The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-02-26 00:00:00

- ,1

•
iIaPRRIAL PARLIAMENT.
- • • •• r. •
• •• •
fugl -a
LORDS, rtiris. • j
fir. b. . &ink 114 others, bonsais..a Stemigifniiiiimi
Comtism, reqee,shik thin Viscount Nitride night Wend 1
elm* Calamodtree, lb be ,e waived as a the We%
,mtenhasieg yritbdrspra, Lord gielsilleor who was present, lea
fits alien. The L..rd C. aticrillor theta eared the
4 the Hesse of Coronnos to be rolled In again, sad
liedikshedrhess shot Ike Nub* Lord world rutted.
Zvi
atITZW I LLIAM presented a frau certain to-
habitants O Loot's@ and Viestailaster against the Chimney-
eireepers' 'Regidnitse Rill.
The Mt Cliaplsio's Regulation UHL was brought front this
COaranons by Mr. Methuen and others. and read a Grid tiros.
A Gaudentan free she Treasury presented en warn of the
Iltadhetmet Bins Windings She sth January, 1811, to thvith
1818, •
On the motion of 'Lord LA UDERDA LP.. that Remiss. awl
ether Papers frisbee to Itittielpier Bills. were ordered whir
e pdmied.
tltivaiee Notite=te ;tea a Pertains Oa" ington.lo
illiitthleti Cosidasties alba
Alevgh. aild"; that the owe mutat be reformed.
Reel GROBV ' OR void. be had:, Petition to present hold
Timms Mass, Isle a' Pri.oncr in Ilersemairier•tane Jail. ad
of the persons mica bad very properly resisted the abeaseres
taken to induce them -to tuner mos recognisasires. The,
Wks)! which was read by the Clara. And laid on the
was blokiiiif to that psesested to the Common trees die
•
BILL OF INDEMNITY.
The Doke of MONTItOiE said it was his ditty
to pretest a Bill for indemnifying his Majesty's Mi-
nisters, and persons employed inopprehentling pri-
soners under the late Act of Parliament. It was
not necessary for him to say any thing in its support'
in this stage. He should merely propose, that the
Bill be now read a first time. On leticley, when he
intended to move the second reading, he should tub.;
mit to their Lordships' consideration some observe.
boos on the nateresnd object of the measure.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE would not have
troubled their Lordships with any observations es
the Noble Duke's proposition at the present moment,,
if he did not. conceive. that it involved a question of
considerable coustitetiorial difficulty and importance.
Thii consideration indocei him to oppose the mew-
sere, even on the first tending. "robs- the tide of
the Bill, as he had hoard it stated by,
Duke, it appearbd• to 'bra Hill fir itidetnnifo;4lllll.
Majesty's Ministers for-very act they -hid'donenin.
der the Suspension of the liebeas C drifutt Tirt
Bill, !weever, for aught •their Lordatsfieteithew,
might extend still further. NOI, *Ott* OW. AV ilk
toatioo in which their Lordshipi were placed! -nor
knew by the Journals of the other House of Watt.:
!lament, that Papers had been also sent. to 'Eat
House, and referred to a' Committee ; that Cots.•
mitres bad not yet reported, and their Reportmigist
be SOCh as to render any proceeding of the.kirelitat
proposed very improper to be adopted by their fatirth:;
ship. ft sorely was not known to their 1;104040o,
Ault tbi itereft of the Cbrieetistiesiroirld +mien Mi.,
nisters. It might prove of-a very different eietoie.L6
Suppose it afforded matter oft Which that House shoetd
think fit to impeach Minister!, their Lordships wiaold
then have to sit as judges on a question which trek
had previously 4gek,Thiskeit lie reminded the Itums
that on a former occasion they hartdecideti in- et-
cordance with the .opittioti of a Noble and Leacosti,
Lord, that they would .not entertain a certain me*.
sure, because it might come before them iii their. jul
diciat capacity. On that lame ground, this 13€1'
was not fit to be entertained; for any regulating i
principle of their'proceediegi were more to he
gerded than another, it oat. this—that the Ilosiss
ought never to give extrajudicial opinion. This theni•
was a questioe of great importance to •the 1401:
lotion, and on that greond he trusted theli
ships would be induced to delay all further pro.
ceedings until 'they learned what measures might be
adopted by the Huse or Commons. If they sp..
proved of the principle of the Bill proposed by the
Noble Duke, and read it.a secontlitime on Friday
neat, they might be placed ill the Situation of as-
sembling as Judges, after they had, prejudged the
question on which they woold.be calledlo decide.
The Earl of LI V Elt POOl, saw no possible ground
for delay in the objection stated by the Noble Lord.'
Were it good for any thing, it would be equally good
against a measure which their Lordships had ',reedy.
sanctioned, namely, the appointment of a Committel!
to engaire.into theconduct of 11liniters on the papers
which had been submitted to their consideration.—'
This, it was true, was done without any knowlegde
on the part of their Lordships as to what that Com-
mittee would decide; but the objection that, OK
House ought to proceed to a legislative measisteisin
the opinion of the Committee, was equaliy. strong
against referring the papers to that Committel.lo
order that they might give an opinion to the Elonse.
The Committee had, by order of the House, exainined
these papers inquisitorially, and had come to an
opinion, which was now on their Lordships' table,
In pursuance
of
that opinion his Noble Friend cos:-
sidered himself bound to introduce the Bill he hill
presented. Whether that Bill was warranted by thi,'
Report was the question to be argued on the second
reading. The Noble Lord had made the suppoiitiiid
of the Committee of:the House of Commons comity
to a different conclusion from their Lordships' Coao7
mittee; that was doubtless possible, but the suppls•
sition afforded no reason for delaying the progress of
the present measure ; since, if what the Noble EMI
supposed did not take place, the consequence wield
, be, that the Commons would throw out the Ledo's!,
nity Bill when in came before them. Besides, tit(
case was by no means a new one, and iheri was Is
particular, on the Journals of the Parliament of fee.
land, a recent precedent for the course now. taken.
The Bill of Indemnity (or the proceedingi of
jetty's 'servants during . the disturbances in [relied
originated in the House of Lords, and it never was
suggested •there that it ought to be delayed until it
should be seen what. decision the noise of Commons
'came to. It was most unreasonable to argue that
their Lordabir.aught to dear a measure elskfkar


