Star.
London, England, 1805-07-10 00:00:00

PefRLIAMENTitR7 PROCEEDINGS.

MOUSE OF LORDS, TUESDAY. JULY 9.
'-.:riseerbame.. Arch-way Bill was mad the third date, and paftedi
Old vatioue other Bilis were forwarded in their rcfpeCtivo fiasco.
The Earl of SUFFOLK raid be 'Hated to oder a very few
words to the Houfc, which be deemed to be of very great Wiper-
tance as to the object, which was to corral a rnilapprehenikm ra-
fpeding the treatment of Mr. Todd Jones. He had received let-
ters from unqueitionable authority, Rating that be had a good
and commodious apartment, was permitted to take the air in the
ground belonging to the prifon at his own pkafure, and had the
convenience ()flitch attendants as he required. His Lortilhip falai
he felt that he was irregular in making this Monad, miconnedcd
with any hulinefs before the Houfc.but be alto felt it to bads duty
to make this declaration for the purpofe of correcting an erroneous
ftatement, which he conceived to be of importance.
Mr. WHITBREAD, attended by a large body
of the Commons, prefented the Articles of Im-
peachment, in maintenance of the Impeachment
made by the Commons at their Lorclfitips' bar.
After the Articles were read by the Clerk,
Lord HAWKESBURY moved, that a Commit-
tee be appointed to (earth the journals for prece-
dents for their Lordfhips' guidance in the proceed-
ings on the Impeachment : And alto, that a Copy
of the Articles of Impeachment be fent to Lord
Melville within one month from that time, and that
hs be allowed to the fecond day of next fellion to put
in his anfwer.—Ordered.
On the motion that Mr. Trotter's Indemnity Bill
be committed,
The LORD CHANCELLOR fail, that no Bill
of greater importance ever came before the Houfe,
and yet no grounds had been made out to jnifify it.
Much of the objeaion he had to the Bill had been
done away by the Articlei of Impeachment being
adually laid on the table this day, becaufe thee
contained fome evidence, tome reafons not before in
the polfeffion of the Houle. Still many objeaioni
preffed on his mind. He believed there was no in-
fiance of the Hoare being called upon for indemnity
for tranfaaions not known to the Houfe. The checks
the common law had put upon indemnity given to
Approver: were very revue, and moll jealoufly watch%
ed in the adminifiration of justice. They could not
be admitted as evidence till themfelves were charged
by indiament ; they mutt previoufly confers them-1
(elves guilty of the crime ; they cannot be compellall
to give evidence, but mull do it voluntarily ; if they
vary in their evidence in the refpeaive proceedings,
they are liable to be executed themfelves ; and the
fame peril hangs over them if the Jury is not con•
vinced, and the perfon againft whom they are evi-
dence is not conviaed. In the indemnity afked by
this Bill, it does not appear that Trotter and the
others alluded to are accomplices. It depafts from
the principle on which indemnity is granted by the
common law; that the witnefs confeffes himfelf
guilty, but takes indemnity for the purpofe of ena-
bling him to convia another. A material objeetios
he had to the Bill was, that it called on the Houle to
admit, that money had been applied by the partits
implicated, contrary to law ; and thus might pm
judge the very caufe their Lordfhips had to try.
word alfo of moft extraordinary extent and opere-
don was ufed in the Bill. The witneffes were to give
evidence as to their belief, as well as knowledge and
remembrance, This was contrary to all law, to
call upon a man to give his belief as evidence in a
criminal procedure. The laft chafe of the Bill was,
however, in his mind, moll exceptionable. The wit-
neffes are by that exempt from all civil proceedings
as well as criminal ; and from all civil fuits of pri-
vate perfons that may have been injured by their
tranfaaions, and may have a legal remedy agaioll
them. This wasan extent of indemnity not warrant-
ed by the motives and reafons of giving indemnity.
—They are indemnified, by the exprefs words of
the Bill, for illegal application of a)ty money ; and I
though be was perfuaded the Commons intended any
public moray, yet if the witnetfes owe him money which
they have mifapplied, he may feek for it, but without
the allifiance of the law, if this Bill knifes. He
thought it his duty to point out there obj.eaions to
the Bill. If it Rood as it uat prefent, the indemnity
offered to the stitneffes, in the cafe of exemption
from all civil fuits, is a premium and wages offered
for their conviling Lord Melville. It is a price
given for their evidence, and a temptation that (hould
not be held out. Whether he fhould oppofe the Bill
or not would depend on what mould be done is the
Committee.

