Star.
London, England, 1820-02-07 00:00:00

:ii~~'arkins

.

mean to urge to the warrant, as set fix* in there-1
turn to us?'
Mr. ILiblionse—" My Lord, I intend, if I can, to
thew in the fist place, that the. House of Commons
is not a Court occompetent jurisdiction to commit."
' The.CtiIEFJUSTLCE—!‘ Mitt is not ..a point of objec-
tion relating to the terms 4.iftthe return made to t:."
Mr. Ilobliouse.--“Therei% an adjudication set forth
in the return, and unless the Hotise of Commons can
adjudge upon the case in question, that Cannot make
their warrant sufficient. 1 shall endeavour to shew
that the House of Commons is not a Court of Judi-
cattire."
The CHIEF JusrtrE—,' Is that your only objec-
tion ? And if not, be so good as to state what other
objection you have to urge."
Mr. Hobhoase" My other objection is, that the
House of Commons, even assuming it to be a Court
of Judicature, has taken under its cognizance what
cann t be considered as a contempt, but as an offence
at common law, and not in anv way cognizable by
that House. according to the taws of this country ;
for on the face of the proceedings, the. House of Com-
mons proceed to adjudge that the publication alluded
to is a libel, which I contend they cannot do. They
. adjudge it to be a seditious libel, tending to inflame
the people to acts of violence against the Legislature.
The third objection I mean to stitinlit to the return is,
that on the return it does not appear that I have had
an'y hearing at all; and I certainly shall be able to
shew, that this is not only against every principle of
English law, but is even against the proceedings of
The House of Commons itself."

The CIIIEF JUSTICE—" Is there any other objec-
tion you mean to urge ?"
Mr. Hobhouse—" Yes, my Lord. In the fourth
place, I shall endeavour to argue, that, even assum-
ing the House of Commons to be a Court of Judica-
tute; ,and competent to take under its cognizance
what is alleged to be a seditious libel, and assuming
it to have authority to condemn an Englishman in
his absence, still it could not condemn an Englishman
to imprisonment. That is the point I shall- next at-
tempt to contest before your Lordships. The next
point will be, to shew that the natural remedy for
me, under such circumstances, is to claim my libera-
tion at your Lce-dships' hand by Habeas Corpus. I
shall afterwards attempt to shew your Lordships,
that upon the face of this warrant, assuming.; every
other objection to be removed—assuming that no-
thing informal has taken place in the mode of pro-
ceedings in the House of Commons—still there is an
informality on the face of the warrant that must, as
it appears to me, make it iMpOS,;II)IC any longer to
detain me under it; and if your Lordships wish me
to state what that objection is, I will do it; but, at
the same time, with your Lordships' kindness and
. permission, I wish to reserve it for argument when I
shall be brought up again."
The Crime Jusvtoe,• after conferring with the
other Judges, said—" You must tell us what your
remaining objection is."
Mr. Hothouse—" The informality of which I
complain is, that there is no publication at all stated
in the warrant ; the pamphlet alluded\to is not called
a printed pamphlet, and I am not said to have autho-
rised the printing or publishing of it; and this, I sub-
mit, is a vice in the warrant, which, according to all
principles of legal and natural justice, is a fatal ob-
jection."
The CIIISF JUSTICE, after conferring a consider-
able time with the other Judges, immediately pro-
ceeded to deliver his judgment, as follows We
it.ne conferred together, and I am of opinion, that,
sitting in this Court, we are not authorized by the
law of the land to enter into the discussion of any of
the objections taken by the Gentleman on the floor
to his commitment. It has been settled, by many
precedents brought from time to time before the
different Courts of Westminster Hall, and lately in
the most formal manner, by a writ cf error from this
Court to the House.of Lords, that it is competent for
tke House of Commons to commit for contempt;
that they are the judges, and the only judges, as tar
as this Court can know, of what is a contempt of
them ; and that there are a great number of cases,
where motions for the writ of Ilabcas Corpus
have been made, in which this and other Courts of
Westininster hall have, from time to time, refused
to inquire into the authority of the House to commit.
And I now state, most distinctly, that we have no
authority to entertain these objections with that view.
It is suggested, that there is an informality in the
form of the warrant, because no publication of the
libel is stated to have taken place; but the warrant
states, that the House of Commons has this day ad-
judged, that a pamphlet entitled so and.so is a scan-
daloti:libel. Now we cannot suppose that they ad-
judged it to be a scandalous libel, .unless they had
the pamphlet before them, and under their consider-
ation. The adjudication necessarily imports, that'
the pamphlet was before them, and that they had
considered it. Then it is said, that it does not ap-
pear that the party was heard. The warrant recites,
That whereas John Cam Hobhouse, Esq. having
acknowledged hinoself.to be the author of the pam-
phlet, the House of Commons bad therefore ordered
so and so.' It is stated in their Resolution, and it
'appears by the Speaker's warrant, that this Gentle-
man now before us has acknowledged himself to be
the author of the libel; we cannot therefore enter fur-
ther into the question. In the case brought by Sir
Francis Burdett against the late Speaker cf the
House of Ccmmons, which was argued, first, in this
• Court, and after.vatds, upon a writ of error, in the
Court of Exchequer; and ultimately, in the House
of Lords, a distinction was taken between that case;
which was an action of trespass, and the case of a
return to a Habeas COrpus. That distinction was
taken by Lord Erskine, when the case was under the
consideration. of the House of Lords. All .the easel
that have been decided in the different Courts of
Westminster Hall upon this subject were brought
under review, and throughout the whole decision, it,
was never Alinbted that the Courts of Common Law
had that authority to interfere with, supersede, or
take upon themselves to annul, a Resolution of the
House of Commons, by discharging from custody a
person proved-to have been committed by the House
t.f Contnions for a conterupt. The cases I have al-
-1 tided to were in that ease-all acknowledged to be law,
and, in the argument, the House of Lords proceeded
on the distinction between the case of a return to
Habeas Corpus and an action of trespass at law. We
"-)re be ' that '‘ we use not au-
.

