The National Register.
London, England, 1814-04-24 00:00:00

APRIL 24.

sure. He suliiiiitted,lbat all .or any of the matters which Itad.oc-
copied the attention of the house, might, with propriety, be men. !
tioned. Such appeared to be the case from the rules and practice
of parliament, which constituted their best authority in matters of
this description. So it appeared from the. entries in the journals ot:
the House of Lords, and frons the memorial's 'of the rules and prac-
bee of parliament. Hastas precedent book, which had been gene-4
Pally considered me their best guide, laid down the rule accordingly,
and stated, thot it was coatonetry fur the speid in presenting a
money bill, to advert to what the house had been tieing in the course
of the session. In tie entries in the Lords' journals, several speeches
of speakers appeared in presenting moHey bills, in which this line of
conduct had been adopted. He eitm d a variety of cases in proof of
this assertion. Withoot entering into the sabject of the Roman Ca-
tholic claims, he might so far allude to it as to say, that all had
thought it a question of the highest importance. On the one hand,
it was thought conducive to the strength of the empire, and the se-
curity of the constitution, that these claims should be granted ; on
the other band, it was thought that such a measure would be dan-
gerous to both : but all agreed that it was a question of the highest
impoi tanee; and, therefore, in the speech of the Speaker to the
Thrum., at the dime of the Session, hi which it was customary to
enumerate those matters which had partiehlarly occupied the atten-
tion of the house, it appeared fitting that this should nht he passed
over, (:yen on the sulljert had passed. But the fact
was, that though one bili had tailed, another bill (the Duke of Nos-
folk's) sen felon the other -house, mild pass that session. He main-
thilied. that had represented the matter with truth and corieetness.
The larger relief, viz, that of being eligible to seats in parliament
and to the highest state offices, had not been granted. But the
Duke ofNorfolhh bill, extending the privileges of the Catholics,
had passed ; and import this lolible result the passage in the speech,
which has thought by some to be objectionable, had been ftaineth
Nothing had been said in the admires: as to the bill having been rel.
jected : nothing as to the policy i r impolicy of future concessions.
It could not be denied but that the object of the exclusive laws
against Catholics v.'its to preserve the constitution of this country
fund oneotally Protestant, and that the Roman Catholics acknow-
jadhed a foreign inrishiatioo. He had, therefore, done no more
thaiihis duty, in stating truly and correctly the most important
proceedings of the house, and the grounds and reasons of those pro-
eetitings. As to the prelimivary abjection, that the Speaker could
kn-w nothing in its official capacity of what had passed in com-
mittee, he: had to remark that the Speaker must know of it. It
was his duty to be there present, though by the indulgence of the
house lie might be occasionally absent. He might be suddenly
called npon to take the chair, for the purpose of restoring order.
The case had happened to himself. He necessarily knew that the
bill had ,:one into the committee, and had not come out • and he
knew from the consmittee books, which, in their particular place,
were as good authority as the entries on the journals of the house,
what had passed in the Committee. On shell a mere technical ob-
ieetion, he apprehended no one could with much confidence raise
an argument. As to the concluding paraaraph of the passage under
consideration he had there stated that the house had been willing,
and he trustemi evor would be willing, to grant the largest share of
religions toleration. This alluded to the Duke of Northlkhm bill,
which had passed, and thrilled the. gromid and authority for that
paragraph. In *hat he had done, he was supported by great names
and by great authorities, and conceived that he had now said enough
for hi, own
.instilication. (Hear !) It' the house should think pro-
per to prescribe may rules tor the conduct of its Speaker on such
cierashos, t oufining glen wit!:in narrower limits than those to which
lie had hermu before restricted, it would he for the house to weigh
well all toe cunsconenees of such a proceeding, but it would be his
duty to jell obedience. He thanked the house for the
patience and indulgence with which it had listened to him (bear).
When lie haul 'elected that the proceedings respecting the Catho-
lics had been the longest and most important of the Session, he had
thought it his duty to do that which lie had done--his duty to the
house of whiidi he was Speaker—his- duty to the• nation of which
they were all representatiscs. If it should be their opinion, that he
had "Rd in a manner unbecoming his situotion, lie should deeply'
lament that decision, but he slimild still stand fully acquitted to lily
oh» cohscienoe. He now, without fear though certainly not with-
wit concern, delivered up his conduct to the house for its judgment.
(Hear, hem
Mr, Wit ITP.RrAD said, that he had heard nothing in the speech
of tse Right Hon. Gentleman which at all changed tits. view
he had betore taken of the sulafect- He remained now entirely of
sams• (wpm' that he had m inert:tined on hearing of the speech
dehvered ley non at the bar of the House of Lordr. Wahl.