Lord HOLLAND agreed that many of the ob-
lations of the Noble and Learned Lord deferved
conlideration ; but they might all be removed in 'the
Committee. He contended there were fufficient
grounds and evidence regularly before the Houle to
vindicate the principle of the Bill. Thefe were in
the Tenth Report of the Commillioners of Naval
Inquiry, in the fubfequent Report of the Seled Com-
mittee, and in the Articles of Impeachment. To
Med this Bill would be equally injuhlice to Lord
elville and the country. It might happen that the
witneffes had ufed the public money without the pri-
vity of Lord Melville as to the extent or appli-
cation. In that cafe, what would the Houfeof Com-
mons, the people, and the whole world fay, if they
deprived his Lordlhip of the proofs of innocence of-
fered by this Bill ? The anxiety of the public alto de-
mended, that the Bill fhould not be deferred to the
next feffion. He therefore hoped the Houfe would
go in a Committee, where the objections to the Bill
would be eafily removed.
Lord HAWKESBURY agreed with the Noble
Baron in his entire approbation of the principle of
the Bill; and he was moll anxious that no time
fhould be loft. But the oblations to many of the
clanks were moll important. If they could be re-
moved, he fhould be glad. His Lordfbip then took
a very extenfive view of the objedions Dated by the
Lord Chancellor; and concluded by expreffing his
ftrong defire that the Bill fhould pats this Se lion.
Lord SIDMOUTH was a friend to the Bill; and
thought the objations might be removed in a few
minutes, with the aid of his Learned and Honourable
Friend on the Woolfack.
' The LORD CHANCELLOR raid, as it feemed
to be the general with of the Honk that the objec-
tions lhould be confidered with the 'tall poffible de-
lay, he would fuggeft, that the Houfe go now into
the Committee, and that the Amendments be refere-
ed till the third reading.----The Bjll then went thro'
A Committee without amendment ; the Report was
received ; and the Bill ordered to be read a third
time to-morrow.

PADWNCTON CANAL BILL.
Ths Marquis of BUCKINGHAM prefented a pe.
tition again& the Duty impofed on Coals !nought by

'the Paddington Canal. Ordered td, lie on the table.
—The Peddington Canal Bill was then committed ;
and aft ome prOgreft, the Marquis of Bye': *so tr am
moved, that the Chairmin do now leave the Chair,
for the purpofe of afterwards moving that the Re.
port be received this day three month..
The Honk divided on the motion... Contents 8—
Non-contents ts.
The Bill was afterwards palled through the Com-
mittee : and upon the Houle being returned, the Re-
port was brought up by Lord Wallingham.
GUSSIISSIr SMUGGLING SILL.

The Houfe then went into a Committee on the
Smuggling Prevention Bill.
Lord HOLLAND Rated, that his objeftion to the
meafure was principally direded againft that part of
the Bill which amounts to an adoption of the princi-
ple of our right to legiflate internally for that Hand.
At a time when their Lordfhips were :bout to grant
a compenfation to an individual for his lots in rights
of a fimilar nature, in one ;nand, we fhould be ex-
tremely cautions as to the exercife of our power, if
legal power we had, over the Oinftitured Authori-
ties of another rand, without making tome inquiry
as to how far their rights may be .affefted. In the
prefent advanced Rage of the &Monk was imp9ffible
that fuch an inquiry could be made—he, therefore,
hoped, that the Bill would not be fuffered now to
pats ; and fur that purpofe moved that the Chair-
man do leave the Chair with the view of entering
more minutely into the difcutllon of the fubjea in the
earning Sellion of Parliament.
Lord HAWKESBURY maintained that, if their
Lordihips did not give authority to enforce the non-
olage of calks of s certain defcription, and if they
did not grant the right to fearch within the ports of
Cuernfey and Jerfey, they could never fairly hope to
prevent fmuggling between thole Mends and Great
Britain. And, as bit the right to legillare internally
for the Iflands now mentioned, he infifted on it that

