The Sun.
London, England, 1838-04-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 1838

be given to the proceedings of these Committees—( Hear)—
nor should it be forgotten that the Hon. Chairman of the
Shaftesbury Coma ittee (Mr. Blackstone) had himself
been the first to move for the printing of the evidence which
had been taken before that Committee. But, on the whole,
he ( Sir R. Inglis) thought the original motion ought to be
agreed to by the House.
Mr. HUME doubted whether the House ought to enter-
tain either of the motions which were now before them. He
had unsuccessfully endeavoured to put an end to the proceedings
of the House regarding his Hon. Friend, the Member for Dub-
lin, for which proceedings, he had no doubt, the House was
now heartily sorry.—( Hear, hear.)--He thought the motion
now brought forward was an interference with the liberty of
the press.—( Ironical cheers from the Opposition. )—lt was an
attempt to controul public opinion and the moral feeling of
the people with regard to the proceedings of Committees of
this House. If the House were to bring Mr. Poulter before
them, they were bound in justice to bring every one before
them who characterised their proceedings as infamous and
corrupt, which was the case with many of the daily
papers. Why should the Committees of this House have
a greater protection than the House itself ?—( Hear. )
He wished to ask whether the House was to be more careful
of proceedings before a portion of the House to those
that took place before the whole, and whether they
wished to stop the Press from questioning the proceedings
in that House ? He objected to the adoption of the course
proposed, unless the House laid down a rule that no observa-
tion derogatory to the character of the Huuse should be made
in any newspaper at all. He thought the observations of
Mr. Poulter ought to be taken on the very same footing as
any other observations in a newspaper—(Hear)—and the
House ought not to interfere. He thought there would be
no use in calling Mr. Poulter to the bar, for if they did, and
then asked him what he meant by corruption, he would say
that he meant the bias of party, and the House hxd had it from
the Honourable Member for Ripon himself that there
was a party bias in that House. He
( Mr. Hume) thought
the House ought to put an end to the subject by not enter.
taining the question at all. He had seen the House charac-
terised in much stronger language than Mr. Poulter had used,
and on that ground he would support the motion ; but, at the
same time, he felt bound to say, that the wise course would be
for the House to reject the motion by postponing it for 6 mouths.
Mr. HARVEY said, that if it really was true as some
gentlemen seemed to be anxious to impress upon the House,
that the House collectively and individually were so grossly '
corrupt as some seemed fond to impute, it was astonishing to
him how gentlemen should be so anxious to have the honor of
ascat in that House. —( Cheers.) He could not but think that the
amendment proposed was premature, and unjust to Mr. Poul-
ter. It was his opinion that that Gentleman should appear at
the bar, and if he should then say it was impossible for
him to support the charge he had put forth until the
evidence was brought forward, that might be a suggestion
that the House would recognise, but they ought to hear it
from Mr. Poulter.—(Cheers.) With the exception of what
had been stated by some Honourable Members, who were
on the Committee, the House was totally ignorant of what
had taken place before the Committtee.—(Loud cheers.)
If Mr. Poulter said he would be' prepared to justify both in
letter and spirit, the charges contained its his letter to his late
constituents, but that he could cot do so until the evidence had
been printed, that would be an appeal so reasonable and just, that
no one would for a moment think of refusing the time. When he
( Mr. H.) read the letter, he thought the charge was made calmly
and Mr. Poulter might say that he had made the charges,
they were not founded upon evidence which was received, but
upon something which had been rejected, that he founded
them. At all events, Mr. Poulter ought to appear at the
Bar, both in justice to himself and the House. It was im-
possible that the House sought to exercise a vindictive revenge
upon Mr. Poulter ; it would therefore be unjust in them not to
have Mr. l'oulter at the bar, in order that he might have an
opportunity of telling them what were the grounds of his im-
putation. Upon his ( Mr. Harvey) reading the letter, he did
not think that Mr. Poulter would not feel obliged to any
of his friends who tried to excuse him on the ground
of a heated temper. He apprehended that it was a de-
liberate imputation —that it was the settled sentiments
of his mind. It was, therefore, in justice to himself
that he ought to appear at the Bar—it was necessary that they
shouldhat
thought
odet
?al
ari
et
of
mrrowomaar himself
o.oattsshselcuror whether
s
npsvroiersyte conveyed
that
h f
ht
than
taeo
nr
trmeanthauepmtimere
rnet
Gentlemen.o
pch
political
trei charge politic
ca(
.wclrhoor corrup-
tion, H
uspa. l
?t
upon the Committee should wish to hear from Mr. Poulter
himself on what grounds he had made his imputations, and in
what way he wished them to be understood. He doubted whe-
ther any one who had ever lost a seat, or any who had failed
to obtain one through a Committee, did not think that there
was great political corruption and great mental imbecility
on the part of the Committee. He for one distinctly denied
that it was impossible for a Committee to deal fairly and de-
cide according to the justice of the case. He had been
sitting on a Committee all that morning hearing counsel
and witnesses, and he declared solemnly that his sole object
was to arrive at a just conclusion upon the evidence which was
adduced.—( Loud cheers.) If there was any ground for the
imputations which were daily thrown out against Committees,
he conceived that seats in Parliament would soon be plenty
enough, for Gentlemen would be anxious to take some office
or another in order to escape from such company.—Cheers
and laughter.)
