The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-01-21 00:00:00

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.-STOCKDALE V. HANSARD.

Lord J. RUSSELL felt great regret that it should be his
duty to interpose between the Speaker reading her Majesty's
Speech and the house taking it into consideration, but in the
discharge of his duty as a Cabinet minister, and a. member
of that house, he could not avoid it. A petition from Messrs.
Hansards had been placed in his hands, which was of so im-
portant a character that, without at present going into other
details, he should at once move that it be read.
The petition from Messrs. Hansards, setting forth the whole
of the proceedings in the action brought by Mr. Stockdale
against Messrs. Hansards for libel, was then read at length
by the clerk ; and, on the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL,
Mr. James Luke Hansard was called to the bar, and deli-
vered in certain papers connected with the proceedings.
Lord J. RUSSELL then said it was incumbent on the house
not to lose any time in coming to a decision on the impor-
tant question, the importance of which every member must
be aware of. In whatever way the house treated the ques-
tion, one thing was quite clear, that the house could not re-
main in its present position. They might proceed in various
ways ; but the course which he apprehended would be the
best was, that which had been taken on former occasions
with great effect, viz. the committal of the parties who had
invaded the' privileges of the -house. (Hear, hear.) The
noble lord, after some further observations, moved that to-
morrow the following persons be summoned to appear at the
bar of the house :—Mr. John Joseph Stockdale—(hear,
hear)—Mr. J. Burton Hayward, his attorney ; W. Evans,
Esq., and J. Wheelton, Esq., Sheriffs of London and Mid-
dlesex (hear) • Mr. T. Clarkson, and Mr. Burchell, Under
Sheriffs (hears; and Mr. Kemp, the bailiff, who executed the
writ of execution against the goods of Messrs. Hansards.
Sir E. SUGDEN admitted the importance of the question,
and the propriety of coming to a speedy decision on it; but
he could not concur in the course recommended by Lord J.
Russell. Seeing the difficulties that had arisen by the house
becoming booksellers, he recommended the rescinding of the
resolution on the subject of the sale of Parliamentary papers.
Sir R. INGLIS concurred in this recommendation, in con-
sequence of the difficulties that surrounded their attempts to
carry it into effect.
Mr. CRESSWELL said he could not abstain from saying a
few words as to his reason for resisting the motion of the
noble lord. If he understood the ground, taken by the noble
lord, for calling before the house the officers who were con-
cerned in executing the commands of the lawful- office to
which they belonged, it.was this—that the judges had no ju-
risdiction, and that therefore they could not lawfully have
given judgment in the case; and if so, that there was no law
to justify the sheriff in the course he had pursued. In his
opinion, if they took any step at all it ought to be that of
calling to the bar of the house the judge under whose orders
the sheriff certainly acted. The hon. member for Edinburgh
was under a mistake when he said that they could not call
upon the judge because he had not received .a notice of the
proceedings of that house, or its intentions or resolutions in
this case. Now such was not the exact poSition of the mat-
ter, for the sheriff had actually prayed for time to be ex-
tended to him under the circumstances, and it had been
eu.dgeilaen
jdudhgeehs
,adthperroecfoereed,edwetore girveealljyudtghme enpterTnns
refused by the judge. Therefore, the act had been the act
'aentnhccl
manly
tho
eeyarsjncoedurisne t tohe present base, and it would be the more
call upon them, and not upon the officer,
who merely executed their commands. But let them just
see how that house could then call upon either the judges or
the sheriff, or any other officers concerned in this transaction.
They had had the statement that Hansard had been served
•
with a notice of the original action , and on that occasion
considerable blame had been cast upon Mr. Justice Littledale
fur not having allowed the defendant to plead the privilege
of that house. Now upon that occasion none of the hon.
gentlemen on the opposite side, neither the Attorney-General
nor Mr. Serjeant Wilde, 'nor any of the others yvho had

since made the discovery, had suggested that the Court
of Queen's Bench had no power to entertain the question,
not one had then asserted that the.judge had not power to
try the issue before him. Well, then, they bad gone to
trial—they had submitted to the jurisdiction of the court
—they had in a manner admitted the power of the judge ;
but then, when they found that the opinion of the judge
was against them, they had found out, for the first time,
that the court had no jurisdiction. (Hear.) Was that a,
way, he (Mr. Cresswell) would ask, to elevate the authority
of the House of Commons in, this country? Why it was
just like a party consenting to submit a case to arbitration,
and then, upon discovering that the award would be unfa--
vourable, refusing to abide .by it: (Hear.), He would.say,
if there was a fault at all in this matter, it was tho fault,of

