The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-09 00:00:00

PR[VH

On the motion for the order of the day being read,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE rose to bring under the notice
of the House a question of privilege. He alludesi to a
debate which had taken place in that House on the
affairs of Guernsey, and after complaining of the
brevity of the report of that debate which appeared
in the newspapers, he stated that he , had re-
ceived a letter from the Rev. Mr. Dobree, whose name
had been mentioned in that House by him (Mr. Dun-
combe) and also by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite.
Two days before be received this letter a commu,tication
from Mr. Dobree appeared in the Times newspaper,
denying the accuracy of his (Mr. Duncombe's) state-
ments. The letter which he had received was dated
" Forest Rectory, 28th of July, 1844," that day bein.4
Sunday, and it was not for him (Mr. Daneombe) to say
whether it was the sort of correspondence which
a minister of the Gospel ought to indite on inch a
• day. (The Hen. Gentleman then read the 1-tter, which
ststel that he ( Mr. Dunconiho) had charged Mr. Dobree
with " perjury," and with being " insane," and it call. d
tip,•n the Hon. Member to expisin his moaning, and to
give his authority, at the same time threatening conse-
quences if such an explanation sere refused.) Had an
explanation been called for from him (Mr. Duncombe),
excepting under a threat, he would have been the
last person to have refused it. His answer to the
Rev. Gentleman's letter was to the following effect :
" On my return to town this evening I•Yeeeived your
letter with inclosures of the 28th inst. I regret the in-
temperate character of ydur cotirninnirattiii, which pre-
cludes the possibility of my giving that explanation
which under whet. circumstances I should have felt in•
elined to afford." The inclosures were certificates
from the Crown Solicitor stud the Lieutenant-
Governor. Last night he received another lever
from Mr. Dobree, whieh was dated August 6, 1844,
in which he said, "I am in reef ipt of your letter of the
'2d inst., and if you conceive any previous letti r to you
at all intemperate, I beg leave to refer you to Lieut. Ross,
who will give you eery explanation or satisfaction
you may think fit to require on my behal£ I only
regret that the situation which I hold in the diocese of
Winchester prevents me from speaking more plainly,
and in a tone which you deserve. Your most obedient
to command."—(Laughter.) Simultaneously with that
le:ter another appeared in the columns of the Times
newspaper.
"Sir,—Mr. Thomas Slingsby Duncombe, M.P. for
Finsbury, having declined to give me any personal ex-
planation of the epithets of lunatic' and perjurer,'
applied to me in the House of Commons on the 23d of
July last, although called upon to do so, I beg leave to
publish the folloWing proofs of the utter falsehood of his
statements, derived from the hif,hest medical, legal, and
military authorities ; and I leave to the discernment of
the British public to qualify Mr. Duncombe for the future
with the titles he
.may best deserve.
" 1. Mr. Duncombe said (or is reported to hare sai,i),
that lam only fit for a lunatic asylum.' Here is my
reply : • _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _

We, the undersigned, hereby declare that we have
known the Rev. Daniel Dobree since his childhood, and that
he neither is, nor ever has been, either of unsound mind or
weak in intellect.

"‘ S. E. HOSKINS, M.D. and F.R.S.
4" J. O'BRIEN, Surgeon."
"2. Mr. Duncombe said (or is reported to have said),
that lam a perjurer.' Here is my reply, in the letter
of the Crown solicitor himself, who was sent over here to
investigate the business in question :
" Twytord-house, Winchester, July 26. -
"' I cannot coneeive any man, of ordinary intellect, unob-
scured by party prejudice, accusing or thinking a gentleman
in holy orders, of good education and habits, guilty of perjury,
merely because a decision has been given inconsistent with
the tendency of his evidence. We here every day find con-
flicting evidence, given by most unexceptionable witnesses;
and if perjury, were to be imputed to thiwe of the unstwe, ssful
side, half our countrymen would be thought guilty:of a crime
which is not, I trust, our prevailing vice.
" But leaving these general observations. you ask me
whether I think you guilty of perjury? I reply that Ido
not. Ido not believe that your statement made to me, and
by me repeated to the Lieutenant-Governor, was false. Ido
not believe that such statement having since been made by
you in court on oath was perjured.

