LON 
the mean time the debate goes on. The ftrangers are in 
poiretfion of all that has palled ; and thus, by its very ope¬ 
ration, the objeft of that handing order was defeated. 
There was alfo, he obferved, another order, which held it 
to be the s privilege of members to pafs (trangers through 
the houfe into the gallery, except while the houfe was fit¬ 
ting.—Here then were two orders wholly irreconcilable, 
u'nlefs it was intended that members Ihould introduce 
their friends for the purpofe of being committed to the 
cuftody of the ferjeant at arms. Was it not, then, a duty 
to reconcile fuch orders to themfelves, and to common 
fenfe? It was r.ot his intention to move for the repeal 
of the order, or to maintain that there never could arile 
an occalion when ftrangers ought to be excluded ; but he 
did with the order to be fo modified, that it thould not 
depend on the caprice or pleafure of any individual mem¬ 
ber, but be fairly fubmitted to the decifion of the houfe. 
When the character of the king’s fon was to be invelti- 
gated, not a fyllable had been heard of the excluiion of 
ttrangers; but, when the conduct and character of minif- 
ters. were to be inquired into, then it appeared to be a 
fubjeft too tender and delicate for public infpeftion in 
that houfe. Mr. Sheridan thought that there never was a 
period in our hiftory in which it was more neceffary for 
parliament to conciliate the public ; therefore he moved, 
“That a committee of privileges be appointed to meet to¬ 
morrow, in the fpeaker’s chamber, to confidef the order 
of the 5:5th of January halt.” 
Mr. Windham wifhed to know in what manner the 
daily publishing the debates was advantageous to the 
country. He alked what was the value to their confti- 
tuents of knowing what was palling in that houfe? Sup- 
pofmg they (liould never know, it was only the difference 
between a reprefentative government and a democracy. 
Till the laft thirty years, or a few years farther back, it 
was not even permitted to publilh the debates of that 
houfe. So lately as the times of Dr. Johnfon, the debates 
•were never publilhed but under fictitious names. He had 
heard that proprietors of papers had talked of the injuitice 
of clofed doors. This was to conlider the admillion of 
ftrangers into the gallery as a privilege. But, though he 
might perhaps think it ufeful to let this practice continue, 
after having fo long prevailed, he did not allow it to be a 
privilege. The houfe ought to maintain thole regulations 
and orders which had fo long prevailed. He would aflert 
that the rights of the houfe were now in danger of being 
loft from mifufe. 
Lord Folkeltone faid, that, as the public had been al¬ 
lowed regularly to receive a report of the proceedings in 
parliament, he was defirous that no cafual interruption of 
that permillion fliould occur. 
Mr. Yorke haughtily protefted againft the fuppolition 
that it was necellary for a member, who fliould move to 
enforce a (landing order, to ftate the reafons which in¬ 
duced him to do fo. He had moved the order on the 
prefent occafion, from a confideration of the many mif- 
ftatements which went forth to the public laft year, on a 
very important inquiry before that houfe. They were 
now performing their great fun ft ion as the grand inqueft 
of the nation. The grand jury of a county never admit¬ 
ted ftrangers during the time of their examining evi¬ 
dence. A right honourable gentleman had alked why 
they had not proceeded in the fame manner in the courle 
of a memorable inquiry laft year? He regretted molt fin- 
cerely that they did not ; and he took lhame to himlelf 
that he had not then enforced the Handing order. The 
Handing order in queltion was a molt ancient order; the 
principle on which it was founded was, perhaps, inter¬ 
woven in the original conftitution of the houfe. 
Mr. Sheridan Hated, that the object he had in view, in 
the motion which he had fubmitted to the houfe, was not 
to prevent any individual member from clearing the gal¬ 
lery; but merely to require, that, after he bad done fo,. 
he fliould condefcend to give fome reafon for the rtep. 
