Star.
London, England, 1810-06-14 00:00:00

. .
sdciety fee ,Priatioting constitutional information, in
whose views they tould not concur.j. These were the
prinetples which he then, and now, entertained. The
extracts he had read would shew what were the opi-
nions of those with whom he and . his friends then
tenouncid all intercourse or connection. Such opi-
nions he still condemned ; and now, as then, should
renounce all connection or intercourse with those who
entertained them. He would not be so uncharitable
as to impute criminal motives to all those who held
such opinions. Many of.therh, he was ready to admit,
were actuated by no improper or unworthy motive,
however they might havebeen imposed upon or misled;
some, however, he could not altogether acquit. The .
path they were treading was dangerous in the extreme,
and called for the most vigilant attention,to prevent any
injurious consequences. Whenever the people should
take up the question of reform temperately and affec-
tionately—for he doubted much, whether there was at '
present any verygetteral disposition to that measure pre-
valent—there would be some prospect of accomplish-
ing it in a manner consistent with the security of the
constitution. But until that should be the case, the
examples of the other nations of Europe should deter
them from any precipitate attempt to carry into effect
a measure on which the best interests of the country
so essentially depended. For his own part, whenever
he should give his support to such a measure, it
should be upon the principles he had already laid
down, and wereapproved by all thegreatmen to whom
he had referred, and not upon the views or principles of
those with whom he uniformly renounced all con-
nection. He could not have avoided stating so much
upon this most important subject, because nothing, in
his view of the case, could tend so effectually to
frustrate the wishes of these,who were friendly to
temperate and practical reform, as the attempt to
force a reform by the clamours of the people.—
If ever the Government shbuld take up the mea-
sure, there would then indeed be a prospect of its
being accomplished without any risk of inconyeni.
ence ; and the more his Majesty's Ministers reflect-
ed upon the subject, the more they would be con-
vinced it was a measure indispensably necessary to
restore the decayed energies of the nation, to revive
the lost confidence of the public, and to promote the
best interests of the empire. In proportion, therefore,
as this question was agitated by the public, he was
desirous that his principles should be known, because
they appeared to him the only principles upon which
reform could be effected, without endangering the se-
curity of the constitution. But he was still more
anxious that these principles should never be lost sight
of, in reference to a question which affected the privi-
leges of that House and of the other House of Parlia-
ment now also attacked. He was not disposed to do
any thing so improper as to enter into the considera.
tion of a case then submitted for decision in another
place; and more particularly, as it might eventually
be brought before their Lordships. An he wished to
do, therefore, was to state some general princples upon
the subject, in order to correct those pernicious errors
which were entertained, and studiously circulated, re-
specting the privilege, of Parliament. These privi-
leges dtpethied upon their acknowledged public utility
and the inclispt• sable necessity of their existence.—
If they were e c founded upon these principles, they
ought not to be mai,itained, and the exercise of them
would be unjust. These privileges, therefore, he con-
tended, rested upon their known utility, and the neces-
sity of their existence ; and were conformable to the
principles which pervaded every branch of the Go-
vernment. They were evidently supported upon
the same grounds as the Common Law of the land.
The privileges of Parliament were given for the pur-
pose of enabling the two branches of the Legislature to
perform their respective functions.. So far as they wt re
necessary to that end, they must possess them, but uo
farther ; and all such privileges must be inherent in Par- I
liament, whether sanctioned by a written or any other
law or not. It was necessary that Parliament should
have the power to protect itself from obstructions—
to protect its legitimate authority from being slighted
or questioned, to protect the freedom of its delibe-
rations, a privilege which was more immediately con-
nected with the rights and interests of the people.—
Whatever power or privileges were requisite for all
these purposes, Parliament must possess ex nrceultaie
rei ; and if even such power should be carried to the
extent of imptisonment of offenders, it should always
be remembered that it was exercised solely for the
general protection of the liberty of the subject.—
Agaiust what was it that the privileges of Path:merit
were intended to be a guard ? Was it against the
influence ef the Crown ? Most certainly. But was
there nothing else to be gitirded against ? Were not
the calumnies and slanaers vented against the legis-
lature— was not the civiwn ardur prava jubentium to be
also guarded against, as well :is the influence of the
Clown ? This, then, he contended, was the true doc-
trine rt.specting the privileges of Parliament ; and
these were the objects for which their Lordships
were called upon to assert them. The powers
of Parliament mast be co-mensurate with the case,
and exercised internally and separately by either
House, without recurring to any other branch
of the Legislature. These were the doctrines of
our ancestors ;—these were the doctrines uniformly
held out since the Revolution ;—these were 6he
doctrines which ie had at all times maintained,
and would "ever adhere to. It would, he be-
lieved, be readily admitted, that the Revolution had
saved this. country from arbitrary power. Who-
ever should reflect upon the history of that revolution
would be convinced, thitt if Parliament had not then
exercised those powers which had of late been ques-
tinned, they would not be now debating us a House
of Parliament. But even in the present times, when '
it had become the fashion to vilify and defame public
men, these doctrines had been sanctioned by great au-
thorities. The late Mr. Fox, whom no person could
suspect of not having been a strenuous asserter of the
rights of the people, had often contended in support
of the privileges of Parliament. His opinions upon the
subject had never been controverted by his great poli-
tical rival ( Mr. Pitt.) Mr. Burke, too, and other
eminent men of the day. had maintained the same
principles ; and when so many persons, who dif-
fered on so many other subjects, agreed upon this,
it did not require any great exertion of charity to con-
chide that they had not 41 conspired againstehe libel-. •
ties of the people, and in support of the privileges of
Parliament which were not legal and constitutional.
It was an old and a sound observation that even laws, ,
not pet in force, if no inconvenience resulted from their
existence, ought not to be repealed without proper de-