The Sun.
London, England, 1831-03-22 00:00:00

COLCHESTER ELECTION.

Sir ROBERT HERON reported from the Contmittee
on this election that the return of Mr. Spottiswoode was
null and void.

On the motion of an HON. MEMBER a new writ was
ordered to be issued.
GALWAY ELECTION.

Mr. WARD brought up the report of the Committee on
this election, which declared the sitting Member duly
elected.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.
Sir R(51;;-1RT INGLIS said he had to request the at-
tention of e7rj House to a subject which he was about to
Wring under their notice. It related to a newspaper which
he had had put into his hands. It was a consolation to him
however in bringing the subject forward that he was not
oar qf the pirtieractly affected. 1-.te never had at any
titss4,..e.asists 4:01%101.14 of any paragraphs affecting
himself, but he should be unworthy of a seat in
that House if he had not, when such a paper
was put into his hands, called attention to it. It was
extremely important, when on the eve of a discussion like
the one of that night, that Hon. Members should not
be labouring under the influence of threats. He, there-
fore, requested the serious consideration of the House to
the attacks that had been made on what was called the
constitutional conduct on the part of all those who opposed
the measure. The paper to which he referred was called
the Times.—(Hear, hear.) He understood it was a re-
spectable paper as regarded talent, but he could nut think
it respectable as regarded its motives.—(Loud cries
of " Hear, hear.") Other papers had been equally violent,
but he had chosen rather, as the Times was one of the
greatest circulation, to select that. He was not in the
habit of reading the Times—(Hear, bear)—but he was
told the paragraph he complained of was only
one of a series that had been daily issued since the Ist of
March, the day on which Lord John Russell brought in
his Bill of Reform. They had regularly continued up to
the present day, and were calculated to degrade the House,
and hold it up to odium with the people.—(Hear.)---
They were legislating with doubie odds in the gallery
against them.—( Hear, hear, hear.)—He should therefore,
as a Member of that House, betray his duty to his consti-
tuents, as would also every other Member, if they allowed
one of its Members to be insulted in the measure they
had been by this paragraph. The Hon. Baronet the❑
read extracts from the Times leading article of Mon-
day, the 14th of March, the reading of which was
received by considerable cheering in the House. Isle had
no wish to check fair discussion; he bad no such object
to obtain, but it could not be endured that paragraphs
like the one in question were to he published day after day
with impunity. He would repeat, he did not stand up there
to crush free discussion ; but it was very desirable that a
breach of privilege, calculated to disturb freedom of debate,
should be brought under attention. He believed the last time
that a similar motion to the one he was about to make,
was made by Mr. Fox, against a paper then in existence,
called the Public Advertiser. He (Sir R.
did not consider himself affected by the charge, but he
considered that by allowing such a paragraph to go forth
to the world, without the expressed opinion of the House
upon it, the respect and confidence of the people would
thereby be forfeited. He, therefore, moved that the para-
graph in question be read by the Clerk of the I louse. The
paragrapla_was accordingly read.
" When, night after night, borough nominees rise to iffiest
the proceedings of the House of Commons with arguments to
justify their own intrusion into it, and their continuance
there, thus impudently maintaining what the lawyers call
an ` adverse possession,' in spite of judgment against
them, we really feel inclined to ask why the rightful
owners of the House should be longer insulted by the pre-
sence of such unwelcome inmates ? It is beyond question
a piece of the broadest and coolest effrontery in the world,
for these hired lacqueys of public delinquents to stand
up as advocates of the disgraceful service they have em-
barked in. Of two conditions, these persons must be in
one or other: they must either have bought the close bo-
rough seat which they fill, or they have sold themselves
bodily to him who has the disposal of it. It is impossible to
get into Parliament for a close borough but on either of the
above conditions. Yet, is there a single individual amongst them
who has had the truth or honesty to tell the House of Commons,
I have paid 5,00 u/. for this seat, the continuance of which I am
now defending;' or, I have sold myself to the patron of the
borough, for his permission to be one of his members?'"

The HON. MEmsEtt then resumed. He felt it unne-
cessary after what he had already spoken to say another
word upon the subject. He should therefore move that
the paragraph read be considered as a false and scan-
dalous libel upon the House, tending to deter Mem-
bers thereof from the discharge of their duties therein, and
tending to alienate from the House the respect and confi-
dence of their fellow-subjects.
Sir R. GRESLEY seconded the motion, and com-
plained of an attack made by the Press on himself.
He did not speak unadvisedly or without due deliberation
on the subject, but he felt it was the bounden duty of that
House to check that course of abuse and invective, in
which almost the unanimous Press of the country had
joined.
Lord ALTHORP rose merely to put it to the Hon.
Member whether it were advisable, on the eve of such an
important discussion as pressed then upon the House, to
propose such a resolution without giving previous notice
to the House')