. -
the Attorney-General. The question had been safely raised
by the Attorney-General himself. He (Mr.- Cressvrell)
should say that if Lord Denman had, under these.circums
stances, acted in any other manner than that in whicli 'he
had, he would have shrunk from the performance of his duty
—he would not have discharged the functions of his. post
had he refrained from giving his opinion in a case submitted
to him. There were two questions arising .oat -the present
matter, One was, whether the publication was true or not;
rand another, whether it could be made the subject matter of
an action. It might have been quite right for the Attorney-
General to have said that the publication had not taken place
with any malicious intention, and that, therefore, it was not
libellous ; that it had been published on a lawful occasion.
,He might have acted so ; not indeed because such might have
been the privilege of the house, but because it was the law of
the land. (Hear.) If a person. was aware of a friend of his
being about to take into confidential employment an indi-
.vidual'of whose probity he entertained a doubt, and wrote to
his friend a statement to that effect, even though he could
not prove it, it was not likely a jury would give any damages
In an action for libel. And again, a similar position might hold
good in case the Secretary of State was about appointing any
person of seditious or turbulent character to the rank of ma-
gistrate in the country, and any person who was aware of
the fact apprising him of it to prevent such an appointment.
(Hear and laughter.) But the Attorney-General had asserted
that because the House of Commons ordered the publication
of the matter in question, it was perfectly legal ; now that
was a position from which he (Mr. C.) dissented. (Hear.)
He denied that proposition ; and this was also the opinion
which Lord Denman had expressed, and at which the House
of Commons had taken- offence,-:and 'which called forth the
passing of certain resolutions which he (Mr. C.) did not re-
gret that hehad not been iriltiat house to sign but which
he wohld'not,• had he even been then there. Then another
action had been brought by StOckdale; and although they
had asserted that any judge who was to entertain a case of a
similar kind would be guilty of- contempt, yet the house had
made an order that the Attorney-General should plead for
Hansard ; but they had not denied' the jurisdiction of the
court ; on the contrary, they had thrown themselves upon
its judgment. Then, however, they said they did not give
the court leave to decide against them. They asked for its
opinion, but asserted that it should not be, unfavourable to
themselves., They coeld .not possibly, hoWeeer, have the
contempt more complete than it was under those circum-
stances, and therefore if they did anything they should have
the judos before them. Then there had been another action,
and they had desired Hansard not to plead any excuse what-
ever, but to admit that the publication was true. • Nothing,
then, remained to be done but to inquire into the amount of
damages to be awarded as a recompence to the person against
whom the libel had been published. Then, indeed, an order
had been made by the House of Commons to stop the pro-
ceedings ; but he would say there had been no precedent
upon an. occasion where it could be shown that such had
ever been done. But what would be the consequence now ?
They might send for the sheriff, and tell him they would
commit him to Newgate if he levied such an execution, or
handed over such and such moneys to such and such parties,
and then the judges would send him to Newgate if he did not.
So that the poor sheriff was in a position somewhat similar
to that of the unfortunate flying fish—turn which way he
might he had a hard lot to encounter—(laughter). These
were briefly the grounds upon which he (Mr. C.) would re-
sist the. present .motion.. There had been no instance in
which Parliament had interrupted the course of any action
in any court of justice, if lie excepted perhaps only one
which had occurred in the other house. This had been a
case where an. officer belonging to the house had been en-
trusted with an umbrella to take care of, and it had been
mislaid. Now this had been a case which had occurred
within the.precincts of the house itself. An action had been
taken against the officer in the Court of Requests, and the
house had sent for the judge and the party concerned. The
latter had finally agreed to forego his action and judgment
upon payment of the sum of 7s. 6d., and if that important—
(laughter)—case was relied upon in the present instance, he
would put.it as a set off against the £lOO, which had been paid
by them to Stockdale. After having submitted to the juris-
diction of the court in two cases arising out of this transac-
tion, he contended for it that it was then too late for them to
call upon any of the parties to that action. If they called
upon any one, he conceived the more manly and straightfor-
ward course for them to pursue would be to call upon the
judges, and not upon the officer, who was sworn to do the
-duty he undertook.
Sir ROBERT PEEL took a short retrospect of the facts,.and
then enlarged upon the unreasonableness of leaving the officer
of the house exposed to actions for obeying its orders. He
thought the privilege an essential one, of publishing not only
for the use of the members, .but for the use of their constitu-
ents. There might be occasion, for instance, to address the
. crown for. the removal of a judge on the ground of miscon-
duct. Surely the people ought to be made. acquainted with
that ground. It was true that the jurisdiction of the house
cwaa,imperfect—that it ceased with the session. Was not its
eessalion with the session a tolerably strong proof that it
••• f was intended only to obviate obstructions ? .But, as at pre-
sent advised, he was ready to take the course proposed by
Lord John Russell. .
"' Mr. KELLY opposed the assertion of Privilege, but Wished
to secure indemnity to the printer. If the law officers were
sincere in alleging that the Queen's Bench had decided erro-
neously. they might try the question 'by u writ of error.
Lord J. RussELL cited from-;;Lortl, Denreatt's judgment
in " Stockdale v. Hansard" some comments on former de-
Cisions; which tended to show thitt theinAitiotii'eien• of the
judges have . not .:always: been uniform,, ,and sometimes
have been give under the excitement of the time.i If this
'action were tolerated, questions'-might tie' raised on 'the ad-
mission of strangers • during arty discussions: which invpived
imputations on., Individuals, As in the Duke; of York's case.
The Honse 'of Lords had asserted the privilege, and sti shmild
the, House.of Com Mons. • . •
After extended discussion, the house divided on the motion
of ordering the parties to 'the bar. The members Were—for
the motion, 286, against -it 167—majority Ari;.favour of the
motion 118,_ -
The house then proceeded. 'at nearly ten o'clock, to con-
sider the address on her Majesty's speechl—Mr. CAVENDISH
moving, and Sir'W. Somerville-seconding the address. •
Sir R. 'sous coMplained Of the omission of the assurance
'that Prince Albert was-a " Protestant," and thought that
the 'word ought to be introduced.
There was not, however, any opposition to the address ;
on the contrail', after some observations from Sir R. PEEL,
and.explanations from Lords PALMERSTON and J. RUSSELL,
the motion was carried, and the house adjourned at half-past
eleven o'clock. • -

