The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-02-21 00:00:00

imptriat parlianunt.

;.....
~.. ..., . y .._!......,,,4?)
•,•. .... r ,I• • 1 - .., >
.../ • -•. • . '-r
: : ••is • •
Sii; il!. • ---".. t • i,'.: i ...... ,i ••,.;
-...• ,liZ ' 4., 1 • •
.4 404 \ -,::.`c •,, , ‘-'"7:- at.
)
41\-:„....::...::,41
.\,.,:1::::\ ~\2.'.:_-
... ,

. ~"~JC

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MONDAY.
The Earl of ERROLL stated that her Majesty would receive
the address on the marriage (voted on Friday)at Buckingham
Palace, at two o'clock on Tuesday.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH (after having observed that he
thought there ought to be afforded the fullest information
regarding the regulations for the emigration of labourers
from the East Indies) adverted to the progress of the war in
the east, and expressed his opinion that thanks ought to be
voted to the army for the victory at Kelat. . .

Lord MELBOURNE intimated that he also was of that
opinion.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said that he should defer
his motion relating to the treaty of Bergara for a week, in
consequence of the absence through illness of the Duke of
Wellington. The noble marquis expressed a hope that his
grace's health would be by that time restored.
The Bishop of EXETER asked Lord Melbourne whether in
July last he received a letter from the Rev. And. Irvine, of
St. Margaret's, Leicester, stating that socialism was on the
increase in Leicester, and expressing a hope that the noble
viscount would take the subject into his serious considera-
tion. He should like to know from the noble viscount whe-
ther he had received the letter ?
Lord MELBOURNE—I did receive the letter.
The Bishop of EXETER—Did the noble viscount take any
steps in consequence of that letter ?
Lord MELBOURNE—No.
The Bishop of EXETER—Did the noble viscount consider
that any steps were or were not necessary to be taken ?
Viscount MELBOURNE rejoined—Now you see this will
lead to an argument on the whole subject, into which I am
very unwilling to enter ; but certainly, in my opinion, it was
not necessary to answer it. Indeed, I very much question
the prudence of the course which this house has adopted
with respect to that question.
The Earl of ABERDEEN observed that the Marquis of
Normanby had rebuked a clergyman for not sending him
information, instead of favouring others with it.
Lord MULBOURNI: declared that he was much obliged to
the gentleman for his communication, but he had not an-
swered it becaus,:., he was desirous of avoiding a controversy
upon it ; but he was afraid the right rev. prelate would frus-
trate his object.
The Bishop Of EXETER afterwards presented a petition
from Mile-end for the adoption of measures to put down
" socialism."
Lord SrmAsoFORD gave notice that on Thursday he would
submit a motion regarding inland warehousing. His lord-
ship also directed attention to the wretched state of British
commerce on the coast of Africa; and to the fact of there
being 250 cargoes of British goods now rotting at Buenos
Ayres, in consequence of the unjust blockade by the French.
Lord DENMAN brought in a bill restricting, in cases of
libel and trespass, where the verdict did 'not exceed •10s.,
that the costs recoverable should not exceed such amount.
It was read the first time.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY.
Several petitions were presented by Mr.. Williams, Mr.
Benjamin Wood, Mr. Mark Phillips, and Mr. Hume, from
various places, for the abolition of church-rates, and the dis-
charge of John Thorogood.
Mr. VILLIERS, in deference to the wishes of many who
were interested in the question of the corn-trade, would not
bring it on before the 20th March. He would give the usual
notice for some early day after the 20th March.

