to be met ? Were we to have a qualified member to communicate those cases to property tax amongst all our other him in private, and if he found that any public burthens ?-or must the faith with pension had been withdrawn which ought the public creditor be broken, by an to be continued, or that any pension was appropriation of the sinking fund to the continued which ought to have been withexpenses of our establishments? Much drawi he would endeavour to rectify credit had been taken for the reduction the error. of the yeomanry in Ireland. What did Sir F. Flood expressed his high satisthat reduction amount to? Out of a yeo. faction at what had fallen from the noble manry force of 44,000 inen, in time of viscount and the right hon. gentleman, peace 3,000 were reduced. In England, with respect to the loyalty and good disout of 30,000 men, the mighty reduction position of Ireland, and the patience with of 279 men had taken place, while, when which the people of that country had enwe were at peace with all the world, an dured the various hardships and privations addition of near 3,000 had been made to to which they had been subjected. There the yeomanry; he supposed to preserve was not a more sincere friend of Ireland the internal tranquillity of this country than himself; indeed, whoever was not a

Mr. Babington expressed a hope that friend to both countries, could not be a the soldiers receiving pensions might be friend to either. He was as independent a freed from certain inconveniences to man as any in that House, being bound to which he understood they were at present adhere to neither side of it. He never had exposed.

received any thing, and he looked for no. Mr. C. Long declared his readiness to thing from any party. He would, therefore, concur in any suggestions that might be be the last man to agree to any act of that proposed by the hon. member for effecting House which he considered unjust or op. so desirable an object; but he had flat- pressive towards his native country:. But tered himself that his own exertions in re- he was bound to say, that he did not spect to that point, had not been altoge- think the vote of 20,000 men for Ireland ther unavailing.

extravegant. They were dispersed over Mr. Forbes complained that a list of the the country, and their weight was not officers who received pensions for wounds felt. The whole people of Ireland, withhad not been laid on the table; and re- out any reference to religion, were loyal. gretted that in respect to pensions, the Of this fact, the late war afforded abun. officers of the navy were not placed on an dant proof. Half our marine in the late equal footing with the officers of the army. war was composed of Irish Catholics, and He feared there were many cases of a great part of our army of Irish Catholics abuse in the granting of pensions to the and Protestants; and he knew of no single latter.

instance among them of desertion and Lord Palmerston said, it was not usual dişloyalty. The attachment of that coun. to lay on the table such a list as that try should be fostered. Ireland (exclaimalluded to by the hon. gentleman, but if ed the hon. baronet) is the right arm of the hon. gentleman thought proper to the empire. If you lose Ireland, what move for it, he would make no objection will become of you? You ought to emto its production: it would, however, take brace her with both arms to ihe end of a long time to make out. He denied time, as your nearest, dearest, and best of that there was any partiality shown to the friends. army with respect to pensions. Pensions The several resolutions founded upon were granted to the officers of each service the Army Estimates were then put and by departments wholly unconnected with agreed to. one another; so that any thing like partiality was out of the question. As to BANK TOKENS.] The Chancellor of any abuses in the granting of pensions to the Exchequer, in pursuance of notice, the officers of the army, he had in conse- moved for leave to bring in a bill to susquence of what had been said in that pend the penalties for receiving bank House last session, investigated the sub- tokens in certain cases, after the 25th of ject minutely, and he had not been able March instant. The object of this bill to discover a single instance of such abuse. was to afford means after the general cir

Mr. Forbes observed, that he had heard culation of these tokens was stopped; for of several cases of gross

their being still received for various purLord Palmerston requested the hon. poses. It gentlemen going down to the

a

he believed it had fallen. If it should rise no illegality, there could be no need of considerably, he thought there might be indemnity. But it was said, that if misome difficulty; but he conceived the only nisters should be called upon to justify way to preserve the Mint currency, was to themselves in courts of law, they would remove this rival currency from circula- be obliged to produce evidence which it tion. Hitherto it had produced no in- would be improper to disclose. He could convenience; but he apprehended the pot say, that it might not be possible that tokens might drive silver into the melting- a bill on this subject was requisite; but pot, if a crisis should occur when such a then the object of such a bill could not course might prove to be profitable. be indemnity. It was, then, proper that Leave was given to bring in the bill. their lordships should know, before they

went into the committee, to which

of these objects their attention was to be HOUSE OF LORDS.

directed, or whether it was to be expected Tuesday, March 3.

