Star.
London, England, 1820-07-13 00:00:00

_ _ -
, a;

- • .

•

igeolle.aim from sureiiiiiilit soodw, 01111Pleurt
to intigekbeed,reiress of )nsticei NM iakillir ill the al
stance one into emsidennteer the neem ordered .
to, be Ailed he was now awardiney distharged*
the poilebest oil* fem. Jervis thrill inithigilwillou the bar; MR
Sr. LUSHIN9TOWL,the reprimand in
. bus oedered to by entered do tile Journals; the
Hogtionese-st the same time given three diejact chews. ,
BEN NETT presented a Petition4neila en individual
wbose name cuuld not be learnt, prayieg hireekoleibeeilime,
in a trial with the Middlesex Magistrates. dsitievklenee of the
Cleat and short-hand writer of the Polk. Committee..—The
prayer of the Petition was agreed to. i
GRANTHAM ILLECTION.
Dr. PHILLIMORE`moved that the Resolution of
the Committee appointed to inquire into the uteri*"
of the Petition complaining of an undue election for
the Borough of Granthatn, be rend; which being
done, the Hon. and Learned Membet observed, that
his object in rising was to prevent other persons from
falling into the delusion which the Gentleman (Mr.
;Hughes) had done whose election was declared void
by the statute of William HI. prohibiting the treat.
ing of voters or giving them money under the pre-
text of indemnity for loss of time. In his opinion,
it was equivocal whether the treating of voters, or
;giving them money under the circumstances men-
tioned, was bribery or not, acceraing to. the Statute
in question. He certainly was not quite satisfied on
the point in question, and therefore, with the view
of giving a positive interpretation to the Statute, he
should now move the following Resolution :
" Resolved—That the practice of treating. or giving money
to voters by way of indemnity for loss of time, is highly illegal,
subversive of the freedom of election, and tends to most dan-
gerous corruption."
Mr. ABERCROMBY thought the Resolution al-
together objectionable. It 'was declaratory on a
point which, even according to the acknowledgment
of the Honourable and Learned Mover himself, was
very doubtful.
Mr. WYNN said there could be no doubt that
giving money, or treating voters, in such cases,
amounted to bribery, according ,to the Act.
' Mr. WROTTESLEY was of opinion that a doubt
did exist, and the present Resolution not being suffi-
ciently explanatory upon the question, he opposed it.
.Mr. W. smurti clamed with the Honourable
Member who had spoken last. It. was because, a
doubt did exist, at admitted by the Hon. Member,
that he (Mr. Smith)thought the Resolution necessary:
Mr. LOCKHART said, that even if the Resolu..
tion should pass, it was probable that the Judges
might not agree to it; as a mere Resolution of that
'House could not be held binding as law.
Mr. WARREN was firmly persuaded that no Re-
solution of this House oat ht to controul an Act of
'Parliament. Besides, the words of the Resolution
were vague and indistinct. A measure of this na-
lure required serious deliberation, and he should
therefore suggest to the Hon. and Learned Members
1 the propriety of withdrawing the Resolution.
Mr. WYNN contended, that every payment to
voters; no matter how it was described, was illegal.
i Dr. PIIILLIMORE said, he never had any doubt
whatever, not even -the shadow of a ,doubt, that
giving money .to, voters was to all intents and pur-
poses illegal; according to the 'Statute of William
the Third. But he only acted in this case upon the
