The Sun.
London, England, 1822-06-26 00:00:00

1 -
IY 44.-
A 4
I •
0

COTTON MILLS.

Mr. W.-SMITH begged to put a question to the Right
Hon. Secretary for the Home Departthent, in consequence of
information he had received relative to the reluctance of wit-
nesses to give testimony as'to the violation of that Act, which
limited the labour of children in the Cotton Manufactories. He
wished to know whether it was his intention to take any step to
enforce the law ?

Mr. Secretary PEEL observed, that the information was im-
perfect. If it should be proved that the law was violated, he
should feel it his duty to have the subject referred to a Committee
for an examination iuto the facts,and on their repori,ifnecessa7,
submit the propriety of adopting certain measures to remedy
the defects of the Stattite.
EXTENTS IN AID.

Mr. W. SMITH moved, that there be laid before the House
a Copy of a Rule made on Saturday last, by the Court of Ex-
chequer, respecting the issue of Extents in Aid.—Ordered.
HOBHOUSE presented a petition from certain Inha-
bitants of Camberwell, being Protestant Dissenters, praying
for an alteration in the Marriage Service.—Ordered to lie on
the table.

A Message from the Lords here announced their Lordships'
'Assent to some Bills.
THE LORD ADVOCATE AND PUBLIC PRESS OF
SCOTLAND.

. Mr. ABERCROMBY, on rising to bring forward his pro-
mised motion respecting the conduct of the Lord Advocate with
reference to the ScottiA Press, observed that he felt it neces-,
sary to request the indulgent attention of the llouse, although
'the subject of his motion was of a local nature, as it was con-
-meted entirely with Scottish affairs. If however he. should be
able to shew that the Learned Lord opposite, and his col-
leagues,. had sullied the dignity of their offices, not .only by
connecting themselves with the press, but, through that con-
nexion, by a systematic attempt .to calumniate individu'als,
and to affix stains upon their character, to which no man of
honour could patiently submit ; and if he could shew that
, this practice had been sanctioned and countenanced by the
Learned Lord, and that by his instrumentality the forms of law
had been perverted• for bad motives, he-bad a right to expect
that the House would not remain altogether passive on the
subject, even though it referred entirely to the affairs of Scot-
land.--(Hear, hear !)—He stood before the House in the cha-
racter'of a public accuser ; and if he could assume such a cha-
racter to gratify party feelings, there was no term of repro-
ibation sufficiently strong which could be applied to his con-
duct; but as he conceived that it was in Isis pOwer to shew that
.a gross attack had been made upon the liberty of the subject,
and that the law'had bin perverted for oppressive purposes,
be thought he should abandon his duty by shrinking to bring
the subject under, the consideration of the House. He should
state nothing to the House without flue ceasideration .a.but as
it was necessary for him to conorrent-on thealifferent facts, as..
he proceeded, lie - trusted that any expression he might utter
not altogether warranted by the facts themselves, would not be
attributed to any improper feeling. lie 'would himself be the
first to retract such, an expression. -His motion was in sonic
measure connected with the late trial of Mr. James Stuart,
.but he should rely as little as possible on the proceedings
respecting that' trial, though he thought there, had been in
the course of them, much • harsh. and unnecessary, delay.—
After explaining the delay which 'had taken place in his own
motion, and which he stated to have been .occasioned by the
proceedings against Borthwick at Edinburgh, the Hon. and
Learned Member proceeded to state that he should first bring
under the notice of the House the powers which were by law
entrusted to the Lora Advocate of Scotland, in virtue of his
office. He should then state the facts with which the Learned
Lord and his Colleagues were connected, and the transactions
in which they had been engaged with regard to the Press of
Scotland ; particularly noticing the oppression„ which he cons
tended had been exercised ,in the case of Borthwick. Up-
on these he should not ask the House to come to any definitive
opiniod at present. He thought- he should make out a case
which would irresistibly call for a Committee of inquiry, and
not until the House should be in possession of the Report of
that Conimittee, would he ask them to come to any ultimate
decision whatever. First, then, addressing himself to the
powers entrusted to the Lord Advocate. In his person were
contained the powers of the ancient Privy Council of Scot-
land • powers which, before the Union, were exercised by
the Lord Justice General, the Lord Chief Justice Clerk, and
other high Officers. Those powers were claimed for the office
of Lord Advocate in the year 1804, by a Learned Lord Who
then held the office, but who waa now the Lord President.
These were extensive, not to say dangerous powers, and he
did not mean to say that the Learned Lord would ever at-
tempt to exercise them. One of them included the power of
superseding the criminal 'jurisdiction of the country, and
bringing the accused to trial before the Council as a special
Court. There was scarcely any great act act of outrage or in-
justice noticed in the history of Scotland which was not refer-
able to the exercise of those powers. However, the Learned
Lord was in practice /the public prosecutor. lie could
bring a man to trial without the previous sanction of a
Grand Jury ; and though his power was partially re-
strained by an Act of Parliament of the year 1701, or-
daining that he should bring the' accused to trial within 60
days, he had the power , of postponement, by various delays,
to the extent'of 140 days, the whole of which time he could re-
tain a man in custody without bringing him to trial, although
that man might afterwards prove to be innocent of the offence
charged against him. It was true that a private individual
might commence public prosecutions; but this right was
shackled by so many restraints, that it was seldom or ever put
in force. The private prosecutor was liable to pay all ex-
penses if he failed, and for them he could be compelled
to give security. He could be compelled to swear that
lie believed in the truth of the accusation ; and, above all,
he could not prosecute at all, unless he could shew that
he , had sustained a personal injury from the offence. This
was an outline of the powers placed in the hands of the
Lord Advocate. The Lord Advocate and Solicitor-General
were of course appointed by the Crown ; and the former had
the privilege of appointing Advocates Depute to represent him
on the several Circuits, and to exercise many of his powers ;
and he might here inform the House that his motion related to
the conduct of the Lord Advocate, the Solicitor-General, ,and
two of the Advocates Depute. The House and all thinking
men would agree with him in saying,. that in proportion -to the
, magnitude-of these should be the vigilance of the House and
the public in noticing their exercise. Tt should be observed; too,
that in some instances the office of Lord Advocate was a judicial
office : so that if there ever was, case in which great tempers
great forbearance, and judicial dignity of conduct ought to be
united in the same person—it was in him who filled the office of
Lord Advocate. Above all, they had a right to expect that he
would never interfere in any matter which he might rea.
sonably think would come beibre him in his judicial capa-
city. If, for instance, he. observed the dissemination of li-
bels, seditious or blasphemous, or tending to any breach of
the peace, and especially to that which might end in murder, it
became his ddty to interfere to punish the offender, or, to pre-
vent the mischief. Unfortunately, however, his (Mr. A.'s)
charge against the Learned Lord, was of a crime of commission,
and not of omission. He charged the Learned Lord with having
used his patronage, his money, and the sanction of his high of-
fice, to the encouragement and maintenance of a regular system
of calumny, in the shape of libels on individuals ; a crime ren-
dered the more grave and serious when it was remembered that
the Learned Lord was also a co-existing Secretary -of State for
-the Home Department, inasmuch as he was the regular official

.. t .