. - -
thorized to do,- if weiwess to dischargb this Gentle-
man out of custody.; and i now-repeat, .tbat ifAre
should accede to this motion, we should do what the
law would not allow us to do. The- prisoner must
be remanded."

Mr. Hobhouse interfered, and said, " May I have
permission"—
The Civas .lusrtca.--" No, Sir, -are Ire beard
your points." =.?
Mr. Bobhouse bowed, evide itly mortt the
unexpected course which the proceedings ha est

Mr. Justice BAYLEY.—" There have been cases
expressly decisive of this question. The first case
upon the subject is that of Lord Shaftesbury, Ist
Mad. 14$, and the principle thereaaid down is this:
that a commitment by either House of Parliament
for a contempt, is a commitment in execution, and
the Courts of Law cannot, during the Session, dis-
chargwor bail the party. They have no jurisdiction
so to do. The Judges cannot julge of any law, cus-
tom; or usage of Parliament. A commitment for a'
contempt Of either House cannot be inquired of by
the Judges ; they cannot inquire for what the com-.
mitment was ; it is sufficient that the party was corn-
mitred fir a contempt of the House. These are tbej
principles that are to be deduced from Lord Shaftes-
bury's case. The next case was That of the Queen v.'
Pattie, reported in Lord Raymond, 1105. There the
question under the consideration of the Court of
king's Bench was, as to the right of the House of
Commons to commit, and similar principles were'
laid down to those I have mentioned. There Gould,
Justice, said, ' That the Courts of Westminster Hall
cannot judge of the privileges of the House of Com-
mons : those they must debate among themselves.—,
When a commitment by the House of Commons it I
returned, though it does not set out sufficient cause
of commitment, no objection can be taken. The
Judges are not to answer matters urged against this
privilege of Parliament, because the privilege of Par-
liament cannot be determined by common law. It
the cause of commitment is stated to be in breach of
the privilege of the House, the CoVrts of Westminster
cannot know of the sufficiency of the cause, for they
have no rules to produce whereby to judge of its
sufficiency.' This is said by Powis, Justice—' The
Courts and Judges have no jurisdiction to discharge
a man committed by the House of Commons for
what they have adjudged to be a contempt,' acc. 84. c.
This question has again and again been under the
consideration of this Court on different occasions, and
was particularly ender its consideration, in the case
of Sir -Francis Burdett v. Abbott. It was with a
viey to that, that I have collected the authorities to
which I have now referred ; and it was settled and
.adjudged in that case, that the House of Commons
have powdr to commit, and that this Court could not
enter into the propriety of that commitment. We
have not the means of forming a judgment, whether
the commitment was right or not. That case was
under the consideration of the Court of Exchequer
Chamber, and there the Judges were unanimously
of opinion that the-decision of this Court was right.
That decision, I believe, went afterwards under the
consideration of the House of Lords, and there our
decision was ultimately affirmed upon the principle.
Ito which I have been referring. For these reasons, it
seems to me that we are not competent to hear any
discussion'upon this subject. If we see on the face,
of the warrant, that the party is committed for that
which the House have adjudged to be a contempt of
that House, I have no difficulty in saying that the
House had a right to make such an adjudication, and
that we have no authority to call it in question. At
the time when the application for this Habeas Corpus
was made, I believe the words of the Statute of 31
Car. 2, were not so accurately considered, or perhaps
brought to the attention of the Court, as they ought
to have been. It was assumed as a proposition not
to be doubted, that a party had a plain, clear, legal
right to a Writ of Habeas Corpus upon such a com-
mitment as this. Certainly, if the words of the Ha-
beas Corpus Act are looked to, it will be found that
it does not apply to a case this description ; for
the benefit of that Act is confined wholly to the case
where the commitment is for a crime, except treason
or felony, or suspicion thereof. It is clear. that the
Act does not extend to a case of this description. At
the same time, independently of the Habeas Corpus
Act, this Court has a common law jurisdiction to
grant a Habeas Corpus; but, in both cases, there
ought always to be a proper ground of law before
the Court to justify them in granting such a Writ ;
and it~ must not be taken that any man, under any
circumstances, has a right, as a matter of course, to
the Writ of Habeas Corpus. I merely throw this out
in consequence of the manner in which this Writ was
first obtained, because, upon carefully looking at the
Statute of Si Car. 2, it appears to me that this is a
case in which the party is not entitled to Habeas
Corpus as 'a matter of course. Every man who ap-
plies for a Habeas Corpus, is bound to lay such a
case upon affidavits before the Court, as will. be suf-
ficient to regulate the discretion of the Court in that '
respect. Upon the whole, it appears to me, that this'
Court is not competent to hear am argument on the
points which have been mentioned, and that we
should not be warranted in acceding to the motion." '
Mr. Justice HOLROYD and Mr. Justice BAST, in an
able and elaborate judgment, severally delivered
their opinions in concurrence with the other Judges.

The Clitar Jusrica then ordered the prisoner to
be remanded, and an entry to be entered on the re-
turn, of the reasoas why that course was pursued;
Mr. Hobhouse attempted to address the Court
agalt, but was prevented by the Court. He was
then remanded to his former custody ; and in his pas-
sage through the Hall, he was loudly cheered by an
immense crowd which had assembled.

After he bad left the Court, the Cnitr JUSTICE
and Mr. Justice HOLROYD said, they wished it to be
understood, that although a writ of Habeas Corpus
had been granted to Mr. Hobhouse, in the first in-
stance, on the authority of a dictum of Lord Kenyon,
p-
in the King v. Fowler, (T. R.) that this must not be
considered as a precedent in future, because, after
looking carefully trough the Habeas Corpus Act, it
WAS clear that the writ of Habeas Corpus could not
be granted as a matter of course, and without suffi-
cient grounds before the Court for its interposition.

' TRH KING V. NR. SHERIFF PARKINS AND OTHI.7ItS.
Mr. DENMAN applied to the Court to 6.x a day for
the arguing of this case, which our Readers will be
aware is that of the Court of Aldermen - 'lst Sic-
,.

:~:.

