all likel.ilood, per mancialum F.,% . .en in spite of notorious wiage, general warraots were cot:denoted by Lord Mansfield, Mr. JUstiee Yates, and Lord Chief Justice Wilmot. Lord Camden is of the same Opiuion, Awl c a ll s s t i e s, a practice the stibmisstou of gitilt and poverty to il legal power. He would not say with a Noble Lord on a former occasion, that a lawyer's opinion a as given for a fee ; but lie would say with Lord Cam den, " is the law, as laid down (in the opinion) to be found in the books of authority—for if not --theft it is not law ;" and if it was the law be fore, he would ask egain why the Attorney-Ge neral of that day laboured to pass the 48th of the King ? 'Here was the opinion of th e Attorney- General on his side of the question. On tie whole, he contended that there 'was no foundation for the exercise of this power now claimed by Magistrates. But whet he particularly condemned was, the interference of the Secretary of State on this occasion. There never was an act more de- Serving the jealousy of Parliament than't he act of the Executive Power interfering with Niagistretes in the discharge of their duty. Nothing could he more unconstitutional than the act of the Secretary of State interpreting the law to the Magistrates. He not only put the Magistrates in the execution of the law, but undertook to explain and interpret the law. Nothing, he maintained, could be more dangerous. It was at this time more so than at any other. Here the Noble Earl alluded to the case of a man prosecuted at Liverpool on a chnrge of having 'preached a blaspheMous doctrine. He said he had seen and read the sermon preached by that person, and he could not discover in it any denial of a future state, as had been alledged.---- (Heat', hear !)--The only denial was against a separate state of existence for the soul. This was the opinion of the late Dr. Priestley, a • man highly estimable ; it was the opinion of sects who were tolerated in this country; therefore it could not be a fit subject for a prosecution. Another case of illegal stretch of power had recently occurred, which prov ed still more clearly the danger of that in terference to whii:b he alluded. He had seen in the public papers (and they were his only authority) an account of a criminal information , having been moved, on ,Friday lust, against a Ma gistrate, ior most oppressive and tyranniCal con duct, founded on the directions contained in the letter of the Secretary of State a and for having exercised au euthority under the Stamp Laws which did not belong to him. By the exercise of such powers as these, the habits as well as the constitution of the people would be changed, and if we proceeded much longer in this course, either the people would be driven to resistance, or the Government, in order to sustain itself, must be armed with a military despotism. Amidst all the distresses of the times, the hopes of getting through them most be in . ro strict' adherence to the principles of the Constitution, and a reliance on the loyalty and attachment of the people. Lie then concluded with moving— " That a Copy of the Case upon which the opinion of his Majesty's Law OdiCer4, referred to in the Circular LettPt of Viscauut Siamouth; was given, he laid hafore the House." Lord ELLabilloltouGti could assure their Loril *hips, not withetaatsliag the research which had been manifested by the Noble Earl, that the au thority given to Magistrates respecting libels had met with the fullest and most impartial investiga tion, And was built upon such .a foundation, that he had no hesitation in saying, that it was per fectly legal. The question was, whether a Justice of the Peace might hold to bail upon a case of libel, and this he wns certain Justices were com pletely authorised in doing. Taking for the grounds of his opinioa the grave and venerable authorities which bad in several instances been adduced even by the Noble •Earl himself, Lie could nut doubt but that it would be allowed, that the opinion was as well founded as it could be. First, he should refer to the respectable authority of my Lord Hale, who had stated, that Justices of the Peace might issue 'their warrants for the appre hension of persons charged of crimes witoin the cognizance, of the Sessions, and binding them over to keep the peace, &e. Now, if any person should take that passage of his Lordship's opinion and read it, what conclusion would they come to ? Certainly, that a libel was an of fence Cognizable. by .the Sessions. He should then refer to the very snore authority which had been quoted