Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

er.

His objection was not to the obser- tions in aggravation, which he now convation itself, but the time and place in whichceived that he had a right to make. He it appeared. It was not the commentary should therefore now state, that gross and and the criticism itself which he found fault enormous as he conceived the libel to be with; they might be very good, but non which he had submitted to the consideration erat hic locus. The petition of a person of the house, it was in his opinion highly under punishment for libelling the house aggravated by the style of defiance which was not the place in which a commentary appeared throughout this petition, and which on the conduct of the speaker ought to be was highly indecent and insulting to the found. It was the complexion and charac-house. He did not exactly know what ter of the performance altogether, that made it impossible to agree to the motion, and he therefore intended to move an amendment. Sir William Burroughs rose to order. He thought it irregular for a member to make a second speech with a view of moving an amendment.

The Speaker gave his opinion, that by the rules of the house the right hon. gent. could not make a second speech to move an amend

ment.

ness.

amendment to move for, but he thought that the punishment ought now to be increased.

Mr. Canning thought the hon. member might have spared all those topics that related to the libel itself, and have confined himself to the petition which was before the house. If the hon. member who had himself brought forward this business, was content on the night he brought it forward with the small measure of punishment that was Mr. Grey felt extremely sorry to be obli-mentioned, or rather with the no punishged again to trouble the house on this busi- ment, it was not competent to him now to He did not know what was the pre-go back and argue that a severe punishment cise nature of the amendment intended to should be inflicted for that offence. The be moved by his rt. hon. friend (Mr. Wind- hon. gent. took great credit to himself for ham) but he thought it was evident that the being so ready to comply with the sugges house was now placed in a situation that tion of a light punishment; he should also made it impossible to avoid passing some have given equal credit to the conduct of severer punishment than was at first thought his right hon. friend (Mr. Pitt) on that ocof. If the nature of the composition which casion. Whatever feelings he might have was presented as a petition was considered, had in bringing the business forward, was it would appear to have been written alto- best known to himself; but it was most gether in a strain of defiance and accusa- clear that nothing but a sense of duty to the tion. This was the general tone of it, and house could have governed the conduct of nothing proved it more strongly than the his hon. friend on that occasion. Whatever defence of the right hon. gent. (Mr. Pitt). might be the motives of the apparent lenity Could the house countenance the petition of the very persons who complained of the of a person who placed himself in the situ- libel, it was evident that the motive of his ation of accuser of one of the parties? Was right hon. friend (Mr. Pitt) in suggesting a it not evident that the general object of the more serious punishment was, that he conpetition was to attack those who brought ceived it due to the character and dignity this business before the consideration of the of the house, and that even when he was house? He must confess it gave him very himself in a minority, he felt that the deci uneasy sensations the other night, when he sions of the majority ought to be treated heard an hon. friend of his (Mr. Sheridan) with the highest respect. As to the part of give the term of "milk and water," to what the petition which contained complimentary he conceived the grossest libel against the expressions towards the speaker, although character of the house that ever was submit- strictly speaking the petitioner was not to be ted to their consideration. It was by no supposed to know that it had been dwelt means to be considered as an animated dis-on as an aggravation of his offence that he cussion of public affairs, but a mere compo- had spoken so disrespectfully of a decision sition of unqualified abuse against the ma- which was determined by the casting vote jority of the house. It was an attack upon of the speaker, yet he did not suppose that their character as judges sitting in a court of any member could so adhere to strict forjustice; it called them intemperate, partial mality, as to censure the petitioner for mereand presumptuous. He, on the formerly answering a charge that had been made night, had left the libel to the consideration against him. Although it might, at first of the house, without making any observa-sight, appear somewhat ludicrous to hear

the petitioner complimenting the private | could not give a silent vote; nor was he to character of the speaker, yet if that had been left out, and the compliment was only to his situation as presiding over this house, the omission might be complained of with more reason, and would appear to convey something of a reflection on his private character. He wished, however, now, that the editors of papers in general, not only those who conducted daily, but those who published weekly papers, should take notice, and receive warning that a great change had taken place in the system of forbearance that had hitherto been adhered to. Justice, impartial justice, must be done on both sides. A new æra had now begun, and if any general clamour should be raised with respect to the abridgment of the liberty of the press, it must be recollected by the house and the country, on which side of the house these prosecutions first commenced, and who it was who began them. As the petitioner had defended, with mistaken zeal, the man who had been the victim of the anger of that house, was it unfair for him, in extenuation, to shew the causes which had produced that zeal which drew upon him the displeasure of that house? It was certainly fair in him to point out the reason why he entertained so great a partiality for lord Melville; to state the services which that noble lord, and those with whom he acted, had rendered to the country; and it was not extraordinary, or unnatural, that any member of the community, who felt strongly that the salvation of the country, and the protection that he enjoyed in common with all his fellow subjects, was owing to the salutary laws which were then enacted, to be strongly impressed with gratitude for those services, and to undertake zealously, although imprudently, and perhaps presumptuously, to defend a person whom the house had condemned. As to the merits of lord Melville in those times to which the petition alludes, no resolution of the house of commons could erase that page from the history of the country, or from the recollection of the supporters of the constitution. He again repeated, that a great change had now taken place, and that the house and the country must recollect on which side of the house it had begun.