HOUSE OF LORDS—FRIDA.Y.
The House of Lords met at one o'clock, and having been
informed that her Majesty would receive the address on the
royal speech at two o'clock, their lordships adjourned the
house until Monday, and the peers in attendance proceeded
in procession t 9 /resent it. .

HOUSE OF COMMONS-FRIDAY.

Mr. Shelf retook t7he oaths and his seat.

Several petitions were presented far leave to bring in bills
for rail Ways, &C. They were severally referred to commit-
tees for considering petitions for private bills.
On the motion of Sir G. GREY, a new writ was 'ordered
for Rutlandshire, in the room of the Hon. W. Noel, who had
accepted the stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds.
Mr. T. DutsicoainE having presented a petition from Tito-
rogood, now imprisoned in Chelmsford gaol, on account of
non-payment of church-rates, gave notice that he should call
attention to its. prayer on the 30th instant.
Sir R. INous, on presenting petitions from places in
Warwickshire,' fur increased church accommodation, inti-
mated that on an early day he intended to direct attention to-
the necessity of giving. further and full means of religious
instruction, in connection with the establishment, to " all"
the people of this country—a notice which was greeted with
considerable cheering.
Mr. LABOUCHERE, in answer to Mr. Hutton's inquiry,
with regard to a clanse in the 9th Geo. IV., prohibiting the
importation Of flour into Ireland, said that a bill for amend-
ing such clanie was under consideration.
Sir 3. C. HofixouSE (among several notices that were
afterwardi given) stated that on Thursday next he should
move thanks to the British army in India, for their recent
services—a notice that was loudly cheered.
Mr. LABOUCHERE, in answer to an inquiry from Mr.
Baines; said that he believed there would be no objection to
present, at an early period, the report of Dr. Bowring, on
the subject of what has been termed the Germanic commer-
cial league. And in answer to a question from MNEwart,
regarding the monopOlY of the salt trade with Sicily enjoyed
by France, stated that the government of this country was
engaged in negotiating a commercial treaty with the govern-
ment of Naples, which would, he hoped, be satisfactory,
doing away with the duty on Neapolitan oil, &c.
Lord J. RUSSELL, on some papers having been moved for,
respecting the laboura and expenses of the revising barris-
ters, and Mr. Hume having put a question on the subject,
said that a bill for the amendment of the present system of
registration was under consideration.
The usual sessional standing orders were afterwards read.
Mr. Fox MAULE, in answer to Mr. Mark Philips, said
that the further report respecting the hand-loom weavers
would be presented immediately ; but that the general report
of the cOmmissiners thereon, will not be ready till Easter.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in consequence of
Sir R.' Peel'S iriqitiries, said that the experiments regarding
stamped postage covers were proceeding, and might be com-
pleted in six weeks; and that, perhaps, they might be ap-
plied in the first instanCe, in the metropolitan districts only.
With regard to the conveyance of parliamentary bills (about
which Mr. Gotilbtirn made inquiry,) he thought that was a
subject for the house to deal with. He had fixed the price
a@ low as possible.
The -CHANCELLOR of the ExctiEQUER, in reply 'to Mr.
Hume, said he intended to move for a committee for bank
currency inquiry.
Lord J. RUSSELL then resuming the question of privilege,
as involved in the procedings, "Stockdale v. Hansard,"
moved that Stockdale be called.to the bar, which was done,
and Stockdale vas called in and examined. His lordship'af-
terwards moved that Stockdale•,,in his proceedings against
Hansard, had been guilty of a breach of the privileges of that
house.
Mr. LAW, the 'Reebrder, moved as an amendment, that
Stockdale be discharged from further attendance.
An extended debate ensued; Mr. Pemberton, Sir C. Grey,
Sir E. Sugden, &c:, taking part in the discussion.
The house eventually divided. There appeared, for the
motion, 249; for the amendment, 100;. majority in favour of
the original motion, 149; that the proceeding was "a breach
of privilege."
Lord J. Russid.t next moved that for such breach of pri-
vilege Stockdale be committed.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL moved, as an amendment, that as in
the proceeding judgment had been allowed to go by default,
the house was not in a condition to proceed further.

