The Sun.
London, England, 1840-03-07 00:00:00

tIVENINC, ON.

Friend, respecting to resolution nil 835, as to the sale I
of papers. If his Right Hon. Friend meant this Bill
ought, itself to contain tonic regulation er legislative
enactreeet en the subjset, ho said he entertained the •
mess decided objection to any legislative interference
on the mode of publication. But if his Right Honnur- i
able Friend proceeded to alter the resolution of 183.5, '
he said that, so far as the resolution itself went, be felt
the strongest possible objection to the continuance of that
resolution. The alteration of the indiscriminate sale regu-
lations might do much to remove prejudice from the public
i mind, but it was not necessary that the House should con-
sider that as a condition or precedent, because even if the
Hoe-se did alter them (and it was admitted there ought to
be no legislative interference on the subject) the House
might alter them again, and so the principle would not be
affected. He hoped his Right Hon. Friend (Sir E. Sug-
den) would not persist in a motion for a Committee espe-
cially to consider those regulations. In the Committees
already existing on the subject there were considerable
checks upon the publication and defamatory matter by the
House.—(Hear, hear.) There was no reason, however,
why those checks might not be made more effectual ; but
he hoped the introduction of this Bill would not be opposed
by those Honourable Gentlemen who had disapproved of
the course taken by the House, but who yet would, he
should think, gladly consider any measure which would
relieve the majority from resorting to those unpleasant pro-
ceedings that had lately been adopted, and which, while pro-
tecting the privilege would remove the necessity for those
preseedings at the bar, which, repeated night after night,
could not fail to leaver the character of the House.—
( Hear, bear.) He most cordially supported the motion
for the introduction of the Bill, and he trusted he should
be enabled to support it in every stage.—( Cheers. )
Mr. C. BULLER said he considered the question as
to tke sale of the papers had nothing to do with the
matler.—( Hear, hear.) In an action for libel, it made
not the slightest difference in point of law, whether the
papers complained of were distributed by sale or other-
wise.—( Hear, hear.) If he published a libel on his Hon.
and Learned Friend—which he hoped there was no chance
of his doing—( A laugh)—would his Hon. and Learned
Friend consider it a justification that the libel had not
been sold, but only distributed to every Member of Par-
liament ?—( Hear, hear.) He thought it worthy of con-
sideration, whether persons complaining of having been
libelled by publications of that Honse, might not have the
same remedy against the party libelling, as persons had
who complained of having been libelled in a Court of
Law.—( Hear, hear.) He supported the Bill because he
considered it the only practical step which had been
taken towards supporting those privileges which he had
always maintained.—( Hear.) The object of the Bill was
to protect the privileges in a more efficient manner than
the roundabout means, which were attended with hardship
to individuals. It was repugnant to the public feeling of
the present day, that the House should be engaged in a
contest with the Courts of Law, and should send innocent
ipersons to prison. The mode of supporting the privileges
of the House which were formerly resorted to, would net
i be looked on with approbation in the present day. In
contests with the Crown formerly, it was the practice to
stop the supplies.
Mr. H UM E— Aye, and a very good practice too.
1 Mr. BULLER—But no reasonable man would say that

a vindictive measure towards ihe public creditor was an ex-
Fvdient means for supporting the privileges of that House
aaair,st the Crown. He thought that the Bill did not go
far rnougii in extending their privileges, but he would sup-
port it for the purpose of putting an end to an unseemly
sriaabble with an obscene bookseller.
Mr. GISBORNE had hitherto abstained from occupy-
ing the time of the House by say observations of his own
in this discussion, because he thought it might be more
tr•e'uHy informed by others. But they were now in a dif-

ferent position—they were no longer a united body. He -
! was surprised that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Sir
W. Follett) should say that the House was degraded by
the exhibitions which had taken plane at the bar, whilst he
t:irnself admitte-d that it was the improper decision of the
Court of (411,Q11'3 Bench that forced these exhibitions upon
the House. When the Noble Lord Russall) invited
thcin to go to the House of Lords for assistance in main-
-, tainin their privileges, he must say that former times af-
forded-hat little encoaragement. In 1807, after the violent
and tyrannical conduct of the House, in the ease of the
:Middlesex election, popular indignation was roused, and a
Bill was sent up to the House of Lords to restrict the pri_
vleges of the Commons, on the ground that the latter was
defici-ent of public virtue; bet he believed that it would
love been much wiser, rind quite as easy, for the House to
remedy the acknowledged grievance by its own act, es it
als:, could in the present instance. He agreed with the
Hor.:urahle and Learned Gentleman (the Sclicitor-Gc-
noral) that the House should have used the great
powyr to vindicate its own privileges Which it po3sested.
