The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-02 00:00:00

tion, and he was desirous of knowing if there was any
foundation for them.
Sir J. HOBHOUSE said, if he understood the
Hon. Member rightly, he had asked him whether he
had received any official documents from India with re-
ference to the rumour that was in circulation of the im-
prisonment of several of the English merchants
at Canton, and the seizure of a large quan-
tity of opium.—(hear, hear.) In answer to that
question, he had to say that no such officialnotice bad
been received at the India House; at the same time he
could not give the Hon. Member the assurance which
he asked that the rumour was not true ; but all that he
could say was that neither the India House nor him-
self bad received any official communication on the
subject.

of the House. He thought they could not be justly
accused of having caused the publication of matter wan•
tonly reflecting on the character of an individual by pub-
lishing. the Report of a Committee of the House of
Lords, in which the evidence complained of was con-
tained. This person had instructed an attorney
to commence an action against the Messrs. Hansard.
He (Lord John Ruseell) would observe, in the first
place, that this evidence had been taken before
a Committee of the House of Lords, and published
by them. Why had this person passed over
the opportunity of commencing proceedings against
the publication by the House of Lords and re-
served himself until the publication by this House?
He did not wish, however, to transfer the vin-
dication of their privileges to the House of Lords.—
(Cheers.) He would say, that having ordered the
publication themselves, it was their duty to take such
further proceedings as might be necessary for the
complete vindication of their authority. In what man-
ner should they proceed ? Should they again instruct
the Attorney-General to appear in the Court of
Queen's Bench, and state their grounds and reasons on
which they rested this claim of privilege?—(Hear,
hear, and cries of " No, no.") It must be obvious
that such a course would be merely degrading their pri-
(Lvilege, and could only lead to a humiliating result.—
oud cheers.) They had:done that which was ne-
cessary to justify themselves on the grounds of
prudence and forbearance. . They had taken care
to inform the Court of Queen's Bench of the
grounds on which they considered their privilege
necessary, and had done all they could to avoid
a collision with the authorities of the Courts
of Law. Having done this they had not
obtained a judgment, although he believed they were
fairly entitled to it.—(Cheers.) All that now re-
mained to them was to adopt some other course of
proceeding, in order to vindicate their privileges by
Proceeding at once against The first person com-
mencing this proceeding.—(Hear, hear.) By the
resolution which he was about to propose, all persons
would have notice not to commence these proceedings,
and if they proceeded in opposition to the resolution
of the House by proceeding with this action they would
have had due notice of the consequences. He thought
in this manner they might safely protect the Messrs.
Hansard against any consequences to which they might
he exposed. He might be told that Attorneys and
Counsel would willingly submit to be sent to prison by
that House in vindication of what they considered the
legal rights of the subject, and the authority of the
Courts. It was true that it might be painful and 1
irksome to enter into this contest, but there was
no alternative between entering into this contest
on the one hand, or on the other the total de-
gradation of the privileges of the House, and a
total abrogation of those functions which were ne-
cessary for the well-being of the country ; because
of all the privileges which could be asserted
this was the one which was least of all for the benefit
of the Members of the House. On other occasions it
might be argued they had asserted their privileges
rather out of a jealousy of upholding their own dig-
nity than for the public welfare ; but observe
the consequences of submitting in a case of this sort.
If they submitted to the judgment of the Court of
Queen's Bench, all the papers printed by the House
must be strictly confined to the Members, and with re-
gard to all the proceedings, whether they were delibera-
tions on public affairs or matters of legislation,
or whatever they might be, they must keep
their proceedings secret, and deny the people
any power of judging when they had acted with
justice or in accordance with their true interests, or when
they had denied justice and forgotten those interests.—
(Loud cheers.) Would the country be satisfied with
this state of things P Would they be satisfied with
being told, with regard to a pris )1.1 or a colony, or
any subject before the House, they should be ac-
quainted with their laws, when they had passed ;
they should read the bare notes, but with regard
to the grounds of their proceedings, with regard to the
evidence given before either House of Parliament, they
were precluded by a judgment of the Court of Queen's
Bench from giving them any information on the subject?
If they were to take that course, they would be doing
that which in six weeks would be intolerable to the
public, who might more justly say the House was taking
advantage of this judgment in order to keep secret its
proceedings—(Hear, hear)—and that it ought to
take some means by which its proceedings should be
given to the public. He therefore considered
this to be a case in which it was necessary to maintain
their privileges, and in the present case be saw no mode
of proceeding except against the parties. At the same
time, after the course pursued with regard to
the late action against Messrs. Hansard, the •
House could not, considering the cautious letter of
Mr. Shaw, say that any proceeding had already
been taken, which should be visited with the severe
displeasure of the House. It was necessary the House
should enter into a resolution, in order that Mr. Shaw
and the public might be informed that the House
thought it necessary to vindicate its privileges, and if he
should then proceed, he would be summoned to the bar,
and committed fur a breach of privilege. He should now
move that Messrs. Hansard, the printers and publishers
of the Reports of the Minutes of Evidence on the pre-
sent State of the Island of New Zealand, communicated
by the House of Lords to this House on the 7th
August, 1838, acted under the orders of the House,
and that to bring, or assist in bringing, any action
against them for such publication, would be a breach of
the privileges of this House.—(Hear.) He should also
move another resolution instructing Messrs. Hansard
that they be directed not to answer the letter of Charles
Shaw mentioned in their petition, and not to take any
step towards defending the action with which they are
threatened in the said letter.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir P. BURDETT could not help feeling the
extreme difficulty of the case, but agreed with the
Noble Lord that the House ought to possess what-
ever power was necessary for the proper performance of
its functions. The privileges of this House were not
intended to be used as powers against other persons,
but to shield the Members of the House against the
exorbitant privileges of the Crown, which might be
exercised so as to put a stop to free discussion, and the
free agitation of Parliament. The House claimed privi-
leges now which were not beneficial to the public. It
could never have been in contemplation that Members
should be protected, for instance, against arrest for pri-
vate debt. But the whole object of Parliament had altered
with the change in the state of the country. It used to be
a regulation that no proceedings in the House should
be reported out of it. This, among other things, had
yielded to the alteration in the state of society. There
was this difficulty in the way of the House, that when
it once interfered, there was no means of knowing where
it should stop. He had formerly been opposed
to the House on a question in which he thought they
assumed improper functions, of declaring ex poste facto
a libel.—(Hear, hear.) But he considered the House
should have all those powers which were necessary for
the welfare of the public. And he should not, therefore,
oppose the resolutions which he thought rational
and consistent with the proper respect for the
liberty of the subject. Still he feared that they were
the commencement of a great deal of trouble and diffi
Cu'