be deterred from giving his opinion by the indecent threat that had been thrown out by the hon. gent. who had spoken last. That gentleman had stated pretty strongly, that it was in the contemplation of his friends to curtail and abridge the liberty of the press, and wished to have it supposed that he and his friends were to be responsible for the determination on the other side of the house to abridge the real liberty of the press. He saw nothing inconsistent in the conduct of his hon. friend, (Mr. Grey) on a former night with his conduct to-night. He had on a former night given way to that dispo sition for lenity which he perceived to have been then the prevailing sentiment in the house; but when he now found this disposition towards lenity had been abused, and that the stile of the petition shewed strongly the spirit in which the libel had been written, there was no inconsistency in thinking that this lenity had been misplaced, and that some severer punishment should now take place. He confessed that he himself had used the words stated by the hon. gent. and although he gave his opinion that the paragraph alluded to was a very gross libel, yet he called it milk and water comparatively with others which had not yet been noticed. However, he must confess that some bounds ought to be set to the licentiousness of the press; yet when he considered in whose hands the pruning-knife was to be placed, to lop off its exuberances, he was much afraid they would destroy the pith and vital sap of the tree. On this ground he had hitherto opposed all those measures for restricting the freedom of the press; he had opposed all the increase of duties on those smaller publications which might at a cheap rate disseminate general and useful informa tion; he had opposed the bill which required a printer's name to be inserted on every hand-bill, but above all, he had opposed that infamous act (if he might be allowed to call any thing infamous that was still in the statute book), which allowed magistrates and courts to transport persons to Botany Bay upon the second conviction for a libel. Upon the present occasion he had himself been applied to by some friends of the petitioner, and waited on him in conse Mr. Sheridan said, that although it was quence. Having read his petition, he enpeculiarly disagreeable to him to mix in any treated him to leave out those passages, and debate, when his partiality even to the ex-struck his pen across them. It appeared, cesss of liberty for the press would interfere however, that after he had seen him, the with the opinion he would otherwise have petitioner took the advice of some other formed, yet, on the present occasion, he persons, and re-inserted those passages. Af

ter having done so, he had, however, the most grave and serious libel. The great decency not to ask him to present his peti-zeal that some gentlemen now shewed to tion. The right hon. gent. (Mr. Pitt) had punish a libel on the majority of the house, considered it as a fair set-off in the petition- appeared difficult for him to account for in er to state the former services of lord Mel-any other way than he had already done, by ville; if that was any argument, why did supposing they were attached to majorities, not his lordship's defenders in the house or minorities, exactly as they themselves make use of it? When the petitioner chose happened to belong to the one description to state that they sat there as a parliament or the other. Having now found a libel on owing to the exertions of lord Melville and a majority to include themselves, they were his friends, was that language which the ready to vote for increasing the punishhouse could endure? If it was owing to sa- ment. lutary laws, surely it was to the legislature, Mr. Whitbread considered that his hon. and not to one or two individuals, that those friend (Mr. Sheridan) had properly stated laws were owing. It was equally objecti- the grounds from which the disposition to onable in a petition to speak of either the lenity on a former night proceeded. There merits or demerits of any of the parties in were two solutions of it. In the first place, parliament. If a person under punishment his hon. friend (Mr. Grey) had complained for a libel on the character of the house of a libel; the house unanimously agreed should have taken another ground, and in-that it was a gross libel; and, under these stead of attributing the safety of the state to lord Melville and his colleagues, had attributed it solety to the firm stand which the opposition in parliament had made to all the fabricated plots and conspiracies which had been invented on the part of government, for the purpose of preserving ministers in power and office, such a statement would have been equally objectionable. A petition ought not to be so framed as to revive those topics of discussion which were not relative to the matter before the house. He felt sorry that the petition had been so worded that he could not give it his support. Upon the ground he had stated, he should find himself obliged to agree in the vote of his hon. friend.