PRIVILEGE.
LORD JOHN RUSSELL presented another petition from
Messrs. Hansard, announcing that a fifth action had been
brought against them in the court of Queen's Bench, by John
Joseph Stockdale ; and that they had been served with a
writ of summons for Thursday, the 20th February instant.
Sir E. SUGDEN asked if it were true that Mr. Howard,
the attorney for Stockdale, had brought an action against
the son of the sergeant at arms ?
His LORDSHIP answered that he had received no official
information on the subject. He then proceeded to state that,
in order to prevent judgment being signed against Messrs.
Hansard, it became necessary for the house to say what course
they would think proper to take, in order to maintain that
privilege of publication which they had already so frequently
supported. It appeared to him that the most proper course
to follow in the present ease was to resolve that the action
was a contempt of the house, and a breach of its privileges ;
and that any person who should act in pursuance of
the said action, would incur the displeasure of the
house. He proposed to move that resolution with judicial
reference to the officers who would have to act, in prosecution
of the judgment in the case, namely, the sheriffs of London
and Middlesex, the under-sheriffs,- officers, bailiffs, clerks,
and others. He would first move that those parties would
be guilty of a breach of the privileges of the house by aiding
in the real action, and then, that care be taken to inform the
sheriffs, under-sheriffs, and others, of the resolution. His
lordship concluded with moving—" That John Joseph Stock-
dale, by commencing this action, in which service notice had
been given to the defendant to attend a writ of inquiry on the
20th February, such action being brought for acts done by a
servant of that house, pursuant to the orders and resolutions
of that house, made in the exercise of the privileges of par-
liament, had been guilty of a contempt of that house, and of
a breach of its privileges ; and that the sheriffs, under-she-
riffs, and others who should aid in the prosecution of the
said action, would be guilty of a contempt of the house, and
of a violation of its privileges, and subject themselves to the
severe censure and displeasure of the house." If that reso-
lution w re carried, he would then move that a copy of the
said resolution be served by the sergeant-at-arms on the
sheriffs, and that copies of the same be served on the under-
sheriffs, bailiffs, clerks, and others. •
The first resolution having been put, Sir EDWARD SUGDEN
called on the house to pause before they agreed to this reso-
lution. Action upon action would follow, and they would
still be, at last, obliged to have a legislative measure, and so
to address themselves to something beyond the powers they
at present possessed. He opposed the motion.
'ir CHARLES GREY expressed himself at a loss to under-
stand the course pursued by the members of the legal pro-
fession on the other side. With the highest legal authority
on the other side in favour of the privilege of publication, he
would ask them what they would do to put a stop to the
• actions continually brought against the servants of the house,
Ent decisions of the court being against them ? He would
put tais question to the members of the legal profession in
that house who acknowledged that they possessed that pri-
vilege of publication, but who would have the house stop
i:nort in its proceedings, and allow an appearance to be en-
tered to those actions--what would you do if the decision of
&stab the exchequer chamber and the House of Lords was
against you ? bid they know whether the members of the
hotise would support that honse in the vindication of
:nib privilege; and would they then lend them aid in resist-
niv the decision of the lower courts ? If the house was not
aware of this, was it possible to do less than to adhere to
the steps that this nouse had taken, if they did not intend
to abandon their privileges, and suffer the decision of the
tribunals to govern their proceedings?
On division, the resolution was carried by a majority of
116 to 75.

On the next res lotion being put, that copies of the former
be communicated :o the sheriffs, under-sheriffs of Middlesex,
the clerks, officer:, bailiffs, and other parties taking part in
theca proceedings,
SIR EDWARD SUGDEN asked whether it was intended,
under " other parties," to include the jury. Lord JOHN
RUSSELL answered in the negative.
Lord Howicxwished to remark that, although be entirely
approved of the course hitherto pursued, the house should
not stop here. He thought Stockdale and Howard should
-be punished with increased severity.
Mr. E. KNATCHBULL wished to know what the noble
lord meant.
His lordship answered—placed in close custody, and not
allowed to see their friends except under restriction.
Mr. LAW inveighed strongly against the suggestion.
M r. O'CONNELL observed, with reference to the sugges-
tion__of the noble lord, that it was obvious that he did not
at all wish they should proceed vindictively against those
persons, but that they should adopt such restrictions as
would render it more difficult for them to continue to violate
the privileges of the house.
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN congratulated, ironically, the noble
lord on his suggestion, and observed, there had been instances
of the tyrannic
and it was a exerciser of
power by parliament before now ;
inatte
of history, that in the reign of Charles I.
a house of comn ns was found which ordered the torture to
be administered in support of its privileges.
Mr. INGiiAm
prison,contended, that when a party was sent to
he was notdealt with according to the good pleasure
of the house, but accordingt to the'rules for the government
of gaols, and down
Lord Jo UN RL •ssy the law of the land.
et I. vindicated the course pursued by
the majority of the house, and observed, that an attempt had
been made to attach a meaning
which they would not beitr, eanil to his noble friend's words
s lordship proceeded to argue,
from the judgement deliveredllif
Saturday, by Lord Denman,
" that the publication would al
held in all the courts to be
protected, if the report was fairly
given as a report of a
political proceeding with which iit
was importance that all
men should be acquainted," that his oflrdship had admitted
all that the majority of the house co" What
that majority complained of in the course of for.ti, ese
proceed-
ingsg that the
s
was, that the court of law took it for granted
a i series of libels
ranted
house of commons was engaged in publishing
for the sake of selling—(hear, hear,)—the house
having, at the time, no interest but to make.opfuraimtohnast
which was for the public interest to know--(hear, hear)--
showing no private enmity against any individual; havinc, no
wish to make gain or profit by the publication ; and, ' undero
these circumstances it was that the majority of that house
held that a court of law was not entitled to look upon such'
publications as other than privileged publications. (Hear.)
Suppose that the House of Cominons were to assert that a
judge had no right, in a court of law, to make any statement
reflecting on the character of-an individual; but it was not
to be permitted that in a public court, full of spectators, any
thing which could be termed a slander should issue from a
judge on the bench—(hear),--such an assertion as this would
be equAly unfair and absurd. It was well known that the
judges, c hear in after “mg what had been. adcl4 0 before them,
repeatedly, in their charges made stafenfents.rdectiag on the
character of individuals ; but this was done in the course of
their judicial duty, and from no private desire to injure the
individual, or to indulge private malignity. If then, the
judges were admittedihl'Y
the .House of Commons to a
right
in what they did i
united commons of the some respect ought to be paid by
the judges to thatt & I court which was instituted by the
taken it for granted,
lieved, that it could be theeYol"
they ; and the ought not to have
ought not wyantonly to have be-
to publish private libels upon of the House of Commons
p
The resolution was then puotnanr individual. (Cheers.)
reed to.
Mr. James Hansard was afterw'arad4s examined, with a view
to obtain the names of the parties by whom the writ was
served ; alter which the
ATTORNEY GENERAL moved that Mr; Pierce and Mr.
Howard, jun. the clerk, and the son of 1%
i
tiered to attend at the bar to-morrow. . lloward , be or-
Some discussion took place on the subject, and the 'notion
was ultimately agreed to.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—TUESDAY.
The Peers assembled this day chiefly for the purpose of
arranging the procession for carrying the congratulatory ad-
dress to the Queen on her marriage. Previous to their
quitting the House, Lord Crofton took his seat as a repre-
sentative peer for Ireland ; and the Transfer in Aids Bill
and Prison Acts Amendment Bill each passed through a
stage, and were ordered to be read a third time on Thursday,
to which day the House adjourned.

