The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1805-05-31 00:00:00

4

_~:

IMPERIAL PARLIAMERT.

HOUSE OF LOl.DS—Truignay, MAT 30.

riw■

- -
The Lila upon th: Table were forwarded io their reai.ective
at I—,
private RAI; were hr log'it up from the Commons: by
Mt S. I.r Fevre, Mr tiamnitou, an I other Gentlemen.
MR sus Per FO).
The Earl of LIMERICK moved the order of
the day fur resuming the adjourned debates upon
the subjea of the torus of attendance. Scc. of Mr.
.Itistice Fox, upon the Committee of the whole
Ilnuce, which being r-ait ;
Lord Viscount CARLETON rose, aid resumed
his ohscrvations upon the subject. After referring
to some cases and precedents, he observed that, with
re.pea to the rig .t of itsning writs of assistance,
noon which so much stress had been laid, the A(t of
Union being silent upon the Intik& regard should
be had to what was the common law and custom of
the realm. That of Ireland was, that the judges
were entitled to receive writs of assistance, whenever
their attendance in the House of Lords was deem-
ed desirable; such was alto the rule and custom
of England. The Friglish judges did not at•
tend as imperial judges, but, as the judges <1
Itasf;land ; they had no authority over Irish cases ;
every principle in favour of the right of the
Engli,h Judges to receive those writs, obtained
equally in favour of that of the Irish Judges • the
ease was very different with respellto the Scots
Judges, they hitcl officially no seats in the Scots
Parliament; but that of Ireland was, by the Art of
Union, identified and consolidated with the 13ritish

Parliament, and placed on a footing of perfeEt equa-
lity; in corroboration of this, was the circumstance,
that all the Members on the part of Ireland were
taken from the then existing Irish Parliament, and
not by new eleetions after the union, as wa• the case
with the Sztaish Members. Under these consider-

*fiats, he thought the Common Law, rule and
custom of the realm, should be resorted to, which
was in aeon: of the Irish Judges receiving writs of
assistance, who were entitled, in every repe,f, to be
treated exaaly ia a similar manner with tho.se of
Lord HAWKESBURY entertained the highest
resist& for every thing that proceeded from the
Noble and Learned Viscount ; but in the particular
Me, he rather differed in opinion from him. The
present questien he coca: to he, How and in what
manner, Par. Justice toe was to attend, if ne
should thMk fit to attend, to defend himself against
the articles and charge? It was perfentiy clear, that
en person was admitted into the body of that Hour,
except in virtue of a writ or summons, of one de-
ecriptioe or another. No writs, as the law at pre-
sent 'toed, were issuahle to the Irish Judges, of
course they were not competent to be admitted witn-
in the House. Until the peint should be decided,
they certainly were not entitled. Urdu the letter
or "-^ An of Union, they were not ; but it may be a
future ones:ion, whether they should be entitled, he
a special legislative provision. The point in ques-
tion, however, he thought the House perfealy
competent to decide ; arid the practical question
was, whether, as the law now stood, writs of
assistance were issuable to the Irish. If not,
City were not entitled by law to come ieto
the body rf the House. the general question
may he decided by various modes. With re-
aped to the idea -if the Houses being incorporated;
it was trite that the It ish }kerne were, by repre-
vntetton, incrrporatrd with that of Great Britain ;
yet., it did not follow. that cv(ly appendage of the
Irish Parliament was, idevtifiel wilt these of Great
Britain, or to be a!tiched to the I reperiel Home of
Lord.. Such could not be considered as flowing
from the Union. At the same time, he freely ad-
mitted, that the case of the Scottish Judges could
rot, by fair analogy, furnish an argument against
the rights and privileges of those of Ireland.
The Earl of LIMERICK concurred in the
opinion of the Noble Lord, that the Irish Judges
were not admissible within the House, except
by v tut of writs of assistance. However, in the
present particular case, it should be expressly
declared and understood, that the proceeding
of an individual should eat tend to impair, still
less to cede that principle of right, which he con-
ceived, by the genuine principles of the Union, to
vest in the Judges of Ireland. In saying this, he
meant not in the least to advocate the cause of the
Learned Judge in question, still less -to say any
thing to procrastinate the proceedings ; but to ex-
press MI wish, that any aft, chained by the jedg.
meet or the feelings of an iadividuel, should tend to
infringe or impair the rights, or the dignity of the
Judges of 'rated.
The LOR'J CHANCELLOR was as anx:ous to
uphold the dignity of the judges of Ireland as any
man iinthat House, but he bel;ge..l their Lordships
to recollea the:, in the present ca,e, Mr. Justice
Fox was not called on to attend. He was merely
at liberty :a attend. The fan would depend upon
his chi es. which, if it was, that he will attend, he
had suggested the most respeaful mode and place
which, under the existing law, he could be allowed.
Witehretpeatotherightof attending within the House,
it seemed universally acknowledged, that such could
not be derived but horn a Writ of Assistance ; and,
in reference to the existence of such a right in the
Irish Judges, there were various modes of proceel-
ing to ascertain its existence, or to vest it, in cam it
may be held not to exist. For his owe part, speak-
ing as an individual, when he considered the pre-
babi'ity of having a number of Irish causes to dig.
cuss, and when he recollefled the torture of hearing
inch a multiplicity of Scots causes—(el levh )
the assistance of the Irish Judges, as attendants in
that House, would be very grateful to him.
The EMI of CA RNA AVON argued for the pro-
priety of having the rights of the Judges, or ra-
ther of the Pc*/ of liciand, decided on in that re-
' Tea. The Noble Earl seemed of opinion, the
right did exist, and that the people of Ireland should
have their causes decided on, with the assistance of
the Judges of Ireland.
Lord Visconnt SOMERTON "Archbishop of
Duhlin) Was of opinion, that by a fair construction
of the Mt of Union, the Irish Judges were placed
on a petted equality with those of England. Ey
the third Article of the Union, it was expressly
said, that the ma Legislatures shuuld become one
and the same Parliamerr. The An made no
difference with respea to the rights of the Irish
Judge.; if they were entitled to receive writs of
sternums berm the union, they, not being deprived