~•.

-

i

• _
gel% dot frarkr it N rite / ; .114;1 441 ;41; ;14110 .rdl •u•

peered to be the necessary result of the Report of
their 01,111mittee; until the other House or Partit-
tient came to a decision. Their lordships wets not'
bound to mildew their proceeding by that decisirsie„i
of. which indeed they could resularty know whin
Tates* ttoogii the medium of the Votes of the Heel*
of Commons. Upop the whole, then, the N
Her' had stated aothipg which was.sOfficieut tp la
the House to stay the Legislative messy, now;
rope*. to them. Whatever *retinas that Ow,
ears might be liable to, siesta come regolarlz protest
*cession on the second 'oldies of the Bill ou Friday
Peat
Lord HOLLAND expected that the Noble Duke
meld have stated more at length what was the sta-
tism of the Bill he bad presented. He, however* did
'not mean to 'weepy their Lordships' time with any
PaWrilithine Mk that point • sad rose merely to no.
800 tie sweet which had beefigiosolo.the objection
of his Noble Friend, who bed been, it appeared, io
some measure miaaaderstood. His Noble Friend
had not argued that the House could not entertain
this Bill. His objection merely amounted to this—
that, in a constitutional point of view, it was not
proper nor prudent to proceed with sack a measure,
when th! other Hasse of Psrliamenx bad still to de-
cide on the siltation of the conduct of Ministers, and
when there was before that !louse a considerable
neen't. of Petitions, complaining of highly improper
end unconstitutional acts. To the erganseitf of
.the
impropriety of proceeding with the measure tinder
such circumstances, the Noble Secretary of State bad
given no satisfactory answer. lie bad referred to'
one precedent, which appeared to be that which
oc-
curred in 1798, in the House of Lords of Ireland ;
bet that was the precedent of o measure which had'
been condemned by the first lawyers in Ireland sad
this country, and which wee the disgrace of the Parr.
liameut that passed it. The reference to such a pre-
cedent as that, afforded further reason for a vigilant
observance of this Bill, lest some of the enormous
provisions of the Irish Act should be included its it.
Without even waiting for the Report of the Com-
mons' Committee, it 'was possible that a Member of
that Hesse might become possessed of facts, which
.would enable him to Jay on the table articles of im
peachment against. some of his Majesty's Ministers.—
If such a proceeding were to take place, their Lord-
'ships would be reading a second time a Bill fur in.
demnif)ing those who.were shoot to be accused at
tkeir bar. The Noble Secretary of State had remind-
ed their Lordships that the Commons might reject
,the Bill of Indemnity. Certainly they might ; bat
than it was to be recollected that, besides that re.
*lion, they might also come to the bar with woo-.
loani.accosetlon against those whom their .Lortisitips
44,00 declared ippopent. If their Lordship,. wish-
ed that• their acquittal should be'honouiable tb those.
in whose favour it might be pronounced. they wbuld
adopt the course recommended by his Noble Friend.
Could the People of E-giand think an acquittal ho-
nourable and impartial, when it would appear to
them that the question had been already. prejudged ?
To dylay the progress of this Bill was no denial .of
their Lordships' power to criiiittate, and. pass it. All
that was proposed by his :Sable Friend was, that
they should suspend further. proceeding! on it until
after the Report of the Committee of .the House of
Commons should be made, and that there should be
no reason to suppose that any articles of impeachment
would he brought up from that House.
'.The Duke of MONTROSE said, that the Bill was
of the same nature- as the Bills of Indemnity pro-
posed in similar cases, and he saw no reason for de-
laying its progress on the possibility of some other
proceeding being instituted in the Commons. It was
impossible to tell how long they might have to wait
for the decision of the other Moose; and, upon the
same principle, the whole Session might be allowed
to pass away before the Bill was read. lie could not
on such grounds consent to the House depriving it-
self of the opportunity of proceeding with a measure
which they bad an unquestionable right to institute,
and the propriety of which appeared to him equally
sudoubted.
A conversation was then carried on for some time
across the table, reletive to the progress of the Bill.
Lord HOLLAND proposed to move, as an amend.
aient, that the Bill be read a first time ten days
hence ; but a motion was finally made for this day
pe!oisight.
I'he Earl of LIVERPOOL intimated a willing.
nets to, postpone 011 second reading till Monday.
•Lord HOLLAND and Lord LAUDERDALE
spiished that Tuesday should be the day.
The Earl of LI vEltroaL observed, that if the
Bill passed at all, it was ne.essary that it should pass
before the holidays. Their Lordships would be sum.
mooed for the second reading on Friday, and it
would then be open to them to determine on what
day the ,Bill should pass. through
any subsequent
stage. In the mean time it would be printed.
After • few words from the Earl of
ROSSLYN
and thq Marquis of LANSDOWNE, who wished to
delay the second reading to Tuesday, the amendment
was negatived, and the Bill read a first time.
Adjourned to Friday.

