SUMMARY OF POLITICS. PROCEEDINGS AGAINST LORD MELVILLE. -When, in the Register of the 15th instant, p. 928, after giving an account of the proceedings of the 13th, it was observed, that, as Lord Melville is now before 66 a court of justice, we must, for the pre"sent leave him;" when this observation was made, few persons, not closely connected with Mr. Pitt and Lord Melville, could have imagined, that, previous to trial, Lord Melville would have been taken out of the court of justice, by a vote of the House of Commons, rescinding the vote which had just then passed, and which had produced so much satisfaction in every part of the country, and amongst every description of persons, excepting those only who, either directly or indirectly, either actually or in expectancy, share in the plunder of the public. On the 25th instant, however, Mr. Leycester, who had been, as the reader will not have forgotten, the chairman of the Select Committ. e, gave notice, that he should, on the next day (a notice of only 24 hours) make a motion for rescinding the resolution of the 13th; that is to say, the resolution, which was then passed in the fullest House ever known, for ordering the Attorney General to commence a criminal prosecution against Lord Melville, in the court of King's. Bench! Upon this extraordinary and unexpected step, I shall quote the observations of some of the members of the House, beginning with those of MR. BANKES."There were," said he, "here two ques tions for the consideration of the House, "and he had heard nothing like a reason ad"duced in support of either. In the first 66 place, they were required to substitute Impeachment instead of a Criminal pro"secution. The other thing which they were called on by the present motion to "do, was, however, of a more serious na : 66 66 "the Impeachment were this night vowed, "it also might be done away within the "next 24 hours; and that, too, at a time "when most of the members who had. "constituted the House which passed the "resolution had retired into the country on "their private business, little dreaming of any attempt of the kind. That in fact was the case here.The learned gentleman yesterday gave notice of his inten"tion to move, that the House was this night called on to agree, in reversing one "of the most important decisions of the "session, at a period of the year when more than one half of the members had "left town. What would people out of "doors think parliament were about, if, "without any reason alleged, they altered " what they had done by. so deliberate and "serious a vote of that House after a pain"ful discussion of two days The hon. "member then proceeded to inquire "Had nothing new come out before the "Select Committee to warrant the House "in proceeding farther than the resolutions "originally adopted?Had nothing new come out in the defence of the noble lord "himself? Yet had gentlemen who were "of opinion that the original resolutions 66 were necessary and proper, and that far"ther proceedings ought afterwards to be "had, the happiness to find the hon. and "learned gentleman who made the present "motion voting with them, concurring in every endeavour to discover abuses and "peculations, and to punish delinquency.?. "No! Had not he, and all his friends, ture. They were called on to do away a decision of that House past within the "last fortnight and on what sort of notice was this extraordinary call made on them? "On a notice which more properly deserv ed the name of a surprise! 66 In what sort "of House had the resolution to which they "were thus called on to rescind been pass"ed? In the most crowded House which any man now in parliament recollected to "have seen assembled. Yet, on a notice "of 24 hours, was the House called on to "do away the vote of that night. If such a doctrine were once tolerated, there were no limits to be assigned it. There was "no proceeding, however important, which might not be overturned in 24 hours. If complishing that to which he himself had "been disinclined. But when the hop. "member found the hon. and learned mov"er formally maintaining that no ulterior "punishment ought to be thought of, he thought it became his duty to suspect the sincerity of the hon. mover's intentions, "and to believe, that instead of giving facility to, it was meant to impede the investigation which the House had resolved dilatory nature of impeachments, and the "advantage both to the law and to the per sons accused, that a speedy decision should "be come to, that if not otherwise unfit "for a jury, that mode was preferable to stigation of those gentlemen who had all along opposed the different resolutions "which had been come to, and had reproached them with not consulting the "ends of substantial justice. Had the present attempt been made in as full a House as that in which the resolution for a Cri"minal Prosecution was carried, he knew Ipeachment. The prejudice which per"vaded the country, he maintained, could "not have any effect. The great length to "which challenges of jurors was allowed by "the law, would nearly remove any objec"tion of the kind; added to which, a spe"cial application might be made, if it ap-" well it would have shared the fate it mepeared that circumstances rendered it necessary. The jury would not be a com"mon one, but composed of the gentlemen "of the county, equally qualified with "that House to form a judgment on the 66 The objection, however, suppos ing it to be a good one, was equally applicable to the mode now urged by the "hon. and learned gentleman. In the "House of Peers would be found persons by favour and friendship attached to the noble lord, and therefore equally improper to be his judges. On the other hand, there, too, he must expect to find many, who, as he himself had declared, "had at county meetings too made speeches against him, and had thereby prejudged "his cause. In short, there even more "than in a court of law, the House must expect to find his partial friends and his political opponents, both equally disqualified from being his judges. An argument much insisted on by an hon. and "learned gentleman, (the Solicitor Gene ral), was, that a greater number approv"ed of the Impeachment than of the Cri"minal Information. He begged, how"ever, to warn the House against allowing "themselves to be led away by such an ar gument. For, to what did it amount? "He was aware that many gentlemen did "not wish to trust the Attorney General in "this matter, and preferred Impeachment, "that it might remain in their own hands. " And was this but equalizing the ob"now, they would be following the recomBy adopting the Impeachment "mendations and suggestions of those who jection at "rited.. Now it was made at a period when "it could hardly have been in the contem 66 plation of any one that such a thing was "intended. Indeed it was impossible to "believe that such was in agitation even (6 among the friends of the hon. and learned mover himself four days ago; else why "should the Attorney General have thought it necessary to ask instructions how to "conduct the Criminal Prosecution? Even "this he conceived to be a novel and ex"traordinary prcceeding, and one of which "the journals of the House did not furnish a parallel. He was convinced had proper "notice of this motion been given, incon"convenient as it might be for members to "attend, they still would have attended to "resist it. If the motion was carried, it ment altogether."