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

THE. STATESMAN.

they must be used in that form, from which they
should never have been diverted in point of princi.
pie. They should be used for the protection of the
rights of the people.
Mr. FULLER thought the question lay within
a narrow compass. To his mind it appeared to be
only whether the prisoner had been sufficientiy pu.
nished or not. - if he had been sufficiently pu.:
%tidied,. why were they to have him called to their
bar to acknow lege his offence ? That House had
nobly cut up the prerogatives 'of the Crown,
which had been previously undefined : it now be.
came their duty to reduce to some definite state its
own privileges, which even the Right Hon. Mem-
ber in the Chair would find difficult to understand. '1
They were bound to define their privileges, and
not continue to commit during the session. It
was no matter whether a party were committed
for three clays or three months; as nothing could
be more absurd than to commit without any cer.
tain rule to go by. The subject had a tight to
have some measure of offences and punishment es.
tablished. They ought to enact a Magna Charta
of Parliament, as they had the great charter of
their civil liberties and rights.
" tEquam memento,
" Rebus in arduis,
" Servare mentem." •
As it was admitted on all hinds that Gale Jones
had been sufficiently punished, he ought to be
discharged. If they should enact some statute on
the subject, he was determined, whenever a
question arose for a commitment, to vote for
the commitment for a certain period. If their
privileges should be left in their present vague and '
undefined state, no inatt's house could bo safe.
But as he had been already very severely repri.
mended for a breach of these privileges, in order
to avoid being led too far by irritation, he should
read from a paper what undefined privilege could
do. The Hon. Member then read, that such pri.
vilcge could put it in the power of a nervous
Chairman of a Committee to call upon the. Spea-
ker fur protection : it could give the Speaker the
power to order a person to withdraw, and to the
House that of ordering him into custody, without
allowing him the opportunity of hearing the
charge against him : it could give the power of
keeping him in confinement, to the great affliction
of his family, and so as nearly to cause the death
of some of his connections ; and then it could
give the power of reprimanding the person for an
offence, which at Common Law would not be pu.
nished by a fine of five shillings. If that repri.
mend should go down to posterity upon the Jour.
nals, it would be more injurious to the House
than to the individual, in the minds of the people.
Lord FOLKESTONE wished to set the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Secretary Ryder)
right, as to what he had stated to be the practice
of the House respecting petitions. That Right
Hon. Gent. had said that it was not necessary for
Mr. Gale Jones to acknowledge his' offence, or
retract any opinion in his petition, in order to his
being discharged, but merely to state his regret
for having incurred the displeasure of the House.
To show that the Right lion. Gentleman was not
correct in this statement, he had only to refer to
a petition which he remembered to have presented
* few years since, from a Mr. Drake, who had
been ordered into custody for prevarication in his
evidence at the Bar, for having told lies and incre-
dible stories, respecting himself, during his exa.
initiation us a witness before that House. That
petition he had brought up, and when it had been
read, he moved that it be laid on the table; but
was then informed by the Speaker, that it was
contrary to the established practice of the House
to place any such petition on its table, unless the
petitioner submitted to the authority, and craved
the mercy of the House, at the• same time acknow-
ledging the justice of the sentence. Some days
after he had presented this petition., however, it
was found that all that Mr. Drake had said was
perfectly correct. The consequence was, that
Mr. Drake having been committed for supposed
lies and prevarication, was suffered to remain in
confinement because he would not acknowledge
that to be false which was afterwards found to be
true. Though he had not remained long in such
confinement, the Parliament having been dissolved
in three or four days after, yet that did not alter
the nature of the case.. Having stated this case,
and the decision of the Chair upon it, he was au:
thorised to assume it to be the invariable practice
of the House to require a petitioner to submit to
the mercy of the House, and acknowledge the
justice of his sentence. As the Right Hon. Gentle.
mau (Mr. Ryder) therefore had stated, if that
were the practice of the House, he should vote
that Mr. Jonekbe discharged, he had a right to
expect that the Right Houourable Gentleman
would be as good as his word, anti 'vote for the
motion of his Honourable and Learbed Friend,
whose.commina.places, as represented by-the Right
Honourable Gentleman, appeared to him to con-
sist of most able, eloquent, and conclusive allot-
ments. Upon the whole, he was convinced that
Mr. , Jones ought to be discharged, and should
therefore vote for the motion.
Mr. CUILWEN observed, that the able speech
of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman who
brought forward this motion, was in itself sufficient
to recommend this important question to •the
most serious consideration of the House. The'
case of Gale Jones at present seemed to him to be
not that lie should bo continued in -confinement
for a contempt, but fur the obstinacy and pertina.
city with which he persisted in'ilecliiiing to submit
himself, by petition, to the .mercy of the House.
Though he had not been present on the occa.
sion, he was well informed that M. Jones had re.
spectfully submitted to the authority of the House,
when first brought to the Bar: That having been
the case, then, lie would ask, whether the House
would punish him for that obstinacy to which lie
might have been worked up by others, in abstain-
ing from applying for his release by petition. The
House on this occasion should leave out of its con-
sideratiou every thing concerning Mr. Jones, or
the circumstances which might have prevented hillt
from petitioning. In that it would do ' what be.
came its oon dignity; and he was .persuaded that
it would be .more honourable to them, as well as
gain them more fespect from the public, to dis.