110 USE OF COMMONS.—TUESDAY.
The Commons met shortly before two o'clock, and also
proceeded to present a congratulatory address on her Ma-
jesty's marriage.
The SPEMCER (the house having resumed at five o'clock)
stated that her .7,4035ty h id been graciously pleased to return
the following answer :
" I thank you for this dutiful and affectionate address. It
is with great satisfaction that I find an event in which my
feelings are so deeply interested has been attended with so
many manifestations of loyalty on the part of my people, and
has called forth such sentiments of loyal attachment from my
Parliament."

. -- -
Lord ASHLEY gave notice that, on the 3d of March, he
should move the appointment of
select
o all pensions
quire into the act regarding factories. committee to In-
quire
Sir R. POrL raoi'ed for returns setting
February,frth
on the civil list granted since 18th day
of
the present time ; specifying the name of the party to whom
amount of
1834, to
in each case a pension has been granted, and the
the pension granted ; and the total amount of pension grant-
ed in each year ending the 20th day of June, 183& 1836,
1837, 1838, and 1839.
Lord J. RUSSELL proposed as an amendment also
like re-
-111 January 1; 1628,

The returns, as mended, were ordered. -,, •
Sir R. PEEL then moved for accounts of the number of
marines now employed on shore or. Afloat on the coast of
Spain, in any service connected with the execution of the
quadruple treaty ; also of the total value of the, stores of all
descriptions advanced to Spain under the provisions of the
quadruple treaty ; and of the sum (if any) received frpm
Spain on account of such advances, and of the arrangement
made with Spain in respect to the ultimate repayment of such
advances.
The returns were ordered.
The Earl of LINCOLN presented the answers of his Royal
Highness Prince Albert and the Duchess of Kent, expressive
of thanks for the messages voted.
Mr. PENDAILVES presented a report connected with the
trial of contested elections, fixing March 12 for the hearing
of the Ludlow and Ipswich petitions ; and March 16 for
for those reg,urding Totness'and Cambridge.
Sir J. GILAHAM, referring to the state of our relations with
China, observed that parliament had now been assembled for
a month, and no information had yet been laid before the
house, from which they might collect what was the real situa-
tion of affairs at Canton ; and the question which he had now

to ask the noble lord was, whether he was prepared to
say when he would lay on the table papers relating to affairs
that were so interesting to this country?
Lord PALMERSTON trusted that they would be ready early
next week ; but they would not be ready before that time.
Sir J. GRAHAM then, referring to our relations with Per-
sia, asked whether the Sovereign of Herat, Kamram Schah,
had seceded from our alliance, and whether he was not in in-
timate connexion with the court of Teheran ?

