The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-25 00:00:00

OFFICE.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from
Capt. Charles Stolzberg, residing in Somers-town,
formerly, a captain in the Polish service, and now
an exile in Great Britain. The petitioner stated that
he was devotedly attached to his native land, and
would remain so until the day of his death, but he
begged to assure the House that he had not interfered
in the politics of this country. He stated that he had
discovered, to his astoni,hment, that letters addressed
to him had been detained in the Post-office, and that
this system of espionage was carried on to such an,
extent that he could no longer with safety or confi-
dence avail himself of the privileges of her Ma-
jesty's Post-office, being unwilling that the inter-
course with his family should be subjected
to inspection.—(Hear, hear.) The petitioner stated
that he was ready to , prove that there never did exist
and never had existed the slightest pretence for this
gross violation of private correspondence; and he
therefore prayed the House to institute a rigid inquiry
into the circumstances that led- to this breach of na-
tional hospitality; and to give petitioners such redress as,
to the wisdom of Parliament, might seem meet
for the personal wrong he had received.—(Hear,
hear.) He (Mr. Duncombe) was satisfied that for
this breach of confidence between man and man, of
which the petitioner complained, .the House would
not refuse immediate redress. When,. on a former
occasion, he called the attention •of the House to the
.
subject, it appeared to the House that the grievance
of Which the petitioner complained was supposed
to be removed by the withdrawal of the warrant of
the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
The Right on. Gentleman had not informed them
against which of the four petitioners he had issued the
Warrant, but he (Mr. Duncombe) stated he believed he
could supply the omission, and that it was the corres-
pondence of Mr. Mazzini which was opened ; he
stated that he was a respectable gentleman residing
in this country, and that he was an Italian refugee;
and he then asked the Right Hon. Gentleman whether
he was aware that the correspondence of. Mr.
Mazzini had been opened at the Post-office. The
Right Honourable Gentleman stated that a war-
rant was issued against one of the- parties, but who
the person was he (Mr. Duncombe) must find out.
Here was the petition of only one individual, Captain
Stolzberg, an officer of artillery in the Polish service,
and he complained that his letters had been opened
for no reason whatever, he never having meddled
with the politics of the country. What would be the
answer of the Right Honourable. Gentleman to
the complaint of Captain Stolzberg—whether he
would still continue to shield himself under of-
ficial silence he (Mr. Duneombe) did not know,
but he trusted that the House was prepared to assert
the power which it possessed, and to see if this great
and enormous power which had been vested in the
Secretary of State had been abused or not. The
Right Hon. Gentleman had been asked by the Hon.
and Learned Member for Kinsale what construction
the Government placed on the- law ' whether they
considered it necessary- to issue only a general
warrant fOr opening all letters belonging to one in-
• dividual, or whether they considered it necessary to issue
a separate warrant for the opening of each letter. The
Right Hon. Baronet firmly but respectfully declined to
give any answer. Now if the Government and the
Secretary of State were suffered to shelter themselves
behind this official secrecy, *hat became of the respon-
sibility of which they heard so much, whenever any
measure was before Parliament for giving new power
to the Secretary of State ? Las* year, when in the
debate on the Chelsea Pensioners' Bill, he had ob-
jected to giving the Secretary of State certain enor-
mous powers, he • had been told that the Secretary of
State was responsible, and that he was always in
his place to answer -any questions that might
be put to him. He now called upon the
Right Hon. Baronet to explain the manner in
which he had exercised- these great and important
powers.—(Cheers.) That power had been vested in
the Secretary of •State, he admitted, but it was only
to be exercised in cases in which internal sedition, or
domestic treason, was apprehended.—(Cheers.) There
was no pretence of this sort for violating the corre
spondence of Captain Stolzberg, or of Mr. Mazzini.
On a former occasion he had stated that he did not
think one individual in twenty was aware that the
Government possessed this power, he believed
that if he had stated that no person in the whole
twenty were aware of its existence, he would have
been right. He found, from what had passed
in another place, that one of the greatest judicial
authorities in the realm • was not aware of the exist-
ence of this power. But it had been stated by that
high authority that the construction put upon the Act
of Parliament by the Hon. Member for Kinsale was
the correct one, and that it did require, according to
theatrict letter of the law, that a separate and distinct
warrant should be issued to authorise the opening
of each letter. The question, therefore, pre-
sented itself to' • the -House and the public
under two distinct points of view. First, had they
adhered to the strict letter of the law in ordering the
letters of Captain Stolzberg, Mr. Mazzini, and other
individuals to be opened ; and if they had not trans-
gressed the letter of the law, had they not abused the
power vested in them in opening these letters at all ?
The Government had done both; they had trans-
gressed the law- and bad abused the power which
rested in them in opening those letters.—(Hear,
hear.) It would not satisfy the public, for the
in his place again
but
smaYust be
itanidgh- RBeasrpooneettf_utioly.:tand up
firmly, I decline to
answer the question.”—(Great eheenng.) -As to Mr.
Mr. Mazzini,
:his letter to
tMainizziusinil.,wphuatnndnimd
bthoat?wgeoNnstanlewmf;iaenintd
°fin
observed,
Or these two gentlemen
tahnadt
the Captain
opening to I:fb et
the
same system. (Cheers.) He
was part of the
admit that the
Oar, Duncombe) might
ge
letters f
Ga-
vernment should have the power of opening the
f internal
o( suspeeted persons in cases o
sedi-
letters areof pomp wha had absconded from
tion, or the leL,- Doyle ioeiged to those cases
justice. But when -awes and benefits of
they would think that the advap..._ abuses
that power -were not counterbalanced by
""
of it—(Much cheering)—and would say with him
that it ought to be abolished.—(Hear, hear.) In the
case ef,Mr. Mazzini, there was no ground of inter-
ference. raised.- He had nothing to do with Foreign