charge this man than to continuo his imptison.
ment. There might, and he had no doubt there

wore persons who would attribute such an act to
motives dishonourable and base. But were they
to regard such feelings? Were they to neglect tom
do a ditty, because wicked men might ascribe bad'
motives to them ? He concurred in all the senti-,
men ts of the Honourable and Learned Member who

brought forward this question : lie was persuaded
that it would be cruel to call upon a man to re.
tract or renounce opinions, the truth of which he
might conscientiously believe. Such a principle
seas unknown to the laws of this free country ; at
least, he knew of no law that called fur such a
renunciation. If the dignity of that House required
that such a principle should be acted upon, he
should be the last man that would vote for the
discharge of Mr. John Gale Junes without corn.
plying with the established forms. Whatever
might have been his opinion as to the nature
of the offence, as the House had decided it eo be
a breach of its privileges, it was not for him to
dispute the propriety of such decision. But the
Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Secretary Ryder).
argued the propriety of requiring a petition, on
the ground of precedent. Could not that Right
lion. Gentleman weave, that if there were any.
value in that argument, he might on the same ground
refuse his assent to the discharge of Gale Jones, if
he did not appear.at the Bar on his knees, as in the
-case of Murray, alluded to by the Hon. and Learn-
ed Gentleman on the floor ? Whatever might be
the course, of precedents heretofore, this was a
time when he was of opinion the House ought to
make a different precedent. He was determined,
to stand by the House in every thing that was
necessary to its dignity ; but he did not think
that would be best consulted by protracting
the punishment of an individual, because lie
would not apply for his enlargement, by sub-
mitting to acknowledge the justice of his
sentence, and craving the mercy of the House.
—At this critical and awful period, it was his
opinion that the House should not shut its eyes to
the real state of the country. He was one of
those, who, so far from thinking, as had been
some time since stated within their walls, that
that House, in point of reputation, had not a leg
to stand on, he was fully and satisfactorily pef.
'waded that such an aspersion was absolutely false.
He was bound, nevertheless, to admit that they
did not possess that high degree of public confi-
dence which ought to belong to them, If by for.
bearing to discuss their real difficulties, they could,
remove them, that might be a reason why they
should pass them over without notice. But in his
opinion, the only true way of averting danger was
to look it in the face; and these were times which
imperiously called upon them to meet every diffi.
' culty with fortitude and spirit. The great bulk
of the nation, he was convinced, was firmly at.
tached to the Constitution and the Government,
and ready to make all the sacrifices which the cir.
cumstances of the times might require. He was
bound, however, to admit, that the country had
many grievances to complain of; and these that
House was most particularly... Gelded upon to
attend to and redress. Under this impression,
it was with considerable satisfaction he learn.
ed that an Honourable Member (Mr. Brand)
had that evening given notice of a motion for a
Parliamentary Reform. It was impossible
for any Honourable Member to listen to the sen.
tiinents expressed out of doors, and not to be
convinced of the necessity of some reform of the
representation in Parliament. In order to show
how the feelings of the House and of the country
pointed out the expediency of adopting some mea-
sure for that purpose, he had only to advert to
the attention which was uniformly paid to every
thing that fell from the Honourable Member for
Yorkshire (Mr. Wilberforce). This mark of re-
spect that Honourable Member received in a much
higher degree than many other Honourable
Members, who, without meaning any thing of.
Pensive to that Hononrable Member, might
justly compare with him in every other respect.
To what was this owing but to the natural
weight which must naturally belong to any thing
coming from the Representative of 50,000 consti.
thents?' This showed how necessary a Reform was,
which would give to the Members of that. House
the representative respectability of the collective
number of their constituents. When he talked
of Reform, he did not mean any of those wild
and visionary theories which had so frequently
been recommended in latter times. His wish was
to infuse into that House a greater portion than it
contained in its present constitution of the landedl
interest. Feeling as he, did upon this head, he I
could not but condemn that prodigality of the ho-
nours of nobility, which had robbed that House
of so much respectability, without adding any
thing to the consideration of the other House
of Parliament. --There was another point al-
so, upon which he must express his most.
decided regret and disapprobation ; namely,
of that list whiff!), upon the motion of the No.
ble Lord, the Member for Westminster, had been
laid upon their table. In that list of persons
he was sorry to find the names of persons without
merits; to perceive that pensions were granted to
the relatives of persons who would and ought to be
ashamed to take such paltry sums from the public
purse. It was by no means his opinion, that if
the whole of such pensions were dime away, they
would in any material degree contribute to relieve
the public burthens ; but when it was found that
such grants were taken by persons connected with
the highest classes, the circumstance would tend
greatly to excite and continue that distrust of pub-
lic men, which had unfortunately risen to a
greater height of late than ever. There was another
circumstance, more immediately connected with
their proceedings) which was likewise an object
of regret in the present situation of the country ;
he meant that practice of personal erimination
and recrimination which had too often likely
disgraced their proceedings. The chair, heewas
convinced, had never been more ably filled, oe its
duties performed with more dignity and satisfac-
tion than by the present Speaker : yet be must oh.
eerve, that a great laxity had crept in of late which
brought public men into discredit. Though he wa-
persuaded that there were much integrity and te.

•

s

•;.