If, after the exclufion of the ftrangers, the houfe Ihould 
DON. 219 
acquiefce in the propriety of the motives for that excluflon, 
the public would then be fatisfied. To what was it ow¬ 
ing that Great Britain was able to maintain a ftruggle, 
and he hoped it would be a luccefsful ftruggle, with 
the victorious arms that had trampled on the indepen¬ 
dence of the proltrate nations of Europe for the liber¬ 
ties of the world ? To the liberty of the prefs'alone, 
and molt particularly and emphatically to the unre- 
ftrained publication of the debates and proceedings of 
parliament. It had been alked how fuch publication 
could produce any public benefit, or conduce to the 
well-being or happinefs of the nation ? By Ihowing 
to the people, the grounds on which public meafures 
were rel’orted to, and particularly by convincing them 
of their neceffity ; thus inducing the public to fubmit 
with patience to the heavielt burdens that had ever been 
impofed upon a nation. If the liberty of the prefs had 
exifted in France before or fince the revolution—if it had 
exilled in Auftria—if in Pruflia—if in Spain—Bonaparte 
would not now find himfelf in a fituation to dictate to 
Europe, and filling the throne of nearly an univerfal 
monarch. As to the analogy between the houfe of com¬ 
mons in its inquifitorial capacity and a grand jury, grand 
juries did not publilh the evidence on which they were 
bound to form a decifion, becaule it could be only an 
ex-parte ftatement, which, however, might influence the 
opinion or verdict of a petty jury.— Mr. Sheridan, in con- 
clufion of his reply, begged of gentlemen not to miftake 
his motion, which was not by any means to refcind the 
order to which it referred, but to have it afcertained by 
a committee of privileges, whether any, or what, modifi¬ 
cation of it was neceffary. 
The Chancellor of the Exchequer thought it neceffary, 
for the dignity of the houfe, to maintain the privilege 
that any member has to call for the clearing of the gallery 
without argument.—On a divifion of the houfe, there ap¬ 
peared : for Mr. Sheridan’s motion, 80 ; againft it, 166. 
Mr. Yorke was foon after appointed Firft Lord of the 
Admiralty and one of the Tellers of the Exchequer. 
There is in human nature a very ftrong and aClive 
principle of imitation. It appears in earlielt childhood, 
and has the happy effect of exciting and ftrengthening 
the powers of both body and mind. In lea-port towns 
children amufe themfelves with the conltruCtion of lliips 
with paper or palteboard; in military ltations with drums 
and wooden arms, and wheeling like foldiers. At every pe¬ 
riod of life mankind have a ftrong propenlity to imitate their 
fuperiors. In the metropolis, the feat of the government, 
the middling and lower claffes ape the proceedings and 
debates in parliament, from much the fame principle that 
boys play the parts of foldiers and failors. In every ale- 
houle club, they difpute on all political, and fomerimes 
other, (objects, and are engaged in forming rejolutions, making 
motions, J'econcling motions, and Jupporling or oppofmg motions. 
Debating focieties are inftituted, meeting once or twice 
a-week, where any one, of either (ex, is admitted, and may 
have an opportunity of difplaying his oratorical powers, 
or admiring thole of others, at the final! expenfe of one 
(hilling. This became a kind of trade or bulinefs. The 
prelident, or manager, paid for the room and candles; what 
remained of the admillion-money, after defraying this ex¬ 
penfe, went into his own pocket. Among thcfe affemblies, 
was one which affirmed the title of the Briti/h Forum. The 
prelident was called John Gale Jones. The vote for enforcing 
the Handing order for the excluiion of ftrangers, and what 
pafled on that occafion in the houfe of commons, .was 
made the fubjeift of difcuflion in the Britifli Forum. The 
following placard was every-where ltuck upon the walls 
of the metropolis: “Windham and Yorke. Britiih Fo¬ 
rum, 33, Bedford-ftreet, Covent garden; Monday, Fe¬ 
bruary 19, 1810. Queftion; ‘Which was a greater out¬ 
rage on the public feeling, Mr. Yorke’s enforcement of 
the (landing order to exclude ftrangers from the lioule 
of commons, or Mr. Windham’s recent attack on the li¬ 
berty of the prefs?’ Laft Monday, after an interelting 
difcuflion. 
