The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-27 00:00:00

only question W:l3, whether it. was advisable for them to submit
patiently and silently to the judgment pronounced by the G;urt
of Queen's Bench, as contended for by the Hon. Gentleman
the Arember for the University of Oxford, and by. those who
followed in his track. He must confess that if this question
turned ultimately upon the narrow and technical ground men-
tioned by Mr. Justice Littledale, he should not be disinclined
to adopt the views of the Hon. Member for ices University of
Oxf ird. But, in considering this question, he could not con.
cea; from himself the doctrines which had been laid down by
two of the majority of the judges who decided the question
against the defendants, for he could not but consider it to he a
case of imminent ranger to allow principles so laid down by
those learned judges—principles fraught with danger to the
privileges of that House—to remain unquestioned. The House
sheutd not merely regard a temporary case, but should regard
its successors, and should not do anything which would perma-
nently cr pple their privileges. 'When he considered the man
tier in which this case had been conducted—when he consi-
dered the manner in which the judgment of the Court had
betn followed up— and when he considered all . the
other circumstances of the case -he could not sub-
mit patiently and quietly to such a judgment as that
which had been pronounced, without calling upon the House
to interfere; and the interference he would now suggest was
simply t. bring the case before the House of Lords by a writ
of erior from the Court. of Queen's Bench. He knew it would
be said by some, that such a course worati he taking an addi-
tional step in the wrong direction— ( Hear, hear )—that we
had suffered enough already from praceediega of this kind, and
that therefore there would be no use in now pursuing the same
dangerous course. Let him, however, remind the House that
this was nut the first time that such a course hail been ctopted ;
there were several other cases of a like nature on record, such
as the case of Abbott in error, though it might be said, that in
that case it was the plaintiff who made the appeal a but even
so, he would still contend for it that this was not a preceed-
ing in furtherance of an erroneous course adopted by that
House. Such a proceeding would be inevitable, and he thought
that they should not allow a judgment of any doubt in respect
to their privileges to stand without appeal. But it was said,
that in adopting the course recommended by the
Committee they would be proceeding in a wrong form.
But they had on many occasions allowed persons to plead to
actions brought against them for matters done under the au ho-
rity of the House, and thus they had left it to the Courts of
Law to decide on their privileges. The same question which
was referred to the Courts of Law would be referred to the
Court of Error. It was unfortunate that all the cases hitherto
had been before the G urt of Queen's Bench. He would not
say that the judges of that Court considered themselves pledged
to a particular course; but they certainly had sh iwn a very
strong opinion in res. ect to the privileges of that House. t_t
was, therefore, desirable to have the opinion of another tribunal.
He was extremely desirous that their prom edirgs should be
recommended to the public. He was most anxious that it
should not be supposed that that House was asserting a right
to the exercise of an unlimited owes,' or assuming a tittle be-
yoad what they were justly entitled to. He was most de-
sireus that the House should understand thai this was a question
of the deepest interest to themselve , and that their privileges
depended on the exercise of this power. He was perfectly
satisfied that the course the Committee had recomm nded, the
course he had proposed .to tl e House, was the most favourable
for bringing the public mind correctly to understand what was
tip• real point in this most important matter. He would ven-
ture to say that the temperate and favourable matitier—aed he
ht ped the Right Hon. Hember for the University of Oxford
would allow him to say the lawful manner—in which that House
had acted, would produce this result. Should they be deceived
in their expectations, and should the Court of Error take the
same, and, he must be permitted to say, the er oneous view,
taken by the Court of Queen's Bench, still the public mind
would be favourably impressed with the manner in which the
House had exercised that power. The difficulty of comino to a
proper conclusion on the subject was mainly owing to the- cir-
cumstance that there were s ill three actions peeding. in all of
which the House had given permission to the defendant to ap-
pear and plead. t ine of these action, .was laid at 100,001►!.
And why was this ? They had, in the fit at instance, asked Mr.
Howard to appear at the bar, he was imprisoned for contempt and
he afterwards brought an action, and was awarded the sum of
201., which, fortunately for the public, was all that was under
the declaration. He considered the course he had recom-
mended the beat to adopt in meeting the great diffieulty in.
volved in the present questioit. He knew that at the bast
they had but a choice of evils. Hr did nit know what course
he would ave advised under the circumstances, had tho pre-
sent action not been originated, aid had the subjeat been first
mooted in that House nefore the present action was bi ought.
