Star.
London, England, 1810-04-06 00:00:00

..

House of Lords, this ques.
by the Court of King's Beno.
....rze many things as a_bleach of
Court of Law would not, hold as
'lion of L6rd.chief Justice be
might be 'the privileges of the
unless the offence was-committed:
/as not cogniaable .by sheitt.
oo,haddeelareditastheiropinion,
Imons had no right to commit an.,
, who did not belong to ).he'd
was not immediately within thell*
was inconsistent with the liberties
a right should be allowed to
material argument in -favour
laronet, who stood rather in an
that the libel, if libel it could
..ommitted out of doors, and was
It had not been asserted by,
House on a former night, that
:al did really exist, nor • would
that froM the notoriety of the
exi4.' The Honse of Conimons
Legislature, and should not arro-
vhich belonged tOthe whole eel-
-Ig, Lords, and Commons. The
to any such power:. it was not ra-J
: any other branCh of the Legisla.!
?recedents had beencited on a for-
!se Gentlemen who so strongly con--
leges of Parliament andwhoesteem
to the dignity of.the House that
mittal should exist. But in ,a
lved the Prerogative of Parlia-
the reign of Charles the First, a
dissention and disturbance, could
it and proper criterion by which
conclusions. The Noble Lord
.sing his full approbation of the
by the Worthy Baronet, which
,ported by those authorities which
:d to give them the currency of
His Lordihip also contended for
lourahle Baronet to-state his opi-
.ct to his Constituents. . •
'THER followed. He must dif.
. Noble Lord. He (Sir J.) was
indicate all the exertions of autho...
House might feel competent, but
it there should .be a power there,
defend the subject : its place was.
and the Crown, equally resisting
melt •nd regal prerogative.—
)11 was, first, whether-the publica-
id next, whether the power of com-
a House ? The publication was not
:ause it involved a greater offence.
asking, Whether the House were
Magna Charta null and void ? In
was a Fbel. It was absurd to
Ind Magna Charta on the carpet
Parliament did not exist at the
-eat Charter WAS given. The real
oint was, whether a branch of the
art, though perhaps not technically
Ilumniated with impunity by any
to asperse it ? Or was that power
which was granted to every other
common club, namely, that of
:tions to the object of their meet-
to he asserted that nothing but an
,bstruction could require removal ?
istruction in impeding the judge-
.
r:ng the minds of the Members ?
the case in die impeachment
Members coming to the
nine(' ; out there was a popular
placards were posted up nick-
n !tans there were, it must be
and hissing used on that occasion,
; no doubt on his (Sir J.'s) mind,
like the one now in debate was a
.rtrut•lion Were the Members of
frightened by alarming papers, and
they could he righted by the slow
:ment ? But the object of most im-
Hance, for the mair.tenance-of its
: it should be the judge of what was
iat was not ; without this its inch..
lot exist for a single hour. (Hear.)
liar and invidious claim ; it was the
:y Court to jtrdge for itself in acase of
acre was no revision of their authori-
,on. The House might abuse its
might every power entrusted to man
to history of the House for the last
\dreel years was the best answer to
they scarcely ever stepped beyond
!its which the public interests and
.s marked out for them. Et had been
pt was not a Breach of Privilege; he
;Land the argoment, and that was his
iswering it. It was. said that any
:onstrued into Privilege, but this ob-
It apply in fact; the Fuse wanted.
it had enougb.Alo,adY. (Hear.)
As now on. the popular, silk, and was
fm by a. man who stood :high upon
ibels had once been levelled against
e 'hie of Prerogative.., (Hear.). Sup-
NI from the King but no !I he must
that was impassible ;
.bnt, suppose it
-out the
.Ministers, (here Sir John cor-
again, and found that equally
-man could be found in the:Ministry
:ortail the rights 9.1 the House, (hear)
!posed those Gentlemen whose voices
d, would. be. equally active to sup-
inn of the powers which the House
? (Hear.) .He (Sir J.) di d aatig
less .real because it might not l.,etra-
years. The injury could not have
-till- printing became common. Oni the
acknowledge himself surprised at the
tale's in the resolutions of the Honour-
,:ho seemed not ckternrined as to the
,jest of even his' own motion. In the
4:-.ilebate, the. history. of their privileges
'to be der.jueed from the aelcnowledg-
:her branches of the Legislature ; .lent
would only look for them in the law of
The case of the King v Flower, had
upon ; but let the sceptics look to the
Lord Mayor of London, when com-
arrest of a Messenger of the House,

. - • ..., I. • - ".•-•„ i 7%; :•'"..'", Alap I. •
..4: - : •••: ..' .4 ----
-Ly. .* •-\'• ''' .7.1 S.
