The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-03-24 00:00:00

adroitly slipped into ilk arguments thatordera to the ereceof refus-
ing tolnaittence of foreigners had been sent nut to our colonies. T i e
word colony was Ndroitly. slipped into the argument ; now it
meant the for'reet if tiihrahar, whets the oilers sent nut were, that
ercry mark of hospitality should be evinced, bat that the stay of
'foreigner% should not be continued lonizer than was consistent and
required by the ditties of hospitality. Ile supported the Hill I.OW
for the swum reason that be supported the Enlistment Rill ; for he
thought that this cannily should neither he 'Aired to be the scene
for harlemeng dcaigna against government,' with which we stood on
znicable tent's, ruifher should the subjects of this country be per-
mitted to engage in Iris of hostility against friendly nations. fire
ennui, by which parsons also were domiciled here, and had estab-
belied themselves in England, were affected by this hill, was now
removed. This in a great mrisure reconciled him to it. and the
few instances in which it was called into operation also weighed
with him in the support which he now gave it.
Sir J. M .iI'XIN TOSII was aporeheasfve theta want of physical
force would not permit him to offer to the Howse the arguments
Thieh lie had intended to oppose phe present bill; it conveyed.
however, an 14‘0101101 to the House, that it was not his Intention to
detain them for soy considerable length of time. The Right
Honourable eientlemsn (Mr. Wynn) appealed to him to beer
testimony to his 'modem in the debate on this }till in the year
11818. lle felt himself bound, in justice to the Right lion. Gentle-'
man, to testify the accuracy of the statement he had that night
made relative to his conduct en that occasion, which he remenn
bertd the more perfectly, as he was on that occssiots opposed be
the Marquis of 11,ondonderry (whose loss they all deplored,: and as'.
he laboured not only tinder the disadvantage of inferiority of in. '
tellectual vigour to hint, but also under a physical disadvantage
similar to that to which he had already alluded. On questions
relating to the ancient constitutional law of this country, ar.d in
which the nistouts and iiroieutions of the former period of our
history were involved. he looked upon the authority of die Right
lion. Gentleman as highly respectable. Ile did not believe the
Right Hon. lientle.nan maintained that the power of expelling
foreigner." was a prerogative of the crown ; it had hers' maintained.
however ; but in his (Sir James Mackintosh's) opinion, the argu-
ments adduced to sustain It were not adequate to the proof of the
position. If the present !till were one *high, in the opinion of the
Right llonourable Gentleman, should not have passed in 11111 i. was
it one that should he enseled in 1824 ? lie would leave to the
House to determine in which of these two years the most specious
pretexts could be invented for its enactment. (Ilex, hear, hear.)
Ile would have to the House to decide, whether a Bill which,
in the opinion of the Right Honourable Gentleman, was one
that should not have pis* in the first year after the Continent had
been agitated and convuleed by a revolutionary war, was a 11111
which ougth to be enacted in the ninth year of a milesequent peace?
(Cheers.) ' ll'hen this Bill was last discussed, in 181'2, the Right
ilmmurable I icntletnan WWI not present; and, as lie was a Al Mister
of the Crown, he (Sir J. Mackintosh) interred from his absence a
disapprobation of tne Bill. If then, in 11122, he disapproved of it,
what was then in the present aspect and condition of continental
affairs to convert that disapprobation into approval ? Was the
derail of revolution greater, or was it not greater now than then ?
I The Right lion. Secretary (Mr. Peel), who proposed this Bill,
acconspanieal it with a speech conceived in the most conciliatory
tone, and delivered with a most polished and ingratiating address.
l'he repeech of the Hight Honourable Gentleman might be well
Icharacterized by a figure of the ancient rhetoricians, called
Eneeenternno," which literally meant the calling of had
things by good names. ( Ilear, hear, hear.) However, die
polite circumlocution of the Right Hon. Gentleman resolved
itself into the simple idea of absolute power--of absolute power not
over a whole nation, but over a comparatively small number of
persons ; but still it was absolute power, plain and undisguised.
