The Sun.
London, England, 1832-05-22 00:00:00

the benefits of public representation.—(Hear, hear.`,
But Cheltenham was, above all, entitled to a representa-
tion o❑ account of the manner in which it bad dis-
tinguished itself in the late contests, and the zeal with
which it had stepped forward in opposition to the claim,
of the brother of the Nob'e Duke, whom he saw opposite,
(Beaufort) when that Noble Lord refused Ca pledge him
self to vote for Reform. On that, and on the best of all
grounds, that he believed it could not be resisted, he
should vote against the otnirsion of Cheltenham in the
schedule.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA was averse to the con-
ferring of the franchise in Cast's where there were distinct
and separate interests which demanded representatives. al-
though he had from the,first stated it to be his determina-
tion to support the enfranchisement of the great towns.
With respect to the 101. franchise, he thought it was better
defined under the old Bill than the present one. In the
present Bill the definition of the right was exceedingly
vague, and he was convinced that the clause as it stood
would be mi.hievous, and lead to practices highly in-
jurious in the manufacturing districts. Their Lordships
heard of the increase of voters, and he saw no reason why
a manufacturer, who employed some hundred men, could
not place them in small cottages, and by giving them no-
minally higher wages while he made them pay higher
rents, increase i❑ that manner the number of voters.
This he was convinced would be one of the consequences
of the clause. He objected also to another portio❑ of the
Bill—that which gave votes for th' counties to those who
already possess votes for towns. He thought they would
tend much to take away from the agricultural interests
that fair proportion of power which their wealth, and in-
fluence, and importance in the State entitled them to de-
mand. After contending that he had always been a❑ ad-
vocate for the extinction of the rotten boroughs, the Noble
Earl argued that he was guilty of no inconsistency in op.
posing many portions of the present Bill, which he thought
would he subversive of the Constitution, and which he was
sure would not be a final settlement of the question ; for
before many months passed over their heads, their table
would he crowded with petitions from other places for the
extension of, or participation in, the right of voting.
Lord DURHAM was convinced that the Noble Baron
who proposed the amendment did so for the purpose only
of recording his own plans, and not that he might lead
the House into a protracted discussion of the general prin
ciple of that schedule. He thought, therefore, that it
would he more convenient for the House to agree to the
clause generally; and afterwards to discuss the case of
each town, in tire order in which it stood in the schedule.
If the Committee allowed the case of each town in the
schedule to be discussed separately, and in its order, he
would pledge himself to show that every one of those
towns was entitled to the representation ; and that the
plan of the Noble Loril, instead of putting an end to the
agitation of those claims on tire part of other towns,
would, on the contrary, give rise to greater bearthurnings
and jealousies. The Noble Baron had given three reasons
founded upon his own knowledge of the circumstances of
Gateshead, to prove that place not to be entitled to the
representation. But he (Lord Durham) would under-
take to prove to the satisfaction of the Committee, that
the Noble Baron's reasoning was incorrect. In the first
place, the Noble Baron stated that Gateshead was a suburb
of Newcastle. Now, he (Lord Durham) could assure
the Committee from his own knowledge, that Gateshead
never was a suburb of Newcastle. In the second place,
the Noble Baron contended that tire interests of the former
place were identical with those of the latter; and thirrfl;•,
that the trade of the two place,' was the same. Now, in
each of those particulars, he (Lord Durham) could assure
the Noble Baron, that he was altogether misinformed.
He would also undertake to show, as each town came to
be discussed, that the amendment of the Noble Baron
would, by interfering with the schedule, injure the Bill
instead of improving it, and would give great dissatisfac-
tion to the country, and especially as respected the me-
tropolitan districts. As to those districts, if the framers
of the Bill had erred at all, they had erred in the too great
limitation.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of HADDINGTON would not have tres-
passed on the time of the Committee that night, hut for
the prelirnin ,ry observations of the Noble Baron who had
just sat down. He would leave it to the Noble Baron
and to the Noble Lord near him (Lord Ellenborough) to
fight their own battle between them.—(Hear, and a
laugh.) His own objections to the present Bill had been
from the first, that it allowed no hope of the final settle-
ment of the question of Retbr►n. Now all that he could
say in favour of the Noble Baron's, amendment was, that
it did hold out some hope of a final settlement.—(Hear.)
That Noble Baron (Lord Ellenborough) had asked how
could it be expected that the towns which, to the number
of twenty, were entitled to be placed in schedule C and
D, would be satisfied after the disappointment of the hopes
which the framers of the 13111 had excited ? But be would
go farther than the Noble Baron, and would say, that it
was impossible to give any answer to the arguments which
would be alleged in support of the claims of many other
towns which were now excluded from the representation,
after the places in those schedules should have been en-
franchised.—(Hear, hear.) In a petition which had that
evening been presented, they had a specimen of the sort of
claims which such plans would make.
Earl DARNLEY assured the Noble Baron opposite
(Lord Marlborough) that if the plan now proposed as an
amendment had bee❑ brought forward six months ago, he
(Lord Darnley) should have been disposed to support it in
preference to the present state of the Bill. But now,
looking to the quarter from which the amendment came,
he was compelled to look upon it with suspicion.—
(Cheers.)
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said that he should not press
the amendment to a division.—(clear, hear.)
The clause was then agreed to.
After a desultory conversation, which was not heard
below the bar, Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds, were
severally voted part of the schedule without dissent.
On the question being put, that Greenwich stand par
of the schedule,