Sir 11. INGLIS considered it was not usual to post-
pone the consideration of a question of libel.—(Hear, from
the Opposition. )
Mr. CALCRAFT did not believe that the paragraph
in question could at all have the tendency which the
Hon. Member for Oxford seemed to conceive. He
thought there was nothing so much calculated to lessen the
confidence of the people in that House, as any attempt
o❑ its part to infringe on the liberty of the Press. He did
not believe that the paragraph in question was libellous,
bat even if it were considered so, the Attorney-General
was the proper person to take notice of it.
Mr. BARING agreed, but on different grounds, with
the Honourable Member who had just sat down.
He hoped the subject would be left as it was, that what had
passed would operate as a notice, that while the liberty of
discussing what passed in that House with freedom, might
go on, yet that those discussions were to be carried on
with a little more decency.
Mr. PERCEVAL rose with considerable difficulty, as
he had not intended addressing the House on the present
occasion. He certainly could not by any means agree with
the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, that the
subject having been brought before the House ought to be
passed over. He bad not long ago given his opinion
upon the state of the Press in this country, and it now
being again mooted, if the house of Commons got rid of
it in the way proposed by the gentleman who had last
sat down, that House would lose its authority and lose its
character by any such a proceeding more than by any act of
violence the House could be guilty of—l say (continued the
Han. Gentleman) the question having been brought before
the House, if we decline to proceed, if we decline
to visit this gross breach of privilege as we ought to do,
if we shrink from doing our duty cm this occasion, we give
an ascendancy to the Press which it cannot obtain by
any other means.—(Cheers.)—lt may be a question
whether at this time the subject ought to have been
brought forward, but it having been brought forward I ap-
prehend there is but one course to pursue, namely, to vote it
a breach of privilege, and to follow that up in the usual way.
I was not present when the Hon. Baronet brought forward
his motion, and I do not know, therefore, whether he
called the attention of the House or not to this being a
part of a long continued series of paragraphs, which could
only have been written for the purpose of preventing Hon.
Gentlemen from doing their duty, to prevent them
from giving their votes against the Reform Bill,
and for the purpose of libelling their characters
if they did vote for that Bill. The paragraph
to which my Hon. Friend has called the attention of the
House was the climax of this series; and it is impos-
sible to doubt that the writer meant thereby to deter men
from doing their duty—to hold them up to scorn
and reprobation if they did—to represent them as in.
famous Members for boroughs, who would not dare
to again face their constituents if a general election
took place—to render the whole discussion of the
House of Commons contemptible in the eyes of the
country, and to promulgate a belief that that discussion
was conducted by men who had no right to be
there, and to vote in the affairs of the country,
being only the slaves—the hired lackqueys of corrupt
Peers. —(Cheers.) This was the only intention with

