The Sun.
London, England, 1819-03-27 00:00:00

NEW SOUTH WALES.

Mr. BENNET communicated to the House that
the motion which he intended to brine forward
that day, for an instruction to the Committee on
Nils to enter on an inquiry► into the state of the
Cololly of • New South Wales, was now unne-
cessary, as he was glad in being enabled to state
that the Comtnittce bad since decided on the pro-
priety of that investigation, and would proceed on
it on Monday.

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.

Lord A LTHORP stated to the House his desire
to communicate an •occurrence, of which, as in-
volving a breach of its privileges, be felt it'bis
duty to lose no time it, putting them in possession.
1340 re the Select Committee on the Worcester
Election Petition, a soldier of the name of Wm.
Stinton, of the ist Foot Guards, was examined.
It appeared that in the lobby of that House this
soldier was arrested by a military Officer, on the
ground of being that day absent from his military
duty. As soon as the transaction was made known
to the Committee, it was presumed that no further
step would be taken against the witness, and that
it :would be unnecessary for the Committee to
mention it in their Report. He had however since
understOml that the Man had been flied by a Court
Martial and found guilty. He was not aware
(whether any punishment in consequence of that
trial had taken place. The proceeding '• probably
had origiumed in a mistake, but it amounted un-
doubtedly to a breach of privilee'; and of all
breaches those committed by a militaty authority
called for the most vigilant aitention of that
House. Having mentioned the circumstance, he
wished to leave to the opinion of the House itself
the mode of proceeding that ought to be adopted.

The lion. Colonel TOWNSEN D said (as far as
the Hon. Member could be understood, who spoke
in a low tone), that the soldier was arrested by a
seri?.ant, not for his having attended tl►e Com-
mittee, but for the breach of a military duty. The
serjeant heard he was gone to the ltibby, and fol-
lowed him there. The man had behaved very
ill when arrested by the serjeaut, and had run
away front hint. lie hart] been tried since by
Court Martial, but as he did not command the
regimen!, he did not know the sentence.
A MEN'S ER, whose name could not be !ea►rned,
said, the arresting a soldier in the lobby of that
House, he being a witness, seas a breach of pri-
vilege, and thought the House should adopt sonic
measure to vindicate its jurisdiction,—(hear !)

Sir M. W. ItIDLRY said, there could be no
4ionbt that the privileges of the House were vio-
late:l. Some step must therefore be adopted to
expuss its disapprohaiion,
General Putris ohserved, that it was not for
his attendance at the Cwornitiee the soldier was
tried, but for a dbtioct m;litary ()Wrote. _ _

11 r, TiF.RNrY said, the,military offence of the
soldier was not the conii(leration. The goe•tion
was, had this man b-en obstrncted in that free
egress anti rt-gb-ess to which., a witikess, sum-
moned to give evid,-itee before a Committee of
that douse, he was cntillvd ? If that •obsttnction
had been given, and that was admitted, it was im-
possible-but that the House should t Ake some step.
if it did not, its silence would have the effect of

isteVentiug pAirlculasiy,
from attending, when their presence and evidence
wcre necessary to the examination of. any ques-
tion before that House.

Mr. BECKEIT spoke a few words in so low a
tone as not to be audible in the Gallery. He was
understood to say that the House should take no-
tice of the proceeding, but that he believed the
offence fur which the soldier was tried was wholly
of a military nature. _

Mr. .11gNsET wished to have the Minutes of the
Court Martial produced. They would shew the
exact o►tfence on which the soldier eras-arrested.
The Honourable Officer (Townshend) said, he
did not know the sentence, or whether the man
was punished. To be legally punished, he
must have been legally arrested ; b►►t he was
arrested in the lobby of that House, which
was nu illegal arrest ; and if punishment followed,
no matter what the offence, it was au illegal pu-
nishment.

Sir C. MoNck considered this a violation of a
most important
.privilege. The House, was bound
to protect its witnesses, and it, doiog so it only
he same power which every Court of
Justice possessed, and when necessary exerted.
,t'ir JAMBS MACKIN-I'ost( observed, th it every
Membrr must adroit, that one breach of the ori-
vilege of that House had been committed. Anti
a mote serious violation of its authority could not
be tm,sgined than the forcible arrest of one of i,s
witnesses, within the lobbies of that House, by a
military-Officer. If the house a few nights back
felt it to be its itisperative• duty to punish a pri-
vate individual (Mr. T. G. Grady) for a mere
threat toe witness in attendance by its order, on
what pretence could they-soff,.r to pass with im-
punity, and without. notice, the forcible arrest of
another-witness, and that too by military autho-
rity ! It was, therefore, with the greatest sur-
prise he turderN?ood the Military Law Adviser of
the Crown (Mr. Beckett) to extenuate the con-
duct of that military Officer, on the 'ground of
his ignorance of the privileees of that House, in
other words, of the law of the land. That exte-
nuation was no sort of justification. It would be
a most monstrous doctrine to send abroad, under
the sanction of the high authority of the Niiiitary
Law Adviser of the Cro%vo, that violations of its
privileges by Military Officers were to be excused,
because the persons violating. were ignorant of
those privileges. He (Sir J.) telt the House
should issue an order for the attendance of the
Serjeant, and it the Sol.lier was under attest, to
have him also produced.
Mr. BECK ErTT, in explanation, said that the
Hon. Baronet Was wholly mistaken in supposing
that he had ,extenuated the conduct of the Set-
jeant, on the ground of his ignorance of the pri-
vileges of that House. As to the Court Martial,
he understood it was solicited by the soldier.
Sir J MACKLNTWtt said, the contrary-was the
impression of himself and his friends near hint,
and he was_ glad he afforded the Hon. Member the
opportunity of removing it.
Mr. BENNET said, it was probable the soldier
solicited the Court Martial, because he would
have been flogged without it.
After a few words from Mr. Wm. SMITH, Lord
AlnaParli tnoved, that in consequence of an arrest
of a witness of that House on Satarday last, the
Seijeatit of the Ist Foot Guards, who was em-
ployed to arrest him, be ordered to attend on
Tuesday next.
Mr. IV. WYNN said, that though not in his
place when the discussion commenced, he Lad
heard sufficient' to convince him that to delay so
important a subject to Tuesday was extremely ob-
jectionable. He felt the imporance of the sub-
ject, fixed for Monday, still be thought the present
question could not be postponed. Ott a former
case of an arrest of a witness by a civil officer, the
House proceeded forthwith. Ile was fully of opi-
nion the same course ought to be followed in the
present instance.--(Hear, hear !)
Colonel BARRY suggested, that as there was no
proof at present of the Serj:fant's being employed,
that word should be left our.

The CHANCKLLQR of the EXCHEQUER acquiesced
in the opinion, that the motion should he for the
House proceeding forthwith in the ; and it
being thus amended, the motion was agreed to.
Mr: BENNET could see no objection to the pro-
duction of the Minutes of the Court Martial.
After a few observations from some other Mem-
bers, it-was ordered that W. Stinton, the witness,
be also ordered to attend forthwith.