Report of the Committee, from which it appeared
.at an inveterate practice had prevailed in the Bo-
rough of Grantham, of. giving £7 or £8 to each of
the voters, by way of recompense for loss of time.—
It was by following this inveterate practice that the
;th
Gentleman, whose Election had recently been de-
clared void, had been misled ; and he wished by this
Resolution, to prevent others from falling into the
same error. ,
The House then divided, and the numbers were—
For the Resolution, 66—Against it, 60—Majority, 6.
Mg. ABEIIeItOIBY said, with reference to a
Resolution (that of Dr. Phillimere) which had just
been carried by a very small majority, that he would
take an early opportunity, in the, next Session, to
bring the question before Parliament.
THE QUEEN'S DEFENCE.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, he rose,..purivant to no-
tice, to move that he and his Learned Friend (Mr.
De.inian) should have leave given them,
.as her Ma-
jesty's Attorney and Solicitor-General, tieing; Mem-
bers of that House, to appear in her Lehait at the
Bar of-the House of Lords. The Learned Gentle-
man moved, without further preface—" That leave
be given to her Majesty's Attorney ;..id Solicitor.
General,. MeMbers of this House, to plead as Counsel
at the Bar of the House of Lords against the Bill
now pending in that House concerning her Majesty,
ender the peculiar circumstances of 'the case ; and
that the said leave shall Snot, in time coming, be'
drawn into a precedent to permit the Members of
this House tq Act as Counsel at the Bar of the House,
of Lords."—The Learned Gentleman observed, that
he had introduced the latter part of the motion, be-
cause the House would recollect, that their order,
was more especially directed against Private Bills
than Appeals, and he thought it was proper that
the salvo should be co-extensive with their Stand--
ing Order—(Hear, hear). '
~:. •
Lord CAS TLEREAGH said, the case of the.
Queen was so peculiar, it w4s of suChtranseentleut
importance, that if there were,two Honourable Mem-
bers in that House to whose legal care her "Majesty'
wished to intrust her interests in the Houre of Lords,,
it was quite sufficient testate that fact to induce the
House to dispense with the Standing Order, and to
grant the necessary leave. But he conceived the
same privilege should be conceded to the other side,
if Gentlemen, Meinbers of that House,...svere called
on to exercise their, talents in support.' of this im-
portant Bill. In that cise, it Would be proper that
the indiiiduals thus selected should exercise their
functions in that House with the same reserve, and
with the same uaderstanding, that die Gentlemen
opposite would exercise theirs—namely, that they
should discuss the question professionally, and not
interfere by giving any vote as it. In making these
observations,. he alluded to his Majestj's Attorney
and Solicitor-General, who might, in the perform.
ance of their professional duties, be called on to at-
tend. Assuredly, the reasons that applied, in grant-
ing leave to Members of thit House to oppose the
Rill, would apply with equal, force to the case of
those Members who might be required, profeseionally,
to suppcirt it. Actuated by this feeling, be would,
either by way of Amendment, or in the shape of a
I substantive.ntotion,,eisll, on Ue AWN to 'allow his
I Ildaje4y4 Attorney and Scilicitae.General .the' same
t leave that was poised to the Attearef and Selicitore
•
i Gbl General of her Mx testy.

