The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-25 00:00:00

COMMITTEE ON COMPLAINT OF BREACH OF

PRIVILEGE.

The c'Jramittee sat again on Wednesday. The members present
were—Mr. Bright, Lord Hotham, Mr. Maoartney, Mr. Butt,
Mr. Keogh, Mr. 0. E. H. Vernon, Colonel Bentinok, Mr.
Moore, and Mr. Henley (chairman).
The proceedings commenced by the re-examination of
Mr. William Ford, who was questioned about the sum of
money presented by the corporate officers of the city of Dub-
lin to Mr. Reynolds, then M.P. for the place. Witness was
town-clerk at 500/. a-year, and, as his office bad been pre-
served to him through Mr. Reynolds's exertions in the House
of Commons, he was asked to subscribe 100/. to the fund. It
was represented to him that the subscriptions that were being
collected were intended to be applied to the payment of Par-
liamentary expenses, and the expenses of Mr. Reynold's elec-
tion petition ; but he replied that he had already contributed
towards that object, that he knew well that the 1001. asked
of him was intended as remuneration for Parliamentary
services, and that he would not contribute for any such

Par Pos-
e Colonel Bentinck—Of his own knowledge he knew no-
thing of any transaction in which any member of Parliament
had received money for patronage ; he had not come to Lon-
don to repeat to the committee all the idle talk and scandal of
the town of Dublin.
Michael Enright, porter at the Dublin Custom-house, was
then called, and examined about the propasal he made to Mr.
Bindon about paying him 9t. to procure witness's advance-
ment in the Custom-house. He acknowledged that he had
made that proposal, not thinking there was any harm in it.
The situation he wished to procure was a vacant fire-lighter-
ship; and he had heard that it could be had for 91. James Cun-
ningham, of the Stamp-office, Dublin, had told him that he
had heard from a former occupant of this fire.lightership that
that sum had been given as a " hand-over" for it to Mr. Rey-
nolds, M.P. Witness spoken to Cunningham twice lately on
'the subject, but it had passed from his memory, and he now
said he knew nothing about the matter.
The next witness was Mr. Mowbray Morris.
The Chairman—We did not get from you yesterday Mr.
Morris, the office you hold in connexion With the Times. We
should like to place it on our minutes.
Mr. Morris—l am manager of the paper.
The chairman—Have you refreshed your memory with re-
ference to the article that appeared in the Times in the
anonth of September, about which you were questioned ?
Mr. Morris—I have.
Moore—I am to understand, then, that you speak with
all the authority and information of the Times itself with re-
ference to those two articles ?
Mr. Morris—l can give information, but I speak with no
authority whatever.
Mr. Moore—ln the article of the 19th of September there
occurs this passage :—" The Irish members must all be paid,
and they will all vote for their pay. . . . The Irish member
is a very serviceable animal, all the more serviceable for not
being very nice in his habits. (Laughter.) It is not too
much to say, that hardly a single measure would have been
passed for the last 20 years but for this facile and well-paid
Swiss corps." Is it not the natural and undeniable inference
from these two passages, and does not your statement amount
to this, that every Irish representative must be paid, and that
they will all vote for their pay ?
Mr. Morris—Before I answer that question I must submit
to the chairman that the subject before this committee is not
the article of the 19th of September, but that of the 6th of
February. The statements upon which that article was
founded are contained in the Freeman's Journal, and it is
hkullly fair to call upon the conductors of the paper to answer
questions concerning an article written six moi.,hs ago, ou no
other ground than it happens to be upon the same subject as
the particular article which is impugned. You might with
equal reason call noon the Times to answer questions upon any
articles that may have been written ou the conduct of the
Irish members during the last six years, or any period.
Mr. Moore—Excuse me. There is also a passage in the
article of the 6th of February to this effect :—" A. committee
of the House of Commons would apiy3ar to offer the most