by the Noble Earl, Hawkins's Pleas of the Crown. There it was stated, that a Magis trate might convict torbigh treason, for a breach of the peace, &c. Now, what was, a libel ? Though not a forcible breach of the peace, it was evidently a breach of the peace byact and in reality. The only question seemed therefore to be, and that was what would never for a moment be doubt ed, whether libel was au offence coining under the cognizance of the Quarter Sessions. Lord Camden, if thin-mighty examined, would' be found also to be really an authority io fa vour of the poWer being granted to Justices; for he stated such .offenees to he under the cognizance of Coniervatora of the Peace. What would the country do without some such power as that which bad been given to Magistrates ? Were persons to be allowed to disturb and inflame the public mind for many months without being brought to justice, or without a chance of their being for some considerable time prevented from publishing seditious libels. The country w o uld not b e secure without some such mode of protection, and he wondered that any Noble Lord could for a moment even imply any thing against such a power. It was a necessary power which the moot y required for its good government, and if there had not been such authority for such a power to May gistrates, he would not have thought that House justified in adjourning even is single day without passing ionic Bill for granting such a power. With respect to Mr. Wilkes's case, he should say a word upon what had been dropped by the Noble Earl. it had been said that that Gentleman hall not b een gu il t y of a breeCh of privilege of Parlii went ; and why / Because what he bad been guilty of did net amount to an actual breach of the peace, butt it bail never been stated that Mr. Wilkes ought not to be held to bail fora libel. With all the authorities which he had stated, with the authority of Hale, ,Lord Camden, Mr. Sedeaut Hawkins, and with the number of wit- , recognizance! which he had pro. thiccd, tor so long a period, he could not belii daring it as his opinion, that there wes a very great toundation for the opin;on which 1 ad been stated, anti he conceived it the most ne ce ss a ry and the most beneficial measure, that in the pre sent titneii could have been adopted. Lord ERSKINii said, that no man could enter. twin towards the Noble Lord (Ellenborough) 4 more friendly disposition than lie did himself. Ni. person could hold- his legal ' knowledge in higher estimktion ; but upon the present occasion he felt himself hound to dissent, from the opinions of the Noble Lord, anti he telt confident that the practice in subjects of libel would bear hint out in that dissent. During the French Revolution, a time when much danger %vas apprehended from seditious pi•aet ices in this emit). try, every part of it was inundated by libels. Whatever evidence was brought forivaid during that period, at the Old Bailey, upon the stihjecr tit those libels, referred tosuch as %.‘ere hciun!ly pub- Halted. 'there were libels tried there at that time collected from all parts of the country; aCol in no one case was a person held to bail after au arrest by a Justice of the Peace. The Society for the Suppression of Vice never proceeded against any nelson arrested and held to bail by a Justice of the Peace for the publication of a blasphemous libel. The question now was, how the common law stood upon the subject.—[Here the Noble Lord read a passage front Lord Hale, to prove that at Justice of the Peirce could not hold to bail for every offence within, the cognizance of a Ses sion.)—They'were here upon the plain law of the land. If the Secretary of State considered the case so clear, what necessity was there for taking the opinions of the Law Officers of the Mown ? The Officers, in the opinion delivered by them, were guided merely by their own judgment...—. They did not state that there were any legal de cisions upon the case. They offered no grionuls for their deci,;ions. But even though practice might be offered in support of svlit had been done, this was not sufficient. Lord Camden said that practice, ever since the Revolution, did not constitute common Jaw unless supported by legal decision. Surely the miterable creatures who went about hawking these seditious or blas phemous papers could nut belookedupon as guilty of lib:de, and held to bail by every Magistrate who may think pioper to arrest them. This wits never Ilse case, even during the French tion. The Judges themselves, wit:.out a Jury, had not power to decide as to what was