of them that they should accomplish both INDEMNITY Bill.] The order of the objects. What were they to be called day being read for going into a committee upon to do? Surely the same clauses on this bill,

and words would not answer for the dif. Lord Holland rose, but not, he said, ferent objects he had pointed out. If all the with the intention of resisting the motion. proceedings had been legal, what danger There were, however, two or three ques- could there be in disclosing the evidence tions which he thought it right previously on which the arrests had been made?to ask, the answer to which might perhaps | There was another point which also apenable their lordships to proceed with peared to him worthy of their lordships' more precision and dispatch when in the consideration, namely, how far this bill committee than they could otherwise do. fitowed as a consequence from the suspenHis present purpose was not to discuss sion act of last session. It had been either the principle or the details of the asked, how their lordships could suppose bill; but as their lordships were about to that the Habeas Corpus should be susgo into the committee, it was important pended without this bill becoming necesto know what was the object which they had sary? He must confess that he had not there to carry into execution ; for, after all seen this natural consequence; but if it the discussion which the subject had un really existed, ought it not to be their dergone, there were still some points with lordships business to make out that conrespect to which the intention of those who nexion in the committee ? The bill, as it had introduced the bill was very obscure. stood, contained no reference to the susOn one or two of the grounds on which pension act from which it was said to they rested the measure, they seemed to spring. The preamble declared that a be at variance with themselves. It had traitorous conspiracy had existed, and been said, that precedent was followed in that numerous persons had tumultuously the present case; but if it had been the assembled, &c. and stated acts to have object of the framers of the bill to estab. been done, which, under the supposition lish it on precedent, the result of their of all the proceedings being legal were labour was not consistent with their inten- proper to be resorted to. The vill, how. tion. All former acts of indemnity in ever, did not declare that these acts this country had acknowledged or im had been done in consequence of the susplied that certain illegal acts had been pension of the Habeas Corpus. This bill, committed, and on the ground of that therefore, applied generally to all arrests, illegality the indemnity was granted; but and was, in that respect, more extensive the present bill, according to the asser- in its application than the measures which tions of those who supported it, the report were said to have given it origin.-Anoof the committee, and its own preamble, ther difficulty here arose in considering came before their lordships with the alle. this bill, which, instead of being founded gation that no illegal act had been done. on precedent, differed in one material reThe report which had been made by their spect, not only from all the old bills of in. lordships' committee stated, that the per- demnity in this country, but from that of sons who had been taken into custody 1801, which had been so often alluded to, had been arrested on oath. According to inasmuch as it granted indemnity, not only all the assertions and allegations, there for arresting and detaining persons, but had been no-illegality; and if there was for discharging. Have prisoners, then, of the peace.

been illegally discharged? It would be- / discharged' is not sufficient: it is not come their lordships well to consider what equal to the word acquitted,' which has might be the effeci of the introduction of a definite meaning. Where the word acthis word into the bill, not merely with quitted is used, it must be understood in respect to the protection of ministers, but the legal sense, namely, by a jury on the to the future security of the persons to trial. But there are various ways by whom it applied. If ministers, or the ma- which a man may he discharged from his gistrates who, under them, carried the imprisonment, without putting an end to Habeas Corpus suspension into execution, the suit. If, indeed, it had been alleged, had acted legally in discharging prisoners, that he was discharged by the grand jury's they would stand in no need of indemnity. not finding the bill, that would have They could have no fear of producing evi- shown a legal end to the prosecution.” dence to show that they had acted accord. The other judges were of the same opiing to law in setting the persons they had nion. After what he had stated, and, in arrested at liberty. It was necessary, how- particular, after having recited this deci. ever, to call their lordships attention par- sion of the court of King's-bench, he ticularly to this circumstance, as it apo thought it right that their lordships peared that there were cases in which the should be informed on the following discharge of prisoners by the magistrates points :- 1st. Whether a person dismight be illegal. In stating this, he charged by authority of the secretary of wished to refer their lordships to a case state, without any bill of indictment which occurred in Hilary term, _1788, against him having been thrown out by a before Mr. Justice Ashlıurst, Mr. Justice grand jury, or acquittal on trial, or on a Buller, and Mr. Justice Grose. The case noli prosequi, can be held to be diswas intituled, Morgan v. Hughes. The charged according to law. 2nd. Would a plaintiff having been accused of felony, discharge by the secretary of state prevent and discharged, brought his action for the person from being again arrested on malicious imprisonment against the justice the same charge? 3rd. Could a person

