The Sun.
London, England, 1814-11-24 00:00:00

PETITION OF DANIEL LOVELL,

Mr. WHITBREAD said, the person in wliose be
*half he now presented a Petition was at present a
prisoner in the Gaol of Newgate. That per-ion,
Daniel Lovell, the Proprietor and Editor of The
Statesman Newspaper, had been nearly four years
confined in Newgate, and was likely to he con,
fined there for life, unless the Crown should be
disposed to initktate his punishment. He stated,
.that he was unable to Try 0.,. •-
.ruitenced, and to find the necessary sureties
for his good behaviour for the next. three years
The Petition was then brought up and read. After detail-
ing the causes of his different trials and convictions, it stated,
that he ,had been imprisoned in all nearly four years ; that
the pt.riod of imprisonment to which he was sentenced ex-
piree in 'May last; that he was in embarrassed circumstances,
and unable to find sureties for hisgood behaviour ;and that he
laboured under severe attacks of an asthmatic and pulmonary
nature, which were increased by his imprisonment, and which,
if he were not speedily liberated, would soon put an end to
his life.

Mr. WHITBREAD said, in moving that this Petition
should lie on the table, which was all that be intended doing
at present, he could not avoid calling the attention of the
House to the extreme hardship
,ot this case. He conceived
that three years and a half of imprisonment, extended now to
nearly four years, was certainly sufficient to expiate
-any offence of the kind which could possibly be coin-
itted. It appeared, that out of the three instances of
the] for which he had suffered, two of them were copW
'otn different papers ; and this extraordinary partiality had
ie n shewn, in one of the cases, that the persons from whom
:copied tho libels, and who suffered judgment to go by de-
t, had never been called up to receive their sentence,
Cat; he,who bad also suffered judgment to go by default, was
up for sentence, and imprisoned for une year. In the
stitia'llinstance, for which he suffered imprisonment he had
-` on affidavit at his trial, that from his imprisonment he
kneqhing of its insertion. He again suffered judgment
to.,i, default, and he had been sentenced to eighteen
111-- im risonment, to pay a fine of 500/. and find two su-
reties y
„ ft, his good behaviour of 5001. each, and be sound him-
placese'?oo/. He was aware that this House was not the
e nake an application for a mitigation of punish-
thatet,i the House could not award any such
13"67,1,4 but the Petitioner had already made an ay

