The Sun.
London, England, 1831-09-13 00:00:00

CORN LAWS.

Mr. ELLICE presented a petition from Coventry, pray-
ing for a revision of the corn laws.
Mr. HUME supported the petition. He hoped that it
would not be long before those laws should be brought
fully before the consideration of the House.--(Hear.)
Mr. ELLICE agreed with his Hon. Friend, the Mem-
ber for Middlesex, that the state of the corn laws required
the most ample and the calmest consideration of the House.
Lord G. SOMERSET, in reference to the Tregony
election petition of 1830, wished to know from the Hon.
Member for Kerry tvhat he intended to do ?

After a short conversation, in which Messrs. O'CONNELL
and WYNN participated, the debate on that subject was
further adjourned to Wednesday next.
Mr. H. GRATTAN presented a petition from the Ro-
man Catholic inhabitants of Navan, praying that the re-
venues of the Church Lands in Ireland be applied to the
relief of the poor.
Mr. HUME said, that the present state of things could
not go on in Ireland ; it was impossible that the Legislature
could look with indifference upon a body of men wallowing
in wealth, and paid for doing nothing.
Mr. ESTCOURT observed, that the remark of the
Hon. Member of Middlesex applied with equal force to
property of all kinds. The members of the Established
Church in Ireland were men of learning and ability, and
there could not be a greater misrepresentation than to
describe 0 em as paid for doing nothing. He would not sit
silent and hear such insinuations thrown out against them.
Mr. HUME threw out no insinuations; be would state
broadly and above board, that he thought the members of
the Irish Church Establishment were overpaid, and that a
very large proportion of those who were best paid had
nothing or very little to do.
Mr. ESTCOURT said be did not believe the statement.
Mr. O'CONNELL wished to deity the statement of the
Hon. Member for the University of Oxford. It was a
mischievous error to suppose, that the title to Church
property stood upon the sante footing as that of private
property. Church property was trust property, as any
Clergyman of the Church of England or Ireland would
learn to his coat, if he took it into his head to become a
Jew or a Catholic. He agreed with those who said, that
there were to be found Clergy of the Established Church
who had some duties to perform, and who did perform
them ; and lie would not much object to the payment, if
they were only paid according to their work. The Hon.
Member knew not much of Ireland, or be would scarcely
have hazarded the assertions which fell from him. Did
he know that one Rev. Gentleman, Thotnas Perceval
Magee, held eleven livings?
ALLEGED BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.
Colonel SIBTHORPE—I rise for the purpose of
bringing under the consideration of the House one of the
grossest violations of its privileges that, perhaps, cou'd
have been committed. I allude to a report, purport-
ing to be the report of a speech delivered by tne in
this House, and which contains the grossest possible mis-
statements respecting what fell from me on Tuesday, the
6th instant, during a discussion upon the Reform Bill in
Committee. On reading the Times newspaper of Wed-
nesday, the 7th of this month, I find the most gross, in-
jurious, unwarrantable, and, I may add, false statement of
the words which I then used. It must be evident that
the intention of the report and the description was to
to bring into contempt the Members of this House.
There was evidently but one wish, namely, to lower and
vilify individual Members, and but one endeavour, to de-
grade the House of Commons in the estimation of the
country. I find that not only did the Times newspaper
publish the report to which I have referred, but has
followed it up by a statement on the part of the editor.
I can safely affirm that those publications were
wholly unwarranted by the facts, and that a greater
falsehood was never sent forth to the public. On the even-
ing of the day when this misrepresentation was published, I
felt it my duty to call the attention of the House to what
had occurred, and to give to the report the most unquali-
fied contradiction. I felt that I owed it to this House and
to myself to vindicate my character from the gross as-
persions attempted to be cast upon it ; but as I have al-
ready said, on the Bth the same Paper reiterated the for-
mer statement, and thereby cast upon this House and upon
me a double insult. That Paper, in endeavouring to vin-
dicate its first statement, only followed up the line of con-
duct, both in word and deed, asserting that in the Morn-
ing Chronicle and the Morning Herald a similar account
Was given, thus imputing to those Journals the same
gross misrepresentation and falsehood of which the Times
itself had been guilty—there were no such statements or
descriptions as that in the Times. I entertain as much
respect as any man for the freedom of the Press, and I
desire as much as any man to promote the free exercise of
opinion; but I conceive that there can be nothing so
dangerous or so degrading to Members of Parliament as
those gross, wilful, and repeated misrepresentations.
or
therefore hold it to be the duty of every Member of this
House, as far as in him lies, to stand forward for the
purpose of contradicting them, and then following that up
by moving such proceedings as the case may require,
the privileges of the House permit. I shall not now de-
tain the House longer than to move that the paper now
put in be read.
Mr. TREVOR, in seconding the motione,,:i.,,tnnhu
baatouinht,
that
at hi
s aast theeaod
House greatly indebted to the Hon. Member fort
i
g
the course which he had thought proper to adopt, in
pursuing
oci:iuyauda-
cious
witho bringingnanrs
edeumvneacdr
raeakirl
us the rosmui nosoonststpi cracei
pdo
eai terrh.u. eel e
adpl
nut
tdbilivl
aui
act
nsa
81
eai oeo
jmnuo ssil
ad-
dition the
to having done so, it was pursuing the same line of
conduct. If such a course were allowed to be continued'
it would have the effect of reducing that House and the
House of Lords to the situation of mere cyphers.—draw-

