their attention, had not something been said on a former night, which had made a greater impression than almost any other circumstance that had been stated respecting the progress of blasphemy and sedition, but which he had the means of completely contradicting. He alluded to what had been said by the right hon. member for Dublin, respecting the practice of teaching blasphemy in certain schools, called Union Schools, in the north of England. Schools of that description were of such service to the com 1818, after the libels which had been published when the leaves were falling in the preceding autumn had been allowed to pass unpunished. And what wonder that the impunity with which they had so long been permitted to transgress should have led to this result-should have induced them to recommend the assassination of the governors of the country? This it was that brought him to the same conclusion with his hon. and learned friend, that till it had been shown that the existing laws had been applied, and had been found ineffectual to put down the mischief, par-munity, that they ought not to be charged liament ought not to make new laws, put- without sufficient reason. He believed it ting additional power into the hands of was the schools at Stockport and Macthose who had made so little use of that clesfield against which the accusation was with which they were already vested. brought; and a gentleman of great reWhen any one contrasted the late apathy spectability, who had inquired into the with the rigour, amounting almost to per- matter, had furnished him with the means secution, with which at one period all of showing that the accusation was perliberal principles had been treated, he fectly groundless. This gentleman, who thought that one main cause would be was as great an enemy to sedition and discovered of the extent to which this li- blasphemy as any of the hon. gentlemen centiousness had of late been carried. opposite, had visited the schools in quesAbout eight or nine years ago, a prosecu- tion, and from his letter, part of which he tion had been instituted against an indi- would read, the House might judge of the vidual, for publishing an article, of a cha- nature of those schools. The hon. and racter very different indeed from that of learned gentleman then read extracts from the publications to which he had just re- the letter, in which it was stated by the ferred. Of that article, the most libellous writer, that he found in the schools 25 part was the following expression:- bibles and testaments; that the primer "What a glorious example it will be in used was Mrs. Trimmer's spelling-book the power of the Prince Regent to set (was this "the blasphemous primer?"); when he succeeds to the throne!" and that the teachers were steady serious perthe person first brought to trial was not the sons; that the expense of the schools was original publisher, but one who had co-defrayed by a subscription of one penny pied it into his paper from another publi- a week for each child; that sermons were cation. The result was, that he was ac- preached every Sunday; that the preachers quitted, and properly acquitted, not only who officiated were five in number-three in the opinion of every liberal person un- Methodists and two Calvinists; that in the connected with the proceeding, but he morning, prayers were read before any might say, in the opinion of the learned instruction, and that prayers were read in judge who presided at the trial, and who the evening before the dismissal of the summed up the evidence with a leaning boys. In short, that the whole discipline to the side of the defendant. Now, he of the school was connected with prayer. would call on any honest man, to lay his Here the hon. and learned gentleman, obhand on his heart and say, whether he be- serving some symptoms of impatience, lieved that any course could be pursued said, he was aware that many persons more calculated to sap the very founda-liked better to listen to accusations than tion of the laws, than this unequal manner of administering justice-one day allowing treason, blasphemy, and incentives to assassination, to pass unpunished and unnoticed, and another day incurring enormous expenses by prosecuting persons who had not offended against the laws. Having said thus much on the question immediately before the House, he should not have trespassed longer on to the refutation of groundless charges. Those who maintained that the "intensity of light" which had burst on the people, disqualified them from enjoying liberty; those who held that education was a curse, calculated to make the people bad subjects; those who entertained such opinions were more likely to be heard than himself, from the cause which he had statednamely, that groundless charges were lis much he had thought it necessary to say in vindication of these schools, although the subject was not immediately connected with the question under discussion. tened to with more patience than the refutation of such charges. He thought it important, however, that these schools should be defended from an unfounded accusation; and he was sure that no one would rejoice at the correction more than the right hon. and learned gentleman who had been led into this error. Could it be supposed, that in these schools they were in the habit of using blasphemous primers, and that, whenever a person rapped at the door, they put them out of the way, and got Mrs. Trimmer's spelling-book ready to be