with the hon. Member should he (Mr. | appear on all printed papers whatever. Ayrton) be a Member of the new House, and put him in possession of the views of the Government on the subject. MR. EDWIN JAMES said, he thought that the country was much indebted to the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) for having devoted his attention to the matter; and, as Her Majesty's Government had met him in so fair a spirit, he (Mr. James) would take the liberty of suggesting to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Home Department that, at the most, all that was necessary to be preserved of the existing enactments having reference to newspapers was 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 76. That statute prescribed registration, and that the printer's name should appear on the publication. Now, as the object of legislation on this subject at the present day ought not to be to clog newspapers with restrictions, he thought that the provision requiring the printer's name to be attached to the publication would be sufficient. Since the establishment of the cheap press attacks on private character had not been known, the conductors of the newspaper press discharging their duties, as journalists of public matters, without invading the sanctities of private life. He would suggest to the Secretary of State for the Home Department that requiring the printer's name to appear on every publication would be all that was really necessary; and that, by abolishing everything else, we should get rid of the machinery which clogged the liberty of the press without producing any practical utility. MR. MILNER GIBSON remarked that there was nothing novel in the proposition before the House; for, in 1855, the right hon. Member for the University of Oxford proposed a Bill to abolish both the security and the registration required of newspapers. It was considered maturely by the Government in 1855, and they were prepared to legislate pretty much in the manner now proposed by the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State would, therefore, find in his department, ready to his hand, all the information that might be required for a consideration of the question. He (Mr. Milner Gibson) submitted that the principle which should be acted upon was this. that no rule should be applied to newspapers that was not applied to all other publications. If it were considered necessary that the printer's name should appear on newspapers, let it also They ought not to have a distinct legislation for newspapers, for here had been the stumbling-block, and no court of law had yet been able to decide clearly what is a newspaper. MR. AYRTON said, that after the suggestion made by the Secretary for the Home Department he should not ask the House to proceed further with the Bill this Session. THE SOLICITOR GENERAL observed that all parties were agreed that the statutes which required security to be given ought to be repealed, and that those which required the printer's name to be attached should be retained. The only point for consideration was, whether the law which required newspapers to be registered at Somerset House ought to be repealed or not. He admitted that there were no means of enforcing that law; but, on the other hand, it was possible to provide some better means of registration. He thought the better course for him to take would be to move that the right hon. Gentleman should leave the Chair, which would terminate the Bill for the present Session. House resumed. [No Report]. ROYAL WESTERN YACHT CLUB OF IRELAND. PAPERS MOVED FOR. MR. COGAN said he wished to call the attention of the House to a letter from the Lords of the Admiralty to the Royal Western Yacht Club of Ireland, dated the 26th day of June, 1858, withdrawing the privilege of wearing the white ensign from that club, although granted them by Royal Warrant, dated the 6th day of February, 1832, and confirmed by letters of the Admiralty of the 30th day of July, 1849, and the 29th day of April, 1853, and ratified by Vote of the House of Commons, of the 29th day of July, 1853, and to move for ་་ Copies of all Correspondence relating to the Warrant granted to the Royal Western Yacht Club of Ireland, especially those in the years 1832, 1842, 1849, 1853, and 1858, and particularly the Admiralty Warrant to the Royal Western Yacht Club of Ireland, of the 6th day of Febru ary, 1832, and Letters of the 31st day of July, 1849, the 29th day of April, and the 2nd day of May, 1853; also Letter addressed by the late Maurice O'Connell, Esq., M.P., to the Lords of the Admiralty, and Sir James Graham's reply, dated the 23rd day of May, 1853. Of any Letters St. George's, the Holyhead, or any other Yacht or Minutes of any applications made by the Royal Club, for permission to wear the White Ensign, with the Answers thereto. Of any Memorials or Letters from the Royal Yacht Squadron to the the club being borne out. If the Admiralty Lords of the Admiralty relative to their claim for reconsidered the matter he hoped that the the exclusive use of the White Ensign, with the Answers thereto, since the granting of the War-flag would be given back as the two counrant to that Club. Of Memorial presented by the tries should be treated alike. There should Royal Western Yacht Club of Ireland through His be equality of Royal favour as well as in Excellency the Lord Lieutenant to the Lords of other matters. the Admiralty, with the Reply thereto. And of General Warrants granted to all Royal Yacht Clubs, with the dates on which separate Warrants were issued to the Yacht Owners of the several Clubs, authorizing them to carry the respective Club Ensigns." This privilege involved the very existence of the Royal Western Yacht Club of Ireland. That club consisted of nearly 400 members, and possessed about 130 yachts. In 1832 it was authorized by Royal Warrant to wear the white ensign, but