F

pmts on COW.ire' of tlieHonse, he must ece
lowrid to say, that the personalialtercalions to which
ha hod alluded had a dkrect tendency to lower them
in the public estimations His only wish was, that
, the
,11.10 use should. be :tendered respectable; and
though he thought every, item of saving of importance
les it was nut by subordinate retrenchments, both,.
the
country reduction
we t f btehesagyrcledat. establishmcuts,
kiVilhici snheZril
n)
minor
come, .it would Pokterions question how far sait,
reductiontemling
tb coulda t cquestion
btf to effected ct
weree tl
o;
nbl
yu t t to.
thoughth
b difficulties iffi citl ti
removedcs
could, ty.
a strong, fi`em, and efficient Administration, scorL
bining all the talents in the House. For the pro.
priety of forming such an Administration, he could
appeal to the House whether they
under any circumstances of difficulty, he driven
from its bias to tlu; public interest by any
considerations. Such an Administration could nut
be formed from either side of the House. It was
the duty of the Members of that House to attend
to this great subject ; and of all those who had
high characters in that House, and great weight
as woll as stake in the country, to unite for tiiat
-important purpose. If such a body should de.
Clare themselves, the country would soon rally
round them ; and then their privileges would he
cheerfully acquiesced in, as privileges given solely
for the interest of the people. The Bill he had
the honour to bring forward last
Ilitei•enanr,otplipoousgithe
abused by some, and ridiculed by others, had
yet, he trusted, prriduced some good, and would
'lead to that gradual and temperate Reform
which was the most difficult to be accom.
pushed. Of the Right Hon. G
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) be was always
disposed to speak handsomely ; but he could not
look upon him as possessed of force and vigour
enough fur times like these. The hopes of the
country, he should repeat, depended altogether
upon a combination of all the talents and respect.
ability in that house. Having stated thus much
upon the general situation of the country, he
should revert to the question before the !louse;
and on this he should only say that he would veto
for the liberation of Gale Jones, conceiving that
such a measure would not compromise the honour,
the dignity, or the character of that House.
Sir T. TURTON was of opinion, that the iadi.
vidual to whom the motion referred, had suffered
punishment enough. If he had, he would ask
whether it was consistent with their dignity not to
put an end to the punishment? The offence for
which he had been imprisoned had existed fur sere.
ral years, and might have been borne either by
the House or any individual Member, These de.
bating Societies had been held for several years
without having been taken notice of; and Gentlemen
might recollect to have seen the names of Mr. Pitt
and Mr. Fox, men great in mittd, and great in cha.
ratter, placarded in the same manner as it; the in.
stance which had been complained of. He had
had no doubt that the placard was a libel ; but he
thought that it was unworthy of the Hoo. Member
to notice it. But when it had been
.oC:J!:gitt under
the. observation of the house, it must have ecru
punishes!, though not severely. When Jones had
expressed contrition for his offence at the bar, it was
his opinion that it would have been most consistent
with the dignity of the House to have discharged
him. As a difference of opinion prevailed upon
the subject, both in and out of the House, it
would have well become that House not to ap,
pear to punish the offence vindictively. It was
scarcely to be expected, that a man convinced that
he was right, could be brought to acknowledge
himself wrong. When he had last year moved
for the release of General Clavering, he was told
that his application would be fruitless, unless Ge.
neral Clavering should, by petition, acknoeledge
his error, and submit himself to the mercy of thp
House. But General Clavering would have spb.
mitted to rot in prison rather than admit, what he
was convinced he was incapable of, that he had
been guilty of prevarication. Then it was said
that it was enough that the person should say ho
was sorry for having incurred the displeasure of the
House. But could any one suppose that he was
not sorry for it ? As to the obstinacy that Was
imputed to him, would not persecution or rose.
cution be likely to make way man obstinate ? But
by keeping Mr. Gale Jones• in confinement, would
he be likely to come out either a better subject or
with fewer partizans ? This was a case in which
they ought to make a precedent, if they had none
to go by. Why keep the man in prison ? WIS
there any thing in the temper of the times to in-
duce the House to that course ? lie could wish .
that the Learned Gentleman had not brought fors
ward this question at this time. Though he thought
that they should not act under the apprehension of
being thought afraid ; yet he would rather be sus.
peeled of fear than convicted of injustice. Ile
should, therefore, perform an act of justice to
the individual, by voting for the motion of the
Honourable and Learned *Meruber who had
so
ably and eloquently recommended it to the House.
The MASTER of the ROLLS stated, that ac•
cording to his view of the motion under considers.
tion, it might be reduced to two questions: first,
whether the individual had suffered sufficient pit.
nishmetst ; and then, whether, such being the cases
he ought to he discharged ? He could wish that he
had been better acquainted with the practice of the
House, in such cases; whether it was founded on
established law or on wage; autl again, if upon usage
whether that asap had been unbroken from time
'immemorial. lie should always be against break' g
in upon long-continued usage, because the prowl'
tion in such a case would bc, that it had been fon"
cd on wise atid convenient grounds ; and hoshoulti:
'therefore, he inclined to abide by the tow, whorl,,
it did nut lead to palpable injustice. if 1s
usage were, as he must presume it to be, such ~.t
the party offmtling was not to be diichargeilin r!ti
he should petition and acknowledge his of once.,
ewiotellilideohfe
int:l7ll,i
eleawdu tuft);
bo
en stulitts,e, titicheisigtototlie full
fo
it. lie agreed that>i man must.be taktn fur Au't';.';
when the House hait'cleclar'ed his gut!, by a ".
as
but then the individual May not thiek his dc.
offence, and in ..that cake it Wotild be erne
insist upon his admitting it, But the .
ffie I
1101.10"6141C PCl.ltietaali (Mr. Ity,i-er) the
tQ think. that such ecknowledoescut 01