(flew., clear.) In the moral lassitude naturally created by an op-
position to measures in which he had long been fruitlessly en-
gaged, it was consolatory to seize on any circumstance which
!eight compeneate him for the moot bat unavailing support
which he might have given to ethers! measures. It was therefore a
consolation to him, in which he would ever delight, that he had con-
tributed to the mitigation of the severity of the present Bill, and it
more than repaid him for all the fatigue he had undergone on this
and other occamons, that out of twenty-six thousand person'', lie
hail been instrumental in rescuing ten thousand from the yoke of
arbitrary power. The mildness of the administration of this power
bad been adduced as an argument Mr its continuance. For his part
he cherished no pommel enmities, and his political opposition war %In-
tel toed by private rani .r; but without any personal accusation of the
doe want of leniency in the administration of this power, he would
ask io what country besides this could exist such a power, without the
risk of having it abuses! ? and if its abuse did not frequently occur
in this country, much surely was owing to that rigid scrutiny
which we have exercised over the conduct of Government. (Hear.)
It was, tberetiire, some satisfaction to know, that the intrepid and
unwearied opposition which had been given to this Bill in every
stage of its progress, was not altogether without effect; and if they
did not succeed to the eetent they deserved, their tithes were
not at least entirely thrown away; for In candour he was bound
to adult, that the omission of the clause alluded to by the Right
lion. Gentleman was a material mitigation, and a substantial
benefit. The flight Hon. Secretary had also it sorted to another
rhetorical figure, which, to avoid using two great words instead of
one, tie would explain in simple terms—he had commenced where
he ought to have terminated. The Right Honourable Gentleman
began by obviating objections to the Bill, instead of stating reasons
fur the necessity and policy of its enactment. This was a prepos-
terous mode of' argument, and the very presumption of objections
proved the necessity lie felt that he was under of excusing it.
That this Bill wait au alienation float the customs and usages of
one anemone was whet he (a lis I. /1.) conteadad las, and It had
not been proved that it had been loseonant 05 thillWe The example
of four or five acts of power, in thou or five centuries, was not a suf-
ficient ground on which to justly a Bill ee oppressive as the pre.
sent. Acts of power were not the safest guides for legislation.
There were ouch precedents for the worst measures. General
warrants did not Willa for precedents; they were rarely ye.
sorted to before the Revolution ; during the Revolution fre-
quently, but not often subsequently, until the period that
Lord Pardon finally condetuned them. They were also con-
demned by Lord ('hathatu, who, although he had used
them es Secretary of State, yet, as a Peer, afterwards had the man-
lineal, to avow their oppressive tendency and effect, and aided in
the abolition of them. There were also two other cases—ship-
lllll ney and the dispensing power—these were new acts of power,
and claimed as prerogatives of the Crown. Venal advocates, by
the aid of unrestrained analogies, and plausible Judges, were
found to take upon them the guilt of deciding in their favour.
The result wax, that they plunged the two Monarchs, whom they
sought to sustain, into an abyss of ruin ; it brought our Charles 1.,
to the seaffithe and hurled his son, James 11. from the Throne.
