The Sun.
London, England, 1839-06-01 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDoN. SATURDAY, JUN Pi, 1, 1839.

adultery had been completely proved, ai one of the wit-
nesses had proved that Mrs. Lardner had lived for some
time with a gentleman paSsing as her brother, without her
husband having any access to the house, and there was
besides considerable corroboratory evidence. He, there
fore, conceived that there was no ground for saying that
the preamble had not been made out.—( Hear, hear.)
Dr. LEFROY said his doubts bad been removed by
what had since passed.
The preamble was agreed to, and the House resumed.
The Report of the Select Committee on the Norwich
Tonnage Bill, was brought up.
Sir G STRICKLAND brought up the Report of the
Hatfield Small Debts Bill. The Hon. Baronet then stated
that he wished to draw the attention of the House to a peti-
tion which had been presented on Tuesday from Wm.
Evans, relative, to the: Pontefract Manor:Court Bill. As
no three clear days had elapsed, a C mmittee could not
take it into consideration. He, therefore, moved that it
be an instruction to that Committee, to take the petition
of Wm. Evans into consideration.—Agreed to.
Capt. PECH ELL moved the third reading of the
Brighton Geis Bill, which was accordingly read a third
time and passed.
Mr. T. ATT WOOD presented a petition against the
Birmingham Canal Bill, which had been recommitted ; and
stated that he had applied to take his seat as a member
of that Committee, but had been told it was not competent
for him to attend; he, therefore, asked leave of the House
to attend that Committee.
Mr. WARBURTON said that the Hon. Member hav-
ing neither signed the declaration nor been present at the
election of Chairman, he (Mr. Warburton) had given it
as his opinion that the Hon. Gentleman was not a Member
of that Committee, and the Committee having now re-
ported, was therefore defunct.
LONDON POLICE BILL.

Mr. HAWES moved the following Gentlemen be ap-
pointed a Select Committee on the London Police Bill :
Mr. Hawes, Lord John Russell, Sir Robert Peel, Mr.
Fox Maule, Lord Hotham. Sir Matthew Wood, Mr. Est-
court, Mr. Lasce:les, Mr. Paulson, Mr. Crawford, the
I? corder of London, Captain Alsager, Mr. Milnes, Mr.
Fazakerley, Mr. Strutt, Mr. W. Miles.
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON said that having been a
Member of the late Metropolitan Police Committee, he
hoped he might be permitted to say a few words in reply
to the accusation which the Hon. Member for the City of
London had brought against the Members of that Com-
mittee, on account of the laxity of their attendance. Since
Tuesday he had referred to the proceedings of the Com-
mittee.

The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member was out of
order in referring to a previous debate.
Mr. C. LUS lIING TON would bow to the decision of
the Chair.

Sir R. PEEL said that something, ought to be done
with respect to attending private Committees. It was
proposed that there should be a public Committee, and
what he wished to know was whether it was the rule of the
House that every Member who did not hear the whole of
the evidence before a private Committee should not be al.
lowed to vote? If such was the case, it would be impos
sible for Honourable Members to do their duty in public
Committees. _ _

Mr. HA WE S :lad himself been prevented from attend-
ing a private Committee one day, and considering the rule
to be that all Members on a Commttee should hear the
whole evidence, he had declined voting. If the whole time of
Hon. Members was to be occupied in private Committees,
it would be impossible for them to attend their public

duties.
Mr. P. THOMSON believed the rule to be, that no
Member should vote on any question which he had not
heard, and that no one should be entitled to vote on the
preamble unless he had heard all the evidence.
Mr. HUME said, as the rule had been laid down, it
ought to be strictly enforced.
Mr. G 0 UL BURN thought that the declaration made
by a Member that be was willing to serve throughout a
Committee, was qualified by the proviso that he should
not vote on any question without having heard it, and at-
tended to the evidence relating thereto; which meant that
if a Member had been absent he could not vote on the
question then under consideration; hut on a new question
he would have the same power of voting as if he had at.
tended throughout the whole proceedings.
(The name of Sir James Graham was substituted for that
of Sir Robert Peel, and that of Mr. Alderman tiumphery
for Mr. Strutt.)
The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. THORN EL Y gave notice that on the 11th of
June he would present petitions, and move a Committee
of the whole House, in order to carry into effect the
prayer of the petitions, which was for a reduction of the
duty on Haytian coffee.
Sir R. ING LIS gave notice that on Monday next he
would ask a question of the Noble Lord, the Secretary for
Foreign Affairs, relative to the state of slavery in foreign
parts.