•

•

~e,a`.
~~

,dhail on

14 ;Sl=l7'ols4o'. - •
Mr:Hunt was eat; and hoped the Court would
fix a day, as ttkatsparties.ltad attended so often. Ile
intimated that the delay was attributable to Mr. Den,
plans who would not agree to the appointment of a
da 'Amu it was proposed on a former occasion.
~
..:. : DEN MAN appeared to deny this.
r. Hunt—lt was die case, Mr. Denman, but you
have bad so many cases of this kind, that----.
Olin' Jurrtcf.Sir, sit cannot—
Mr. Hunt stopped.
The Cuter Jorrics said, he was extremely sorry
to occasion inconvenience to parties, but the Court
had not the-power to accelerate the hearing of this
case. It must take its chance, for t• remove the.bur-,
den from one party, was only.to throw it upon ann.
ther, and there was much important business to be,
done before the conclusion of the Term.

MR. HUNT AND THE LANCASHIRE AtAGISTRATES.
Mr. Hunt took his station in the centre of the floor,
and manifested an intention to address the Court.

The Curer J risTlcs,-Mr. Hunt, what do you want?
Mr. Hunt—My Lord, I have a motion to :take to
the Court.

The CHIEF JUSTICE—What is the nature of it ?
Mr. Ilunt—l will shortly state it. I move for a
Rule to show cause 'why a writ of certicrefri should
not issue out of this Court, to move my trial (the
King against Hunt and others, for a conspiracy to
overthrow the Government, at the Manchester ►?•icct-
ing, on the 16th of August last) out of the jurisdic-
tion of the. county of Lancaster, and into that of the
neighbouring county, that of York, or else within
the immediate jurisdiction of this H6nourabic Court,
in Middlesex or Westminster. I make this motion
on the ground that I shall not have a fair trial in Lan-
cashire, where the cause now rests, and—
The CIIIEF JUSTICE—Do the other defendants con
cur in this motion?—Mr. Hunt. -I don't know.

The COURT—Then we can't grant the motion.—
All the defendants must concur in the application.
Mr. cannot ascertain whether they will
or not, for I never saw them before I was in prison
with them.

Mr. Justice Berg—We cannot help that ; but
we must know before we can consider your motion;
all the parties who are indic:ed must come into Court,
and concur in the application.—Rule refused.

On Saturday Mr. Sheriff l'aniuNs appeared fit
the Court of Requests, Guildhall, to answer the com-
plaint of a publican in Newgate-street, who charged
him with a debt of £1 13s. being the balance of a
bill of £6 13s. incurred for a treat given by order of
the Sheriff, at the complainant's house, about two
years since, at the termination of the Carlisle Elec-
tion. In reply to the charge, the Sheriff said, his
order was limited to £5, which he had paid, and
Therefore he did not deem himself -responsible for i
anything further. Much altercation ensued, but the
Commissioners at length decided against him, when
he quitted the Court in high dudgeon, threatening to
prosecute the complainant for perjury. Mr. Under
Sheriff Pullen, however, who accompanied him, paid
the money.
Sunday se night; at eight o'clock in the morning,
six rren were apprehended, charged with having,
for some time past, waylaid, assaulted, struck, and
maltreated* the workers at Brobmward Cotton Miro
near Glasgow, and with unlawful combination, and
on suspicion of being aiders in the recent attempt to
set fire to that mill, as mentioned in the Star on Wed-
nesday. They behaved in the most thameful manner
after their apprehensit n.
'MANSION-HOUSE.—ROBBERY OF TIIE BATII AND
BRISTOL MALL.:—W. Watson, John Playfair, and
Win. Boniface, were brought up for re-examination
on Saturday, when the former, on the oath of a
Gentleman who saw him in the coach, at Marlbo-
rough, was fully committed' for trial:
GUlLDHALL.—Tranciscoßurney, Philippa George,
and Peter Rocco, three foreigners, were on Saturday
charged by the snperintendant.of the Refuge for the
Houseless, in London-wall, with having purloined
'some of the stores. The prisoners, it appeared, had
been admitted for the night into the Institution, and
slept in that part of the premises immediately ad-
joining the room where the stores and clothing were
deposited. Early in the morning they contrived to
cut whole through the partition, and by means of a
I stick, with a hook at the end of it, got possession of
several articles. They were, however, observed by
a man who slept in the same room, and who gave
information of the circumstance. An Miser was
accordingly sent for, and on searching the prisoners
George and Burney, there were found on the former
two pair of new flannel drawers, and on the latter a
new jacket and a new pair of gaiters, part of the
stores belonging to the Committee. The Committee
were not desirous of prosecuting the fellows, and
they were therefore committed to hard labour in Gilt-
-spur-street Compter, for one month each.
LAMBETH-STREET:IMPORTANT TO PAWNERO-
KEES —Saturday, a pawnbroker, residing in White-
chapti, was charged, under the " Mutiny Act," with
receiving by way of pledge, a shirt belonging to a
private soldier in the Grenadier Guards, the same
being a regimental necessary. The case being clearly
proved, the defendant was convicted in the penalty
of five pounds.
INQUIST.—An Inquest was held on Friday even-
ing, at the White Horse, Rupert,-street, St. James's,
on the body of Mr. James Brown, eget!! 25, shop-
man to Mr. Bartram., pawnbroker, of 1%. 44,. War-
dour-street, Sbho.—Mr. Jas. Fellows, head shopman
to Mr. Bartram, said, deceased served under him, and •
had been.in.the house three months.- On Thursday
witness requested deceased to go up stairs to the store- ,
room (the gan-et), in order to throw down a parcel,
which he did; afterwards he (witness) heard a noise,
and in consequence of the-deceased not coming down
stairs, he was induced to run up to the store-room,
where he saw the deceased lying•ou his back, appa-
rently dead; he instantly sent for a surgeon, and Mr.
Keys arrived ; on taking him to the room where the
deceased was, they discovered a pistol lying by his
side, on the floor ; the place was covered with his
blood and brains ; the top part of his skull was blown '
off, and laid on the floor. Witness said the pistol
was received in pledge in July last, and had been
lying on a shelf in the apartment ever since ; it was •
their habit to receive loaded pistols RI pledge, and
to lay them by without examining them.; he had
no doubt but the melancholy circumstance was the
effect of accident—Verdict, Accidental Death:

CLERICAL tNT'

~•••

VENCE.