g ihtece.
could,
at,
ht
c reduction of theeffgercetaetd;butthedim
establishments,
thatn)"
untry was to be saved. 'Whenever peace may
ume, it would beekterions question how far eria
ductiou cot k 1
nding that question were only to be removed he
nittg all the talents in the House. Fur the pro.
strong,
ffit;tentnii,i
naognudss
ucecfnh whethercaine lit t ey Administration,t Administration,ou
ir)ipeetyaiotfo
nder any circumstances of difficulty, he driven
!tem its bias to the public interest by any
ansiderations. Such an Administration could not'
e formed from either side of the House. et was
he duty of the Members of that House to attend
a this great subject ; and of all those who had
igh characters its that House, and great weight
s well as stake its the country, to unite for that
esportant purpose. If such a body should de.
dare themselves, the country would soon rally
ound them ; and then their privileges would he
:heerfully acquiesced in, as privileges given solely
or the interest of the people. The Bill he had
he honour to bring forward last year though
•.
'bused by some, and ridiculed by others, bed
rat, he trusted, prriduced some good, and would
ead to that gradual and temperate Rama
which was the most difficult to be accom.
dished. Of the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite
'the Chancellor of the Exchequer) be was always
iisposed to speak handsomely ; but he could not
ook upon him as possessed of force and vigour
nough fur times like these. The hopes of the
:loutitry, he should repeat, depended altogether
upon a combination of all the talents amid respect.
ability in that Ilouse. Having stated thus much
upon the general situation of the country, he
should revert to the question before the House;
and on this he should only say that he would vote
for the liberation of Gale Jones, conceiving that
such a measure would not compromise the tumour,
the dignity, or the character of that House.
Sir T. TURTON was of opinion, that the iedi.
'ideal to whom the motion referred, had suffered
punishment enough. If he had, he would ask
whether it was consistent with their dignity not to
put an end to the punishment? The offence for
Which he had been imprisoned had existed fur sere.
ral years, and might have been borne either by
the House or any individual Member, These de.
bating Societies had beets held for several years
without having beets taken notice of; and Gentlemen
might recollect to have sects the names of Mr. Pitt
and Mr. Fox, men great in mind, and great in cha.
racter, placarded in the same manner as in the in.
stance which had been complained of. He had
had no doubt that the placard was a libel ; but he
thought that it was unworthy of the Hoe. Member
to notice it. But when it had _been
'ocehgult ender
the. observation of the House, it must have wee
punished, though not severely. When Jones had
expressed contrition for his offence at the bar, it was
his opinion that it would have been most consistent
with the dignity of the House to haie diseherged
him. As a difference of opinion prevailed upon
the subject, both in and out of the House, it
would have well become that house not to ap,
pear to punish the offence vindictively. it was •
scarcely to be expected, that a man convinced that
'he was right, could be brought to acknowledge
himself wrong. When he had last year moved
for the release of General Clavering, he was told
that his application would be fruitless, unless Ge.
neral Clavering should, by petition, acknowledge
his error, and submit himself to the mercy of the
House. But General Clavering would hare sob.
mitted to rot in prison rather than admit, what he
was convinced he was incapable of, that he had
been guilty of prevarication. Then it was said
that it was enough that the person should say ho
was sorry for having incurred the displeasure of the
House. Butt could any one suppose that he was
not sorry for it ? As to the obstinacy that Was
imputed to him, would not persecution or prose-
cutiun be likely to make any man obstinate ? But
by keeping Mr. Gale Jones• in confinement, would
he be likely to come out either a better subject or
with fewer partizans ? This was a case' in which
they ought to make a precedent, if they had none
to go by. Why keep the man in prison ? Was
there any thing in the temper of the times to in-
duce the House to that course ? He could wish .
that the Learned Gentleman had not brought fort
ward this question at this time. Though he thought
that they should not act under the apprehension of
being thought afraid ; yet he would rather be sus.
pected of fear than convicted of injustice. Us
should, therefore, perform an act of justice to
the individual, by voting for the motion of the
Honourable and Learned 'Member who had so
ably and eloquently recommended it to the House.
The MASTER of the ROLLS stated, that ac•
cording to his view of the motion under considera-
tion, it might be reduced to two questions: first,
whether the individual had suffered sufficient pit.
nieltment ; and then, whether, such being the easel
he ought to be discharged ? He could wish that he
had been better acquainted with the practice of the
House, in such cases; whether it was founded on
established law or on usage; autl again, if upon usage
whether that usage had been unbroken from time
'immemorial. He should always be against breakthe
in upon long-continued usage, because the pres"'"P:
tion in such a case would bc, that it had been feu"!
•
ed on wise awl convenient grounds ; and he show,
'therefore, he inclined to abide by the usige, wlteei
it did nut lead to palpable injustice. if I's
usage were, as he must presume it to be, such that
the party offending was not to be disehargethilliq
he should petition and acknowledge his olleocer, '
lull
would, he owned, lead to consequences to the
lot
extant of which lie would be unwilliug to
I it. lie agreed that ai man must.bc takes fur Au'
when the House havi'declar'ed his gui!t by a rots;.
ad
but then the individual nee), not ti Ilia 14
. , offence, and in:that cake it would be erne.
insist upon his admitting it, But the
I
ifueoltersble GCl.ltietaall (Mr. Ryder) stelae
- to think. that such ecknowledeelsot f the
•

