The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-02-18 00:00:00

a, Later charge of libel was a fit subject for the cognizance of the
dorsal tribunals of the country. Suppose the charge of libel
'true. and Mr. Franks brought an tenon agaiast Mr. Kenrick
As the Liston of the lioJse. This suggested itself to him as
of ‘l,,,Figeultiati which might arise, and he onie
mentioned it
t • canonic. Again, suppose the Hottse, by • majority,
fx;;-.1-imatca guilty, and a Jury ewe afterward* to a dif.
t ? He would not say that the possible proceed.toss •
tribunals should bind the House, but when questions
e 1,., ii y was
or before them it was advisable to give these
.
.rdte d..' consideratio.i.
r^" • alit NE surprised to hear it asserted that one of the
S 1., . was
lo m -ost Mr. Kenrick was for a malicious prosecution. As
sbel
fu• as Ls; (Wild understand the amount of the charge, it went no
f .eta than to allege that Mr. Kenrick prosecuted Franks without
fficia • p-nof, If this was really all the ground of complaint in
a • rsc to this particular, the only charge remaining was the pub-
ft; tai the libel : but the Howie should consider that he had tot
eshialed this libel in his character of Magistrate or Judge. It
aid spar to him it was the moral private character of Mr. Ken-
net the flame was inquirin into objection and that to proceed with such
ale.qu was to establish a very able precedent.
il HLNMAN mid not help expressing his surprise at the
aug esnon that this inquiry was an investigation into the charm-
vs of Mr. Kennet as a private individual. The ground on which
it Tommie was as distinct fain this as possible. Mr. Ktinnek
west two the Court of King's Bench and moved for a
formation winst Mr. Franks ; and from the affidavits then put
an, he (Mr. Denman) founded the present charge. This was no:
nisch of a private proceeding ; it was a oration made of course in
span Court, it beeline the sub;ect of general discussion, and was
cued-tied by the one thousand newspapers and publications of the
day. Some allusion had been made by the Member for Hertford
(Mr. Limb) to a peculiar kind of bargain which was supposed to
twist ender particular circumstances ; but he disclaimed any thing
4. the kind. It was not only unustal amongst the profession, but
tettereva it appeared world entail disgrace and ruin. The
Member for Peterborough (Mr. ncarlett) observed that diet care
eras involved in great difficulties, because a Jury might come to
one conclusion. and the House to another t but was this an emu-
mem that could be considered as applying ? If it did, tt applied
also to its full eaten(, and It would be ridiculous hereafter for the
lionse to suppose that it had ibe power to question any Judge on
the lunch. Tht question was, if the proof was sufficient; in his
udignent it would he found to make out the charge. His charge of
libel was derived wholly from the affidavits—it might beconsidered
• translation of them. Here was found • calumnious letter basely
aspersing the character of hly. Freaks. Ile was aware that the
writing c f a libel was sometimes the most meritorious act of a man's
life; but this was not the use when a rash individual, first failing
;n his attempts to persecute an individual, afterwards tried to tun
him down by publishing that leapecting him which was untrue.
Ie had been also said that the charges should.not be connected, but
the character of a libel depended on general circumstances; it was
nor to be ascertained by a single isolated fact. Mr. Kenrick had
dinged Franks with four facts, all of which he could prove to be
false. If the House had any duties to perform to the public, one
of them unquestionably was to keep the administration of justice
lure. If any one possessed of common honesty or feeling should
say that he who first persecuted, and then published a letter calum-
tisting a poor man, was a fit person to be intrusted with the admi.
aistration of justice, to such he would exclaim. " In God's tame
let the present proceeding be abandoned." Was the House ready
to lay down a rule that nothing but what was done by a Judge in
his public capacity was to be brought before the Home ? Was it
to be said that open and notorious infamy was to be made no came
of proceeding ? if this were to be the case, the power of that
Hoses would soon become a dead letter. lie had been tempted too
far at this stage of the business; but his impression was, that if
peeper inquiry did not take places when such instances as the pre-
heat arose, those officers which ought to possess the entire confidence
end respect of the public, would be looked upon with jealousy, dis-
trust, and contempt.
Dlr. fiCARLETT explained. He did not say that notorious
infamy was not a proper subject to be brought before the Houma
What he meant was, if any person were libelled and applied to the
!loose, the proper answer would be, " Go and bring your aititin
in the ordinary way."
Mr. STIi.IRT WORTLEY said he saw no offence upon*
charge which was made. Mr. Kenriek wasesid to have gone before&
neighbouring Magistrate and preferred a false charge. Another of
the offences was, that he had offered Franks, that if he would
plead guilty to apart of the charge, he should be visited with a less
swoons of punishment. There was nothing extraordinary in
this : it was every day offered to those committed on charges of
forgery that if they chose to plead guilty to the minor offence, they
would incur a punishment less extensive. It was true that the
House did not allow any Judge to judge of their privileges. But
;ad turbid that private affairs should become the subject of their
gamin, I An investigation by that House was particularli liable
to prejudice. If he were to be tried for a libel he should say,
'• Give me twelve honest men to try me; I prefer them to such a
tribunal as this." (blear, bear.) The Hon. Member concluded
by saying that he should support the amendment.
Mr. ABEHCROhlilit said that he conceived when an indivi.
dual so conducted himself that !Bloaters could not feel themselves
justified in appointing such a person as Judge, the time had arrived
for steps to taken to remove him. VICu the consideration no.
thing that • Judge should possess a pare and untainted character ?
Many lientlemen seemed to think it beneath them to look into the
punt, of the administration of_justies ; but they took a different
view of their duty from him. He agreed with the lion. Secretary
who had said these were all questions of degree, and all who beard
that statement would feel that this charge did not stand by a sepa-
ration of the charges, but by the mutual support they afforded each
other. It had been said Fmk, wu ultimately committed by the
Grand Jury ; but let it be recollected • country Magistrate pos.
snood a cunsiderable degree of influence, and that should be in.
/paired into, If he complained that he was brought unfairly before
the public, he should be told that it was his own act. He regret.
ted to observe so many respectable Members treating this inquity
as one of very trifling importance.
Mr. Secretary CANNING said, of all questions brought before
the House there was not one, perhaps, on which every_ Member
world be so free as here to act on his own opinions. He would
shortly state his reason fur giving his support to the original mo.
Om. if it were a question now introduced for the first time, he
should probably agree with those Gentlemen who thought that
there was not that in the charges which should induce the House to
institute an inquiry ; but he could trot forget that it was counte.
minced during the last year; and more eape:ially he could not for-
get that his Honourable Friend (Mr. Secretary Peel) did induce the
Learned Gentleman to postpone a part of the question, without
intimating that it would, when again introduced, be opposed. He,
therefore, vu compelled to say that lie would not now, on a new
view of the case, though that view might be different from the ma
originally taken, interpose anything which would obstruct the pro-
mess of the Learned Gentleman's motion. The Learned Gentle.
man bad consented to • postponement of his motion at the request
of his Honourable Friend, that the press of public business might
not be interrupted ; and he had a right to suppose that that cour-
tesy which he had observed wouldoot beopposed by the new matter
now introduced.