He had merely opened the case with tae view of inducing others
in that House, who had more weight. and experience than him-
self, to give their opinion as to the wisest course to pursue.
He would conclude by moving that a writ of error be brought
against the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench in the
"
case of" Howard v Gossett.

_
MEt•SAGE Ftioll THE LORDS.
Messengers from the Lords brought up several Bills, which
were ordered to he laid on the table.
CONFERENCIt. 11-1 THE LORDS.
A messenger from the Lords r«que.ted a conference with the
Commons on the Railway Clauses (,cotland) Consolidated
13i11. The Commons consented, and a leputation way ap-
pointed for the purpose. when the messenger left the linuse.
The d, potation then tetu►ned from the conference with the
Lord-, the messenger reporting th-d their Lordship- hail re-
ferred the amendments in the Railway Consolidation. (Scot-
land) Bili, and assigned the reason- for their iwertion.
The debate on the question of Ptivilege" was, then re-
sumed.

Mr. HUME could not understand the. course.at present
q
pursued by the 1-1-ruse; the preper subject for discnssion was
that of the adjourned debate.—(Cries
of ". No, no.")
The SPEAKER intimated that last evening the Solicitor:
General had shaped the question of privilege to a, specific mo-
tion for tliseussion on this night.
Mr. HUME was at a loss to discover why the ordinary
practice of the House should. be departed fr.m on the present
occasion; and, as to the preserit question, they would be only
getting more and more into difficuUies as they went further in
the waver. The conflicting arguments of the Learned So-
licitor-General only confirmed 11,m in that belief, as. at one
time he defended one thing- and at another time -a "other.
He adm tted all his hopes were di-appointed—that a false s'el,
—a palpable error had been committed—and yet he advised.
them to go on in their mistake. - -He ( Nir. Hume) thought
they would be degrading themo-lvos below any other court in
the kingdom, if they submitted to the indignity of repeated
defett. The simple question was, whether the House would
-urrender their isghts to any other tribunal, 'r • eserve to
themselves the power of definine thei owe privileges. The
Solidi or-Genet al had alternately speculated upon a favourable
at d unfavourable result in their ap, eal to the superior House
in error; and while su.h un.:ertainty existed, the best course
the Herne could adopt was that recommended by the Right
Hon. Baronet opposite, and se.tle whatever vas to be done at
the present moment. It was a want of real courage not to
encounter the real difficulties of the ca-e. • The House ought
at once 'to take 'the course- which became it. • If they could
hey,- affirmed that it• was' a breach of privilege to levy the
moneit. -was no less a- breach of privilege now that it had
been levied. He would conclude by proposing the following
amendment, " that it is inexpedient to ems ust the privileges of
this Hoose-to any ether tribunal than the House itself."
e gallery was then cleared for a division, when there ap-
peered—
For the amendment. 46
Against it • 7B '
' • Majority against -the amendment —32
Mr. ROEBUCK resumed en the original motion, and said
the question now was as to what they were to do. The speech
of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Solicitor-General
had sufficierf•ly laid open the weak points of the case, and had
shown that threats alone would be the issue of the whole
of the warrants en which so much stress had been laid.
This was evidently the -long snd short of what would arise from
the nomination of the plead rig. In fact, there was no doubt
that these warrants were at i-sue with the ordinary law of the
!and. One of the must eminent of -the Solicitor-Generals
wh.s, had ever graced the Bench had first expressed that opinion,
and when he looked a, the sit, ech of the Solicitor-General he
saw that he came to the same conclusion. He rid not say so
,:ertandy, iut :hat was the real English of his- meaning. He
acknowledged ihat this was not so openly expressed as it might
have been, but still it was quite evident what the Him. and
Learned Gentleman's meaning was at the notion. He said
'that he did nut wish to •sp ak with any disrsspeet of the Court
of Queen's Bench, but it was evident that he th- ught that the
law of that court was very bad law, and that if they were
asked, the greater part of the judges would say so. But
the • thnourable Gentleman said, " Let us get to the Court
above." Why, what would be the result of such an applica-
tion? Why, thti they would he exposed togreater danger
than they were before. He would advise the taking 'an alto-
gether different course. Far what were they to do, suppos
ttg
the judges, or a majority of them, were to take the same view
Vale ea-e as the Court of Queen's Bench ? They would then
have a 1 the judges against them. And what view did they
think the leople ot England would take of this proceeding—
with a hat eye would they look upon the House of Commons?