v &ace was not necessary" • Uppn this poiatr
hi should wish to put a
,question to some cum.
relent authority ; and to none more competent
could he apply than to the Right Hon. Memberin
the Chair. The question was, whether the estabi
hsbed practice was as bad been described ; lest
though the answer might influence his arguuteut,
if it was not regular, he should not press the clues.
nun? but assume the affirmative, and reason upon
that assumption. First, thens the maw!' why the
practice of petitionitig had grown into use was
Main and obvious. The commitments by the
'louse were for an indefinite time ; and is the pri-
soner could have no knowledge of the time for
which he was committed, be, was usually led to
petition early, in the. hope that it might lead
to his discharge.' Into his petition, thoterisre,
it would be natural fur him to throw in all the
eircumstauces and sentiments which might be
likely to induce the House to comply with
his application. Thus it was, that the practice
of petitioning might have arisen, and thus
tau the parties might by petitioning have usually
obtained their discharge sooner than they other.
wise would. Thu House, showing itself indulgent
to those who petitioned, genceal:y released them in
three or four days after their commitment, unless
in cases dais aggravated nature, which may have
led to the practice.of requiring petitions to be pre.
gent 11. For himself, be was extremely loth to
break in upon long established usages ; but he
was not prepared to follow. this usage into all its
rousequenees. The effect of such an usage as
this %soukl be, that different persons might be corn.
witted for the. same or similar. offences, at dif-
ferent periods of the Session, and, in consequence
of this usage, be subjected to very unequal degree
of punishment. Mr. Gale Junes might, fur his
offence, be committed at the commencement of the
Session, and out being disposed to petition, might
be confined fur six or semi months, whilst sue.
censinitted for the same offence, may be con.
fined only three or four days. Jones persists in nOt
petitioning, and continues the whole of the Session
ill continemeut ; the other submits, acknowledging
his offence, and is discharged in three or four
days. If a question were to hat put to him Ow any
given time of confinement, whether the prisoner had
been sufsciently punished, he might answer in the
affirmative, according to his idea of the proportion
between the offence and punishment. But if asked
shy he should not be discharged, he should be at
a loss to answer, according to any principles of
jurisprudence known to him. The continuance
of the confinesneut was a puitishment for an 0f..1
fence of which' the Heuse had not declared him
guilty, upon which they had passed no vote; i:
Would be &punishment, not for what he had done,'
but for what he had abstained from doing. Ac.
cooling to any principles of jurisprudence with
which he was acuainted, this would be a
strange system of punishment. %%lest difE•renee
could it make to that House if he were to ac.
kauwledge the offence ?—\Vould it be any
satisfaction to their privileges, or their digiiity, if
he were to make a false acknowledgment to that
effect ? Under the present circumstances, it must he
obvious to the House, that in such an acknow.
ledgmaist the party would not act voluntarily ;
La if he were to submit, it would only be that
he might not suffer three or four months longer
Imprisonment. But, would the House thereby
gain any security for its privileges? Would they
acquire any accession to their dignity ? Could they
he assured that Ga:e Jones would not again offend
in the same manner? If he were to offend again,
could they not commit him in the same manlier as
if he had acknou le lged his offence in this in.
stance? Ile knew of no analogy by which
this ri4ht to make a man confeis his offence
mall be justified. His opinion of the effCet
of i etitioning was, that the party imprisoned
might obtain his discharge somewhat earlier.
But he could not perceive why the ab.
stainin,l from presenting a petition should have
het:Get of lengthening the duration of his con.
finement. rutting the ease in that way, the mo.
tire for peiitionjug, as well as abstaining from
petitioning, would he obvious. The person who
i.roenterl a petition Was generally liberated ; but
who did nut petition star suffered to remain in
confinement. This was the reason why petitions
l'er.tme the practice, because there was scarcely
aly instance in which the party committed did
Lot present a petitioe, exiapt in those cases
in which pride or convictieit prevented the
adoptioti of such a course. Upon these groundp
it was that he was of opinion that John Gale
Junes ought to be discharged, if the !louse should
be of that be had suffered sufficient pun:ab.
meat. If he were to be asked what extent of im.
prisunment he should consider a sufficient punish.
meat fur the offence he should say one mouth, or
six weeks ; but should not by any means
extend it beyond two mouths. Considering,
therefore, the length of this person's confine.
Net, he should vote for his discharge. He a.
Peed perfectly with the Honourable garonet
that they should not entertain any fear of
b'ing thought afraid of what might be thought
of their motives. But ho would not consent
to do an act of injustice, in order that he
might not be supposed to be afraid. Such a feel.
ing he did not entertain. lie should take the same
twirse on any other. occasion. Ile had nut paid
any attention to this subject before the present
ri`c had been brought forward. ‘Vhen he did
t,urn his attention to it, he very quickly arrived at
tie conclusion which his Hon. and Learned Friend
come to, and as he was convinced that the
;nail had been sufficiently punished, he should vote
Jr his discharge.
rye SPEAKER rose and said, that he did not
noose
whether it might not be the pleasure of the
nuesc that he should give an answer to the gees.
Nos which hail; been put to him, and particularly
by the iti,ht Honourable Gentleman who had just
84t actwn. He was prepared to state what he had
gathered from the Joesruals as to the practice of
Parliament un this subject.' The course was dif.
rerun
on commitments to the custody of the Ser.
leant, and ott commitments to hi, Majesty's
it'll. lit the instance of commitments to the
Serjcant, which
her • were but temporary, the prac.
was both ways. The party obtained his rc.