it was a fair and equitable principle acknowledged
by tee Conflitution, that whatever belonged to the
Crown of Great Britain thould be confequently fub-
jed to the right of the Parliament of Great Britain
to legiflate for it ; and this right had been ailed on
from the time of William the Third to the reign of
his prefent Majefty, by the peels of various Alls
of Parliament.
The Duke of CLARENCE declared that in his
opinion it was impollible that the fair and honourable
Made of the Mends could be carried on unlefs fume
akeration were made in may claufes of the Bill.
Lord HOLLAND obfervad that he thought that
this country had had fufficient experience to judge
of the propriety of faercifing our right to legiflate
internally for our dependences. The laws which
had been mentioned by the Noble Secretary of State
as beating upon the prefent cafe, did not appear to
him to have the leaft analogy to the prefent Bill.
The Houfe afterwards divided on the firft Claufe,
which extendethe operation of the Bill to Guemfey
and Jerfey.—Coate* 6. Not Contents 19.
We underftand the Bill was then paled through
the Committee and reported.
DUES OF ATHOL'S I'LL.

Upon cur being re-admitted into the Houk, we
found the Marquis of Buckingham arguing againft
any further proceedings in the Duke of Athqrs Bill
for the prefent,
It was defended by the Earl of Weßmoreland and
Lord Hawkeibury.
After which an Adjournment was moved by the
Marquis of Buckingham, at t o'clock.
his the Houk divided. For the Adjournment
—Contents—Prefent 7—Proxies 3 t 2.—Not-Con.
tents—Prefent at—Proxies 24-43—Majority 33.
The Earl of CARYSFORT and the Marquis of
BUCKINGHAM then alluded to the want of a liced
in the year t 746, and on thakeccount it was moved
that the Bill be committed this day three months.—
This motion was, however, negatived without a di-
vifion.

The Houfe then went into a Committee, when the
Counfel for the Houfe of Keys were ordered to be
called in, for the purpofe of gating the interelts which
it was alledged they had in oppofing the prefent Bill.
Mr. Rom, LLY was accordingly heard in explana-
tion on that point.
The LORD CHANCELLOR did not think that
any fufficient intereft bad been affigned by the Petitio-
ners, to induce their Lordfhips to allow them to be
heard in detail in fupport of their objeftions.
The Marquis of BUCKINGHAM thought fuf-
ficient grounds had been affigned by the Learned
Counfel in fupport of the petitioners interefts to be
heard.—lt was determined, however, that the bill be
proceeded in.
The Marquis of BUCKINGHAM then again
moved, that the Honfe do adjourn, (it being then
nearly one o'clock) but the motion was negatived,
On the motion for poftponing the preamble as ufual,
The LORD CHANCELLOR objeded to it, as
containing objeftionable terms, and as proceeding on
the narrative that the Sovereignty of the Ifle of Man
had been conveyed by King Henry the Fourth to the
predeceflors of the Duke of Athol, and continued
from that period in his family.
In fupport of this part of the preamble, Connie'
was ordered to be called in. Mr. ADAM and Mr.
Haatisom were accordingly heard.
After they had concluded their arguments, it was
determined to pollpone the preamble, and to proceed
to the feveral claufes of the bill.

The LORD CHANCELLOR wi(hed them to be
gone through without much dirculfion, and to re-
ferve the debate till the third reading.
The Marqnis of BUCKINGHAM, though ex•
tremely inimical to this precipitate mode of proceed.
ing, and extremely anxious for delay, gave way to
the Noble and Learned Lord's fuggenion.
On the Claufe granting the Annuity of a Fourth
of the Revenues of the Ifiand from the Confolidated
Fund, The

Duke of NORFOLK objeded to the mode of grant-
ing the allowance. as calculated to interfere with the
proper management andripplication of the public re-
venue. He accordingly took the fence of the Houfe
on the fubjeift.
On the divifion the numbers were—For the chide
1 9—Againft it s--MA jori t y 14.
The other atufes were, after Come converfation,
gone through, the Report was received, and the
third reading appointed for this day. when the Lord
Chancellor intimated that he would Rate his fend-
meats at length againft the palling of the Bill.—Ad-
jonmcd at near four o'clock.