The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-15 00:00:00

THE St N, LONOON, TUESDAY MORNING, .JULY 15, 1845.

Patlilment. In 1625, in the reign of Charles the First, a
progenitor of a Noble Lnrd in that House (the Earl of St.
Germ ins), along with Se!den, Stroud, and Pym, requested to
pail a teu,ain qui-stint, to the Horse. Orders came from the
King that th qu 6t,ou should not be put, ar4 P rliament was
dissolved. These paHe, were arr• d vrol the Attorney-
General instiluted proceedings against them in the Queen's
Bench. The proceedings were carried on, the question was
fully argued before the judges, and they convicted these five
illustrious men, on the ground that, though they had spoken in
Parliament, they had spoken in an unparliamentary way, and
were, therefore, amenable for the words spoken. They were
severally fined. He would refer to another case, in whica a
Member of the House of Commons, Sir William Will:arils, for
putting his name to minutes of the House, by order, was prose-
cuted, and fined in the sum of 10,0001., 8,0001. of which he paid.
The Noble Lord, having given several other instances of
the practice of the several courts of law, the Common Pleas,
the Exchequer, and the Queen's Bench, proceeded to say that
there had been as yet no instances in which parties had been
proceeded against fir evidence given before a Committee. It
was only in these speculative times that such a course could
be conceived of; and he was of opinion that unless they in-
stantly put a stop to such proceedings, and vindicated their
privileges, actions of this kind would be multiplied to an in-
definite extent. There was no confidence to be placed in the
courts of law, as far as their privileges were concerned. For
the good of the people, as well as for the independence of the
House, they were bound to take steps to put an end to those
proceedings. Unless they did so, their dignity would be
assai'ed, and their usefulness destroyed. —( Cheers. )
The Earl of WICKLOW said, if their Lordships intended
to proceed in the way they had specified, it could not fail to
lead to serious consequences. He had no doubt that a breach
of privilege had been committed, but it had grown out of a dis-
regard of the privileges which they possessed. It was a breach
of privilege to report their proceedings ; it was a breach of
privilege to publish evidence taken before a Select Committee.
They had winked at the breach of privilege committed in pub-
lishing the debates; they went further, and authorized the
sale of printed papers. Such a course was most objectionable, in
many cases, to individuals who had given evidence. These re.
ports should only lave been circulated amongst their Lord-
ships. The case before them arose out of the publicity which
had been given to evidence given by a witness before a Com-
mittee of that House. He had listened with great
attention to the speech of the Noble and Learned Lord on the
woolsack. Not fine of the cases brought forward by that
Noble Lord or by the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Campbell)
could fairly be applied to the ease before them. The majority
of the cases which had been cited were materially different from
that which then engaged their attention. He looked upon it
as one of expediency—of discretion. Would they enforce their
privilege? No. Because they were not popular with the
country. There' was a deep rooted antipathy to the privileges
of that House. If they were about to establish a precedent
they should take care of its nature. He hoped that the indi-
vidual would be able to get out of the dilemma in which their
Lordships were about to place him.
Lord CAMPBELL strongly advised their Lordships to put
a stop to the action.
The LORD CHANCELLOR then put the motion that
Mr. Hallow be committed to the custody' of the Usher of the
Black Rod until the further order of the House.—Agreed to.
Their Lordships then proceeded to consider whether the
plaintiff's attorney, Mr. Hardwin, should be also committed to
the custody of the Usher of the Black Rod.

Lord BiIOUGHAM said, what, might be considered con-
tempt in lAIO would now have a different construction upon it.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said the question was now
about the attorney. The case was a very extraordinary one,
and mignt be specially attributed to the attorney. It was this,
that the declaration concealed the fact that the evidence was
given to a Committee of the House of Lords. It stated that it
was given in a room before their Lordships. This was a very
important fact, and should have appeared on the face of the
declaration.

Lord BROUGHAM—That is the special cleadm-'s fault—not
that of ,he attorney.
Lord CA NIPBELL considered that they would do
wrong to commit the plaintiff, and not his attorney,
who was much morn to blame than him. Pettifovgirte
action, were brought by pettifogging attorneys, who in-
duced some party to become the plaintiff. He must
protest against the doctrine that it was the duty of a solicitor
to bting every action which he was instructed to bring. It
was the duty of an attorney to examine the cause of action—
that there was some reasonable cause for laying it. If they
committed one, they ought to commit the other.
Lord BROUGHAM said, I have a communication to make.
before you order the committal of this person, who has been
grievously injured. He has instructed his attorney to dis-
continue the action. I therefore think that you should proceed
no further.