Mr. Dent thought the petition contained no matter that could be adduced in aggravation of the original libel. It appeared to him a great inconsistency in the hon. member, (Mr. Sheridan) to give credit to the legislature for the salutary laws it had enacted, and yet give no credit to the administration who had brought them forward.

Mr. Sheridan, in explanation, said the hon. gent. had completely misunderstood him. He neither meant to give credit to those laws as salutary, nor to the government that introduced those laws.

The Attorney General thought it was a most extraordinary speech which the house had just now heard from the hon. gent. (Mr. Sheridan). His expression on the other night was a remarkable one, and would not easily be forgotten. He had described the libel as a "mere milk and water" production, when compared with many others, and yet this night he found out that it was a

circumstances, it was not surprising that his
hon. friend (Mr. Grey) should, as usual, feel
a greater disposition to lenity than the right
hon. gent. (Mr. Pitt). If the fact, how-
ever, was, that it was one of the minority of
the 8th of April, who both wrote that libel
and drew up the petition, it was not extra-
ordinary that that hon. member should
warmly defend his own productions. The
set-off in this case is curious. The editor,
who is punished for libelling the majority of
the house, tells you, in his vindication, that
he has very frequently libelled the minority.
Was it to be endured, that an editor of a
newspaper should tell the house of com-
mons that he had sat in judgment upon them
and their proceedings, and pronounced his
applause or his censure on the different par-
ties in parliament as he thought fit? This
set-off stated, that lord Melville had been an
old and faithful servant of the crown. It
had, however, been proved, that for more
than 16 years of the time he was in office,
he had been an unfaithful servant; and that
the principal object of him and his colleagues
was to cling to office as long as they could.
As to the party heats which prevailed at
those times, they were in a great measure
gone and obliterated from the page of his-
tory. The right hon. gent. himself (Mr.
Pitt) had, if there was any faith in man, pro-
posed and recommended his hon. friend
(Mr. Fox) as a fit person to hold a high of-
fice in the government of the country; and,
therefore, he could not have supposed that
he deserved those scandalous libels which
had been thrown out against his character.
Without wishing for any severity of punish-
ment to be inflicted on the present occasion,

he should be very glad that the hon. baronet would see this petition in the same light that it appeared to him in, and consent to withdraw it for the purpose of preparing another that would be more decent and seemly. The expressions in the first part of it would be sufficient to obtain the object, and the remainder had much better be omitted. He then appealed to the hon. baronet, whether it would not be better to withdraw his petition?

Sir H. Mildmay answered, that he had heard nothing in the latter part of the discussion which altered in any manner the opinion he had before formed.

Mr. Ryder thought that the topics objected to had been very fairly and naturally introduced into the petition, and if the house was to consent to have the petition withdrawn upon these grounds, he thought it would convey a severe reflection and libel on the conduct of that government to whom the country had been so much indebted. Although he by no means wished to revive party animosities, yet he considered that the petitioner had a right, when the question came in his way, to state, in extenuation, the reasons for which he felt so much zeal in the cause of lord Melville; and, for his part, although he was not at all personally acquainted with his lordship, he should not hesitate to say, that whatever offences he may have committed, he had rendered great and important services to his country.

Sir John Newport wished to give an hon. member (Mr. Canning) an opportunity of explaining what he meant by saying lord Melville had fallen a victim to the anger of that House ?

Mr. Canning did not recollect having used the expression: he thought he had said the displeasure of the house, and that even that phrase he had given with a qualification.

Lord De Blaquiere thought the origina llibel was much aggravated by the stile of the petition. He did not think that the house should take notice of every sentiment that was put in writing by a blockhead. He could not bring himself to think that a man was worth notice, who would not take advice even for his own relief. The hurry of the press was given in excuse for the original paragraph; but, it should be recollected that the circumstance upon which that writer had thought fit to comment, took place before the recess, and it was not right to admit any thing which was untrue as an extenuation. He had received good advice, and had not availed himself of it, but had acted in oppo

sition to it; he thought he should not be allowed to pass with impunity.

Lord Marsham thought equal credit was due to those who first brought this business forward, and those who, when it was brought forward, decided on it according to what was due to the character of the house. He did not think that every printer should be allowed to appoint himself a censor of the proceedings of that house. He, however, did not wish the punishment to proceed any farther, but should be glad that a more seemly and becoming petition was presented to the house, than that which had been read.

Mr. Whitbread then said, he should move that the petition be negatived and returned to the petitioner, in order that another might be immediately presented which would be fitter for the house to receive. The first page of the petition would be fully sufficient.

Mr. For appeared to think the previous question would be the best way of disposing of it.