Every lawyer in the House allowed that the Court of
Queen's Bench was w:-ong, and the Court itself seemed to
hesitate in its course. He agreed with the Solicitor-
' Genstral, that if they legislated upon that privilege they
would be compelled to legislate upon every other. A
G;ilant Colonel opposite (Col. Sibthorp) cautioned the
supporters of the privileges as to the reception they
would meet at the hustings, and spoke of the feeling that
eli-ts abroad upon the subject. In the case of Mr.
who was not a more distinguished person than Mr.
Stockdale nlmself, there was a very loud and general ex-
prcasion of feeling against the tyrannical and corrupt con-
elect of the Houle of Commons, but there bad been no
meeting now in favour of Mr. Stockdale, except one at
the I?, cemason's Tavern, which was professed to be a
public meeting of the county of Middlesex, but to which
otte was admitted without a ticket, the room being half
%vita at•orneys, chirks, and Lut-nbailiff.i. There had
been ten or twelve meetings since the confinement of the
Sheriff 4, and not a word was said at any of them upon
she subject. lie admitted that the House had difficulties
to contend with, but he would not agree to appeal to any
\ -other power for ass stance, and he would oppose the Bill
in its present stage and every other stage.
Sir ROBERT PEE i.. had from the firt, foreseen that

the Ilestse must resort to legislation before it could effec-
tually ocure its privileges, hut at the same time he was
most anxious that every meaeure should be resorted to for
that purpose before they proceeded to legislation, He
certemls had at first suggested that a Bill should originate
in the House of Peers, but siren then he had changed his
minion. He tees most anxious to support every privilege
oF. the Howe without legislation, but the great difficulty
with him was, how they acre to be defined. And if the
other privileges which the House possessed were invaded,
he would be the first to advocate the adoption of the most
effectual measures to protect them. Ho believed that the
power of publication was absolutely essential to enable_
the House to perform its duties to the public,
sad he believed that a more unwarrantable judg-
ment than that which was attempted to be set
up against the privileges of the House had never been
given, or one more irreconcilable with the reasons that
were• stated for pronouncing- it. He would not state more
noon that subject, because he had it from his Right Hon.
Friend, who bad been Lord C'eaneellor of Ireland, and
f;ors his Hon. and Learned Friend, who was one of the
greatest ornaments of the profession, that the House of
Commons was possessed of the power, not liable to ques-
, Vert in any Court of Law, of publishing its own proceed-
iers.,...._( ilea:, hear.) Ile was glad that the House had
not resorted to legislation in the first instance, but had
takete every step abort of it which they could to assert
their privileges. The course they bad adopted had done
this goo.l, they bad by it shown that they had the power
of i.e. :Isieonalent—nnd the Court of Law had been cora-
peied to recegiese that power. If he thought that that
power would maintain the privileges of the House he
would go on with it without resorting to legislation,
but he felt convinced that it would have no such effeci. He
thought that the attempts which the House had made to
vindiseee its privileges would have great effect in fortify-
ing them. His sole reason for listening to the attempt at
legisletion was his firm belief that the powers which they
poesessed at present were incomplete. With respect to
time, it was true that they could menace for the future,
but the Cee.stitution deeied them the power of exercising
the single penalty which they could inflict, tamely, im-
priersanent cater prorogation ; so that during the recess,
teleen Parliament was not sitting, the printer of the house
would be liable to be harrassed by individuals bringing ac-
tions against, hie. Was that decent? And was it not a
great indignity to the House of Commons that parties
could pursue such a course ?—( Hear, hear. e He had
been told that they hal a remedy by adjournment ;
instead of prorogation. 'Wes it right, he would ask, that
the Remo should go to the Crown and ask it to not pro-
rogue, but to adjourn. Was it not far more fit to make an
attempt to provide a legislative remedy. The Hon. and
Learned Member for Exeter had said, " Why did they
not peal from the Court of Queen's Bench to a Court of
Error." For his (Sir R. Peel's) part he thought the
esearso they had adopted was far preferable, and that from
the dispeeition which had been shown by the Judges since,
1 he thought they would be more successful in appealing now
) thant they would in the first instance. Another point
watch persuaded him that it was necessar for
ji the House to legislate upon
this subject 3' was,
that the power wh'.ch they now possessed did not
prevent
i the plaintiff from getting all that he wanted—namely,
the
II getting the damages that were awarded in his favourst
that gave an eueouraeement to his going on. Inthe:inpadree;
\ sent ease Mr. StocOale had had the money,
and 1 the conviction that be would be liberated at the end of the
' Session, he had no doubt that Mr. Stockdale was well
Is p)eased with the terms he had made with the House. Mr.