by a letter from the Admiralty, dated the 26th of June, 1858, that privilege was withdrawn, on the ground that the white ensign was restricted to the Royal Yacht Squadron. He must deny, however, on the authority of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carlisle, that the Royal Yacht Squadron ever had the exclusive right of using the white ensign, and what he wanted to know was, why the Admiralty had revoked the Warrant of 1832. He thought that after all that had taken place it was a harsh proceeding to withdraw the white ensign from the Royal Western Yacht Club of Ireland. It might appear ridiculous to make so much fuss about the matter, but it should be borne in mind that this was a point of honour with yatchsmen. He trusted that the Admiralty would, on reconsideration, revoke the decision at which they had arrived. He concluded by making the Motion of which he had given notice. LORD BURGHLEY said, he also trusted that the decision would be reconsidered. The club consisted of 200 gentlemen, and they felt it was a harsh proceeding on the part of the Admiralty to withdraw the privilege of using the white flag from their squadron. MR. LYGON said, that the Admiralty had no objection to the production of the correspondence moved for, and though he could hardly say that they were prepared to reverse the decision arrived at, they would be anxious to meet the views of the hon. Gentleman as far as they could consistently with their duty. COLONEL FRENCH said, that no reason had been assigned for revoking the permission granted to the Royal Western Yacht Club of Ireland, and he trusted that the white ensign would be restored to them. LORD LOVAINE explained that all English clubs were not entitled to the use of the white flag. Motion agreed to. Copies ordered. FISCAL AFFAIRS (IRELAND.) SIR DENHAM NORREYS, who had given notice of a Motion for a "Select Committee to consider to what extent the principle of representation of the ratepayers' could be safely adopted in the management of the fiscal affairs of counties in Ireland; and also whether poor law unions' might not beneficially be substituted for 'baronies' as fiscal districts," said that the county accounts of Ireland extended to the expenditure of £1,045,000 a year, and the whole was expended under the superintendence of a body in each county of about twenty-three gentlemen, who were selected by the sheriff. Nothing could be more absurd than the present system of expending the public money in Ireland; and, should he be returned to the new Parliament, this would be one of his first Motions. He would withdraw the Motion of which he had given notice. House adjourned at a quarter after Seven o'clock. 2a Affidavits by Commission, &c.; Indemnity; St. James' Baldersby Marriages Validity. Royal Assent.-East India Loan; Oaths Act Amenment; Patents for Inventions (Munitions of War); Common Rights, &c., (War Department). PRIVATE BILLS. SIR JAMES GRAHAM said, that when at the Admiralty in 1832 he advised that the white flag should be extended to the Royal Western Yacht Club of Ireland, and he was sorry that the decision then come to had been revoked without any allegation of improper conduct on the part of" That the Promoters of every Private Bill which RESUMPTION IN NEXT PARLIAMENT. On the Motion of Lord REDESDALE it was Resolved noble Earl opposite that it was desirable, before Parliament was prorogued, that some statement should be made as to the position of our foreign relations. has been introduced into this House in the present Session of Parliament, and which shall House of Commons, or which shall be pending in this House, shall have Leave to introduce the same in the next Session of Parliament, provided that Notice of their Intention to do so be lodged in the Private Bill Office not later than Three o'Clock on the Day prior to the Close of the present Session; and that all Fees due thereon, up to that Period, be paid. "That an Alphabetical List of all such Bills, with a Statement of the stages at which they shall have arrived, shall be prepared in the Private Bill Office, and printed. "That such Bills must be deposited in the Parliament Office not later than Three clear Days after the next Meeting of Parliament, with a Declaration, signed by the Agent, annexed thereto, stating that the Bill is the same in every respect as the Bill at the last Stage of the Proceedings thereon in this House in the present Session. have been read a Third Time and sent to the "That the Proceedings on such Bills shall be pro in this Session. THE EARL OF MALMESBURY: My Lords, unless there should be some unforeseen objection to my doing so, I shall be ready, before Parliament is prorogued, to make a statement to this House which I hope will satisfy your Lordships that Her Majesty's Government have done all they possibly can to preserve the peace of Europe. INDICTABLE OFFENCES (METROPOLI- THIRD READING. GRAND JURIES. Order of the Day for the Third Reading read. Moved-That the Bill be now read 3a. LORD LYNDHURST: My Lords, I object to this measure, both in principle and detail, and I wish to state to your Lordships the reasons and grounds of my objection. In the first place, I would suggest to your Lordships that when any measure is brought forward changing the fundamental laws of the country, and particularly the important laws which relate to trial by jury, you ought not to consider only the present state of things, but to look forward to the future-to take into account complications which may hereafter arise, and to proceed with the greatest cir"That the Standing Orders by which the Pro- cumspection and caution. At present we ceedings on Bills are regulated shall not apply are not at all aware what arbitrary governto any Private Bill which shall have originated ment means; we now pursue the directly in this House or been brought up from the opposite system. Prosecutions for