The National Register.
London, England, 1817-05-19 00:00:00

lbeir origin. Dr. B. has exccuttd his talk wit► great
Skill and discrimination, atidlve hope that his fellow
countrymen will reward his labours according to their
merit. There are a few verbal differences from the
English ►ucde of expression, which we believe arc the
ar►ations of the American dialect, from that of the
mother country ; and without adverting to 'the work
having been compiled is America, any reader would
be ready to call them inaccuracies of grammatical cor-
r., intim ; but these are very few, and may be rendered
palatable to au English reader by an attentive editor.
Another wlrk has lately found its way to England
from the fiesta) press, which we shall hope to notice
en a future day. " The history of the Jews from the
Destruction of the Temple to the 19 Century, by
Marmot Ada►►►s, in 2 Vohs."

IMPERIAL P.411.1.1.11EVT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

MOND %V, MAY 12.

A Petition was prolented from the Roinan Catholic. of
Warwick and Stafford, on the subject of the Veto, by Lath
Fiztwilliam.-0; dead to be Irid on the table.

LORD SIOMOLLO'S I'IRCL LAR.

Earl Gney rose to bring tOrward his motion on the Circular
Letter of the Noble Viscount. The Noble Earl observed, that
he should content himself with moving for the case upon
which the Cirtular Letter was grounded. It was necessary
to the understanding of the opinions of the Law Officers of the
Crown ; hut as the present saotion might be the foundation of
smite future proceedings, he would make some observations
on the case. The Cit color Letter was addressed to the Lords
Lieutenants, in order to instruct the Magistrates how to act,
in eases %envie persiiiis so otleutling should be brought before
them. That no application had been made to the Noble Vis-
count, he must contend. (The opinion was here read by the
INioble Earl.) The power of a Secretary of State to Commit for
treasonable practices liliel,is an acknowledged right,w Inch
he could not dispute ; nor would lie question the same authority
being ve:..ted in the Judges under the 48111 of the King ; but
the power given by the Act in question applied only to the
Judges of the Court of King's Bench. In that respect the
opinion was incorrect, when it stated, that the power wa,
given generally to Judges. Now as to the opinion of the Law
Officers, they appeared to have grounded it upon the decision
made by a Noble Autl Learned Lou.ol In the Cucuta'. Letter
though the word" illaSpile1130115" was used, no such word was
to be found in the opinion of the I. iw Oakes... Every sire-
des of minor offence, vested in the Magistrates the power of
coinntitting or requiring Lail; and if the opinion of the
Crown Officers be true, they were now justified in committing
far libel. In the Common Law he had nut been able to find
any sitelt Law as this—the Statute Law was silent nu the sub-
ject ; nor could be hod any •it..lt powers upon record ; on the
contrary, all the authorities he had tout,d militated against it.
In the commission of the Justices, no such power was re-
cognised. 'Fite first opinion he found was that of Lord Coke,
who denied the power of the Magistrate to commit previous
to indietinent for trespass, such a proceeding being contrary
to Magna CleJlts ; nay, even in felony, he had no such power.
Rut this authority was questioned by Lord Hole. HA
in his Pleas of the Crown, is of opinion " that a warrant might
be granted for treason, felony, or premunire, by a Ntagisti ate
out of Quarter Sessions, and lie 'night commit for the like
offences." But it was clear that this could out apply to Libel,
or other misdemeanours The next authosity that of Cilia*
Jtiviees Hale, who says, " that Justices may commit prisons
charged with crimes cognisant within the jurisdiction of the
Session•of the Peace."—" The opinion °fifty Lord Coke was
too straightdared,"—says this Learned Judge. The opinion
of Blackstone was not at yafiance with these, but that writer
was subject to have his opinions contravened. The Noble
Earl contended, that these ontliorities wcte in favour of the
position he had assumed, namely, that Magistrates were rut
vested with the powers of committing fur libel. 'file opinion
of Chief Justice Holt was, that Justices derived their power
in consequence of their being Conservators of the Peace. In
two eases of commitment by the Secretary of State for libel,
decision was made by the Judges of the Bench in favour of
the person committed. So in the ease of Wilkes, where, in
reference to that of the Seven Judges, my Lord Camden was
of opinion " that Jiidge Foley, the only honest man of the
font', was right in deciding i.gaiiist the power exercised by
She Secretary of State." Lord Camden was of his opiition,
and discharged Mm. Wilkes. He would ask the House whe-
ther they could produce any practice to sliew that Macis-
trotes had exercised such power, except in caselilotennspira-
cies, which were cognizable at Sessions. But Lord Mans-
field, in a case which e.11»4' before him, was of opinion that
Justices of Sessions had the inrisdiction over crimes of this
description, the Sallie as in cases of cheats; but then the
power did not exist, in any other form Hiatt by the decision of
two Magistrates. It was on a practice of this sort that the
opinion of the LAW Officers rested. He wait pretusrert to con-
tend, that such power was not vested in this- Secretary of State,
Without ina-aiiiug to Itllect OH the character of Magistrates,
who were in geueral men of gond character, Country- Gen_
slomen, exercising their duties gratuitously, it was nut right
to permit theta to exercise titmice! %%%%% -yrs which the opinions
of the Crown Lawyers were calculated to support. Tne ins•
mense powei granted was a new anti dangerous one to the
Constil to iota. What was the effect of this power It enabled
e -ery informer in the country to carry his tictito before any,
Alogist I ate. who, from mnotivesof seWinterest, or to serve ail,
political perpoNe, nieglit commit for libel, without atrmilia:
the avew,ed person an opportunity of gettuirt bail. He would
here cite the opinion ot Lord Camden, denying the authority
Of the Secretary of State to commit in eases of lids
So iu the case of general warrants, the Judges. as was well
know, coa:lsnmed the practice of issnitig them as being ille.
al. 'file Noble Earl Collilndoi, Ili it the law was only to lie
foittid as laid dowd by the tout is of Law. In the vase,
and Spence, All Slick authority was Vl.S,ed in tile I.teis.
trates ; indeed, if it had been, it would be dangernits to the
per:tile AA the State. But there was another. consideration,
and lii4t was, the conduct of the Secretary of state, who had
sent ;he mush actions to the Lords Lieutenants tit tlic s••verat
counties. Tile N pule Earl here allotted to the Magior„t„ who
committail Mr. Wright, and stated that he had read the s,.r.
mon for which that Ge:alernasi was charged—it did
•hew the
not dent
(lie i.e.triortality of the soug lie ineuttolied rums to
entrweing the Magistracy with such pow ors sod
Al rziut cJ ill • case which carte before the Linn of