The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-24 00:00:00

1?;44,-

(Cheers.) If, Sir, you do not think so, lam prepared to
make a motion.—(Cheers.)
Mr. SPEAKER—The Hon. Gentleman has put a
qaestion to me on a subject which does not form part
of the Orders of the House, and on which it is not for
me to decide.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. Hogg then rose at the same time with Mr. Borth-
wick and Sir IL Inglis, amidst loud and repeated cries
of "Go on, Hogg,' " Order, order," &c. At length Sir
R. Inglis and Mr. Hogg sat down, and
Mr. BORTHWICK said that he thought that he
ought to have been heard when he was in possession of the
House. lie thought that if the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman opposite wished to continue the discussion of last
night, he ought to give notice.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," de-
risive cheers. and continued calls for Mr. Hogg, to
which, at length, Mr. Borthwick gave way.)
Mr. 110GG hen rose, amidst cheers, and said :—I
hope to receive the indulgence of the House, and I think
that I am not going too tar when I say that the case is
a matter of privilege. An imputation of
interfering with the privileges of the House
has been cast upon the Secretary for the Home
Department, a Minister of the Crown.—(Hear.) But I
have still more the right to claim the protection and
justice of the House, as I was an officer appointed to a
sworn duty.—(Hear, hear.) - I am placed in some dif-
ficulty as to how I should proceed, in consequence of the
declaration made by the Honourable Member
ho is now absent. I hold in my hand
the speech of the. Honourable Member • which
he made last night, and whilst I read it I wish to
impress on the House that its meaning cannot be mis-
taken. I w ill allow him to comment on my condnct
as he pleases. I will allow him to say that we were
wrong in our decision, and that the law was wrong on
which we acted ; but I will not allow him
to cast upon me imputations of being in-
fluenced by a Minister of the Crown in discharging
the sacred duty to which I was sworn as a chairman of
a committee. if it be true that I had been guilty, or any
other officer guilty of such conduct, it would be your duty
to express yourself on the infamy of his conduct. But
if the charge cannot be substantiated I leave it to you
to express your opinion of the man who has made it.
I am not sufficiently versed in the forms of this House
to know what course with propriety to pursue ; but I
claim, as I think I have a right to do, the protection of
the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's
Government—(Hear, hear)—and I claim the protection
of the Noble Lord, the Member for London, who is ever
anxious that justice should be done to every man, no
matter to what party he may belong.—(Loud cries of
"Hear, hear.") I claim from them to intimate some pro-
ceeding by which the opinion of this House may be
marked. Perhaps the most proper course will
be, that the House shall declare by resolution that
the charges brought forward are false and libellous.—
(Cheers.) The document I hold in my hand is the re-
port of the speech delivered by the Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Ferrand), wherein he refers to what he terms the
Right Hon. Secretary's (Sir J. Graham's) delinquencies,
in the plain-spoken fashion—(Laughter)—which -is his
custom, and in words which are well calculated to gain
for him the sympathy of every opponent of the poor-
law. He says, in that speech, that " the meeting should
remember that no man had resisted the poor-law
more vigorously than Mr. Walter, and it therefore was
felt necessary by Sir James Graham to get him unseated.
Against that gentleman's (Mr. Walter's) return a peti-
tion had been presented, and in that petition an allega-
tion was made that between thirty and forty pounds had
been improperly expended. His speech went on to say that
the Committee to try this petition consisted of three
Whigs and of three Tories, and its Chairman was Mr.
Hogg, the Member for Beverley, one of the most pure
boroughs in the kingdom, but whether he (Mr.
Hogg) got his seat for 401. or not he
(Mr. Ferrand) did not exactly know.—(Hear, hear.)
This Tory Chairman, aided by Sir J. Graham, unseated
Mr. Walter. Mr. Hogg tried to explain away his
conduct on that occasion, and all the Government side
of the House on which I sat listened with feelings of
disgust while he ' higgled and haggled' in that expla-
nation.--(thar.) There was but one man on that
side of the House who vociferously cheered, and that one
man was Sir James Graham." Now, Sir (continued Mr.
Hogg), is there any human being who could read that
article without an impression that it distinctly charges
me with having been influenced by Sir James
Graham and the Government basely to forego my
duty, and to give a verdict for the purpose
of excluding from the House a person not
acceptable to them ? In a court of justice when
we seek the obvious meaning of a libel, we ask what is
the ordinary acceptation of its terms. I ask you to look
at this journal itself—to examine its comments on this
imputation upon me—and then I ask any gentleman who
has heard me read the extract, if he can have any doubt
that the imputation cast on me is that of having been
influenced by the basest and most dishonourable motives,
and having made myself the instrument of Sir James
Graham in unseating Mr. Walter from his place in this
House? I ask if any gentleman could have any doubt on
the subject? I do not complain of the terms in
which my decision has been spoken of. My " higg-
ling andhaggling" has been dwelt upon, my determination
has been dwelt upon, but of this I do not complain. The
subject was properly treated by the Noble Lord the
Member for London last night, when he said, that whe-
ther my deductions were right or wrong—whether my
law was good or bad, that was nothing to the
purpose—that whether my explanation was sa-
tisfactory or not was nothing to the purpose.