ready and appropriate machinery for testi❑g the truth of an
accusation of this kind. We therefore suggest that some
member --let us hope an Irish member—will put upon the
books the proper notice for securing an investigation into the
matter. It is one which must deeply affect the character of
the Irish representatives." Now, if we are called here to test
the truth of all accusations of this kind, and if this be an ac-
cusation of precisely the same kind, and even stronger than
that to which the attention of the house was called on the 7th
of February, it would naturally suggest itself to the minds of
the committee to inquire into the connexion between the two
articles, which bear upon the same subject, and carry with
them precisely similar accusations.
Mr. Morris —The accusations there referred to had been
previously defined ; they were accusations made by Dr. Gray
and Kelly, and it was those accusations which were pointed
at in the article in the Times, calling upon the Irish represen-
tatives to inquire into the question.
Mr. Moore —We inquire into the fact of the corruption, and
not into mere allegations that may be made. It is into the
fact of corruption that I am inquiring when I put those
questions.
Mr. Morris—l submit to the chairman that lam not called
upon to answer questions which are irrelevant to the objects
of this committee.
Mr. Bright—Are the committee to understand you to say,
Mr. Morris, that you consider that you are not bound to
answer any questions whatever with regard to any preceding
article to that of the 6th of February
Mr. Morris—Yes.
Mr. Moore—Will you allow me to call your attention to
another passage ? In your article of the 6th of February you
make this remark :—" We are not the accusers in thismatter.
If Irish members are held forth to the public in this degraded
point of view, it is that they stand accused by their own
countrymen of the most signal acts of corruption."
Mr. Morris—Still occurring in the same article and accusa-
tion.

Mr. Moore—lt would scarcely be true, would it, as regards
the meaning the public would apply to that passage; it would
scarcely appear that you are not the accusers, inasmuch as six
months before you had brought forward, in a very deliberate
and elaborate manner, an accusation stronger even than that
made by Dr. Gray ?
Mr. Morris—l think that, supposing the public is mode-
rately reasonable, they will read the article as a whole, and
not select particular passages, and, reading the article as a
whole, they will see that any opinions which were expressed
in it were intended to apply to the particular cases then under
discussion—in fact, to the accusations brought forward by Dr.
Gray and Mr. Kelly, and to no others.
Mr. Moore—Well, I, as one of this committee, wishing to
investigate the whole fact of corruption as alleged against Irish
members, call upon you to answer the questions I shall put
to you as to the article of September 19. Ido not ask you
to name the writer, but I ask you upon what authority or in-
formation, private or public, you took upon yourself to bring
against the Irish members such accusations as you have done?
Mr. Morris—l must first ask the chairman to decide upon
my objection.
Mr. Butt--I have not this article of September before me,
but, as I recollect it, it does not contain any charge of selling
places.

Mr. Morris—l think, until my preliminary objection be de-
cided. I ought not to answer any questions.
The room was then cleared on the objection. When the
doors were again opened,
The Chairman, addressing Mr. Morris, said that the com-
mittee were of opinion that his examination might be extended
to the article of September last.
Mr. Moore—Well, taking the two articles together, does
not the accusation contained in them amount to this—that all
the Irish members are needy men, that they are all paid to
vote, and that they all vote for their pay ; and that that accu-
sation is made without any exception or explanation ?
Mr. Morris—l am not prepared to admit any inference from
the articles. I must leave it to you and the committee to
draw your own inference.
Mr. Moore—But is not that the statement made in the
article ?
Mr. Morris--If you ask me as an individual what my opinion
_ _

Mr. Moore—l ask you as manager of the Times. -
Mr. Morris—As manager of the Times I am not prepared
either to go into any justification of the article, or to offer any
opinion about it.
Mr. Moore—Have you any objection, not as a matter of
justification or opinion, but as a matter of fact—the article
Navin; been written, and the accusation made—to state to
the committee upon what grounds of information or au hority
they were so written and made ?
Mr. Morris—l can only state what you yourself, or any
other person, may ascertain for himself—viz., the public in-
formation upon which the article was founded. I can refer
you to a letter which appeared in the Times on the 16th of
September, three days previous, to which the article of the
19th refers in terms. That is the public information on which
the article was grounded. •
Mr. Moore—That public information being an anonymous
letter published in your own journal ?
Mr. Morris—Yes.
Mr. Moore—And have you any objection to state to the
committee upon what grounds the statement in that letter was
founded ?
Mr. Morris—l cannot.
Mr. Moore—You cannot? Therefore, in point of fact, lam
correct in assuming that your statement: was made solely
because of an anonymous letter which was published in your
own journal, and that you object to stating upon what grounds
of authority or information the writer of that letter acted
when he wrote to you I
Mr. Morris—l cannot put myself in the position of the
'writer of that letter. The conductors of the Times, at the
thus they published it, knew who had written the letter,
and it may be presumed they believed the statements in it,
otherwise they would not have founded a leading article
upon it,