CAMBRIDGE, FEB ltrA Y 4. •
The late Dr. Smith's Annual Prizes of Alis each, to the two
best Proficients in Mathematics and Natural Philosophy among
the tonuuenciag Bachelors of Arts, are this year adjudged to
Mr. Henry Coddington and Mr. Charles Smith Irsrd, of Trinity
College, the first and third Wranglers.
OXFORD, FEBRUARY S.

Wednesday, the Rev. Edward John Furrow, M.A. of :Jag-
dalen College, Cambridge; was itieezporattst o€ Trinity College;
Oxford, Grand Compounder.
Thursday, the following Degrees were cotiretred
DOCTOR 1,1 MEDIANS.
James Arley Ogle, Trinity College.

MASTERS OF A WIS.
The Rey. John Stedman, Pembroke College.
James Hall, Wadham College.
&roue! Pepys Cock erell, Fcllow of Merton College.
Aruodell Bouverie, Fellow of Alertoy College.
The Rev. Robert Crawford Dillon, St, Edmund Hall.
BACHELOR% OF ARTS.

Barron, Esq. Wadharn College. Grand Compoundtr.
Charles Anthony Bunt, Merton College.
George Parker aezther, Exeter College.
David I)undas, Student of Christ Church.
Thomas Lombard, ditto.
I lenry Parsons, Scholar of Balliol College.
Yesterdayobe Rev. Edward John Burrow, M.A. of Trinity
College, V 133 admitted Bachelor in Divinity, Grand Compounder.