Stockdale having the money, the House at the latter end
of the Session, would be called upon in the miscellaneous
- estimates to submit itself to the degradation of voting a
sum of money, for the purpose of satisfying the Messrs.
Hansard. The Howse had no other course to adopt but
that, because there could be no doubt that the greatest in-
s Just •
' ice had been done to them, as their goods had been
i seized and exposed to sale.—(Hear.) Another point
1 which persuaded him of the necessity for legislation
' was the time that had been wasted in discussing this ques-
tion, and which! no doubt would still be wasted unless
(
some measure settling the question was passed. The
House bad relied on imprisonment for the preservation of
lits privileges ; but he ( Sir R. Peel) doubted very much
Iwhether that would prove effectual, as it had hitherto not
ibeen so.—( Hear.) L'pon these grounds, therefore, he
should give hia cordial assent to the motion of the Noble
Lord, for leave to bring in a Bill, reserving to himself the
right, if he found it necessary, of altering the measure in
its details. It had been said that the House would compro-
mise its rights by lousing this Bill, becaube by it they called
upon the House of Lords to assist them in stating what their
privileges were. Ile could not see how their right's would
le: compromised by the course proposed to be adopted by
the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) But even if, when the
I Bill Rent to the House of Lords, that House should require
1 concessions which the House of Commons could not agree
j to, it would be in the power of the House of Commonspowertso. i reject the Bill and fall back upon their original nal
iH
se
Lie trusted that the House of Lords would
the practi-
I eel embarrassment in which the House was placed, and
I would
sent back the Bill in such a shape as
would enable
I tl-,e House to receive it. He had said originally
Bill ought to have originated with the Houseo;h that the
but be had changed his opinion in that respect, thjeokridns;
that it would be much better that the Bill should now or,-
) ginate in that Muse. He was clearly of opinion that the
poster the House at present possessed was incomplete, and
being unwilling to do that which was alien from the spirit
•

of the present age, namely, committing the Judges. he !
should give his cordial support to the Bill of the Noble
Lord, believing that unless some effectual measure were
adopted the House would come into collision with the Judges.
The House of Commons, the great inquisition hr the
country, the great inquirer into and corrector of buses,
ought to have the power of publication. For le i year:,
they had published the grounds of the decision they came 1
to in legislative measures. He did believe that the sound
public opinion of the country was with them upon the
main question, but he thought it was most important that
their privileges should be placed upon a permanent and a
sure protection by law, and not go on vindicating their
own privileges themselves, setting the example of lower-
ing the Judges in public estimation. On these grounds
he thought that the House decided wisely in submitting to
the House of Lords a law not involving the privilege but
the right of publication. By so doing they would avoid 1
drawing into question their other privileges, which were
equally essential to the fulfilment of their functions.
Mr. HUME was very sorry to hear the Right Hon.