lir.
Moore—Yes, but the letter contained no public fact
Whatever Upon which the writer based his accusations. It
ywaone ra_erelyinan assertion of facts, and I want to know whether
ea:,7
or
fe,
a position to inform the committee upon what
acts, or sources of information the writer acted,
for,
."' nrse, it is the
:made in lett, same thing whether a statement be
Mr. Morris_ or in a leader t
have already thme!'ab give you no more information than I
gr. Moore—Ne
oi,
y
do You know as a matter of fact, or are on able to stat
many
men
who
at_h_atuth not needy,
are not among the Irish members
needy, or who occupy a high social
position I
Mr. Morris—l an, aot_
?TOP to state anything whatever
en my own authotity.
Mr. Moore—=No; but yittp,
speaking as the editor of
the Timm, in which these articles
sappeared.
Mr. Morris—Not as the editor, but as the manager.
Mr. Moore—Well, as the manager
•
Mr. Morris--You are good .
o no
yrhich have a ten-
e
to call me here as
manager of the Times began,
by
with my
. stating, and I must
again, repeat, that I dt consider
w_e
duty to answer any questions whatever
Idency to elicit the information upon h the Times ex-
presses its opinions.
Mr. Moore here, in substance, repeated hi,
Mr. Morris—l cannot answer your question question,
without being
led eventually to dislose such information.
Mr. Moore—Well, do you know what Dr. gm. ..4_
Do you know that Dr. Gray's statement applied ?
only to a
limited number of one section of Irish members?
Mr. Morris—l have no knowledge whatever of Dr. G
rars
meaning, except what is apparent from his speech.
Mr. Moore—Well, I am speaking as to what is apparnt.
Did not his accusation specially apply to a limited number of
Irish members ?
Mr. Morris—His accusation, so far as published, won
appear to point only to one individual.
Mr. Moore—Did not the insinuation particularly apply to
a particular section of Irish members ?
t Mr. Morris—l think it very probable that Dr. Gray in
ended to point his censure only against those Irish represen-
tatives who were opposed to himself in politics, as the
custom is.

Mr. Moore—Were not his accusations directed against
those who were guilty of the practices he was endeavouring
to denounce ?
Mr. Morris - I really would rather not answer any ques-
tions as regards Dr. Gray's meaning or intentions, because I
am not cognizant of them.
Mr. Moore—No ; but you said the article of February the
6th was founded on Dr. Gray's statement i
Mr. Morris—Yes; that is the only public information.
Mr. Moore—Well, let me point your attention to a passage
in that article—" In the name of constitutional government
we may be permitted to ask, what does the section of Irish

members represent beyond the embodied wish of some hun-
dred needy men to obtain place, salary, and position ?"
That is your statement.
Mr. Moore—No ; it is a question.
Mr. Moore—But it is a question implying an opinion, I
presume, Do you deny that it was intended to express an
opinion in the form of an interrogatory ?
Mr. Morris—l must repeat that lam not in a position to
explain the article in any way whatever ; and I must de-
cidedly refuse to do so.
Mr. Moore—But in the form of an interrogatory does not
that passage occur
Mr. Morris--That sentence doss occur in the article, but,
as you say, it is a question and not a statement; and I would
direct your attention to another part of the article in which
the Irish members are challenged to answer the question for
themselves.

Mr. Moore—Have you taken the trouble to find that there
are Irish members who have always held a high position, and
who, if paid, have certainly not voted for their pay ?
Mr. Morris—l am not prepared to answer that question.
Mr. Moore—Have you heard any statements, or are you
aware of any facts that are calnlated to warrant you in stat-
ing that all the Irish members are paid, and all vote for their
Pay ?

-Mr. Morris--I could, of course, if the committee thought
my individual opinion was of any value, state it ; but I
would suggest that such opinion would be of no value what-
ever to the committee ; and, as representing the Times on
this occasion, I must repeat, what I have said already so
often, that I am not prepared to answet any questions what-
ever concerning that article, or concerning any article, nor to
attempt to justify it.
The last question was ordered to be read to the witness.
The shorthand writer read it accordingly :—have you heard
any statements, or are you aware of any facts which are cal-
culated to warrant you in stating that all the Irish members
are paid, and that they all vote for their pay ?
Mr. Morris—l must decline to answer that question. It is
not consistent with my duty, as far as I understand it, to
answer the question.
_ _

Mr. Moore—The question is, are you aware of any facts ?
Mr. Morris—That question is put to me as representing the
Times newspaper, and I cannot disclose the information upon
which the conductors act, and of which I happen to be cog-
nisant in consequence of my position in the office.
Mr. Moore—And is it the custom at the Times office, and
is it a fair specimen of the scruple and care and consideration
the Times is in the habit of observing in bringing grave
charges against public—
Mr. Butt (to the Chairman)—Sir, I object to that question.
Mr. Moore (to the witness)—Well, but if it were a private
individual, instead of a public journal, who had made this
accusation, do you not think he would in thattase be called
upon to state upon what grounds, opinion, or authority he
made such a statement ?