C

• .
• •
. .
_ .
. . . . . . .
, . : • . . • • 1
• . ..... 4 ...i., .. ....t 4 I.' . I.• • • 04.
10.--,..-• . . ..---.
—7l' th orized to do,- if wee:me to dischali this Gen& :riftParkiiis arid' OWiii;,% ..h
'Ti. (AU lie V' . Ain* - • CLERICAI'AVTILIGENCE.
1 • 1 • -:. - -
. - • mean to urge to the warrant, as set forth 'LI the le- -man out of custody.; and I now-repeat, Abet if-Ore Miehae nbes•dire. a
CA MBRIDGE, FEBRUARY 4..
-turn to us?' • should accede to this motion, we shottld do what the Mr:Hunt was sent; Arid hoped the Court would •
The late Dr. Smith's Anrual Prizes of A 11.5 each, to the two .'
Mr, nobhoirse—" My Lord, I intend, if I can, to law w id best Proficients in Mathematics and Natural Philosophy among '.
on not allow ui to do. The- pasoner must e .
fix a' day. as eltepartieeshad attended so often. He
intimated that the delay wits attributable to Mr. Den-
the tone
Bachelors of Arts, are this year adjudged
thew in the first place, that the .House of Commons be remanded." . -
Mc. Henry Coddineton and Mr. Charles Smith Irird 'I to
's. is not a Court of-competent jurisdiction to commit.", of Trinity 4,
• ' The.CillEFJusetee—oTaat is not point of objet- • • e
. Mr. Hobhouse interfered, and said, " May I have imatne who ruld not agree to the appointment of a
da when it was proposed on a former occasion. e college, the first and third Wranglers.
OXFORD, FEBRUARY S.
S tion relating to the terms atfahe return made to us." ' Permission S DENMAN appeared to deny this.
h Mr. Ilobliouse—aThereit, an Adjudication set forth The Crime .losetex.--" No, Sir, -we Irv, heard --
• r. Hunto-It was the case, Mr. Denman, but you Wednesday, the Rev. Edward John Pairrow, M.A. of Mag- -..
your points."dalen College, Cambridge; was iaccrporatost of Trinity Cullege, • .
;* in the return, and unless the Hotise of Commons can. e . . have bad so many cases of this kind, that.-- Oxford, Grand Compounder. a
Mr. Hobhouse bowed, avidnitly mortt the
• CHIEF JUSTICE-44', We cannot— Thursday, the following Decrees were cosirerred :
adjudge upon the case in question, thatiannot make .
:".1 their warrant sufficient. 1 shall- endeavour to shew unexpected course which the proceedings he e elf
• Mr. hunt stopped. DOCTO2 1,1 MEDIANS. t _
.1: that the House of Commons is not a Court of Judi- Mr. Justice BAYLEY.—" There have been eases The Cater Jorrics said, he was extremely sorry Janms Adey Ogle, Trinity College.
t'
cature." • expressly decisive of this question. The first case to occasion inconvenience to parties, but the Court
The Rey John Stedmmka
:Ft
IR,Serteri A ItTeLcollege.
.
.
The CHIEF Jusrtre—e Is that your only objet- upon the subject is that of Lord Shaftesbury, lst had not the-power to accelerate the hearing cf this James Hall, Wadham College. ,
•^,• thin ? And if not, be so good as to state what other Mad. 14$, and the principle there.. laid down is this: case. It must take its chance, for t• remove :Imbue- Samuel Pepys C!Ockerell, Fellow of Merton College. .i'
• Objection you have to urge." that a commitment by either House of Parliament den from one party, was only-to throw it upon :inn- WruOun ore:leen Bouverie, Fellow of M
__ertost College.
The Rev. Robert Crawford Dillon, St, Edmund Hall. aa'
el
• - Mr. Hobhouse--" My other objection is, that the for a contempt; is a commitment in execution, and ther, and there was much important business to be
BACHELOR% OF ARTS.
• House of Commons, even assuming it to be a Court the Courts of Law cannot, during the Session, dig- done before the conclusion of the Term. William Barron, Esq. Wadham College. Grand Compounder. i
"i
of Judicature, has taken under its cognizance what charge-or bail the party. They have no jurisdiction stn. IIuNT AND THE LANCASHIRE.MAGISTRATES. Charles Anthony Bunt, Merton College.
- a George Parker a.eather, Exeter. College.
It. cairn tbe considered as a contempt, but as an offence so to do. The Judges cannot julge of any law, cus- Mr. Hunt took his station in the centre of the f100r,.1
Dayrd Dundas, Student of Christ Church. 11
5 :It common law, and not in any way cognizable by toms or usage of I arliarnent. A commitment for a and manifested an intention to address the Court.
Thomas Lambard, ditto. a ' '
that House. according to the •taws of this country ; contempt of either House cannot be inquired of by The CIIIEPJwsTIcs,-Mr. Hunt, what do you vsant? Henry Parsons, Scholar of Balliol College.
' • for on the face of the proceedings, the. House of Corn- the Judges ; they cannot inquire for what the corn.' Mr. Hunt—My Lord, I have a motion to make to Yeiterday,•the Rev. Edward John Burrow, M.A. of Trinity '.
s* : mons proceed to adjudge that the publication alluded mitment was ;it is sufficient that the party was corn- the Court. • 1 College, WaS admitted Bachelor in Divinity, Grand Compounder. '''•
V to is a libel, which 1 contend they cannot doS They mated fir a contempt of the House. These are the The Cuter JUSTICE—What is the nature of it ? 1 ECCLESIASTICAL PROMOTIONS.
fai . adjudge it to be a seditious libel, tending to inflame principles that are to be deduced from Lord Shaftes- Mr. Bunt—l will shortly state it. I move for a The Rev. Harris= Packard, 'ALA. Is presented to the Rce- i.
the people to acts of violence against the Legislature. bury's case. The next case was that of the Queen v. Rule to show cause Why a writ of certieretri should 1 tory of Fordley, with the Vicarage. of Westleton annexed,
:
' ' The third objection I mean to sttbrrtit to the return is, Pattie, reported in Lord Raymond, 1105. There the not issue out of this Court, to move my trial (tale' eseijoeen. •
ev. Henry W. R. Birch, M.A. to the Vkarege of Ray. •
° that on the return it does not appear that I have had question under the consideration of the Court of King against Hunt and others, for a conspiracy tel don, la.nd perpetual Curacy of Southwold, Snfolk S -
• ; any hearing at all; and I certainly shall be able to King's Bench was, as to the right of the House of overthrow the Government, at the Manchester hlect- Thei Per. T. H. I ey, to the Living of !Amtrak, Devon.
?:
-; shew, that this is not only against every principle of Commons to commit, and similar principles were ing, on the 16th of August last) out of the jurisdic- The Rev. J. W. Nibloch, Curate of litteldn, ;hew, to be
.'
English law, but is even against the proceedings of laid down to those I have mentioned. There Gould, tion of the. county of Lancaster, and into that of the Master of the Free-School, in that town.
• •
•-I • the House of Commons itself." Justice, said, "That the Courts of Westminster Hill neighbouring county, that of York, or else within
•:: The CHIEF Josetee—" Is there any other object cannot judge of the privileges of the house of Cons- the immediate jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, Extract frcm Warburton's I,ettert, Nov. 29, 1760 ;
d b the new d b one after
preaching
ter,
e Mr. Hobhouse—" Yes, my Lord. In the fourth When a commitment by the House of Commons is on the ground that I shall not have a fair trial in Lan- stet, n