_ _".'' • '.(
ditiltali 4 iliipeas -arte.* the Chierlust,toe p- i•-• r !was .cif• • •
4,.., t resisting isy. the wise of the piee-e,
DeiSitetet in fiiik• Chien, on the Plain grouniltintt:., tithing but a forced conetrtlimion could make any it,
' of committing for contempt; r
every -ourehaci a power
that each Court ;enlist be the ;le. of what was con- an authon•ty than the late 'Lord Chatham' had .used
. .
Wept t. 4141 that as the content time when 'the ii ts
might vary, name- i much stronger expressions at _a gl3
1, 'thit not iseingibitinipt-of the Court at Durham 'of that House had been discussed in courts of law.—
tmhichmightbe contempt of th eCourtof King sßench, .He had. said" in the.Honse of Lords; that if they meant
unite 'the nation, they must convince them that
addndieni no juelgenent of .the point conld Ede given to . . . ,
.... :
tint of the CourteeveheieAkciffe,nee We's 'offered: The , their claiinswOuldbe regarded . but if a cOntrneycolree
.
..same envier was•gift on successive applications-to ; was to be pursued, if thebreaches, of the Cepstou-
, the Courts in.:. .. • on,, till the whole of the twelve 1 tion were not to be repaired, if mei:liberties' were to
4udges had *SeicliheilopinionAte same side.. ;be surrendered
“to a deenv:tic Minister,
." may.di.s-.
7adge I,)e. fr` -- , s language *ate " have a right . cord," said he, prevai . r ever !". pis Loedslhp.
'to :couterilt, beianse it is necessary** they should ' further added, that in thiecase he allude to, he hoped
leave the right." If this jtiagment "pi given up, they ' to see the question brought to issue,'' and fairly
mutt bedependent on the people Ortir,) or rather on tried !. .Such were the 'Words of the great -Lord .Cle.t
I-
• le'
the mob: 'he might remind the. House of -Murray's them I. it mattered .la 0 indeed, whether .the fibere
ease, where Chief Justice Wright and Mr. Justice ties of the people were tetrendered to a despotic l'eli-
L Foster remanded theparty on• the simple ground, that nister,.or,
before
othe House klif Commons. With suet
he had been committed by the House. He would go authoritye
them, the House niud Ise slow in
Jack no farther than to the Kentish Petition in 1701. straining the interpretation of the Honouruble Barn.:
The six persons who presented it were committed.. It net's expressions. Another complaint was,, that the.
.was a Tory Ministry. Before the nett Session, that Bill of Rights was called; a Bill of Wrongs; but the,
Ministry and Parliament were succeeded by a Whig Honourable Member read only a part of the. `pas
Miinestry and a Whig Parliament ; yet even then, sage.
. [Here the Noble Lord quoted the wliote pas-
With all the spirit of contention strong in both par- sage as it standsin Sir Francis gurdett's Letter :3 • •
.