r. F. FRENCH gave notice that on the 6th of June,
he would move an Address to her Majesty praying steps
might be taken for the purpose of securing the benefit of
Railway communication to the several provinces of
Ireland.

PENNY POSTAGE.
Mr. WARBURTON wished to ask a question of the
Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department

The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer the
other night stated that he intended to move a resolu-
tion founded upon the Report of the Committee of that
House, respecting postage. The report was in favour of

a twopenny rate, 6a they stated at the same time, that they
would have reported. had it been in their power, in favour
of a penny rate. The announcement made by the Right
Hon. Gentleman was at least ambiguous. and he wished to

know from the Noble Lord the nature of the measure to be

proposed by the Government, whether it was to be in fa-
vourpf a twopenny or a penny rate?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said his Right Hon. Friend
had made but a short statement, but still he had been

much misunderstood. The intention of the Gov,rncnent
was to propose a resolution in favour of a uniform penny
postage.—(Cheers.) At the same time it was right
to state that the plan must be a most comprehensive one,
and it would take a considerable time in preparation.
They would propose the resolution as he bad stated, and
they would pledge the House to make up any deficiency of
the revenue which might occur from the change. The
whole question was a very large one, and ono upon which
he could then give no opinion. It was a great and large

experiment, but the adoption of it would- have one very
considerable benefit—it would prove a great convenience
to the middle and lower classes.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. LABOUCHERE brought in the Jamaica Bill,
which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a