,

•

~~

O.' •
%. ';‘.
!1,z7 , •
• -

, , •

F 147.

C

_ Mr. W. Vila
rod it jippeired ti
hers-of Shis•House
Muse of Lit& as
this Home. there
lea,* vas I
beth--hut
necessary grounds, and accompanied
or not voting.. If: that were not the case, it would
produce extrerne-inconienieniei for it would Ise ini-:
possible that Gentlemewcisuld come With Impartiality.
to the discussion of a Bill here, against or in favour
of which, dry acted as Counsel at the Bar of the.
other House. This reason indeed was stated, as the
ground of the Resolution of 1666, which mighrbe
considered as declaratory of the law of the case. In,
private Bills the ineonvenienceWould hi particularly-
felt ; for if,Counsel who were Members of this HOuse
were allowed to appear as Advocates in those-Bills
at the Bar Hof. the Lords, it might happen that they
would be retained in tuch caset•lnerely to procure
their assistance in this House. After the Resolution
in 1666, such indulgence was frequently granted :
but it was also the ground of much dispute between
the two Houses; for as it was essential to the autho-
rity of every Court that it should have the.power of
punishing its practitioners, the Lords claimed the
right of confining some Members who acted at their
Bar in that capacity. This was another inconveni-
eoce, and it tended. to restrict the indulgence to cases
of appeals. The last leave of this kind was given,
he believed, in 1710. Under these Circumstances,
he thought it would be better to add- to the motion
the words, " that the same should not be. drawn into
precedent;' and to add,. also, that the application
was Made " under the special circumstances of. the
case." With these guards, he thought the House
might safely 'grant the permission to her Majesty's
Attorney and Solicitor-General ;. but he thought that
the King's Attorney and Solicitor-General did not
stand in the same light. The Icing was got a party
in this Case,. and he did not see why his Officers
should get a permission of this- nature. As to her
Majesty) Officers, he did not see any objection to the
motion, if it should not be brought into a precedent.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, he had no kind of objec-
tion to the introduction of the words proposed by his
Honourable Friend, and he accordingly inserted them J
in his motion. •
After a few words from Mr. BAKKE% the clues.
tion was then put, " That leave be given to her Ma-
jesty's Attorney and Solicitor-General, Members of
this House, to . plead at . the Bar of the House of
Lords, under the particUlar circumstances of the case,
against a Bill pending in-that House concerning her'
Majesty the Queen, and that the same leave shall not,
in time to come, be drawn into a precedent."—The
'notion was-agreed to. • .
Lord CASTLEREAGH did not think that any'
distinction could be drawn between the case of the
King's Attorney and Solicitor-General, and that of
the Attorney and Solicitor-General of her Majesty.
The King's Attorney and Sidicitor-Genetal were Of-
ficers appointed to act in great'pulilic prosecutions,
and had a right, as Officers of the Crown, to exercise
their legal Junctions in this, as in other cases of a
more common nature. It would. seem that.they were
the only patties that could appear, with, advantage,
before the-House of Lords. Heconceived it would
be very unfair, supposing that the Bill should pass
the House of Lords, and be brought under the consi-
deration of this House, if, when one party was al-
lowed the advantage that would result from the at-
tendahce of two Gentlemen who had been present at
the wholeproceeding, and cross-eiamined the wit-
nelses, the opposite party. were not allowed the assist-
aace of two other Gentlemen who had an equal
"knowledge of the case, and who were possetted of
the necessary facilities for bringing the whole of its
Merits before the Hansa In his opinion,. the public
'Situation of theXines Attorney and Solicitor-General
s!ndered it equally necessary that they should sager-'
intend the prosecution, ai that the confidestial ohm-
-don of her Majesty's-Attorney and Solicitor-General
should induce the House to grant them that liberty.,
He should, therefore, move—.
" That leave be given to bisMajesty'i Attorney and Sdlicitor-
' General, Members of this House, to plead u Counsel a the Bar
of the House of Lords, in support of the Bill noir pending in
that House, concerning her Majesty, under the particular cir-
cumstances of the case ; and that the said leave shall not, in time
cabling, be drawn into precedent."
Mr.- W. WYNN said, the case of the Queen's At-
torney and Solicitor-General could not, as it appeared
to him, be drawn into precedent; but, on the con-
trary, he conceived that of the King's Attorney and
Solicitor• General might. He knew of- no ordinary,
occasion on which the Attorney and Solicitor-General
of the Queen could be Caned on to act in that capa-
city ; but the House knew there were many Bills in'
which the State was concerned, where a similar per-
mission might be required for the King's Attorney
and Solicitor-General. The House must be aware,

that when Bills connected With 'the State were op-
posed and supported -it the Bar of this House, the
King's Attorney 4ndSolicitor-General were not called
on to plead ; and on the same principle some other
Learned Gentlemen might be selected to appear at
the Bar of the House of Lords.
Mj. W. WILLIAMS inquired whether the King's
Attorney and Solicitor-General would be precluded
from voting ?
Lord CASTLEREAGH said, he bad already dis-H
tinctly stated that they would.
Mr. BROUGHAM observed, he was by no means
unwilling that the Learned Gentlemen who were op-i
posed to him and his Learned Friend on this occasion'
should be permitted to plead at the Bar of the House
of Lords. He would not therefete offer any opposi.
don to the motion; but, at the same time, it was ne-
cessary for him to state that there was a peculiarity
in the Queen's case, that did not at all apply to the;
of the King, which chewed the
_great propriety
permitting the attendance of her Legal Advisers at
the Bar of the other House. The King and theihrbe
lic, it should be recollected, were Opresesitedinlils
House of Lords br the Judges, which was. PISA'
stronger reason than. any. that had been .rvens for
supposing that the appearance of his fillessty's A.
'Raney and Solicitor-General was not absolutely nee
011WIFT. Besides, thegrra Officers of Stale appeared
his Majesty's whilst, on the other hand,th
tineen had no paprika:ad ve whatsoever inthat Horn
'lt•Lard CASTLEREAGH' said, the Ministers of dif
Ciewsi could only be coasideredisiXtcliviffiSal
capacity, aslffernbell or ale EfOitse
air.M.'"baoll was 'then arappo. .

