100 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1810. 



draw. The Speaker stated, that 

 this was, in similar cases, the uni- 

 form usage. Sir Francis Burdett 

 accordingly withdrew; after which 

 Mr. Lethbridge proposed the two 

 following resolutions for the adop- 

 tion of the House:— 



" 1st. Resolved, that the letter 

 signed Francis Burdett, and the 

 further argument which was pub- 

 lished in the paper called Cobbett's 

 Weekly Register, on the 24'th of 

 this instant, is a libellous and 

 scandalous paper, reflecting upon 

 the just rights and privileges of 

 this House." 



"2nd, That sir Francis Burdett, 

 who suffered the above articles to 

 be printed with his name, and by 

 his authority, has been guilty of a 

 violation of the privileges of this 

 House." The motion was seconded 

 by Mr. Blachford. After enume- 

 rating various precedentsforadopt- 

 ing the resolutions, he asked how 

 they could hesitate to adopt them 

 when they recollected the spirit 

 and the advocates of jacobinism 

 that were in the country ? Their 

 numbers, whether in leaders or 

 disciples, were but few. But their 

 object was, to dispute, and to bring 

 into discredit, theauthority of that 

 House. If that spirit sliould not 

 be checked in time, it would not 

 only take away the dignity, the 

 character, and authority of that 

 House, but destroy the very exist- 

 ence of it as a branch of the legis- 

 lature. The discussion of the re- 

 solutions was adjourned till next 

 day, March the 28th ; when Mr. 

 Sheridan expressed his conviction 

 thai it must be equally the wish of 

 both sides of the House that the 

 discussion relative to the Scheldt 

 expedition should not be inter- 

 rupted. But, besides that very 



weighty consideration, ifever ther6 

 was a case in which precipitancy 

 and rashness were to be avoided, 

 it was the present. It was not a 

 plain and simple question, on 

 which the House could decide im- 

 mediately. There were two dis- 

 tinct questions involved in it. 1st. 

 As to the right of the House of 

 Commons to imprison. 2nd. As 

 to the character of the terms with 

 which the argument had been ac- 

 companied: terms, with respect to 

 the precise import of which, there 

 might be a difference of opinion. 

 He contended, that the proper and 

 constitutional course was, to refer 

 the matter to a committee of pri- 

 vileges. Mr. Sheridan concluded 

 with moving, "that the committee 

 of privileges should resume its 

 sitting on that day se'nnight, and 

 that the paper complained of 

 should be referred to it." Some 

 debate about the necessity of 

 moving this, in point of form, as 

 an amendment on the original 

 question, was superseded by a mo- 

 tion made by Mr. Brand, as an 

 amendment to ths original ques- 

 tion, that the debate be adjourned 

 till to-morrow se'nnight. A con- 

 versation ensued on this question 

 of adjournment, in which most of 

 the speakers entered into the 

 merits uf the original question. 



Sir Samuel Romilly said, that 

 any man had a right to discuss 

 every great constitutional ques- 

 tion, whether of original power or 

 constituted authority. He might 

 show his folly in arguing a point 

 in which no otherman could agree 

 with him, but still he had a right 

 to do so. There might be inflam- 

 matory language in the paper in 

 question ; but, at the same time, 

 there was great ability in the rea- 