second time on Friday next.
Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from the Society
for promoting Christian Knowledge, against the 14th
clause of the Prisons Bill.
PRIVILEGES OF PARLIAMENT.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL wished to call the
attention of the House to a subject of great importance to
the best interests of the public, and the privileges
of that House. Far some time that House had
ordered that certain papers should be communi-
cated to the public, with a view of informing
the public mind arid enabling the House efficiently to per-
form its duties. One of those papers so published was,
with respect to the management of the gaol and Newgate,
which pointed out various abuses that exived in the ma-
nagement
yhetrhsethinattrothduectmioonrals
of theof
perioofngthahtadgaoble,eannd
among others
corrupted bt
obscene publications. A person of the name of Stockdale
had brought an action against the Messrs. Hansard, who
had been appointed by that House as its officers to distri-
hute that publication, and upon a petition being presented
by the Messrs. Hansards to the House, stating that such an
action had been brought, the House passed a resolution by
which the Attorney-General was ordered to appear to
that action and defend it Iu obedience to the instructions
he bad received, he entered an appearance to that action,
and defended the party against it was brought, to the best
of his ability.—( Cheers.) It now became his duty to
state to the House the result of the proceedings. That
day the Court of Queen's Bench had pronounced
judgment in the action, and they had decided unani-
mously that the defence had failed, and that the action was
maintainable. He would cautiously abstain from entering
into the merits of that judgment—it was to be received
with respect and reverence, and he had no hesitation in
saying that all the Learned Judges who had concurred in
it had acted most conscientiously ; but at the same time it
was his duty to inform the House of the extent to
which the judgment went. It was most alarming, and
placed that House in an entirely new position. Th,- Court
of Queen's Bench had decided that that House had no
right to make such an order as had been made, and that it
was not a privilege, but an usurpation. The grounds
upon which that judgment proceeded rendered it the more
important and more alarming. Hitherto that House had
been considered as the judge of its own jurisdiction and its
own orders. The Court of Queen's Bench had decided
that they were the judges of all the privileges of the Hoaae;
that those privileges might be submitted to the determina-
tion of the lowest tribunal, and that, finally, the question
might be submitted to the judgment of the House
of i• Lords ; so that all the privileges of the Com-
mons were finally to be decided by the Lords.—( Hear.)
In the publication of papers it was said the House must
take care that not more than 658 copies should be printed
and distributed. He had asked what was to be done on a
dissolution, or on a Member ceasing to be a Member?
They said that presented no difficulty, because on a disso-
lution of Parliament, or on a Member ceasing to be a
Member, all the papers he had received as a Member
were to be immediately destroyed.—( Laughter.) There
was to be a great conflagration, and all the papers were to
be committed to the flames, and if any individual
should have in his library a paper he had received as a
Member, and he read that paper or showed it to another,
that must be considered as a libel, and subjected him to
an action. He (the Attorney-General) had appeared, and
defended the action. He was therefore now in fructus
officio, and waited the further directions of the House. It
appeared to him it would be advisable to appoint a Com.
mittee to inquire into the proceedings in the action, and to
decide on the proper course to be adopted. If that should
be the pleasure of the House, he should propose the same
members as were on the former Committee, with the addi-
tion of the Solicitor-General, Sir Edward Sugden, Mr.
Goulburn, Mr. Pemberton, Dr. Lushington, Mr. Warbur-
ton, Mr. Bernal, Mr. Easthope, the Solicitor-General for
Ireland, and the Lord Advocate for Scotland ; of course
he would be glad to add any other names that
might be suggested. This was no party matter—(Hear,
hear)—and he recollected with admiration the manner in
which the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite ( Sir R. Peel)
vindicated the rights and privileges of that House.—
( Hear, hear.) It was his intention to move for a copy of
the record in the action of " Stockdale v. Hansard," and
for a copy of the short. hand writers' notes of the proceed-
ings ; but he begged leave first to move for the appoint-
ment of a Select Committee, and he hoped the Committee
would have no objection to meet to-morrow, although it
was Saturday. He hoped that whatever discussion might
take place there would be no exhibition of any warm
feelings, but that any observations that might be made
would be made in a calm and dispassionate manner.
Mr. DARBY had had the honour of hearinr, two of the
Judges, Justices Paulson and Coleridge, deliver their