-This speech of Mr. Bankes was, as it merited to be, received by the House with eyery mark of attention and applause. It expressed the sentiments of the people; sentiments firmly settled in their minds, and not to be removed by any thing that can be either said or written by the partizans of Mr. Pitt and Lord Melville. To the speech of Mr. Banks, it will be proper to add an extract from that of Mr. Windham, of Mr. Whitbread, and of Mr. Fox.; for, upon so momentous a question, every one who has the means, should use them to his utmost, to give the public a full view of all the circumstances.— MR. WINDHAM said, that the precedent which the adop THREEFT "tion of the motion before the House would serve to establish, would be a prece"dent; in fact, that would tend to render "the most solemn decisions of the House "unsteady and insecure. If a proceeding "of a nature so novel were really thought necessary by any party in the House, it "would have been but decent and respect"ful towards the House on their part, to "have taken another mode of proceeding. They should at least have given a reason"able notice. Indeed, in his opinion, nothing of the kind ought to have been attempted without a call of the House. In"stead of taking this course, a mode of 66 ponderance of about forty or fifty mem"bers, in opposition to the general sense of "the House. This objection was the more "wonderful, when it was recollected, that "out of a House, consisting of nearly five "hundred members, no fewer than two "hundred and thirty-eight were found to support the criminal prosecution. To "talk, then, of the real sense of the House "not having been declared, was to assert "what was totally contrary to the actual state of the case. How the specific num"ber of forty-three, whose influence had "been so much alluded to, had acted, he "would not now decide. Whether it was "the influence of one part of the cabinet played off against the other, he would not "then stop to ascertain, but at all events "the House had nothing to do with these proceeding had been resorted to, that if successful, would, there was too much "ground to fear, bring scandal on the "House. His character could not, in his apprehension, fail to suffer much in pub-"contests. It was enough to know, that "lic estimation if such a proposition were "adopted. Gentlemen should bear in mind "that it was not Lord Melville alone, but that House, that was on trial upon this "occasion, and the character of both would "be decided by the result. Lord Melville "after the gravest deliberation, resolutions "of the highest consequence were passed against Lord Melville for his misconduct "in one of the highest offices in the state. "If forty-three members did decide this "momentous question, this was no proof of "the imprudence of the vote of the House, or of the inconsistency of the individuals "composing that body; they acted from "the impulse of honourable sentiment, on a great public question, and their decisión "had diffused throughout the country the utmost degree of satisfaction. To reverse "the decision of the House now, was a very indecent and uncalled for proceed ing. Many members were absent, whose opinions could not, at this period of the "session, be again collected. In every "view of the subject, therefore, though originally inclined to prefer the mode of "proceeding by impeachment, he should vote against the motion of the learned 66 gentleman, from a conviction of the dany "gerous consequences of disturbing a so "lemn decision of the House, obtained af "ter the fullest consideration of all the "circumstances connected with this in "teresting question."The speech of MR. Fox is entitled to particular attention. Imperfect as the report of it, doubtless is, it will sufficiently show what were the grounds, upon which he opposed the proposition be fore the House. I beg leave to request the reader's attentive perusal of it. He said, that "the question, in every 66 point of view in which he could consi"der it, as connected with the cause of "the country; as affecting the dignity "and consistency of the proceedings of "that house; as involving in it various "considerations of the greatest moment, it appeared to him to require the utmost "attention. Before he came to what he regarded as the material objections to the proposition which had been offered to the house, he would say a few words as to "the notice which had been given. It was "said, that notice had been given a week ago in effect, though not in form. That possibly might have been the case, and that notice was certainly as good as the "notice of yesterday, which certainly "would not have been given, unless for the purpose of lessening, in some degree, "the monstrous scandal of the proceeding "which was now pressed upon the House. "The Right Hon. Gentleman on the floor "had gone into a very accurate comparison "of dates, and had endeavoured to prove, "that it was impossible that the motion. "could be earlier brought forward. But was "it necessary that he should put it off a "whole week? Why did he not, as soon "as he had perceived his error, which he supposed he had as soon as he awoke in "the morning, take the first opportunity "which offered itself afterwards, to move for a revisal of the proceedings? When he perceived that he placed Lord Melville " in a situation disgraceful to himself, why was not the notice of motion given when "the members were at their posts, and. "when it would not be liable to the suspi"cion which must now attach upon it, not only in the House, but throughout the "entire kingdom? It was not