Star.
London, England, 1830-07-21 00:00:00

NALVEIftTION.

The Earl of WESTIIIVRIARipresented a petition from Sir
Jonah Barrington, praying that some of the evidence taken against
him be struck out. and that he might be allowed to cruAt-examine
Mr. Pilleau, the Register of the Court of Admiralty.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, the document to which Sir
Jonah Barrington objected had been struck out.
The Duke of WELLINGTON did not consider the petitioner
entitled to proceed further with evidence.
The LORD CHANCELLOR then rose, for the purpose of
calling upon their lordships to consider whether they would concur
in an address to the crown voted by the other house of parliament,
and communicated to this house by conference. Ihe address con.
caned Sir Jonah Barrington, who filled the office cf judge of the
Court of Admiralty in Ireland. It charged that learned judge with
having been guilty of malversation, and prayed the crown to t,istniss
him. He was accused of having appropriated to his own use car.
taro sums of money paid into the Court of Admiralty, on account
of two vessels, the Nancy and Red Gear. The noble and !earned
lad stated the facts as they appearrl in evidttice, and declared that
in his own opinion the charges had been proved by documents in the
hand-writing of Sir Jonah Barrington. He, however, let their
lordships to say whether the evidence slid not lead to an inference
that the learned judge had appropriated to his own use part of the
funds, which he inddirected to be paid to a Mr. Patrick Hamilton.
If it did, the address of the other house was justified.

The Duke of WELLINGTON, after a pause of some seconds,
moved that the house do concur with the Commons in the address.

The mottos having been carried nem. dis.
The Duke of WELLINGTON then moved that a conference be
held with the Commons, to acquaint them that the house agreed to
the terms of the address.—Ordcred.

The Manages, of the Conference were al,o nominated.
LAW OF LIBEL BILL.

The LORD CHANCELLOR, previous to going into committee
on this bill, stated the nature and effect of it. A bill was passed in
the 00th of the reign of George 111. for the purpose of making
some alteration respecting the law of libel, so far as it related to
political and blasphemous libels. By one of the clauses it was pro.
vided that persons convicted a second time of political or hlasphe.
mous libels aught be banished. At the time the bill passed mall,
individuals said it would be inoperative, and so it proved, for during
• period of ten years there had been no prosecution under the
statute. The Noble and Learned Lord did not consider the re-
peal of that act going too far. To the part of the Bill repealing it
he gave his concurrence. There was another portion of the bill
to which he should direct the attention of the House. By an act
in the same session (60th George III.) it was provided that
every person publishing a newspaper, and other publications
described in the act, should enter into recognizances at the
Stamp Office, himself in 3001. and two sureties. It' the nub.
lications were in the country, the recognisance was V.OOl. TI e
object was to get rid of blasphemous and seditious libels, i.y
forming a fund out of which every tine might he paid wild It
the law imposed on the party. A clause in the bill before the Met,.
raised the sum from 3001. to 4001. in London, cud front 20M. t.,
9001. in the country. The bill went funhet. It nude die ftif d
answerable to any damages which a party may be liable to in a c.t :I
action for libel. It frequently happened that a person of no pro.
petty entered his name at the Stamp-office instead of a wealthy pro.
prietor, and the offended plaintiff got nothing by a judgment. The
object was to check the circulation of private slander. by having a
fund ready to answer for private slander. The noble and learned
lord was of opinion that it was more important to cheek private
slander than prosecute for seditious libels. On such grounds the
bill had passed the other house, and he should propose the second
rentoinnt.podyflOn Ng the discussion until the committee.
HOLLAD thought the law of libel required great alters.
don It was but an act of justice to repeal the law which punished
with banishment for libelr Some persons elsewhere had
is
described this Bill as a greet boon to the public ; a great conces-
sion to the liberty of the press. It had been greedy extolled, and.
after long gestation, brought forth. The cat,itowever, came out of
the bag.—(A laugh.) It was rot an act of relief, but an act of se-
verity to the press. The Noble Baron was glad to find the Noble
and Lamed Lord declare that the banishment clause had proved
inoperative. The fact was as be stated, when the Bill was intro-
duced, banishment was not the law of England. The Bill ass
passed in a time of terror, and the experience of ten years had provtd
the weakness of legislation upon unconstitutional principles. The
Bill was a curious Bill : it was • sort of Janus. It carried two
fans: one face smiled, and the other frowned. Banishment in tart s
of libel was repealed, and recognisance, extended, to answer for
damages in civil actions. He certainly returned thanks to the noble
and learned lord for one intimation,—namely, that it was better to
taunt private slander, than punish seditious and blasphemous li-
After that liberal admsion, he had hopes of seeing a revi-
sion of the whole law of libel. It was his intention, in the Con.
mitts*, to move to leave out all the words at the end of the second
clause, with a view of introducing words to repeal ell that applied
to the taking of recognisances. It was absurd to suppose a per.
son entering into recognisance could know whether evidence taken
in a court of justice, or the speeches of Counsel published in the
paper of which he was the proprietor, were libels. The Noble Ba.
ron doubted the polity of taking recognisance% and wished to do
It away.
Sir A. GaAs's., and others from the Commons, brought up the
Forgery Bill, with the amendments agreed to ; the Beer and Cider
Duties Bill ; the Scotch Judicature Bill ; the Stage Coach Proprir.
ton Bill, and a private Bill.
Consideration of the Law of Libel was resumed.
Lord WYNFORD said a few words in support of the Bill, and
the house sent into Committee thereon.
Lord HOLLAND, in pursuance of the notice he had given, rose
and moved a repeal of all reeognisanees whatever.
The motion having been put from the woolsack, was negatived
without a division.
Several verbal amendments were then made, and the bill was or-
dered to be read a third time (to-morrow) this day.