The Statesman.
London, England, 1810-04-17 00:00:00

. r I
•

"W.:

W 4,17,-r-•
,• •
•. 4, •

. - ~

. '

• PRICE eon.

-
__

main as long as thii House could ketiik him, until
he recanted ; for he must, in such a case, have
endeavoured, as much as in him lay, to deceive
the people, and to bring reproach on this House,
and, indeed, scandal on the Constitution; and in
such a case, the House might be called upon to
make such a person the instrument of his own
humiliation ; but then it would amount to this,
that this would, in that case, have power to in.
ilia a punishment infinitely more severe than any
other tribunal in this country has the power of
inflicting ; for it might operate in a manner more
terrible than that toy corporal punishment could
occasion'; inasmuch at it is calling upon a man to
make ao open declaration to degrade himself and
to state what he does not believe. I say it is out
sufficient to say, that such has been the practice of
ibis Oolitic, I thy there tomtit to be some principle
to support it, oor do I think that a few Ingle:melt •
would be &efficient to support each a. practice,
even in the miudg of those to whom practice it
sufficient without its being founded npum
pie; and here I may be perthitted to say, that
much of the practice of this Muse has changed
at the opinions of mankind have changed upon
subjects of this kind ; both have become much
more liberal than at one time they were, and much
attention has, of late, been bestowed on the fed.
ings of individuals. As a proof of this, I would
' remind the House of its former practice, when it
was in the habit of ordering individuals who bad
offended it to appear at its Bar, nut only to retract
but to fall upon their knees at the bar. I befitted
that for the last half century that degrading cere-
mony has been dispensed with. Alexantler.Mur.
ray's case was I apprehend the last of that. kind:
There arc other cages.of most extraordinary sub-
mission exacted by this House of individuals who
had offended it. In one, on the subject of an
election for the county of Cornwail, there were
two individuals, one of them a Baronet, who were
compelled, not only to make this submission at
the Bar of this House, but to make a submission
also at the assizes before a judge ; . aud therefore,
if precedents are to be quoted, you may quote
them for a severity which we hope the House
,Wotild brush to think of inflicting. But it will out
adhere to any such precedents ; nor should it in
my opinion adhere to precedent so far as to re•
quire a petition from a person who has already re.
ceived a ,punishment that is fully adequate to this
offence he has committed. Now, what is the pie;
nishment inflicted on this individual ? Be • ha 4
been sent to, and has been imprisoned in the cow-
• MUM jail of *-Newgate 'me 'Ante thoVittl day of
Feb. last. When he had been only twenty days,
in confinement, a motion 'was made it; this flouts
that he be brought to the Bar for the purpose of
being discharged ; and,' although I was riot then
in the House, I understood from Gentlemen who•
were present, it was the general sense of the
House, that if a petition were presented, express-
ing his sense of sorrow for his offence, no doN't
was to be entertained that he would, at that
meet, have been discharged. Why then, Sir,
you will consider that lie has been detalued five
weeks, or nearly so, since that period, purely
fur that omission, that is, for non-compliance
with that which is said to be the usual' proceeding
of the House; and I am sure that no maii.will
contend that the not makkrg a submission irnt aft
te be considered as stn offence of magnitude, and
yet you treat it as an offence not only of magnl-
tude, but of greater magnitude than that which yon
-have decided to be a breach of your privilege,
for that is the offence for which this individual was
committed; and the House will consider, that if
this Motion be not granted on the ground which
I am now stating, that as it was willing to forgive
the individual for his offence at the end of 20 days
if he presented a petition, yet it punished him
with imprisonment five weeks because he did not
-petition ; and'the House Would have to consider
Nether what torture of mind the principle of this
tosieting on recantation may lead to. Let this'in..
divides' have ofitnded over so grossly against the
privileges of the House; let him be ever so justly
,complained of, or ever so justly punished, stilt
staking hilrecantation the . condition of his. re.
lease, for he really in his heart feels (however er-
roneously) that ho has not offended against the
orfrleges of this House, that he has not eiotatea
any principle of the Constitution, how cruel is it
to call upon him to declare what ha hat done?—
How can he, without hypocrisy, make such a de,
elarationt —and yet, if he does not, he must .
main in Newgate as long as this House has peeve,;
to detain him, that is, until the prorogation of
•Parli,ament, which probably will not take place
until the month of Juno or July, a punishmeqt
which •no man in this Home will consider other.
wise than more than ordinarily severe. Now sup.
pose this individual shall have heard what pasted in
this House on this occasion, and that no Ind's,.
.dual in it had entertained the same opinion that
he does on this point, and suppose that, after
all, he should consider that his opinions are
correct, although they may be erroneous opt.
this House has no legal power of imprisonment tor
(lions. • But, suppose he should really think that
any thing that is not dune within the House,. and
that the question is a question of greet constitu.
tional importance, involving not only the rights of
this House, but also the rights ut ever) one of the
rest of his Majesty's subjects: let us support, thit
after having heard all the arguments which have
been urged, arid all the. precedents Which have
been quoted, that he still conscientiously rcusilfit'
the opinion, that to imprison a British sitt.ject for
what ho has done is an illegal puntshment ; I would
ask any Gentleman, who now hears me, whetha;

.~

•
• •
. • •