•
• ROUSE OF COMMONS.
•
• The welted rending of she Steamboat Bill was postponed
6.1 Mond y
It •
Mr. CANNING presented a Petition front Liverpool in ra-
G..s•Lights.—Ordere.l to lie on the table.
. Sir S.,KOM ILLY prevented ^ Petition from Mr. Edmund
T•wesend. complaining of great abpces in the ittinahtlir..tioostif
the Rankrupt Laws.—Referred to time Committee .if Bailtnipt
Laws.
. • Lord K IRK WALL prevented two Petitions from Denbigh
and !masher
.place in the County, again t the LeatitcrTas.—•
ordev'ed tolie on the tah,e.
A Petition wail received Tram a Cnaveyencer of font ran'
practice. against alterations in the practice.
A person from the Ram India.heuse prevented Arcetints
Reinlations made in the Ere ladies, containable to Act of

- ,

^. •

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
observed, that 1 Rest_ probable there would not he a
tali' attindanei of -'Members-10-motraw, owing to
particular -'ciftiensstaeces., He therefore propised,
that the &Ude it lie Aging tihodid adjonto Gear to-
morrow till Friday.
Mt.- CALCRAFT had no intent*, to Oppose lb.
isetitio, ilui he 'lobed to know whether the Army
lhadmates would- certainly con* his 'ota Friday Oe
'Mot • pardcolaily as be etatitlitood that the twit itito -
id ortbe Fiance Committee could nit be C 06..
cludetbefore to•rnortoW. •
The CHANCELLOR of the EtCligtiggit
said, he was tote the Haase woiWiiiit be &Weis
Of any premature discussion. They mist, haideter,
he *woe of the importance of 'intiodeeinethelle. -
tiny
.841. The EstleriteS Might, in the first its-
elf,* be considered es to tboiwparts if the'', which
re we not likely to tlr. subject of rotate d/g.
cu,sinn.
Mr. CALCRAFT only wished to know whetbet
the Estimates would come on on Friday Or nok. --'
The adjournment till Friday aris thin agreed to.
A oration war agreed to for requesting the attends
ante of Lord Vistount Melville on the CocornWei elf
Es peeditere, &c. •
GHAPLKINS OF PRISONS.
On the third reading of this Hill, '
Mr. CUR WEN remarked, that his object lair,.,
only been to prevent the Isaiah espatirlitriri of the
money of the counties. He did not desire improper.
ly to abridge the power of the Magistrates.
The Bill was MCI a third time and passed. '•
The Office Indemnity Bill was read a second Maio,
and *eot thvonih a Committee.
Lord FOLKESTONE presented i Petition for
Annual Parliaments, &c. from a pact of Glasgow.—
Ordered to lie on the table, and be piiiiied.
The Scotch Aqua-vita Licence pill weut ttrouigti
a Committee.—lteport on Friday. •
Accounts were received of persons tried and cone
view!.