The declaration of the discharged by the secretary of state insert plantiff stated that he had been “dis- in his declaration, on bringing an action, charged.” Upon this a special demurrer that there was an end of the suit against was entered, setting forth that it did not him? These were important questions, appear by the declaration, that the plain and he thought them worthy of their lordtiff had been tried and acquitted, or dis- ships' consideration on grounds totally incharged by due course of law, and that it dependent of the bill before them. did not therefore appear that the commit- The Lord Chancellor wished, in the ment was without cause. The declaration, first place, to observe, that he did not in fact, must státe, that the prosecution is consider himself so great an adept in the at an end; for a person aggrieved cannot criminal law as to be always prepared to bring an action, without showing that he give their lordships a satisfactory opinion has been discharged according to due upon every difficulty that might be started. course of law, either by a grand jury In the present case, he must also confess, throwing out the bill of indictment pre- that he could not recollect the terms of ferred against him, by acquittal on trial, the question which the noble lord had put or by a noli prosequi. Their lordships with sufficient precision to enable him to give would therefore perceive, that the exten- it a full answer, were he in other respects

a sion of the bill to cases of discharge was capable of so doing. With regard to what of itself an indemnity to ministers. That had been said as to this bill being founded this was the unavoidable consequence of on precedent in all its provisions, he certhe introduction of that word into the tainly had never so argued it. He had on bill, was evident from the judgment the contrary observed, that when the Hagiven in the case to which he had aliuded. beas corpus was suspended in the reign Mr. Justice Buller on that occasion said, i of king William, it was distinctly acknow. “ The grounds of a malicious prosecution ledged in the bill of indemnity, that illegal are, Ist, that it was done maliciously; acts had been committed; but it was at the 2dly, without probable cause. The want same time declared, that these acts were of probable cause is the gist of the action; so necessary for the safety of the country, for it should have showed on the face of and the preservation of the constitution, the record, that the prosecution was at that it was fit no persons should be put to an end. Saying that the plaintiff was the expense of defending themselves in

suits which might be brought for their sued the very same course that had been commission. The principle of the act of adopted. When persons taken into cus1801, though different, was a just prin- tody were delivered on recognizances, it had ciple also. It was this--that the names

been usual to bind them to answer, from of persons who had given information time to time, in the King's-bench. If that should not be disclosed. Whether that was illegal it had been illegal ever since the principle was to be, bona fide, in any par- | law of the country had been administered. ticular instance maintained, depended on He had himself had the honour of filling the those to whom the constitution had given offices of attorney and solicitor-generalthe right of deciding on such questions. he should say, perhaps unfortunately for What their lordships decision on this himself, for no situation was so pleasant point ought to be, it would be for them as that of a private barrister, and none so to consider in the committee ; but if that full of anxiety as that of solicitor or attor. principle was one which ought to be acted ney.general; but he was always in the upon, there was another which possessed practice of going from term to term and o claim not less urgent on their lordships' respiting recognizances; and no persons attention-he meant the protection of the had ever sat in the courts of justice who magistrates who had executed the laws. understood the laws better than those In a case in which there had been a proba- who presided during the time he alluded bility of a general rising against the go. to. He could give no better answer than vernment, it was obvious that great num- he had done to the question of the noble bers of persons would be arrested. To lord; but he owed it to the kindness of leave the individuals who had caused these the House, and to the indulgence he alarrests to contend with the multitude of ways experienced, to give on all occasions actions which might be brought against the best answer in his power. If it were them, would be to allow them to be over- explained to him, and he were satisfied whelmed and crushed with an incalculable he was wrong in what he had stated, he expense. As to the chief point in the should be ready to give any farther infornoble lord's question, he should consider mation in his power. it most contemptible conduct in him were The House then went into the comhe to withhold from their lordships any mittee. information on a legal point which he

The Lord Chancellor proposed, that could give. He would therefore state his the House should consider the preamble opinion, for which such allowances should first, instead of postponing it as usual, be made as his practice confined to courts because it was closely connected with the of equity required. Though he thought enacting part of the bill. the word “discharged” highly proper and The Earl of Lauderdale observed, that necessary, he was not aware that it had if the House was to set aside all precebeen inserted in the bill until the noble dents, and rely on the argument of the lord had referred to it. It certainly ap- learned lord, he must say that argument peared to him a point of great importance, had no great weight with him. The and in stating what at the present moment meaning of a preamble was to explain the occurred to his mind on the subject, he object of a bill; but how could it assume could only say, that he did not think a to do this before it was decided of what man discharged in the way described by clauses the bill should consist ? Here the the noble lord would be discharged ac- learned lord, contrary to all usage and cording to law. But this formed precisely meaning, called on the House to consider a case in which the magistrate ought to the title and preamble of the bill, before be protected. If, when a rising against the various clauses had been decided on. the government was apprehended, a ma- - Lord Redesdale contended, that it would gistrate arrested on information a number materially serve the convenience of the of persons suspected to be engaged in House to proceed first to the consideration such a treasonable design, was he to be of the preamble, because the preamble punished for discharging those persons was intimately connected with the enactwhen the danger was over, and when he ing clauses, and would, in fact, be neces. conceived that he had no longer any right | sary as a point of reference to explain to detain them? Surely, no clearer case many of the objects to which those clauses for granting indemnity could be suggested. were directed. He knew what he should have done on The Earl of Carnarvon admitted that such an occasion. He would have pur- there was a close connexion, grammatical