New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-08-10

priv;ls &c and contempt. Tor which they pro-
ceeded 10 commit the Lord Mayor md Alderman
Oliver to the Tower. OF Al. erman Wilkes they
fought Shy, for he Claim ea 70 be a member from
M,dclesex, az q the attempt to br,og him before
tie House for censure would have revived tae
Ubcle controversy az t. the Mi3dlssaX election.
as he ceciin'd 10 obey heir orser TO attend
the House unless called upon TO ATTEND as
member il bis plsce.
The full rigi end liberty Of publish ne reports
Of tie dOings AID debates % both Houses of
Parliament has since been fuly viniicated
snd has become 6s much one of tne 'nsti-
tut'Ons Of Crest Britain as the very Parliament
iuelf The House If Commons has also relln-
aui.ted its pTeteusiaus, go far az least a. any
applicstion of them TO practice is CONCERNED to
erase JUDICIAL records aud t. Interfere 70 stop
the regular course Of Judicial proceedings-a
great gain, no doubt. to the Cause of popular
rigbts-a great triumph Of la aud justice oSer
brute force-but one which hos been achieved
without sry assistance fro the English courts
Of law which might natural have been expected
TO step forward in tni. emergency FIR the relief
Of tee oppressed and 70 the rebuke OF usurPi-
! tioD, instead Of pIsyinr as they did the same
| part Of 1Unkes to despotism when they had
formerly done in the ease Of the -hip-money.
10 have applied to the Court Of Kings Bench
to release the imprisoned MAYOR WOULD have
been ridiculous Lord M7usfeld was st once
CbiefJustice Of that Court aud chief legal adj
' ser of The Ministry, himself t,king leading
part 10 those assaults upon the right, of Jurors,
which we're az that time so loud subject of
compia m, and which IL became necessary soon
after to restrain by act of Parliament. the
opinions Of the other Ju iges Of the Kings Bench
were generally guided by Mansfield so it was in
vain to expect any relief from that quarter.
writ OF hsbeas corpus was therefore sued out of
the Court # Common Pleas, before whom Ser
eeast els presented the case Of tue imp -isonei
NsyOr II a very strong light "The Lofd Mayor,
be argued, "wGs in fu possession G. jurisdiction
- in RE csse. He was obliged 70 recide upoa
" the question b fore him; shall his oOinion be
" adjudged contempt Is this the Law of the
"l4nd that when different courts having jGris-
sd elton Of the stme nature differ in their de-
4" cisiops, they are guilty of contempt Que
o. against another, and may be punished for such
" conteuptsl 1t is no contempt in me, pri-
" vate man, to have an opinion different from
d" the greatest authority in tits Kingdom; 1t was
q" the Lord Mayors opinion in the case before
"'hin,: he was bound by his oath 90 &C. pursuant
&" to that opinion; it was his bO1nden duty to
q" act accor1ingly; be would have been perured
." if, out OF respect for any persons, he had not
6b,ycd The call Of his conscience. 1t was no
" crime for him to entertain tue opinion; enter
teining It, he was bound to declare it, and it
" was bis duty TO act IN consequence OF it,
"There is no hing 10 be pretended in favor OF
8" the proceeding Of the uouso of Commons but
heir assumed trapscendental power Now 1t
swoald totally destroy ali the benefit and the
very eLd Of the Haboas Corpus if the trans
" cendtncy Of any power whatever could blind
the eyes OF d court of justice and prevent their
" inquiry into its acts. Such q decision by
Judges sworn to administer faithfully the laws
" would be fatal to everything that is worth
"PTtserying in our boosted constitution aud
:. would leave tie unhappy subjects OF this
country in a state much worse than a state of
" savage nature"
That the House Of Commons hal been iilty
of a gross outrage, aud that the necessity for a
remedy was strong and pressing il was impossi-
be to deny. But the Court was afraid JUICES
have always been too much like cur dogs: bold
aud impudent enough with a master b. to back
item; but seldom daring with nothing tut them
selves az justice to depend upon ('nd too often
it is to be feared not even inclined) 70 resist the
violence Of thieves and robbers. It was so in
this case: and nstesd Of discharglng the Lord
Mayor fro N an imprisonment which they did not
venture 70 deny WIS high-hanocd and Illegal, the
court exeIted all its ingenuity 10 get up plau-
sible pretcnss for declining to interfere.
Now It is exceedingly natural that The impris-
onment Of Passmore Williamson for presdming
t. have an opinion different from that of Judge
Kane as to the abolition Of Slavery in the State
Of Peunsy lyabia, and for having dared 70 express
that opinion TO party interested, should have
driven tie angry Judge to a gross violation of
law, similar to that Of which the British House
Of Commons was guilty ID thrir attemp pit to sup !
press all reports Of their debates, or any pQbca-
tioa Of criticisms or their proceedings; bat is
very amentsb.e, though at the Same tine thing |
that too often occuIs, that the Judicial cow
arcice exhibited on that occasion by the En- /
glisL Court Of Common Pleas, their trucking 70 !
usurped authority, and their betrayal OF the |
rights int1usted 10 their guardianship, sholld |
eighty four years after be made precedent of |
BY ChiefJustice Lewis to justify in PeInsyl. |
yania similar derectiOn Of duty, aud failure Of /
justice.