I allow every one to form his opinion on these points,
and to express that opinion as they please. I confine
myself to the one point of the charge that imputes to me
impure and dishonourable motives.—(Hear, hear.) I
confine myself to this single point ; and when this
House talks of keeping its jurisdiction within itself
'and of not resorting to another tribunal, how can it
command the confidence of the public if it allow its
sworn officeis to be thus assailed ? I hope that those
who are more conversant with the forms of this House
than myself will kindly suggest what the proper motion
ought to be. My idea was, and I assure the House that
I never communicated it to a single individual below me,
but ' from the long standing of the Right Hon.
Baronet in .the House, and from his exalted
position, he might be able to treat with in-
difference in this House what I could not
consistently with my duty pass by; and, as the sworn
officer of this House, I think I have a still stronger
right to request and demand of it, not protection, but
justice—(Hear, hear)---than even the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet himself. I ask the House if these are imputations
made on my honour and integrity in the discharge of
my duty, and, if they are, I call on the person making
them to substantiate those charges, and here I am to
meet them.—(Cheers.) If I had done anything to create
a doubt or suspicion of my conduct I should be satisfied
to meet the consequences, but if no man can state any
such grounds, or raise any such doubts in the minds of ho-
nourable men, then I have a right to the protection of the
House, and I hope it will afford it to me.—(Hear, hear.)
therefore, trust you will afford me that justice which
you can afford to me, and that is to declare that I acted
honourably in the discharge of the public duty
imposed on me by the House, and to stigma-
tise those who have cast on me this foul
imputation.—(Loud cheers.) I apologise—but I
feel I need not apologise to the House—(Cheers)—but
the House will recollect I did not bring this forward—
(Hear, hear)—l had not the slightest idea of noticing
it ; but when it was noticed in this House my personal
honour required that it should not be allowed to rest
there.—(Hear.) I have been told it was unworthy of
my notice, and perhaps I ought to apologise to the House
for calling its attention to what was stated in a public
journal. But it was stated in order to poison the mind
of the public against me, and it was as base an insinua
tion as the other. It stated that I was looking for some
office or employment from the Government. I ought to
apologise to the House for noticing it ; I feel it humiliating
to reply to such a charge ; but on my honour, never,
either directly or indirectly, from any member of the
Government, or any person connected with the Govern-
ment, have I obtained, or asked, or sought, or applied
for, or looked for, any office, or employment, for my-
self, or any human being belonging to me.—(Loud
cheers.) , This insinuation is as base and false as the
other, and with the exception of sending an application
to my Hon. Friend for the situation of a guager, backed
by representations from the place I represent, with
that exception I never asked for place or emolument for
myself from any Government past or present. I ought to
apologise to the House for this; but these calumnies are
sent into the world, and circulated by'a journal which is
extensively read, and which ought to be above making
such imputations—(Hear, hear)—and I therefore
think it is my duty to declare indignantly that they
are false.—(The Hon. Gentleman sat down amid loud
cheers.)
Sir J. GRAHAM then rose and said, the House will
bear in mind that, at the very moment the Hon. Moil-
her for Knaresborough resumed his seat, I rose for the
purpose of addressing it ; and, Sir, I must remark,
after what has fallen from the Hon. and Learned
Member for Beverley, that in this House there is no
distinction amongst us. We are all honourable men,
enjoying the highest honour which in a free country
can be imposed on any gentlemen, that of being chosen
by the people as their representatives in this assembly.
—(Hear, hear.) I conceive that when the honour of a
Member of this House is assailed, the honour of the House
itself is is jeopardy, and that it is not the duty of the
individual Member to vindicate his honour so assailed ;
but that it is the duty of the House to ascertain whether
the stain cast on the honour of that Member was
well founded, If it is the opinion of the
House that the charge is well founded, it is their
duty to expel the Member guilty of dishonourable con-
duct, in order that the honour of the House may remain
unstained. The House will recollect that last night I
waived my privilege of moving that the words
be taken down by the clerk at the table.
I am now limiting my observations to the chargef which e
the Hon. Member has preferred against mysel. Th
accusation was this :—I had used my official power for
the purpose of obtaining a false report. These
identical words. Yesterday I stated that I waived
my right to have those words taken down. I said
it was better the Hon. Member should have an oppor-
tunity of substantiating his charge. I referred also
on this occasion to another charge, which in general
terms the Hon. Member for Knaresborough directed
against the Hon. Member for Beverley and myself.
The lion. Gentleman said that the charge was contained
in a report of his speech which had appeared in the Times
newspaper, and asked him to come down with
report in order to add the general charge against
the Honourable Member for Beverley and myself
to the more specific charge against myself alone. I
certainly fully expected when the Honourable Member
rose in his place, that he came down so prepared, and
to give effect to the resolution, I understood. him for-
mally to have announced last night. Certainly when I
rose to address you, and comment on his extraordinary
omission on the first and substantial charge
against myself, and also on his having for-
gotten what I understood he had promised
in reference to the Hon. Member for Deverley, and I