Baronet drawing back from that high and manly tone which
he had assumed on the opening of the session. If
it was necessary or wise to pass such a Bill as proposed by
the Noble Lord, why not at once take the proper course,
and bring in a Bill defining all the privileges of the
House. The Sergeant-at-Arms had an action brought
against him ; would the present Bill stop that action.--
( Hear.) It was declaied upon all hands that in the decision
in the Queen's Bench the Judges were wrong—they had
every reason to believe that the Chief Justin, and other
Judges, had common sense. Surely, then, when they
found that their conduct was unanimously condemned, they
would review their judgment, and finding themselves in
error they would retrace their steps. By legislating
at all they were departing from the high ground on
which they stood. Were the privileges of the Queen's
Bench defined?—were the privileges of any of the Courts
of Law defined ?—did they not exercise their powers with-
out any statute law ?—was it not degrading then to
that House they were appealing in piece-meal
as it were—to ask for protection of their privileges by legis-
lation ? If it could be said that that House was unable
to maintain its privileges, let a Bill be brought in alto-
gether defining their privileges, and legislate upon the
whole matter. In his opinion there was no ground what-
ever for appeal. What would the House do? The
Sergeant would soon be in a situation to claim their pro-
tection. Would they bring in another Bill to provide for
that case. Suppose a Committee upstairs were to sum-
mon a party to give evidence before them, and he refused
to attend. What power had they by statute law to com-
pel him. Would they bring in a Bill to define that pri-
vilege also? He protested against the shilly-shallying
conduct which the House was about to pursue.. He was
sorry that they had embarked in the cause at all, if
they were determined not to carry it through, for
they were retreating without being vanquished. They
ought to proceed as they had begun—follow the ad-
vice of the Solicitor-General, or answer his speech; let
them contradict his arguments, or they were bound to go
along with him, in maintaining their privileges to the utmost
extent. He should certainly give his vote against the Bill.
Colonel SIBTHORP—They were told from high
authority " that there is joy over one sinner that re-
penteth."—(Lauglitcr.) It was with much pleasure,
therefore, that, from what bad fallen from the Hon. Mem-
ber for Kilkenny, be learned that he regretted all that
had taken place. He had no doubt so also did the
Noble Lord who had introduced—he meant no offence,
but he must call it a most nonsensical Bill. Many people
had shrewd suspicions why some measure bad not been
brought in before ; probably it might be in order to
give the Right Honourable the Chancellor of the
Exchequer time to bring in, to prepare, a better
Budget than he was now able to do.—( Laughter. )
They had now honourable gentlemen suffering punishment
—gentlemen as honourable as any that he saw on the oppo-
site benches; nay more so. for the Noble Lord, considering
his public conduct, ought to have been on the treadmill fur
the last ten years—.(Loud laughter)—and they were pu-
-1 nishing those gentlemen because they would not violate
their oaths end disregard the Queen's writs. Then Hen.
Gentleman had said it in the House. and belied said it out
of the House, that he looked with the utmost suspicion on
everything that emanated from the Noble Lord and his
colleag,ues—( Loud laughter)—and he must confess that
he considered the present embarrassment of the House hod
been got up in order to screen the Noble Lord and his
colleagues from the odium which would naturally attach
to them in consequence of their conduct. However, on
the present occasion, if bethought that the Bill introduced
by the Noble Lord would release those Hon. Gentlemen
who were now in prison, it would meet with no opposition
from him. In fact, for such a desirable purpose he would
agree to ehnost any measure.
Lord HO WICK thought that those who had attended
to the speeches of the Right lion. Baronet the Member
for Tarnwoith, and tho Hon. and Learned Member for
Exeter, must have conceived that they were called upon
to support this measure upon the plea of the utter incom
petency of that House, by its own authority. to support
its own privileges. It was that recognition of the inahility
of the Louse to. support its privileges, that was the great
reelection to the Bill.—( Hear, hear.) By this Bill it wag
for the first time to be recognised by express legislative
enactment, that the House of Commons was subordinate
to the Courts of Law and the House of Lords. Of what
avail was it that they should be the judges of their own
privileges, if that judgment was to be a dead letter? By
this Bill, they would have to hold that the privileges of
that House were to be subjected to the control and deci-
sion of the other branch of the Legislature. The Learned
Solicitor-General had clearly shown, last night, that they
had power to call witnesses to the bar, and power to call
cur the production c: papers, but it might be said tha•
those poivers and privileges rested on such clear evidence,
on long prescription, on grounds so clear, that there was
not the slightest chance of their being impugned. Before
the case of Stockdale and Haesord. he should have thouelit
the same might have been said of the pi ivileg it, that was
now questioned.—( Hear, hear.) He would ask, did the
right of compelling the production of papers from the
East India Company rest upon any ground but the ground
'at publication —and upon what was that right estfiblishe I ?