ties,. they, loch agreed in the commitment, and even order that nothing may be wanting to render truly
embodied the princiPle• of the proceeding into Reso- ludicrous"Eat
in
v" e 'part of: this proceeding, which inverting thr. faiv;
lutions which were put upon the Jottrnals. Judge of tiaedraema,as well as all other• laws, begins with a tarce, aiid
ends, with a tragedy ; the House of Vonimbris imprison' Mr..!;
' Halt's authority had been brought in opposition to Jones—undefthe sanction of what law, think ye i-. 4:f ho Bill of 1
. the doctrine of privilege ; but that opinion Met been Rights. Wen mdiginhttPalnneicnasitlrgithititineig.tbilloof
.ieVssr;rignl,dielciocyouttlle 1
given in contradiction to the sentiments of the other , be. thus
rties coofntvheertpe
eleven Judges. "The Honourable Baronet talked in aum eopleo: -those liberties for which It was erprelsly '
framed, claimed, demanded, and insisted upon to protect., Mr,
strain of superciliousness of all authority, which was I Yorke has discovered a new meaning in the Bill bf RiPt.s; aad
not directly in favour of his crude conceptions. He . because the Bill of Rights declaresh tit.:4
t oaf
Memberrliaieonftraorur lwl'oltr.°t
spoke of "Mansfield, Kenyon, and such others ;" cannot
btheeoreuiensti h°eaehas saypiwentlyreeooncluded,P thatn f the tient& are
but even in the case when Holt's authority was cited,i
i prohibited from exercising their understanding, for the purpose ot
the principle did not apply ; he had only considered Gentlemen who sit in
discussing or censuring the conduct of the
the excess of power, leaving the existence of that that House," &c.
power out'of the account, and• in fact taking it for With these observations, it might be true, that
.granted. The pamphlet of the Honourable Baronet Mr. Yorke might have some reason to find •fault ;
I
appeared to him a feeble work ; it was a bad argu- but it did not appear that the House had any •such
ment, and the Srgument was bedly handled. This reason. Another paragraph had 1. en much ipsisted
was the only fault which he (Sir John) was inclined to upon, at p:vge 55 ,ending by saying. (peaking of The
find with the author ; he would haa;e let it die—(Hear) House of Commons) that they, " inflated with their
he would have left it to ' perish among the common high-blown fanciful ideas of Majesty, and tricked
pamphlets that every day saw perish ; the arguments out in the trappings of royalty, think privilege and
were old sand had:been exploded long since ; it co,n- protections beneath their dignity; assume the awerd
tamed false stateniente and Misquotations ;he silo= of prerogative, and lord it equally over the King and
traduce his Own judgment in thinking it mischievous. the People." Now, he must say, whatever might
(Hear.) The first page contained a quotation from be attemptelin the way of ridicule, that,he agreed
Blackstone, as if he had been in favour of its princi- with an Honourable 'and Learned Gentlethan below
pies. ; bite it should be remembered that Blackstone him (Sir Samuel Romilly), that he did :not clearly
was one of those Judges who remanded Crosby. He understand this passage. Yet, whatever these words
expressly stated,. that the Courts of Justice had power were, every one of them, lie believed, had been before
over all commitments but those of the Houses of Par- used by the Honourable Baronet, in his place in thot
liament during their sitting. The Right Hon. Gen- House, when he moved for 'the liberation -of Gale
tleman then declared himself perfectly indifferent as Jones. He was sure they had been used by him on
to what might be the pleasure of the House in its fur- other occasions. He did not state that as a justific:ae-
ther proceedings on the subject, considering the pub- tion, but only as to the fact of their not being unpre-
lication of the Baronet as a very dull pamphlet. He cedented. As far as lie could make out their mean-
did not often intrude upon the attention of the House, ing by the context, he presumed that by " assuming
hut he could not forbear expressing his opinion on the the sword of prerogative, and lording it equally over
present occasion, holding the privileges of the House the King and people," was meant the power assumed
to be essential. They had exercised them hitherto by the House of Commons, of punishing where the
according to their discretion. In individual cases, law did not order it, and of doing acts beyond what
sometimes the offending party had been reprimanded,' the King or the people had the power to do. That
and at other times committed. The- Honourable . was the best interpretation that he could put upon it.
Member who brought forward this business seemed The passage might perhaps be offensive ; and they;
not to have made up his mind as to what steps he were told, that it was the more injurious as it was
ought to take ; but without meaning to cast any re- unintelligible. There might really be some inge-
flections on that Honourable Gentleman, he must say chitty in this reasoning—but he could not perceive
that before he-brought such a question as the present why the House should be the more inclined to punish
into discussion in the Hhuse, it was his duty to con. when.sitting in judgment on a passage they did not
rider it, not only in an abstract point of view, but in all clearly understand. It was called scandalous and B-
its circumstances ; and what was 'his ulterior object. bellows. He spoke in the hearing of learned persons
He should, for that purpose also, have consulted with when lie said he believed, that to be scandalous, it
other Members, of experience in the practice of Parlia-
must be false, and to be libellous, a bad intention
menti of full knowledge upon such subjects, and who
must be shown ; which he had not yet heard urged.