political House of Commons in the present Session, in regard to any of the Stages through which the offences are never heard of among us; the same shall have passed. administration of justice is mild in the ex"That all Petitions presented this Session re-treme; and we have no grounds of comlating to any Private Bill shall, if necessary, be referred to the Committee on the Bill in the "That if any such Bill shall have been amended in this House in the present Session the same Amendments shall be inserted by the Commit tee on the Bill. next Session. "That no Fetitioners shall be heard before the Committee on any Bill unless their Petition shall have been presented within the Time limited in the present Session, unless that Time shall not have expired before it closes, in which Case, in order to be heard, their Petition must be presented not later than the Second Day on which the House shall sit after the Bill has been read a Second Time in the next Session." THE STATE OF EUROPE. THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE said, that looking to the accounts which had for some time past been published in this country through the ordinary channels of information respecting the threatening aspect of affairs abroad, he would suggest to the plaint whatever on any of the points I have referred to; we may be perfectly satisfied with our present position. But, unfortunately, I have lived in times of a very different character. I have seen the time when the Government was carried on, in comparison with the present state of things, upon arbitrary and even tyrannical principles-when political prosecutions were of constant occurrence, and were conducted with extreme harshness, and when punishments of great severity were inflicted for political offences. I have been myself, to a certain extent, not merely a witness of, but an actor in, those times. I will not enter into the circumstances which have occasioned the change that has since occurred. Perhaps the growing prosperity of the country and the contentment which the truth of such accusation must afterit has produced may have contributed to wards be confirmed by the unanimous sufbring about that result. But, my Lords, frage of twelve of his equals superior to we must not so far delude ourselves as to all suspicion." Blackstone adds, that this suppose that such a state of things can law ought to remain "sacred and invionever again arise. Violent political feel- late.” But how sacred and inviolate? ings may again be excited, and who can Not only from those attacks which none venture to say that a similar state of things have ventured to make, but from all meamay not again occur? At all events, let sures calculated to sap and undermine it, us not, acting under such a delusion, take and to introduce arbitrary rules of trial by any steps towards destroying the barriers justices of the peace. He goes on to state and fences the constitution has given that, however convenient a change might against the exercise of arbitrary power. appear-as doubtless all arbitrary powers, That would be the extreme of folly. well executed, are the most convenient Now, what is the language of the con--yet it should be resisted, as the little stitution, and what is the system under inconveniences in the forms of justice are which we have lived? The constitution the price a free nation must pay for provides that no man shall be put on his its liberties in more substantial matters. trial for any grave offence except on the Such is the language of that great presentment of a grand jury, or found Judge in stating. not his own opinion guilty except on the subsequent verdict of alone, but that of all the great authorithe petty jury. The decision of the grand ties which had preceded him. Now, let jury must be that of twenty-four persons, me recall to your Lordships' recollection declaring on their oath that they believe that there are exceptions to this rule, the party charged is guilty of the offence and when you come to consider those exof which he is accused. That has hitherto ceptions, you will find that they confirm been the law of the country, and it is the the rule, and confirm it in the most marklaw at this moment. It has stood the tested and decided manner. One of those exof the very worst times. In the most arbi- ceptions is the power which the Attorney trary periods of our history that law has General has to dispense with a grand jury never been infringed or broken in upon. in a case of criminal information ex officio. Attempts have been made at different The Attorney General is a high officer. times to invade it by intimidation and He is, or is supposed to be, a man of corruption; but the law itself has stood great learning. He fills a most responas a barrier, firm as a rock, amidst all the sible situation. His conduct is viewed, storms of the very worst epochs, and has both by the public and by Parliament, in come down to us unchanged. And I must this exercise of the prerogative, with the regret, my Lords, as a Member of the greatest jealousy, and he exercises it, when Conservative party, that the first attempt he uses it at all, with the greatest caution. to change this law is made under the Con- I recollect, as an illustration of this, that servative Government; above all, I regret many years ago, when I was a Member that a measure of this kind is brought for- of the House of Commons, a very distinward on the Motion of my noble and learn-guished individual, who then held the office ed Friend on the woolsack, a Conservative of Attorney General for Ireland, a gentleLord Chancellor, for whom I entertain such distinguished respect and esteem. I have stated whst is the law, and has continued to be the law throughout the whole period of our constitutional history. But let me remind your Lordships of the opinion of that great authority, Blackstone, on this subject;—and it is not only