judgment, and he had either misapprehended them or
misapprehended the Attnrcey. General.
The ATTORNEY-GENERA L said it was to obviate
all possibility of doubting whit the Learned Judges had
laid down, that he had move.Lfor a copy of the proceed-
ings.—( Hear, bear.)
Sir ROBERT INGLIS had considerable doubt whe-
ther this was such a case of breach and privilege as to
justify the Hon. and Learned Gentleman calling on the
House for a decision without previous notice. All the
Court of Queen's Bench had done was to decide on a
question the House had submitted to them, and how could
that be called a breach of privilege which the House itself
had invited?—( Hear, hear.) He hoped the Speaker
would be good enough to state whether he considered this
a question of that peculiar character of breach of privi-
lege which would justify dispensing with notice.
Sir E. KNATCHBULI, hoped the House would not
sanction such a request being made to the Speaker.
( Hear, hear.) His opinion, however, was, that the At-
torney. General ought to have given notice of his intention
to move for the appointment of the Committee, but there
could he no objection to his moving at once fur a copy of
the record and the short-hand writer's notes.
Lord J. RUSSELL did not think the two Hon. Ba-
ronets who had ju,t spoken rightly understood the proposi-
tion of his Hon. and Learned Friend. One would suppose
from what they had said that an immediate decision was
called for, and that proceedings were to be adopted instanter
against the parties for a breach of in ivilege. All his Hon.
and Learned Friend asked was for the appointment of a
Committee to inquire into the proceedings. That was
a course arising out of the proceedings adopted on a former
occasion—a proceeding not precipitate, or violent, or vin-
dictive, but a proceeding singularly moderate and tempe-
rate, directing the Attorney-General to plead with respect
to the proceeding then pending before the Court of Queen's
Bench.—( Hear, hear.) No one denied that the judg-
ment of the Court affected their privileges, and what they
did that night might be called in question„ The votes
might contain an accusation or a censure on some p erson.
( Hear, hear, hear.) Their Speaker, in tho natural course
of their proceedings, by the direction of the House, would
have to sign those proceedings—they would go forth with
the Speaker's name attached to them, and would be pub-
lished throughout the country. Some person might imme-
diately proceed against the Speaker fur a libel, or against
the printer.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Therefore whether that
decision was right or wrong—whether it was new or ac-
cording to all ancient form—it was a decision vrhich the
House could not pass without inquiry, and it was most fit
that they should immediately appoint a Committee.
He had no doubt the judgment which had been delivered
was marked by that ability and learning which distinguished
those eminent persons, but he did say that, as concerned
the Commons of England, and the people of England, they
were bound to investigate and lee, bow they, could best
discharge their duty to their constituent!.—(Cheers.
Mr. WYNN had no doubt whatever, in reference to the
suggestion of his Hon. Friend the Member for the Univer-
sity of Oxford, that any Member had a right to lay before
the House, and was entitled to be heard at any time upon,
what he might• consider to be a breach of privilege.—
( Hear, hear.) The matter was most urgent, and they
should remember that on their votes two or three nights
ago it appeared a Mr. Lovibond was cognisant of an act of
forgery—for that act of forgery the Speaker was directed
to reprimand him, and administered the censure of the
House.—( Hear, hear.) These proceedings bad been en-
tered on the votes, and had been signed by the Speaker.—
( Hear, hear.) No time ought to be lost in adopting mea-
sures for the consideration of this case.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the Speaker was
not liable, but the printer and all the officers acting under
him would be liable.

Sir R. PEEL would not lose a moment in instituting
an inquiry into the facts of the case.—( Cheers.) Notices
were not absolutely necessary. Hon. Members had a
right to bring forward a motion without notice, and it
ever there was a case which justified departure from forms,
which were used merely for convenience, it was one in
which the privileges of Parliament were so deeply al
fected.—(Cheers.)
Mr. KELLY would not offer any objection to the mo-
tion of the Hon. and Learned Member. He concurred
with the Right Hon. Baronet, as well as the Attorney-
General, that it was enough that a decision had taken
place affecting the privileges of the House, to call on the
House to take immediate measures on the subject. He
thought a Committee ought immediately to be appointed,
and that the greatest publicity should be given
to these judgments, for the more they were made
known to the country, the more assured was he, that they
would meet the entire approbation of the people; because
the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench was cal-
culated to preserve the dignity of the House, and liberty
of the people.
Mr. O'CONNELL said if the plaintiff bad not been
guilty of a breach of privilege, the Members of this House
might as well walk out and shut the doors, for it would
be impossible for them to conduct the public business.—
( Hear, hear.) The only controul over the Judges was the
decision of this House. They were no longer responsible
to the Crown. They could only be removed by the vote
of this House, and since he came into the House, he could
recollect the removal of Sir Jonah Barrington, against
whom certain charges were made. According to the
decision now given, he might have gone into the
Court and brought his action.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
It was impossible to tolerate the decision of the

Queen's Bench, and the House was now exercising
great temper in not ordering that the four Judges do to-
morrow attend at the bar.—( Laughter, and cries of " Hear,
hear.") This was his deliberate opinion. The question
was a highly important one, belonging to the privileges of
the Commons, and he considered the decision to be directly

egainst the people of the British empire.—( Hear, hear )
Mr. PEMBERTON could not help making a few re.
marks after what had fallen from the Honourable and
Learned Member for Dublin. What had the Judges
done? If there had been any breach of the privileges of
this House, it had been committed under the sanction of
-the House. Au action hnd' been br4ght,iu ;a Court, of
Law by a private plaintiff against a private derendapt.
This House asserted it to be contrary to its privileges
that one of the Queen's subjects should assert
his rights because the privileges of the House
were incidentally involved. The plaintiff insisted upon
proceeding, and then every difficulty which had now arisen
was pointed out. He believed there could not be found