When in 1792 it was proposed
e,Li to introduce the present bill,
Ministers hail recourse to opinion or, the express question,
a* to whether the right of expelling foreigners was a prerogative'
of the Crown ? When such a question was to be referred, it wra
natural that the person selected for such reference should be one of
no partial bias to popular principles, of learning undisputed, and
of that species of learning which gave information on the practice
and principles of legislation, &Tooling to the customs and spirit of
our ancestors. The profession of the law would recognise, In
Sergeant Hill, a character such as lie had sketched. The
opinion of that learned person was. " that there existed no general
lower in the Crown of expelling foreigners ' • that all prerogatives
of the Crown were founded 00 COlllOlOll la
ww ; common law was
founded on usage; and so far, he could ascertain their usage
did not vest such power in the Crown." This was the opinion
of an eminent lawyer, when this Bill was introduced, at the
rimmiencement of the revolutionary war. But, looking to
a remoter period of history. the House would perceive that a special
statute was obliged to be enacted for this very purpose. The pe-
riod to which he referred was the reign of Ilenry the Fifth, who
was obliged to apply to Parliament for the enactment of it particu-
lar statute, to enable hint to expel the subjects of the Ihuke of Brit-
tany. This, too, Ras at a time when that Monarch had returned
victor' fromthe field of Agincourt; yet, notwithstanding all the
poop and splendor of dust glorious achievement, he was Obliged
to apply to Parliament to invest him with plower for the purpose lie
J (Sir J. 111ackintaih) had specified. bitch was the doctrine of our
ancestors, and such the opinion of Sergeant Hill. It was a legal,
not a political opinion, " Nuts Will Mr memo." Sergeant (lull
was not like him (Sir J. Mackintosh) a liefonner, nor, he believed,
even a Whig. The Right lion. Secretary had first spoken of the
power as vested in the Crown, snd then, by way of a second
edition, amended it by adding the 'superfluous epithet of
"effective," as if the very term " power" 11111 not imply and
convey efficiency also. He would contend, however, that nu such
poyrer existed ; their WeettiVho "rectifileirjudicial eases of its
existence • and he paid little regard to any solitary, obsolete,
and unjoilicial precedent that might be found slumbering in anti-
emoted repositories, and that were ransacked aftivonly by lawyers,
who sought to colt tier the acts of their from wlumi they solicited or ex-
peeled favour. It had been adduced as an argument in support of this
Pill, that it was not likely to he abused ; but he would not accede to
a measure which admitted even ofliability ; it shade, not admit even
of possibility of ohmic. This was rota IVar Alien Bill. Those who
voted for the War Alien Bill might with perfect consistency vote I
ageir.st the present. This Rill could not be defended on any pretext t
arming out of a state of war; but in a time of perfect peace and tnui.
quality it deprived strangers sojourning here frinit the benefit of the
Hahne l'orpus, of trial by jury, and of other advameges which
Englishmen enjoyed; and the sill of the elinister was the only
rule of discretion by which hi• expulsion from the kingdom
should or should me be determined upon. To give much a
power as this to Government, and to seek to justify it, by saying
it was not likely to he abused, was an argument why the House
of l'onimoins should invest Ministers with the most arbi.
teary power on every subject of legislation. (Hear, hear, hear).
If this argument were well founded there would be 1101111: reason Mr
apprehending, with Mr. Burke in his letter to the people of Bristol,
that Ale. Ilienie's opinion of the tolerableness of arbitrary power,
when mildly exercised; wax not wholly groundless, tend it was our
ditty to revel the censures that hail been so often bestowed on
that abused and injured fiwiresa. the ILuitille, in which the fewness
of the captives was the beet proof of the mildness with which arhi_
teary imprisoi 'tit had been exercised in that country. Arbitrary
punishment Was 110 more tolerable. because mildly exercised, than
arbitrary imprisonment. Butt to proceed with the argument as if it
I were tenable. It was alleged in defence of the Alien Bill, that no
compleint had been made ; that the powers given by it to the lio.
1 rerement had not been abused. Could the Houseforgeo that it was
I the. very nature of the abuse, when committed, to place the suf-
fercr beyond the power awaking it known. (Hear.) Suppose the
case tit' any foreigner, driven from the liomerly hospitable ties of
England, where could he find refuge? Ilow could he make
; lute complaints beard by the Parliament, or people of Ent_
land? The argument acknowledged, that the tendency of that
power was naturally and peculiarly to abuse, anti if flee inquiry,
hold diacension, the debates of Parliatnent, the frequent appals
to the imblic, and those other proceedings which characterised the
spirit of a free government, furnished nwrective, tier the evils which I
would otherwise have flowed from 'llene deviations front the grin-
elides of free government, what Ras the inference a Will every norm
should (Ir.'s.. l' The necessity of cheris'aing those principles which