Colonel DAVIES was inclined to adhere to the amend-
ment. What was the use of calling in Mr. Poulter, when
they had the simple mode of ascertaining whether the
charge was correct or not, by examining the evidence it-
self ? The Honourable Gentleman opposite had stated,
that if this matter were to be postponed, lie and his
colleagues would have to be under the imputation for a consi-
derable time ; but how would the Hon. Gentleman escape that
imputation by having Mr. Poulter called to the Bar? Did
the Honourable Gentleman suppose that Mr. Poulter at the
Bar would unsay all that he had said—(Cries of " Hear,
hear")—or that Mr. Poulter at the Bar would retract
the gross charges he had made through the public Press.-:-
(Hear, hear, hear ) The most that could be said against it
Was, that the letter itself was a most intemperate letter. Gen-
tlemen opposite, who appeared to be so tender of their
characters, were perhaps not aware that a letter had. beel,i,
inserted in the Times of Saturday, signed " Robert Pigott,
a Member of that House.—( Loud cheers.) Li that letter
was the following passage I take this opportunity of dis-
avowing all share in such a transaction, worthy only of our
present Government, and being a record of the grossest out-
rage ever perpetrated within the walls of the House of Corn.
mons." That letter was signed Robert Pigott.—( Cheers. )
He did not know whether Mr. Robert Pigott was present or
not, and whether he avowed or disavowed that letter. —( Crl' 8
of " Question, question," from the Tories.) What he meant
to state was this, that if Mr. Poulter was to be visited with
any punishment, a portion of that punishment ought to
fall upon the Hon. Member for Bridgenorth.—( Cheers. )
Mr. W YNN cou'd not agree with the Honourable Gen-
tleman who char icterised this proceeding as vindictive. It
was not vindictive but protective.—( Hear, from the Tories. )
What would any Gentleman in that House do, if he were
charged individually with gross corruption? He would either
appeal to the House, or he would answer the charge by saying
that the gentleman who made it was a liar and a calumniator.
.If any individual should publish a letter charging a judge or
jury with corrupt and wilful p urjury would they think of exa-
mining the trial ? They wou'd say " You are protectedin the
execution of the duty which the law calls upon you to discharge;
we will extend that protection to you immediately, because you
acted in the discharge of that duty--the law has vested a dis-
cretion in you, and we will give you credit to believe that you
acted hoteely." There might be a different case. ?UP-
pose a charge of personal corruption to be brought against a
man, it might be a ground for proceeding against him, but
that was not a ground for a general charge against a Com-
mittee. The unsuccessful party in every suit was inclined to
attribute his failure to the ignorance or corruption of the
Court which decided against him. The House could not in
justice to the individual Members who were thus charged conic
to any other resolution than that ofcalling Mr. Poulter to the bar.
Mr. T. DUNCONIBE did not know the use of the House
making an order the other day unless it was to be acted upon.
—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) It appeared to him
that by ordering Mr. Poulter to the Bar, they would express
no opinion as to a breach of privilege having been commit-
ted—that would entirely depend on the truth or falsehood
of his charge.—( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial side.)
He therefore hoped his Hon. Friend would withdraw his
amendment, and allow Mr. Poulter to be called to the bar,
and asked whether he avowed himself to be the author of it ;
and, next, whether he stood by and maintained the allegations
therein ?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not avoid saying a few
words with respect to the question before the House ; and he
felt it the more necessary to interpose at this stage of the dis-
cussion, because he confessed he could not agree in the senti-
ments which had fallen from Hon. Gentlemen at that or
the opposite side of the House. He owned that it
did appear to him that this matter ought not to be entered into
at ali. He was of opinion, that where the allegation was ge-
neral, and had reference merely to the political conduct and
opinion of a party, it would be wiser and more dignified of this
House if they refused to interfere at all in the matter. The
Right Honourable Gentleman had put a question to him
as to whether, if this was a matter of personal imputation, he
should not wish to vindicate himself. If it were of the nature
described by the Right Honourable Gentleman he
undoubtedly should ; but he thought there was a clear
distinction between an imputation cast on the con-
duct of an individual, and on that pursued by a
particular party. If it had been said that an individual had
received a sum of money for voting in a particular way, he
should certainly think it right to have the individual making
that imputation called to the bar of the House, and
punished as the House might think fit ; but he thought
it quite a different thing, when the political license
which they all exercised was carried beyond the usual bounds,
and the conduct which was called by some unjustifiable
was designated by others as corrupt. He thought
that such a matter as this had better be left to the ge-
neral decision of the public, than be made the subject of
reprimand or punishment by this House. There was a
clear distinction between the character of this House
and the functions exercised by the Judges. It was right that
those exercising judicial functions should endeavour to main-
tain the respect due to the high authority which was de-
puted ; but when a popular body like the House of Com-
mons selected in this manner a particular individual for
making a general allegation respecting the character of the
House, or of a portion of it, he feared that a vote
which condemned that individual either to prison, or to any
other punishment involving penalty or disgrace, would be re-
garded by the public generally as a punishment which was
dictated more by passion than necessity or a regard to the
character of that House. He owned he would be confirmed
in that opinion if the only cases to be selected were those of
the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin and Mr. Poultcr.