log upet them the entire contempt of the public. Ile
hoped tie House would take the subject into its most serious
consideration. It certainly did not surprise him that the
journal of which he spoke should have assailed as it had
the Hon. Member for Lincoln, when even a Royal Per-
sonage, whose general conduct obtained the respect of every
Englishman, was made the object of its base, cowardly,
and disloyal attacks. He need do no more than call atten-
tion to a leading article very recently published in that
journal, referring to the other House of Parliament. With
such facts before them, lse knew not how they could pass
the offence by without incurring the utter contempt of the
nation. Its uniform study was to discover and put forth
all that could draw down on Parliament the contempt of the
public. He, therefore, hesitated not to say that it was the
most malignant, calumnious, and revolutionary paper that
ever disgraced the Press of this country:
The Clerk then read the following report of the speech
delivered by Colonel Sibthorpe on the 6th, as published in
the Times of the '7th :
" Colonel Sibthorpe rose with violent agitation, and declared
that he had opposed the Bill fairly and fearlessly. His side of
the House was cheered by the supporters of Ministers, as it they
had got through their labours. He could tell them that their la-
bours were only commenced.—(A laugh.) He did not under-
stand being treated with contempt.—(Continued laughter.) He
could tell those who laughed at him, either in the House or out
of the House, that he would support his opinions and vindicate
himself to the last hour he had to breathe.—(Laughter, and cries
of " Hear, hear.") He regretted that the Bill had passed so
soon.—(Bursts of laughter.) The Bill had passed too speedily.—
(Laughter.) If his opponents were tired, he would not give up.
--(Laughter.) He would never give in.—(Laughter.) He was
never yet put down in the House, and never would be.—(Laugh.
ter.) He was never put down out of the House, and he defied
the Hon. Member opposite, who was laughing at him, to put him
down.—(Laughter.) (We could not exactly catch the particular
Member to whom the Hon, and Gallant Colonel alluded ; the
laughter appeared to us to be general.) He defied the Hon. Mem-
ber to do it. • The Hon. Member had supported the Bill consci-
entiously,and why did he not suppose that he (Colonel Sibthorpe)
had opposed the t ill with equal conscience ?—(Cries of Ques-
tion' question,' from all parts of the House.) Colonel Sibthorpe,
with great vehemence—He prayed to God that the Bill might
not pass.—(Cries of Oh, oh,' and Question, question.') If the
Bill did pass, which he prayed to God might never be the case,
all he had to say was in the words of that great, that sublime
statesman, now admired, and who, he fervently trusted, would
have his memory for ever preserved in that House, " Oh, save
my country; may God have'mercy on it! May od protect it
from revolutions, and may he preserve in it all proper respect
for the aristocracy—all proper respect for the—(The Hon. Mem-
ber was so interrupted with laughter, that we were unable to
catch the objects for which he invoked respect.) He felt con-
fident that the Bill would not pass—such a Bill never could pass."

The Clerk, in reading the übove account of Colonel
Sibthorpe's speech, of course repeated the word "laughter'.
as often as it was given ; almost every repetition again
causing renewed laughter.
The Clerk next read the Times of the Bth, a report of
the complaint made to the House by the Gallant Colonel
of the al!eged misrepresentation, together with the Editor's
note thereon :

" Colonel Sibthorpe said he should take the present opportu-
nity to complain of a contemptuous report of a speech of his in
the Committee yesterday, which had appeared in one of the
morning newspapers of that day. The report to which he al-
luded was interspersed with laughter, and other expressions of
derision, which he flatly denied had been justified by the fact.—
(Hear.) He considered he had the more reason to complain, as
this report had been inserted in a journal of the highest respec-
tability—he meant the Times—and it was therefore only an act
of duty to the House and to himself to contradict so gross and
unwarrantable a statement.* _