Sir FRANCIS.BURDETT rose and said, I am not
exactly aware of the exact words that have been used, but
I agree with the Hon. Member who has just sat down,
that the Press has with very great perseverance, with
very great integrity, and with very great ability etteo-
ceted the cause which is now at. issue between the horookh-
mongers and the state of this country. I am not the
least afraid of any course that may be taken on this occa-
sion. Any course that may be taken will tend to bring
to issue the opinion of the country upon the corrupt system
which has so long existed ; and I will trust to any Jury
—to any tribunal—to any collection of English-
men who have the slightest feeling ; in a word,
to any collection of men in England, except those
who I have now the honour of addressing within
these walls—(Hear, end a laugh)—the subject with more
than perfect confidence. I declare that I am perfectly sa-
tisfied of the fate of this House. Had the fiat not gone forth ?
and as to their character being libelled by an honest
writer in a public paper stating that fact—(Hear, hear,
hesr)—are they ashamed of it ? The corruption of
returning Members to this House is as notorious
as the sun at noon-day; and when we are forced
to see Members get up because the privileges of the
House of Commons are violated forsooth—because the,Press
states the exact state of the thing—(Hear, bear,
hear)—l should like to ask the Honourable Mem-
ber, who is so tender of those privileges, why
he overlooked the vital and fundamental privileges
of the country, that of Peers, or the Press, or any man,
however high, not being allowed to make a traffic
of the seats of that House, without its being
considered one of the greatest breaches? The Hon.
Member continued to debate the question at con•
siderable length. He was satisfied that the time
was now come when the base and nefarious traffick-
ing in boroughs would be put an end to. Which-
ever course might be decided on, lie considered that that
House was certainly not the proper forum to pronounce
a decision on the conduct that had been complained of.
It was against reason to suppose that the House was
both accuser and Judge. He himself had been consi-
dered. as a libeller of that House, and had suffered
what he considered its greatest punishment. He re-
membered the time when such a system as was at
present pursued would have to be spoken of with
the utmost tenderness; but since the year 1807, when
Lord Castlereagh and Mr. Perceval were detected
in this scandalously traffickine system, and when
they turned out an Hen. Mt /Weer for not being
present to vote in favour of the measure they brought
in there, the public had taken notice of this corrup-
tion and handled it in a very different style.—(Cheers.)
He agreed with the writer in the Times entirely, that the
boroughmongers ought to have the decency to withdraw.
—(Cheers.)--He could hardly flatter himself they would
do so, but he thought that this was the right course.
He was perfectly satisfied that if they voted against the
present question of Reform, their votes would have
no more effect than if they had whistled to the wind.
In his view of the case, it was a matter of perfect
indifference whatever course the beroughmongers
pursued. He thought they would hardly be so indiscreet
as to adopt any proceedings against the writer of this pa-
ragraph at this period of fermentation ; but if they did,
he was quite sure that the damage or compensation
awarded for any infringement on their supposed virtue
would be extremely small.
Sir C. 'WETHERELL said, that there was no man
who was more an advocate for freedom of speech, and no
man more permitted himself freely to use his speech, than
the Hon. Member for Westminster, who was a great
friend to freedom of debate in that House.—(Hear, hear.)
The Hun, Baronet set out with being a lover of popularity
—he was an advocate of freedom, a great theorist, and a
great practiser of the doctrines of liberty and equality.-
-(Cheers, and " No, no !")--but, at the same time,
since he (Sir C. Wetherell) had had a seat in that House,
a more dictatorial speech, more dictatorial in language,
more dictatorial in manner, more dictatorial in principle,
more full of usurpation, more full of that arrogance which
carries the dictatorship of tyranny into the freedom of de-
hate, he had never beard. The declaration of the Hon.
Baronet had never been equalled in that House. The
Hon. Baronet bad the presumption to recommend the bo-
rough Members to retire, of whom (said Sir Charles) I
am one.—(A laugh.) Does he dare (continued Sir
Charles) to call upon me—does he dare to call—does he
presume to call upon me—(A laugh)—does he dare
to call upon Honourable and independent Gentlemen
—Gentlemen as honourable and independent as he is—
(Cheers. )—Does the Hon. Baronet, I say, dare to call upon
me to go out of the House, and not to vote on the question
which is to revolutionize the Legislature ?—(No, no !) I
say yes. The Hon. Baronet advised the borough Mem-
bers to go out of the House. This is the most ultra dic-
tatorship—or I will say, as the Noble Paymaster of the
Forces said of one the other day, the plus ultra dictator.
ship—over the debates of this House that ever was known
in a public assembly. Shall I retire when the Hon. Ba-
ronet keeps his seat ?—(Hear, hear.)—Shall I go out
while he keeps his place on a leather cushion?--(Hear,
hear. )—When the Hon. Baronet, with due liberality, re-
commended me to go out, does he think that lie is to be
allowed slyly to blackball all those Members who will not
vote for the revolutionary principles of a Jacobin revolu-
tion ? He could tell the Hon. Baronet (Sir Charles
continued) that the borough Members would do their
duty. After commenting at some further length on the
dictatorship of the Hon. Member for Westminster, the
Hon. Baronet proceeded to discuss the question before the
House. The Hon. Baronet had only drawn a short cons
elusion from long premises, he had indeed had nothing
but premises, anti he hoped that the House would allow
him to lay down his premises before he came to a
conclusion. He had been a reader of the Times.
The foreign articles of that Paper were written
with greater ability than those of any other Paper,
and for those he read the Times. His name was not, he
believed, alluded to in the paragraph referred to by the
Hon. Member for Oxford ; that paragraph was not one of
those which might apply to A, B, or C, but it described
the case of all those whom it was proposed to expel from
the House, or not less than 160 Members. That pe.ea-
graph was a libel on that House and its Members, and
proscribed 160 of its Members. In his view of the para-
graph he did not agree with the opinion 51 the late Pay-
master of the Forces (Mr. Calcraft). If his Right Hon.
Friend looked at it, he would sec, that it did not depend on
the Press if its libels did not take effect. His Right Hon.
Friend did not like the form of expression in which his
Hon. Friend had clothed his motion, but, for his part, he
did not object to it. He did not know that be should,
himself, have taken notice of such a libel; but it having
been taken notice of and brought before the House, there
could be no doubt it was a libel ou the House, and a gross
attack on its privileges. He woeid conclude by saying,
that be had never given a vote of which he was more con-
vinced of the propriety than lie was of the .vote he should
give in favour of his Hon Friend's motion.—(Hear.)
Sir CHARLES FORBES regretted that the motion of
the Hon. Member had not gone further, and taken into
consideration the ether numbers of the Times. If he had
gone to the paper of the 2d of March, he might have in-
troduced some more revolting specimens of the gentlemen
of tile Press, and of their endeavours to stigmatise as
scandalous those who dared to show their faces again in
the House, should the Parliament be dissolved. That
paper said, and he remembered the words well, " that the
now infamous and marked-out nominees of Peers and
other opulent persons would be justly handed over to
condign punishment or popular indignation, if they should
dare to obtrude themselves into Parliament." That and
similar passages had struck him so forcibly, as being ex-
ceedingly offensive and of an infamous character, so con-
trary to the just and proper liberty of the Press, and so
licentious, that he carried the paper down to the House, in-
tending to call the attention of the House to the subject.
He consulted persons of high authority on these matters,
bta i whichn
g.
and they preferred treating the matter with silent-con-
tempt, saying, that if it were publicly mentioned it
the would give the paragraphivas t(liieastironuosteroif o
notoriety
Editor of the Times
(Hear, hear.) There was some truth, but, be thought,
mere (sager in that opinion. It was evident that the
House encourages, by its silence, and by not noticing such