Long exercise and acquiescence; and yet, if the Etrt
India Compeny refused to produce papers, and the House
proceeded to compel the production, the matter, according
to the doctrine laid down by some gentlemen, would come
before a Court of Law, upon an action rf trespass, er in
some other shape. The question of the right of the House
of Commons to publish, had been decided by the Court of
Queen'sßeneh totally contrary te the recent -decision. He
alluded to the case in which .I,lr. Herne Tooke wished to
proceed against a publisher for re-pubiishing a report of
that House. Thu Court of Queen's Bench then deter-
mined, not only that the reports of that House
could not be libellous, and that the authorised
printer of the House could not, upon any con.
struction of the law, be held to be subj.mt
for proceedines for libel, but they said that an unautho-
rised reprint by a private individual could not possibly be
regarded, even as against that individual, a libel. There-
, furc the House had no security either from previous de-
cistens or acquiescence. The Right lion. Member for
Tarnworth, although be acknowledged the right of the
House to publish their proceedings, and the necessity for
so doing, yet wished them now to lay down their arms
and confess themselves powerless. Where was the evi-
dence that they were powerless?—(llear, hear, hear,)
If the liou:c resolutely exercised its powers during
its sittings, his opinion was that there would very speedily
be au end of all endeavours to queseion their privileges
during the recess. He behoved that if the House bad
not shown symptoms of yielding, no doubt or hesitation
had been expressed as to the course that ought to be
adopted, that even in the present case the Sheriffs would
have paid the money to Me. Hansari. But if they hail
not done that he was satisfied that future Sheriff's
would have been very cautious how they made a similar
levy. Then it was said they were putting the Sheriffs
to extreme hardship. He thought that argument was
conclusively disposed of last night by the Noble Lord
the Member for North Lancashire. If the House acted with
that decision and resolution which became tlam in a
matter of such high importance, the Court of Law would
most grossly violate its duty if it attempted to punish
the Sheriffs. It was an acknowledged principle of law
that no public officer could be called upon by any Court
to incur risk and damage which that Court had not the
power of redeeming him from. But assuming that the
Court of Queen's Bench was disposed to punish the
Sheriff, the House could pass a Bill for the purpose of
relieving the Sheriff from the hardship. By so doing they
would not touch one of their privileges, and he ( Lord
Howick) would be most happy to support such a Bill.
He was afraid if this Bill were passed they would have
questions of privilege constantly before the House. He
would take leave to ask the Noble Lord (John Russell)
and the Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel),
why they had incurred all this evil and mischief if they
were to make a concession, which they might have made
in the first instance ? Why did not his Noble Friend bring
in the Bill on an earlier day ?—( Hear.) The Right Hon.
Baronet said they had gained something by the discussion
—that they had enlightened the Judges and the other
House of Parliament as to the value of the privilege of
publication. The Right Hon. Baronet had passed air
extraordinary compliment upon the Judges and the other
House, if he thought that common sense and common
reason required so much hammering in order to penetrate
their heads.—( Cheers and laughter.) He (Lord Ilowick)
thought all these benefits of discussion might have beer,
attained by the earlier introduction of the Bill. He ac-
knowledged it was a very painful duty to inflict
Sheriffs
punishment upon the Sheriffs, whom he acknowledged
had been guilty of no moral crime.—(Hear, hear.)
