The Sun.
London, England, 1818-02-11 00:00:00

sittsiett 'he was its ettofy way ditquatinen. Ike le.obt
'welt offered protection as it wit.ne.s, but no re-
ward as an into) titer. It was far from his Wish
to &creel, any one from justice Omit unless he opal,
believe Campbell, it was useless to vote for the
production of the record ; and as be could not do
this, he must vote against the motion.
Sir S. hostmtv said; the Right Hon. Gentle-
man bad quoted a copy of the triad which he had
not seen, and of which no man in the country but
the Lord Advocate had a copy.
Mr V. FITZ.GRRALD was not aware that his
copy of the trial was different from that of the
Hon. and [warned Gentleman, as he had heard
that which be held in his hand quoted from the
opposite sick of the House.
The Lout) Act*-ocaTE. of Scotland stated the
copy to hat:e been published by the authorised
short-band %%Aker. it would have been published
sooner, but theyeporter havini, sent the speeches
of the prisoner's counsel to them for correction,
they had keet them from the month of August till
the end of January, and in the mean time a muti-
lated and incorrect report had appeared.
Mr. J. P. GRANT explained the circumstances
tinder which the publications last alluded to haft
appeared. The delay which-had occurred in cor-
recting the speiChes
~was caused by the notes of
the short-band writer having been so Very iocor-
rect , and so oriirstelligible, that had it required great
labour on the part of the. Counsel for Ilse prisoner
to correct and make out their owo reasoning,
The Avroasait-Ggsanat: observed, that in the
testimony of Campbell be had seen an account of
an artful matt who could build a large fabric of
falsehood to disqualify himself, as a witness, be-
canse he could tell what he knew. Every rum was
bound to appear in a Court at Justice, but it did
not toilow that a man attacked by a witness shOuld
be called to account by the House of Commons.
He _could not sanction a motion that imputed
blame to the Lord Advocate, for the question
se;Illy was a charge against the Leitrned Lord.
He bad . said, as had been quoted bribe Noble
Lord (Hamilton) that no communication had
been sought by him with witnesses: Still, bow-
ever, there must be some communication between
himself and witnesses, in order to a prosecution.
He should have felt it his duty to have acted like
the Lord Advoc:ite, had he beet) told by a wit-
ness that his life would be in (longer it lie be-
cause an evidence, and lie certainly should have
given hint assurance of protection. That
cook, not be called tampering with a witness,
and no promise of that kind cutild disqualify a
man from appearing to give evidence. Atallary
was often concealed in general proportions— dolas
verscaur in generalibus ; and that had been exem-
plified in the arguments upon the present ques-
tion. Though he would not defend the proceed-
ing, as it had been described by the Cvntlentk.n
opposite, be would defend it as it really was, and
must oppose the motion.
Mr. FIN LAY did not see how the House could
get out of Alkis• business in a satisfactory inannel?,
without calling for the production of t..tie recto d
he wished the present motion to be carried, as be
desired an inquiry into the whole of the late pro-
ceedings._
Lord A. Hatatwrost replied at some length, and
argued, that if some forthee inquiry were not
grouted, the vote of the House this night would
not clear the characters of the parties who had
been charged withimproper,conduct, nor satisfy
the eoantry.
The House tine dividesi, when the numbers
were—

Ayes.. • ..
Non 136
Majority against the Motion.. ,
GAM/NG HOrSES.

Mr. OGLE obtained leave to bring in a Bill for
the effectual suppression of Gaming, and the bet-
ter regulation of Houses of Play.
The remaining Orders bring disposed of, the
House Adjourned at HALP•PAST TWELVE.