PRICE SEVENPENCE.

communicant with the Hon eSecretary. upon all matters respect-
ing the internal government of Seotland. He should here in-
form the House, that since the Union, Scotland'having lost its
Parliament, the principal attraction in its capital was the Bar,
which could boast of having among its Members men of first-
rate talent and education, and of the highest possible charac-
ter, and those, of course, possessed considerable influence in
the country. The number was from 150 to 200 ; and it was to
be observed that the Lord Advocate had the patronage of 80
places, to be distributed among Members of the Bar; The
House, therefore, were able to judge of the good or the ill
Which might be winked accordingly as this patronage was Well
or ill directed. He should proceed to inform the House that
in the year 1820 there was a paper in Scotland of very Ilited
circulation, called the Clydesdale Journal, which -was after-
wards removed to Glasgow, under the name of the Glasgow
Sentinel. It was set on foot by several Gentlemen in the
neighbourhood, but it 'was nearly expiring when the Lord
Advocate and other Mientleinen gave it-their support in a cir-
cular letter, recommending the paper, and atating their wish
to promote its circulation, with a view to counteract the ef-
fect of many publications which were distributed .ahrough
tlv. country, and addressed particularly for bad Purposes to
the Understitudings of the lower classes. ' This paper was
signed by the Learned Lind on or about the 2§th of Novem-
ber, 1820 ; and it therefore became a natural question, what
was the spirit in which this paper was conducted previous
to that day ? Were its principles correct, and was it judi-
ciously conducted, so as to warrant the approbation of the
Learned Lord if, indeed; under any circumstances, he
ought to haVe' lent his support to any publication of a poll-,
tical tendency?—(hear, hear, hear.)—He (Mr. A.) had seen
extracts taken from the previous numbers of this papa"; and
he declared that they contained libels against individuals as
. .
gross as could possibly be 'mapped.
.They imputed motives
of baseness, .disloyalty, and treachery, to many respectable
-individuals; and, among them, to Members of that' House re-
specting their conduct in Parliament: This was particularly
remarkable, upon an occasion wherein the majority of the
House had agreed with the proposition of the Member who was
the principal object of attack. 'He meant his Noble Friend;
the_ Member' for Lanark (Lord A. Hamilton). The conduct
imputed to those:respectable individuals was such, that, if
true, it disqualified them from keeping the company of Gen.
tlemen. He would not, however, ask the House to take his
opinion as to the character of these extracts. He would give
them much better authority. He had a letter written by one
of the Gentlemen who had supported the Paper, in answer to
a letter from the Editor, requesting further assistance. The
Gentleman said the Paper had been much injured by the inju-
dicious and improper attacks it had made upon individuals.
This was the character of the Paper given to it by one who had
been, and appeared to wish to be, one of its supporters. ' The
House were tob,well acquainted with the melancholy result of
the 'support which had been given to it by the Learned Lord ;
the death of Sir Alestander Boswell; and the deplorable afflic-
tion of his widow and children. Copies of this recommendation
'of the Lord 'Advocate were sent round to many persons con-
nected with the GoYernment, or likely to entertain the.politi-
cal opinions supported by the paper. Seeresy was enjoined,
and each person was expressly directed to, return the letter
sent to him. Above 200 of these had been distributed, and only
two of them were not returned in conformity with the injunc-
tion of the letter, One of there two was addressed to a highly
respectable Nobleman, who, it seemed, did not think it worth
his while to return the letter; and the other was addressed to
an equally respectable Gentleman, who, from careless- habits,
had neglected to return it., All iis time it was to be observed
that a Mi. tefaydon, the Sheriff' Depute of Lanark, a Alernber
Of-the legal profession, was the principal" writer in the paper ;-
and by virtue of his Office, he, of course, had judicial power in
the County. 'He challenged the Learned Hord to deny, that
lie knew this fact at the time he signed the recommendation.—
:(Loud Cheers from the Opposition Benches.)—This -Mr. Hay-
don, therefore, in his judicial Character, Might notinrpsobably
have had to decide upon proceedings brought against the Paper,
for the very articles written by himself. Would the Learned Lord,
he repeated, deny that he knee the fart of 31r. Ilaydon beihg
the:principal writer in this Paper in November, 1820-?---4The
LOed AdvoCate here, as was understood, denied that he knew
it.l-o-At• ear eveffrarA/We Tiatedori knew that the 'Lord Advocate
had Signed it.—fOlieera.froin the Oppesition.)=LThir
Mr. Ilan -
don had allowed himself, to be the author of the most'ecalidal-
ous libels in that paper, in the writing of which he war -
coura,ged by the. aignatare of the Learned Lord: He now
came to the notice of a paper more geherally known by the
public. Ile meant the Beacon; the history of a hich paper was
shortly 'this. In • 1821, a Resolution at Edinburgh, had 'been
frothed, professing to establish a new Paper to be etlled the
" Beacon ;" and every entleayoue. was made to obtain signa-
tures to the Resolution ; and a number was obtained, greater,
he believed, than that ever obtained for the 'eatablish-
-merit of a Paper in that part of the country.' As' many-as
800 names were obtained; a number, which he was satis-
fied; could be attributed only to the active interference of
the Learned Lord. It was proposed to 'open a banking ac-
count, to Meet the expellees which would necessarily. be. in-
curred in the working of the Paper ; and the House of Sir W.
Forbes and Co. was applied to for that purpose. That House
however; declined opening the account without a guarahtee
to answer any loss which might be sustained by answering the
demands of the Paper ; and on this occasion, a bond or_ gua-
rantee was . entered into, signed by several persons, Whbse
names he had in his hands ; but he should only mention thenames
of those who held officiateituations.'First, there was the Learned
Lorda then the Solicitor-General, who also held the judicial
situation . of Advocate and Sheriff Depute for the county, of
Perth ; Mt. Hope, an Advocate Depote • Sir Walter Scott, a
Home Sheriff Depute ; Mr. Hoe Drummond, a Member of that
House, and. the Lord Provost of Edinburgh. • He would, he
thought, be able to shew that theSe Gentlemen had made them-
selves praprietors of the Beacon. The language of 'this paper
was, in substance, that those who' subscribed it wished to
countenance the paper and its principles, but to disclaim 'all
'liability beyond which they stipulated • so that if the receipts
' of the paper fell short of the expenditure, the subscribers
became bound to pay' a rateable contribution. This was,
therefore,. a current bond of credit for the paper, and was of
course given, in the hope that the subscribers would not have
to pay any thing, though undoubtedly they did net expect to
receive. The paper, in fact, was altogether set up by this bond ;
and by withdrawing their names, the subscribers might at any
time have put an end to the paper. So much for the matter of
pecuniary account. The next question was, how was this
paper conducted ? He would in . this case also not ask the
House to take his opinion. He would give them better autho-
rity. One of the Gentlemen who signed the bond, .disap-
proving very much of the way in which the paper was con-
ducted, wrote a note of-remonstrance to the Editor; anti this not
being attended to, he withdrew his name, and never afterwards
suffered the peper to be brought into his house. He (Mr. A.)
Might select many of the libels inserted in this paper; but he
should not go through them. Some of them were in imitation of
the ancient Scottish songs, and might not be intelligible to :the
English Members. They night, however, very safely be Cha-
racterized as groas, vulgar, and such as could never be written
by any person who had a right to call himsella Gentleman.—
These libels caused the publishers of the paper to be pursued
by some of the individuals who were libelleu and led to an
inquiry as to who were the promoters and supporters of
the paper. The moment the Learned Lord and the others
were discovered, it was found that the paper could not exist.
It scarcely survived the discovery of its supporters.—(A
laugh.)—On this discovery, however, a correspondence was
opened between the Learned Lord and some of the Gentlemen
Who had been libelled in thepaper ; and as the answers of the
Learned Lord to the applications made to him on this 'subject,
formed a part of his defence, it became important to consider
it. And here he admitted at once, that if the defence set up
by the Isearned Lord was sufficient in either a legal or a moral
point of view,' there would. be no foundation for ihe motion
which he (Mr. A.) should submit -to the House.—He should
requestthe attention of the House to the letter of the Learned
Lord, in answer to the'application from Mr. James Stuart:—
The Learned-Lord said, that he had never any intention to give
countenance to the circulation of libels, still less to that of libels
on individuals. That the suppOrt he had given to the Beacon
newspaper referred •• entirely to the political principles of the
paper.. The Learned Lord, it was true, professed to disapprove
of attacks upon private character; but let the House only -look
at the character of the Sentinel newspaper, which had been pre-
viously countenanced by the Noble Lord.—(Cheers from the
Opposition.)—Let them look at' the principles of that paper
. .
since it had received the support of the Learned Lord. Unless
the Learned Lord could shew that he had token steps to prevent
the Beacon continuing its libelous, course, he-mukhe considered
as a supporter. of it. The Learned Lord must be:jUdgdar ether
men would be judged ; and it appeared that the paper in
eel) had owed its existence and its death to the Learned Lord.
The' Learned Lord, in his letter to Mr. Stuattaoontinuet!—,he