44•44) by petition often, -sad often by statutes&
made in his favour, as in the cue of a commit.
Committee,
meet by a at 'the time the Cent-
" Wee reported that the witness comported or de.
sowed himself properly. The House would re.
tellect the case of. Mr. Alcockt who presented a
petition on being ordered to the Bar, and yet was
committed to the custody of the Serjeant though
'discharged in the course of the same ni ' The
' last cue of that tlescriptien was that of M . Stu-
Air
art, the primer, who was committed to I%e cus.:
turfy of the Serjeant, .and afterwards discharged
upon petition. The commitments to his Alejes.
t)es jails were 'different. He might venture- to
say, that in such Cases the practice, if put ton.
versal, was general, not it; refeaie 'from such
commitment, but 'Nom petititni. Fur 'this hu
could lint! no rule : it rested' altogether on prac.
face.; and that, with the qualificatiOns he 'had
mentioned, was steady and Ultiforita.'• A.s*to the
digerent forms of petitions, that must hive ariscO
from the different and various cirettnistaisCei which
each petitioner might wish. to bring under the
consideration of the House: In general, the party
acknowledged that-he had offetideAl. against the pri-
vileges of that House, and expressed. sorrow for
that offence. Ile had thui stated what. he had been
able to collect from the Journals, ant(which he felt
it his duty to communicate to the Rouse. '
The CHANCELLOR of the* EXCII.EQUER
I observed, that, as the Speaker had 'itatedi that
every person committed to a jail, according to the
practice of the House, • was required to petition,
before he could be discharged, it would nut be
necessary fur him to say much upon this subject.
!I The question was nut whether a Petition presented
was insufficient, but whether the circumstances of
; the time or the occasion were such as to intlece
the House to depart for the first time from its
established practice. Ile could see nothing in
either to call for such an abandonment oldie prac.
tice of Parliatiieot. His Honourable and Learn.
ed Friend had reasoned eloquently against the
. severity of ceiling upon a man to recant here.
tical, or theoretical opinions, which lie may have
entertained against the Constitution. Against all
such arguments the wily answer was, that lie was
not to be called upon to abjure any such opinions.
But having been voted guilty of a Breach of the
Privileges of that House, lie saw no reason why
he should not do that which he bad already done;
—[llear, hear !] The Hun. Gentleman seemed
to think that Gate Jones had dune enough in his
former acknowledgment. But why should he now
I refuse to do what lie haul dune at the Bar, when it
wail requisite, according to the practice of the
House, that he should present a petition to that
elfect to entitle him to hi discharged ? This sin.
•
gle circumstance was sufficient to get rid of all
the "aegunients of his Honourable and Learned
Friend opposite. It would appear. that he was
not .eatled, upon to. recant any. opinions by a
rderence to the minetes of what passed when he.'
seat at the Bar.. From these, it would be seen
that he admitted, " in this instance [ have erred ;
and I threw myself awn the mercy of this assem-
bly.".. Was it not clear .thee from this that he
Nas not tu be 'called pa to re,Gaet Ali opinions he
'64l.pi*Tiously held I' It was his.own contumacy,
therefore, in 'refusing, to do what he had already
done, that pievented him (rum being discharged.
lc had been asked, why" not discharge upon their
own sense of justice? To this he would answer,
that the justice of such cases was always governed
by the presenting a petition. Refusing, there.
fore, to petition, he was not entitled to be di:,..
charged.. It was absolutely necessary• fur the
House to abide by its forms, and that without suf-
fering themselves to be bewildered with reasoning
upon abstract propositions. As to questions raised
with respect to the inequality of punishment
in the exercise of this power of the house,
,he would admit that the House had many
infirmities as to the power of inflicting punish-
ments. If Jones hail any severity to coin &alio or,
lie brought it upon himself. Ile had reason to
believe, notwithstanding what had been stated by
the Noble Lurd opposite to the contrary, that his
Right Hon. Friend was correct in stating, that
Gale Jones had applied to. a Member to present a
petition fur him. "fltd factbe had (ruin nude quar-
ters than ono, to whom it had been communicated
by the Hint. Member himself. In the case of
General Clavering last year, the Hun. Baronet
(Sir T. 'furtun) would not even -be heard without
a petition. • The • case of Drake, too, happened
in a good time, as the Gentleman opposite sat then
at the side from which he spoke; and yet the
practice of the House had been adhered to. In
these two-recent cases, the House had shown Inure
severity than towards Gale Jones. lie was not
called upon to admit the falsehood of what he had
stated before, but merely to say that by petition
which he had already said at the bar of" the
Huns.. WAS there any thing that called for such
departure from their usages ? Was there any
thing in the period that required them to de-
scend from their dignity ? Was this a time
that they were to diminish those privileges
which were essential to their existence? He
agreed that they should not be actuated by any.
fear of being thought afraid to do their duty ;
hut strong as he felt that sentiment, he should not
do an act of injustice. He was of opinion that
Gale Jones should be made to submit to the prac-
tice of Parliament. This he was convinced the
case required; and as no eircurnstauces had been
shown to induce the House to depart from its esta-
blished usage, he should feel bound to vote against
the motion.

Sir vimAs TURTON, in explanation, said
that K. had presented no petition from General
Clavcring, whom nothing could have tempted to
ackuowleiJge that he had prevaricated, when con.
scions that he was wholly Incapable 'of such con.
duct. •
Mr. WHITBREAD, if the explanation of the
Hon. Baronet had not anticipated him, had intend.
ed to set the Right lion. Gentleman right as to
the allusion he made to the case of General Cie-
vering. No petition whatever had been presented
to thoHnuse from General Clavering ; and so far
as thu reasoning of the Right lion. Gentleman
rested upon that case, it must fall to tbcground.
He was of opinion that the Right Honourable

Art FUT

TH I STATMMAN.