to the Secretery of State at a time when his
life was despaired of. He applied by letter to Lord Sid-
month in May last, inclosing a Certificate of the Medical
Gentleman appointed for Newgate, stating that his life was
despaired of. My Lord Sidmouth returned for answer, that
under the circumstances of the case he did not think it ad-
visable to recommend any mitigation of punishment. H
'made a second application to the Lords of the Treasury, and
to this no answer whatever was returned. In these circum-
stances the Petitioner came before the Bar of this House as
his last resource. I hope Gentleman opposite will advise the
Crown to take compassion on this unfortunate man ; and af-
ter his four years' imprisonment, and in consideration of his
bad state of health, that it would be graciously pleased to re+
mit the fine.iand not require'sureties from him. It :night he'
said that he was still carrying on a newspaper, and that be
had where Withal to pay the fine; but he had made an in-
quiry into the Prisoner's circumstances, and found that this
was not in his power. The Prisoners told him, if he could
find 500/.
.or the necessary sureties, at hisk time of life he
would sacrifice his last shilling to obtain a blessing so long
desired by him, even for, the very short time which in all
human probability he would be allowed to enjoy it. He had
written to him a letter detailing his: distress and his pe-
cuniary circumstances, which it was out fittingand unneces-
sary tb read over to the Housii; it was sufficient to say, that.
it impressed him fully with the conviction that it was not un-
willingness, but absolute inability, which prevented him from
paying the fine. He requested some of those who were able,
to say whether they were willing to give au advice of mercy
to the Crown.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it. was painful to, be
obliged to snake 'any observations of a tendency unfavourable
to the Petitioner. In case his advice were asked in this case,
he would say, that the mercy of the Crown ought nut to' be
extended to the Petitioner. It might be supposed from the
statement of the Hon. Gentleman, that the four years' impri-
sonment was in consequence of one conviction. (No, No,
from different parts of the House.) He was first convicted in
I 807, when he was committed to the custody of the Marshal
of the King's Bench Prison for a month, and fined in 501.
The next date was in Easter Term, 1810; The Honour-
able Gentleman had been misinformed' respecting this case.
It was true the Proprietors of the Manchester Papers had
-not been prosecuted ; they gave up the authors of the libel,
and made a prompt apology. With this the Property Tax
Commissioners were satisfied. But the author of the libel
was punished by a year's imprisonMent The Commis-
sioner's were not, however, satisfied with the apology of Mr.
Lovell, and called on the Officers of the Crown to bring him
up for sentence. On this occasion he was imprisoned for
twelve months. The next sentence was in Michaelmas Term,
1810. It was twelve months imprisonment in Neweafe.—
While order this imprisonment he made his paper the vehicle
of another libel, respecting the treatment of prisoners of
war in this cunntry.' This libel was of a most dangerous na-
ture, and might have been productive of dreadful sufferings
to our subjects who were prisoners in France. From that
time till now lie had carried on hit newspaper, and a news-
paper was generally supposed to be a profitable concern. He
had even lately erected a new weekly paper, called " The
Constitution." He• was ready to allow that where imprison-
ment, in consequence of inability to pay a fine, was pro-
longed much beyond the period of the sentence, that such
prolongation might be supposed a commutation of the fine,
and that the time had arrived at which the party might be
liberated. It_ was necessary,' however, to secure the public
against future aggression. But what security had they in
this case against a renewal of the offence, when such it ap-
peared was the estimation in which the Petitioner was held,
that he could find no two persons who would be security for
three years for hisgood behaviour? He thought, under all tke
circumstances of the case, that the House ought to be cautious
how they interfered with a- sentence which the Court had
thought fit to apportion after the most mature deliberation.
Mr. BROWNE thought that the observations of the Hon,
and Learned- Gentleman were calculated to excite a prejudice
against the unfottunate Petitioner. He knew' of no human
transgression for which an imprisonment of three years and.
an half did not atone. The offence here, however, was one
that naturally grew out. of the freedom' of the country; it
was the offspring of free discussion, and those laws whiise ob-
ject it was to extinguish this, were, in his opinion, " more
honoured. in the breach than the observance."
Sir GILBERT HEATHCOTE complained of theireatment
which persons imprisoned for libel often experienced in their
confinement. It was possible to render the punishments fre-
quently inflicted as severe as death itself. His attention had
been called to two cases of peculiar hardship: he meant the
case of Mi. Colobett,- who hail been wised with the common
felons during his imsrisoninent in Newgate; and of another
Gentleman, who had beets sent to Lincoln Casle., Ile pre-
sumed that i❑ sending him there, it never• was intended
to deprive him of the ordinary conveniencirs and com-
forts of life. For some time, however, he was treated
with a harshness which tindotibtedly had aggravated and
exceeded the punishment intended by the Court. The dis-
tress of the present Petitioner was such as to excite universal
commiseration. There was in practice, he feared, too
queutly, a vigour beyond the law. It appeared to him, that
Government would do well to guard against any exaspera-
tion of a law already sufficiently severe. Jr might he well if
they would apportion a small part of the immense resources
they had at their disposal, to the erection of a prison to which
persons confined for libel might be sent, instead of being
mingled with the common herd of vile and wretched male-
factors. With respect to She Petition now presented by his
Hon. Friend, be should not attempt to injure its merits by
any observations of his own, but should be satisfied with
earnestly recommending it to theconsideration of Ministers.
Mr. Alderman Arfußs said, the'Hori.Baronet was greatly
in error in supposing that Slr.•Cobbett had been confined
amongst the ,ordinary.criminals in Newgate. With respect,
to the 'case now under consideration, lie had visited Mr.
Lovell, and found him certainly in possession of little inure
than the bare conveisiencts of life. He was dispose 4 to be-
lieve that_ he was really incapable of paying the fine, and con-
sidered it to lie a case in which the prerogati, eof mercy
might be properly exercised.- He hoped, therefore, his Ma-
jesty's Gov.-rtnnent would take his case into consideration :
lie believed his health was in a very indifferent stare, and
must he made Much worse by a continuance of imprison
ment in apartments which afforded him no betteraccommoda.