Shad, he said, no share whatever in the'conduct of the paper, but
-he thought. that his withdrawing his name while proceedings
were pending against it would have the appearance of a desire
no his past to shelter himself from pecuniary consequences. He
also said that he had not seen the , articles complained of until
his.attention had been drawn to them. Now he (Mr. A.) Could
prove that the numbers of the -Beacent were regularly sent to
the Learned Lord ; and though he of course could not prove
4, hat the Learned Lord had read them, lie supposed the presump-
`twit was, that a person who ordered a newspaper to be for-
-warded to him, read that paper. His case, however, did not
stop here. The other night he heard the Learned Lord oppose
a Bill of-an Hon. and Learned Friend of his (Mr. Kennedy) re-
specting the judicature of Scotland. When he went home he
happened to turn over the files of the Beacon newspaper, and
there he observed in one of the numbers an article headed
Mr. Kennedy's Bill," which contained all` the arguments
urged by the Noble Lord the other night against the Bill; ar-
gument for argument, and illustration for illustration.—(A
. Laugh).—The article might really have been cut out, and sent
to a newspaper as a faithful report of the Learned Lord's
. speech. He mentioned this as a very singular coincidence,
just to shew that there was every appearance of the Learned
Lord being familiar with the paper. However, the beamed
Lord afterwards, notwithstanding what he had said of disdain-
ing a wish to shrink from pecuniary consequences, did ac-
tually afterwards withdraw his name, and gave as a reason for
doing so, that an action had been, or was about to be, commenced
against him as a proprietor. If the subscribers to the bond
in question were legally liable, as proprietors, they must be
„considered as responsible for every thing which appeared in
the paper. If the Learned Lord himself were to prosecute the
proprietor of a newspaper for a seditious libel contained in
the paper, he could not admit it to be answer to the eharge
that the proprietor was ignorant of the insertion of the libel.
This position had been established in thecase of Capt. Johnson,
fwho in the year 1792 was brought before the Court of
Justiciary for a contempt of that Court, committed in reflec-
tions upon its proceedings. Capt. Johnson proved that he was
not' the author of the libel • but being the proprietor of the
Paper, he was held responsible for the contents of it, and
punished. In the present case the Learned Lord was distinctly
charged as a Proprietor. How could the Learned Lord proceed
• criminally against other Proprietors for libels if he were not
himself held responsible in the present instance ? When the
Learned Lord pleaded against Mr. Stuart on a late occa-
sion, could he possibly forget that his interference had in a
great measure been the cause of the cruel necessity which had
-rdriven Mr. Stuart to vindicate his honour ? The article in the
Beacon referring to Mr. Stuart, was a libel tending directly to
a breach of the peace. In other articles it was stated, " that
there would be no concealment, and that the writers were
willing to come forward and avow themselves ; and there-
fore while the paper continued, it had a. right to call itself
.a gentlemanly paper."— (Cheers and laughter.)—When Mr..
Stuart brought actions against the publishers of the paper, he
was assailed by fresh libels, and accused of the most glaring
cowardice ; the written defence to these actions, signed by
Mr. Macneil and the other Advocate for the Defenders, stated
• that these articles did not go beyond the bounds of newspaper
..discussion.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.)—He was, how-
: ever, happy to say, that this defence had not yet come before
the Court. When it did, he had no doubt it would be overruled.
•He had yet that to state, with respect to which the conduct of
the Leaped Lord Advocate had been, to use the mildest term,
the most objectionable that had ever been imputed to the holder
of a situation like that which he filled. He particularly called
upon the House to give their attention to a plain statement of
the case. He would submit it to them without observation ;

and dying so he felt confident that it would come home to their
feelings with a degree of force which the most splendid elo-
• quence would labour in vain to supply. The case was that of
_Mr. W. Murray Borthwick. Mr. Borthwick had been in part
proprietor and editor of a newspaper, in which character he
. had at first been honoured with the countenance of the
.Learned Lord. Mr. Borthwick had some concerns with Mr.
Alexander, who was for some time his partner. In 1821

they carried on between them the Sentinel of Glasgow.
—On the 14th of November, in that year, Mr. Borthwick
and Mr. Alexander agreed to dissolve their partnership.—
The conditions on which Mr. Borthwick was to give up his

share to Mr. Alexander were these: that he should receive
:twenty pounds in money, and ninety pounds in bills, which
were to be delivered by the Bth of December. Mr. Alexan-
Nder paid twenty pounds, and gave one bill to a small amount,
'which, however, was ood for nothing. Mr. Alexander not
_having complied with the terms of the agreement which had
..been made, Mr. Borthwick finding he could not gain the con-
sideration for which he had consented to give up his interest in
, the paper, on the 18th of November instituted certain proceed-
ings before the Magistrates of Glasgow, the object of which
- was to force Mr. Alexander to carry the contract into execu-
tion, or to reinstate him (Mr. Borthwick) in that property
which he had proposed to relinquish. On the very day on which
Mr. Borthwick gave notice to Mr. Alexander that he was about
to proceed in the way which he (Mr. Abercromby) had men-
4tioned, on that day, and not before, did Mr. Alexander take
steps to advertise the dissolution of their partnership. Mr.
_Borthwick took the course which he had stated, and which in
,effect said to Mr. Alexander, either perform your agreement; or
.let me be reinstated in my property. To abridge, as much as
,possible, he would pass over the intermediate proceedings and
.go at once to the decision of the Magistrates on the appeal
.made to them by Mr. Borthwick. On the 14th of February,
~the Magistrates pronounced this decision, that the defendant,
Mr. Alexander, should deliver the Bills with the securities
• which he had engaged to...clrnish to Mr. Borthwick within six
days, or Mr. Borthwick, availing himself of the other alter-
...native, was to be reinstated as a partner in the concern. The
.six days expired on the 20th of February. Mr. Alexander
had not fulfilled the terms of his agreement, and Mr. Borth-
wick therefore felt himself in a situation to re-enter and take

.Possession of that property, which, by a competent jurisdic-
tion, had been decided to be his. He applied to the Magis-
trates for a warrant to enter upon the premises. The warrant
•was granted. Mr. Alexander knew of this on the 20th Feb.,
•but Mr. Borthwick delayed acting on this till the Ist of March.
•Oi that day he re-entered on his own premises. There he re-
.mained for seven hours. Mr. Alexander offered no opposition
but by signs of ill humour and marks of disrespect. But Mr.
Borthwickcarried off one key and some papers, which as a
joint proprietor he haa a right to do, and announcing to the
workmen that he would return at an early hour to resume the

,directiOn of- the concern. When Mr. BOrthwiek acted, thus,
if he had no right to do so, why did not Mr. Alexander at once
take the course which he afterwartls took ?. Borthwick
,was as guilty of theft when he acted the part which he had de-
.scribed on the Ist of March, as he was on the 11th, but at the

,former period it never occurred to Mr. Alexander to prefer such
.:a charge. On the 2d of March, Mr. Alexander got Mr. Borth-
,wick imprisoned for debt in, the Jail of Glasgow. There he
,remained tilr the 10th, when he was released, and on the 11th
,he resumed the management of his office, acting on the war-
rant which he had obtained from the Magistrates, to enable
-him to do so. Mr. Alexander, finding his scheme had failed,
opposed Mr. Borthwick on his return. Mr. Borthwick, how-
ever, acted as before, carrying off such papers from the pre-
-miles as he thought proper. Now, after acting thus, he (Mr.
Abcromby) intreated the House to mark what was the first
step taken by Mr. Borthwick. His first step was to proclaim
the theft (if such it were) which he had committed, by apply-
- ing to the Magistrates to record what he had done, stating to
them, " I have done so and so, and would have done more had
. not Mr. Alexander and others interrupted me, in consequence
of which I now call on you to interfere." But in the course
;of that day another remarkable step was taken. He knew not
by whose advice Mr. Alexander had acted, •but on that day it
,occurred to him that it would be advisable to accuse Mr. Borth-
widc of stealing that which had been decided to be his own pro-
perty. Such a charge must be preferred by the Procurator-
:Fiscal on his own responsibility, or by the party complaining,
with the concurrence of the Procurator Fiscal. Now what was
the course taken by Mr. Alexander ? In the first place the
.prosecution was represeited to be instituted by the Procura-
tor Fiscal alone. What did the Procurator do when he saw
this ! He altered the ,document, so that it should appear the