attacks, the Press to proceed in its present course, He saw
this, but he was in part reconciled to silence by its being
observed, that these paragraphs were the mere productions
of an anonymous libeller. Those who wrote such libels
were no better than cowardly assassins ; and if they were
not as cowardly as they were licentious—if they bad the
spirit—tbey would be cowardly assassins. He hoped that
the people would have more good sense than to allow their
judgments to be led astray by what these papers said. He
had heard no person speak of these paragraphs but with
indignation. The Hon. Biironet (the Member for West-
tninster) had attempted to defend them, and in his opinion
the defence and the cause were worthy of each other. He
trusted that no Hon. Member would be intimidated from
doing by the threats of such men. He hoped
that thleywtyould do their duty conscientiously, and be
trusted they would stand firm, though they should pay
with their lives for the performance of the duty. He at
least was determined to resist, at every step, this most re-
volutionary measure ; and if it were carried, he did not
believe that the same class of men as at present would find
their way into the House of Commons.—(Question.)—
The ornaments of the House, the greatest men, the
-riofightest patriots, had found their way into that House
through the means that were now denounced by the Noble
Lord—with no great consistency, as the House and the
country might know by comparing the Noble Lord's plans
with his written works; and if those denounced means
were done away, such men would no longer find their way
into Parliament.—(Question.)
Lord ALTHORP—Sir, it is impossible for me to deny
that the paragraph brought under the notice of the
House is a breach of the privileges of this House—
(Cheers)—but I think it is a different question, in what
manner we ought to treat this publication. Upon a
question which interests the people of the country in the
way and to the extent that this Reform question interests
them, it is true that violent language—that unjustifiable
language—is used by advocates and writers on both sides the
question—(Cheers from all sides)—but when the Hon.
Baronet says no attacks have been made, except upon those
against the measure, I must deny the truth of that remark.
Do sot we who advocate the measure see • ourselves daily
called revolutionists ?--( Cheers. )—Do we not see ourselves
attacked forendeavouring to produce revolution.*--(Cheers.)
Upon a question of this kind I must admit that the public
Press has used language that cannot be justified, but I ap-
peal to the prudence of the House, whether this is a case in
which the privileges of the House should be vindicated with
any degree of severity, when the public feeling is so
strongly excited. I have experience enough to know that
when questions of a breach of privilege are brought forward,
it is difficult to induce the House to look at it in a temperate
manner. But if we are carried away by our feelings now,
I ask the House, whether such proceedings will be
likely to reflect credit on this House, and if not
inconsistent with the forms of the House, I beg to move
the previous question, instead of coming to a decision on
the motion.

On the amendment being put,
Mr. CAMPBELL referred to the cases of the Queen's
Trial and to the period of Catholic Emancipation,, toshow.
that in periods of much popular excitement warm and in-
temperate language had generally been overlooked. He
complained of the Hon. Member not having brought for-
ward the subject immediately after it had occurred ; it
ought to have been on the moment. The House had sat
every day last week, even Saturday, and yet not one word
had been said on the subject till that night.—(The Hon.
and Learned Member made some further observations,
which, as ha spoke from under the gallery, were not
audible )
Mr. C. WYNN regretted that he could not vote with
his Noble Friend.—(Hear, hear.)—Whether or not it
was desirable to have brought forward the subject was one
thing, but now that it had been brought forward he was
compelled to say _that the House could take no other
course than to declare that it was a libel, and au infringe-
ment on the privileges of the House. Considering the na-
ture of the great question before the House, the para-
mount interest it had excited in the country, and the
great talents that had been called into the discussion, he
thought some greater latitude might be allowed than ordi-
nary circumstances. If the discussion had been confined
to the defects of the Constitution, and to show the neces-
sity of reforming it, he would allow great liberty. But
what was this writing ? It went to deprive a great part of
the Members of that House of the freedom of deliberation.
He hegeed the second par ,graph referred to might be read.
The Clerk accordingly read the following paragraph
When night after niKht, borough nominees rise to infest the
proceedings of the House of Commons with arguments to justify
their own intrusion into it, and their continuance there, thus
impudently maintaining what the lawyers call an adverse
i
possession,' n spite of judgment against them, we really feel in-
clined to ask why the rightful owners of the House should be
longer insulted by. the presence of such unwelcome inmates ?
It is beyond question a piece of the broadest and coolest etfron_
tery in the world, for these hired laequeys of public delinquents
to stand up as advocates of the disgraceful service they have
embarked in."