in.tke coarse of arguments had done
great injustice to Gale Jaws. By comparing his
commitment to the ruses of persons committed
for falsehood or pietarieation, the Right' Ho.
nourable Gentleman hid done much injury to
tho persob whose case was now under considera.
Con. Ho wasglad to find the Right Hon... Gen.
tlemen opposite admitting that the submission of
Mr. Gale Jones et, the bar was sufficiently
because when ho hid staled tkat.ipoti a former oc.
sion, 'these Right Hon. Gentlemen hid denied the
fact. Now, however,* the Alight • Hun. Gentle.
man opposite sicknOwledged that the sabmisslen
was -suchut that time as to satisfy Mm, if only
renewed petition. The Right Hon. Gentle.
man 'hdci made hut a partial
_quotation from the
minutes; becluself he had quoted the; whale pas.
site, it would give a different appeirtinco to :the
feelinethat produced it. The paisageshoiii4 be.
gins •POn reviewing the paper,. hoiever,.l
Itilew!ddge errororec.-".1 lie MOO acoltithons,
he did think had treatedtals•lOnis'ivith*CrOcity in
Catititiftiachiii. for such an oiteniiiraftee he had
throwithiutsditnpinitheir teers,y„ *:
Put the Right
Hen. Offsittfitnsan had argued that' lie-nO4 refused
to ackeitiwtetlge by petition wliathe had Rrevionily
admitted, and that it waii,oWing. to his own con.
tunsacyz that, lie was not dischUrged. What could
the House thiuk of Mr. Jones, or he of the House
urCOmnions, that after having admitted his error
and thrown hiniself upon its mercy, it-should bp
'expected that he should a second time acknowledge
his offence ? Was it..uot enough that he had once
made the acknowledgement? No! said the Right
llonourableGentlemait, in the spirit of 'his in.
tolerance, we must have him again do that which he
has dune before; weshall have himagein at the Bar,
and make him show that he has not changed It s
opinion. But supposing him to have changed his
opinion—supposing that others too have changed
their opinions—why should they compel him to
sky that what he thought true yesterday he con.
finites to think true this tlay ? He was aware that
• the [tight Hun. Geetlemati was stedfastly fired in
Ms religious opinions, and that ho might call upon
the House to believe all they had been taught when
they were children. But, said the Right Hon..
Gentleman, he is nut to be called on to retract
any theoretical opinion. If he had changed hie
opinion upon the subject of that paper, which he
had before admitted to be an offence or error on
his part, would it not be to call upon him to
do violence to his conviction, to oblige him to
acknowledge what he did not now believe ?
—Suppose a man to live before the Refor-
mation, and fur disbelieving transubstantiation
to be brought before the persecuting Inquisi-
tion. Suppose him before that terrible tribunal
to admit that lie believed the article, and notwith-
standing to be sent to prison, where, meeting
with books to enlighten him, he discovers the
' error into which he had fallen, and reverts into
his former opinion, would it be no retraction
of his opinion for him to be ohliged to admit the
doctrine of transubstantiation ? But the Right
Honourable Gentleman, if he did not acknow•
ledge what he .bad done before, would apply to
him the torture of the mind. Might 'sot the man
-properly avow he would rather rut in prison
than submit. to such a recantation ? than be
driven to admit that to lais false which he knew to
be true ? This would. he Jones's case if he
had conscientiously changed his opinion since be
had beau' at the bar of that House. But the
Right Hon. Gentleman ,would have his confine-
ment continued to the end of the Session, if he
did nut petition, and that too at s time when he
was remarking on the infirmities of the House of
"Commons respecting the indiction of punishments.
,That Right Hon. Gentleman was the first man who
in a British House of Commons desired that it
might have the power of imprisoning fur a cer.
tein time. .This was the first instance of such a
doctrine being broached since these questions had
been canvassed by enlightened men. If he, fur
one, were to be in (lie situation of Jones,, and to
petition,. he would be a hypocrite. The other
[tight Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Secretary Ry.
der) who had called the able speech of his lion.
end Learned Friend common places, had cer.
taiiily exhibited in his own impressive, eloquent,
illustrative, and conclusive speech, a meat sulk.
ing contrast to the common places he described.
It had been said, that in all such cases. the,
!louse was bound to decide for itself. That he.
denied. It had mint done so in the case of Stock.
dale or Reeves. The Attorney. General /as or-
dered to prosecute.. The Right Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Ryder) therefore had mistaken and mistatcd
the pre.ctice of the House. In all his arguments
the Right Hon. Gentleman confounded the con'.
raitment of Gale Jones with commitments to which
it bore no resemblance. Why should it be cow.
founded with the cases Of Drake-, or Cbtrering, and
of Sandon ? Forbid it, justice ! forbid it, fair
dealing ! forbid it, the spirit of toleration'! Mr.
,Gale Jones had bacu punished for a thing that to
the knowledge of every Member in the House,
had been practised every day for a considerable
time past. As to the privileges of the House, he
conceived they should be resorted to only in cases
of necessity ; and he saw no necessity for the
House having exercised its power in the case
of Mr. Jones. lie happened not to be in the
House at the time the vote passed for his commit-
tal, and lie was now happy that he had itt no de-
gree made himself a party to that vote. If ever a
similar question should again be brought forward,
he should not concur in such a vote. Ito should,
on the contrary, propose that the case should be
referred to a Jury. It was well known that many
things, which fora long time had been considered
privileges, were found, when -examined, to be no
privileges at all. Among that number, he would'
mention manorial rights. He would not contend
that Mr. Gale Jones should be ,released OR ae.
count of any circumstances belonging to the pre.
sent time, but that he had a right to be released
on the justice of his case. It would be cru-
elty to continue his punishment for a term
mud longer than could be considered lidetil!mid
to his (Wendt. Ile knew nothing at ell of Mr:
Gale Jones ; but be bad heard that at the bee
pf the" House he 'made a decent apology for. his
dime, and be thought the lifiuse ought not no*