Lord ELLENBOROUGH arose amidst cries of
" Question," " Adjourn," "Go on," &e. He said that
he objected to the insertion of Greenwich and Woolwich
in that schedule, because the enfranchisement of those
places and the agricultural districts which separate them
combined in one borough made way for the operation of
that principle, the evil consequences of which he had en-
deavoured to point out. If the principle that a given
population contained within a certain number of square
miles should entitle a place to send Members to Parlia-
ment, where in England was the district in which such a
claim might Not he set up ?—(Hear, hear.) But the ob-
jections which the Nuble Lords opposite themselves bad so
often made to nomination boroughs, applied to the enfran-
chisement of those places, an they would constitute a no-
mination borou,;h of the most mischievous tendency
(Hear, hear.) The two Members would be returned by
the United Service—one by the Ordnance, and the other
by the Admiralty. Woolwich was a wretched town,
consisting chiefly of the houses of artificers in the ern-

ployment of the Government—of small shops de-
pendent on those artificers—and of public. houses.
He thought that they might just as well give the re-
presentation to the regiments of artillery as to that
place.—(Hear, hear.) Again, Greenwich was thieily
the property of the Crown by a recent purchase, so
that the voters there would be for the most Fart und,r the
influence of the Crown. Must of the principal house-
holders were retired sifficers ; and surely such a consti-
tm-ney would render tine place a nomination borough of
the worst kind. On these grounds he moved that Frome
should be inserted in the schedule instead of Greenwich.
The LORD CHANCELLOR was surprised at the ob-
jections which the Noble B iron now advanced against the
enfr inchisement of Greenwich ; because it was, no long
time ago, the Noble Baron's principal objection to the pre-
sent Bill, that it would create a difficulty in the obtaining
of seats in Parliament for the members of the Government.
But when he remembered that the Noble Baron eulogized
nomination as good in itself; and especially deprecated the
destt uction of boroughs for which members of the Admi-
nistration could be nominated, he (the Lord Chancellor)
could not see the congruity of the Noble Baron's argu
ment.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He did not say this as
agreeing with the Noble Baron that nomination boroughs
were such good things, but only to show, that all that
he (Lord Ellenborough) had said of Greenwich would
be, it it were true, a strong argument why the Noble
Baron ought riot to oppose this part of the schedule.—
(Hear, hear.) But the fact was, the footing on winch
the right of voting was to be put by the Bill before tine
Committee was such, that there was no justice in saying
that Greenwich would be a nomination 'iorough. That
town, taken with the other places which were united with
it in the schedule, contained a numerous population, pay-
ing 22,00 W. in assi-sied taxes, and having upwards of
0,000 houses rated above 10/.—(Hear, hear.) Now, a
great proportion of those houses were occupied by respee•
table and wealthy persons connected with the commercial
interest; that was well known to every person who was
acquainted with the
neighbourhood of Greenwich. But
perhaps Noble Baron's acquaintance theme was con-
the
con-
fined to a New of the most convenient houses.---(A laugh.)
That myna,in fact, the head-quarters, he might
say,the roost important branches of the trade
of thisr. co
ouna ti
interest.—(Hear,
he,
o districtf
one
grounds
rotinin'edswotfthe shipping
opulation,assesseil taxes, and
tre
commercial importance, that district was entitled to the
representation.
Lord WINCHILSEA rose amidst impatient cries of