The Hon. Member continued—lf that were not the
despotism of that arbitrary system of liberty which
they had seen elsewhere—if that were not the introduc-
tion into this country of that system of tolerant intole-
rance which would allow no liberty to any opinions but
its own—be did not know what was. It was said that
it was not prudent to commit the House to a contest with
the people, which was undoubtedly a subject of serious
consideration. But it could not be doubted that these
libels would go on increasing if they were unnoticed—
would not any person who might be brought up at a fu-
ture time justly complain of the House in allowing writers
to go such lengths, and having passed over these libels as
unworthy of notice? To that course, then, he could not
assent. He knew the inconveniences to which public
men exposed themselves by embracing the course he re-
commended; he knew the penalty they must pay, and he
was not afraid to meet it.—(Hear.)
Sir JAMES GRAHAM had heard the speech of his
Right Hon. Friend with regret, but not with astonish-
ment. He was aware that his Right Hon. Friend had a
partiality through his whole life to support the forms of
the House, and, therefore, he was not surprised at his
speech. He bad heard, however, that speech with great
regret, for though he was aware of the opinions of his late
colleague and Right Hon. Friend on the subject of Re-
form, he was himself sincerely and ardently desirous
that the House slionid come to a favourable decision
on that great T4estion.—(Calls of " Question.")—lf
the House would allow him, he was anxious to be
permitted to say a few words, though he should be
reluctant to infringe the rules of the House. He
knew its general courtesy, and should be ready to bend
to its wishes. He was about to say, that though no
man was more ardently desirous than he was, that
the great measure which had received the sanction of the
administration should be approved of by Parliament, yet
there was one feeling in his heart which was more ardent
still, and that was, that the discussions on this question
should be conducted so as to preserve the peace of the
country, and the stability of our institutions, and that
there should be no excitement of any angry feelings either
in that House or the country. Entertaining that wish,
he thought it was most unfortunate that the Hon. Mem-
ber for Oxford should have regarded it as his duty to bring
before the House a question of that nature, when the eyes
of all the country were turned on the House, and all the.
nation was waiting in breathless expectation for its dem •
sion. He was sorry that his Hon. Friend bad deemed it
his duty to turn aside attention from that great question
to a conflict between the privileges of that House and the
freedom of the Press. It was desirable that there should
be no such discussion between the House and the Press
before they came to settle the great question of the even-
ing. He hoped he should not betray any soreness on such
a subject, hut week after week—Sunday after Sunday.—
(Hear, hear)—some kind friend of his who hadprobably
left the warm precincts of office—(Hear, hear)—" cast.
ing long lingering looks behind him"—(Hears and a
laugh)—made attacks of somewhat the same description
on him and the Right Hon. Friend who sat near him.
rtleceted to wasreriniandiend
tbdeayeouarfsteerofdatbye odfebatthee
bqyuetbsteionHodni:
Member for l3oroughbridge (Sir Charles Wetla!rell), and
he asked what will your constituents.at GJekermouth
saytoth
terms
this.—(A
(trus of rcas
Alaughs.a)lir a
iet
nd was
vilified and
abused
in the coarsest ridicule;
but was he deterred from the fulfilment of his duty by the
repetition of these attacks ? No. If he wanted any addi-
tional stimulus to pursue the course he had undertaken,
and to discharge his duty to his country and to his consti-
tuents honestly, fairly, and conscientiously, he found that
stimulus in the attacks to which he was thus subjected.--
(Hear, hear.) If, however, these attacks are to be taken
as questions of privilege on one side, they are equally so
on the other ; and those who would punish the news-
' papers for what they may consider as libels, will be bound