If no object
as obtained by their punishment, it was mere
gratuitous cruelty; and in such a case he thought the
were
much-injured individuals. He bad stated
his objections to the measure, even supposing it should
pass
s hie tad h he
shape
atth ite
could Noble
paio Lordin
thatwis shapehcd but a whatnd if assu-
ranceit did
not, in what a situation would it leave them I The Right
wweenlyesktitdrnhheainegnoodhtt
Hon. Baronet said that if the measure failed, they would
be in no worse pssition, and the people wulelbecome
more reconciled to the measures the people would become
more reconciled to the measures th
tohfemthseelqvueesstthioant.
hal-dlemtandoeugthhternit
neces-
sary to adopt. He (Lord Howick)
ether
divisionsi
teaf
raetdeeHit ihti
aa
increasedamong
the difficulties of their position,
would have great legal authorities against them,
dtthakeye
had every reason to believe that discussions
place there, and that they would meet, not with wdo:ufld and
be
but with the most determined assailants. By bringingener;;
such a Bill they gave proofs that they distrusted Ceirou-131
powers.—( Hear, hear.) If it failed, they would be obliged
to resume the struggle, with crippled means and infinitely
weaker powers. What prospect did the Noble Lord hold
out that such a failure would not take place ?—( Hear.)
' Indeed, he had already seemed to doubt very much its
success, and, so far as he (Lord H.) could collect the in-
dications of opinion from the Hon. Members who bad
spoken, it seemed probable that that House would not
support it without far greater concessions than his
Noble Friend was inclined to make.—(Loud cheer-
ing.) He did not hesitate to avow his opinion,
that no small share of the opposition they had encountered
arose from the dislike to a reformed House of Corn.
' moos, and that there existed in the minds of some parties
a wish to degrade and humiliate it.—(oh, and cheers.)
Why there were Hon. Members opposite, who would hardly

venture to assert that they would have given the sante
votes agalnst an unreformed House, of Commons.—
( Caters.) It appeared as if they regarded the present
House as being too closely identified with the people,
and as having too large an infusion cf democratic principle,
thet it would be dangerous to confer upon it any increased
powers. He (Lord Howlett) had heard that very argu-
ment used.—( Hear, hear.) If such a feeling existed in the
House, could the Noble Lord give him any assurance that
it did not exist, even in a greater degree, in the other
House.--( Hear, and cheers.) In the whole of that pain-
ful struggle nothing had been so mortifying to him as to
see his Noble Friend, after the noble, the constant, and
firm support he had received—to see his Noble Friend,
who had introduced the Government measure of Parlia-
mentary Reform, bestowing, with his own hand, the
mortal wound that was now meditated against
their privileges and dignity.—( Cheers.) If there had
been no wavering en, the part of the Noble Lord he was
satisfied that the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Tamworth would not have deserted him. It was owing to
the Noble Lord that the House of Commons, after having
threatened and blustered, was now humbly about to recede
from its lofty pretensions, and obliged to come for assist-
ance to the other House. He certainly should not be a
party to a measure which was humiliating and degrading
to the House of Commons, and he should certainly record
his vote against the Bill.—( Cheers.)
Mr. MACAULAY would not detain the House by
any lengthened remarks, but he was exceedingly unwilling
that the question should go to a division without ex-
plaining to the House the grounds on which be should give
his vote. He would not go over the ground which had
been already so ably occupied by preceding speakers—he
would merely observe that he believed the House of Com-
mons was, by the law of the realm, the sole judge of its
own privileges. He believed that publication was, by the
law of the realm, one of the privileges of the House, and
that it was essential to the due administration of its func
tions, and he believed that the Court of Queen's Bench
had decided the question that came before them, in a
manner which was founded neither in law nor in reason.—
( Hear, hear.) If the Bill now before them was to provide
that these privileges should henceforth belong to the
House, he should most decidedly oppose it, but such was
not the proposition of his Noble Friend ; that would raise
the question of their privileges, and he would not consent
to their being questioned; but the object was merely to
provide a new remedy for any infringement upon their
established righs. Let them take an instance from the com-
monest case that could occur at law. Suppose a party held
a Bill of Exchange for good consideration, and that an
Act was proposed to entitle him to an action against the
acceptor, be should certainly object to such a Bill, as being
calculated to derange the whole established system of
their paper credit; but if the proposition was to give a
further remedy by distress, as in the case of a landlord,
would any one say that that was bringing the value of the
security at all in question ?—( Hear, hear, hear.) What
was now proposed was not to declare •that the
House had the right of publication, but simply to add
another to the former remedy for a breach of their privi-
leges, leaving the former one altogether untouched. If,
after the passing of the Bill, any party brought an action
for libel against their publisher, he would, like Mr. Stock-
dale, be liable to imprisonment for such a breach of their
privileges. The ground on which the present measure
rested was, that the former remedy was in some respects
inconvenient and insufficient. There was not a single
Member of that House, who would not admit that there
oas inconvenience in the present remedy. Had the House
been unanimous in its assertion of its privileges, the pre-
sent difficulties would not have arisen. But it was obvious
that a large number of gentlemen were opposed to them
on the question. Their debates on the subject had occu-
pied more time than was likely to be devoted to the union
of the Canadas, and much more than they bad spent unon
the Irish Municipal Bill.—( Hear, hear.) The remedy
they at present possessed was singularly likely to be
misconstrued and misunderstood by the people. The
Noble Lord admitted that they had been compelled
to imprison the Sheriffs, but, et the same time, he ac-
quitted them of all moral guilt.—(Opposition cheers.)
Was not a remedy inconvenient which punished by impri-
sonment men who were declared to be free from all moral
guilt ? Look at the case of the Sheriff—he filled an
office of ercat trust and importance, for which he was not
even paid—lie was placed between two opposing powers,
and whichever he obeyed he was sent to prison by the
other. Was that a state of the law which they should any
longer peimit to endure ? He admitted that which had
been done was necessary ;n self defence. It was analogous
to tae case of war, where the innoeent too frequently suf.
feted with the guilty. IF a sentli power, which wished
to stand neutral, happened to stand; between the two great
contending parties, it was impossible to prevent its being
attacked and injured by both. Daring the late war, it
was well known how little the poor Hollanders loved the
system cf Buonaparte—they detested it, but yet
the people of England were not tle less forced, from
circa:este:Lees, to blockade its ports; and treat it with
severity, as the on;y way to perm-it and obstruc, the
operations of the energy.—( Hear, hear.) In a case like
the present, where a party was placed between two con-
tending authorities, neither of which permitted any appeal
to the other, legislation was absolutely necessary. The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman, the Solicitor- General, had
told them to trust to the power of imprisonment, which
had never yet failed. He believed that might be true, if
they exercised it unsparingly and mercilessly ; but neither
their own feelings, nor those of the people whom they re-
presewed, would allow them to do so.—(Hear, hear.)
The moment the health of a prisoner began to suffer—the
moment confinement began to operate upon those wbo
were weakly, or robust, or apoplectic, they would be obliged
to give %\ ay. Under these circumstances, it was clear
that some other remedy was absolutely necessery.
The Noble Lord asked what, if this Bill were carried,
would he its effect, and what would be the effect if it were
lost? He hoped rise Bill would be carried, and that the
other House of Parliament would interfere to save the
country from the direful consequences that must result if
they drove the House in absolute self-defence to use the
whole power which it possessed. But if this Bill miscar-
ried he would say this—they were absolved—they would
Eve none to the other House, not in an humiliating mar-
nc would heve said they did possess the power of
:indicating their privileges—that they had the power of
throwing the whole country into confusion—of stepping
the supplies—of stopping the Mutiny Act—that there was
no potver which any public body could possess which that
House did not possess—of imprisoning every man who vio-
lated tpozliseeisrsitihrieseplergiveisle—ieofoifm
Peerage,PCi')niig and every ministerial
otaer who should execute the sentence of the
Court ; but as it was not their wish by
means like these to enforce a most necessary
privilege, they applied for a new remedy—not because they
had not remedies stringent and efficient, but because they
were such as could not be applied without a disedution of
society, and the most cruel pressure upon individuals—
that tncy had severe remedies, but asked for mild ones—
that they had a remedy disagreeable to the great body of
the people, but asked for one the whole people would
unite in approving. He believed, if they went in th et
manner, they would have the port of " no mean suitors."