" Question." He entirely concurred in the opinion of tl
Noble Baron near hint (Lord Ellenboruugh), that Green-
wich would make a borough of the worst description.
After some interruption from the calls of " Question !"
" Divide !" "Withdraw !" the amendment was negatives),
and the original question, that Greenwich stand part o
the clause, was agreed to.
Sheffield and Sunderland were then severally voted part
of the schedule without dissent.
On the question that Devonport stand part of the clause,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH proposed that the question
respecting that town should he adjourned for discussion on
another evening, in consequence of the impatience (as lie
was understood) which the Committee manifested.
Lord DITRHAM thought that it was not yet so late
that the Committee might not conveniently go into the
discussion then.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord WYNFORD would support a motion for adjourn-
ment if the Noble B iron persevered in making it.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE said, that the House
seemed to be so little inclined to discuss the details of the
Bill, and, indeed, there could be so little good expected from
the discussion, that he would recommend it to the Com-
mittee to vote all the details of the Bill at once, and send
it up to a third reading.—(Cheers and laughter.)
Lord ELLENBOROUGH was sorry to hear that cheer.
It showed that the House had got into a state from which
it was not easy to bring it back, and in which it would
be impossible to discuss the schedule fairly and temperately.
If the Noble Lords persevered in going through the details
of the Bill in that manner, he would promise them they
should not carry their Bill these six months to come.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) However, what had occurred in the
House in the earlier part of the night had not deprived
burn of the hope that the discussion would be conducted in
a proper manner.—(Hear, hear.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the Bill had been
discussed, so far as Noble Lords on that (the Ministerial)
side of the House were concerned, both fiirly and tempe-
rate y.—(Hear, hear.) The cheer which gave the Noble

_ .
l3aro❑ so much dissatisfaction, appeared to him (the Lord
Chancellor) to le no other than an expression of good hu-
mour, in which several Lords near the Noble Baron had

joined.—(Hear.) Surely it could not be complained of,
that the Noble Duke opposite had net been greeted with a
serious cheer, when it was plain that he did not say seri-
ously what had caused the cheer ; that is, that he wished
the Bill to be passed at once.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
As that was the first time the question was introduced as
to the hour at which the Committee should adjourn each
ni;ht, he thought it would be convenient that the House
should then decide that question at once; and there was
no reason w by the adjournment should be fixed so early as
eleven o'clock.

The Marquess of LONDONDERRY wished to ac

quaint the Noble Lords opposite•, before the question of
adjournment wis decided, that he was determined to take
the sense of the Committee respecting the representation
of the Tower Hamlets.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH expHned, that he proposed
the adjournment, not on atcouut of the lateness of the
hour, but on account of the impatience manifested by the
Committee.

Lord WYNFORD thought that Devonport ought to
be included with 13!ymouth, and that two Members would
then be quite sufficient for both combined.—(Hear.) If
Devonport were to have two representatives, all places
similarly circumstanced would claim a similar representa-
tion. At the least, if Devonport were continued in that
schedule, the places in schedule D would have a right
that their representation should not be diminished. Fmr

the sake of that interest (the agricultural), which,
although it supported the other two interests (the com-
mercial and manufacturing), was by this Bill sacrificed to

them, he would object to Members being given to this and
to many other places in those schedules. The effect of
the Bill, upon the whole representation of the country,
would be to give no more than 170 Mvmhers to the agri-
cultural interest, whilst the commercial and manufacturing
interests would have 330 representatives.—(Hear.)
Lord 31ORLEY assured the Noble and Learned Baron
that he underrated the importance of Devonport and the
respectability of its inhabitants,—(Hear.)
Lord WYNFORD made some reply, which was in-
audible in cons-quence of the cries of •' Question."

Lord ELLENBOROUGH would repeat his former de-
claration, that it was most dangerous to establish the prin-
ciple, that places were entitled to representati,tn on account
of their possessing a large population and considerable
wealth. When that principle should (ince have been re-
cognized by the Legislature, every place that might here-
after increase in wealth and population would claim to be
represented ; so that the Bill, as it stood, instead of irting,
a final measure, would lead to constant change. Devon-
port was circumstanced similarly to Greenwich, as re-
spected the influence of the Government. There were
two places in schedule It which had each a greater right
to two Members than Devonport : be meant Helston and
Dartmouth.

