96 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1810. 



agree in rejecting his proposition. 

 But if, with him, they thought that 

 they could not overturn the law 

 of the land, and the acts of parlia- 

 ment solemnly passed, by any 

 assumed power exercised by that 

 House alone, they would agree 

 with him, that John Gale Jones 

 must be discharged : with a mo- 

 tion for which purpose sir Francis 

 concluded. 



Mr. C. W. Wyne said, that 

 if a motion had been brought for- 

 ward for the liberation of John 

 Jones, on the grounds of the con- 

 trition for the offence which he 

 had confessed at the bar, he should 

 not have objected to it. But the 

 proposal of that liberation was 

 interwoven by the honourable ba- 

 ronet with other topics, to which 

 he could by no means subscribe. 

 Mr. Wynne produced instances of 

 commitment prior to the long par- 

 liament. With regard to libels, he 

 admitted that no instance of com- 

 mittal on such a charge was met 

 with prior to the reign of Elizabeth. 

 But the fact was, that in the pe- 

 riods which immediately succeed- 

 ed the invention of printing, there 

 was no such thing as the liberty of 

 the press, which now existed, so 

 happily for this countrj-. To this 

 valuable privilege hebeiieved, that 

 our present pre-eminence above all 

 other nations was to be attributed. 

 — The principle on which the pro- 

 tection of members from arrest, 

 lest by such arrest ihey should be 

 prevented from attending theirdu- 

 ty in that House, was clearly in- 

 disputable: and it appeared to him 

 to be equally clear, that libels, or 

 any other means of interfering 

 with the due performance of a 

 member's duty, should be equally 

 provided against. The same rea- 



sons which justified a court of law 

 in punishing any contempt, or in- 

 terruption of its proceedings plead- 

 ed in favour of the privilege exer- 

 cised by that House in the case 

 which gave rise to the present dis- 

 cussion. — The Attorney-general 

 cited a number of cases to show 

 the indisputable right of that, and 

 of the other House of parliament, 

 to commit for any contempt or 

 breach of their privileges. Astothe 

 words of the warrant of committal, 

 "duringthepleasure of theHouse." 

 so particularly dwelt upon by the 

 honourable baronet, these words 

 were also the subject of consider- 

 ablediscussioninthecaseof Crosby. 

 But the result was, that they were 

 found to be those usual in all simi- 

 lar cases.— Mr. Creevy thought 

 that the right of committal, in 

 such cases as had been referred to, 

 justly and necessarily belonged to 

 that House. Therefore, although 

 he was disposed to vote for the 

 liberation of John Gale Jones, he 

 could not agree to the proposition 

 as founded on the general doc- 

 trii\es laid down by his honourable 

 friend, A declaration to the same 

 effect, in favour of JohnGale Jones, 

 was made by lord Folkstone, 

 though he could not go the whole 

 length of his honourable friend's 

 proposition. Lord Folkstone main- 

 tained that the House was compe- 

 tent, by its own authority, to punish 

 any contempt or interruption of 

 its proceedings. He denied, how- 

 ever, that the publication of a libel 

 was to be regarded as a contempt. 

 For, if a libel and a contempt of 

 court were held to be equivalent, 

 how came Hart and White to be 

 brought to trial for a libel on the 

 court of King's-bench ? If they 

 had been held equivalent to that 



