The Sun.
London, England, 1810-05-12 00:00:00

pliCifly in the enlightened philosophy of (he et'eceti.r:
times. He would not here stop to comber'. pre."
j
. . • -• •
udite by , prejud7ce, or ekamine how far an
:so, frivolous should' be allewed -to .inealidate
an sutliolity so weighty ; but he would take one of
tildie Whom he had understood to have been chiefly
keliedT upon out of that lionse, as. layieg down 00'
pions hostile io the extent end exercise of their pri"
vileges : he meant Sir William Blacksione.
Judge had been cited in away so imperfeElly- as t 9
the context, and so ignorantly as to the copse"
,gnence, (hat' he was considered by wine of those
whb had suffered therriselves to be -so egregiously
deceived; as laying down principles incompatible
with what were called the 'Privileges of Pad*
ment. 'Here the 'Right Honourable dentleeerP.
referred to Blackstone 's Comrnentaria, and i:eo4
from it a passage to the following died :-ee"
Maxims upon which they proceed, together with ill
method' of proceeding, rest entirely in. the. breast of-
the.Parliarneet 'itself; aedare'not dt fined -and aster'
tamed- by any particular stated laws.-111e.prix'?
leges of Parliament are likew.oe very large and reb7e`
definite.' And therefore when in 31 Hen. VI.- lbee:
House of- Lords propounded a question to theiteles'
concerning them, the Chief Just ice' Sir John Fortes"
cue, in the name of hts brethren, 'declared,. ", that '
they ought .net to' make' answer to that question
for it hash not been used aforetime- that 04
Justices should in any wise determine-- the privi"
leges. of the High Court of Ritlimente- For it iti so
high and mighty in its nature, that _it may make
law : and -that- which is law, it may make 11°.
late : and 'the determination and knowledge °I
that privilege belongs to the -Lords of Parliament,
and. trot to the-Justices." • Privilege of Parliament •
• was principally established, in order to protect its
Members not only feom being molested by their
fellow7sobjeds, but also more especially from being
oppressed by the power.of the Ctown. If, there'
fore all the privileges of Parliament were. once. to be
set down and ascertained, and tio privilege tobe
allowed but what was so defined and :determined, i‘
were easy for the executive power to devise s°l''e
new case, .not within the line of privilege, and 110-1
der pretenee: thereof to harass any refractory Mem."
bear. and violate the freedom of, Pe-liar:tent.
dign i ty and independence of the two Houses are there'
lore in a great measure preserved by keeping Oleic
privileges -indefinte."—After having read this P 35.
sage from Blackstone's Commentaries, .be hoped t°
Lear no more of Sir William ilackstone• He flex.
referxed to a treatise written'on the Power of parti.:
ament,,by Sir Robert Atkins, one of the Judges
the Cotirt of CoMmon Pleas.---a man whoa) bi 6
described as a -sound and - constitutional Lawyer.,
He read e - passage frOM the sixty-ninth page °I
this' treatise, which was in- substance that " Hay:
lug- made it appear -that the power of. the High
Court of Parliament; though divided sometimes
the*xercise, was:.the same in effeel, however exert:
cited, whether in its legislatii e capacity as a bran"
of the Legislaturee or in its iud.cial character as the
Magna Curia, orin capacey of-a Council,•as
Communia Cqatsilia Beg nit" Though all7s:dtastrin'
was now thought not to- he maintainable in the'9
enlightened times, :Jet this - was- no new discovery',
the same objections were started- a- hundred years
ago, but the objection was rested upon the-atria:tat
principle, indepen..knt of the Constituton; and• tint
upon ary principle-derivable from the Constittition•
The objection rested on a principle that applied t°
,all-Governments. Ncine.had, noneever could_nec'l";
stitnted so perfect as' not to leave a discrm- tionary pow'
somewhere. This was the principle of the objections
of Lord Heir, in that...memorable case in Vine!)
dissented from the eleven Judges of that day, , His
argument was, that the aouse of Commons ryay.
declare any thing' they please' privilege. But tl)';
proved nothing more than that power might b
abused-e-Was it, therefore, not to exist at all ? YePa
sty the Objections, but in a detipite form.. .1301 !",
law of the land said otherwis--the moment pr'T
lege of Parliarne.nt became defiehe it was subjuganhf
The law of the-land was not to be overturned. -
the law of Parliament. be supposed to be limited IV;
sound discretion, the Judges are eat to presll-1%
'otherwise. The Judges are in .to case to prestyli.
that Parliament has abused
.their privileges; their
privileges ,exist in itheir own good pleasure; their
!
own discretion is the essence of- that privilege•-:-"If
.the one be removed the other is. destioyesi,
sides Lord Hoot's objection went as leech to liunea,
nature itself as to the privilege of PA-hail-Jew, WWl'
men are men, some part of the.most,peifeet
nary Government must be left the discretion
thelir rulers. But- Loud Holt, in laying down b!:
opinion neon a siegelar iticiple, stood alone
that opinion. Was it nothing that "die rein-3401_
11 judges of the land were of an opposite opinion.
And here it was carefully to be remetil6,-,r,A,
an eng them there were many as z:ble, sound, C°'';
H
•stitutiorial Lawyers as Lord Hole hiMself. Bo' 1,1
had been argued; that no unlined undctitls'
power ought to be known by the ge
did' not argue thus for what . ought to he, but* wh'tt
*actually .was: The Constitution veselei
and-there could be no Constitution under
which fnUst. not' vt.st 'disc:fttrio() sorUe w here. ',if A.if
King's Bench passes an erroneous judgmcnt in 141%."
there-lay an appeal' by Writ of Eire to the Hoe'
of Lords—their Loreships may ceetirm that Trutt;
indgment insteadeOfeesci ding it, here
injuryar a reMedeeebut who would,ar"%d
front thence egeinst the ~vi,dpi,n of vesting suchcretion in:the Hotee ? It the Judges of the king's.
,Bench were guilty so:: willutcorruptgii),
,the 000.,e
of Co 41) 01_0.0 t at;e coniz.trice(l-. such alleL"
offeeee, eat: p.roceed to pruseetue such malversation
to..con"dign -.punislimeote But Who shall calf lb°
Parliteneet to account'? if the people dO Clot
prove of the cendect of their Bepiestentatives, iheY
may ref uee to-re7elect them mgein roact for t 1 Wl°
in diet f-L-2-)use when they go beck to than for re-cie"e"
ion. The, people sorely would not proceed tost4l'
the Parliament by 'at tempts if, deprive them of their
privilge.s. lint it was stilt contended, that the HoP'sc
had no power to conirnit!or libel. Where s , he 'itgr'..•
were they to lot* for the privilege of Parliatnent• tt
no! in the Customs and pr:ictices of Rirlianeen[ ?""
such a position, the api)lic3,-,
titer w‘es notediflicult ; ter efroe, the earliest
tttitt litAsoltad--beeri in habit conlinitting .f°f
- lib 1, and y'.4l,!erous 6:piessions. They woctu
tin) instance of it so. tar hasek -as in the 59•11
pvolume .'of eee of the first volum'of their Journals, followed
.by
.numerous othi.-rs in the.subsequent volumes.
La v, of Parliament was on this head as, dear, :16