Lord GREY said, that Devonport was a pl ice of great
wealth and independence, and containing 44,000 inhabi-
tants, and upwards of 6,000 houses rated at 101. In re-
spect to population and wealth, Frome was greatly inferior
to that town. But he would ask the Noble Lords who
were acquainttd with those places, what kind of Reform
would that be which should give to Helston and Dartmouth
the representation which was refused to Devonport ?-( Hear.)
The Marquess of SALLSBFRY said, that the import-
ance of D-vonport was sink.ng considerably.
Lord WYNFORI) rose to explain, amidst loud cries
of " Question !'' and " Order !" The Noble Lord having
resumed his seat,

Devonport was voted part of the clause.
Alter some conversation respecting the boundaries,
which was not audible below the bar,
Wolverhampton was voted part of the clause.
The Committee then adjourned to Tuesday; the Chair-
man reported prowess, and the other orders of the day
being disposed of, the House adjourned at a few minutes
after Twelve o'clock.

HO USE OF COMMONS, MAY 21.
Lord INGESTRIE presented a petition against the
armingharn and London Railroad Bill.—Referred to the
Committee on the Bill.

Mr. HUME brought up a report of the Committee
(with amendments) upon the Tower Hamlets Small
Debts Bill.—The amendments were read a second time.

Mr. Alderman WOOD brought up a report of the
Committee (with amendments) upon the General Cemetery
Bill. The amendments were read a second time.

Mr. KENNEDY presented petitions front the Corpo.
rations of the burghs of Ayr and Irvine, in favour of the
Glasgow and Edinburgh Railway Bill.

Sir A. AGNEW preened apetition from the Synod
of Galloway, against the proposed system of education in
Ireland.

Sir C. FERGUSSON said he had rec,ived a letter from
a clergyman who attended the Synod, and who declared that
so far from the petition being unanimously agreed to, it
was only carried by the casting voice of the Moderator.
He (Mr. C. Fergusson) would not provoke any discussion
upon Cl's subject, but he could not refrain from expressing
his opinion that the petition was founded on an entire
mistake, and so were many speeches of Hon. Members in

that House. The petition stated that by the proposed system
only certain portions of the Scriptures were to be used.
That was an entire mistake ; for there was to be a general
and joint mode adopted in the moral, literary, and
classical education, but there was to be a separate
religious instruction for different religious persuasions,
arid there was nothing to prohibit the children from baying
the whole of the Bible. It was merely that the Catholic
should have nothing to do with the religious instructian of
the Protestant, nor the Protestant with the Catholic.

Mr. O'CONNELL gaid,if one allegation, viz. that of

the Protestant being deprived of the use of the entire
Scriptures, be true, he would oppose the scheme as readily
as any Protestant gentleman in the House. All the Catho-
lics claimed was that the use of the Scriptures as a school.
book should not be enforced on the Catholic chi'dren. The
grossest oppression had been practised by the Irish landlords
in compelling Catholic parents to send their children, under
the threat of starvation, to the Kildare-street schools,
and it was against such a system he comphined. The
Catholic did not want to interfere with the religious edu-
cation of tee Protestant, and it was only just that the Pro-
tant should not interfere in the education of the Catholic.
If the Ministry had not been a Reforming Ministry, there
would not have been half the outcry there had been. Ile
was sorry to see the intelligent people of Scotland express
the opinions they had done on the subject. The plan in-
trottuced by his Majesty's Government was not dictated
or required by the Catholics. They
ihibdaerdeinon,rocbeodubtjuecpatolilioi
steheeytirieeqSu:irreirditunr,ae!,ittihatthiet hshanodusldofncoht objection
at ot
Ca-
tholic children as a schoolbook.

Colonel LINDSAY thought the plan Would fail of ac-
complishing a united system of education in the country.
Mr. JAMES JOHNSON disclaimed, on the part of
Scotland, any cant or hypocrisy in their opposition to the
measure.

FERGUSSON considered the opposition to the
measure had originated in party spirit, and thought it ex-
tremely unfortunate when a measure brought forward
avowedly for the purpose of reconciling all parties, and pro-
moting harmony among children of all classes, should
have been met in the manner it had been in the present
ease. He trusted that House would never become the
theatre of theological discussion.

Sir B. BATESON declared that there never was a

subject in which so little political feeling had been extr-
eised as the present. The opposition to this measure vgb.s
founded in truth, and would every day be stronger a 1,,)
stronger.

