The Statesman.
London, England, 1810-04-21 00:00:00

-T•-•.-•,1,,

_

`iFiiiiiihivitalwE srfrztotot 1
t sti4.•-viseictie Nl* -GALE Jorrei and %Sit
deito . 4 is
Fluters ltrr W4l* -awfully committed to
prises' by the _Sraix::A's *arrant, is a question
OA& first receive A solemn decision. If the
noun or Commons li not entitled to exerclie this
authority, it Oust be restrained by the judgmehti
of the Courts of Lair ;.--if, on the other hand•l'
it is entitled to it, this power must be so explicitly
acknowledged and troclaimcd, that the penple
may avoid etpoking themselves to the resentment
of the House. 1 bare always considered the
House of Commons as entitled to punish summarily
1 every act •*hich immediately impeded their pro.
ceedings. Such an act is .a breach of privilege,
1 and a contempt. The discharge of their func.

tionS requires that it should be instantly pu.
nished ; but wherever the offence does not ire.
niediately impede their proceedings, it is an of.
fence at the .common law, and can, with equal
convenience, be examined and punished 'in the
Courts of Law; there the House of Commons must
send the matter complained of to the Courts of
Law. In a former letter, I mentioned the case of
Mr. JOllll STOCILDALV., where the late Mr. PITT
laid down this doctrine. In * case which happen.
ed a little before that of Mr. JOIIN STOCEDALE)
on a complaint of a Breach of Privilege, by a
publication, pending the proceedings against Sir
ELIJAH Impair, Lord GRENVILLE, then a Mem.
ber of the House of Commons, held the same opi.
nion, and he endeavoured to- account for the
House of Commons having sometimes proceeded
summarily, where they ought to have sent the
subject to be inquired into in a Court of Law,
from the following circumstance:...." While the
King granted Commissions to the Judges quamdin
sibi placueril, the House was afraid- of trusting
their Privileges to the examination of the Judges;
for the questions in dispute were most commonly
relative to the Prerogatives of the Crown, .and
they feared the influence of the Crown over
Judges, removable at the King's pleasure. But
now that the King grants Commissions to the
Judges qnamdin se bene gesserint, that ground
of apprehension is at an end:
The House of Commons onght therefore, said
Lord GRENVILLE, never to attempt to oust the
common law of its jurisdiction. A doctrine- has
sometimes been advanced, and incautiously as.
settled to by Judges, that the Courts of Law
have no authority to' examine the claims of Privi.
lege made by the House of Commons. But this
doctrine cannot be supported—the law of Parlia-
ment is parcel of the Law of England; so is the
Ecclesiastical Law. While the Ecclesiastical Court
is examining and deciding on a subject eognbable
by the Ecclesiastical Law, even though the Court
should proceed erroneously, and mistake the Law,
the Courts at Westminster will not interfere. But
whenever the?Ecclesiastieal Court exceeds the limits
of the jurisdiction assigned to it, even though it
should be doing the *cry act which the Law of
England prescribes, the Courts of Common Law
'will interpose, and prohibit its proceedings. Thus,
the Law of England directs an Intestateis estate to
be distributed among his next of kin: yet, If the
Ecclesiastical Court were to attempt to en.
fora this distribution, although 'they were
making the distribittion in the lame manner as
the Court of Chancery Would direct, the Courts
of Law would grant a prohibition, for the Eccle.
siastical Court cannot enforce a treat. The same
principle must be applicable to every tribunal
which exercised a limited authority. The House
of Commons, like the Ecclesiastic:li Court, must
be presumed to be acting correctly ; but when the
facts stated prole to the Court of Common Law
that the House of Comntotis hat exceeded Hi su.
thority, the Court of Common Law will set adide
its proceedings. This doctrine was deer!), laid
!laird by Lard Chief JustiCe Ilot,T, in the case of
the QUEEN v. PAT?, and others ; and is to be
found in Lord HOLT'S Reports, page b2ti. It is
stated with so much accuracy, that' I think I
shall be excused if I trausCribe it from the Book,
verbatim :
*an gear., v. !Ate' INN A I.' 9 ANN.
On a writ of Habeas Cimino, the Defendants, who had
been committed to Niwgate by the House of Commons, were
brought into Court; and the cause of their kommitment was
Myrna 4 to be, for having celmosetterd and proseented an at-
tires at la* *inn the Constables of Allesbory, for refining
the* votes in the election of Members of Portia:blew, in con-
tempt of the strisdictieit, and breach of the Privileges of the
House of Cosentino. The Cabaret fbr the Defendants prdy-
ed that they Might be discharged for several reasons; end for
that they hid done ao MilaWfal act, &e: let three bf the'
-.fudges opposed it, and said, that the Rotor if Commons
were the prop** judges of their own privileges; tge.
HOLT, Chief J astice.—" I ea of opinitsa, that the prase-
cosiest of If* suit Is lawfol, nod no *each of the privilege
of that Home I nor can their judgment lanke It so, or coo-
elide this Court front detenstifoot contrary; ond when the
Wow of Commons exceed then' legal bottotb and authority,
shelf acts are wrongful, and enanit beJtatilled more than the
sew of private melt. There is no gentian bat their authority
is twins the law, and at it Is eirctubscribed, to it may be ex-
ceeded: If we should my, they are Judges of their ptlni-
lege and their own authority, and Nobody else, tisat would
make tbeit privileges at they wseld have them: In such
case, if there be a smooth' impriestreit by the House of
Commons. what Court shall deliver the party f Shall we
*ea say, there is no redress? aid that we are not able toente•
este theme laws, en which the Llbertg of the Subject &-
pee& It is tree, all Codas kw a far 'edges of their ewe

_ .;

