Star.
London, England, 1811-04-05 00:00:00

PARLL

HOUSE OF LORDS, APRIL 4.
The Royal Musa was given by Commission, to the Exchequrr
Bills Funding ein, the Commercial Credit Bill, the Annual IP-
. detnnlty, the Commissioners of Military Inquiry, Ltd the Militia
Officers' Indemnity Bills, together with thirty-one Bills of a pri-
vate or local description.
The Lords Commissioners were the Loan CIIANCZI.LOR,
Earl BATUUKST.and LOPII WALpINQRAM.
'Their Lordships then adjourned for some time during pleasure.
After the resuming of the House, about five o'clock, the Bills
upon the table were forwarded in their respective stages.
--. MILITIA ENLISTMENT BILL.
On the accession of the Militia Inlistmemt Bill,* short conver-
sation took place between the Earls of Liv ea toot, Daisy, and
RossLy N.
The Noble SECRETARY of STATE having
stated the expediency of the Bill ill question meeting
with no unnecessary delay in its progress,,suggested
the propriety of reading the Bill a second time to-
morrow, notwithstandiog the notice of a Noble Earl,
respecting a discussion on another Bill, stood for that
day ; and such Lords as thought proper could deliver
their sentiments on the next stage of the Bill, for
which it may be understood that the discussion of the
measure was fixed.
The Earl of DERBY expressed himself greatly
dissatisfied with the principle of the Bill in question,
at least to the extent to which it was carried ; and
should feel it his duty to oppose it in every stage'. It
went to perpetuate a new system with respect to the
Militia, and mediately to impose additional bur-
thens on the poorer classes of his Majesty's subjects.
His Lordship also noticed the great rise, latterly, in
the price of substitutes. The principle of the Bill was
one which deserved the greatest attention from that
House ; and he thought its discussion should take
place at the regular stages, though he did not flatter
himself he could persuade their Lordships to vary the
proposed arrangement.
The Earl of ROSSLYN supported what had fallen
from his Noble Friend, and the Earl of LIVER-.
POOL spoke in explanation.
An understanding appeared to be settled, that the
second reading should take place to-morrow.
LETTER OF MR. POLE.
. The Older of, the Day upon which their Lordships
were summoned, being read,
• Earl STANHOPE rose to bring forward his pro-
mised motion on the above subject. He first moved
that the Circular Letter of Mr. Pole to the Magis-
trates, of which a . copy had been laid before the
' House, shduld be void: and it was accordingly read
Act
the Clerk. 'His. Lordship then moved, That the
Act of the Irish Parliament of the 33d of the King,
eh. 29, viz. the Convention Act, be also read ; which
proceeding accordingly took place. The Noble Earl
then observed, that their Lordships had just heard
read thetwo documents upon which exclusively he
meant to fount his proposition. He said the motion
was in itself a very simple one, and which in effect
would go to declare, that the letter. of Mr. Secretary
Pole, calling upon the Magistrates of Ireland to act
as .he required of them, was going beyond the letter
of the Act. That was what his motion imported.
It certainly went to, reprobate the lettet upon the eel,
count of illegality, and he defied any lawyer what-
ever
to disprove the construction he should put upon
the Act. The measure in question was certainly con.
trary to the liberties of the people, and tended to ex:,
cite hatred and ill blood. Their Lordships should not
stiffer such a docume4t to remain on their table un-
noticed. He would, in the.first instance, state his'mo-1
tion to their Lordshi ps:—lt was to call uponthe House
to resolve o That it had taken into its most serious con-
sideration the Circular Letter of Mr. Secretary Pole" to
the Magistrates of Ireland, and also the Act of Parlia.
meet therein mentioned, being an' Act of the Irish
parliament, of, the 33c1 of his Majesty, chap. 29, and
that the House thinks it necessary to declare, that the
said Circular Letter required the Magistrates to de
and perform certain aets of severity not authorised
by the said Act of Parliament, and which if done and
performed, would be directly contrary t 6 law ; and
that the said letter by so requiring the Magistrates to
act, required them to attack the rights of the people
of Ireland, and is therefore and thereby an unjust
attempt to invade their liberties; and that the s id
letter was directly contrary to that spirit of concilia-
tion which ought to actuate the Government of Ire-
land towards the people of that country." This was
the motion which he meant to submit to their Lord-
ships. The jet of it was, Mr. Pole's calling upon the
Magistrates to perform acts of severity which they
were not authorised by the Act, and that was the,
true question before them. The Act in qUestion was
•undeniably a penal statute, and it was a fixed princi-
ple in law that every penal statute should be con.
strued strictly. His Lordship then proceeded to an
examination of the letter, and provisions of the Act
in question, contending that a plain and obvious con-
structien- thereof amply -bore out the conclusions.
couched in.his motion,. The Act did not in the least
degree trench upon the right of meeting to petition
. for the redress of grievances ; this vats expressly men.
tiooedln the proviso at the end of the Act : " that
'asiothingtherein should be construed to. prevent the
' undoubted right of his Majesty"s subjects to petition
Parliament or his Majesty for the redress of public or
primate grievances." They...should attend partieu.
• lady to the circumstances of the' case, to know whe.
• ther they came within the mtaning_of the Act. These
Were publicly notorious. The Meetings contemplat.
:Aid. by the Act were not lei ti 4 dispersed, only in case
•if resistance. Their Lordships were not now to be
told of the essential dlfferiee between delegates and
representatives, and inanageos of petition. ,Witli re.
. • spect to the real elefsoition of the word delegate, he
entirely coincided
•f. Dunning.
that of his very Learned
Friend, the late; Dunning. A delegate was, by
his appointmept,4oveste4arith some right which he
did not before possess, the right pf acting for and in
the name or behalf of . another ; as in the case of de-
legation of power to an Agent to sell out Stock, or
any second perspn to do that for another which it was
• not convenient or pnecticable for the principal to do.
How was it possible, he would ask, that threeenilli-
.. ons of any descri tion of people could petition, but
by means of del-. ation? Each individual 'could not
personally sign• t petition. - His Lordship then en-
. tered into a detailed description of a popialArmeeting
o' .some years since itt the county of Kent, at which'he
was particularly active; where, by means of delega-
.
tien, and dividing the county into districts, fic pie
purpose of more easily soliciting and obtaining sig-
natures to a petition, appointing managers of petition,
-• Ita. a rititioa was preeentad to the Serseign, at-