themselves to abstain from many of those observations
which had been used but too freely in the course of the
debates on Reform. It will be their bounden duty to sup-
press all those paasages in the speeches of the Members which
stigmatise the measure of Reform now proposed by the Mi-
nisters, under the sanction of the Sovereign, as tending to
bring about a revolution.—(Hear, hear.) Why, it was
the other evening, in the course of the discussions, that an
Hon, Baronet (Sir H. Hardinge) declared that the Re-
form Bill would, if carried, shake the Crown from the
head of the Sovereign.—(Hear, hear.) That sentiment
had been since repeated in the Muse, and echoed in the
newspapers—(Hear)—and yet no one on that side of the
House had thought of treating it as a breach of privi-
lege, or an invasion of the right of free discussion.—
Better at once shut up the gallery of that House, and pro-
claim to the world, by a rigid enforcernent of the standing
orders, that no strangers shall be admitted, nor no account
of the proceedings of that House go forth to the public.—
They might as well put an end at once to all free discus-
sion as to attempt, by a proceeding like that recommended
by the Hon. Baronet (Inglis), to endeavour to prescribe
the limits in which it is to be carried on. Of the danger
of that course to the country and to the Constitution
he had not, however, the slightest doubt ; and in so much
dread would he hold the prospect of such an event, that
although the passing of the Reform Bill was one of the
objects dearest to his heart, and which he considered likely
to prove most beneficial to his country, yet he would be
content to forego Reform itself, rather than abandon that
freedom of discussion and publicity of their proceedings
which was 30 essential to the preservation of their con-
stitutional liberties.—(Hear.) If he was called on to ex-
press an opinion on the subject of the article in the Times,
he would say with the Noble Lord (Althorp) that he could
not defend it ; but he called on them, at the same time,
when they proposed to deal with this question in the man-
ner recommended by the Hon. Baronet (Inglis), to con-
sider that they were a deliberative assembly, and that they
could not, as parties, exercise a sound discretion in the ca-
pacity of Judges.—(Hear.) He agreed in the force of
the observations of the Hon. Baronet (the Member for
Westminster), with reference to the language of some of
the petitions which had been presented, and which that
House had not hesitated to receive and to allow to be
printed. The Members of the Duke of Newcastle had
been,spoken of in these petitions ; the boroughs of Lord
Fitzwilliarn had been alluded to ; and could they, after
having thus admitted themselves to be nominees, declare
they were the real representatives of the people.—(Hear.)
The Right Hon. Baronet concluded by observing, that he
thought what had been already said and done on this sub-
ject would operate as a salutary warning on both sides;
but if the Mon. Baronet pressed his motion to a division,
he must oppose it for the sake of the peace of the country,
and the safety of our public institutions.—(Hear.)
Sir H. HARDINGE thought, that the Right Hon.
Baronet who had just spoken, although he deprecated
further discussion, was one of those who had done his
utmost to prolong it.—(Hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet
had gone out of his way to select au illustration for his
argument, and had chosen to mix up an expression of his
in reference to the Reform Bill, with the subject then
before the House, as if there was something in his obser-
vation in common with that libel which every Member of
either side condemned. —(Hear.) Was there anything in
the expression of an opinion that the Reform Bill had a
tendency to loosen the crown on the head of the King, to
be found in common with the language of the libel in the
newspaper, that the Right Hon. Baronet should find it
necessary to advert to it so poir.tedly?—(Hear.) Was he
(Sir H. Hardinge) to be debarred from the expression of
his opinions in that House, because libels were published
out of it ? Did the Right Hon. Baronet mean to make it
a parallel case, and to say, that the expressions which fell
from him with respect to the Reform Bill, and that he had
expressed his opinions on the Reform Bill as indiscreetly
and coarsely and improperly as the libeller in the news-
paper ?—(Hear) Another Hon. Member had atigma•
tised him as a boroughsnonger, who ought not to have a
seat in that House. There were, however, some borough-
mongers even among them most closely connected with the
Government. He srw sitting beside the Right Hon.
Baronet (Sir J. Graham) at that moment a Member of
the Government, who sat for a borough closer by far than
that which he represented, and, indeed, one of the closest
in the country.—(Hear, hear.) (We believe Lord John
Russell was the Member alluded to). He begged, how-
ever,
to remind the Hon. Member that he had re-
presented the city of Durham in that House for more
than nine years, and that the number of his constituents
were at no period less than 1,200. He now, however,
represented a place where the constituency was not so
numerous, but lie could conscientiously declare that he
was as free to speak his opinion and to give his vote on
any subject at that moment as he was before. What
right then, had the Hon. Baronet to stigmatise him as
unfit to sit in that House from being a boroughmonger.—
(Hear, hear.) If it was possible for him to forget the
courtesy which was due to the Hon. Baronet (the Mem-
ber for Westminster), he would say, that if the Hon.
Baronet presumed to insinuate he (Sir H. Hardinge) was
not at liberty to express his opinions freely and fairly in
that House, he flung back the imputation with scorn.—
(Hear, hear.) He regretted the debate which had now
taken place. He regretted that the Hon. Member for
Oxford had brought the question before them, and he was
sorry for the occasion of it. He was not, however, to be
deterred by clamour from the expression of his feelings
with respect to the Reform Bill. He respected the opinion
of the people and their claims ; but when the Constitution
of the country was at issue, he was prepared to come before
the people and resist the fulfilment of their view of the subject.
The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded by declaring that he
was determined to do his duty, and to express his opinions
fearlessly and conscientiously, in spite of the taunts of the
Hon. Member for Westminster, or the clamours and at-
tempts at intimidation of any party either within or with-
out that House.—(Hear.)