PUNISHMENTS.
Sir S. ROMICLY role to move for leave to brlpg
in a Bill to remove from the Acts of the 10th end 1,41 b
of William 111., each parts as took away the beacfit
of Clergy from , persons iudiited and triad tee
stealing .in dwelling-houses, &e. It etas eat nem.
sary for him to eqter at any length on this subje;t::-...
The opipion of the !louse of Commons, he th his
`e
had .been pretty fully.xpressed. This Bill .''
a,
net
passed' the 'Howse twice in last Parliamelt, and toe l.-
in.itnpresea. On the lest occasion the Bill paspd
• eithost.eny Apposition whatever ; hg might tkevicere
spy, unviiiriously ; yet the Bit( • Iv; in tails lystfoce
rejected, by At, other jrouse. Orr !het 1'1).1;4 it
Jsiutipßt.i?i" ptript fr hire' to soy. ranch ; yet be
coal .noi. refiaiiikoas laying sometMug on the ye.
sent stale of the .admarlipation of Justice in the
country.. This might best appear from the returns or
the number
,q crioninith n:itirehenried, kried; con.
victed, and. ex.eauted. TOO . reiuriii froy4;los to
1816 inclaisivY, makiiig 10301, showed flut ender
these Acts .Q 53 vrtisits has been inelic.terl ;.itt-these
ouly 11,3 had biers sapizally coevicted„ but not tine
!lad been esecutvi. Of simple larceny, 365 had been
found guilty, Chia was a strange circumstance:ln
the. administratlon, of tbe Laws, a. hen such siumbera
of persons were charged with celilial oireobes. :A.
high authority,. 3,1 r. Justice , Illadtstoire, had made
particular remarks on the (Accts. of the praCtice of
Juries retuining.verdicts founded on the value of ihe
sum.at the time of, passing the law, compared with
its, present ',aloe., There was another Bill of !tic
(Sir. S. Romilly's) to which he might allude—he
meant that as to capital offence for stealing in houses,
&c.. to the amount of 40s. In 10 years, up to 1816.
1097 persons.had been tried on. the Act ; of these 293
had been capitally convicted. but sot one of then
had been executed.—[Hear, hear!]—ln 18l6f 1.31
were tried, of whom 49 were convicted, and only
one executed. Altogether, of 1,200 persons indict.
ell, one only had in that time suffered by the law.
Of 342 persons convicted, not one had beets executed.
lUnder such circumstances, however, crimes actually
multiplied, and the sentence of the law was not car•
vied into force. It was a matter of importaoce for
the House to take into full consideration the state of
the Criminal Law, in other and larger respects thaw
as regarded these particular Acts. The recent pip.
rice had been not to carry the laws into esecuttnn
generally, but only its cases of extraordinary geilt
and enormity. But there was another brooch of the
' law where the practice of the administration oriastice
was different—he alluded to the cases of fraudulent
bankruptcies and forgeries, its whicts • system was
pursued directly the reverse; hot here it might be
seen that, under the operation mod effect of severe
Laws, the crimes intended to be checked had beets
enormously multiplied. He could find only One in•
stance of conviction under the Statute of Geo. IL
when the individual received the [total pardon.—.
Those who were acquainted with the Bankrupt Live
most know well what a number of fraudulent capes
occurred every year, during the last 40 years. Yet
during a .period of 85 years, he found only Nor con-
victions carried into effect. It appeared that pu.
merous creditors, in cases of this sort, though
defrauded, came to a determination to leave the
debtor to impunity, rather than take the alternative
of proceedings which might lead to the shedding
of blood.—[Hear, hear, hear!]—The offences, of
*forgery had also obviously greatly multiplied—per.
' kips, by the lornc.elistencenf so much paper.cer.
tench, not merely of the Bank of England, but, of
other Bodies,: sqd the gibueral augmentation of the
number of, paper .securities. This might have ren-
dered it nearly impossible to wocee4 on the former
system. Pardotit were foepd neceterry ; but he be.
Havel few werejgranted, except ender ticcumstances
e 1 particular tfealificetioo and mitiistion, Ile held