to_
place, I shall endeavour to argue, that, even assum. returned, though it does not set out sufficient cause cashire, where the cause now rests, and— KING, who, as Lord MANSFIELD tells me, expressed 1
.o. ing the House of Commons to be a Court of Judaea- of commitment, no objection can be taken. The The CIIIEFJUSTiCE—Do the other defendants con his offence publicly, by se) ing, that he came to Clia-
so •
ille one; ,and competent to take tinder its cognizance Judges are not to answer matters urged against this cur in this motion ?—Mr. Hunt. -I don't know. pel to hear the praises of GOD, and net his ownl
...
.-- what is alleged to be a seditious libel, and assuming privilege of Parliament, because the privilege of Par- The Cotner—Then we can't grant the motion.—
A COMPLIMENT SPOI LED JCILEM Y TAYLOR'S fuDe,
i it to have authority to condemn an Englishman in liament cannot be determined by common law. It All the defendants must concur ria the application. 1 sal Sermon was preached by Dr. Ruse, his successor
his absence, still it could not condemn an Englishman the cause of commitment is stated to be in breach of Mr. ilunt—l cannot ascertain whether they will in the See of Dromore, which he concluded in a
to imprisonment. That is the point I shalf next at- the privilege of the House, the Courts of Westminster or not, for I never saw them before I was in prison , strain of panegyric much mere complimentary to the
tempt to contest before your Lordships. The next cannot know of the sufficiency of the cause, for they with them. Blume than to the e Clerey of his Diocese; " for,"
•
point will be, to shrew that the natural remedy for have no rules to produce whereby to judge of its Mr. Justice BAYLEY—We cannot help that ; but said the Preacher, a had his parts and endowments ei
me, under such circumstances, is to claim my libera- sufficiency.' This is said by Powis, Justice—' The we must know before we can consider your motion;' been parcelled out among his Clergy, it would per-
_
lion at your Lordships' hand by Habeas Corpus. I Courts and Judges have no jurisdiction to discharge all the parties who are indicted must come into Court, haps have made one of the best Dioceses in the World !" e
shall afterwards attempt to shew your Lordships, a man committed by the House of Commons for and concur in the application.—Rule refused. R. Wedderburn, the thick preacher, who is under 3-
' • that upon the face of this warrant, assuming every what they have adjudged to be a contempt,' &c. Ric. _ prosecution for blasphemy, was liberated from New- :
other objection to be removed—assuming that no- This question has again and again been under the On Saturday Mr. Sheriff PARKINS appeared to gate on Friday night, on entering into recognizances, Ca
thing informal has taken place in the mode of pro- consideration of this Court on different occasions, and the Court of Requests, Guildhall, to answer the corn- himself in £lOO, and two sureties in £5O each, to ;o1
. i,.
• ceedings in the House of Commons—still there is an was particularly ender its consideration, in the case plaint of a publican in Newgate-street, who charged appear and take his trial in tbehittings after the pre- ae
informality on the face of the warrant that must, as of Sir -Francis Burdett v. Abbott. It was with a him with a debt of £1 13s. being the balance of a sent Term. • •
it appears to me, make it inipos,;ible any longer to vices to that, that I have collected the authorities to bill of £6 13s. incurred for a treat given by order of BIRTHS. .'
• detain me under it; and if your Lordships wish me which I have now referred ; and it was settled and the Sheriff, at the complainant's house, about two ..
On the o-Gth ult. at Highworth, Wilts, the Lady of the Rev. s•
: to state what thatobjection is, Iwill do it ; but, at .adjudged in that case, that the House of Commons years since, at the termination of the Carlisle Elec- Edward Bowden, of a sou. 1
the same time, with your Lordships' kindness and have power to commit, and that this Court could not tion. In reply to the charge, the Sheriff said, his Februari 1, at Weston House, Warwickshire, the Coureess 4
. permission, I wish to reserve it for argument when I enter into the propriety of that commitment. We order was limited to £5, which he had paid, and of (Unmet!, of twin daughters. k
-4•
shall be brought up again." have not the means of forming a judgment, whether eherefore he did not deem himself -responsible for MARRIED.
The Cuter JUSTICE,' after conferring with the the commitment was right or not That case was anything further. Much altercation ensued, but the Lately, at Chatham, Mr. Daniel Hosmer, Pastor of the
Baptistbt.aoicolstur.ae
. other Judges, said—" You must tell us what your under the consideration of the Court of Exchequer Commissioners at length decided against him, when tho,na,toSfncl.ahrattiehna,mt.o Sarah, daughter of the late Mr. fie'
:,; remaining objection is." Chamber, and there the Judges were unanimously -he quitted the Court in high dudgeon, threatening to The Rev. Joseph Amphlett, Fellow of Worcester College, l*
re
i Mr. Hobhouse—" The informality of which lof opinion that the-decision of this Court was right. prosecute the complainant for perjury. Mr. Under Oxford, and Curate of Broseley, Skropshire, to hii,e Martha
se complain is, that there is no publication at all stated That decision, I believe, went afterwards under the 'Sheriff Pullen, however, who accompanied him, paid Gem, o
fd King's Heath, daughter of the late Thomas Gem, Esq.
Thuay, It Chelsea Church-, the Rec. Richard Sand ilends, 't
in the warrant ; the pamphlet alludedeto is not called consideration of the House of Lords, and there our the money. - jun. of Putnee, Surrey, to Miss De Brett, of Sloane-street. •
a printed pamphlet, and lam not said to have autho- decision was ultimately affirmed upon the principle Sunday tennight; at eight o'clock in the morning, Jan. SO, at St.Sidwell's, Capt. Sir Edwyn Francis Stanitope , 74,
• rised the printing or publishing of it; and this, I sub- to which I have been referring. For these reasons, it six teen were apprehended, charged with having, Bart. R.N. of Stanweli, Middlesex, to Mary, eldest daughter •::.
mit, is a vice in the warrant, which, according to all seems to me that we are not competent to hear any for some time past, waylaid, assaulted, struck, and of Major Dowell, late of the Commissary Department on the
a principles of legal and natural justice, is a fatal ob- discussion'upon this subject. If we see on the face, maltreated' the workers at Brobmward Cotton Mil', HoAnt.
sts ; India
Company
's Bengal Establishmeet.
James Armstrong, Esq. %I iitA• on the Ben- c .
jection." of the warrant, that the party is committed for that near Glasgow, and with unlawful combination, and gal Esta.blaisinhnestesi'it, to Susan, second daughter cf Mr. James e.