a man bold enough to vindicate what was called the pri-
vilege of the House in opposition to what the Judges of
the land had laid down. It had been admitted that 'he
action should go on, that the case should be argued,
and that the Judges should decide, and after they had de-
cided according to what they believed to be the law of the
land, and had exercised the jurisdiction which the House
permitted them to do, the Hon. and Learned Member for
Dublin said the four Judges ought to-morrow to be sum-
moned to the bar. The doctrine of the Hon. and
Learned Member was this, you may decide, if you will de-
cide in our favour, but if you decide against us, we will
order you to the bar.—( Hear.) If there had been any
breach of privilege, it was not in the decision given, but
in the entertaining of the question, which the House
itself had permitted and sanctioned. The House could
only proceed by contempt.---( Hear. hear.) No one
supposed the House would send the Judges either to their
own prison or to the Tower. And yet what would be the
issue? Why, that they would be either just in the situa-
tion they were at present, or they would come into collision
with the law—a position that would not be very advan-
tageous to Parliament. They would be embarking in a
contest, the end of which could not be seen, and he doubted
very much whether the popular voice would go with them
in such a course of proceeding. Had the Noble Lord
contemplated what had taken place on a former occasion,
when a similar subject bad been under discussion? Why,
'von each occasion when the matter came under their
attention, the contest ended by the dissolution of Parlia-
ment, thus leaving their power still in the hands of the
law.—( Hear, bear. )
After a few words from Sir C. Grey,
Sir ROBERT PEEL said that all the questions
stated by his Hon. and Learned Friend, Mr. Pemberton,
would be open to the consideration of the Committee.
The appointment of a Committee was then agreed to.

On the names being proposed,
Sir ROBERT INGLIS said he should object to those
Members being again placed on the Committee whose
opinions were matters of record.—(Hear, hear.) The
Honourable Baronet observed, that if the Committee
called for the short-hand'writer's notes, they would be ar-
rocrating to themselves a most dangerous power, and a
power which had never been exercised before. They
would in fact be calling though not bodily, yet practically,
the Judges to the bar of the House, and the effect of that
would be highly injurious to the best interests of the
country.
Mr. BLEWITT thought it would be more respectful
towards the Learned Judges, if they were asked to com-
municate their judgment to the House.
Af er a few observatious from Lord J. RUSSELL, the
Committee was named.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then moved that the
Committee have power to send fur persons, papers, and
records.
Sir R. INGLIS begged to know whether by this motion
it was intended that the Committee should have power to
send for the Judges. He believed in his conscience that
the House would not exercise such a power. He did not
think there was ene Member in the House who would dare
to make a motion to bring them to the bar. If the House
would not do -so, he, for one, would not agree to give
such power to either fifteen or thirty Members. He would
be contented with the assurance of the Noble Lord or of
the Attorney-General, that such would not be the case.
Mr. C. BULLER said, three years ago he had the
honour of sitting on the Record Committee along with
the Right Hon. Baronet, when he made a motion himself
calling upon the Judges to give evidence.—(Oh, oh.)
Sir H. INGLIS rose to explain amidst cries of spoke.
He would divide the House if be did not get such an as-