-~---T

-,

to insist dpon any more. Uptight very well hap.
pen that in the mean time he Might hate Aura
his opinioo, sad might now conceive (es may
others did) that the Home had no right SO commit
him. If this Was the conviction of his Mind it
present, it wonabe cruel to Cooke him wall be
stated a contrary opinion. A good deal had home
said about the state attic Public dsind epee die pre.
sent question. Ile must allbn than wall imPtllitilde
to beeetirely indifferent to that consideration; and
the opinions which he had heard and riadebstis this
question was first agitated, had shaken most con.
siderably the opinion he bed before formed with
respect. to the privileges of the House on the
point of commitment. lie thought it was how.
over must unfair to make the state of the publks
Mind en argument for continuing G. Jones in prison
longer than the- justice of his case required ;' and
"that no man ought to be htc rificed iu order to
prove the privileges of the. Muse. If be was
now to be disishargud and commit another act of
the same kind, he might be again taken ,up' and
punished as if he had not beeu before inspHsoned.
The continuance of the punishment beyond all
measure or appearance of justice, would prodtice
an effect on the public mind, very oppbsite to that
which would be wished by those who were fur
supporting the character of the House with the
country.
Mr. It' NML Arose, and said +.44 I Must differ
from- all the arguments of the Hoo. Gentlemen
who here preceded me, 'as to pint of form. I
wish it tobe understood that I do not desire it to
be recollected; that my name bad ever been
eluded.— [Year, Hear.]-74 wiskto giee.nryvote,
and that it should be considered u perfectly. eta.
partial. But cats any Hon. Member vote foe the
dismissal of a man who contemptu•ously refuels to
acknowledge the privileges of that House, by his
not petitioning ? I caunot think the slightness of
the crime ought to be the means of doing away
with the privileges and precedents of this House.
I cannot sure the difference between the case
of Me. Gale Jones, and many .others, that
have been acted upon in the same *ay.... [Keer]
It has been said by an Honourable 'emit
of mine, that it was merely a question between
this Gdritleinatt and the House. This I deny; it
is nut the attestation of Gale Jones, it is nut a
quarrel bete eels him and the House, but it is in
indignity shows; to the House, and it had been their
duty to take notice of it, to preserve their prero.
gative. (hear, hear !)- I would ask, why seed
bliss to prison at all ? I will answer, because it
will deter others from acting in the mime
[hear! hear !] I will apply to the Right Hon. and.
Learned Gentleman, who brought forward this
motion (Sir Samuel Romilly), whose. Criminal
Bill I shall have an opportunity of descanting
on ; but I would ask him, would he propose
that it should be unjust to lump a criminal
in prison, because he might by petition be re-
leased ? Suppose, for instance, that a man was
attempted to be rescued, would it be said,. that Ma
fate was bard, because he was still confined on ac-
count of the rescue not having taken place?.--
[Hear j I say a man', offence, whetlaWlee IS
doomed to definite or indefinite impritonment,
when he has it in his power to remove himself by
petition, nay, to enlarge himself, is looked upon
with a lenient eye. On what grourots cab my
Honourable Friends contend, that Mr. Gale
Jones should go without tiny punishment; that
he should, contrary to every rule of this House,
be disch-arged,, without conforming to its forms?
The subject, in my opinion, as it relates to the
forms of this House or its privileges, ought never
to be brought in question, or allowed to be in pod
:lithos, that evidence could be brought against
them. The arguments of my Honourable Friend
(Mr. (Niteroi) far surpassed my idea of this
question ; he entered into the continental war,
and not satisfiell with that,• took a full review of
what is called Parliamentary Reform. To the
theory of Reform, I was averse, but still must I
be more so, at the present time, seeing the ferment
in the public mind, which has been exposed to
every discerning twin, fur those several days
past, which, perhaps, is only suspended ; shall
we, iu the very vitals of- that Saint, grant
them that and other objects of oteir desire
shall we release John Gale Jones from prison,
that we might have it to -say, that ne sent him to
Barrabas ? [howl laughicr.] I am not blind
to the faults of the House, but its estimation is not
to be judged by such a criterion ; it has not a
right for a moment to.stoop; for when you en-
courage by your connivance, the House must lose
its privilege. I think the House, in the case of
Mr. Gale Jones, have beets attempted to be jibed
oust of their privileges. lam of opinion. that the
Right Hon. Gentleman, Mr. Yorke, acted per. .
Getty proper ; .at the sane time I must acknow-
ledge that I would have let it pass ; but men hay.
'lng different opissiong, I must approve of his con.
duct, and do think there was no other mode of
taking it up. I feel sorry that it has called forth
• the animadversions that it has—l meats as to that
superior man, the Hon. Baronet, who has been
committed ; bust, with all its consequences, ['think
the right mode had been pursued--I took 0 middle
course on the letter of Sir F. Burdett—on the
motion of his expulsion—because I thought the
House itself could not have dose it—Eikar,
haul] I must confess that I think the present
time the most improper to bring forward the quev. •
tion rich the Right Honourabler Gentleman has
this 'eight—[Dear, hear I.] It had been said
thit it wound be carried 'nem. cots..-but in
What way could that be understood, whew -it
was, known that if the person intinisowed
Mill wily petition, he would bet refuted I
I have heard much talk of humanity, but
why was it not brought forward in the casein(
.General Clavering and Captain Sattdon, last year ?
The hardship certainly was less to a man in a
lower sphere of life, than to them ; yet oily came
out by petition, and the other remained until the
Session. closed. [Pearl.] Larceny is thought
more disgraceful than highway robbery ; yet the
law lays a heavier penalty on the latter. So with
treason : although the law dealt more severely
with those who came under the denomina.
tion of that charge, yet it was thought less die.
graceful. So, Sir, it is with the privileged of this

_ _

• ' - I I

- -
-