Star.
London, England, 1820-07-19 00:00:00

-.ed. The sending of &Ott oet of the country by
Proclamation, on which great stress had been laid,
bad now been shewn to have been done under a Spe-
cial Act,of Henry VII. which, with other Acts offen-
sive to the Scots, was repealed in the reign of James I.
So that, so far from that proclamation being a proof
of the existence of the prerogative, the proclamaiioa
was (as it followed the very words of the Statute) a
proof that such a prerogative did not exist, as there
was need of an express Act of Parliament to autho-
rise it. The most unobservant readers of aocient
writers must have, remarked,. that great confusioa
prevailed among them as to their descriptions or de-
finitions of the sovereign power. All those parts
of the supreme power which every State possesses,
which could not be conveniently exercised, were ge-
neridly represented by Civil Lawyers to be parts
the prerogative. It had been said, by old writers or
law, that England was an rabsolute Monarchy, winor
merely meant that it depended on nn wher S:ate,
but from this expression it had been inferred tl:.,t are
King had sovereign power. Mr. Pym, or Sir L
Coke, had well said, "I know the sovereignty of
the King's person, but as to sovereign power he
does not possess h." When it was said that it was
the right of the sovereign power to send foreigners
out of-a country, it was merely meant to say that
its doing so was not a legitimate ground of war to
the nation to which those foreigners belonged. llut
the sovereign power was in England, not in the Ki:,g
alone, but in King, Lords, and Commons. 11'riters
might be apt to conceive that, because it was a part
of the sovereignty, it must be lodged in the. Crown
—but this was an unwarranted assumption. All the
instances which the Noble Viscount had referred to
on a former occasion, either proved nothing from
the violence of the times in which they occurred, cr
proved too much, for the powers which were cea-
tended for were, at the times which had been men-
tioned, exercised upon persons who were not aliens,
as well as upon aliens ; but though the acts were
contrary to law, there was no redress for those .v.las
had suffered under them. This brought him to an
argument of the Noble Viscount, that the powers
had not been abused. Whether they had or not, he
(Lord Holland) knew not ; but he knew, that if the
Noble Viscount acted illegally or improperly, leis
unfortunate victims had no redress. The Noble
Viscount knew, that when he had seized some paper-,
he (Lord Holland) had wished to ascertain the le-
gality of the fact, but because the person who had
suffered under it was,sent out of the country, it N\ as
impossible for him to do so. He did not say v,
tiler the act was legal or no ; he did not wish at that
moment to make any particular charges, but he
knew, that if papers had been seized in the same
manner from a person who was not sent out of the
country, that person would have been able to bring
the legality of the action to the lest. "He (Lc).
Holland) had taken the advice of lawyers of mi.
nence--he had offered to take a power of attorney
to proseeute the action, but was told that it was
impossible. Though he had much friendship and
respect for the Noble Viscount who exercised this
power, he certainly could not, after the experience
of the last two or three years, pay him compliments
on his mildness in the execution of Iris office—(Hear).
However civility might induce him to say in the
Lobby to any Noble Lord, that he was persuaded he
would not abuse a power entrusted to him, he should.
.say as a Member of Parliament, that he did not
know the use of the Statute Book, or the advantage
of any free Government, if there was not a presump-
tion that arbitrary power, wherever it was granted,
would .be abused—(Hear, hear). But it was not
merely in the case of arbitrary power being abused
that it was mischievous ; the submission, the prostra-
tion of mind which it produced, were the same,
whether it was abused or not. It was the conscious-
ness that the power might be abused, that made the
difference between a government of will and a go-
vernment of law. He had stated before, that he had
known instances of the advantages taken over fo-
reigners. Advantage might be taken by one man
over another, under such a law as this—by the au.
dacious and cunning over the timid and artless, even
if it applied to Englishmen. But as it applied to poor
foreigners, quite Ignorant of our manners, it was a
more powerful instrument in the hands of bad men.
" You saw me take off my hat to Lord Sidmouth,
and what a gracious bow he made me in return ; I
am his particular friend, and I have only to whisper
in his ear that you are a Jacobin, and you will be
sent out of the country instantly; give me six months
more to pay my debts, or I shall go to the Secretary
of State's Office!" Things of this kind had come to
-his knowledge, and if they had not, he should have
known, from his acquaintance with human nature,
that such things must have happened under such a
law. But he did not merely look on the law as mis-
chievous in this indirect way; he had always re-
garded it as one of the most atrocious engines of the
spirit of despotism--as one of the links of the great
chain wherewith to bind down the Prometheus of
litical improvement throughout the world—f
at the various Congresses of Monarchs !—( r
The Noble. Lord then mentioned the case of
lish Gentleman, who had been prosecuting
suit for a sum of money, against a Governs
friendly to our own, who was shipped off '
,country. Spilt an act as this might have,
'served, formerly made the subject of a frieni
presentation ; but by the Alien Act their mout
stopped—they would he told they could not
plain, as they had changed their own laws,
an arbitrary power over foreigners.—The Nk
ron, after remarking on the strong impression
every person who conversed with foreigne-
that this law made on them, observed on its ,
in the present situation of the country. There
a nation with which he hoped we should k
tinue united in friendship, and not the less firm 1,
account of the late glorious change in her situ?
he meant Spain. But if that country ghoul."
flicted with any of the misfortunes with wl
Revolution in France had been attended—if t.
or the Clergy and the Nobles should take ref
this country, the new Government of Spain
ask us why we fostered their exiled enemies?
.Alien Act did not exist, our answer was clear.
might say—" We, like you, are a free people,
yarned by" fixed laws, and we have no power
'miles from our shores." But we could not
while the Alien Act existed, and we might!
to exercise it—at least, so it had happened
France, iu the case of a similar law. When

,:

fer such a
aw as mis-
always re-
ines of the
the great
ieus of po-
d—forged •
.(War).—
)f an Eng-
ing a law-
wernment
3ff to this
'e, he ob-
riendly re-
ouths were
not corn-
vs, to get
Noble Ba-
;ion which
ners knew
intpolicy
There was
long cone
firmly on
situation;
aid be af-
which the
if the King
refuge in
ain might
1? If the
lear. We
eople,
er to drive
not say so
t be forced
med with 3
n the 14w 4
1