proceeding was instituted by Mr. Alexander, with hisconcur-
rence. He did snore than this : feeling from what he observed
.that it was probable all was not right, he wrote on it " con-
...cm-red with," .only, and signed it. P. was thus seen that the
.first person to whom the paper was shewn was so struck with
41se course which had been pursued, that he was anxious to
;avert the idea that it
.rested on his responsibility. Mr.
Borthwick was , taken before the Magistrates of Glasgow,
-and they, the only impartial Judges before whom the case
.hatl been brought, or ever would be brought, decided that there
-was no foundation whatever for the charge. Mr. florthwick
-then went to Edinburgh, where he should be able to prove, if
permitted to do so, that he had lived without concealment.-
-1-1 e must now leave Mr. Borthwick ,or a time, to advert to the
-.conduct pursued by others, with whom it had hecome an ob-
ject of importance to obtain the controul of certain papers. A
proceeding had been commerced for that purpose. Mr. Stuart
;clad been examined on this subject before the Sheriff. Every
effort .was making to obtain those papers, when the dud be-
tween Air. Stuart and Sir A. Boswell opened a new course of
things to the parties. He begged particularly to call the at-
'l.t?-stints of the house to the fact that every part of the proceed-
ing before the. Sheriff of Edinburgh passed under the observa-
tion of Mr. M'Neil, who acted as Counsel for Mr. Alexander,
avho was well aware of what had taken place before the Ma-
gistrates of Glasgow, and aware that they had acquitted
Mr. Borthwick of all participation in the crime which
'had been laid to his charge. The case was one in which
Isorrlhe beginning to the end nothing had occurred to change
stile colour of the transactions which it involved, and there
oval therefore no possibility of- setting up the plea of being
Oa the 3d of April Mr. IlorthwiOc was arrested,

under the pretext that he was about to fly from justice and
make his escape to America. Now if such were the in- i
tendon of a 'person in his situation, it did not immediately i
suggest ...itself 'to the mind why he should be found on the
eastern part of Scotland. Mr. Borthwick was arrested on the
3d April, and immediately put in irons.—(Bear, hear, hear!)
He was manacled with irons which were too small for him, and
wleich in consequence subjected him to much suffering and in-
convenience. '1 Was not all. Ile was carried from the place
where the arrest was made to Edinburgh, between two armed
persons, as though he had been the most odious and desperate
criminal in existence. He was denied all access to his friends,.
and, in other respects, treated with much severity. This was
the course pursued towards a man accused merely of stealing
his own property—in whose favony the Magistrates had already
decided, and whom no man had dared to bring to trial. He
was treated as the worst of malefactors. He applied for leave
to put in bail, but was refused. On the 6th of April he was
indicted, and the 24th was named for the trial. On that day
the Learned Lord came into Court, but the public prosecutor
did not think fit to bring on the trial. Every effort was made
by the Counsel for Mr. Borthwick to provoke the opposite
party to proceed without delay. Mr. Hope on this occasion
said, pro loco et tempore,' he deserted the diet; that was, he de-
clared of his own free will and pleasure he would not then go
on with the trial. Mr. Hope, however, in his mercy had said,
" If you choose to go out on small bail I shall not object to it."
He (Mr. A.) on this subject, need only state what had been he
answer of Mr. Borthwick's Counsel, and he begged that it
might always be remembered that the case was one between
the Law Authorities of Scotland and a man accused, bf steal-
ing his own property. The reply of Mr. Cockburn, Mr.
Borthwick's Counsel, to Mr. Hope, was—" I cannot advise
my client to take the benefit of this offer." (And why could
not the Learned Gentleman so advise Mr: Borthwick ?) " be-
cause if he takes the benefit of it, he must lose under the Act
of 1701, all chance of ever getting rid of this charge." He
could only get rid of it by being tried under the precept which
had been issued, and. Mr. Borthwick therefore said, " I can
accept of no mercy from you—l can only avail myself of that
which is secured to me under an Act of Parliament." He re-
mained in prison till forty days had passed. On the day when
that
.period expired, Mr. Borthwick applied to the Court of
Justiciary, and claimed to lie discharged under the Act of
1701. He said he bad right to be liberated under that Act:—
So said the Judges, but then a new charge was preferred by
Mr. Alexander, with the concurrence of the Noble Lord, which
was in fact the same which the Magistrates of Glasgow had in
the outset declared to be groundless. The Learned Lord would
tell him that he had no option in this matter, and was bound to
concur when a charge was preferred. This had been called in
question by Mr. Hume, who had contended, in particular
cases, the :Lord Advocate might refuse to concur, and reserve
his reasons for doing so, till called on to state them before the
Court of Justiciary, in which Court, the party complaining
of such non-concurrence, might ask a remedy. Here was a
case, in which, after an individual had been confined for
forty days, a charge known to be groundless was preferred,
and the party detained for a crime of which he could not by
possibility have been guilty. The charge had been dismissed
by the Glasgow Magistrates when originally preferred, and
with a knowledge-of this the Noble Lord had suffered it to ex-
tend the confinement; of Mr. Borthwick. Good GOD ! under
such circumstances Was it for. the Learned Lord to countenance
a charge, which, it was clear, the person who made it could only
refer in a spirit of the most diabolical persecution.—(Hear,
hear, hear !)—Was it to be endured that the Lord Advocate
should be all powerful in Scotland for every purpose but that of
standing between an individual and injustice and oppression !
(Hear !)—ln such a case he (Mr. Abercromby) must agree with
Mr. Hume, that the Lord Advocate ought to have withheld his
concurrence, and have shewn his reasons for doing so before the
Court of Justiciary. That which he had described, it was to
be remembered had taken place in a.country where there was
no Grand Jury—where all was done on the responsibility of
thb Learned Lord, who was only responsible to that House.
He now asked the Learned Lord, if he thought Mr. Borthwick
innocent, why did he not discharge him ?—if he thought-him
guilty, why suffer Mr. Alexander to interfere ? This was the
case of Mr. Borthwick, with the exception of one very singu-
lar fact, which was this,that immediately after the trial of Mr.
Stuart, Mr. Borthwick had been released. Within 48 hours
after Mr. Stuart's acquittal, without being brought face to face
with the Learned Lord, without any sort of trial, this unfortu-
nate man had been liberated, after enduring a confinement of
seventy days' duration.--1 Hear, hear !)—ln 1820 Mr. Borth-
wick was patronized by the Learned Lord, who had written
to him, " I shall be 'happy if I can be instrumental in getting
the Government advertisements for you." This the Learned
Lord knew to be so. In 1821, this Learned Lord had written
in praise of his paper. But when Mr. Borthwick became an
instrument to expose those who were engaged in libelling his
Learned Friend, ' then he was imprisoned, put in imps, and
treated like the worst of malefactors. He put it to the
House, if it were not 'clear that the proceedings which had
taken place with respect to Mr. Borthwick, were not intended
to prejudice Mr. Stuart on his trial. Mr. Stuart had been
examined on the subject of' them, which had in fact formed
a part of the indictment. That part of it, however, the
Lord Justice Clerk had said, was not only not proved, but
was actually disproved. lie complained of the course taken
on the late trial, in which a Learned Counsel sprung up
at the close of the examination of each witness to desire.
that all might be sent out of Court, because he intend-
ed to examine them on the ' ensuing Monday. This had
been repeated after each examination, yet the Learned
Lord was hardly out of Scotland before the individual, on
whose trial they were examining, was sent away without being
tried at all. He would put it to the House if proceedings like
the present did not- call for inquiry. They must be dead to
every touch of humanity, and to all sense' of justice, who did
not feel that there was no security for any one. if such persecu-
tions as these could be sanctioned under the forms of law by the
Leitrned Lord. He wished for inquiry, that it might be known
how Scotland was governed, and for the sake of the Learned
Lord himeelf, he wished it, whose character would never be
wholly free from taint Without a full and fair inquiry. He
then noticed the action brought by Mr. Gibson against Mr.
Cheap, a Gentleman of the Bar, who was said to be the real
Editor of the Bedeon, and that brought by Mr. Stevenson
against Mt. Nimes), who was a journeyman earning. five-and-
twenty shillings per week, but who Was bound to indemnify
Stevenson for damages given against the paper. On the very
day the latter action was brought, Niinmo took his departure
from Scotland for Paris. He knew not, however, whether he
was still at Paris, but this lie knew, that if the Learned Lord
thought the good opinion of his fellow citizens of importance,
he would do well to bring Cheap and` Nimmo forward, for the
people of Scotland would never be satisfied with respect to the
part which the Learned Lord had acted, till' those persons
had been examined. Sonic time before the Beacon was es-
tablished, a Paper called the Edinburgh Correspondent had ex-
isted for some time under the influence of Government. But
it appeared that the Editor of this Paper did rot carry his
virulence far enough for his patrons • but after the destruction
of the Beacon, those persons returned the Correspondent. In
both of these papers was observed the same virulent libels against
Mr. Stuart. After the-negotiation for the undertaking with re-
spect to the Beacon; discussions took place as to the extent of
abuse to be inserted in the articles in it, and also as to the ap-
pointment of an Editor. The result of this part of the discus-
-sion that took place was a determination to have an Editor not
known in Edinburgh, and who should unite to his other qualifi-
cations a due mixture of the bully and the bravo ; and accord-
ingly an Irish student was provided---(A laugh.)—He should
be able to connect with all of these transactions ohe or other
of the Crown Counsel as a principal actor anti mover.—(Hear,
hear.)—The first witness he would examine to this part of his
case were persons of the names of Watson and Thiselton. He
had, now stated this case to the House, in which he appealed to
them as arbiters, because he could snake that appeal to no
other quarter. He did not ask the House to assent to the
truth of his propcisitionse but he was much mistaken:if the
House did not think that he had made out a prima facie
case to justify him in calling for a full, fair, and impartial in-
quiry. He had exposed a systematic plan of libel, and the
information he possessed connected with theselibels, Magis-
trates and persons holding situations of authority in the coun-
try, sheaving the effects of the evil example of. the Learned
Lord. He intreated the House to recollect, that although this
system appeared for the present put to rest, it was ready to be
renewed. The death of Sir- Alexander Boswell was not the
only lessoh that they had been taught by it. Already the
lamented Mr. Scott had fallen a victim to Scotch libels, and
the success of the libeller's pistol upon their first victim, seemed
to have given fresh vigour to their .proceedings. All that he
asked of the House was, that he should be permitted to thew
his grounds for what he had stated—that he might be allowed
to prove what he had advanced. If they were proved, they
ought to be redressed. If they were not proved, it would be to
the honour of the Lord Advocate.—(Hear, hear !)—He con-
cluded by moving, " That a Committee bei appointed to in-
quire into the conduct of the Lord Advocate and the other Law
Officers of the Crown, in'Scotland, with reference to the public,
press of that country, and especially with regard to the prose-
cution against William M. Borthwick."
The motion having been seconded, and put from the Chair,
The LORD ADVOCATE said, he felt it a painful duty to
be obliged to rise upon this occasion. There-were few men
whose conduct had been so arraigned ; it had happened to no
man before him to be time arraigned before the Commons of
England. Nothing could be more difficult than the task which
he had to discharge upon that occasion. He felt that in ap-
proaching this discussion, his character, credit, and future hap-
piness were at stake.—(Hear, hear !)—While he said this, he
did not mean to complain either of the manner or the time of
bringing forward this motion. He certainly was not prepared,
,from the nature , of the notice given by the Honourable and