tion than that he bad mentioned. He believed from what he
had heard, that it would not by possibility be in his power
to pay thy fine, except by resorting to a subscription from the
public. He-thought, however, from what the Petitioner had
'told him, that he might be able to procure sureties for his
good behaviour for the time required by the sentence, as far
as 2001. a piece; and if he wafd do that, he flattered him-
self his Majesty's Government would, under all the cir-
cumstances of the case, chew him that lenity which the pe-
tition prayed for.
Sir GILBERT .HEATHCOTE said, that Mr. Cobhctt,
through the interference of Alderman Wood, was removed
from among the felons in Newgate.
Mr. Alderman ATKINS said, Mr. Cobbett was taken to
prison at a late hour in the e% ening, and was conveyed to the
state side, but. he was never put among Cie felons.
Mr. PONSONBY believed that the Court would not have
imposed so heavy a fine, had it been acquainted with the real
state of Mr. Lovell's affairs.. It was of the greatest impor-
tance that persons placed in such situations should disclose
the pecuniary difficulties to which they were exposed, which
would not only affect the amount of the fine, but of the seen-
it,inc in s,rior, which the Court ought to be peculiarly earn-
II
Mr. BATHURT observed, that the question was, whether
the additional itUVrisonment suffered by Mr. Lovell could be
held to be a sufficient commutation for the fine he • was not
able to pay. 'With regard to the securities, the Court always
formed its opinion not merely upon the pecuniary circum-
stances, but also upon the conduct of the Prisoner.
Mt% WHITBREAD hoped that nothing that had fallen from
him would-have the effect of injuring the cause he had -es-
poused, by preventing the visitations of mercy upon Mr. Lo-
yell. He was happy to find that the disposition of the House
was so much in favour of the Petitioner.
The Petition was ordered to lie on the table.
A Mes Sage from the Lords informed the House that their
Lordships had agreed to furnish the House with the First and
Second Reports of their House on ,the subject of the Corn
Laws.—Urdered to be printed.
COLONEL QUENTIN.

Mr. TIERNEY stated, that when an Hon. Gen-
tleman (Colonel Palmer) had last night given, no-
tice that he should, after the recess, make again
a motion on the subject of the late Court-Martial,
in consequence of an article which had appeared,
1.3, authority, in a daily evening print, he was not
aware that be was nearly as much implicated as
the Hon. Colonel himself in the contents of that
article. All public men were liable to have their
conduct examined into and canvassed ; hut what
the Courier had published was not the opinion of
the Editor, but a contradictiou, by authority of the
statement he had made in the House, of facts con-
nected with the hard situation in which the Offi-
otrs of the 10th Hussars were placed. The article

