The Sun.
London, England, 1829-05-19 00:00:00

admitting him to Ire beartl at the table, and
,ny Member of the House of Lords being admitted
.vithitt that House, being heard from the floor. I,
for one, therefore, shall be quite ready to concer
,n the motion of the Right Honourable Geritleuoi.
Nit. BROUGIL4II—My Right Hon. Friend
has anticipated the few ob,ervationa I had intended
io make. I differ from the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite in the view of the question totally ; for I
think the precediots that have been cited are
such as will bear out my first • proposition,
that the table of this House is the right place for the
Member of the county of Clare to be heard at. But I
certainly do not now mean to contend for his beittcr
heard at the table; for in following the one line of con-
duct rather than the other, according to precedent, I
think I should be putting the House to the necessity
of hearing a very unnecessary discussion, if I ,vere
to urge my views (which I am prepared to urge if
necessary) of the grounds on which I think Mr.
O'Connell has a right to appear at the table. We
have precedents of one that was called to the bar, and
4everal who were called into the House. Baring the
Hon. Member for the county of Clare at the bar,
will be no impeachment of his rights and privileges
as an unsworn Member. It will have this advath.
tape, and which I should be happy should attend it, it
will tend to prevent the
possibility of litigation e e.
where. Although I have no doubt whatever that my
k
Rt. Hon. and Learned Friend takes the correct view
of the statutes, in the opinion he has given that that
would be no infraction of those statutes, yet I
cannot answer for all other persons taking
the sante view, and it is barely possible that
advantage might be taken of the CllCUMstainee
by some others to give trouble to the Member for
the county of Clare, if he were admitted to the table.
It is possible also, if by possibility, a re-election of
that Member shall hereafter be deemed necessary, it
might lead hiin and his constituents who might after-
wards return him, into a question before a Committee
of this House, vhether or no. by entering into this
Manse, at this period, he had incurred some of the
forfeitures. Upon all these grounds, I for one cer-
tainly deem that the St course for. the House to take:

will address myself entirely to these three questions,
whether he is to be heard ? and, if heard, whether
at the table or the bar. Having given the hes.
consideration to this question since the adjourn-
ment on Friday, I am now of opinion that
under all the circumstances of the case, it certainly
would be right that Mr. O'Connell should be heard.
Whatever, Sir, our ultimate decision may be, I think
that decision will be more satisfactory, if we admit
the object of it to state his case in the manner I
shall hereafter make out. I conceive, Sir, the question
is not only a special, but an individual one, and there-
fore excepted from ordinary rules. But it may
be not merely a question of admission to privilege,
but it tray involve a question of liability to penal-
ties, because questions may arise as to which of the
two oaths was proper to be taken by the indivi
dual. If he took the wrong oaths, I apprehend
certainly that he will be subject to penaltie-
io law. He will have entitled himself
to take his seat under those oaths which he
ought not, and will therefore lay himself open
to those penalties which may be recovered.
As to the question, if it be the pleasure of
the House to bear him, whether it should be at
the table or at the bar, for myself, I have no hesi-
tation in saying, it would not be fitting to permit
him to be heard at the table.—(Hear, hear.) I
think there is nothing in the precedents which
entitles him to be heard argumentatively .at the
table. Ido not know whether it is the wish of the

House that I should enter into these precedents, but
I shall not do so unless the House desires me. I be-
lieve the whole precedents bearing on this case,
are limited to Lord Fanshawe, the case of Sir H.
Monson, Mr. Cholmondeley, and the case of the Con-
vention Parliament. In addition to this there is also
the case of Mr. Archdale, the Quaker, and
Mr. Wilkes, who was brought up in custody
at the bar. Fanshawe, Monson, and Cholmonde-
ley, were very peculiar cases. They were
Members of the Convention Parliament, and

is to prefer, of the two, both of which are open, that
of giving the Hon. Member the opportunity of being
heard at the bar, and therefore of adopting the.
amendment of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite.
The SPEAKER then put the amendment,
which was carried without opposition.
Mr. BROUGHAM then observed that he
considered it would not only be expedient to give
Mr. O'Connell the opportunity of being heard forth-
with, but that the House should proceed and come
to their final decision upon the question.

had sat in the House without having taken any
oaths whatever. They had never taken the oaths
before either the Lord Steward or at the table of
the House. In fact it was impossible they could have
done so, for the Oath of Allegiance was prescribed
by King James, and therefore they could not take it.
But they sat as Members of the Convention Parliament,
and were parties to a Parliament declared to be good.
They were sent there when an Act passed abrogat-
ing the Oath of Supremacy, and prescribing new
oaths. The law required that after the 6th March,

Mr. PEEL then made an observation in a iov
tone of voice, which we understood to be assenting
to this proposition. •
The SPEAKER now put the question, that Mr.
O'Connell be called to the Bar, which was carded
unanimously.
Mr. O'Connell in a few minutes made his ap-
pearance at the Bar.
The SPEAKER then addressed him thus
O'Connell, the House have . resolved that von ho
heard at the Bar by yourself, your Counsel, or