.T 63

Hon. Gentleman (the Speaker) had no authority fur such a proceed-
ing. He was neither authorised by the House, nor justified by any
precedent, in taking tie liberty. to make the observations be had
done. When Charles the First entered the House of Commoes to
arrest five of its members, and called upon the Speaker Lenthale to
point them out ; his answer was, " As Speaker of this House, I
have neither eyes to see, ears to hear, or a tongue to utter any
thing, but what the House shall command me." The conduct of
the Right Hon. Gentleman had, however, b. en the direct reverse
of this ; he had found eyes to see, and a tongue to utter what the
House had never commanded or authorised him to do. He eon-
aided by moving a resolution -as an amendment to Lord MertAth's
motion, which was in substance, " that it appeared to the House,
that the Speaker did, at the close of the last.session, deli%er a speech
at the bar of the House of Lords, in which be state(' certain pro-.
ceedings that had taken place in a Committee of the whole !louse,
relative to the (-tabus of the Roman Catholics, without any autho-
rity from the House so to do ; and that he did inform the Prince
Regent of the motives and reasons which he assumed to have in-
fluenced the Committee on that occasion; that by so doing be had
been guilty of a violation of the trust reposed ii, him, amid of the
privileges of that House, of which he was chosen gulrdiatt amid pro-
tector." He wished to give no opinion at present about the Catlin.
lie question, out of which this had orige,azed ; but whatevcr
might have been his opinion on that subject, he could wit avoid
voting against the proposition of the Hun. Gentlemen' who spoke
last.

Mr. WYNNE had read the precedents with much attention, anti
could not find an instance where the Speaker noticed those proposi-
tions which had been made in the house and negatived.
Mr. Rose said, he had a firm conviction that what had fallen from
the Speaker was conformable to the usage of Parliament, and t his con.
viction was strengthened by the precedents that had been adduced.
Allusions had been otten made to in,:asures depending, though per-
haps not to tneastues that had been negatived (a laugh); and an
allusion to the foraner was a stronger case than an allusioh to the
latter.

Mr. FREDERICK Dour LAS opposed the motion. One instance only
had occurred of a vote of censure having been pawed upon a Speaker,
(Sir John Trevor,) and that in a case of flagrant corruption. The
house would surely not couple with this vote, a vote of censure upon
another Speaker, distinguished both for his public and private virtues,
and endeared-to the house and the country by the recollection of his
services. _ _

Sir Jour; NEWPORT supported the motion.
Mr. P. GnA ST supported the motion.
TheCrixreELLoa of the Exen,.Qt! ER thought it is duty to vote
against the motion and the amendment,
Mr. PLUN REIT considered the speech in question to be one of the
most unconstitutional attacks ever made upon that House.
Mr. CA NN I No said, the Speaker had certainly given a colour to their.
proceedings differing widely -from tlr,t which lie (Mr. Cunning) would
have given, but should he for this object of his giving the view which
he took of it ? He might-think he saw an error of judgment—he might
think it an unfortunate exercise of the di4cretin vested in hint, hut
he could see nothing to condemn as an abuse of the advantage.he en-
joyed--(Hear, hear 1) He would not s•iy, it the abstract question
were what ought to he the extent of the Speaker's discretion, that he
would vote for giving it all that latitude which it at present had ; but
he thought the Speaker hardly treated, when they visited on him, not
only his actual extension of that discretion, but also the vice of Ilia ori-
ginal institution—(Hear, lone, hear 1) He enticluded, by declaring it
to be his opinion that no case had been made out to call for the special
interference of the House.

Mr. TiAI NEy stated it to be his intention to vote for the original
motion, as that appeared to him to furnish the mildest preventive ut the
evil of which they complained.
General MATur.sv supported the Amendment.
51r. Bs.' nit RST asserted the privilege of rl►e Speaker, and t', ex•
ample of former Speakers authorised all he had said. Dlsaporovisig
both of the motion and amendment, he should, in the first instance.
vote that the words of the !stollen should stand, in order to throw out
the amendment. Ha should afterwards put a negative on the original
motion.

The (.;allery waq then cleared, and the amendment having been r)e-
gatived, the i louse divided on the
FOr the unitiun, 106 ; AgainNt
Adjourned at one o'clock.

Amongst the stories related of Buonaparte in the French
papers, is one of his havini highly praised Louis VIII.
rejoiced in his restoration, and stated that he should have,
been glad to have beet' one of his Majesty's Genii