however, upon so paltry an objection as the mere want of a sufficient notice that he principally rested, it was upon great and important constitutional grounds. If the "motion proposed by the hon. and learned gentleman should be adopted, what security, he would ask, was there, that any motion which should be ever carried "against a minister may not be rescinded? "The right hon. gentleman says, was there " any notice of the amendment for a crimi"nal prosecution given? Why no, and "for this reason: no form of proceeding "had at the time been adopted, and it was competent to any gentlemen to suggest "that form which seemed to him best adapted to meet the exigency of the case, and to secure the ends of justice. But what was "the motion of to-night? A right hon. "gentleman gives notice, that he will move "to exclude part of a proceeding which 44 has been sanctioned by the House; he gives notice that he will move, that the part of the charges which applies to Jellicoe's debts should not be proscecuted by the Attorney-General, and the honour stultify themselves now, he would not "consent to give them the advantage of "this kind of double proceeding. They "resisted the impeachment, he supposed, upon the principle that a man, when two measures are proposed to him, and ne"ther of them agrecable, takes the worst "in order to render the whole-proceeding "ridiculous and deserving rejection. As "to the argument that many of those who "had spoken on his side of the House to "night approved still of the impeachment, "why so they did, and so did the learned "gentlemen on the other side of the House, " and so did the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Canning) who sat next him; but that "he supposed was in him only the exercise "of one of his usual practices, and lest he "should miss the opportunity of flying at "the persons whom he could not vote with. "Not but that there were objections even "to the proceeding by impeachment. When "he considered that there were seventy or "eighty members in the House of Peers "who had been exalted to their seats du"ring the administration of which Lord "Melville made a part, perhaps it would "have been adviseable that he should look a little about him, but still he would have "preferred the proceeding by impeachment "to any other. It may be said then, why "will you not take it now, when it is "offered to you; you may have 200 with you, and you may be sure of carrying "it? To this he would say, he would "rather have those 43 with him than the "200. He did not like this uncalled-for "civility. There was something suspicious "in their assistance. Would he think his "tax the best? But the supporters of the "motion think it very hard that we will "not trust them. To this he would say, a criminal prosecution, and the Right "Hon. Gentleman wished to impose the "proceeding by impeachment upon them, which they had rejected, and which was "directly contrary to their decision, in fa vour of another proceeding. A great "deal had been said for the purpose of "proving that the decision of the House was in reality the decision of the minority. Suppose the Right Honourable Gen"tleman should take it in his head to revise this proceeding next week, would he not make use of precisely the same argument? "If the question of to-night be carried, "there would be an end to the criminal prosecution, and by a similar juggle he might get rid of the impeachment, and so let "Lord Melville escape perfectly free. There' was nothing to prevent his doing so next "week if he pleased; he would have the same arguments in favour of it, and perhaps something more in point of numbers. "He had originally preferred the proceed 66 ing by, impeachment, but if he were ask"ed which he liked best now, he would "take the prosecution in preference to impeachment, and for this reason, that the "House had so decided. The appointment "of managers was a consideration of diffi 66 culty and great delicacy. No person "would like to go into the House of Lords "with a conviction that he was sent there "by a majority of that House, which he had reason to suppose was not friendly to the " success of the cause with which he was charged. Many inconveniencies were produced by it, and he believed former managers had felt the ill effects of it. It "would damp the ardour of any man in such a situation, if, when coming back for instructions to that House, he was to "be met at every turn by persons hostile to "the whole proceeding. When he consi"dered the conduct of all those on the other "side, persons who seemed absolutely ena moured of the delinquencies of Lord Mel"ville, who seemed as much attached to his "misconduct as the Prince of Orange was to "his country, and decided to die in the last "ditch of it; when the very motion now proposed, was, for aught he knew, per"haps, part of a system to withdraw Lord "Melville entirely from public justice, he could not, whatever his original opinion "might have been, but give it his marked disapprobation. What the motive for bringing it forward might be, he neither "knew nor cared, whether to screen Lord "Melville, or to triumph over a political ad versary but he would assist in neither. "Should the House join in it, they would "betray the cause they had engaged in, and destroy all the credit which their former proceedings had obtained for them. The "proceeding by criminal prosecution had "been carried in one of the fullest Houses " he ever knew, except two or three, and were they now to rescind, in a House not near so full, a resolution so deliberately "discussed, and so solemnly approved? "Could the House, with any decency, be "called upon to revise its decision? If re"vision were necessary, adjourn the ques"tion, not until Monday, as it was proposed by an hon. friend of his, but for three "weeks, to give time for a call of the "House; and let all members be brought 66 up again to rectify the unfortunate mis"takes that his Majesty's ministers have "made in their votes on this subject. Be"fore he sat down, he would move the "other orders of the day, for the purpose "of getting rid of the motion proposed. "He was one of those who thought, that so far from Lord Melville not being pu"nished enough, that he was of opinion he "had not been punished at all. As to any "violation of privilege, it was quite out of "the question. If the lords did not complain in Lord Halifax's case, it was not very likely that they would complain now." "Peers were as subject to be tried for mis"demeanours by a jury as others. Lord |