The Sun.
London, England, 1821-07-04 00:00:00

much abuse. For himself, he had One or two
objections to becoming a member of it. In the
first place, he considered it to be his duty, as a
'Member of Parliament, to direct the Attorney-
General to prosecute where it was necessary.
He would here observe, that when the state of the.
press was such that it endeavoured to destroy all
reverence for the-authorities of the land, and to
do away with all subordination ; be did no.t think
that the Law Officers had excited sufficient
energy. There was one individual who had
committed every outrage upon religion, who had
recommended. rebellion and assassination, and
whose crimes had drawn upon him the visitation
of the law, still contrived to receive the supplies
of the poison in which he had before dealt, from
London, and to,vornit forth it upon the country
from the prison in which-he was confined. He
really thought this ought to be put a stop to, or
there was an end to the power of the laws alto-
gether.. Seeing, as he did, this licentiousness of.
the Press, he hoped the Association would go.
on with its proper object of prosecuting calumny
and detraction, on any side, without indulging
in improper political bias, whether they found it
in the true John Bull, or in_ the false John Bull.
For these reasons he should vote against the motion.
Mr. DENMAN was happy his lion. Friend (Mr.
Wilberforce) had addressed himself rather to
the Society which had been incidentally alluded.
to, than that immediately under the considera-
tion of the,House. The objection to the present
Society was, that- it must necessarily encourage
spies and informers, and he believed it was im-
possible for any man to act the part of either
without abusing it. He never world believe
that a man who condescended to the office of a
spy, and whose reward depended upon his find-
ing subjects for prosecution, would not. take care
to earn that reward in some shape.or. other. This
Was the nature of all spies and informers.- The.
Society, however, under debate was distinguish-
able from , all others that had been referred to
for the purpose of justifying it, and when he
heard a Cabinet Minister stand up and defend
such a Society, his • surprise amounted almost to
indignation. Many Societies were instituted for
the defence of property, and for punishing all
felonious attacks upon it. Were these political
Societies ? Were these likely to ingratiate the
members with individuals in power ? - Even the
-Society for the Suppression of Vice, though ob-
jectionable, perhaps, on a strict view of the law,
.had many laudable purposes for its object, and
none which he more approved than those which
went •to deck the distribution of obscene
pamphlet's among the young.—(Hear, hear!)—ln
cases where it was necessary to enforce the law,
there could be no doubt of the propriety of the
Attorney-General being the prosecutor ; but was
the law to be enforced by a combination of men
without authority, who raised powerful friends,
among whose subscribers many appear to be
anonymous, and some, he believed, were not in
.existence ? That many of these persons were re-
spectable in.private life, he had no•doubt ; but
mere respectability was not sufficient to justify
a Society which required judgment, discretion,
and inflexible public principle to prevent it from
,becoming mischievous. . Associations like the
present could not be legal in any sense of • the
:word, for they sought the ruin of those who
published works which this Society forsooth
thought proper to condemn. He would boldly
say that the proceedings of the Society in the
mime of this man, J. B. Sharp," were- ille-
gal. To prosecute a man, to demand. his stock,
to ask him to engage upon oath to do or to
forbear from- doing this or that act, was this
legal or justifiable ? lie (Mr. .D.) understood
that, one person, the Editor of a Newspaper,
who had been prosecuted by :this Society, had,
under the natural terror of such. a prosecution,
paid nearly 80 pounds to stop it.---(Hear, hear.)
if it were urged that the state...of •the times
required unusual legal interference there was the
greater reason for, legal responsibility. The ob-
ject of Mr. Reeve's Association was to answer
Republican works, and this Society . professed
somewhat of .a similar object. - He found that in
their circular they proposed to employ literary,
men of ability to answer the sophistries of sedi-
tious and blasphemous writers ; but the only
written arguments he had knoWn them •to use
were indictments, a species of argument powerful
though rarely convincing. Conduct like this was
in fact placing the press under a censorship with-
out .the authority of the law. lie believed there
were.aa many anonymous subscriptions as he had
ever observed advertised in support of any ob-
ject. Some of the signatures too might be very
fanciful. He had just put- his finger upon one—
" Ogles, the Misses." Now, whether this was
the real subscription of some ladies of the name
of Ogle, or whether it was intended as a piece of
wit, he really could not say ; but. it was not at
all material. Another point of view in which it
struck him that the Society was highly dan-
gerous. was this-7 Suppose
.it were met by a
counter Association. Would it not in the course
of time be almost impossible to find an impartial
Grand Jury or Petty Jury ? The struggle for
triumph between opposite parties would be so
strong that the very fountain of justice would
be polluted. In this point of view he thought
the objection to the Society very strong, and he
thought it was better to discourage a system
which fostered the. detestable herd of spies and
informers; for sure he was that while they were
encouraged they would never fail to excite
offences-in order that they might be paid for de-
tecting them.—(Hear.)
h e ATTORNEY-GETTERA.I. said the motion
sought to put an end to all the prosecutions
complained of without inquiring whether they
were properly instituted or not. His Hon.-and
Learned Friend had not ventured to say that the.
Society in question was illegal in its constitution.
If it was, the Courts of Law would have been
applied to for the purpose of pronouncing its il-
legality ; but no proceeding had been taken in
either of those .Courts for the purpose of raising
the question. He could see no distinction be-
tween this Society and the others which had
been alluded to in the way of comparison. For
the first time, however, in. that House he had
heard himself called the public prosecutor, and
he had .heard it said that he was the constitutional