The Earl of WICKLOW said, the plaintiff had stated that
when he brought the action he was not aware it was a breach
of privilege,
The LORD CHANCELLOR said in the present ease, as
far as it appeared to him, the attorney was the most guilty
party.—(Hear.) The plaintiff might know nothing of the
privileges of Parliament, but the attorney could not be ignorant
of them, and he wished to draw particular attention to the de-
claration. It stated that certain words were spoken in a certain
Committee, from thereports of which they were taken. It
dropped the word " Lords," and the mere dropping of that
word showed it had been loft out intentionally; because
any one doing so would have been guilty of a breach of pri.
vilege, so that the attorney was the most guilty party.
After a few words from Lord BROUGHAM,
The LORD CHANCELLOR put the motion that Mr.
Hardwin, having been guilty of a breach of privilege, should be
committed to the eu.tody of the Usher of the B;ack Rod, which
was agreed to, and the parties, who were in attendance at the
bar of the House, were then taken into custod--

Sir R. FERGUSON said that he considered this the most
important clause in the Bill The Government had taken to
t! ernselves every possible power in this case. They had taken
the power of building as many asylums as they thought fit, and
of making what rules they hail thought fit. But hey had left
the important subject of inspection altogether nnprovided rer.
The inspectors of prisons ',ere so placed that they courd not
discharge efficiently, and with due protection to the lunatics, the
office of inspecting the asylums as well as prisons. He would,
therefore, press upon the Government the necessity of making
an ample provision for frequent and careful inspection.
Lord CLENIENTS concurred in what had fallen from his
lion. Fnend, and hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir T.
Fremantle) would give some definite statement upon this sub-
ject before the clause was finally determined on.
Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE was sorry that he could not
at present lay down any distinct proposition on the subject,
but he had no doubt that it would be necessary to make here-
after some larger provision for frequent and adequate inspection.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said, that if the inspectors of pri-
sons were to have the inspection of all the lunatic asylums, the
days of their visits would be regularly anticipated, and the ap-
pearance of the patients prepared for the examination in the
manner most creditable to the managers.
Lord C. HAMILTON took the same view as the Hon.
Baronet (Sir W. Somerville), and hoped that the Government
would take measures to secure an efficient system of in-
struction.

Colonel RAWOON said that the evidence contained in the
reports before the ',louse showed how little the present system
of instruction availed for the protection of the inmates.
After some further desultory conversation, the clause was
agreed to. _

Clause 24, being the interpretation clause, was agreed to
without discussion.

Clause 25, which limits the operation of the Bill to Ireland,
was agreed to, as was also the 26th clause, which provides
that the Act may be amended.
The preamble was then agreed to, the House resumed, and
the report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow.
SECOND READINGS.
The Turnpike Acts Continuation Bill, the Loan Societies
Bill, the Highway Rates Bill, and the Militia Ballets Bill,
were severally read a second time, without discussion, and
ordered to be committed to-morrow.
The House then adjourned till Five o'clock.

The House resumed at Five o'Clock.
LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER RAILWAY.
On the motion of illy. BROTHERTON, the consideration
of the Lords' amendments to the Liverpool and Manchester
Railway Bill was postponed till to-morrow.
MONMOUTH AND IfEtiEFORD RAILWAY.
Tne Monmouth and Hereford Railway Bill was read a third
time and passed.
BRIGHTON AND LEWES RAILWAY.
Mr. LASCELLES brought up the report on the Brighton,
Lewes, and Hastings Railway (Hastings, Rye, and Ashford
Extension) Bill.
The South-Eastern Railway (Tunbridge to Tunbridge
Wells) Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Lords' amendments to the Keyingham Drainage Bill
were agreed to.
The report on the Yoker Road Bill was brought up.
White's Charity Estate Bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed.
SOUTH WALES RAILWAY.

The South Wales Railway Bill was read a third time, and
pas,ed.
Ellison's Estate Bill was read a second time, and ordered to
be commuted.
GREAT NORTH OF ENGLAND RAILWAY.
The Lords' amendments to the Great North of Enr,land
Clarence and Hartlep3ol Jupation) Railyßill were agreed to.

and if that magistrate were respected, this loss of life would not
have taken place,
Sir T. VIIEMANTLg, in answer to the question, said ho
would feel it to be his duty to abstain from giving any opinion
which might affect the proceedings before a competent tribunal.
He might s however, that there had been mote then one
magist rate present at liallinhassy during the day on which the un-
fortunate occurrence took place. It was nine o'cloc•k at night
when it to,tk place, and there were then no magistrates present.
With reference to the orders alluded to, he would decline at
present giving any opinion regarding the issue of such a di-
rection.