" We-have referred this observation not only to the reporter
whose account is complained of, but to others who were present :
they deny the accuracy of the Hon. Member's charge. On
looking at the Herald and Chronicle, we find, that though the
reports are shorter, they contain the same allusions to the
laughter of the House, which the Hon. Member asserts to be an
invention of our reporter."
Colonel SIBTHORP.E said, that the motion which
he should submit was intended to support the privileges of
that House. He should move that the printer and pub-
lisher of the Times newspaper on the 7th and Bth of this
month be required to attend at the bar of that House on
Wednesday, the 14th instant.
Mr. HUME wished to know from the Hon. Member,
whether he complained of the words which the report im-
puted to him, or the description of the manner in which
that speech was received by the House ? If he complained
of the words put into his mouth that was one thing, if
of the frequent introduction of the word " laughter," it
was quite another.
Colonel SIBTHORPE said, that the words imputed to
him conveyed an exaggerated impressio❑ of his sentiments;
and with respect to the manner in which it had been re-
ceived, he was bound to say that there was no such conduct
on the part of the House as had been stated by the Times
newspaper. It was altogether a gross misrepresentation.
Mr. HUME often regretted that that House had not
the means of sending forth to the public authenticAed re-
ports. He confessed he slid not see how they could bring
an Editor to that bar for the introduction of the word
laughter into the report of a speech—that is, for the too
frequent introduction—it was a question between the true
number of times that laughter was excited and the half
dozen times too often which it was introduced. It would
be rather ridiculous than otherwise to bring an Editor to
the bar on such a charge.—(Cheers.) If motives or words
of an improper kind had been imputed to the Hon. Mem-
ber, it might be very well to make a complaint; but what
was this? That one reporter mentioned instances of
laughter of which the other took no notice !

Mr. O'CONNELL said, that any notice of the matter
would be inconsistent with the dignity of the House. No
man should be called to the bar, unless upon some charge
of a solemn and serious nature ; mere exaggeration of a
thing so unimportant did really not call for such a pro-
ceeding. The Journal in question had already been sub-
jected to punishment enough, in the castigation inflicted
on it by the Hon. Gentleman who seconded the motion.
Surely, the repetition of the word " laughter" would not
justify a proceeding for breach of privilege—would not
justify any exercise of the arbitrary and despotic authority
possessed by that House. He would put the matter thus:
Suppose the lion. Member thought proper to proceed in
a Court of Justice, by way of indictment or criminal in-
formation, did he suppose that the countenance of any
lawyer would resist his inclination to laugh. He hoped
that the Hon. Member would not press his motion ; but
assuredly, if he were so ill-advised us to take the sense of
the House, he (Mr. O'Connell) must divide against him.
Lord ALTHORP was understood to concur with the
Lion. and Learned Member for Kerry, in the view which
he took of the motion under consideration. Though the
report much exaggerated the laughter, there was laugh-
ter, as he well remembered, especially when the Hon.
Member for Lincoln spoke of the Bill as having been
proceeded with speedily ; then, indeed, there was
laughter. So far as he recollected, the account given
of the laughter was not excessively exaggerated ; and
whether or not, he thought the printer ought not to be
called to the bar. Ile was very averse from the House
engaging itselt:in any contest with the Press, unless in cases
where there was strong reason for doing so. He thought
that the reasons on the present occasion laid before
the House by no means justified any interference. He
hoped, therefore, that the Hon. Member would not press
his motion. He recollected no instance in which the
House engaged in any such proceeding, without having
much reason to wish it had been avoided. 'Lie power of
censure which the House possessed was valuable, and es-
' sential to be preserved—essential to the freedom of debate
and the privileges of the House—but he was sure that no
Hon. Member could fairly say the present was one of
those occasions on which an arbitrary power, and one
which ought seldom to be exercised, would advantageously
be call into aciivity.—(Hear.)
Mr. LAWLEY (as we understood) said, the report was
almost verbreim, et literatim. He never read a more ac-
curate or correct account of any speech delivered in his
hearing. The comments towards the beginning might
have been a little exaggerated ; but surely that was no
reason for such a motion as the present.
Colonel SIBTHORPE said, that there had been a gross
misrepresentation of what had occurred, and that was per-
sisted in by the Editor, and therefore it would be his duty
to divide the House.

The House then divided—
For Colonel Sibthorpe's motion
Against it 7O
Majority —63
REFORM.
Lord ALTHORP, in answer to a question from Mr.
Goulburn, stated that on the bringing up of the report of
the Reform Bill it was not the intention of Government
to more any amendments but those of which notice bad
already been given, with the exception of a few verbal
alterations.