With any respect or. with contempt? They would some of
them soon have to consider the orinions of the people. - He
would suggest, then, whether it would not be better to take
mother course, and to at once get rid of the difficulty in which
the- had been placed for the last ten years ? That he thought
wax I:iN far the most ad vi-able plan. and thos avoid altogether it.
terfoine with the liberties of the subject. What was the
'power on whit h they had acted? Was it any reasonable
.or
legal oower ? It was alleged that it was on the authority-of a
warrant, but he denied that this wa• a warrant or par-
took of anything to the nature of a wairatit ,in the
sense in which the term was ever used. 'Let them 'suppose a
ease. Suppose there was an invasion .if the country, and for
the urgency of the moment that ,House to resolve to call A. B
to the bar i.f the House. • According to the present decision
the Court of Que•-n', Bench vrouht issue its writ, arid at nice
r. here any individual from the, power of the House; ard by a
writ of habeas corpu• at once relieve the individual of whom he
had spoken Of all necessity of- atteneance upon the Home.
This would be a violet on of the i rivileges of the Hou.,e; and
from that moment the privileges of the House would be set
aside by a court of law accenting, ,o law. From that same
moment also that their privileges were violated there would be
a breach of the Constitution. for the House of C'romons was
the highest •anctuary of the Constitutions—( Hear, hear.) It
was all very well for Gentlemen to cry out " Hear, hear," but
why did they not follow out what thsy asserted in that House?
It would be better for them to at once say that they had
in this instance taken a wrong course. Let them
not take the chances of another tribunal. Let th--m
say at once that they had not taken the best time to vindicate
their privileges, but they were resolved to vindicate them in
future. Let the judgment be levied, and not in the usual way..
Let the -ZOO/ go by the board. But, then, there were three
Other cases, and what was to be done with' them ? Why let
them on those occasions re-assert the privil, ge. of that House.
Let them determine that they wound be treated with prop r re-
spect. They could not pursue the interior minis-ern of the law
before that House. Let them apprehend every person en-
gaged in commencing or carrying on any suit—plaintiff, attor-
ney, witnesses, whoever they might be, and imprison them.
Let every person who was, engaged in any way in comtnitting
a breach of the privileges of the House be brought forward and
laid by the heels. Let them assert-their privilege, and go the
whole length of it. Let them not have any of this trusting to
chances. Have no more of this shuffling, this handling of the
cards in the hope that it might turn up hearts for trumps.
the House were now, for some secret purpose. de-
Supposing
termined to sir with closed doors. Supposing they-were to ex-
clude all strangers and turn out the reporters opposite—how
were they to be affected by a habeas corpas,.supposing for the
right decision it was necessary to call some eight or ten men
to the bar of the House. Were they to be interrupted in this
fulfilment of duty because of the interference of the Court of
Queen's Bench ? They were sitting in secret conclave on
some case of emergency in which the country was in danger,
and was the first Minister of the Crown to be told by some Hon. I
Gentleman that it was all a mistake, that he knew better than the
Prime Minister what the state of the case was, and that. he
would not suffer the rights of the public to a knowledge of the
debates to be kept from the public on that occasion. Let then
the question be set at rest. Let them come to a resolution that
their privileges should not be inysded and commit any party
persisting in violating them, and maintaio their privilege:
with all the forde which they could command. (The Solieitors
General intimated some dissent.) The Hon.- and Learned
Gentleman intimated some dissent. But supposing the earn
d
error were to be annulled by the Court above and the decision
were to -he against hint ; how would he then proceed in up-
holdiT g the liberties 01 England ? He (Mr. Roebuck) knel
seinething of the way in which the liberties of Englishmen
were protected lay the Court of Queen's
tench. Thew. ole of
the judges might take the same view as the Cott, tof Queen's
s
139 pub—where, thee, would be the r,,r,4099 pc IS law% jet' of