98 



ANNUAL REGISTER, 1810. 



their privileges, to discharge a per- 

 son whom they had unanimously 

 declared to have been guilty of a 

 breach of their privileges. — The 

 Bill of Rights was intended to pro- 

 tect constitutional meetings, le- 

 gally convened, for discussing the 

 conduct of public men. But cor- 

 poration meetings, or county meet- 

 ings, legally convened by the she- 

 ritts, were not to be confounded 

 "with spouting clubs. — Mr. Perce- 

 val called on the House to weigh 

 well the consequences of making 

 the case of John Gale Jones a 

 precedent. Some stress bad been 

 Liid on the expressions of contri- 

 tion made use of by Jones at tiie 

 bar. But tiie House had unani- 

 mously agreed, afier that confes- 

 sion, to commit him. Tlierefoie, 

 somesubsequent acknowledgment 

 was necessary. 



Sir Francis Burdett argued, that 

 the legal meaning of contempt was 

 that which throws obstructions in 

 the way of the proceedings of any 

 court. But how were the pro- 

 ceedings of that House obstructed 

 by a libel ? He insisted that the 

 lex parLiameutaria, that had been 

 so much talked of, was binding 

 upon their own members, but not 

 upon others. — It was likewise a 

 most material objection to the 

 right of commitment claimed by 

 the House, that they could not 

 proportion the punishment to the 

 offence; as an individual might, 

 possibly, be confined seven years, 

 or, if a dissolution of parliament 

 were to take place, only fiv^ 

 minutes. 



The amendment was negatived 

 without a division : hut, upon the 

 original motion, the Housedivided. 

 For it, It: against it, 15.S. 



On Saturday, the '2.^\\\ of March, 



thereappeared inCobbett's Weekly 

 Political Register, a Letter in- 

 scribed, " Sir Francis Burdett to 

 his Constituents, denying the 

 power of the House of Commons 

 to imprison the people of Eng- 

 land :" accompanied with the ar- 

 gument by which he had endea- 

 voured to convince the gentlemen 

 of the House of Commons, that 

 theiracts, in thecaseof Mr. Jones, 

 were illegal ; laid before them, he 

 said, in a more full and connected 

 way, than could possibly be done 

 by parliamentary reporters. This 

 publication was brought under the 

 notice of the House of Commons, 

 March the 26th, by Mr. Leth- 

 bridge, at whose desire the ques- 

 tion WIS put by the Speaker to 

 sir Francis Burdett, whether he 

 acknowledged himself to be the 

 author? Sir Francis having an- 

 swered in the affirmative, Mr. 

 Lethbridge gave notice of a mo- 

 tion on the subject. Next day, in 

 consequence of this notice, Mr. 

 Lethbridge rose, with a degree of 

 pain and embarrassment, which, 

 he declared, he had never felt be- 

 fore, to make a complaint against 

 one of the United Commons of 

 Great Britain and Ireland, who, in 

 his opinion, had violated the privi^r 

 leges of the House. He did not 

 mean to enter upon the subject 

 itself, but only to lay on the table 

 the document which the honour- 

 able baronet, who was the object 

 of the motion hs had to make, had 

 admitted to have been published 

 by his authority. For the purpose 

 of saving the time of the House, 

 he had marked certain passages ia 

 that document, which, in his opio.- 

 ion, more particularly justified 

 him in the charge which he had 

 preferred against the honourable 



J 