F. STATigiM Sri. „e_

i‘eis; ifm.kt

r

• .I..';v '•;- •

17. ;

-777-7111saliadii14;hna7iicias17-7741 atbet-7:7
any Court . ve every Je-
ri:tuition; iv t,, iatrodaews. ants et nifisiaa, by ening
every man a Judge is bio owe cause."
It was Weida ;boat. Wbefin 'Writ Of arise lap spina
jadgment Oven an a Mad& coins? raison amnion she
Hone of Lards, wbere It oceasiosed great &bans itL4l4Olll
the two Moises at Parinuneat ; bit the Pa: fission befog.
I toss alter prnrossed. tie dispate was driansiet
Lord Chief Justice HOLT was in .111.441flOrity.
and the final decision was pre ictited by a proroga.
Lion of the Parliament : but, at this day, I be.
Heirs that there is baton. opinion of the Profession
apon the Subject, via: that the doctrine of Lord
Chief Justice; Hoc} was Behind law. In legal
knowledge, strict integrity, and the firmest eau.
rage, no Chief justice of England ever'surpaised
Sir Jolts HOLT. To say that the House of Car:
mons is alone to judge of the extant of ittown.pri.
vileges and powers, would neceesatily leid is hied
the grossest absurdities. ' ForMerly the property
of the .Member of the House of Commons *al
exempted froth being taken in execution i this pri.
vilego *as abolished by Act of Parliament, (hiring
the reign of his present Maiawri`. Let us sup.
pose that a Sheriff's Officer was summoned before
the House, for selling the goods of a Member of the
House of Commons, under a writ of fieri facial;
and that the Houie voted this tri• be a breaCh of
privilege, and committed the Sheriff's °Meek to
Newgate ; if nothing more appeared in the order
of commitment, save only that the Sheriff's offf.
car was committed for a breach of privilege, per.
haps the Court of Law could not afford relief. But
if the facts were stated in the order of commit.
ment, viz. "'That the Sheriff's officer had sold
the goods of a Member of the House ander a writ
of fieri fucks, which act was a breach of the pri.
vileges of the Hauge, and that the party was
thereupon committed," is it possible that, upon
such an Order being returned with the Habeas
Corpus, the Court of Law could hesitate sue
ment. on setting the prisoner at large ? If the
Court did not set the prisoner at large, the House
of Commons would have exercised the power of
repealing an Act of Parliament by its own sole
authority.
VEIANIUS.

2rizlN • I I••• 1 • I. I. I In=2.
SIR FRANCIS BURDETT.
•
We understand that Mr. Sherif( Woo.i !polio
to the following effect, after Mr. W•UTIIKAN had
heft the chair, on Thormlity night, sod when our
Reporter had left the rooin.—He said, That- on
receiving d letter from Sir Francis Burdett, on Sa..
turday, he immediately proceeded to the Worthy
Baronet's house. Upon arriving there he ordered
the army,to withdraw from before the Worthy Ba.,
roost's door ; and the Officers instantly conformed
to his order.—As to the people, bo felt emalident,i
that be himself alone could have dispersed them,
without any poste 'cosaitotets. Feeling it his duty,
and being also of opinion, as he had nu hesitation
in stating, that the Speaker's Warrant was idle.
gal, he offered to stint at. Sir Francis Burdett's.
house on Saturday night, aritlka view to, protect
the Honourable Baronet's lakkation, but that
was thought unnecessary. He, however,,
turned with his Colleague to Piccadilly on Sunday
morning, and again found the- Guards with en'
Officer, not so very well disposed to conform to
his orders as he who commanded eo the preceding

evening. He applied to the two Civil Migistrates
whom he found them and they thought proper to
say, that, if the people did not disperse, they
would order the troops to charge. This threat,
howeter, was nit axecteado for he rimptly told
theta Magistrates, that if they attempted to issue
such an order, and any death ensued, ho would in-
dict them for murder.—[Load applauses, and
a &sr of Name 177-7--Turtheri he pre.
vented those Magistrates from lending out placards
deacribiitg the people as felons, &c. whirl placards
he found at the Gloucester Coffee-hottie ready for
circulation. But his interference prevented thoie
papers from going forth, which he could not help
considering as improper, and likely to lead to
muck misehief.—lThe cry of Name ! Name !
wis again revived with increased eagerness; but
the Worthy Sheriff did not comply with the do:
site of the Meeting]. He conclbtled wish de-
claring his resolution to persevere in the line of
conduct which obtained him the approbation of
so respectable a proportion of his fellow-citi.
sens.
•.

SENTigtiIITAL ASECDOTC—[Front a Swedish
Paper.]--A circumstance has recently taken place
at Fahlun, the capital of Dalecarlia, in Sweden,
which Might figure with ddvantage in a novel. In
working to establish a new communication be.
tweet' two shafts of a mine; the body of a miner
Was discovered id a state cif perfect preservation,
and impregnated with vitriolic water. The body
was quite soft. but herdened on being exposed to
the air. No one could identify the individual ;it
was only tecollected that the accident by which ie
had beets thus buried in thh bosom of the earth
had taken place 50 years ;go. AU inquiries as to
theisme of the sufferer had already ceased, when
idecrepid old woman, leading on crutches; slOwly
mWvanced towards the corpse, gild knew it to be
that of a young man, to which she had been pro.
mired in marriage half a century ago. She threw
herself on the corpse, whom had all the appear.
anee of bronze statue, bathed it with her tears,
and fainted with joy at having once more beheld
the object of her affections on this side Of the
Crave. It is easier to conceive than to trace the
singular contrast affotded by .that couple ; the
one buried 50 years ago, still answering all the
appearances of youth, while the other, weighed
down by age, evinced all the filmic, of youthful
love.