in question went to deny that Col. Quentin had
applied to the Officers by authority:, and• what
authority it was not necessary to mention, for a
copy of the letter, called by sonic a Round Robin,
on Which the harsh sentence inflicted upon them
was afterwards"founded. It also made it appear
as though he had intended to detract from the
kindness of the Prince Regent in raising Lieut.-
Col. Roberts to his prise t situation. hle did not
exactly comprehente: die difference between the
statement which he NA made and _that puldished
by authority on this •point. When it %vas said,
that the appointment had been given by his Royal
Highness to Colonel Robarts unsolicited imme-
diately on his return from the Continent, the tact
was not correct : it had been conferred after that
Officer . had distinguished himself abroad ; and
without wishing to detract from Elie merit of his
Royal Highness in bestowing such a reward, he
had always understood from all Military men, that
when an Officer in the _command of a regiment
had so distinguished himself as to have his name
irentioned in the dispatches of the. Commander in
Chief, it had been the, uniform practice of the
service to raise him one step in rank. He was
most anxious that the House should see that he
had not wilfully asserted any facts which were not
made out by the evidence ; and he should now
proceed to the letter, which it was now said had
not been delivered to his Royal Highness throngh
an application in his own behalf. He asserted
again,- that the Officers were most anxious that
this letter should not be given to. the Prince. In-
stead of requiring Colonel Palmer_ to lay it before -
his Royal Highness, its delivery had been. de-
manded of them in the mess-room by the antlio.s
rity of the Regent. He shoold call upon his ho-
nourable Friend to state, whether it was the wish
of the Officers that the document in question
should be laid before the Royal Eye ? Whether,
on the contrary, they did not desire that it should
be considered- as cancelled, and as' never having
been written ? This- was the more important to
ascertain, as the whole of the severe proceedings
against the Officers were founded on this letter,
which could not have been produced had their -,
own intentions alone been carried into effect." He
therefore once more called upon his Honourable
Friend to state, whether, when Colcinel Quentin
had required the delivery of the said letter in the
mess-room of the regiment, the Officers bad not
refused it ? and whether be himself, Colonel Pal.
mer, had not given it up by 'coon-nand to his
Royal Highness, through w,.ich- means it became
the ground of the dreadful punishment inflicted
on the Officers of tbe 10th Hussars ? In these
statements, to which he had pledged himself, he ,
was certain of being borne tan by facts. He did
not wish to provoke a discussion on the subject. •
The House must feel for his situation,. when the
statement which he had made had- been denied by
authority. It was not on account of the Officers
lie requested this explanation ; it was in vindica-
tion of his own character., He concluded h 3 re.
peating his questions to the Honourable Member,
and stating, that as to the' tact of the Officers be-
ing desirous the letter should be considered _as
cancelled, and not produced, he could bring the
testimony of every Officer in the regiment.
Colonel PALMER stated, that the letter had ori-
ginally been delivered by the Officers to him, to
be used accio•ding to his own discretion ; that he
had thought it his-first duty to communicate with
Colonel Quentin on the subject, as Commanding
Officer. He had waited on his Royal Highness-,
'to give him an account of the state of the. regi-
ment, but had
.made no mention of the letter. -
Col. Quentin. was present at that interview. His
Royal Highness had desired hint (Col. Palmer) to
go to the Officers and insist on their preferring
charges against Colonel Quentin. The latter-bad
subsequently come to the Officers and demanded
that the letter in question should be delivered up
to him. The Officers had refused, and-said, that
they wished it to be considered-as cancelled. He
had then demanded it by order of the Prince Re- .
-gent ; and in consequence of the Officers being
unwilling to disobey the orders of the Prince, ho
(Col. Palmer) had waited on his Royal Highness,
and said, that if he issued his commands for the
delivery of the letter, it should be immediately-
delivered. His Royal Highness then denied,
over and over again, having authorised Colonel
Quentiii to demand that the letter should be given
up- As to what bad been stated, that the letter
had been-delivered with one from Col. Roberts,
that was totally incorrect. The letter of Colonel
RObarts-.had not been written till the day after,- ..
inconsequence of the Orders issued by the Prince
Regent, thst the Officers should bring charges
against Colonel Quentin. - it was stated, that his
Royal Highness had sent the whole of the letters
to the Commander inlChiet : of that be knew no-
thing, but believed they had been delivered to
Col. Qitenrin, as be understood Col. Roberts had
seen the letter signed by the Officers on Colonel.
Quentin's table, -and was inclined to throw it
in the fire, considering the means by which it
had been obtained. As to his Royal Highness
nibs I,,,eintr, interfpepri in toa!dtig him (Colonel
Palmer) the prosecutor, although the Regent
had not absolutely commanded him, his Royal
Highness had expressed his .wishes in a way to
be nearly tantamount to a command. He (Col.
Palmer)' had waited on his .Royal Highness, and •
expressed his disinclination to prosecute ; in the •
conversation of one or two hours which_took
place on that occasion, the Prince stated, that be
considered him bound to come forward, and that
it would appear a desertion 'of the Officers of the
regiment if he did not. To this he replied, that
his Royal Highness must be aware, that if he be- -
came the prosecutor, he should-do his duty, and. -
exert himself to the utmost to bring the ch;irges
home to Col. Quentin. The Prince Regent ex-
pressed his conviction that he could notact other- _
wise ; and it was with an understanding of that
nature that he had undertaken the office of pro,
secutOr. He was sorry to have been obliged to
state these facts at the present period. It was his
intention to defer the discussion of the subject,
uotilheshould bring forward the motion of which
be had given notice:. He differed from the Right
Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Manners •Sutton), on the •
view of the question which he had taken on a
former night. He did not think that his answer
at that time had been satisfactory, and be hoped
that When the subject should come once most,
before the House, the Right Hon. GentlemaA