"`T. L. DANDIER.
"But Nit.. Thacombe thinks fit tolissert that lam
I unworthy of credit,' &c. Here is my reply, addressed
.to me by General Napier himself:—
" Haviland Hall, July 23.
"' I'see that yourenemies, as unscrupulous as they
are locally powerful, have determined to destroy your cha-
racter and prospects, I give this testimony in all sincerity of
belief in its truth, and in accordance with what I hive more
than once written to the Secretary of State for the Home-
office. From personal observation, from the assurance of Bri-
tish officers, natives- of Guernsey, and others not natives of,
4-Buenisey, roth your general character; andifrerm,the straight-
forward, frank, earnest, and unvarying testimony you bare
given to me in private, to Mr. Dampier, and in my presence
at the so-called secret inquest of the Royal Court, I have
' the most implicit confidence in the truth ofyour depositions.
I feel 'sure that you are totally incapable of falsehood, and
that perjury is as incompatible with your In tions of honour,
as it is incompatible with your sacred character of a minister
of the Gospel. All persons of honourable minds who know
you, must start with indignation and horror at the infamous
attempts now made to charge vou with such a crime.
" • W. NAIII ER, Lieutenant-Governor.
" To the Rev. Daniel Dobree.'
" And now, Sir, pray tell me what is Mr. ThomaS
Sling-by- Duncutnhe?—l am, Sir, your obliged and grate-
ful servant, " DANIEL DOBREE, M.A.,
" Rector of the Forest and Turteval, Guernsey.
"Forest Rectory, Aug. 6."
Now he (Mr. Duncombe) thought he was justified in
asking the Government whether they sanctioned the
Crown Solicitor Taking any part in this personal squabble
between the Rev. Mr; Dobree and himself. It would
be recollected that-he appeared there in the discharge
of his public duty. He knew nothing of any of these
parties—he was merely the channel of communica-
tion between that House and the great body of the
people of Guerrisey. Mr. Dobree had charged those
people with disaffection and disloyalty ; a charge
which he (Mr. I.)uicombe) knew to be quite
unfounded. It had been proved in a court of justice
that Mr. Dobree was unworthy of credit. %What he
(Mr. T. Duncombe) complained of was, that when he
moved for the correspondence which had taken place
between the authorities of Guernsey and the Right Hon.
Baronet, he should be told that the production of that
correspondence would be injurious to the pubic service,
and yet the Crown-Solicitor and the Lieutenant-
Governor of Guernsey should he allowed from time
to time to refer to it in the newspapers. Ife
thought it but just that the correspondence_ shtuld
produced, or that .it should not be referred to by a
subordinate of the Government, such as he apprehended
Mr. Dampier was. As to the charges which he (Mr.
Duncombe) had made, he could only say that he was
borne out by the local press of Guernsey, which teemed
every iiteek. with charges against Mr. Dobree, and which
defied thaCgentleman to indict them for libel. He
(Mr. Duncombe) wished to know whether the Govern-
ment sanctioned its officers mixing themselves up with
such matters as these ?

Sir J. GRAHAM said that it was evidently late in
the session, or the Hon. Gentleman would never have
taken up half an hotir of their time to discuss such a
question as this. If the Hon. Gentleman had asked him
whether the letter which had been addrea'ed to him was
a letter a clergyman, ought to have written, he should
have said at once that it was not. But if the Hon. Gen-
tleman r-ally thought it was worth while to enter into a
discussion on this matter, he was bound to say that he
ontertaineal a very different opinion. lie thought
it was unworthy !if prolonged di,cussion in that Hou,e.
The Hon. Gentleman stated that Mr. Dampier was in
the employment of .the Government. Now, the Hon.
Gentleman Ought to be better intOrtned !before he made
his accusations, Mr.-. Dampier held no situation under
G. tvernment. sent to Guernsey .to.itAltire into
the le ate of effairsitiZe inson sequence of the n forn a
54; -
Lica 4 )41!afirvil, 444 le4-
_