Lord JOHN RUSSELL defended the expressions of his
Hon. Friend (Sir James Graham), and denied that his
Right Hon. Friend intended to draw any comparison be-
tween the expressions of the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir
H. Hardinge), and these of the writer in the newspaper.
His Right Hon. Friend merely wished to show the
heat and strength of expression which had been occa-
sionally drawn forth by the discussions in which they
were engaged. The Noble Lord then proceeded to observe
that the House should pause before they committed them-
selves to sanction the proceedings now recommended—
for they who proclaimed the language of the newspaper
to he false and seditious—they who were attacked were
now about to inflict the punishment; and, with their pas-
sions inflstned by hearing the offensive passage read to them
by the Hon. Member, they refused even a day for con-
sideration before they cams to their vote of censure and
condemnation.—(Hear.) lie confessed that be thought
the course they were pursuing would have an effect the
reverse of that which they anticipated. The people at
large, who disapproved of that House constituting itself at
once a❑ accuser and Judge, were too much in the habit of
taking a very different view of such proceedings, for they
frequently pronounced those who suffered by them to be
martyrs, and elevated them into heroes.—(Hear.) He
had, at one time, in vain pressed the House to pass over a
vote of the same description as that which was then re-
commended. Au Hon. Member had written a pamphlet
which gave great offence to that House. It was deter-
mined that he should be committed to Newgate ; aqd
what was the result ? He was returned most triumphantly
as Member for Westminster at the next election.—(Hear.)
If he could suppose that, by supporting the motion of the
Hon. Member for Oxford, he cc,cid deter others from
similar offences, then he should not hesitate ; but as they
could not hope that, he .thought that the preservation of
freedom of discussion would be materially affected by con-
senting to the course which was proposed.
Sir F. BURDETT said he was always disposed to
adopt that course which lie thought best fitted to secure
the rights of the people. The Hon. Gentleman (Sir H.
Hardinge) said lie had no constituents.—(Cries of no !
and spoke! during which the Right Hon. Baronet re-
sumed his seat ; but he immediately rose again, in obedi-
ence to the louder and more general call from his own side
of the House.) However much lie might be disposed to
regard the Hon. Member, lie must be permitted to say,
without intending to give him any offence, that when the
state of the representation and the vital interests of the
people were under consideration, as he understood them
now to be on the question of Reform, he was determined
to do his duty, in spite of all the clamour and in defiance
of all consequences. The Hon. Member had placed him
in the situation of one of those who had no constituents.—
(Cries of no.)

Sir H. HARDINGE, in explanation, said the Hon.

Baronet had made a mistake; in persisting to assert that
he had no constituents. The borough lie now represented
had now, in the year 1931, a greater number of votees
than it possessed at the time the franchise was first con-
ferred on them, and many more than it had in the year
1695, when the representative system was settled, at the
Revolution; and he might add, that, for the last fifty year,
the number had gone on increasing every year.—(Hear.).
Sir F. BURDETT said, that however distineuisl el the
Hon. Gentleman might he as a Mender of that House,
end however honestly and efficiently he might fulfil the du-
ties of office, still he wanted the essential quality of a re-
presentative of the people—a large body of constituents.
With respect to the Reform Bill shaking the Crown from
the head of the King, he must say that, in his opinion, i..t
would het it more firmly on his brow without that dim-
ming of its luetre, which was the consequence of its pal-
ticipating in the abuses of those who had properties in
boroughs.—(Hear.)
Sir R. INGLIS, in reply, said, he might have concur-
red in the proposal of the Noble Lord if there had been a
single individual found in that House to defend the lan-
guage of the passages he had brought under its attention.
He could not abandon his motion, for. if he did so, he
thought he should ba abandoning his duty. The House
had a jurisdiction on the question of its own privileges
which it was isounsi to support; and unless it was pre-,
pared to renounce the rights it possesses) on such occasions,
it must, when a subject of this kind was brought before
it, be prepared to do its duty. It might be a question
whether be had exercised a proper discretion in bringing
the matter before the House. In his own opinion he be-
lieved he had done his duty, and he then:fire persisted in
his original motion; adding, as an amendment, that cer-
tain passages in the limes Newspaper of the Ist, 2d, 7th,
9th, and 14th of March are false and scandalous libels,
and that that they be banded over to the Attorney-
General, with instructions to prosecute the writer.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but

Mr. HUNT rose amidst loud cries of " Question," and
persisted in addressing the House, notwithstanding the
noise by which he was assailed. He said their patience
must be great to overcome his, for he was determined to
speak unless the Speaker told him he was not in order.--
The Hon. Baronet who brought forward the motion
wished the Attorney-General to prosecute ; but were they
sure, although they might pronounce the articles to be
libellous, and the Judges agreed with them, that twelve
Jurymen could be found to agree with them? Notwith-
standing the coarseness of the language used by the writer
in the Times, he (Mr. Hunt) asserted that every word of
the article was true..--(Hear, hear.)—Tbe question was
whether they would agree to a resolution declaring asses..
tions false which every man in that House knew to he
true ?—(llear.)—A Member behind him (Mr. Hume, we
believe) intimated to him that he would only do the
Times mischief.—(Hear, awl a iatih.)—He repeated
what he had said ; and be thought that House, in the last
act of its life, would be true to the character it had main-
tained through its career, if it came to a vote pronouncing
that false which every man in the kingdom knew to be true.
Strangers were again ordered to withdraw; but
Sir R. PEEL rose and said that as the Hon. Baronet
(Sir R. Inglis) had in his motion referred to papers which
he had not read, these papers should be also read and Laid
on the table before the House came to a decision on their
contents.