1

-31)0410 rhe. votritiLltig ;more iike.
trepiy.. ' He :trusted 'he should .tlom hr able to
Trovvince•A•very ot,lo iii *4 'country that 'the Offi-
cers of the '1 Otivbati ontf-iillv treated.

Mr. Trek•NusA-,-.41.-isrunn ecessary to confirm the
statement of the lion. Officer, and- I hope the
notat is now satisfied that I was warranted in
matiing th•t•assertions.of a ;-.)rnier
heart)--The Hon. Colonel was not desired by .the
Oilicers••to deliver the letter to the Prince; on•the
contrary, •it.,was„stronglyrv-sisted by them. So
that-the. statement •in the•paper is a c.lireet'false-
hood. It now appears distinctly that Colonel
Palmer was•not desired to deliver the letter to the
Prince* Regent, but, that it was obtained by his
L7ighbess, sol'ely by the influence of his
high -,station:--ay, his.. command that the' letter
should be delivered up.—(Hear, hear,• hear l).
Mr. M-So•rTor7 said., that -be could of Course
know. nothing of the..letters in 'question until.
th,y came befdre him oti • the Court-
Martial. He did not even know•of their exist-
ence. On the. trial the letters were -put in, and'
were 'authenticated by Colon-el Palmer; • who 3C.,
companied his evidence with-. a-statement'that he-
should feel it necessary to apprise the-Cotirt of
the,cii.cumsranees belonging to these letters, as to•
the mode in which they came into the pOssession•
of Colonel Quentin. .As-- far as • he' could' re-
collect, his evidence then was perfectly coinci-
dent with the statement made= by the Honourable
Colonel now—it was not the-.same iu Nvo4'ds,'
•but •in .substance. The letters therefore' being
produced with this explanation, • the Court, iu
forming its decision,• was fully possessed of all the.
facts that7had just-now•-heen detailed.-''Before the
letters came into the hands of the Adjutant-
•he ,(Mn' Sutton) of course, kneW
'n'o-
thing of the transactions relating •to •them. Fie
regretted. that the statement made by him on a
former night bad not been satisfactory to -the
Bon. Colc-mel: it was not from a- wish to pass
_over anypart;of the accusation of the Hon. Colo-.
reel withlut reply. r -
Tire SPEAKER: inquired- Whether any motion was'
to be-proposed.
Tiii.itts-ET was-not- aware that any was ne-
cessary ; bad the statement of-which he had COm-
.plained• conic Oirly from the' other 'side 'of the
lion se, he should -not have thought it necessary'
- to wake any.remarks• upon it ; but purporting to!
be.given from such high authority, it required
sonit• reply.• That reply be believed, was satis-:
factOry.--L-(Hear; hear, lrear !)
The subject Was•then dropped. .
FEES IN THE IRISH COURTS OF JCSTICt.