exhibited? The writer of the letter before alluded to stated, that the discipline of the school was of an evangelical cast, and that meant too religious. He was not one of those who was credulous enough to believe, that in the presence of visitors nothing but the Bible and Mrs. Trimmer's Catechism was in the hands of the children, but that the moment strangers turned their back, the masters, with shut doors, taught irreligion and blasphemy. To expect the House to believe that such was the real state of the case, was to draw so unconscionably on its credulity, that in his opinion the draught would not be accepted. He believed that not one atom of treason or irreligion could be found in these schools. He should not forget to state, that they had some copy-books, containing sentiments respecting the affair at Manchester, which were not likely to be relished by persons of ultra-tory principles; for although there was nothing whatever of a seditious nature in them, they were expressive of opposition-politics. It ought to be observed, that the magistrates had no affidavits of the facts which they had stated respecting these schools; they had merely sent up the report on hearsay. The gentleman from whom he had received the facts which he had submitted to the House, added in his letter, that all these schools were supported by subscription, and that, as there was not one of the subscribers so high in rank as a shopkeeper, it was with the utmost difficulty they were able to sup. port them; but that still they struggled, at the expense of their own comfort, to provide instruction, religious instruction, for their children. Yet against these persons a clamour had been raised, and they had been represented as wretches, who were not content with speaking and publishing blasphemy and sedition, but were even labouring to poison the minds of their children with those principles. Thus Mr. Plunkett said, that every person who had heard the hon. and learned gentleman who had just sat down, must be sensible that he owed it to himself and to the House, not to suffer the allusion which had been made to what had fallen from him on a former occasion to go unanswered. It was now nearly a month since he had taken the liberty of offering his humble sentiments on the situation of the country. At that distance of time he had made use of expressions, which, he ventured to say, had been that night most completely although he was sure not intentionally, misquoted. He would take the liberty of stating what he believed he had said, and thus the mistake which had arisen would be set right. He was first charged with having said, "that the conduct of magistrates ought not to be too critically inquired into.' Now he begged permission so state, that at the time he made use of this expression, there was no appearance of an indemnity being asked for on the part of the magistrates, nor, as he was apprised, of any intention existing of screening them from the operation of the law as it affected their conduct. He conceived that their conduct was open to inquiry in the court of King's-bench, and he did say, that it was inconsistent with the dignity of the House to stop short in the task which their public duty imposed upon them, for the purpose of critically inquiring into their conduct, and for parliament to exercise a degree of criticism which could not have been exercised in a court of justice. This was what he meant to say, and what, he believed, he had said. The next charge brought against him was, that he had looked for a definition of liberty among the records of the Roman empire, and in the Justinian code. He had defined personal liberty to be potestas faciendi quicquid leges licet; but he had at the same time said, that there was as well as a personal a political, liberty. It would have been candid in the hon. and learned gentleman to have stated, that he had made that distinction. His hon. and learned friend had brought another charge against him, which was that he had asserted, that the "intensity of light" which was thrown on the people unfitted them for the enjoyment of li berty. Mr. Brougham. I did not say that you directly said so, but such an inference was deducible from your expres. sions. delicate to mention. The letter be should be happy to communicate to his hon. and learned friend, but he did not feel that he should be justified in pointing Mr Plunkett resumed. He would now out the particular school, as the individual state what he did say on that occasion, concerned would have no opportunity of he had said that an intensity of light defending himself. And now having said (which he did not regret but rejoiced at) so much as to his personal vindication, was thrown upon every subject for the he begged leave to say a word or two last few years, that public curiosity, with with respect to the merits of the bill respect to the affairs of government was under consideration, which, in concurexcited to such a pitch, that the faculties rence with the language of his right hon. of the great portion of the people were friend on the other side of the House he not sufficiently exercised to consider well could not conceive in any degree an inand thoroughly-that therefore it was fraction of the liberty of the press. In likely to lead them into error, and that it the first place, this measure did not in was the duty of parliament to see that any degree interfere with the great standgood and wholesome food was adminis- ard and truly useful works which