The Sun.
London, England, 1837-06-06 00:00:00

fi st reqolution, on which the following division took

place :--

For the first resolution l4
Against it
The previous question was then moved on the se-
cond resolution,' and the third was negatived. Such
being the end of Burdett's case, we wish to Alance at
the case of Sir William Williams, Speaker of the
House of Commons, in the 32d of Charles the Second.
One Thomas Dangerfield, well known in history, gave
information of a conspiracy, which he delivered at the
bar of the House of Commons. The Speaker signed
the paper, and appointed the King's printers (New-
comb and Hills) to print it. An information was filed
against him for ordering the printing and publish-
ing of the libel. The Speaker pleaded that what
he did was by the order of the House of Com-
mons. To this plea the Attorney-General demurred.
The demurrer being allowed by the Court, a plea
in bar was pleaded by Mr. Williams, but he finally
withdrew it, and judgment went by default. A
fine of 10,0001. was imposed by the Court of King's
Bench, but James the Second afterwards remitted
2,003/. of it, annexing this singular condition, that
nothing should be given to_the courtiers who had been
employed to solicit this abatement. This was not the
only prosecution that Sir W. Williams was exposed
to, for the discharge of his duty as Speaker. Bills
were brought into Parliament in 1689, 1690, and
1695, to reverse the judgment against Sir W. Wil-
liams, but the whole failed. In the expected discus-
sion on this important subject, it will appear that Lord
Denman is supported in his law by Williams's case.
The Commons may insist upon the privilege of pub-
lishing libels, and commit those who commence a
process against the Speaker; but then the question
will arise, whether the Court of King's Bench must
not grant relief if the House were to vote an ac-
tion perfectly innocent to be a breach of privilege ;
and on those grounds to imprison ? On the other
hand, it will be a subject of, inquiry, whether a power
of control over Parliament is to be exercised by a
- Bench of Judges ? "If the Judges (it is said) were
to.take cognizance of what either House of Parlia-
ment have voted to be a contempt, they would imme-
diately subject themselves to an impeachment for a
breach of the law which they are sworn to administer,
and for manifest infringement of the Bill of Rights."
" It is to a sense of the constant superintendence and
centroul (says C. W. Wynn, M.P.), which is not only
the right, but the duty of Parliament to exercise over
all courts of justice, that the puri:y of those courts is
principally to be attributed." Will it now be said
that the system of the Constitution is to be reversed,—
that Parliament is to be su'ijected to the centroul of
Judges appeii!ted by the Crown, and its dignity and
freedom to rest upon their decisions? The answer
is :—Law-makers should not be law.lreakers. If the
Commons or Lords do wrong, they should be amen-
able to the law they themselves have made ;

" Justic.t; does wrong to no man."
Adverti.sey.

SECOND EDITION.
SUN OFFICE, Seven .9' clock.

THE r,ONDON GAZETTE

THIS EVENING.

DGVi'NING-STRE:T, JrvE 2

The King hal b: en plcas?ci to a; point. Itlsjer-General
Jo'ioiton tu be a Kn:ght Co.omantier of the Most Honourable Mi-
littry Order of the Bath. in the room of fits Right Ilotitm:able
Sir Richard Hussey Vivian, Bart.