Lord J. RUSSELL resisted this amendment, as calculated
to nullify all their proceeedings.-
.0n the division, there appeared, forthe motion, 239 ; for
the amendment, 105 ; majority of 134 in favour of the motion
for a commitment to the Serjeant-at-Arms.
Lord J; RUSSELL proposed to defer the motion for calling
the sheriff to the bar till Monday.
Sir R. PEEL asked whether proceedings might not take
place in the Queen's Bench before Monday that would alter
the position of the parties?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL declared that no proceedings
would be adopted that would alter their position ; but he had
no objection to the house meeting on Saturday to proceed
with the business.
It having been moved that the sheriff attend on Saturday,
Mr. KELLY proposed, as an amendment, that " the house,
at its rising,- do adjourn till Monday."
The house divided again. The numbers were—for the'
motion, 116 ; for the amendment, 3G ; majority in favour of
the original motion, 80, that the sheriff, do attend the
house at twelve o'clock on Saturday.
Mr. KELLY gave notice that; on Monday, he would move
resolutions tothe effect that Messrs. Hansard, in consequence
of the action brought against them by Mr. StOckdale:, be
indemnified by the house, and, that the Attorney7Geueral,
if any other actions were brought against .thein, should be
instructed to defend their.—Adjourned:

HOUSE OF COMMONS—SATURDAY.
The Commons assembled at 12 o'clock [the Lords had ad-
journed from Friday till Monday] to proceed with the case of
privilege arising out of the transactions in the case " Stock-
dale T. Hansard."

On motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, the sheriffs' officer
(Hemp) was called to the bar and examined. He proved the
levy and sale to the amount of z1:695, and the payment of £640
in the sheriffs' office ' • adding that he had entered into cove-
nants with the sheriffs to execute the duty they directed him
to perform, but that if he had done what was wrong he hum-
bly begged pardon of the house.
• The sheriffs were next called in and examined by the Attor-
ney.;General, &c. They said the money had •not been paid
ovLF.to Stockdale • they considered it to be in the hands of
the Under-Sheriff. They had authorised Hemp to sell the
goods. The Under-Sheriff France was also examined : the
wrigy,,hQ,said, was.now in the..hands of Messrs. Burchell,
under the control of the sheriffs.
Mr. Sheriff Evans (after the "close of the examinations,
and on the sheriffs being asked whether they wished to make
any further communications) said, if in the execution of a
most painful duty they had done anything to incur the dis-
pleasure of the house they certainly deeply: deplored it.
Sir R. INGLIS thereupon moved that the sheriffs be dis-
- chargedfrom fUrther attendance oil the house.
Lord •Jomil RUSSELL proposed as an amendment that the
sheriffs be ordered to attend the house on Monday.
After some discussion the house divided. There were for
the motion 64; for the amendment 166, majority in favour
of the amendment 102. The sheriffs, as well •as the other
parties, were then ordered to attend again on Monday.
Mr. LAW moved that the evidence taken be printed " for
the use of the members only."
Lord JosiN RUSSELL moved that it be printed " and dis-
tributed with the Votes." _

This amendment was carried without any division, so that
as the evidence is distributed " with the votes," it is pur-
chaseable by any body as heretofore.
Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice, that on Wednesday next he
should call the attention of the house to that part of the
Queen's speech which recommends a provision to be made
for Prince Albert.

On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the customary pre-
liminary resolution of the session, in considering the Queen's
speech, was adopted—namely, " that a supply, be granted to
her Majesty."
After some conversation, in consequence of a question put
by Sir R. Peel, regarding letter-covers provided at the house
for members only, the house adjourned till one o'clock on
Monday.