Star.
London, England, 1821-05-09 00:00:00

• • Z -• No

. •-.

paragraph whw" 1\110*st:16E410 in the Courier News-
mix, although h was substantially correct, was not
inseitted by the authority, advice, consent, or, know-
-ledgott2f any person connected with the high indivi-
dhal Wose character was chiefly concerned ; on the
contrary, the appearance of it gave them great pain,
as they feared it might be inferred that they were not
amply satisfied ith the very handsome conduct of
•the Honourable Member for Shrewsbury. He begged
to repeat, that the paragraph in question was wholly
false and malicious--(Hear).
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that no
one who had heard the explanation given by-the Ho.
nourable Member behind him, and had heard the
paragraph on the table read, could for a moment
doubt that it was a libel. An imputation of the na-

titre conveyed in the paragraph, and the direct as-
serting that an apology was made, when an explana-
tion merely took place,. must he considered by every
person at least as a breach of privilege. Consider-
ing, therefore, the statement in this paragraph as
wholly false, and reflecting so severely on the cha-
racter of a Member of that House, he saw no other
course for the House to adopt than to vote the publi-
cation a'breach of privilege, and afterwards have the
Printer brought to the Bar.
The Resolution then passed neat. con.
Mr. BENNETT then moved, " That T. B. Weaver
(Printer and Publisher), do attend at the Bar of this
House to-morrow."—Ordered, nem. con.
THE SEDITIOUS MEETINGS BILL.

Mr. LENNARD rose, pursuant to his notice, to
move for the Repeal of the Act of the 60th of Geo.
111. relative to Seditious Meetings, &c. The Hon.
Member entered into a review of the character of
the measure, and the circumstances under which it
was passed. It was a measure adopted by Govern-
ment and by the House, during a period of alarm
and domestic agitation, which, thank GOD, no longer
existed in this country ; and, whatever might have
been the necessity which called for the enactment of
measures so destructive of our liberties and the spit it

of the Constitution, that necessity no longer remained,
and these Acts ought to expire. The dearest rights
of Englishmen were destroyed by the operation.of
this law. Public Meetings were interfered With, and
the only Constituti,nal mode which the People had
of expressing their opinions on the conduct of their
Representatives, was taken away. If these Bills were
to be continued in operation, he was convinced much
of the energy and force of the c _nary would be
destroyed, arid the spirit of the People done away.—
By the measures then adopted, the freedom of the
Press, the Guardian of the People's Liberties, was
done away, and every possible facility was given to
the establishment of arbitrary power—(Hear, hear).
The People were now quiet and tranquil ; no one
would attempt to deny that position ; and the occa-
sion on which this attainder of the People's rights
had been founded, having passed away, he trusted
the attainder would he reversed. He might be told
that these Bills would expire in a few years, if the
conduct of the People should appear to deserve it ;
but he could not consent to have the restoration of
o ir liberties deferred for a moment—(Hear, hear).--
It was now nearly two year; since a new and arbitrary
mode of punishment for political libel had been in-
troduced into our Code ; but such had been the effect
produced on the spirit of the People, such the apathy
caused by this suspension of public liberty, that not
a single remonstrance had been made on the subject.
The People had ceased to regard the House as their
Constitutional Guardians, and paid no attention to
their proceedings—(Hear, hear).—The second Act
to which he had alluded, the Libel Act, introduced
a most severe and arbitrary punishment for a libel,
which neither Judges nor Lawyers could define cor-
rectly. He would not trouble the House with any
remarks on the law of libel, but he saw nothing to
negative the proposition, that Judges might in time
future be as cruel as in times past, and what an in-
strument did such an Act put into the hands of such
Judges ! Suppose an Hon. Baronet (Sir h. Burdett),
might, by a legal finess?, be tried for publishing a
libel on Ministers, he should tremble fir the result ;
especially considering the conduct that some Judges
had adopted—(Hear, hcar).—lt might be said there
had been no restrictions on the Press; but if so, that
bad arisen from the independence of Julies. He
would say, that the expression of public opinion had
been less free since the publication of these Acts.—
Though no inconvenience might have arisen from the
Acts hitherto, it did not follow that the case would
be the same in time to come. If to meet was the

right of the People, in proportion as that right was
circumscribed their liberty was diminished—{Hear).
It was a fact that County Meetings were less nume-
rous than they used to be, and the expression of pub-
lic feeling was greatly restrained. Without doubt
we owed much to the forbearance of men in power
to put these Acts in execution, and it was true that
so long as that forbearance was guaranteed liberty
had nothing to fear, for

" Arunquans liberlas grader Mat
Quern. sub rev piu."

But who could say how long this state of things would
continue, or where encroachments once made would
stop ? He believed there were few who were bold
enough to assert that we were now in as free a con-
dition as we had been at other periods of our history.
—Every year of •the late and some preceding reigns
was marked with one encroachment or another, and,
of course we were losers in liberty by all these enact-
ments—( Hear ).—He was aware he had been but a
feeble advocate of a good cause; and it might also
be thought that the time had not been judiciously
chosen. But the earlier the resistance to it was the
better; and, should he fail now, he should bring it
regularly before the House till the subject should
fall into abler hands. If the affairs of the country
should be deemed by any to be better managed under
a system of coercion, he was not one of those.—The
Hon. Member concluded by moving for leave to
bringin a Bill to repeal the 60th of George HI. cap.
6 and cap. 8, entitled an " Act for more effectually
preventing Seditious Meetings and Assemblies."
Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW had always been friendly
to the liberties of the people; but, at the same time,
he was of opinion, that the Acts commented on had
been called for by the circumstances of the times.—

He was sorry any allusion had been made to aJudge
in the Court of king's Bench. Than the Judge al-
luded to, no man could possess a more humane mind ;
and if that Judge had acted wrong, let him be pro.
ceeded agalast in a constitutional manner. A mere