The Speaker thought that the previous question could not be put upon the motion in its present form.

Mr. Whitbread then said, he should negative the question, intending, however, to vote for the receiving a petition that might be unobjectionable immediately after.

Mr. Wiberforce said he was a friend to the liberty of the press, and particularly as it related to subjects of a political nature, which were more important to be discussed than any other, as far as the interest of the public was concerned; and for that reason he should be disposed to make greater allowance even for excess of liberty in those topics than in others, because they were more likely to lead men to a warmth of expression than any other, and because they ought to be discussed with greater boldness, and boldness of discussion naturally lead to excess, upon some occasions. He allowed also what had been hinted at already, that wherever any one was accused of misconduct, it was but fair that he should call his conduct, previous to that accusation, in aid of his case, as it might operate to soften the rigour of judgment against him; and therefore he should, in a case like the present, be among those who were disposed to be most liberal; for he wished to allow all possible latitude to political discussion. He therefore wished to see no attack made on the liberty of the press, for which reason he could have wished that this had not been

made matter of complaint; but being | judges, and suppose he were to endeavour brought forward, the house must dispose of to set one part of the bench against the it in the best manner it could. And here other, and that, instead of intreating the he, with all his partiality for the liberty of lenity of the whole court, he had endea the press, could not help observing, that the voured to foment a quarrel among the stile and mode of the petition were such as judges; such a person, he apprehended, he should not wish to hear at the bar of that would not be considered as having thereby house. He trusted he should not often see done any thing tending to mitigation of pua person, whose general conduct he might nishment. On the whole of this matter, he approve, making the sort of apology now did really think it such as he had already offered to the house; for although he ad- stated it to be. It was a case in which the mitted that an apology should not be too petitioner ought to make an apology, but humble, yet, when it was made at all, it he confessed he was not for a very humble should have been made to the whole house apology; merely a gentlemanly apology, of commons, for when any attack made but that such apology should be made to upon it became subject to the censure of the whole house of commons, and not to the house, the apology, whenever it was one side of the house, which he could not made, should be made not to one side of help considering to be the case in the prethe house, but to the whole house, and if sent instance. any person had incurred the displeasure of The Solicitor General said, that with the the house and made his apology, when he opinions of the hon. gent. behind him (Mr. solicited its forgiveness, the apology should Wilberfore) he entirely concurred, and not be allotted to that party which usually with those of the noble lord sitting below constituted its majority, or with a view to him likewise, for he concurred in the sentiprocure to the petitioner the favour of those ment, that the apology ought to be offered, whom he might conceive constituted the not to one side of the house, but to the majority of the house, for that was language whole house. He concurred in the obser totally improper for a supplicant. Now, if vation, that whenever a libel was published he recollected the words of the petition cor- on the house of commons, it was not one rectly, there was one among them of an side of it only that ought to be offended, but ambiguous meaning; it was not the word the whole house ought to be so, and most sorrow, but regret; so that it reminded him undoubtedly was so. In such case the digof a story, wherein a person who had been nity of the whole house ought to be vindiguilty of a crime and apprehended for it, cated; and if any petitioner had endeavourbeing called upon to make his apology, said ed to make his escape from the indignation he was sorry, not for the act, but for his of the house by conciliating one part of it being taken. But whatever course was instead of the whole house-if he endeataken, the house would take care of its cha-voured to shelter himself by any such atracter, and that if the present petition was tempt, the judgment of the house would withdrawn, the house did not enter into any only be the more severe against him. compromise with the petitioner as to what he had been accustomed, when he heard an sort of petition he was to be at liberty to argument on any document, to look at the present. He did not think that the dignity document itself, instead of taking the conof the house should be engaged in discussing tents of it from the description of another, what petition would be right, but it was before he drew any conclusion from it; sufficient to say that the present was not so. in other words, he chose to examine the Supposing the house to be of that opinion, premises before he drew any conclusion, he wished it to be understood, that if the pre- because if the premises were not true, the sent petition was not received, it was be- conclusion was not likely to be correct.cause it was not in that stile of expression Now his hon. friend behind him (if he was which ought to be presented to the house allowed to give him that name) had observof commons in behalf of a person who had ed that the apology ought to have extended offended its dignity. The present petition to the whole house in this case; and he had appeared to him to be deficient in the tem- observed there was no sorrow, exprest in per and view of it, for it was apparently the petition; there was only regret stated. preferring one part of its members to others. Hearing that stated from that hon. member, He would suppose that a person came to who was usually accurate in his expressions, receive the sentence of a court of justice, he was induced to look at the petition itself, and that he were to present a petition to the and by it he found that the words were

But

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »