The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-11 00:00:00

LIBELS BY THE PRESS.

The Duke of NEWCASTLE hoped that the Noble Vis-
count would feel it his duty, as head of his Majesty's Govern-
ment, to put down agitation, and to destroy the sources of agi-
tation, wherever they might make their appearance. He had
seen an article in the newspapers the other day of a nature
which ought to have attracted the attention of the Govern-
ment. He alluded to a paper called a Ministerial paper--the
Morning Chronicle—in which appeared the following pas.
sage .
" The people of England have the satisfaction of knowing that
they have a leader who will not desert them in the hour of difficulty
and danger. It now rests with themselves whether they will
weakly abandon the cause which they have all but won to the
enemy ; or make one more exertion, by which that enemy must be
for ever crushed. But we will not so far libel the character of our
countrymen as for a moment to suppose that when victory is about
to crown their efforts they will weakly turn their backs on the foe,
and submit to be trampled on by infuriated oligarchs. Through-
out city, town, and village, we expect to see the people once more
at their posts, prepared to crown the work which added so much to
the national glory in 1832. Repose from incessant and most ha-
rassing agitation they never can expect till they humble the oli-
garchy in the dust ; for submission would only make these tyrants
more insolent in their exactiens. With a hostile Court and a hos-
tile Peerage they must makeno truce till they have deprived both of
the power of doing mischief. The Municipal Corporations Bill
must be carried. Through the Corporations the Lords hope to
make the Reform Bill a dead letter; and without their reform, all
that we have achieved will avail us little. Well do the Tory Lords
know this." _

He now asked did the Noble Viscount intend to charge his
Majesty's Attorney-General to prosecute such a villainous
publication? The articles against the King were of the same
character, and he maintained that the Noble Viscount was
bound to prosecute it. The Standard of the same evening
had quoted this libellous matter, and he put it to the House
whether Ministers ought to suffer such diabolical libels to be
circulated ?

Viscount MELBOURNE was not in the slightest degree
answerable for the publication in question. The policy of
prosecuting for libel had been so often discussed in that House
that he would not enter into the question again, and be could
only add that it was not his intention to prosecute the article to
which the Noble Duke had just given such increased currency.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE was sorry that the Noble
Viscount did not feel it his duty to prevent the Kingly power
being so much polluted.
Several orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at a Quarter to Seven.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Auarsr 10.

Tne SPEAKER entered the House at a quarter to four
o clock, but as forty Members had not arrived till it was within
one minute of the hour, it was four o'clock before he took the

Chair.

BOGNOR IMPROVEMENT BILL.

Lord G. LENNOX moved that the House do agree to the
amendments introduced by the House of Lords into this Bill.

Mr. POTTER wished to know what those amendments
were?

Lord G. LENNOX—The only amendment was one by
which those who transgressed the provisions of the Bill were
to be sent to prison and kept to hard labour.
Mr. POTTER—Such a provision was quite unusual in
an Improvement Bill. He thought it too much that persons
should be vent to prison, and kept to hard labour for trans-
gressing the enactments of such a Bill.
Mr. E WART complained of the mysterious manner in
which these amendments were introduced. He suggested
that the amendment should be read.

The Clerk unrolled the Bill amidst some laughter. Upon
a moderate computation we should say that the Bill was up-
wards of 150 feet in length.
Mr. POTTER submitted that many of the offences specified
in this Act were not such as ought to subject persons to be sent
to the tread-mill among felons. He moved that the amend-
ments be'printed, and taken into consideration on Wednesday.
Lord G. LENNOX—These persons would have no com-
munication with the other prisoners, as the silent system
was adopted in the gaol. It would be extremely hard if this
Bill, after it had been in this House since February, should
be now thrown out, and he would certainly take the sense of
the House upon it.
Mr. WARBURTON disclaimed any intention of throwing
out this Bill. There were new offences occasioned by these
amendments—at all events there were new punishments, and
when this was the case it was only fitting that they should
know what these punishments were before they passed this
Bill. It was not a sufficient authority for them to pass these
amendments that the House of Lords had thought proper to
introduce them.

Mr. O'CONNELL suggested to the Noble Lord (Len-
nox) that he had better consult those who had entrusted
him with the care of the Bill, in order to see
whether or not they should omit these objectionable clauses.
If these clauses had been introduced with their assent,
there must have been something wrong that they were
not introduced in the first instance ; and if they
had been introduced by the other House of Parliament,
without the parties' assent, why, then, they might be disagreed
to, and upon a conference with the House of Lords, it was not
likely that their Lordships would persist in retaining them.
The SPEAKER made some observation which was net
heard in the gallery.
Mr. WILKS thought the objection of the Hon. Member
for Wigan perfectly right, and if he divided the House, he
most certainly would support him. He thought, however,
the matter might be arranged without any division by con-
sulting with the promoters of the Bill.
Lord SANDON thought the House ought not to consent
to inflict new penalties before they were enabled to know the
offences to which certain penalties were attached.
Lord GEORGE LENNOX observed that no new penal-
ties were inflicted by the Bill.
After some observations from Mr. EWART, on the motion of
Mr. O'CONNELL, the debate was adjourned till to-morrow.
Sir EDWARD HAYES presented a petition from Do-
negal, complaining of the Excise Laws. Also a petition from
Cork, against the Irish Church Bill.

Mr. W. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from a pa-
rish in the county of York, to the same effect.

The O'CONROR DON presented a petition from the late
Paymaster of the Forces of the Sixth Dragoon Guards,
complaining of his being dismissed the service, in conse-
quence of a false statement, with respect to his accounts. It
had been stated that he was in debt to the regiment, while the
fact was that the regiment was indebted to him. The peti-
tioner prayed that enquiry might be made into his case, in
order that justice might be done to him.
Mr. C. ROSS objected to the petition being received, as it
claimed money alleged to be due.

The SPEAKER said it appeared to be an application for a
settlement of money due to the petitioner.
The O'CONNOR DON said the petition merely prayed
for further inquiry.
The SPEAKER suggested that the Hon. Member had
better withdraw the petition.—Petition withdrawn.