could look a little farther into all the probable conse- He could see no right to infer any bad motive in this
quences of such a discussion. By such means a wiser
publication, unless it were put on the word " /?eiht,"
mode of proceeding might have been instituted, and
for which, he declared, lie could tied no ground.—
the Honourable Member himself, as well as others,
Then he came to the second part of the proposition,
relieved from their present state of uncertainty. which stated it to be a letter " reflecting on the just
Lord FOLKSTONE was desirous of addressing : ,
ars and
privileges of this )louse ;" so that the
the House, as, notwithstanding so grave an maim- i
i House were called upon in one resolution net only to
rity as that of the Right Hon. Gentleman, he must
decide tipon the paper, but upon the justness of the
differ from, him, both with respect to the Paper it- rights, against the possession of which the letter ar-
self, and the question of the right of the House, on 1 elle .Lt Lete. Gentlemen fairly consider the nature of
which the Paper complained of treated. The Noble I b
'the whole paper. It was written by an Honourable
Lord thought he had a right to complain of the Hon.
I Member to his Constituents, explaining more fully to
Gentleman who moved this question, not having
I had
the nature and extent- of his arguments than he
stated his views as to his farther proceedings. At first
I had done in his place, or than they could have been
he was content with the mere reading of the publics-
repotted to his Constituents. He did not know to
Lion ; and then h^ appeared much alarmed ; so much
what extent Members were to be permitted to publish
so, that he said 11;s hair stood on crnd when he read it;
1 their sentiments. The Standing Order forbad the
but what crime ii. contained he had not stated. Every
r publication of their deba'es ; nevertheless that prac-
Gentleman on that side had taken a different view of
.1 Lice had been long connived at. In former times it
the matter; nee confessed that the Paper did not in-
I could not be considered such a grievance, since /in-
volve the right of the House, one thought it did ; I
drew' lifdrvel wrote a full account of their proceedings
others entertained different opinions. Some charged
'to his constituents every week. This ought, there-
it with falehood ' • add the Right Hon. Gentleman
', fore, to be taken into view. He should be sorry
arraigned' it of bad taste and bad authorship. It was
to pass sentence for a libel, merely oh what he
called scandalous and libellous ; but no proofs of this : recollected to have fallen from a person in the
were given ; and while its bad taste was censured, t
' hurry of debate—but mieht not a person, in pub-
was admitted that it could cie no harm. It was
lishin sentiments .delivered in the House, supply
charged with want of candour ; but that was not., h : g
what was a little defective, and strengthen What w:‘:
sufficient groundfor the House to proceed Upon. Thee
too weak,? He must dissent from a decision till he
Right Hon. Gentleman should, when he mule that •
knew what was the meaning 6f their authority and }lei.
charge. have appeared candid himself; but that was
vileges. He found privilege derived rronvirivatunt at,
rot. perfectly the case, when he referred to one eeeolu-
I a priieite law, an exemption from the power of others
bon of the House, which the paper stated to have been i
—and this must be mosteaccurate.ly defined in its na-
drawn up by Sir E. Coke, in 1601. One Hon. Member •
titre and its extent. What was to be found of privileges
had complained of the expresions respecting the legal
as anciently claimed Fieedom of speech, and free.
power of the Speaker's warrant, and called it a gross
don from arrest for Members, and ler their scrvetels,
breach of privilege. The jet of the argument lay in
when Coining to orreturnieg from Parlkunent, except-
the merits of that statement. If the Hon. Baronet
ing
peece. Vrivilege was only exemption, but not power; in cases of treason, felony, and breaches of the
(Sir F. Burdett) was at all light in his argument, he
45 object clearly was only to prevent obstruction. If
must state what he had stated on that point. Before
Gentlemen called it a libel, they should consult some
pushed beyond this, it became dangersons ; -but what
aethorities. If they turned to law books, to Hawkins
was oow claimed was different, and contrary .to the
or Coke for instance, to learn what were the requi-
definition of the word. It had been, stated, that it was
'sites if a legal warrant, they would ind that it must
as necessary to protect the Members frem libel, as
from hissing and hooting them; hut hissing and boot-
:have Itiv:tur authority, moat be under hand and seal,
i and must he for a lawful case ; and then, when they
ing were actual and undeniable interruptions and ob-
found the present cause deficient in these respects, they
structiOns. • The Hon. Baronet had not denied the
r could not find any great crime in the statement of
right of removing all obstructions. The Learned
• the Hon. Baronet. One had laid great stress ou the .
