Star.
London, England, 1801-06-20 00:00:00

vets perazis furpeded of high treafon and treiron-
able practices, becaufe it would be impoffible for
thofe Minifters to juftify or defend the fame with.
out an open' difclofure of the means by which the
Paid traiterous defigns had been difcovered. That.
Lord Hobart thought, was all the opening and ex-,
*nation that the Bill required.
The Earl of CARMAIVON denied that what the
Noble Secretary had juft repeated was by any
means an adequate explanation for a Bill of that
great importance. It was a Bill, he raid, that con-
ferred irrefponfibility on hisMajefty'sMinifters for
all their conduft, clnring the whole period of time
that the Habeas Corpus Ad had been fufpended.
There was a falutary maxim in our conftitution.
viz. That the King could do no wrong. To the
he cordially and completely fubfcribed, becaufe be
knew and admitted twat it was extremely lulus-I
tageous to the fafety of the Rate and the tranquil-
lity of the kingdom, that the Sovereign (hould not
be held to be perfonally refponfible for any parted.]
his conduit, but that the refponfibility fhould rell
wholly with Minifters. No man ever thought of
applying to them the maxim that fo properly ap-
plied to the Sovereign. Would it not be monftrous
to fay that Minifters could do no wrong ? In that
cafe how could the Commons impeach Minifters
for their bad advice, and their bad conduct ? How
could they bring them to their Lortlfbips' Bar
and try them on charges of high treafon ? It was
abfurd and unconflitutional to make them irrefpon.
fible. It was what no wife Parliament ever
dreamed of, becaufe it muff diredly open a door
to practices and conduct highly dangerous and
detrimental to the great public interefts of the
country. It ought not to be done for a fingle hour;
but what did this Bill do ? It gave them irrefpon-
libility for ever. He could eafily fuppofe, the Earl
raid, that great inconvenience would arife. if ac-
tions commenced by perfons who had been arreft-
ed and imprifoned, were to be immediately brought
to trial ; but was that any reafon that they never
Mould be brought to trial ? If a power was given
to ftirpend all fuch anions for a limited time; if
the Bill was to continue in force for one year only,
or even to the end of the war, he would not objed
to it, but he never would content to an unlimited
irrefponfibility, becaufe let their Lordfhips cone-
der what an unwarrantable injury would refult to
the individuals who had been confined, as they fop-
pored innocently confined, (and innocent in the
eye of the law and of the Conftitution they muff
(land) under circumftanees of great hardfbip and
oppreffion—They would Rand branded and mark-
ed for ever, as perfons fufmded on good grounds
of treafonable practices; their chaffers would be
torn from them by violence and injtilliee, and al-
though they (matted under the feeling of infinite
injury, they would be deprived for ever of the con. '
filtutignal and legal means of defending themfelves,
proving their innocence in the face of their coun-
try, and obtaining damages for the wrong that had
been done them. For there and other reafons
which his Lordthip Rated, he Paid he fhould vote
itift the Bill
The LORDCHMICILLOR defendedtheßillas anse
of juftice to thole who had been inftrumentaltinpro.
(erring the Conftitution againft the molt redoes
attacks that were ever made againft it. He ad.,
mined that the fufpenfion of the Habeas Corpus
did not take away. refponfibility from Minifters;
he should be lorry it did. Mena-els ought to be,
refponfible for every .4, but whilft their endss.
Yours were directed to the preferration of every
"thing that is dear to Engliflnen, he thought they
ought to be preceded from litigious and vexatices
profecutions. A report had gone abroad that he,
had laid Minifters fhould never want indemnity,
This he pofitively denied. He denied alto, that
this Bill was to indemnify Minifters, or to table
from them any refponfibility for ads which could
not be juftified.—The Bill was called for by pa..
ticular circumftances to primed thofe who said
under his Majefty's Government, and Unveils
whoremea'ns the ConUitution was preferred. He
was Attorney-General under the late Adminiftra-
tion, a fituation which placednorefponfibility upon
him for the ads of that Adminiftration, therefore
he could not be fuppofed to be interefted in the
patfing of the prefent Bill. In his fituation he bad
merely to give his opinion as to points of law z
but he had an opportunity of knowing the circus'.
• fiances tinder which many committals took place;
and in his opinion, his Majefty's late Miniftert
would deferve the execration, inflead of the admel,l
ration and confidence of the people of England,
if they had not ailed with that promptners and
vigour which marked their dircuffions. He was
not fo incredulous as his noble and Learned Friela
(Lord Thurlow), as to believe there was no dais.
gcr to be apprehended from fuch exertions—fish
machinations--as were ufed to overturn the Coe:
flitution ; though he was ready to admit it to be
his firm belief that the great mats of the people
were loyal. If Minifters bad not taken the Reps
they did to counteract the evil defigus of the dif-
affeabd. and to protect the loyal, in his opinion
'they would have deferved to have their heads
brought to the block. With refped to the fur
gellion of the Noble Lord (Suffolk) of palfing d
the Bill for the Ripulated term of a year, or eves
during the war, lie could not concur with the No.
,ble Lord. He thought it belt to let the matter et
reft for ever, fince spies and informers were sot,
only denoonced as objects for all:Amnion, but the
perfons alto who employed them. He thought
if Noble Lords vvould take into their confiders:
trop all the circumflances under which his Ms.
Jelly's Knitters aged, they would not refute their,
Ant to the prefent Bill. Much of the informs.
don upon which Minifters sided came from the
Continent. For the fake of argument he would
fuppofe it obtained through the means of fecret
fervice money. He would therefore oh the Hear*
if it would be honourable—if it would be confer
tent with trne policy—to expofe filch information.
No Noble Lord in that Houk would more deeply
regret than himfelf the ponithrnent of an innocent
individual—if one fufferc.l, it was one too many.—
But in such a Rruggle for all that was dear to
Englishmen—when turrnuoding nations were over-
whelmed by the Jodrines againit which his hlajef.