surance.
Mr. HUME thought, that with the exception of the
Crown that House had power to send for any individual
in the country. It would rest with the Committee whether
they sent for the JuAges or not ; but if they thought it
necessary, be hoped there would be found plenty of
movers and seconders.
RUSSELL could
not
Lord JOHN possibly agree that
the Committee should ,be at all fettered ; on the other
hand he would at once say that in appointing the Com-
mittee there was no intention to examine the Judges—had
there been any such intention he would at once have avowed
it': but at the same timeh e would not preclude himself
if
from taking such a course, necessary,
The ATTO
RNE y GENERAL intended nothing but
the utmost respect to the Judges in the present proceed-
ings. He believed they had acted most conscientiously
in g ivi n g their judgment
and honourably ; but at the same
time the Committee most not be precluded from the excc
vise of one of its privivileges—they must have the power to
send for the Judges,
if it was felt„necessary—he could not
preclude himself from taking that course, though at the
same time there was no intention of doing so at that time.
Sir E. hNATCUHULL hoped that such an assurance
would satisfy his Right Hon. Fricncl. lie hoped there
would be no attempt made to summon the Judges to ex-
plain their official conduct, for if they were, he was sure
they would not come, and then would the House exercise
power to compel them ?

Mr. WYNN must protest against the doctrine that the
House had no pov.e; to summon the Judges to their bar.—
it was a monstrous doctrine.
Sir R. INGLIS—Was he to rely—(Loud cries of
spice, spoke )
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none
took place ; and after a few words from Mr. Sergeant
%VILER and Sir C. GREY, the motion was agreed to.
On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, orders of the
day were ordered to have precedence o ft-notions on Thurs-
day, except in any special direction of the House with
respect to a notice of motion. _

Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the House at its rising
do adjourn till Monday next.---Agreed to.
On the motion of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL the
Committee of Privileges obtained leave to sit to.morrow,
notwithstanding the adjournment ~f the House.
COUNTY COURTS BILL.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL then moved that the County
Courts' 13d1 be read a second time, and stated that as the
discussion was to take plice on a future occasion, he would
ric,t detain the House with any observations. He intended
after the second reading, to move that it be referred to a
Select Committee.

Mr. F. KELLY did not intend to offer any objection to
the second rending, but he could not allow the Bill to pass
that stage without stating that he intondtd to give his most
determined opposition to it. The Bill a ould go to repeal
the whole law of the land with regard to debts above 151.
Col. SiBTEIORP thought this Bill was the most de-
lusive and disgraceful of all Ministerial jobs that was ever
proposed to Parliament.

Mr. PAK INGTON said many offices were created
under the Bill, the salaries of which were to be defrayed
from the Fee Fund, which he believed would not be suf-
ficient for the purpose. He should be glad to know from
what fund the deficiency would be made up.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL observed that the
great principle of the Bill was to afftrd cheap justice to the
poor man. There was a feeling abroad, not without foun.
lotion, that law was a luxury to the rich. It was far
better that there should be a court to which a poor man
could go for the recovery of five shillings, even though a
wrong decision should be given, than that he should feel
there was no tribunal to which he could appeal.—( Hear,
hear.) He hoped the House would at once assent to the
second reading of a measure that tended to remedy a
most crying evil.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. DARBY inquired whether it was intended to
throw the payment of the salaries, if the Fee Fund was not
sufficient, on the County rates ?
j Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the Fee would
' prove sufficient for the purpose ; but if the Committee to
whom the Bill would be referred thought otherwise, they
would so report; but he thought the Government or
Parliament ought not to hesitate to provide a fund for
carrying out the object of this Bill. If they refused to do
so, it would be an absolute denial of justice.
Mr. DUNCOMBE would be glad to know why Mid-
dlesex was exempted from the operation of the Bill ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said there vvas a Clause in
the Metropolitan Police Courts Bill by which the Mid-
dlesex Courts would be provided for.

Mr. HUME contended that nothing was so much
required by the country as the Bill before the House.
—( Hear, hear, hear.) If it was a job, he hoped the
Government would bring in many such jobs.—( Hear, and
laughter.) If they did so, they would soon find they had
the support of the country, and would have no occasion
then to fear any oppositiou.—(Cheers.)
Capt. PE CHE was certain the country would wil-
lingly bear the expense of the Bill, and hoped the Noble
Lord would persevere with it.
After a few obhervations from Mr. GODSON and Lord J.
RUSSELL, the Bill was read a second time and ordered to
be committed.