The Sun.
London, England, 1836-02-12 00:00:00

the better protection of the Fisheries en the coasts of England
and Wales. The Hon. and Gallant Member stated that the
Bill was founded on the resolutions of a Committee which
sat on the subject in 1833, and that its principle erects were
to prevent the aggressions of the French fishing-boats on the
English coast, and to protect at a certain season of the year
the brooding fish in the bays and shallow waters off the south
-
cm coast of England.
After a few words from Sir Edward Knatchbull, Sir J. Bul-
ler, Sir J. Reid, and Mr. Poulett Thornton, leave was given
to bring in the Bill.
PARLIAMENTARY AND MUNICIPAL VOTES.
On the motion of Mr. D. W. HARVEY, a return was
ordered of the total number of persons qualified to vote for
Members to serve in Parliament in each of the cities and
boroughs of England and Wales ; also a return of the total
number of persons qualified to vote for councillors in each of
the cities, boroughs, and towns of England and Wales under
the Municipal Reform Act; such returns to be made from
the last registration.
PARLIAMENTARY BILLS.
Mr. HUME, in pursuance of his notice, moved " That all
Bills be in future written in plain round hand, instead of black
letter." His object was to facilitate the reading and writing
of such documents, which were at present difficult to write,
and by no means easy to read.—( Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no
objection to the motion, but thought it should be first com-
municated to the Lords, as it would be a strange anomaly if
the
t Bills of me House were written in plain hand, while those
of other were engrossed in black letter.
Mr. FIUME thought the House of Commons should first
agree to adopt the new system, and then communicate to the
Ho'ase of Lords the determination at which it had arrived.
Mr. CHARLES WYNN defended the black letter.
\Vherever the ordinary writing of the time had been adopted,
it had, in succeeding generations, been found more difficult to
decypher than even the black letter of the earliest periods.
The rolls and records from the time of George 11., for in-
Stance, were far less liglble than those written three or
four centuries preceding,
Mr. JERVIS thought there would be no difficulty in
fixing a model on which the plain round hand could always
be formed.
Mr, O'CONNELL thought that every reason existed in
favour of establishing a new system.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said they had the expe-
rience of a century and a half of the advantage of the plan
recommended by the Hon. Member for Middlesex ; for,
during that time, the whole of the proceedings of the Court
of Chanery had been written, not only in plain round hand,
but upon paper;
and whatever other difficulties might arise in
understanding the proceedings of that Court, he had never
heard that any one had found any serious obstacle in under-
stat
cndin nt g every
dinge word of the records of the Court for the
laseury anhalf.
After a few words from Mr. HUME and Mr. GOULBURN,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that the old
system of writing was inconvenient. Many Members could
not understand it. It often puzzled himself; and he believed
that even the printers and the printers' devils could not read it.
Sir F. POLLOCK had no objection to the alteration pro-
posed, if it would tend to the convenience of any Honourable
Member. At the same time ho hardly thought it worth while
to adopt it.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was understood to support the
the resolution, and to approve of the suggestion that all Bills
should be re-engrossed, after amendments had been intro-
duced.
Mr. HUME would, with the permission of the House, with-
draw the resolution he had proposed, and substitute the fol-
lowing That a Message be sent to the Lords to desire
!heir concurrence in the arrangement, that all Bills before Par-
liament should in future be engrossed in plain round hand, in-
stead of being in black letter."
Col. THOMPSON was of opinion that every document
that came before Parliament ought to be printed.
The amended resolution was then agreed to.

LAW OF LIBEL.
a B
Mr. O'CONNELL then rose to move for leave to bring in
ill to amend the Law of Libel. As this subject would be
fully discussed on the first or second reading of the Bill, he
triosted the House would not think it necessary for him now to
,go further than to state this fact—that every one admitted the
taw of libel to be at present in a most unsatisfactory state. The
Noble Lord who lately filled the office of Lord Chancellor,
was certainly of that opinion ; and the Noble Lord who now
filled that office, when in that House, spoke at length and
l'et
ltY ably upon the same subject. The obvious necessity of
altering the law of libel would be shown, if he were to state
nothing else than this fact—that as the slightest written im-
putation upon character was, in point of law, a libel, where the
smallest exaggeration occurred in any one paper, which
should be copied in nineteen other papers, any speculative at-
torney might bring twenty different actions againstthe par-
.tles, and if he got but one farthing'• in damages, he punished
'no and
in penalties perhaps of 500/. in the shape of costs.
There was another part of the law of libel which required
4triendment; though he admitted it should not be approached
Without caution. At present it was a criminal offence to
Charge any man of any crime, or of anything that might make
him appear ridiculous, however he might merit the charge.