Sir R. INGLIS said (as we understood) that they con-
tained passages of the same tendency as that already read;
and his motion now was, that they be delivered to the
Attorney• General to consider the nature of their contents,
and to prosecute, if he found that a prosecution could be
supported.
Air. O'CONNELL said the expressions in the Times
were coarse, and not to be justified. But u ere they not
" true ?—(Hear.)—The Hon. Member for Borouabbritige
(Sir C. Wetherell) bad himself partly admitted that they
were so. He condemned the whole proceeding as impolitic
and unjust, and as a gross attempt to accuse and punish at
the same instant. In his opinion, it would be much more
decent not to go to a vote on a such a question. The
House was following the practice of Ithad;kmantlius—
they pronounced the guilt of the accused, and then sent
him to be tried.—(Hear, hear.)

Sir R. PEEL said he regarded the present proceeding
as purely preliminary, and it should be marked by a spirit
of regularity as well as justice. Reference had been made
to other papers which were not before the House; and he
confessed he could nut make up his mind on the question
with respect to them, for he had not read them until they
were placed in a connected series before him. lie had
heard the first, but the House was about to commit itself
on several others, of which it was presumed they knew
nothing. He suggested that these papers be also read.
Sir R. INGLIS said that they were all of the same
character and tendency, and he wished to save the time of
the house by abstaining from reading them.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL expressed his surprise
that the Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Inglis) complained now,
for the first time, of language contained in paper', not ene
of which was less than a week old, and said nothing of-
fensive in any of the succeeding day's papers ; and he was
the more surprised, because the lion. Baronet had spoken
to him on the subject. and even put the pipers into his
hand, without intimating his intention to proceed in that
manner. He would not say be had expressed an opinion
that it was or was not a libel ; but coarse he had admitted it
to be, although false be really could not call it.--( Hear.)
He thought it, and he now said, it was highly desirable
that no proceedings should be taken on it with respect to
any supposed breach of privilege ; and so far from believ-
ing that language of that kind would induce any Member
to abstain from opposing Reform, he thought it would
have a directly opposite tendency, inasmuch as it induced
men, front a sense of pride and of honour, to persist in
supporting that system which had subjected them to such
attacks from their connection with it. He thought, on the
contrary, that attacks in language such as that of which
the Hon. Baronet complained, were calculated to defeat
the carrying of the measure of Reform, and to confirm
the opposition of those Members who, although not ac-
countable to large bodies of constituents, were, he believed,
acting on a principle of honour, although lie must say that
he thought their opinions were liable to be biassed by their
situation. He concluded by expressing his regret that a
question of this kind had been brought forward on the eve
of the greater debate, and under eircumstinces which
bore the appearance of a disposition to delay the decision
on the most important topic which ever came under their
consideration.

After a few words from Sir C. WETIIERF.LL,
Sir R. PEEL disowned, for himself, an intention to
obstruct the debate which was expected, and observed
that he had not even heard of an intention to make such
a motion until he entered that House, and heard that it
was commenced. He trusted this explanation would
clear that ride of the House from the prejudice which
might be raised against them by the Learned Gentleman's
observations.

Mr. SLANEY, amid loud cries of " Question !" con-
tended, that the people would look on the whole proceed-
ing as an attempt to set aside the decision on the Reform
Bill.—(Hear.)
Sir R. INGLIS thought the Learned Gentleman (the
Attorney-General) should not have referred to the conver-
sation he held with him on the subject of these papers,
unless he had also repeated the nature of that conversa-
tion. He (Sir R. Inglis) would not follow his example
by detailing the nature of that conversation. Al he would
say was, that he had seen some of the papers that day fur
the first time, and he was ready now to read the passages
to which he alluded, if the House thought proper.—
(Cries of no.)
The Gallery was the❑ cleared; but we understood that
the motion was withdrawn.
On re-entering the Gallery we found

Sir G. CLERK on his leg., with a petition, we be-
lieve, against the Parliamentary Reform Bill ; but the
anxiety of the House to proceed to the discussion occa-
sioned loud cries of " No, no," upon which the Hon.
Baronet postponed presenting his petition ; ob-erving,
however, that was the first time that he had be ind any
objection made to the presentation of a petition upon the
subject.