Lord PALMERSTON answered, that-heicaa not himself re-
ceived any information respecting the close connexion said to
be established between Kamram Schah and the court of Per-
sia, but some late accounts seemed to show that some con-
nexion existed. These accounts, however, rested only on
report.
___

Sir E. WILMOT begged the noble lord the Secretary of
State for the Colonies to postpone the committee on the
Colonial Passengers Bill till a later period than the day now
fixed, Friday week, in order to give those gentlemen who
took an interest in the subject time to consider the clauses
which he proposed to introduce for regulating the emigration
of Hill Coolies to the Mauritius.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that if the clauses were not
ready in time for members to have an opportunity of consi-
dering them, he would not bring on the discussion on the
day for which it now stood. _ _ _

In answer to a question from Sir J. Graham,
Lord J. RUSSELL said, that any information which could
be given respecting the emigration of Hill Coolies, and the
conition of those who had emigrated, would be given with
the papers which his noble friend at the head of the Govern-
ment had promised in the House of Lords to lay before
Parliament.
Mr. LABOUCHERE, in answer to Mr. Luke White, said
that he admitted the importance of some measure on the sub-
ject of " pihitage," but that after the failure of Mr. P. Thom-
son's efforts on that subject, he thought it would be a need—
less waste of time of the house to bring forward, at present,
any bill on the subject.
On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the question of " pri-
vilege" was then once more resumed. Thomas Howard (the
son of Howard, Stockdale's attorney) was examined at the
bar. The youth, very unceremoniously answered questions
put to him, by declaring that he had served the writ for a
further action (the fifth 3 on Messrs. Hansard; that he had
done so " forming a tolerably near guess" at the nature of
it; and that he was aware of his father's commitment, but
that what he bad done was in obedience to his father's
orders.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thereupon moved that such
conduct was " a breach of privilege."
Carried by 137 ayes, 37 noes; majority 100. The next
question, that he be committed to the custody of the ser-
geant-at-arms, was also carried by 134 ayes, 41 noes ; ma-
jority 93.
Pearce, the clerk, was next examined, and having admitted
that he had served notices and writs in this matter, it was
moved that he had been guilty of " breach of privilege."
The house divided. The question was carried by 135
ayes, 53 noes ; majority 82, that there had been breach of
privilege.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL then moved that Pearce be
committed to the custody of the sergeant-at-arms. That was
carried by 134 ayes, 54 noes ; majority 80, in favour of the
motion for commitment. _

A petition was presented by Mr. France, the under-sheriff,
praying for the protection of the house as far as he might be

iffeCted by the actions now proceeding against Messrs
Hansard.

Mr. Fox MAVLE then moved for, and, after some con-
versation, obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the
Constabulary Act of last session.

Some returns relative to towns and boroughs which have
petitioned to be incorporated were then ordered on the
motion of Mr. Ingham ; on whose motion also a select
committee was granted on the 4th and sth William IV., cap.
52 (the Merchant Seamen's Fund Act,) to consider the state
of the funds, and how they cou d be most effectually main-
tained and administered for the benefit of the seamen.
Mr. LEADER postponed till Monday his motion respecting
the case of Frost, Williams, and Jones, with an understand-
ing, as it appears, that the prisoners should remain at Ports-
mouth till the question is disposed of.
On the motion of Sir J. HOBHOUSE, the order of the
house containing a vote of thanks to Major General Sir
Willoughby Cotton, &c., was discharged, and a new order to
the same effect made, including, besides the name of Sir W.
Cotton, that of Major-General Willshire and other officers in
command in the late operations in India.
The house adjourned at a quarter past twelve.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—WEDNESDAY.
The House of Lords did not meet this day.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-WEDNESDAY.

After the presentation of many petitions for church exten-
sion, for an address praying for the free pardon of Frost, &c.
Mr. LIDDELL gave notice that on the 27th inst. he would
bring forward a motion on the subject of the pension granted
to. Sir J. Newport.
Mr. PABINGTON moved the seonnd reading of the bill

to alter and amend the laws relating to the Bare of beer.
Mr. WARBURTON took an objection to the form of pro•
ceeding, quoting the standing order, dated' April 9, 1;72,
which provides that no bill relating to or concerning " trade,"
shall be introduced, except its introduction be previously
sanctioned by the resolution of a committee of the whole
house ; and he moved, as an amendment, that the bill in
consequence be withdrawn.
The SPEAKER held that the bill came within the meaning
of such standing order; whereupon it was withdrawn for the
purpose of being initiated by resolution of a committee of the
whole house. _ _

.•
Mr. Sergeant TA.LFOURD moved the second reading of his
" Copyright" Bill.
• Mr. WARBURTON took the like objection to this bill, but
its applicability not being admitted by the Speaker, the hon.
member then proposed as an amendment that the bill be read
a second time that day six months.
The house eventually divided. The numbers were—ayes
-59, noes 29—majority 30.
The house shortly afterwards adjourned.