Mister of the Rolls lied maintained the doctrine Mie-
n* of the word 4., resist ;" and a string of passages
your of the necessity of the power Of the House, but*
had been read to put an impropercenstruction on the
130 X q.i a iitivileie. His Lordship wanteil • to, know why
Meaning of that word; eif the ceetext were fairly
.Lord Chief dustiCie De Grey, too,
considered, it Wliiilit Mittt i it was necessary.
ar- that the %wird o mossy,
i main ame t • d the• it ' d t enable the House
neeess }atm or er o
was connected with the words".lega-; . . 1 " and' that •lt .
was only by a forced interpretation that any thing etie - - (
yk•Derform its fuse tions 3,444,01x:4y denied.
Housewe
but legal resistance could be tan as the writer's in- churned of removing obstructions ; mid the had
tention. It spoke of legally resisting, of resisting gone on very well without claiming motoupon former

occasions so as eras the case in the instance ce Stock-
dele.and. of Reeves, where no step -of this rt was
taken. Another point stated was, thatit wRa neces-
hary that the House should be the judge of its own •
privileges ; but the question was, whether they had a
right-to judge whether such and such an Act was a
breach- of vtiiiit privileges:rit was argued. that. all
Courts had power to punish for contempt, and that,
therefore, ,that House had such power. Contempt
was Obstreicticki Or contumacy., Lord Kenyon had
said that ccuttempts might be. eonsmiti•ed by persees
out of the Court, Or its immediate verge • . and lie
statedthe-case of one Bildmote, a. Shetifif, ;iho: was
punished for contempt in consequence of a neglect
cif his silty, which was a different case. tingley, the
printer, refused to answer %sections in the Court, he.
caukohe held himeelf liable to be tried by big,, s,
,
:Sid he was. thereupon committed to prison,. eeheee he
remained two ;ears, alweye -persevering, tie his causal,
and actually publiehingfiF4sh offences-. Yet, finally, the
Attorney:General moved for his release oq thegretund
that he • had.already suffered a greater ponielement
than would hive been inflicted upon him, hasthe•beesi
convicted and sentenced ler his offenote•Novi from the
co-iiduct ef.Bingley while in e onfineneentehiacontempt
and grevegreetee an geotereee That
ile-a,atehwe iCso.suPrint cowilat
fKinaPg'sl,94eg"'4ecll•tvetlse
snlPtitnesaentetl; atad in
There were regultr modies.4 pr-oeeeding. Hart anti
White, the.printer and editor -of a newspaper rtlle4
ihe Adependent Whig; were not consmittedby.ehe COure
of King Deitch for a contempt; they wc-re prosecuted;
For a libel on. that Court, found guilty byea. Jury, sen;
tented, and penished... In the same way that House
had often proceeded. ,It. was said. that tlere was in-
consistency in Sir Francis Burdett* eoting the
committal of Mr.'Heilei.Senelen and. Giaterel Ga.
vering ; but in their cases, there-was an evidank 'con-
tempt and "Obstruction. —pleor, hear.). House
was then a Court of Inquiry,. and.penished titem.for
their prevarication which was essential to the prow
Cation of that Inquiry. He would say,.that their be.
ing able to inflict that very punishment furnished- ae
argurrieeelu eupportof hiVonslpsion, that their ;sows
existed only against obstructiees. Punishment for a
specific, time v IL power long sleet given up by that
House, and note the cpfineueent ceased at an act-
jourOnetit : a' proof trial the povier was not for the
execution of punishment. eThey had abandoned alI
claims to punish' for a yeare or a week, or a day.. A.
