The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1810-06-08
FOR THE ENQUIRER.
u SIR FRANCIS BURDETT.

sSSouhl ot tue imprisonment Ot Sir Francis
burdett, and the steps which led to it. AS
is transaction, which has excited large
share OF interest. and is likely to lead to some
important results, we wish them to have the
whole merits OF the case before them.
he right OF the House Of Commons IN i'm.
prison the people of England, or any of their
own members, for real or pretended libel
upon them, Is certainly an assumed en-
enactment upon the rights of the people,
we regret that the ;" Argument of Sir F.
bnrdett, which would have placed this no.
sition in its proper point of view, has not
yet appeared in the Prints of this country.
although it was published in Co6beffs RI
gisfer of March oath.
Sir w. Blackstone, the soft and miami
minister ofpower, dispatches this question.
Sfaf dash, IN very few words. The tri1,;
seSes OF parliament" says he Z" are very
large and indefnife." In reply to which
Burgh in his "Political Disauisitions. We.
ny justly observes, that Blackstone "seem,
TO forget that the safety of the PEG.
"ple limits all free governments. It is
true that the people of England, not being
accustomed. till lately, to apprehend dan
ger iron any quarter but the throne. have
all along encouraged and supported their
"parliamepts in extending their power. as
the only sure bulwark against regal en-
creichments. But latter ages have taught
. us the necessity of looking out for security
"against parliamentary encroachments
There are some, indeed, of whom better
shings can be said, who err on the very same
side, from an opposite reason. These poll
ticIans wish to invest Parliament with a she
Cies OF Omnipotence, to serve as a check to
the fictitious Onnifotencc of The crozpn.
But they forget in the first place, that the
voice OF the people is now seldom or never
heard in the II. OF c.; that there is generally a
majority, at the service. of ministers, and
ready at their bidding to doom any obnoxi
Gus man to the prison or the Tower. They
forget, in the next place.. that if the
aouse OF Commons acre a pure repre-
sentation of the people if the knights of
the shlres were as numerous as they ought
to be /; II the old rotten boroughs were am
Putated IT neither placement nor pension.
ers were admitted to a seat and If Parlia.
ments were confined to two or three years
only, instead OF seven that even in this
case, these parliamentary privileges ought
not to be mnipotent--because 1st they
would be unnecessary to the protested object,
and In the I'd place, they would be DANCE
rous, as the II. of G. would still be liable to
sudden sallies of passion, or to violent en-
croachments upon the rights of the people.
That Parliament hare certain tripilePes,
IS not to be questioned-bu the mistake
hes, not in giving them any, but in giving
hemtoo Wncn-not In asserting their exis-
Fence, out their unfUerSaHty. In all cases
OF violent interruption to their proceedings or
as they have been styled in England ebstruc
fions, tits the part of Parliament. as well as
OF courts g OF all deliberative bodies, to pre-.
serve order, and to restrain, punish, aye i'm
prison the turbulent. The reason is. because
their proceedings could not otherwise go on;
From similar reason, flows the right which
they possess OF Furnishing a man, who NAL
treats one of their members, for what he has
said In debate-because, the liberty of de-
bate is essential to a fair exercise of their
powers This privilege, even in England, is
not lett to construction or precedent, for it
is IN the bill Of rights, declared in 1858,
That the freedom of speech and debate or
proceedings in parliament ought not to be
impeached or questioned, in any court or
e'place out of parliament" The same
power, is given, in similar terms, by the con
sttuton of the U: S. 1t was recently exer.
c;sed by the senate of N. York, in the case
of the Englishman, who had challenged De
Witt Clinton.
But II Parliament should extend their pri
vileges beyond these limits, then it becomes
not right, but encroachment, not protection
TO themselves. but 0ffressio,t upon others. |
when they imprison one Of the people for a |
pretended libel upon themselves, they break
down that liberty, which belongs to the peo-
PiC, vi discussing ana CtItlciSiDg all their |
measures. They trample on this essential pri
Pllege OF their constituents. Such was the case |
otGale Jones.-And when they proceed to
1mprison one OF their own members, for hav-
ing addressed his constituents, an attack is |
made upon the responsibility of the repre-
sentative, and one Of the other rights of the,I
constituent; the right of hearing his agent
explain 10 him the measures, which he mad
pursued in his service. Such is the case of
Sir +. Burdett But neither he nor G.. Jones
has been charged with any obstruction to
their proceedings----nor any interposition
with the individual liberty of debate, They
were charged with publishing a libel, bnt
their punishment should have been sought
before other trlbunals.--In the case of Bur.
dett, the offence has been heightened by the
breaking jorcf6ty fnfo his house an act !
on which even the Attorney General, Mr.. !
Nickary Gibbs, does not seem copclusiyelv tn !
have made up his mind
such, we hold, to be the true doctrine on
this subject Tile conSequeuces of these
proceedings may perhaps be important. |
u ne spirit of the ciuzens of London is rous |
ed, and il the fame should only spread into
the other parts of the kingdom, it may lead
eventually to a Reform of the II. ofC. with
out which, we hold, that the liberties of the
people will be extinguished, and the empire
OF britain will toppIe headlong to its ruin.
LeNDoT, April 10
before .yP nrocse1 IN enter into Jo,.;t. Il