Learned Member, to expect such a statement of fact.. H e
thought from the notic4 that there would be merely a general
inquiry into the Press of Scotland, and no more. When
Mr. Whitbread brought a charge against the last Lord Advu-
cate, he had the courtesy, before putting, him on his trial, to
furnish him with a complete knowledge of his accusations, and
thus enabled him to come fully prepared before the Hottse.
But he had heard the first of his charges that night, although he
might have brought fOrward a general motion on the subject
ten months ago, and hail threatened to do so, it was not till
three days after the death of Sir Alexander Boswell, in whom.
he had lost a friend, and when the public feeling ran high,
that he had thought a fit time for such a motion. If he
thought as he stated he did, it was his duty to have_taken mea-
sures not to allow him to disgrace the office which he held.
For the last eight days, the public press had done every thing
in its power to prejudice this question ; and this, too, at a time
when he was defendant in an action for damages to the amount
of 10,0001. as a proprietor in one of the papers alluded to by
the Honourable and Learned Gen tleman.—( H ear. )—These were
the preliminary observations he had to trouble the House with.
With regard to the charges brought against him, that House
must be aware that he stood in a situation of difficulty,
inasmuch as he was connected with other individuals, Mr.

Hope, Mr. M‘Neal, and others. The House would be
aware , of the hardship of the case upon these individuals, he
being called upon to make their defence, having no means of
communication with them, and not knowing of the charges
against them till that day. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman
had' began by speaking of the nature of the powers belonging
to the Lord Advocate. The chief power of that Officer was
that. of public prosecutor, and the diminution of prosecutions
chewed that it had been exercised honestly of late, and he was
convinced, that the effect of the power so exercised, was to
bring fewer persons to trial. The power had always been ex-
ercised with the greatest moderation.. With reference to the
matters immediately, touching himself personally, in which the
Hon.. and Learned Gentleman had dealt, it appeared that he
charged. him with a connexion with three Newspapers.-
-One of these newspapers was entitled the Edinburgh Correa.
pondent ; and on that subject all he had to say was, that
the statement he had made was entirely new to-him • and al-
though he had occasionally seen that Paper in his 'house, he
solemnly declared that he had not been connected with that
Paper.—(Hear, hear, hear !)—He wished to be understood as
wishing for the appointment of a Committee, could it be done
without implying censure upon him. Indeed were it not for
that, there was no species of inquiry he did not court.—(Hear !)
—The next Paper he was said to be connected with was the
Sentinel. He confessed he was surprised to hear his name in
connection with that Paper. He had never read it, nor sup-
ported it in any-shape, or had any connection with it.—(Hear,
hear I)—He received a letter from Mr. Borthwick in November
1810, in which he stated his desire to establish a. Newspaper
on constitutional and loyal principles, in which the cause of
good order and morality might be supported in the face of all
opposition. The writer stated that he was unequal to com-
mence the undertaking upon his own means, and without the
certainty of support, and that if he could be assured of the
countenance of the Officets of his Mejesty's Government in the
country it would give sufficient publicity to the Paper to make
it successful. His answer to that letter was, that however de-
sirable such a publication might be, he knew that it was not
the practice of his Majesty's Government to give their support
ton paper by the Government advertisements solely on account
of the principles of it being in conformance with their own.—
(Hear !)—This answer he sent on Nov. 5, 1819, and from that
time he heard no more about that paper. Ile applied to ether
quarters and succeeded, but he had uniformly refused to give
any assistance to him, even by ordering the paper. It was
certainly true that in November, 1820, that individual came to
him with a paper, drawn up by the Hon. Member for La-
narkshire, and subscribed by a great number of the inhabi-
tants of that county. This paper stated that he had actually
been ruined by his exertions in the cause of loyalty and good
order, in his endeavours to establish the paper he was con-
derned in, and want on to a pledge of support. His impres-
sion was that he had not signed that paper; but he was
willing to admit, from the lion. and Learned Gentleman's
assertion, 'that it was so. He had long been connected with
Lanarkshire, and was a freeholder in the county, and as such
he subscribed to the pledge of support. It was to be oh-
served that the lieentiousnesf of the presS at that time was
very great, and had caused six or seven trials in 1829 for
blasphemy and sedition, and was considered as the main-
spring of all the insurrections about that time in the West of
Scotland. Under these circumstances he put it to the House,
whether it was not natural to accede to the recommendation,
brought to him from a respectable quarter, and which was
only intended to operate as an inducement to others to sup-
port the paper. But it never could be construed into .a
pledge to support all the papers enianatinie from the same
source. This paper, however, soon ceased to exist ; the types
were sold to a person of the name of Alexander, who, in con.'
junction with Borthwick, set up the Glasgow Sentinel. He
asked if it was fair to make bins answerable for this proceed-
ing, which was set agoing under a different name and place,
and after the lapse of a year ? It would be the last act of his
life to do as had been attributed to him ; and he declared, that
he never had the remotest connexion, either by purchasing,
seeing, or promoting, in any way whatsoever, that_ Paper.—
(Hear, hear !)—He wished also to state, that the, removal of
a the Sheriff-Depute of Lanark, was in no way connected with
this transaction. With respect to the other parts of the charges,
namely, any concern which he might have had with another
paper, it was certainly true that in the end of the year 1820, a
number of Gentlemen of high respectability Ind to say, the.
any of them could be under his influence—he was sure those
who knew them would deem impoSsible—these Gentlemen in-
formed him, that in consequence of the state of the press in
Scotland, there being a great number of seditious publications
afloat, they had come to the resolution of establishing a paperin
order meet and refute the pernicious doctrines and principles
which were thus spread over the country. They-came to him
and said that 15001. would be necessary to establish such a paper,
and he gave 1001. towards it. He did not stand there to deny
any part of his. conduct, and he therefore admitted this act.
And for the purposes which he had stated he was prepared to
say that it was an honest, fair, and legal one. The paper call-
ed the Beacon was accordingly 'established ,on the Ist of Janu-
ary 1821. From that period down to the June folloWing, he
was attending his official duties in Parliament, and he paid no
attention to the paper, and knew very little of what it contain-
ed. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that it contained