After some observations from Mr. Keith Douglass, Mr.
C. Fergusson, Mr. Shaw, Mr. O'Connell, and Captain
Gordon, the petition was read, and ordered to be printed.
The HoN. MEMBER then presented two other petitions
to the same effect.
Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR, on being called upon
by the Speaker, said he appeared with his Majesty's an-
swer to the Address of that House. His llajesty had
most graciously received the Address, and i❑ answer
said, that the state of public affairs since the 10th day
of May would account for any delay in the returning
of an answer to that Address. He trusted that
it was now unnecessary, since what had since transpired
had prevented the necessity of any change in his Majesty's
Councils.
The LORD ADVOCATE then moved the second read-
ing of the Scotch Reform Bill, when
Lord STORMONT said he would take that oppor-
tunity to bring before the notice of the House some of the
most scandalous and seditious libels which had ever di-
graced the history of the press in this country. It also
appeared that up to the present time they had been allowed
to go unpunished. They were so obscene that he knew
not how to discriminate between them, he would, how-
ever, take one which he found in a paper called the
Satirist, of the lath May, which began,—" What the
d—l is the House of Brunswick to us, abstractedly
speaking, more than the poorest sausagemaker in Ger-
many," &c. The Noble Lord read the alleged libel
at full lenth, of which the above is a sample; having
concluded, he said—Was it possible that such a pub.
lication as that should be allowed to continue, while
the Law Officers of the Crown were looking on
and appearing to approve of them by their inertness? As
a loyal subject he could not but take that opportunity of
insisting that the Attorney-General should do his duty
and punish such scandalous publications. He called upon
Government to say what steps had been taken or were
contemplated for the author's punishment. It on a former
occasion had been said that the authors of such articles
were best left to the contempt of the virtuous part
of the public•, but he would ask what such persons, as
could sit down and write such a treasonable article as be
had read, cared for the opinions not only of the virtuous
part of the public, but for the whole of the kingdom ?
Sir T. DENMAN was glad of the opportunity afforded
him of explaining to the House what he thought of the
articles brought under the notice of the House by the
Noble Lord. The Noble Lord would also give him leave to
state to the House, that he had called upon him (Sir T.
Denman) in private, and pointed nut many articles to
him, and he would now state his views upon the whole
subject. A very erroneous opinion seemed to be abroad
of the powers of the Attorney-General; it was thought
that that personage had only to issue his fiat, and then
there would be an end to all such articles as that read by
the Noble Lord ; but he must tell the House that that
officer had no such power, nor in fact more than any per-
son, he could only bring the party before a Jury of his country.
His tirtn belief, founded on observations since he had been
in office, and what he had before observed was, that
nothing benefited the libeller so much as bringing him into
Courts of Justice, and there was no advertisement half
so valuable as bringing hint before a Jury; and also that
whether the trial ended in a victory on his part, or whe-
ther he were found guilty—and if so, he would be
considered a martyr—he would derive considerable
benefit from it. 'With regard to personal invective, how-
ever disgusting or provoking, he (the Attorney-Gene-
ral) conceived that the indignation and contempt
of society would be the best mode of receiving
it, and even the silence produced by that contempt would
be a punishment on the libeller. Ile was in hopes, how-
ever, that the present number of such publications would
gradually diminish, and, indeed, he knew for many months
they had been decreased. He would now advert to what
had been done by his predecessors in such cases, but not
for the purpose of blaming them, or of recriminating upon
them. His Hon. and Learned Friend opposite did not de-
part while in office from the forbearance of his predecessors,
but allowed such publications to pies unnoticed, even in
the most provoking periods. In 1819, some of the roost
atrocious publications issued from the Press, even recom-
mending assassination and forgery, but they all passed
without prosecution, not because there was a want of a
feeling of indignation against the authors, but because
there were inconveniences, to which he had alluded, in
prosecuting them. He would just advert to what
had taken place under his own observation. In May,
1822, he sat for the first time as Common Sergeant of
London, when he was called upon to try a libel of a most
atrocious and profligate deaeription, published in the Re.
publican. That paper had gone on for months unprose-
cuted by the Attorney-General (Sir J. Copley), but at
length the author was brought before him for trial. The in-
dictment contained eleven counts, charging the roost
blasphemous libels and incitements to rebellion, and the
prosecution was conducted, not by the Attorney-General,
but by an Association. After the defendant was found
guilty, be felt it his duty to pass sentence of 18 months'