The CHIEF JUSTICE, after conferring a consider- which the House have adjudged to be a contempt of on suspicion of being eiders in the recent attempt to Fisher, of Duke-street, St. James's. . t
• able time with the other Judges, immediately pro- that House, I have no difficulty in saying that the set fire to that mill, as mentioned in the Star on Wed- Tuesday, at St. Peter's, Worcester, Robert Haliburton, Esq. ,
Mn of the late Col. John Haliburt. ori, of the Hort. Company & .
I ~ ceeded to deliver his judgment, as follows :---,c We House had a right to make such an adjudication, and nesday. They behaved in the mostotharneful manner Madras Establishment, to Ann, durd daughter of Robert Chain •
S. haee conferred together, and lam of opinion, that, that we have no authority to call it in question. At after their apprehensitn. • berlain, Esq. of Worcester.
:: sitting in this Court, we are not authorized by the the time when the application for this Habeas Corpus 'MANSION-HOUSE.—ROBBERY OF TIIE BATII AND
DIED.
- law of the land to enter into the discussion of any of was made, I believe the words of the Statute of 31 BRISTOL MAIL.:-/K Watson, John Playfair, and The Rev, William Babington, Rector of Cossington, ',vices-
thefloor • •
'
the objections taken by Gentleman on the Car. re 2, we not so accurately considered, or _ .
perhaps Win. Boniface, were brought up for re-examination tershire. .
to his commitment. It has been
settled,
by many brought to the attention of the Court, as they ought on Saturday, when the fortner, 'on the oath of a The Rev. J, P. Gidoin, Rector of Lynfingtone, Devon. t
precedents brought from time to time before the to have been. It was assumed as a proposition not Gentleman who saw him in the coach, at Marlbo- I° his 74th yop.ear, the Rev. Samuel Sheade, many years Rector
of Bedston Sal different Courts of Westminster Hall, and lately in to be doubted, that a party had a plain, clear, legal roues, was fully committedlor trial. The Rev Charles Lewis Shipley, M.A. Vicar of Grivaley, a t.- the most formal manner, by a writ cf error from this right to a Writ of Habeas Corpus upon such a corn- '
GUlLDHALL.—Trancisco'Berney, Philippa George, . Worcestershire.
- Court to the House. of Lords, that it is competent for mitment as this. Certainly, if the words of the Ha- and Peter Rocco, three foreigners, were on Saturday Jan. 31, at the Vicarage, Wootton I3assett„ Wilts, Care'dne, 5.
• . • the House of Commons to commit for contempt; bees Corpus Act are looked to, it will be found that charged by the superintendanoof the Refuge for the Wife
of the Rev. Thomas yde it ipley.•
AsAteiNdappl,es, on the 7th ult. of a bilious fever, the Rev. Joh^. 7.•
, that they are the judges, and the only judges, as tar it does not apply to a case this description ; for Houseless, in London-wall, with having purloined M.A. Fellow of Trinity College, dambrid e. - '
as this Court can know, of what is -a contempt of the benefit of that Act is confined wholly to the case 'some of the stores. The prisoners, it appeared, had Tuesday, the 18th ult. in the Sod year of his age, gat Holy-
: them ; and that there are a great number of cases, where the commitment is for a crime, except treason been admitted for the night into the Institution, and well, in laintshire, from a plenrette inflammation, caused by ir,
• where motions for the writ of Habeas Corpus or felony, or suspicion thereof. It is clear. that the slept in that part of the premises immediately ad- neglecting to
,change wet clothes, Mr.-*John Harrison, B.A. of i
have been made, in which this and other Courts of Act does not extend to a case of this deecription. At joining the room where the stores and clothing were Jesus Coll eOxford
West Minster hall have, from time to time, refused the same time, independently of the Habeas Corpus deposited. Early in the morning they contrived to Jan. os,egaged 78, L.' t.-Col. Edward Handfield, of Bedford- "'•
streets Bedford-square. -
to inquire into the authority of the House to commit. Act, this Court has a common law jurisdiction to, cut a'hole throuh the partition, and by means of a Tuesday, at Thwaitc, Oxon, Mr. Bdwatd Rush, fikmer, aged
And I now state, most distinctly, that we have no grant a Habeas Corpus; but, in both cases, there stick, with a hook at the end of it, got possession of
79.: he dropped dead in a meadow near his bouee,'as he %V AZ
. . authority to entertain these objections with that view, ought always to be a proper ground of law before several articles. They were, however, observed by g •
ji nago
.t o. 00iuk
iss e
Charlotterklin'asgi•illo'r of Wesewocd Lodge, BI ,
• . It is suggested, that there is an informality in the the Court to justify them in granting such a Writ; a man who slept in the same room, and who gave borough, aged 24 years.
Y.
Infin of the warrant, because no publication of the and it must not be taken that any man, under any information of the circumstance. An sheer was Jan. :70, Mr. Thomas Matthews, -butler in the family of Sir
• libel is stated to have taken place; but the warrant circumstances, has a right, as a matter of course, to accordingly sent for, and on searching the prisoners Thoma& Gooch, Bart. of Benaere-hall.
'Monday, Emma, eldest claaaLter of Colonel Dbwmozn, of
- states, that the House of Commons has this day ad- the Writ of Habeas Corpus. I merely throw this out George and Burney, there were found on the former maming Kens.
judged,
. j that a pamphlet entitled so and.so is a scan_ in consequence of the manner in which this Writ was two pair of new flannel drawers, and on the latter a Jan. e' s, is.rs. Cenehley, of S!eane-street, widow of the late
es, Jah): libel. Now we cannot suppose that they ad- first obtained, because, upon carefully looking at the new jacket and a new pair of gaiters, part of the Charles, Co:chivy, Etta Paymaster of the aellth Regiment.
, a judged ... jitto be a scandalous libel, .unless they had Statute of 31 Car. 2, it appears to me that this is a stores belonging to the Committee. The Committee Thursday, at the apartments of Mr. Williams, St. James's
: • the pamphlet befare them, and under their consider- .case in which the party ts not entitled to Habeas were not desirous of presecuting the fellows, and tnatFe,
theAtr& 11.1._Iltab_er, wklow of Adam Hanker, Est. Cep-
, . ation. The adjudication necessarily imports, that' Corpus as it matter of course. Every man who apt they were therefore committed to hard labour in Gilt- Thursday
!ir.h. it N
aged .
ursdzy se maoht, .1)9 years, Mr. F. Cook, of St. Mary's
- the pamphlet was before them, and that they had plies for a Habeas Corpus, is bound to lay such a spur-street Compter, for one month each. Parish, Colchester. He retired to rest, ele preceding nict,
. '`. considered it. Then it is said, that it does not apt case upon affidavits before the Court, as will- be suf- LAMBETH-STREET.—ImPoRTANT TO PAWNERO- rather huh:posed, as he !sad been for same time, and his cus-
tomary hour of eising haviug eld, a wmnan, wiao usually at.