libels ; but he had read none of them to the House, and they
were consequently not enabled to judge whether its contents
were libellous or not. Ile was bound to have shewn to the
House that it did contain libellous matter, before he called upon
them to come to a vote declaring it to be so. One case obly had
been decided by the law, and that had come on within, the last
few days. The result of that decision did not certainly go to
bear out the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in his conclusions.
The case was one in which a Noble Lord opposite was a party,.
and the Jury had given him a verdict of one shilling da-
mages.—(Hear, hear !)—lf the Noble Lord was satisfied with
this verdict, it was very strange that he had laid his damages
at 50001.—(Hear.)—When he returned to Scotland in June, he
received an intimation' from Mr. Gibson that he intended, to
commence a prosecution against him as proprietor of the
Beacon. He then sent a copy of the bond to Mr. Gibson
by Mr. J. Stewart, who was the agent employed in the
affair. Soon after this the correspondence appeared to which
the Honourable and Learned Member alluded. The letter
which gave rise to it was a private and confidential one, and
never intended to be considered in any other light by the
writer. The words of the bond declared it to be expressly
understood that he should have no property in the said News-
paper, and no responsibility for its contents. He never was,
therefore, a proprietor, and had no controul whatever over its
management. The 'Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said
that in law he was a proprietor; but that question was to be
tried before the Jury Court of Scotland in about ten daya; and
Ise would put it to the House whether it could fairly anticipate
or prejudge a question which stood for the decision of a Court
of Law.—(Hear, hear !)—He gave his 1001. for the reasons he
had already stated, and when be saw the paper come out
he found it a very dull and stupid document, and con-
cluded that his money was gone and there was an end of it.—
But when he heard that the contents of the paper had given
personal offence to individuals, he hinnediately withdrew
his security upon the bond, and the other Gentlemen concerned
did the same. As a private individual, he apprehended
that nothing could be objected to the part he had taken in this
affair; and it still remained to be shewn how his official situa-
tion would be affected by it. If a private libel appeared in
the paper, by the law of Scotland it could not be proceeded
against by a criminal information ; the parties must proceed
by private action. Therefore he was still to learn how his
official duties could have been compromised, even if he had sup-
ported the paper, knowing it to be the channel of private
libels. Libels upon the Crown were certainly not very likely
to appear in a paper setting out with the principles which
had induced him to give it his support; and he should
like tb hear in what way it was possible that his connec-
tion with it •should interfere with the strict discharge of his
duty. - When he entered into that connection, he saw before
him the great number of prosecutions instituted for seditious
crimes, and the many unhappy persons sentenced to death for
engaging in rebellion, and all this he considered to be the cone
sequence of the licentiousness of the press in the western parts
of Scotland. This was all that occurred to his mind at the time,
and as soon as he found the complaints made .he withdrew from
it altogether. These were all facts, he admitted, and the
other charges which related to him were, as he had shewn,
wholly unfounded. No ' further inquiry was therefore neces-
sary, and the House was as well qualified to come to the
vote at once upon his conduct, as ever it could be. These
were all the observations with which lie had to trouble the

House, as far as the charge affected hint individually. And
`he beg*ed that the House would not confound his personal con-
duct with what followed us to 'the Gentlemen who had been
attacked without the means of answering the case brought
against them. Two of his Mends had been the objects of a
charge which certainly gave hint the utmost surprize. He had
never before heard that Gentlemen who acted as his Deputies
were to be pievented from undertaking private practice.-
-Their salaries were miserable enough, considering the impor-
tance of the duties they had to perform ; and when it was re-
membered that it, was necessary to have men of talent, and
men who were rising at the Bar, it was utterly impossible that
they should be debarred from private practice. It was said,
then, that these two Gentlemen had signed a paper in favour of
a prisoner. But the fact was tiny had only done their duty to
their clients as barristers.—(Hear!)—lle did not expect from the
notice; that these matters would have been brought forward,
and therefore he had no means of being informed upon these
charges. But he knew Mr. Hope to be a man of the highest
honour and character, and quite incapable of !the contemptible
motives with which he had been charged. This4art of the
question ought, therefore, to be thrown entirely out of view in
the deci,-.on to which the House was about to come. The case
of Borthwick had'been spoken of as if he had been the author
of all the acts of oppression complained of by him. But he
was quite sure, that if Mr. Hope could be present, anti the
whole case seen through, every part of his conduct would be
justified. Ile thought a theft had been committed, and a most
atrocious theft by the person charged. He had obtained the
papers by force without a warrant, for it was no warrant until
extracted by a messenger.—(Hear.)—lf he was wrong in his opi-
nion, any Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite might set him
right ; but he asserted this to be the law. The charge was that
Borthwick had broken open the private repository of his
partner's papers, (even supposing him to be such), with a
felonious, attempt., Mr. Hope believed this charge to be true,
and committed him. accordingly. It was then said that he
was put'in chains, and conducted to prison. He could have
no means of ascertaining the truth of this from the nature
of the notice which had preceded this motion. Bat he
would venture to say, that no such order had ever been
given by the Town Council. The liberation of, the person
in question had taken place earlier than was necessary by
law, which proved that there was no unjust detention ex-
perienced. The suit of Alexander being the suit of a pri-
vate party, the Lord Advocate could not withhold his con-
course. He should conclude the observations with which
he Wtl to trouble the HottSe, by stating that no part of the
Government had any connexion with or knowledge of the part
he took with regard to the newspaper in question. If wrong
had been done, it belonged to him alone, and it was most right
for the Commons of England' to pronounce the sentence which
they always pronounced upon injustice, and which of course
would be adequate to his removal from the office he had the
honour to hold. Should that be the result of their decision, lie
should doubtless be succeeded by some one more able to per-
form its duties, but by none who would be more anxious titan
he had always been to exercise its powers with moderation and
impartiality.—( Ii ear, hear, hear !)
The Hon. and Learned Lord then retired from the House.