man-might at the commencement of a Parliament be
imprisoned and remain, ltere,:;Parliament sitting, for
some years, if he made no submission ;.if at the end
of a.. Session, his confinement might he but for, a day,
hoi,eii.ei;',gteett his effenee or eetitempt might be. This
shewed that the Houseleidno power, to confine .041
punish, except in • cases of obstructions. If stAnis-
ston were• made, the, party., was generally , released :
but it was vexy,.o4C.i4tleeea_eivßeetereleet te.eee. ish.
ment 'foe lihetec.' that itsduration should-he:so un-
certain, and ill proportioned offence. .4 The
House assume (iaid the Noble Lord)-this power,
and we dispute it : and we make our stand on the
law of the land, on Magna Charm." The latter ex-
pressly stated, that " No man :hall be Om or imyi-
toned, or disseised of his freehold, or outlawed, or
banished, or any ways destroyed ; nor will we pass.
upon him, or commit him to prison, unless by the legal
judgment of hit Per', or by the Law of the Land."—
He had, therefore, a good right to say to Gentlemen
•••••44 Shew me the law, and the foundation on which
this assumed power stands." It lies with those Gen-
tlemen to make that clear. He h .d other authorities,
and recognitions, besides those he had quoted. He
had resolutions of all the branches of the Legislature,
the authority of Lord Chief Justice Holt, and even
of the Crown, in the opinion of King Charles 1. In
1612 the House of Commons voted, that no Court of
justice had any cognizance on matters that came un-
der their autle)rity ; but this was at a time when they
were assuming every other power to themselves. The
Noble Lord then quoted the Resolution of the House
of Lords, in 1701, understood to be drawn up by
Lord Somers, le which the right of creating new pri-
vileges by either branches of tee Legislature was con-
demned. He did not go to the Lords' Journals to find
the privileges of the Commons ; but it was well to
see what their opinions were at that time ; and their
decision he thought would he found correct. On
what ground was the power claimed ? It might be
said of the House of Lords, that it was e Judicial
Court, but that would not do ; for they claimed this
power in their legislative, as well as in their judici d
capacity. The-Commons House could only claim it
in the. tormer capacity ; and if both these branches so
claimed it, why might net the ether branch, namely,
the King ? Were the two Homes to have a stronger
defence than the Crown ? They had already the same
power to order proses iiions as the Crown had ; and
why should they fora grt ater authority than for
the removal -of obstructions, ender which head, he
thought the case which led to th;s discussion did not
fall ? The Right Honourable Gentlentae had said.
that the right wal„fotinded on law, and exercised as
long back as occasion had called . for the exercise of
it ; and so the House were to determine the law, by
a .long and undisputed exercise. lie went farther,
and said, it had been exercised ever since libel.
were 'written. This the Noble Lord denied. They
Might have, been written ever since the art of prin.
ting had been discover.el,;' but it was long after
that great disCovery before they could find any record
of such power being exercised. The first record
was of the case of 'Hall, in the reiga of Eiizabetle
In the cese of Brass Crosby, the Lerd Mayor, and
Alderman Ofiver,lviembees of Parliament, the House
comniio ed. ifeein both, and the Court refused their
apparpthy hadcation.hisßrUitghwthte:
hitis. wHa!thseaais Corpus,
nothing, that thes t
mn fi
p ur
nothing, if it were also contended that he could not
have [fie merits of his case argued before the Courts
of Law. Wlaw
that it, indeed, to he deemed sound aw
that the law of Parliarisent,' should be undefined
The
e naendt
t
unknown to all except ter Parliament men ?
House would recollect that "they attempted in et.
to commit Wilkes. In 1680, there WAS a remark.
• feet
apisolweeri.nsiTaithcee
Hefothuset s'atitctcleatss
tionif
ethweotedexermcias:roflLbet.lll;s4
and committed one Coleman, of Devonshire.
'found they were, mistaken in the man.
in this
the right man, one Stowell, who resisted ; and.
dilemma they hit-upon the expedient of Toting 1.27,
sick, and adjourned the business to a disfftantedw
which never came. Crosby and Oliver's o encoenis4
the release of a .printer.—Virtlkes refusine
to
attend'
the House al -erred till Friday, tl.ough ifs a
and then took

J