imprisonment upon him, and for that sentence he had
been subject to attacks, arid to charges of severity and
cruelty. He therefore felt a very great disinclination to
proceed ex-officio against any persons for expressing what
they firmly believed to be their conscientious opinions, and
trusted that the good sense of the people would make
them reject such publications with indignation. As
lone as a writer honestly expressed his opinions, and
his opinions only—as long as it was possible to give him
credit for sincerity—he (the Attorney-General) was
greatly disinclined to prosecute.----(Hear, hear.) The case
%v.'s widely different when a writer's object was to incite
to crime, and in the instance to which he alluded, the de-
fendant was only twenty-one years o'd, and, perhaps, had
no improper motive. When, therefore, the term of im-
prisonment expired, it was a great comfort and gratifica-
tion to him (the Attorney-General.) Why did he say this?
Because the liberty of the Press being established in this
country, men were invited to publish their honest opinions
and there ought to be no torturer behind who might pro-
secute them, and throw them into a dungeon for an un-
defined offence. The very existence of the liberty of the
Press ought to make Attorneys-General cautions how they
proceeded to extremities. The only question with a
public officer undoubtedly was, what was his duty, and
how could he best execute it ; he (the Attorney-General)
was not disposed to shrink from it; but this be must say,
that fromlB2 2to
1829, there was almost a total cessa-
tionprosecutions for hbers, not because they were not
rife and aggravated, but because it was thought wiser policy
to let them alone.—(Cheers.) What had happened in
1829 was very remarkable. His Right Hon. Friend
(Sir J. Scarlett) was then Attorney-General, and a must
gross and scandalous libel was printed, not in an obscure
publication, like the Satirist hunted out of sonic corner,
but in a well-known newspaper, the Morning Journal,
supported by a considerable capital, and by great names :
that libel was directed against his present Majesty when
Duke of Clarence, and in it it was boldly asserted that by
his vote on the Roman Catholic Question he had for-
feited his right to the Throne, and never could recover
his title to it. Yet for this publication no prosecution had
been instituted, and when the editor of the Morning
Journal was afterwards proceeded against, the jury wished
that he should not be brought up for judgment, and even
that he had not been prosecuted, on account of the excite-
ment prevailing in the public mind. He begged also to
state that, in that year, a Noble and Learned Lord, who
was reported to have spoken lately in another phee, was
nut only then a Member, but a leading Member of the
Government. Yet the libel on the Duke of Clarence was

then unnotic,d, and on this point he did not mean to

blame them ; only it would have been quite as wise if the
Lord Chancellor of that day had exhibited equal for-
bearance in his own case, and had not indicted the editor
of the Morning Journal in the Court of King's Bench for
a paragraph, which stated that he had accepted a bribe of
30,0001. for making the Hon. Member for St. Mawes,
Solicitor-General. Thus it seemed that the ex-officio
power of the Attorney-General had been allowed for a

„
long time to sleep, and had it not been awakened for the

. -
purpose of proceeding against the Morning Journal, that
paper would have expired much sooner in the contempt
and derision of all parties. In fact, it owed soul. fur

stamps, and as the process for that sum was sent in on the
eve of the trial, a degree of sympathy was excited, and
subscriptions front Dukes and Peers were poured in from
all quarters, which supported it much longer than it would
otherwise hive existed. For these reasons he was averse

to proceedings of the kind, and had only prosecuted
ex-officio eases which incited to cri►ne, and aimed at the
disturbance of the public peace. Even to this extent he
had met with little encouragement from Juries, for it
was impossible to tell whether even a single individual
amongst them, by his obstinacy, might not defeat the ends
of justice. In the cases of Garble and Cohbett, the Go-
vernment had proceeded, and he had very recently met
with Carlile's statement to him, which, if the House had

any curiosity on the subject, he would read to them.—
(No, no.) In the case of Cobbett, Government was de-
feated, and the Jury discharged, owing to the perseverance
of one Juryman; and it was impossible for the prosecutor
to dig int., the heart of society en every occasion, in order
to ascertain what were the political sentiments of those

who were-called upon to try the accused. Such was his
(the Attorney-General's) answer to the Noble Lord's ques-
tion ; and it he thought proper to submit any papers to