Mr. Butt—Sir, I object to that question.
Mr. Moore—l insist on putting that question.

Mr. Morris—l decline to answer it.

Mr. Moore—Then, I have no further questions to put.

Mr. Bright—Mr. Morris, you appear here as representing
the Times, and speak with information and authority—
Mr. Morris—With information, but without authority.
Mr. Bright—But with information and authority upon all
matters on which you are permitted to speak at alp
Mr. Morris—l wish to make no statement on authority.
• Mr. Bright—You state that three days before the article of
the 19th of September appeared there was published in the
Times a letter, without the n ime of the writer appended to
it, to which that article referred, and on which that article
was to some extent based. Is that the fact ?
Mr. Morris—lt is.

Mr. Bright—ls it the custom at the Times office to insert
letters, especially letters making charges, without being in
possession of the name of the writer, or some authority ?

Mr. Morris —Certainly not. The Times publishes no letter
of which it does not know, or believe it knows, the writer.
Mr. Bright—Yes ; I. believe there is a public statement
made to that effect—a regul'ar notice that appears in the paper
always ; but we have had before us here the editor of a Lon-
don paper (t'ae hon. gentleman referred to the editor of the
Standard), who, when questioned on this subject, replied
that the newspapers pretended to publish only authenticated
letters, but that, in fact, they did publish letters of the
writers of which they knew nothing whatever.
Mr. Morris—That is certainly not the case with regard to
the Times.

Mr. Bright—Was there any specific statement made in the
letter to which you refer, or was it merely general in its alle-
gations, as we often see in matters of the sort ?
Mr. Morris—The letter is before you ; perhaps you had
better refer to it.

Mr. Bright—You have read that letter, and are able to
state whether there is any specific fact stated in it.
Mr. Morris—l think not ; that is to say, no fact which can
be separated from an expression of opinion. It is very diffi-
cult to separate facts from opinions.
Mr. Bright—lf that letter were before the committee, would
it enable us to prosecute the investigation with which we are
charged ?
Mr. Morris—l do not think I quite understand your ques-
tion.

Mr. Bright—lf the letter referred to any particular case of
corruption, with such circumstances as to indicate the parties
who are alleged to be the delinquents, would it not enable
the committee to prosecute the object of the inquiry with
which they are charged ?
Mr. Morris—You mean, I presume, by obtaining the evi-
dence of the person who wrote the letter
Mr. Bright - Certainly. If that were the case, would you
be able to lay before the committee the manuscript copy of
that letter

Mr. Morris—l should certainly not be able to lay before the
committee the manuscript copy of that letter.
Mr. Bright —ls it not the case that the originals of com-
munications are preserved at the Times office

Mr. Morris—Not always.
Mr. Bright—And you are not aware whether this particular
letter is preserved?

Mr. Morris—l am aware_
Mr. Bright—That it is ?
Mr. Morris—That it is, or that it is not. I cannot answer
that question, but I cannot deny that I know the fact.
Mr. Bright—But the letter by itself would not further the
objects of the inquiry?
Mr. Morris—l think not.

Mr. Brght —The Times circulates some enormous number,
I believe. By a recent Parliamentary return it shows some-
thing hie 40,000 a day ?

, .
Mr. Morris -I am not prepared to make any statement as
to the circulation at this time. I believe the Parliamentary,
return shows about that number.

Mr. Bright—Then, you aro not prepared tolay before the
committee any fact whatever on which the conductors of the
Times undertook to circulate through 40,000 copies of their
journal in one day so grave and insulting a charge, not against
one individual only, but against the whole body of Irish re-
presentatives

Mr. Morris—When I say I am not prepared to do it, I do
not wish it to be understood that it would not be possible,
but simply that I do not think it consistent with my duty to
do it.

Mr. Bright—Would you lead the committee to infer that you
could give us information affecting 100 needy men, leaving
only five of the whole representatives of the Irish people ?
Mr. Morris—That question is not easy for me to answer,
except in an indirect manner, and perhaps this is the proper
time for me to state the reason why I have refused to answer
any questions involving what I consider the secrets of the
paper. With all respect to the committee, I submit that the
question here involved is the independence of the press. I
think that the press of this country—there being no censorship
established by law—is amenable to no authority whatever
except that of the courts of law, and that not even a com-
mittee of the House of Commons has a right to question the
conductors of the paper as regards the opinions they have ex-
pressed, and that there is no tribunal except the courts of
justice which can compel them to do so; I think I should
sacrifice the interests of the Times, and do a grievous injury
to the press of this country if I answered the question.
Mr. Bright—Read my question to the witness.
The question was then read by the shorthand writer as fol-
lows :
" Watild you lead the committee to infer that you could
give us infoimation affecting 100 needy men, leaving only
five of the whole representatives of the Irish people I"
Mr. Morris - I cannot answer that question directly, as I
said before.