.


stti he had ifeeetved her Mir.

that his,professional services
those of the Learntd Gentlemea
conduct her defence ; and he
would be of opinion, under the
of the case, that the same in-

conceded te him as bad been
Legal. Friends who were her Majesty's
-official law ndvisesrs. He should consider himself
cis 4' t >i>t f vilifigitiiii-ailtiiteirned:Frierids,
mkt) vote on silly itage of the Bill, if it should uki-
matelyvoure•.before.thitt Mote- He should there-
foto . • • . .
" Thai leave etch to • Dr:lsol6BMs Member of
House, to plead as coalsel tithe fir or be }lessee of
against the Bill now pending in.that House, concerning her /.la-
lesty, under the particular etretinweanceetof nisielue, and thu
the said leave shall not in time comint be dassia-flitoprtcvdezit."
Lord CASTLEREAGH said;.liehad no objectiot..
'to this permission being granted to any Fralesional
.Gentleman on either •sid& of the House, whose ser:
vices might be called for on this occasion. At tlii
satne time, he did not see any particular occasion fur
the services of the Learned Gentleman.
Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH said, it was perfectly.
well known to every Gentleman conversant whit
Parliamentary proceedings, that a Civilian was
ways one of the parties to snail transaction as tin:
which now occupied the attention of Parliament.
'There was st peculiar propriety in retaininge Civi-
lian upon this occasion; and it was obvious, from the
cases quoted by the Learned Gentleman (Mr. Wynn)
that the same principle would not apply to co ssoail
a bar as was occupied by the civil law withthe same
strength that it woulet to the more eltensive bar
which was occupied by the common law. The choice,
was necessarily much more limited in the former
than the latter case, and therefore the permission
should be the more readily conceded. He thought
it was a request that ought to be complied with, not
from any feeling of indulgence, but as a matter of
• 'ct justice. •
Mr. W. WYNN could see no
which separated the case of
frotin that of any other CO-tinsel
•leave to be heard with respect
might be brought before the Hi
Attorney and. Solicitor-Genera.
Queen were the standing and official
personages, and, from their situation,
nduct the business more satis:
Learned Gentlemen. But this did
to his Learned Friend, who stood
same ground with any other.
might be required to act as Colinsel
mg ht the other House. Lie kr-
Doctors!Commons was not V)
minster Hall; but it .could..suppli
of great skill andtalent,_-itho.we•
that House. - ,
Mr. BANKES. said; if the Hi
allow any of its Members tO:bo _
Rouse of Lords, they undisislitedlysnight
but he conceived that it would _ -
able measure. The Legal Servants
had received permission to plead
other House, and beyonclitbat I
could not safely go.. letbq 44
Able for their. at any .future tik,
sioDal Gentlemen, Members of
Iserty of pleading,.in-diVorce cases,
of :Lords. Ile.could- see-sko,
tween the Loine4 Clesulemitns*"
other Professional Member of the
therefore pet his -negative on
entertaining any W feeling againtt
• an.—The Motion was
BANIWS Saying " Not"
ADMINISTRATION OW' ENDIDS6II
- Mr. BROUGHAM obtained ice. _
Bill for improving. the Administrathin-
inents connected with Education.
lIRRACM OW PRIVILE4W.
Sir J. NEWPORT said; be '
Lion of the House to alsubjeet
leges were concerned. ,The Himse would
that in the Bill for the
inigidtedancerantdhyaatinwa;thieiesliniditnuisiiionas.
at Bill With this clause had
aving been sanctioned by a very
dry. Under these circumstances
that, if any person had to speak
It least speak of it with decency.
ieved, would be astonished
page in which that-clause was characterized
of Resolutions which were passed -
Merchants in Dublin, on Thursday,
Before he read the Resolutions -
thought it: would be but right
singular speech with which they
Colonel Blacker said, He regretted
question of such great importance;
bumble an individual as himself
but," said he, 4. worm, if trampled
%torn, and rouse like the slumbering
beighter in • every part of the -
Blacker then proceeded to say,
pending in Parliament, a clause of
give them of their chosen Representative,
If not speedily prevented, a wroni
regcaulatietlaodse.ums:l;of ,s.
magnitude; he had, therefore been
tether a series of Resolutions ,
sons might suppose the language
but be would says in repfy to
their rights were infringed upon
He would say, that else Minister,
must be told
.in theinclering langnage--(1
laisghter)-.the wrongs he has dared to •
as soft language could have no
(Lord Castlereigh). having degraded
conduce--{Shook oflaughter).—Belf
would here observe, that the Noble I
events, .oneiciasolntion, his cOnthict
House. The same Mr. Blacker
proposes series of-Resolutions
lotions, which characterised the
" unjust," ." unconstitutionaV•
upon the rights of the citisens of
one, which ran as follows
cumaances isnd wlich.thiv clause
into the.li=nCainsibnsil
rauteitin g if as an attempt
gislation to theipuvans of patty."-
then ropostall*ntOed on the
DV If W4l WI in this speech