-Sil•-JO4N. NE*NPORT "rose 'to triali-e the motion
of whieh'he had notice,-" for Copies of'the
Royal•Cornmis;ion for.inquiring into the Fees- of
the7Courts..in- Ireland." • He complained of no
retnrn•l;aving been nfatle'to a part Qf an Order
formerly•given by the Douse, and asserted; that
the•fees taken in Ireland arnoltined to a tax of Is.
in the pound, -whereas' 'a regulation was made iii
1733 that 6d. only Slionld be ,charged. -
Mr. BATHuss'i•-coneeived that the'imputations
_ thrown, by •thetion.-Baroner upon his Alajest.y!s
Ministers were alvtgether unfounded •and miwar-
yantable. There was no disposition op their part',
and he was sure there 'could be Hone on that of
the principal Miters' of Justice in till's country,
to-frustrate' the. intentions 'of that house: The
Holt. Baronet had, howevq, not .appeared• to be
aware of Thedifficulty of thelask-of inquiritlg into
the duties of all tite4.;ourts of Justice in the king-
dom, as well as the fees-taken by all the Ministers'
of Jtrstier. Such-an entiniry would require great
abijity is those who were to report-npon the duties
of all the Courts of 'Justice ; and if if was meant
to,comprehend ad the Miuiste-s of Justice, Con-
stables as well as whets, it Would be an enquiry'
of great extent. As to England; he had never
hear(! the 'Hon. Baronet' Complain of hilly skit
abuses in this part of the United Kingdom ; and
as to .Ireland and SCothand, some time should be
allaved for communications with the persons most
competent togil'e advice. • There was some diffi.:
entry in selecting the proper persons to be Com-
missioners: hf the Judges .of the different Courts
or .the persons -practising there were appointed
Commissioners, the lion. BaTottet would be dis-
satisfied; Who,'' then, were to be 'appointed ? if
a selection were made from those men who had
been bred to the profession of the Bar, but who-
'from fortune or accident-had retired from the Bar, •
' it was not evident that those men would 'readily •
undertake so ardnous a duty. No •time had, how-
eves,- been lost ,in making the-proper selection,
and-.the Commission was ready now; 'as far as re-'
garied England. If it had been sooner appoint-
ed, it would have been impossible that they could
have by this time produced any-Report that would
have* been ninth laying on the talSle of the Hone.
Sir S. ROMlLLYc,eininly did not mean to im-
pute-any improper- Motives to Ministers On this
occaion,-but still'he did not think,that • sufficient
-respect had been shewn to the House of Commons.
in'not attending to the desire which they expressed
so long ago, that there slioidd be a report upon
this subject " without delay.". He saw-no diffi-
culty at all in t 1 apr<Antrncrit-.0
The.SOLICITOR-GENERAL conceived that many.
of the observatious which had been tilt own out,
would be, generally considered as throwing reflec;-
tions'on all.persons now bolding judicial situa—
tions-, and would tend to bring
,the judicature of
the country into disrespect. yy
Sir S. in explanation, said that he
had no intention of throwing iMputations'on any
of the persons holding high judicial situations.
Mr. ABERCROMBI' considered it highly impro-
per that. two out Of the five Commissioners should
be M-asters'of Chancery, although he highly re-
speoted-those individuals, and was convinced that.
-there were no who who would act with more
- honour, it they weree-placed in that situation.
Mr. 11. AribiNo-roN insisted that -there had
been great difficulty in findingCommisSioners, nor
was it so lunch to be ivoudered at, for a rare com-
bination of qualities- Was 'necessary. Integrity',
talents, habits 'of hu.c.rittess, and a knowli!dge of-the
pirrtieular subject, were • all requiste. 'Several
persons to iv-hont application had been made had
declined to :act ; and op that very day. one person
bud dechteed re!usAl. -• • _

PONsONBY COlllll state, from .his own
knowledge," that the portion ►if tilt!
pubic in I►'eland were -highly' pleaged, with the
pleasure, though be was alvare that It strong and

Travrett4 party 11\at .totimiy were Again t it.
As to the alleged difficulty, of finding Coinn-,is-
sioners, he 'had no doubt that his Hon. Friend
could in a day or two procure at least seven, to
whom no public objection would be offered.

The 'motion was agreed to. -
Sir JOHN 11`.4EwponT they spoke of the Office
for the Registry.ofDeedS in Ireland, in which he
understood fees had been atigmented till they
were nearly quadruple of amount prescribed
by the Act of Parliament they Itad.been doubled
within the last six months. He therefline moved
for an account of the ,Rates of FeeS`demAnded or
taken in the Office. for, the Re'gistry of Deeds in
Ireland, and, of the ..lterations- which had been
made during-the lare'seven 'years. Agreed to.—
He then Moved for an account of the Writs of
Latitat issued on debts below and above 201. in
Ireland, within the last' seven. years. Agreed.to.
Mr. WHITBREAD brought up a Bill for Regulating the
Weights and Measures. Read Ist time; 2rl reading to-mor-
row. Ordered to be printed.