102] 
many of the faid charges as fhall 
appear to them the moft condu- 
*-eive to the obtaining {peedy and 
« effeCtual juftice againft the faid 
« Warren Haftings.” 
2d, “ That the commons of Great 
‘* Britain in parliament affembled, 
« ‘from a regard to their own ho- 
« nour, and from the duty which 
« they owe to all the commons of 
Great Britain, in whofe name, as 
« well as in their own, they act in 
« the public profecutions by them 
« carried on before the houfe of 
Lords, are bound to perfevere in 
*« their impeachment againit War- 
_ “ ren Haftings, Efq; late governor- 
** general of Bengal, until judgment 
«« may be obtained upon the moft 
bbl important articles in the fame.’ 
On the 17th of May complaint 
was made to the houle by general 
Burgoyne of -a libellous publication 
inferted in one of the morning papers 
with the fignature of John Scott, a 
member of the houfe of commons, 
grofsly reflecting upon the condutt of 
the managers of the impeachment, 
and upon the juftice of that houfe. 
The letter was then read by the clerk, 
and major Scott being called to an- 
fwer this complaint, avowed himfelf 
to be the author of the letter in 
queftion ; and at the fame time de- 
clared, that no man livi ing had a 
higher refpect for the rules of the 
houfe than he had; and if he had 
broken them, he haa done fo unin- 
tentionally, and was forry for it. 
The honourabte major then entered 
into a general juRincation of his 
letter, and declared, that if he had 
been guilty of an error in his con- 
duét, he had been drawn into it by 
great examples. He then entered 
into a variety cf publications by 
Mr. Burke, Mr. Sheridan, and ge- 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 
1790. 
neral Burgoyne, which he confi-” 
dered to be by far ftronger libels 
than he had ever written. 
Major Scott, according to the 
practice of the houfe, having given 
in his defence, immediately with- 
drew. 
General Burgoyne then moved, 
«That it is againft the law and 
ufage of parliament, and a high 
breach of the privilege of this houie, — 
to write or publifh, or caufe to be 
written or publifhed, any feandalous — 
or libellous reflections on the honour 
and juftice of this houfe, in any of 
the impeachments or profecutions i In 
which i it is engaged,” 
Which be- — 
ing voted without a divifion, he ~ 
next moved, “ That it appears tq — 
this houfe, that the letter now deli- 
vered in, is a {candalous and libel- — 
lous paper reflecting on the honour 
and juftice of this houfe, and on the | 
conduét of the managers appointed | 
to conduc the impeachment now ~ 
proceeding againit Warren Hatt! 
efq. 2? 
ings, € 
aon the fuggeftion of the chan- 
cellor of the exchequer, that in a 
matter relative to their own privi- © 
leges, and efpecially as a great 
laxity of prattice had of late years _ 
obtained with refpeét to publica- 
tions upon the proceedings of par- 
liament, the houfe ought to proceed. 
He then 
with all poflible caution. 
moved, that ‘the debate be adjourn- 
ed to Thaurfday, the 27th of May. 
It was then refumed, and after a 
Jong converfation, in which, the 
prevailing abufes of the freedom of , 
the prefs were pointedly difeufted, | 4 
the motion was adopted. 
It was then moved, “ That John 
Scott, efq. a member of that houfe, © 
in publilhing the faid letter, was 
4 
rtctctons. 
guilty ofa grols and icandalous re 4 
4 bel, 