The SPEAKER then put the question from the chair, amid
cries of 'Withdraw ! Upon which
Mr. PEEL rose, and said he hoped the House would feel that'
the present question demanded the most cautious consideration,
and the most deliberate exercise of their judgment before they
came to any decision. In addition to the ordinary motives which
should govern them before coming to any decision, they should
recollect the particular situation of the accused individual, whom
he expected to find treated with the strictest justice. Every ap-
peal to the passions and the prejudices should be- avoided, and,
he had to regret that many topics were introduced, perhaps more
for effect than any bad design, which, if unchecked; must tend to
create an undue prejudice againsthis Noble and Learned Friend.
He should now proceed to notice the statements of the Hon.
and Learned Gent. (Mr. A.), in the order in which they were
made. First then, he thought the introduction of the death of
Mr.. Boswell ought to _have been- studiously guarded against,
inasmuch as such considerations tended to create prejudiceond
therefore to mislead the judgment. The same remark applied
to the mention of the death of Mr. Scott. Those matters, no
doubt, had some connexion with a consideration as to the state
of the press, but in the present instance they ought to have been
omitted. Next, as to the opinions•given, and the language held
by Mr. M'Neil and Mr. Hope, when privately consulted by a
client, what had those things to do with the present charge ?
Were those Gentlemen to be made publicly answerable for
what their duty to their client rendered it necessary they should
say or do ?—(No, no ! from the Opposition.)—But what could
the effect of referring to that be, unless to create an unfair
impression against them, and, as connected with them,
against his Noble and Learned Friend ? The House had
now to decide the question. About two months since no-
tice was given of this motion as affecting the conduct of the
Lord Advocate with respect to the public press in Scotland—let
it embrace no other topic. Let it be also remembered, that it
was only three days after the death of Mr. Boswell that it was
given—no intimation was given to any other parties of auy in-
tended charge, and the House was now called upon to decide the
questioh upon the single speech of the Learned Gentleman (Mr.
Abercromby.—( Hear !)--He (Mr. P.) knew very well that cer-
tain papers were referred tu; no Parliamentary documents were
before them ; in fact, all they had as yet to go upon was the
single speech in which the charges were introduced to the House.
He did not mean to say that no case could be made out under
such Circumstances ; but the present was not one which should
be considered as proved, because made in an able speech. He
should now allude to the reported conduct of the Lord Advocate
with respect to the Correspondent Newspaper. It was said the
object of that Paper was, and it was printed for the purpose of
leaving the impression, that notwithstanding the prevalence of
those dissensions which caused the death 'of one of the indivi-
viduals concerned in it,yet that this paper was continued by his
Hon. and Learned Friend, and for the same purposes. To that
charge what answer was made ? The solemn word of honour of
the Lord Advocate, that he knew nothing whatever of that
Paper. To him (Mr. Peel) that answer was quite enough. The
same denial was given as to the Sentinel; and 'who could deny
the solemn disclaimer tvhich had also been given to it ? -He
should beg leave of the House to refer .to a document which
was read to them this evening ; but he now considered it ne-
cessary to refer to it again, in order to shew the animus, the
dispositions entertained by the Lord Advocate, on the applica-
tion of Mr. Borthwick. There was no waste, no expenditure
of time, which the House would not lend to the full investi-
gation of the subject now engaging their attention.—(Here the
letter of the Lord Advocate to Mr. Borthwick, as noticed by
that Noble Lord, was again read over.)—The terms of this
letter correctly displayed the intentions of his Noble Friend,
and completely rebutted the charges made against him.—
The conduct attributed to Mr. Aiken, the Sheriff-Depute
of Lanarkshire, came next. in order. That Gentleman was
characterised as being a party ih that scandal and abuse
charged on the Lord Advocate as promoting ; but he saw
,nothing objectionable in his conduct or the manner of his pro-
motion. It was well known that a change had taken place in
the judicial 'Lairs of Scotland upon the recommendation of a
Commission, and it was then determined that the salary of the
Sheriff Depute should, be raised from 5001. to 8001. a year, and
that he should be a resident in the county. When those ar-
rangements had been made, he felt it to be his duty to se-
lect a fit person to the, office, but he had not recommended
any person until two months after the change has taken place.
When that period had elapsed, the First Lord of the Ad-
miralty had been going. down to Scotland, and he (Mr. P.)
had put him in possession of the name of the persons who
had applied to him for the situation, and had left it to that
Noble Lord to confer with the Law Officers of Scotland,
and to select on their recommendation whoever „might be
presumed to be the best qualified. That course had been
taken, and he would appeal to the House whether this state,
went did not completely negative the charge brought against
his Honourable Friend,- that he had used the influence of
his office on that occasion. Then (the Honourable Member
had observed) whoever had recommended the individual in
question, he still remained in office. lie '(Mr. P.) was asto-
nished at such an observation. The Sheriff was responsible
for the conduct of the Sub-Sheriff, and lie had been given.
/to understand that it was the intention of the Sheriff to in-
troduce a change as speedily as possible, and that his sole
reason for not having (lone so before was, that he had himself
but recently entered upon his office, and that he thought the
public service would be prejudiced were he immediately to in-
troduce a farther change. He now came to the connection of
his Hon. and Learned Friend with the Beacon newspaper. It
was true that his lion. Friend had become security to the
amount of 1001. for the purpose of supporting a newspaper
called the Beacon, and it was equally true that at that period he
had held the situation of Lord Advocate of Scotland. True it
was also that that newspaper had indulged in attacks upcn pri-
vate character, attacks which he (Mr. P.) was far from attempt-
ing; to palliate or defend ; but if he could establish a conviction
in his own mind that those attacks had been made without the
encouragement of his Learned Friend, he could not with any
shew of justice join in criminating him for the encourage-
ment which he had given to the newspaper. The charge
against his Learned Friend was, that he had advanced his
money, and exerted the influence arising from his official situa-
tion, in support of calumny and slander. In considering that
charge it would he necessary to refer to the state of Scotland at
the period when the Newspaper in question was first established,
and especially to refer to the state pf the public press. He had
in his possession various documents, to 'shew that at that period
a great degree of insubordination to the law had prevailed in the
country,, and for the cause of that insubordination he would
Simply refer the House to a document which he then held in his
hand. It was a public document, and bore the signature of Lord
Glasgow, the' Lord Lieutenant of the County. In Nov. 1819,
that Noble Lord had thus addressed the Secretary of State :