1689, every Member of the Convention Parliament Agents, in respect of yOur claim, to sit and vote in
should take the oathsof supremacy in lieu of the oaths Parliament without taking the oath of supremacy. ,
before taken. On the second day a call of the House Mr. O'Connell then bowed and said—l am
was ordered, and it was noticed that several Mem- sure I cannot, Sir, be accused of any affectation ,
hers were absent, and they were called upon to at- when I state that lam very ignorant of the forms of
tend, and to take the oaths of supremacy and alle. this House, 1 therefore require the kind in- ,
giance first, as prescribed by the Act of Wil- dulgence of the House • and I earnestly solicit the
liam and Mary. That was tendered to them. At ready restraint of you, Sir, if I should in any respect
the table they declined taking the oaths, alleging it trespass upon the rules of the House. Sir, 1 claim
was impossible for them so to do. I apprehend, my right to sit and vote in Parliament as the Repre-
Sir,
that the Member for Clare did expressly sentutive of the county of Clare without taking the
the same thing. The Speaker having tendered oath of supremacy. I am ready to take the oath
to him the oath of supremacy according to his opi- of allegiance provided by the recent statute
nion, and the Member having declined to take for the relief of his Majesty's Roman Catholic
it, was ordered to withdraw. Those Members did subjects, if it be deemed necessary. My desire is
what the Member for Clare has done. They stated to have that oath administered to me, and of course
their objections, and were ordered to withdraw. But I must be prepared to shew that I um qualified in
they did not address any argument to the House point of property ; and whether the House thinks I.
upon the subject; in my opinion they were ince- can take the new oath or not : if I am required
pable of doing so, for they were not capable of being to take both, lam willing at my own hazard to sit,
present until they were qualified to sit by law. The and vote in the House. My claim is to sit and vow
case of Archdale was -pretty nearly the same; in this House. lam returned, duly elected, by the '
he was not a Member of the Convention Par- proper Officer, Member for Clare. By that return it
liament, he was called to the table of the House, appears that a great majority of the legal voters of the
the oaths were tendered to him, he declined to take county of Clare voted for my return—that retorts
them, and was ordered to withdraw. The terms was further confirmed by a Committee of this House,
in which he signified his disinclination to take the —confirmed by the unanimous decision of that
oaths, were not the same as those of Sir H. Monson Committee. I have therefore as good a tight to sit
and Viscount Fanshawe. They were not permitted and vote in this House, according to the principles
to address any arguments to the House. Then, in of the Constitution, as any of the Honourable and
the case of Mr. Wilkes, which my Right Hon. Friend Right Honourable Members by whom I am now
thought was a good foundation for thinking that the surrounded. The voice of the people has said-1
Member for Clare should be heard at the table, am the representative of the people of the counts of
Mr. Wilkes was brought up in custody of the Mar- Clare, and I now stand here upon const;.',utio nal
shat of the King's Bench, and appeared at the bar of grounds, claiming to sit and vote in this House.--
.the House. But before he was examined, or any The Statute merely enjoins that Christians of every
thing passed, he desired to put this preliminary denomination shall take the oath of allegiance, whit
question to the House, whether or not, as he hati no one is more willing to take than I aro. It not only
not taken the oaths, and had not presented his qua- requires the subscribing to this oath, but it pro-
lifications at the table—whether he had subjected vides remedies exceedingly extensive and unlawful
himself to the penalties prescribed by the Act for the purpose of piwsahing those who pre-
of Charles 11. He was ordered to withdraw; the sume to sit without taking them—amongst those
subject was referred to the House, and their opi- is the penal sum of 5001., to which I feel it
nion delivered to him, that there was nothing in necessary here merely to advert in general terms, a' •l
:11 called a
iii the Act which prevented him from appear- shall have to speak more largely on that-si:lyi„eli
s
ing at the bar. Independently, Sir, of these hereafter. In that Act I finda_e l
acluus:
precedents, I think the question may be fairly by a discourteous use of hutirap
left to be tried by common sense. Assuming Papist, and this clause I tb..-iik worthy of some
that the oath of Supremacy is in force amid- observation. The object of it is manifest by
i r
rg t o
ing to the decision of the law, assuming that the oath its title, It is) I 4:l;iiik, quite plain, that as long as
of supremacy should be taken by the Member for that Act rernained in Pince it was imposible for a
Clare, I apprehend that it would be quite impossible Catholic to sit for any county. I found a reference
for him to be present at our arguments, or that the to that clause in one of the Statute-books belong
House should permit him to take part in them. The the library of this House, and that Act was repealed