and what was' not a libel, and yet that power was now given to every Magistrate hoot proof—without Judge or Jury. It was highly improper mud uneoustitu 7 ti-inal that the Secretary of State should inter . tere %ich the Megistrates, and direct them as to what they were to consider libellous. During all the time that he had acted as Counsel for certain so. eieties in this country, he never su , pected that Magistrates had the power of itrtesting and hold• ing to bail for libel, nor did he know it to be.done In a.singleltistance. The Loan CHAtCiLI,OII, in expressing his tils . • sent from the conclusions drawn by the Noble and Learned Lora who . had last spoken, entered his protest against being bound by any opinion he should delivef on that night,-fur any other OAR the meri t purpose of the night ; because, if any persons were confined unjustly, they could hays their actions against the Magistrates, and he, 05 well as other Noble Lords, might hiaLT to pro, mounee kidgenent On n trial at their bar in a writ of enior, He professed himself as by no meau4 wanting respect to -the Noble Earl ; bat nothing could have induced him - to have con,. sented to the production of the opinion of the Law OfEcers of the Crown; if he bad not conceived that the Opinion had been; in some degree, embodied in the circular, letter. He feared, however, don the production of that nion might form an evil precedent. He had jections of a more set iou3 ;mutts to the produciion, of the case, for such cases not ;Infrequently con... mined many things it would he imptoper to die" close. Wnh resvect to the right of the Secretary of State to interfere with the Justices, he state& that it had not untrequently been the CUVom for. Secretaries of State to desire the, Chancellor to; inform the Judges to inform the Magistrates to' what offences they were particularly to direct their intention. He never felt any hesitation, in stating the principles that had influenced his, conluct as Attorney-General; he never h any no. lion that every libel on Ministers ought to be looked on aid' acrimony or vigilance ; but if be sow a, system of endeavouring to undermine the Con• stitutioa and the Government, he had ever op. posud it with all his. strength. Such was the cost:, in 1793 and 1794, when there existed a manifest design, tint merely to overthrow the Ecclesiastical, or Civil Establishment, but every Establishment that could secure the happiness and prosperity or the country.. lie could see no reason why his Noble Friend should be censuned for having sent the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown upotx a law point,---lt was nothing more than saying to the Magistrines—" Whatever may . he Inv own, opinion, 1 am yet desirous of having it confirmed by that of some eminent lawyers.;" and doubtless such it circumstance 'must give it additional weiglit. The Learned' Lord (Erskine) had stated, that while Counsel 1t the SOciety for the Suppression of Vice, Ire . ..had' not !mown of the esistenee', of such an, otithh'ilty in the, Magisrrates yet if such men as ilVir. Northey, Lord Hale, Sir Philip Yorke, (afterwards Lord. Hordwicke), Sir John Willes (as great,.ii 'com mon law lawyer as ever 'keit), Arthur Hill, Sir Dudley Rider, and Lorti Itisnsfield, hail in their respective sititations recognised such a power us legal, would the flott;e „vvntore pronounce a contrary opinion? opposition to these authorities a partial opinion pi Hale, and one of IlaWkins had been tulVanectl, but he insisted on it, Oast two great lawyers were iii favour of the opinion, and no one, that ls no lawyer, would tell him, that if one passage de clared certain thingc legal, therefore other things nut contained in it 'were to he considered legal. No one held Blackstone hi g lter than . he did, as a book that did the author very g r eA t, credit, but he did not consider it So much a book of authority as one that showed the author to be a very laborious and able man. Now let the House look to the practice of CO DE this q .hee l !craft). IS 61 'thoi e ) , 1111 grou - 114 rabl e. „F etteni hiltviei os i mach i tul that hi ' l4 Derfu . t ill:, ied for r , Z ir niltovem, hten vt , ;t t , t t 44 r, i q tl ke ‘ tt itliell) th t I rtth e * :i!' an t be Ptitet, 4 thti tin . • if II 10 itcti ty wia e ', ofts! ' 14 4 " et f 6 r Iti io, „ r tG Osed t 4h ,„ itti n 14dc,(Ite ho c to :oht erii 4 441 ' 11 / 4 if I 41 that F ' l "etin • io ta brct 11 0 w l x lo tion et a tt 0 Q414, ' o i l V tit' k ti i: t topos, $4 . 1 t0 yrt I;nier, kler kt i 'th at II : 4 11 4 1 , the ti L " k rein.