of that right by that Ad, still coa: inued to enjoy it.
All the Judges of Ireland, as well is Mr. Justice
Fox, were concerned in the present case; what slit.
tin.ftions were made by the Aft of Union in these re-
speEts, between the Judges of England and those of
Ireland ? If they had the power of issuing those
writs, they were called upon in julti.7e to act upon
it. At any ra,e, it the House decided ci:ntravily to
his sense, in the present instance, he hoped it w.iuld
be so done as not to impair the rights of the Judges
of Ireland.

The Earl of CARLISLE considered the question
as one of cortsiderahle importance. and it should be
thoroughly canvassed and solemnly decided upon.
The r ight may be found rather to lie in the Parliament
of Ireland, than in the Judges. Ihe A.l of Union
was silent upon the subjen, and the existence of the
right should he ascertained, previous to any proceed-
ing hostile to it taking place.
The Earl of R ADNOR. seemed of opinion, the
question should be decided upon; at the same time,
it should be considered, that, thougk by the Union,
the two Parliament went made the same, the Judges
were not Members of that Parliament ; throughout
the whole At no idea of the kind seemed to be en-
tertained.

Lord Viscount CARLETON. in explanation.
observed, thar, whatever the decision of the House
may be wish respea to the forms of proceeding—
whether in his mind suitable to the dignity of the
judges or not ; it was natural to suppose, that the
strong interest which the learned judge must take
in his defence. would urge him to come forward
therein. In that view of the case, he thourJ,lir the
question of right ought to be previously decided.
The Marquis of SLIGO regretted that such a dis-
cussion cculd be deemed necessary, and seemed to
deprecate proceedings which would go to place evm
Irish judges inn situation where an English judge
would not be placed ; and to think that a decision,
as to the sight, should be previously made.
Loid HOLLAND was of opinion the House
should not come to a hasty decision upon the pint
at issue. He was equally adverse to doing that
which might be contrary to law, on the one hand,
or of instituting a proceeding which might tend to
take away the right contended for, on the other. He
thought the interposition of the previous question,
as the case then stood, would not he an improper
mode; they should not do that hastily which might
tend to prejudge a question of such great and va-
rious importance.

Lord'ALYCKLAND thought that a middle
course may very well be adopted; such as should
leave the question of right suspended. He would,
therefore, propose to amend the original proposi-
tion, by inserting, Mier the words, Mr. Justice Fox,
" that not receiving a writ of summons." This
would leave the question open for future discussion,
by assigning, as a reason, that it was in consequence
of his not receiving a writ of summons, that the
proposed mode of proceeding was adopted.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought the
amendment unobjettionable ; at the same time, he
wished to explain, in answer to what had been
tl.rown out b. some of their Lordships, that he hal
no doubt whatever as to the existing law, and he
was surprised that, ever since the anion, no: one idea
had been suggested of the rights of the fri;ll Judges
ti attend the Imperial Parliament, until this ease of
Mr. Justice Fox occurred. The amendment asserted
no law, but left the case open to future discussion,
or to the application of legislative measures with
respea to it.
he Earl of CARNARVON did not approve of
the amendment. it appeared to him of an evasive
na,ure, and he thought the attendance of the Learn-
ed JuJge at the Bar would be a reeks' decision
up•in the case.
_ .

Lard HOLLANn considered the arnen.led as
worse thin the original proposition.
The Earl; of Lissaitica and CAUT.ISLe spike
veraily in e‘ p!anation, as did Lord 1' iscount C A a t.s.
TON.

The Farl of CARYSFORT delivered his semi-
menu at some length. He considered the attend-
ance of the Judges of both countries as a right of
the United Parliament, and of the subjech of the
realm ; as a right which they could be held as
destituted. because it was not specificaily mentioned
in the An of Union. He seemed to think the pre-
sent discussion would be better postponed, until the
genial question should be decided. Ito allowed
the arn-ndment would still leave the question open,
but still he had serious doubts as to the effc:t of the
&final proceeding.
Lord AUCKLAND shortly eTplair.Nl.
After which the question w 4; put on the amended
motion ; which, in effea, waS, " 1 hat if Mr. Jus-
tice Fox should think proper to attend Com-
mittee of the whole [limy, t.e should, • not having
received a writ of sumnionl,' be accommodated
wall a chair at the bar."

On this their Lordships divi.led ; when there
appeared—For the amended motion, 14—Against
it, 10—Majority, 8.
While the strangers were ont, we understand the
order for referring the St. Pancras Poor Bill to a
Committee of their Lordsloips so-marrow, was dis•
charged ; and a new order made, for committing it
on Thursday, the ziih of June.
The Bishop of S F. AS API I (as we could collcon)
repeated hiss notice of a zormer evening, that he
should on Wednesday next make such a motion re-
%petting the said Poll, as should, wtrc he successful,
prove fatal to it.
The second reading of Gardner's Divorce Bill
was postponed.—Adjourned till to-morrow.