" On my arrival here I found the tone of the feeling .of the 1/0
ti
ot hn ewofe
ntseditious
o
pulation of such a description as is calculated to excite serious.
publicn mt
o i naddd ,considerablyprinciplesth at
assiduouslyrevolutionary agitated,
carried
p and
ot he . e fl.
he
principle had
documentamlatg
a
been generally taught, and that pains
.were taken w 1,5i1,5,,_
into the minds of the young the most pernicious and use—
feelings.—(Hear, hear, bear ! from the Opposition.r
He (Mr. Peel) knew that it was the fashion to veak 1411'14
of documents of this description • but he woutti ask 3'
1819, whether a doubt could now exist that oTeat alarm
man who had any recollection of the state a the country 11!
had thei:.
prevailed? Now if his Learned Friend had felt anxious to- Silbdu,'
the feeling which he then saw existing ; if he had been deliree"
of affording an antidote so the poison which had been initille4,i.
if he had wished to follow the advice so often given bylien
men on the other side ; if, in short, he had acted upon the P;
ciple which told them to meet discussion by discussion, erect,o
bat disaffection by the dissemination of loyal principles, s
meet the efforts of the illegal by incukating an observaneist
the law ; if such had been the case, he (Mr. P.) would says°l„.3
although it afforded no vindication of private slander and e`i
lumpy, yet it did justify the part taken by his Learned Friel' d
He would ask, whether, supposing the paper had been conflett
to its original purpose—the encouragement of free discuss's,
and the reprobation of seditious doctrines—would any one 113/,
voted for criminating the conduct of hiS Learned Friend ? itt
was likely that the Conduct of his Learned Friend had beend,,i
fluenced by the circumstances of the times. He had just atten .0
the trials at Glasgow in a professional capacity. ; -and was he.:,..
blame if he had attempted by the means of free diseussion to P.Lai,
vent the sprea f the principles which had rendered those tri
_e
it
necessary ? they right or wrong, the experiment had bee
tried ; and it been tried in the only way in which the Gens,
tlemen opposite had recommended as efficient. What, thesa
had been the ostensible principlesof the Beacon? It appeal
from the terms of the bond, " that a Newspaper, csile',`lis
Beacon, should be supported on loyal principles ; and that • s'
undersigagd agreed to support the said Newspaper, it belt'
understood that they were not proprietors of, or had any coos
trots' over the said paper."—What had been the principle' ",,',
which the paper had been conducted, he (Mr; Ps)-did not kneo,
for he had never seen a copy of it ; but certainly in the Pro
spectus (though he admitted it contained terms suffieiell a
strong) there was nothing which could give an idea that it 113 ,
been intended to make' the paper the vehicle of private slander
Mr. ABERCROMBV—" Certainly not." • , ri,,r,
Mr. PEEL—He was now speaking of intention.---,“`Sts
hear ! from the-Opsosition.)f--Why, if persons in office s'" a
to be responsible for every paragraph which might appear 0,...
newspaper which they supported, it might be extrema% Ps
but lie was sure that that extreme justice would wear the 35
pearance of extreme illiberality. - He had heard an Honours
cetand Learned Gentleman opposite (Sir James MackintoshlP3l
high. compliments- to a newspaper; and yet if he (Mr. r ii;
had risen and said, that in the newspaper which been comp
is
mented there was to be found a paragraph which wantovon /4
attacked female reputation, and had argued that all praise in,
to be denied to the newspaper in question, becauSe in one b,
stance a paragraph had been suffered to appear, for vl,lcog
perhaps, the conductor of the Paper might have been wusle,,
to apologise, he was sure that such expression would have rery
received by the Gentlemen opposite with a natural and s fn-
commendable indignation. But he was now speaking °f ye,
tention. He wished that-the conductors of the Beacon had a"'„,,,
red to the principles which they had held out in their prosPeFtai.
He particularly guarded himself from the supposition of' snln,
eating the personal slanders which that paper might have eesa
mined ; but he contended, that the support• of his Lear'
Friend to that paper had been given solely from a desire w as-
pose discussion discussion to ' discussion, and to combat those sediti°rf„,
doctrines, the fatal effects of which'he had so recently eSPeoe
enced. That paper had afterwards indulged in attack.,%cc
private character; but in the correspondence which had si-etl
been laid before the public, his Learned' Friend had disci:ols,,
not only a participation in, but even approbation of, those ",d
tacks. The Hon. Gent. had attempted to inculpate the ise;
Advocate in a moral point of view, and that upon two seP3ras to
grounds ; first, because a newspaper had been regularly sernto
him ; and, secondly, because upon a comparison of ee Sect
documents with certain articles in the Beacon, he concha ,d,
that the latter articles were the production of the Noble 1,01;„,_
Now on the first point he would observe, that if the circ ;se,
stance of a paper being sent to an individual made Wit for
sponsible for its 'contents, then he had himself to accoon, he
the doctrines of the paper which het k in, but to which be
the Hon. Member he did not contribute. Win. be,
spect to the second ground upon which the Hon. Meecirsc
relied, viz. a fancied connexion between some article in to
Beacon and a speech of the Lord Advocate, he could stateaa
the House to the House, that whilst the Hon. Gentle'tbe
had continued his speech, he (Mr. P.) had inquired of ~,r.
Lord Advocate whether he had ever written for the Irs.ovi
The answer which the Lord Advocate had given was, " 'lsse,
to God, I never wrote for it." Any argument, there eat,
which the Hon. Member might draw from that fancied reset:te
blance, would have no foundation in fact. With regard °first
case of Borthwick, he would not say that this was the fell
time that he had heard of that individual s but he could sauisa
say, that until he had heard the speech of the Hon. Gentlees,
he had been ignorant that it had' been intended to call the alt`bot
tion of the House to that subject. If the House thought for
the power of the Lord Advocate was not sufficiendy defined 'os
God.'s sake let that subject be made the ground of a distinct tie
tion ; but let not Hon. Members bring forward without OW
charges tending to criminate an Officer of the Crown• t for
would say that the case of Borthwick was in itself suffleien aaa.
the ground of a distinct motion. Although his Hon' tor
Learned Friend might be legally, responsible for the condwssos
. his agents, yet he had, been at the time 400 miles distant front
the place. He (Mr. P.) had no doubt, that if sufficient tinlebeol.
been allowed, a full and satisfactory explanation would haves., of
given ; but the fact was, that they had not expected this P'Sai,
be Hon. Gentleman's case, and therefore had no cornstoo
cation with the persons whose conduct it involved, anti
__,,,d.
certainly had a right to be heard before they were condesS,iss
This part of the case he therefore passed over, because no 11,",,,,t ;
had been given that it was in contemplation to bring it for\.,l se
and because, though it was fit that some explanation sh°,,rties
given, yet no communication had yet taken place with the l';',l,p;
accused. He also begged the House to recollect, that in te,!, the
time an action brought against his Learned Friend lo se
part which he had taken, and in which the damages were
se the
10,0001. would be decided. Now if it were right to postr junk'
present motion until the 25th of June, he could not help 0 tile
mg that it would have been better to have deferred it 01 JP
question affecting his Learned Friend had been decideu._ojets
knew that he had but imperfectly noticed the different je'teis,i,
upon which he had touched ; his ignorance of the local 4,,itot
and especially of the Scottish law, would, he hoped, Sonloo of
his apology. He relied upon the ground that the interitrioase
his Learned Friend had been good, and he implored the of st
not to entertain the present motion, whilst the conduct
tic, or
Learned Friend was still waiting the decision of aCe , e
Justice.—(llear !) ,
House at so late an hour on the subject, and, he might .es hiili'
Sir J. MACKINTOSH said, it was painful to addareas,silit;-V
it was not agreeable to his temper or inclination to.o.,otitiag
self voluntarily as the accuser of any public, officer. "blie tie'
but a sense of what was due to his native country, las thecorum, and morality, could induce him to stand forward ?so'
supporter of the motion. He was bound to protect the pahti
from injr ry by slanders and caluminous statements. tics Ds.,
lication to which the Lord Advocate had given his sane tile;
broken in upon the happiness of individuals, destro/iitreloeu".
peace and comforts, by barbarous levity, andproducinsien are
Decorum had-often distinguished the proceedings of 1,1 edtoll','
conducted public affairs, but a system of indecorum seeTios
.1v3",.
reserved for the present unfortunate times. The ques ea than
whether the Lord Advocate of Scotland had encourstase 11:
system a long tune in secrecy, without avowing the st,'„ssineot;
had in it ? His opinion was, that the House of ti , aye
could not, with any regard to law, justice, and what Wale case
the people of Scotland, abstain from inquiry into, nioas,
brought forward by his lion. Friend, who called on tn_e ;too:,
to decide whether there was enough to submit to a CoWnasains_,
—whether there was sufficient ground for a share or ile
a Law Officer of the Crown in Scotland, accused r
cr. -ae
moting private slander in the most flagitious man divert tve
Right Honourable Gentleman had used ingenuity to iiiiht sae..
attention-of the House to subordinate points, which° .!'a Oa3o
been wholly abandoned. One part of the speech watch thires
gyric on free discussion, and an argument had been sea, s.
sedition was to be met •by slander. The paper defen...,id di_,
devoted to the perpetration_ of every crime that CO
grace a newspaper. They had been told that the C/Ydfthe lqgia
nal and the Sentinel were not the same papers, and of tiblo,
Hon. Gentleman had asked what evidence there wasl vitoli i„,
these papers ? Borthwick the proprietor, stated that 1 pelsoof
ous, which was the cause of Sir A. Boswell's death "Yreiy pr, to
the Glasgow Sentinel. That lamentable event was l.lett bor" of
of the danger arising from the endeavour of a Learnsdoctiveuat
support such papers. The libels inserted wereliperduta secc)or
quarrels. Anonymous ruffians could not be caller Ter atl„4,
without a violation of the laws of honour, but whennie_t fouu.ia
portunity occurred to demand satisfaction, blood man
.ccose
He was discussing the conduct of a public officer,,:wwhicllfs,
not be put off his duty by the speeches he had hear:, dosge'si
considered no other than speeches in mitigation. le Dear,,
These journals were systematically conducted, annel_rej„salsi,7t
Lord contributed money weekly, for printing a `'iniscon"io,
these libels. The Learned Lord was charged with nil for s•
in his public office, and the charge furnished
.gro.ll_,,a sa.oo,
quiry, whether he hativiolated decorum and
Lord
re,sYeoss
He' put of view how, for the Learned Lorcie ,__d „ois
sea
sible to the law. The question was, whether h., 11%,e unl',,,
A:riti to t
all the ancient offices of Scotland, and according
ducted himself as a public officer? The Lord Adv°' be stas •