• .
his private consideration, he. would promise to give theta
hie best consideration.. Allusion had been made to slan-
derous attacks upon females of the highest rank. No•
thing could be more disgusting; but it seemed to him
that it would be taking a great liberty if he proceeded
without special instructions.--(Hear, hear.) By a trial
in a Court of Justice they might sometimes be placed in a
worse situation, for,which they certainly would have no
reason to thank him. In the present excitement of the
public mind no doubt many improper produCtiona bad
issued from the Press, but he hoped that the final settle-
ment of the great question would now render their tecur•
rence improbable. He was happy that the censure upon
his conduct for not proceeding against Newspapers was
impartial ; at least, it cause from all quarters ; and
certainly if he selected' any one for prosecution, it would
he the Times of Friday last.—(Lnuil cheers from the
Opposition Benches)—which had obviously falsified what
occurred in another place, and in a manner most abominably
libellous, had attributed a speech to a Noble and Learned 1
Criminal Judge, which he could never have uttered, and the
publication of which ought to he severely visited.—(Cheers
and laughter from the Ministerial Benches.) That Noble
and Learned Judge, who might be called upon at the
Old Bailey to preside at the trial, had himself prejudged
the question in the most positive terms; and after pro-
nouncing that cert :in articles were a notorious libel, had
called upon the Attorney-General to prosecute; nay, to
Buell an extreme of infamy had this pretended reporter
gone, that he had represented the Noble and Learned ;
Judge as accusing the Attorney-General of misprision of
treason for not commencing a prosecution. Suppose the
Attorney-General were to prosecute, and that Noble and
Learned Judge were to preside, what chance could the
unfortunate accused have in such a case, of acquittal?—
The case, too, might be brought before the House of
Peers under writ of error, and then it would be the pe-
culiar province of that Noble and Learned Judge to advise
their Lordships. To assign such a speech to such a per-
son was, therefore, a libel of the most gross and injurious 1
character; and that it was so, was evident from another
circumstance, that the Speaker was made to go out of his
way to attack the Attorney• General ; for what had it to
do with the subject of the debate, and the attendance of
the Noble Lord upon the King at Windsor?—(Cheers.)
The whole WAS; a foul and atrocious libel, for which he
undertook to proceed, as soon as the Noble and Learnnd
Lord denied upon oath that there was any truth in the
representation.—(Cheers and laughter.) He (the At-
torney-General) was the less willing to believe that any-
thing of the kind could have fallen from the Noble and
Learned Lord, because they had formerly been upon terms
of intimacy : lie owed great obligations to the Noble and
Learned Lord, who was something his senior when first he
began to enter into the conversations of men. By his excel-
lent judgment and sagacious mind, that Noble and Learned
Lord had confirmed him(theAttorney-General)in his attach-
ment to liberal opinions, which he for one would never de-
sert or betray.—(Cheers and laughter.) He did not here
speak of notions confided to him as a friend, but of decla-
rations boastfully and ambitiously brought forward by the
Noble Lord many years ago, " I am (said the Noble and
Learned Lord) a disciple and admirer of Sir Samuel
Romilly ; I bate and despise bigotry, and therefore I main-
tain the justice of Catholic claims; and I think Reform
in the representation of the people essential to the preset.-
ration of the peace of society and the welfare of the State.
—(Cheers and laughter from all side.%)
Sir C. WETHERELL agreed that every 1ib:1 ought
not to be prosecuted ; but he did not on this account hold
with the Attorney-General, that he was at once to be
driven from the field by writers of every description in
pamphlets, newspapers, and ephemeral publications. The
question adverted to the general state of the Press, a
matter very fit for the attention of the Attorney-General,
and it bad particular reference to the personal attacks upon
the Queen. The Attorney-General answered, that he had
not prosecuted because he had had no particular instruc-
tions ; but what were become of her Majesty's Attorney-
General and Solicitor-General ? Hail the Hon. Member
for Middlesex, or some other economist, abolished those
offices, that be did not see either of them present on an
occasion like t his, when such infamous, unmanly, un-
gentlemanlike, un-Enelishmanlike libels were under dis- '
cussion ?—( .11r. J. Williams here made himself obvious to the
Hon. Member.) He was happy to see that one of them at
least was in his place, and he might in his presence ex-
press his doubt whether, under such circumstances, it was
either the duty or the practice of the law officers of the
Crown to wait for express instructions. The Attorney-
General bad entered into a long, and be must call it a de-
lusive statement,_ into which he bad introduced a sort of
episode about himself, which might be very pleasant, al- I
though he could not congratulate the Hon. and Learned ",
Gentleman on its logical connexion with the subject of
discussion. The upshot of his speech was, that the At-
torney-General was in no case to prosecute, and he had
attempted to strengthen his argument by reference to cer-
tain libels upon his Majesty when Duke of Clarence, which
he (Sir C. Wetherell), as was asserted, ought to have pro-
secuted. He doubted, however, whether he was in office
at the time, and, at all events, at that date his hands were
tied, and his teeth drawn. Who was it that called on the
Attorney-General to restrain the Press ?—who was it
that called on him to restrain the freedom of debate ? No
one that they had heard yet. The Attorney-General
s :id that freedom of opinion ought not to be extin-
gui
shed. He agreed with the Attorney-General in
that respect ; but they ought to see whether there were
not some who, in the exercise of their freedom of