his own opinion, but that of all the writers on constitutional law that preceded him. He says, "the founders of the English law have, with excellent forecast, contrived that no man should be called on to answer to the King for any capital crime, unless upon the preparatory accusation of twelve or more of his fellow-subjects of the grand jury, and man of great talents and of extraordinary eloquence, was supposed to have transgressed in this respect by having filed a greater number of criminal informations ex officio than was usual for a person in his situation. My Lords, this gave occasion to a very long and animated discussion in that House; and though the result was that the House was of opinion that he had not transgressed the usual rule of his duty, yet what was said in that controversy by parties on both sides of the House showed the jealousy that they entertained of the exercise of this extraordinary power. There is another exception to which I will refer, and which is the only 66 other exception-namely, that the Court of the first step taken by an arbitrary GoQueen's Bench, and the Court of Queen's vernment? To appoint men who shall be Bench alone, has the power of granting subservient to their will, flexible and supcriminal informations upon an application ple, ready on all occasions to do the will made to it for that purpose by private in- of their superiors. I beg your Lordships dividuals. But, my Lords, that power, as to consider what the consequences will be, my noble and learned Friend the Chief under such circumstances, if this Bill of Justice well knows, applies only to excep- my noble and learned Friend should pass tional cases supported by the clearest evi- into a law. I confess that I was surprised dence. [Lord CAMPBELL: Cases of misde- at the argument, or rather the statement, meanour only.] And when the application of a noble Earl (the Earl of Shaftesbury) of the party applying for such an informa- on the second reading of this Bill, which tion is refused, what is the language of the was the only thing that he had to urge in Court? We dismiss you to the constitu- favour of the Bill. And what was that artional tribunal of a grand jury." These gument, or, rather that fact? That he are the only two cases of exception to the had been two days in the City of London general rule. What, then, is the object of in a room without a seat in order to prefer my noble and learned Friend in the pre- a Bill which afterwards was passed after a sent Bill? Mark, my Lords. The Attor- very short inquiry. I confess I was surney General in the exercise of his high prised, because I recollect that that noble functions and the Court of Queen's Bench Earl owes his title, his dignity, and his have the power of dispensing in certain station in this House and in this country cases with the grand jury. And what are to the verdict of a Middlesex grand jury. you doing by this Bill? You are giving We all know very well-everybody must that power to every police magistrate recollect the part which Lord Shafteswithin the metropolitan district; and not bury took in the Exclusion Bill. After the only the power which is given to the high last Parliament of the reign of Charles II. officers that I have mentioned, but a far was dissolved, the Court determined to ingreater power, for, as my noble and learn- flict vengeance on the noble Lord for the ed Friend the Chief Justice has just stated, part he had taken. A Bill was exhibited that power of the Court of Queen's Bench against him for high treason. That charge and of the Attorney General is confined was supported by the same infamous witto misdemeanours, whereas you are giving nesses to whose testimony Lord Stafford by this Bill power to dispense with grand fell a victim. The jury, fortunately for juries, not only in cases of misdemeanour, the noble Lord, threw out the Bill. If but also in every case of felony. My Lords, that Bill had not been thrown out, the these gentlemen to whom you are giving noble Lord would have suffered the same this power are paid officers of the Govern-fate as the unfortunate nobleman to whom ment; they have been appointed by the I have referred. But no doubt I shall be Government, they are removable at the reminded that there are exceptions in this pleasure of the Government. Are you Bill-that charges of high treason are exwilling, then, to make this extraordinary cepted. There are these and other excep.. change in our laws? Is there any occa- tions, but they do not provide for onesion, any case of necessity, to justify such twentieth part of the cases which may be a change? I think I can show your Lord-made use of by an arbitrary Government ships that no such necessity exists. But for inflicting vengeance upon its political let me not be mistaken. My noble and learned Friend on the woolsack paid a just eulogium to the character and abilities of the gentlemen who now hold the office of metropolitan police magistrates. I entirely concur with my noble and learned Friend in acknowledging their integrity, their legal capacity, and their independence; but, my Lords, we are not legislating alone for the present moment, we are not to confine our view to the present hour. We are legislating for the future. Suppose the just possible case of arbitrary Government being established in this country-what is opponents. Cases under the Riot Act, cases of libel, cases of imputation on a Minister, charges against his character and integrity, and a variety of other cases that will occur to the mind of my noble and learned Friend, are not excepted in the clauses to which I have referred; and I say that enough there remains to give ample scope to an arbitrary Government to inflict vengeance upon its political opponents. These are some of the grounds why I object to this Bill. It is harmless at the present moment; but will it always be harmless? We must look to the future. |