It was a crime to tell the truth—indeed, it hack been said that
a libel was aggravated by the force of its truth. Now, with-
out concurring at all in that opinion, or of being supposed to
give any countenance to it, yet there was no lawyer, in or out
of the House, but who must admit that it was no defence in the
case of criminal proceedings for a libel to prove the truth of
the words,—( Hear, hear.) And this anomaly also existed—
that if a person published the truth of another, with however
innocent a motive, yet, in the case of criminal proceedings
against him, ho was convicted and punished; but if he pub-
lished the truth, with however malicious a motive, and how-
ever injurious it might be, yet, in a civil action, no redress
was made to the injured party, and this arising rom the cir-
cumstance that in a criminal Proceeding the truth was nolusti-
fication, while in a civil actionP it.svas.-,„( Hear, hear.) With-
out entering further into the subject, be begged to move for
leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Law of Libel.
Sir F. POLLOCK admitted that the law of libel was not
its a satisfactory state, and that it required considerable alte-
ration. It was impossible for any one acquainted with the
proceedings of the courts of law upon the subject, not to be
impressed with the truth of the remarks which had fallen from
the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin. He, for one,
should be happy to contribute whatever was in his power in the
tay of suggestion, to the amendment of the present law ; at
e same time, if the Bill should be introduced with the
same amendments as were proposed last session of Parlia-
ment, he must in candour say, that he could not give it his en-
tire concurrence.
Mr. O'CONNELL begged just to explain that if the Bill
should be read a second time, it was his intention to move that
it bo referred to a Committee up stairs.
Ihe ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that one great evil
arising from the present law was this; that the most atrocious
libellers were afforded the pretence of complaining that in
the present state of the law of libel justice could not be ob-
tained. The most atrocious libellers defended themselves by
Mixing up their cases with the cases of those against whom
some pettifogging attorney had brought the most union's,. 1
actions. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had'
Pointed out two imperfections in the present law, upon
Iv.ltich alone he was fully entitled to ask for leave to bring in
1)15, Bill. The first was, that any speculative attorney might
becausepocket; (by an absurd distinction made where no real dif-
ference existed), if, in an action brought for a written slander,
Where no real injury had been sustained, the jury gave only
°lle farthing damages, that would carry full costs; whereas, if
the action were for words spoken, and the jury gave a verdict
of one farthing damages, the plaintiff would be entitled to no
More costs than damages. Another fault pointed out was, that
at present the truth in all criminal cases was excluded. He
thought the trutn ought always to be admitted to be given in
evidence, and that it should go to the jury for them to say
whether the publication was bond fide and justifiable, or
Whether it was done from malicious motives. Ample justice
would then be done to the party, and a sufficient protection
Would at the same time be afforded to the public which they
did not now enjoy. He gave the motion of the lion. and
Learned Member for Dublin his entire concurrence.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
COMPENSATION TO OFFICERS OF TIIE MOUSE.
Mr. HUME moved for the appointment of a Select Com-
mittee to consider what compensation should be given to cer-
tain officers and servants of the House, in consequence of the
recommendation of the Committee of last Session that the
fees and gratuities now paid to them should be abolished, and
fixed salaries be substituted instead thereof.
Mr. O'CONNELL, when the subject should come before
the House, should propose that the compensation should be
Committee
to the full amount of their present salaries. The
was then appointed.
THE BRITISH MUSEUM.
Mr- ESTCOURT moved that a Select Committee be ap-
pointed to inquire into the condition, management, and affairs
of the British Museum.
Mr. WARBURTON was glad the lion. Member had
lroved for the appointment of a Select Committee on this sub-
eet ; and he hoped, that in addition to the opinions expressed
by the witnesses who were examined before the Committee of
last Session on the subject, the opinion on the Constitution of
the Board of Trustees, which had been published within the
last few days, would be laid before the Committee, because lie
rconsidered it to be the opinion of one who was a great autho-
,titY on the subject. It was that of a late President of the
'loyal Society, Sir Humphry Davy. The Hon. Gentleman
then read an extract from the publication to which he had re-
frs ri
e-, and which stated that of late years the trustees had
lways been chosen from a branch of the aristocracy, or of
gentlemen who possessed some Parliamentary influence.
Mr. ESTCOURT thanked the Hon. Gentleman, and
begged to assure him that one of the first names he had inserted
in the list of the proposed Committee was that of the Hon.
Gentleman himself.
Mr. HUME was quite satisfied that the inquiry of the
Committee would, as it ought to, lead to an entire change of
system. It was clearly shown, by the evidence taken last
Session, that until some responsible persons should be ap-
pointed, it was utterly impossible to expect a proper applica-
tion of the public money granted towards the maintenance of
the British Museum ; and he should,--for one, unless a proper
check and eoutroul were established, oppose any further grants
being made.
After a few words from Sir ROBERT INGLIS,
Mr. E WART said that in Paris 'no fewer than five public
libraries were open to the people at all times; and he saw no
reason why the library at the British Mnseitm should not be
conducted on the same system of general utility.
Lord SANDON objected to the indiscriminate admission
of the public to institutions where valuable libraries were
deposited. In Paris many books had been taken away,
which were shortly afterwards discovered ticketed on the
book-stalls.