_
opinion, exercised the greatest tyranny towards others.—
( Hear, hear.) The Attorney-General said that there had
been a great degree of excitement on the subject of the
Reform Bill. That was true. The excitement had been
greater than perhaps was ever known on any question,
and a large allowance must be made for that excitement.
• But then, though he did not call on the Attorney-General
to look into every book and every sheet that was published
with a view to search out libels, yet, when the Attorney-
General asked whether it was his duty to extinguish the
Press, he (Sir C. Wetherell) had a right to retaliate the
the
tphreopHos“inti.ona,nadniLl teousraieydthaatenntolemmaanntwhouogfihltledtothesuoffffierce
House of Brunswick to be libelled as it had been.—(Hear,
hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman seemed to
fancy that he had worked his salvation as Attorney-Ge-
neral by having brought the authors of two libels into a
Court of Justice. These two prosecutions were in the
cases of Cobbett and Carble, for recommending the
burning of hay-stacks; and the Attorney-General sup-
posed that, because he had prosecuted these two cases,
notwithstanding that the Crown was libelled, that the
Queen was libelled, that the whole of the Royal Family
were libelled, that both the Houses of Legislature were
libelled; notwithstanding all this, he had done suffi•lent to
work out his salvation as Attorney-General. But the Hots.
and Learned Gentleman was wrong in that respect ;
for though recommending people to set barns on fire
was a grievous offence, yet in the preservation of the
Monarchy, in the preservation of the Monarch and of the
family of the Monarch, and of the personal respect due to
the Monarch and his fatuity, the considerations were fully
as important—(Hear bear)—fully as important as whe-
ther, under particular circumstances, a man had or riot
burnt a barn or a haystack.—(Hear.) But the Learned
Attorney-General did not go by that rule—he put the
British Monarchy in one scale, and these recommendations
to burn stacks of hay and straw in the other ; and though
he (Sir C. W.) should say that the British Monarchy was
of the more value, yet the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
the Attorney-General did not seem at all to entertain that
opinion. "No (said his Majesty's Attorney-General), I
Lawa noro ffi propereesrotshleovifirliett:hi
etreo daistclpreaos.ths,:!ntottu;;oo.lte,
care little for that, as long as I can get hold of men who
have recommended others to burn three loads of sainfotti."
—(A laugh.) That was the judgment of the Attorney-
General. But then, said the Attorney-General, it was
onfottheusuyo:_tsetGeeasiel:onfetil,riilaeliniboeathlt.itcailtitipna
Ge-
nerally that was true; but there were cases in which that
(Philieuraesrde,hhitoaedarad.l)revTlie Hon. and Learned Attorney-General,
however, was not content with making these grounds qf
defence for himself, but he must needs lug head, neck,
and shoulders into th;s nebate, a Noble and Learned Lord
who had had nothing to do with it. What bad that
Noble and Learned Loid done to call for this treatment
at the hands of the Attorney-General? Why was be
thus treated ? Why, but because he had been called
on by his Majesty, in his character as a Privy Coun-
sellor, to do that which he was bound to do—(Hear,
hear)—yes, bound to do—bound on oath to do it,
for every Privy Counsellor took an oath to advise
his Majesty to the best of his power whenever he
should be called on by his Majesty to do so. For doing
that lie had been visited by the Hon. and Learned At-
' torney-General, and in his absence also, most severely;
and the Hon. and Learned Attoi nr) -General had in that
way replenished the barrenness of his speech with a fer-
tility which had nothing to do with it. Ede (Sir Charles
Wetherell) was prepared to go as far as any man in al-
lotting full liberty of opinion, but personal abuse and poli-
twat intimidation were a sort of tyranny exercised by the
Press—(Hear, hear)—and were now grown so virulent
--(Hear, hear)--that he pot them on quite a different
ground, and altogether discarded them front the rule as to
the liberty of the Press.—(llear.) Were not most of
the articles now written in the papers written not to con-
vince but to intimidate—not to influence the judgment by
reason, but to beat down opposition by intimidation, by
intimidating the King and the Peers for daring, to exercise