HISTORY OF EUROPE. 



79 



" of the priTileges of this house, to 

 " circulate lists nominating mem- 

 •' bers to serve on any committee 

 " by ballot." On which a division 

 ensued, for the motion -15, against 

 it 124, majority 79. 



On the order of the day being 

 read for the attendance of ISIr. 

 Peter Stuart, the printer of the 

 " Oracle," Mr. Atkins Wright de- 

 precated the adoptioii of any severe 

 measures towards him, however ne- 

 cessary it might be to support the 

 resolutions. He, for his own part, 

 did not feel his peace of mind broke 

 in upon by any animadversions that 

 might be made upon (hem. The peo- 

 ple of this country had a right to 

 discuss freely the conduct of their 

 representatives. He professed to be 

 of no party, but he highly felt the 

 necessity of maiiitaining the liberty 

 of the press in all its purity. The 

 honour and dignity of parliament, 

 in his opinion, would be best consul- 

 ted in |)assing the article over in si- 

 lence : as that house ought to have 

 a firm reliance on its own rectitude. 

 Mr. Grey said, that if the article 

 had app.ared a trivia! matter (o him, 

 or if it had been a fair comment on 

 public affairs, he should not have 

 complained of it; but it appeared 

 to him, on the contrary, to be mere 

 invective and unqualified abuse, 

 tending to villify the proceedings 

 and insult the authority of parlia- 

 ment; but if the house taought light- 

 ly of it, or if the honourable mem- 

 ber who spcke last should think 

 proper to move that the order be 

 discharged ; he should not feel it 

 necessary to press his motion. 



Mr. Atkins Wright aeairi con- 

 jured the house not to make this a 

 matter of any consef|uence, as a 

 fcarc reprimand would be suiricient 

 for the purpose. 



Mr. Windham said , he suppo* 

 ed the honourable gentleman who 

 spoke last, would take care to be 

 more tender of his own charaeter, 

 as an individual, than he seemed to 

 be of that of the house of commons ; 

 but he saw no reason why gentle- 

 men should fed in that way ; as it 

 would be as much as saying to the 

 public, " you may say what you 

 " please, wcdon'tmindit." — Ifsuch 

 was the rule, why not proclaim it ? 

 It would be false language to say, 

 that.bccausemany things of this kind 

 were passed over, none should be 

 noticed ; the only question was, 

 whether the present instance went 

 to such excess as should lead them 

 to interfere for the maintenance of 

 their own dignity. In his opinion, it 

 was gross, calumnious, and licen. 

 tious, and he should not think him- 

 self acting on a vindictive principle 

 if he voted for punishing the offend- 

 er, in a certain degree, as a w arning 

 to others. 



Mr. Sheridan said, that though 

 the article in itself was extremely 

 improper, yet, when compared with 

 a variety of others which appeared, 

 it might be said to be mere milk and 

 water. If the house was about to 

 adopt a new feeling, and take no- 

 tice of all expressions of this sort, 

 after having slumbered so long, and 

 suffered them to pass unheeded, it 

 should first give notice of it, and 

 not let punishment fall on a particu- 

 lar individual, when so many were 

 involved in the same sort of delin- 

 quency. The househad long conniv- 

 ed at things of this sort ; it had also 

 connived at reporting its debates, 

 and very properly ; for he should 

 consider it a mortal blow to the 

 liberties of the country, if the peo- 

 ple should be kept in ignorance of 

 the proceedings of parliament. The 



members 