He believed that it was not degrading to bring forward e
measure on the subject, which would secure the privileges
of the people, and enable them to act leniently towards those
whose misfortune, rather than otherwise, it was to have vio-
lewd them. He believed that if the House of Lords rejected
such a Bill it would be firmly supported by public opinion—
that they would be supported in measures much stronger
than any they had taken—in ire asuree much stronger than
any the Hon. Member for Dublin would suggest— that
they would find a support they had not yet received, if,
having proposed such a remedy, they sheuld find it impos.
eib:e to obtein the assent of the other House on the only
terms on which they could accept it, consicently with the
honour of the people whom they represented.
Lord MAHON said be was under the painful necessity
of set inp; a few words,
,es he felt himself reluctantly bound
to differ from the opinions expressed by his Right Hon.
Friend the Member for Ripon, whom, with the greatest
regret, be heard last night say that he should vote against
the Bill cf the Noble Lord. On the contrary, he (Lord
Mahon) felt himself bound in conscience to give every fa-
cility to it. The question was not whether the Bill was
A good one or not. The practical question was, whether
they would have a Bill at all, and to that he felt bound to
answer in the affirmative ; and, further, that he should con-
sider the Bill of the Noble Lord with the most sincere
desire to be able to.concur in its provisions. The Noble
Lord ( Howick) said that this Bill was supported by the
minority, because it has a tendency to degrade the re-
formed House of Commons. He could assure the Noble
Lord the information to that effect he had received was
not well founded. There was no privilege the House pos-
sessed, up to the period of the resolutions of 1835, he
,would not now support. What he opposed was the claim
of privileges they had not previously possessed. - With re-
spect to the power of publication he was most desirous to
secure it. He could give reasons why, for if at an elec-
tion his constituents objected to him for some vote he was
supposed to have given, was ho to lose his seat because
he could not send for documents necessary to convince
them?—(Hear, hear.) The main obstacle to the settle..
ment of this question was the resolution of sale—this
was the practical cause of all their difficulties. This
was the opinion of the Right Hon. Members for Ripon
and Exeter, and of every lawyer in the House—but he
might be told the practice of sale prevailed before the
resolution—then why pass it? Till the resolution of
sale they sold by connivance, but since by authority.—
There always was sale, but no direct authority to coun-
tenance it. Then, in his opinion, this legalized sale
constituted all the difference. He admitted the necessity
of sending these publications to constituents, but there
was a great difference between doing this, and their
public sale. Let them repeal that resolution, and they
would get rid of the difficulty. Then, to avoid injury
to individuals, what objection could there he tolintroduce
a clause into the Bill that persons giving false evidence
before the House should he subject to the same re-
nalty as persons committing perjury in a Court
of law ?—( Hear, bear.) He should support cheer-
fully the resolution of the Noble Lord. He thought
some injustice was done to the Ministers on that question,
in underrating the painful nature of their feelings in dif-
fering from those with whom on all other occasions they
was painful o
tdiffer from them on
to them to do so,
cbourtdbiaellliyevcinog-opitertoatebde.
theirlt d
done so.
this question, they laad, painful as it was to them, reluc-
tantly Mr. BERNAL thought it was a pity the Noble Lord
should have ransacked former debates for the purpose of
alluding to the question of sale, which had nothing to do
with the present debate. The Judges had held that the
question of sale bad nothing to do with this question—they i
said the question was one of publication, and if the Report
in question had been sent to Mr. Stockdale to be bound,
that would have been a sufficient publication, according, to
the doctrines of the Queen's Bench, to entitle him to bring
his action. With respect to the present question ho would
ask his Noble Friend, who stated that this Bill was an
evil, if he saw anything in this question but a balance of
evils, and this he (Mr. Bernal) thought the least evil?
cote
the
this
committalmeasure.
olf necessary His Noble Friend the Member for Stroud had not shown
,any wish to lower the dignity of the House in bringing
forwarde
fo r
the Judges,
Judges,h(
uhtl n h
thoughte ern a wouldI)
t!
o,
every means should be taken to avoid such an occur rove.