Mr. Bright—What > mean is this : Is the committee to un-
derstand that in the charge contained in that article nobody
supposes you meant that 100 Irish members were to corrupt
—that the statement was not to be taken as numerically cor-
rect? There were some chargeS of corruption, and you be-
lieve in some, but we are not to understand that you believe
that 100 members are torrnpt?
Mr. Morris—My answer to that question is that I can not
state to the committee what I believe.
Mr. Butt—Would you extend your idea of the privileges of
the press to facts as well as to opinkdf?
Mr. Itlorris—To everything vrhatever.
Mr. Butt—Then, if a speeific and positive fact was stated in
the Times with reference to the inquiry we are now entered
on, you mean that we could not ask you for the information
on which it was founded ?

Mr. Morris—lt would be a matter entirely for the conside*-
ration of the conductors of the paper whether they wonl4
answer it. If they thought the question could be ans*Oted
without involving the interests of the press, they lota pro-
bably answer it.

Butt—Have you road the article of September, and does
it not appear to you that it is a statement of opinion rather
than a statement of facts ?
Mr. Morris—lndividually, that is nk:r• Wigan.
Mr. Butt—Now, as to the articie of rebtliary; atii.ing your
opinion in the same way, it is to some extent * litiaement of
information also, and to that ,eitent it b 3 llitibrmation for
which the journal is not responsible?
Mr. Morris—That is quite trize„ :Preilded the inference be
not drawn that the two &eta Mout:toned by Dr. Gray were the
only grounds upon which the epinions of the Times were ex.
pressed. Ido not wish the.t inference to be drawn.
Mr. Butt—Then you cto not say anything one way or the
other as to what inikrmation the Times may or may not hate?
Mr. Morris—l 'make no statement whatever upon the
eet.

Mr. Britt—Then your statement in not Meant 'to ,stseliVey to
us either a positive or a negative assertion its to what other
information the Times may have'? 'I Mk you because I
thought you meant to say that 'thee* *as other information at
the Times office.
Mr. Morris—l wiish it tb ‘be clearly understood that I make
no statement on the statect.
Mr. Macartney--ta it not the invariable_ rule at the Times
office, that they ao not, and never did, palish a letter with.-
out knowing the parties, or believing they, knew them ?
Mr. Morris—l cannot answer a question put so genetatSr•
I can only speak as to the custom of the office, tleinestion-
ably that is the rule which, to the best of * knowledge, is
always observed.

Mr. Bright Ven remember a'reiterkable discussion abed
an annonymotts letter being siiblished at one time ?
Mr. Morris—That is the very reason why I wish to guard
myself against answering the question in the general term In
which it has Ikeo. put.
Mr. Butt --If the Letters of Junius came to you, you would
very preha.bly be glad to print them ?
Morris—l am afraid not now.
Bentinck—As manager of the Times you admit, I
suppose, that charges of gross corruption have been brought
in your journal against the body of Irish members ?
Mr. Morris—l admit nothing more than What appears In
the paper.
Colonel Bentinek—ln your e.hpaiity of manager you are not
prepared to offer any 'e planation or justification of the
charges brought in the Times against the Irish members ?
Mr. Morris-1 am not.
itColette) Bentinek—Then, is this an exceptional case, or is
the r
ae tee at
without being pre the Times office to publish grave charges
port of them ?
pared to bring forward any proofs in sup-
Mr. Morrie—I am not prepared to answer that question.
Colonel Bentinek—
are unable to den Then I suppose • I may assume that you
y that it is so ?
may draw, but
Mr. Morris—That is an inference which you, as an individual
I presume the committee is too just to draw it.
Mr. Butt—l understand you do not admit the right of the
committee to question yon as to the article of September?
Mr. orris—No ; nor as to that of February. Mr. Butt—That is a grave public question.
Mr. Morris—l wish simply to record my protest on that
question.
No member having any more questions to put, Mr. Morris
then bowed to the committee and withdrew.
Mr. Patrick Fattrell, solicitor, and Mr. Clemson, barrister,