I

• i;

LYNN said' that ft* 4/switifliesi LUSHIN OTOft
Taired to to. the pratfice, ihat gems! 'jesty's royal commands
itslionse should Oppege 'at,th,olTet. the ?should be added to thus
Lords as Advocates, withoptlife leave of alteady selected to coi
e. there weppjoretakitasol'as eils44oo hoped that the House Is
nt teihe-reign OFElfsit4,.peculissr circumstances
*ere always-lbosidecrost special lAd, dulgeoce should be cc
strounds, and accompanied with the reserve granted to his Legal. Fr
• . .._, •

3 :pc' cial citcunastances
the. Learned Member
I who might apply for
to any other Bill that
10115 e of Lords. The
ral of the Kmg and
naiad Counsel of tlio:o
tuatinn, could perhaps
tisfactorilyc than other
aid nee at all apply
stood precisely on. th'e
_professional man who
rminsel on a Bill pend-
knew that -the' bar of
large as that of West-
pply rii-iny,t;eniiemen
. were ii& *lobe's of..
Houle thought dt to •
lats beard at the Bat of
stiitedly might do so;..
be a highly-objeetion- -
rants of their Majesties'
ead at the Dar- of-- the-.
t bessibtlity thiitouitt
it-wouldbeimptri‘-: .1
ttrarse-Rldese,-.•:.
Ofth at the
B4rthe
:uses, cif thb
Serf.Ao, 1116.,
'7'
aoy-
die HOUSetii!ife-Oh°Uld.
I 'the- Moo*. *chant
ainst the,cielk-
tEep ag.ff
:45 Mt.
-
'd leave to bliss in a
inist'ratitity. of. fiadovr-
.on.
vtuarw.; :
had to .eall.the amen-
in which their privi-
lease would recollect,
tiontitheHigh Court
ise was inserted, which
Master in Chancery ;n
use me incompatible.
tad classed this House,
ery considerable major
es it might be supposed
k of this Bill, be might
But the House, he
1 to hear of the las-
s characterized in a set
assed by the Guild of
rsday, the 6th instant.
ons to the. House, be
to read.a -part of tho
ley vrerarrefaced. A •
egretted that, 'upon a
tnce; it devolved on so
self to address them ;
Templed upon, would
'than% lien !—(Loud
le Horse.),—This- Mr.
r, that t, the Bill now
se of which went to de-
nprese tative,Teatldbeest,
iron; of the
seen induced to put to-
; no doubt some per-
age to be too strong;
to such persons, that
on by the Minister,—
ter, Lord Castlereagh,
language-(Ceatinued
dared to put on them,
o effect upon him, he
gradedllouelf by hi*
—dielflir 4: Newport)
Diable Lorithsid, .at al
indict avas-that of the
:er then IstoCeeded to
s ; and after pro Res °.
1)e clauskas
;7. and -as entrenching
A. Dublin, he proposed
That, from all the cm-
clause was introduced
Wst feel ourselves war-
gtetept to degrade le-
krty,"-• A Petition wai
'foregoing Resolutions
alone that this class