, in the time of William and Mary. At the period of
law subjects a Member, if lie do not take the oaths
to heavy penalties, and I apprehend if there were the legislature between the countries an important,
subjectdoubts itselfupon
othe n subject,infraction the f
tthe House
oughtlavr.
The nor
at l teas
u alterationnion ,
the tookpainspalancde in the law..
•By. the Act of
with-
of the House are decided by the body of the House, out taking the oaths werep taken aatgvaayin—st (sAnltlr.tiOg
The object of the individual is to be heard, that ob- nell here read the clause referred to.)—This ears
_...up';ise-
ject will be equally answered by hearing him at the to me so plain, that no lawyer can controvert it,
bar as at the table. By hearing him at the bar he that no Judge can doubt its construction. It
will be exempt from those penalties which would is Sir, upon these grounds that 1 claim to sit and
otherwise attach to him if heard at the table. There- vote in this Honse. First, then, I claim to sit and
fore for his own security it will be better that that vote without taking oaths by virtue of the Union
course be adopted. Under these girctitustances, thin Act. Secondly, I claim under the Relief Bill to sit
case being an individual one, resting upon the con- and vote without subscribing the declaration,
struction pf en Apt of Parliament, 1 think it would Thirdly, I claim, under the Relief Bill to sit and •iote
ththeepasoltthirofe
enactments of
aonfdilf,,,,euitroill.yi
be right to give to the individual the privilege and wictialtoinT.
utenkdienti.i
mi'niththoeututealkieirnigaen
opportunity of stating his case by himself, his Counsel,
othertit ioealt.eh
or his agents. I should think, Sir, the public its'ietekt Bt4iallvitoth
is greatly concerned in taking care that we tact ace
thes§ endeavour to go through the- to topicsse as briefly
that amentionednd vote
hmolyd acesrptaoisnsliyb
dlei.recTtehde
tUh
cording to form. Some people, I lcnow, think
:I":atihse
tztintersupoftover;,y;dliicttaliee.!..m(plioreatarn,Ce,heaairi.d)vvNottolltly,
':oabse taken, remarked!
titan 111 r before
tiOnPurable Friend who put a question, appears equal certainty, it did not annex
pains cal!. penalties
to have an impression that the House of Com- to not taking them. It did, however, ( irect them
mons ought not to permit Mr. O'Connell in i mite taken, and it is for th. ~House to determine
the first place to be heard. But even as to tka.. I
W ether it has auth •
mitting him to the table, I should rly, that the_ authority to prevent any man from
exercising the • g right of representation without taki Jig
custom was of admitting him io the table, at those oaths, Ido not mean to canvass that point
first, to talic the oath without any certificate
rd. At great length ; Ido not mean to conceks it, be-
g had taken any before the Lord High St cause I cannot; but I admit that there are pre-
The case of Mr. Archdale was a strong one7th '
prima facie evidence was that he had not : Come Tiep!tt passed sub silentios where gentlemen after
plied with the rulies out of doors, and yet that Actstaete Union having neglected to take the oaths, pri-
he wa:4 admitted into the House. If an individual vale
put ' were brought in for their relief. But
does not take the oath before the Lord High It to the. Housel in Its judicial capacity; and
put it, shall leave it ut once, whether
Steward, he is subject to heavy penalties. Those the having
Union
di not having given the power of
oaths were for the satisfaction of the Crown. The d • eprivtat a representative of his right to sit and
practice of requiring a certificate is not very strictly •
adhered to, and is only a practice of ,odor,o 'oe the_ House could do it of its own auihority,
withoutstiii the warrant of an express law. I would TV'.
times. I have taken my seat myteli. without
, apec ti y remindd.i Hon. Members, that this ow t is
1 being called upon to produce the certificate. species of. istertson of the public rd't large; I
; I thin; Cue course, Sir, you adopted the other even-remind it, also, that those
tng, was perfectly correct, and I now think it right i wouldL th'as rendered in-
eligible area rendered., ineligible
,to 'move that the Member for tbs. county-of Clarel'or no other reason
.en a con ienttous respect to the sacred oblige-
be heard at the bar, by I.4riaself, his counsel or agetits ,
in respeil oft his 'claim to sit and se,;e ; -IN
, ..,, titan
.of an oath. It excludes a meritorious class, and
1 admits all who neglect liament withont faking the oath 0 ku. a- cg c' or disregard the sanction to
I Air- C: W. W. W IoNE-,_i rear' I. 'i which I have referred :it calls
upon the people to
ydo not feel, ' elect the c• 1 the fearless,'
Sir, thorn s any ci.ifferenee whatever ate e.s.a, the mendacious, and
. ever between ito
the 'Hon. Member for the county of Clare's b • 1 proceed.. vw. a the bad principle of making a ss-
ectesn oi; the vicious to the exclusion of the conseien-
, heard at the table or at the bar. I really doenmg
apprehend any danger from admitting -iii
uotti,.! pious. That being the spirit and principle of the
ourable Member, duly elected, to "!
be heard lat lain,ld humbly submit to the House whether it
yqur
table .
.„... PA... I
oe
~:a; . would carry that spirit and principle into specific
1 "Y 4-. do any uluerellee between 1 elkliqUAl94, lt think if I stood on the Act of Uiiiest
9