pear that, the party was heard- The warrantrecites, ficient to regulate the discretion of the Court in that' Kens —Saturday, a pawnbroker, residing in White- tended him on ecing into his dramser •:'ound him lifeless. "
1 6 That whereas John Cam Hobhouse, Esq. having respect. Upon the whole, it appears to me, that this chapel, was charged, under the " Mutiny Act," with Saturday'seniight, a Diu, aged 75, Thos.Jer.klnson Wood- .
s acknowledged hiniselLto be the author of the pans- Court is not competent to hear am argument on the receiving by way of pledge, a shirt belonging to a ward, Esq. many years en active Magistrate fur the county of
i phlet, the House of Commons bad therefore ordered points which have been mentioned, and that we private soldier in the Grenadier Guards, the same &tea, and also a Magistrate for Nortoik.
Saturday se•neight, in 'Wolverhampton, Elliner Austwick.
so and so.' It is stated in their Resolution, and it should not be warranted in acceding to the motion." ' being a regimental necessary. The case being clearly
raohneay, and at the time of his-Co-
-,: hppeers by the Speaker's warrant, that this Gentle- Mr. Justice HOLROYD and Mr. Justice BENT, in an proved, the defeudant was convicted in the penalty wasrie net as aaglleCßlGfarlii tilattattheeAVest
Tower, - . a
man now before us has acknowledged himself to be able and elaborate judgment, severally delivered of five pounds. . The Ced of June last, at Calcutta, aged 3'2, James Rubin.
the author of the libel; we cannot therefore enter fur- their opinions in concurrence with the other
Judges. INQUEST.—An Inquest was held on Friday even- son, Esti. Inspector of Hospitals, and son of the late Rev. Thu-
,
they into the question. In the case brought by Sir The Cuter Joirriea then ordered the prisoner to • • as Itobinsor of Leicester.
ing, at the Vs lute Horse, Rupert:street, St. James's, n' . _ e . .
Jan. ea, )Jr. John Risky, schnoiniaster of Sheerness, for- 'al
' Francis Burdett against the late Speaker cf the on the body of Mr. James Brown, a,got 2a, shop- men),
14 • be remanded, and an entry to be entered on the re- Metier df the Workhouse, Minster, Sheep... .g
es House of Cert.:mons, which was argued, first, in this man to Mr. Bertram, pawnbroker, of 1%. 44,. War- .Mondaynight, in lees: la C f• b• ••' it 44, V•- et
s- lane, an_er ary, aged ..t.1,. - •
turn, of the motes why that course was pursued._
Court, and afterwards, upon a writ of error, in the - ' dour-street, Sitho.—Mr. Jas. Fellows, head shopman ret Roberts: she had spent die ereaing with some friends; :tad
Mr. Hobhouse attempted to address the court retired to Led, when the was suddenly seized with a fit of ill-
of. Court of Exchequer; and ultimately, in the blouse to Mr. Barteam, said, deceased served under him, and
agaito but was prevented by the Court. He
,was tress, moil inla. few hours became.acorpee).:.
Gangers„
Lords, a distinction was taken between that case; had beensin ;the house three months.- On Thursday
then remanded to his former custody ; and in his pas- ..r. Wmtell, of at ... h ,.a.ry : he
the
• which was an action of trespass, and the case of a witness requested deceased to go up stairs to the store- a hearty'i'll.s6'
supper, retired to rest, and.was ft ran a corpse in
sage through the Hall, he was loudly cheered by an
- return to a Habeas Ciwpos. That distinction wasroom (the gan-et), in order to throw down a parcel, momiug.
immense crowd which had assembled.
taken by Lord Erskine, when the case was under the which he did; afterwards he (witness) beard a noise, Wednesday, at his house, in Yoiksplace, Mr. Joseph 'Mattocks, *-:");
.. consideratio* of the House of Lords. All .the cases After he had left the Court, the Conte JUSTICE and in consequence of the-deceased not coming down of an hillammation in hdis.chest. reasiseiGereatelem.iti (who wasofot•ehlel
:3
* that have been decided in the different Courts of and Mr. Justice HOLROYD said, they wished it to be stairs, be was induced to run up to the store-room, knol-fnhien
htheienyythne-ohri.le
ofaen:.;
a',;.:cii eta') Oiesci se;ge2e.to.stty as to
_ Westminster Hall upon this subject were brought understood, that although a writ of Habeas Corpus where he saw the deceased lying•ou his back, appa- rrerc'lude the last offices of his nearest friands. It was only a few at
under review, and throughout the whole decision, it, had been granted to Mr. Hobhouse, in the first in- rently deed; he instantly sent for a surgeon, and Mr. days since he was walking apson his friends in St. Jameo's-otreet. ,
• was never elenbted that the Courts of Common Law stance, on the authority of a dictum of Lord Kenyon Keys arrived ;on taking him to the zoom where the Vella: ---n- - -
--
. rte. ems.
... ............. %/Ili ...Arr.-AIM /KC.
• had' that authority to interfere with, supersede, or tin the King v. Fowler, (I'. it.) that this must not be
' deceased was, they discovered a pistol lying by his worn - • 9 1 f Lisbon 0 O• ,1
' take upon themselves to annul, a Resolutioa of the considered as a precedent in future, because, after side, on the floor ; the place was covered with his Waterford 2 $ i Fr.:nce • I • 0 tn
• . House of Commons, by dischaeging from custody a , looking carefully through the Habeas Corpus Act,. it blood and brains ; the top part of his skull was blowy, ' Guernsey ald.T
may .9 .0 1 11imbusgh
ti 0 I Got;enTqlrgls • 1 2 -4:.;
O 3 at
•'`. . person proved-to have been committed by the House was clear that the writ of Habeas Corpus could not off, and laid on the floor. Witness said the pistol ii°llantl •
panders •• 1 1 Mak* •- 0 0 -
•
::. 61 Commons tor a contempt. The cases I have al- be granted as a matter of course, and without sufh- was received in pledge in July last, and had been Jamaica. 0 0 New•Yort • 0 0. •'
i- Jude,' to were in that case-all acknowledged to be law,since
s ; was , cient grounds before the Court for its interposition. lying on a shelf in ahe apartment ever • it
ail.: II- 01 AT.Eit at IArIDONBILI fib, k•-•Fo- to it n 11€1*.-*.- (
arta, in the argument, the House of Lords proceeded • TIM elect r. MR. SHERIFF PARKINS AND OTHERS. their habit to receive loaded pistols iit pledee, and • Alarming . • •'• .-• 58 °lima" 'ft" 7 -
on the distinction between the case of a return to Mr. DLNMI%N applied to the Court to fie a day for to lay them by without examining them; he had Afterneon -- .. • - 10 --. —!
_____
! .• Habeas Corpus and an action of trespass at law. We the arguing of this case, which our Iteadecs will be no doubt but the melancholy circumstance was the 1/2' "r* xi:lCint;tiargt t7gished by t .sinti. Naar; Piciaits- !': .:.
i LON Di). . P
A ehotadeherefore be doing that Which we usenet au- aware is that of the Court of Aldermen against She- effect of accident.--Verdict, Accidental Death. Place, Tenvle-liar: S
. ..
- • ''' , -'.J,;•••"..; •:•_.'' !` '4%- 7*'' 4*-1.-:.‘ .s:,:' •-!'• !*•'-i'l''''c.'•;- .' '... 1. -.•-• --. •
• • 1 * ''''. 1' • .--;;'-',' ..e...t.......a::-...i.t...,-4.!•..'... :**o- . :I_ t *.'' .4--. .':
- • ...., _ ...