iir7.ligKlS(_)N said that Mr. Kenrick wished the House to
understand he was quite prepared to go into his defence. He threw
himsclf upon the pleasure of the House, and was ready to abide
their decision. Ile (Mr. Denison) perfectly agreed with what had
bees said by the Hon. Member for Yorkshire (Mr. Stuart Won.
ley), but enoth.l. Hon. Member had asserted that Mr. Kennet
might have had mute acquaintance and influence with the parties
who committed Franks. When the punishment was reflected on,
to which the Magistrate might be subjected before whom Franks
was taken by Mr. Kenrick, and when it was considered jury who
founds true bill against Frwtlu, found it on their oaths, he thought
the ague supposition of the Hon. Member was without founds.

Sir W. W. WYNN said this was the sequel of the charges be-
fore the Mouse last session. He conceived they would be guilty of
great injustice if they allowed one of the charges to influence the
ether. lie was satisfied that if in consequence of the evidence there
there were sufficient grounds to impugn Mr. Kenrick, there was a
*crest reason why the prosecution of the cause should not be takeu

out of the precincts of the ordinary tribunals. This transaction
was public—it was well known : but whether it was the transaction
of a public or private individual, that individual was liable in the
ordinary way. If be should be convicted of a malicious prosecu-
tion or a libel, the House would for the future have to take cog.
nuance of all causes affeetludges • and It would not stop here,
for members of Parliament might be proceeded against in the same
manner. They might vote for Ir. Kenrick's expulsion, butthe ono-
meet they opened that door. they opened it to evils which they
had better avoid. In any time of political fetes eit a Member
might be moved against directly he became obnoxious. Ile would
also ask the House if it was desirable to entertain a discussion on a
charge unless there was every prospect that such charge would be
established ? What would be the consequence, too, it the other
House differed from this in its decision t The individual must, In
that event, remain with a deep stain on his character, and without
any prospect of redress. In his opinion the House had always bet.
ter confine itself to cases in which guilt had been positively and eh-
ettfutely shown. The Courts of justice should be allowed to decide
on the offence, and then the House would possess a sure ground of
removal. Upon the whole, be doubted whether the established fazts
were sufficient upft which to ground a vote for an eddies, to the
Crown... The gallery was then cleared for a division, when the
Lumbers appeared to be—.
For the motion . 81

Against it . 42
Majority —39
The Muer then resolved hull into a Committee, Mr. Gordon in
the Chair.
Mr. Gurney and Mr. Bollard appeared at the bar of the House
en the behalf of Mr. Kearick.
Mr. DENMAN moved that John Franks be called to the bar;
batiks Sergeant.at.Arms reporting that he was not in attendance,
limy Peters was called in and ratmined.
lir. DENMAN—Are you. Sir, a magistrate of the county. of
Sauey —I am. I reside within about two miles of bir. Kenna.
I ens, I belletie, the magistrate before whom the daughter of
Franks was brought some years ago open a charge of stealing some
areides in the house of Mr. Kenrick ; I do not recollect what the
'go of the girl might have been at that time, perhaps about 14 or
15 years. lam not sure that she was actually brought before me,
but I recollect granting a warrant for that purpose. There was so
evidence which could affect either her father or mother, relative to
that charge against the daughter; they were not charged as
abettors. Some sheep were stolen Gamma at two different pale&
The first time 30 were stolen, and sous wasdos fell 19 11 •itillb
to consequence of a paper which was foundt • poop MOW as
his house the day after the sheep were usksig g Iwo soma who
really did steal them was subsequently takes up and imourna
she Wooy. The mead time was two yew eitinseis, vb.