were pubtered to the minds of the people. His lished by the respectable booksellers: and hon. and learned friend had said that he then as to those ephemeral publications had charged some of the schools in Eng- which were called newspapers, which were land with teaching blasphemy and sedi- highly respectable, and in which facts tion. He admitted that he had said he be- were fully stated-in which productions lieved blasphemous libels, which had been were generally tolerated, as they ought to made the subject of public prosecution, be, far beyond the line of argumentative had been formed into primers for the disquisition, this measure only proposed purpose of inculcating into the minds of to put other periodical publications on the children that description of pestilence. same footing as those newspapers. What His hon. and learned friend had stated, then, could be fairly urged against the that it was a mistake to say that any thing adoption of such a measure? It was like blasphemous or seditious doctrines said that there was a class of publications were taught in certain schools. But ad-containing ribaldry and trash which no mitting the statement of his hon. and respectable newspaper would admit, belearned friend to be quite correct, would cause any newspaper inserting such offal that serve to prove the fallacy of the in- would not be read long or continue resformation which he (Mr. P.) communi-pectable; and that such publications cated to the House, upon a former evening? That information he still believed to be correct; and surely his hon. and learned friend was not prepared logically to maintain, that because he was acquainted with certain schools where no such mischievous system of education was admitted, that therefore this system was not pursued in any other schools. His hon. and learned friend's contradiction could not, indeed, be effective, unless it applied to the precise schools in which he (Mr. P.) had the best authority for stating, that instruction in blasphemy and sedition actually prevailed. But he had this evening had a letter put into his hands by a member of that House not then in his place, from which letter it appeared that the blasphemous doctrines which had of late been so widely circulated, and so justly censured, were inserted in primers, for the purpose of inoculating children in a particular school, the name of which he felt it would be in should be tolerated for the indulgence of a certain part of the people. All that was intended was, to impose the same duty on those publications which were now sold for twopence as upon newspapers, and this he would say, that if any portion of the people required such a supply of filthy luxury-if they would have such a separate table, they must pay for the gratification of their depraved appetites. His hon. and learned friend, whose eloquence he heard with the admiration which the whole House must have felt, had deplored the fate of young literary aspirants, who he said would suffer by the operation of this measure. But how suffering was to be apprehended he could not at all imagine, and he could not help expressing his astonishment that this distinguished individual who was so worthy to be the great historian of his country, could condescend to fall in with the clamour that was raised upon this occasion, and to contend that the restriction of the filth and ordure, was calculated to restrain the liberty of the press, and to injure that freedom of discussion which was the pride and glory of the constitution of England. The aspirants alluded to by his hon. and learned friend would have ample opportunity, notwithstanding this measure, to send forth their productions to the country, and therefore there could on that score be no reason to oppose the enactment of such a law. The bill was only calculated to suppress those publications which were likely to abuse rather than to maintain the liberty of the press. In the whole course of his political life he had never done any thing more satisfactory to his own mind, or which appeared to him more deserving the approbation of his country, than the part which he had taken on this and the other measures, which, with a view to the public safety, the House had lately felt it necessary to adopt. did not arise from its provisions against the seditious, but against every branch of the hitherto free press of the country. How was it that both these gentlemen never adverted to the recognizances which this bill called parties to enter into, without any previous or possible knowledge of the nature of the subject on which they were to write? How came it, that in contradiction of all former principles in the law of libel, the booksellers and publishers were now made the objects of jealousy and penalty? This was a principle not at all consistent with those sentiments which were once expressed by a noble and learned lord now in the other House, who, if, a speech of his when he was attorney-general, which was in the first person, and which he presumed from that circumstance had been reported by himself, were correct, distinctly stated, that his object was, to get at the libeller, and not at the publisher. Allusion had been made by a right hon. gentleman to his own sentiments on this subject; he was sure (although he never corrected a speech of his delivered in that House in his life, at the same time that he had to acknow Mr. Tierney thought that his right hon. and learned friend when he complained of misquotation on the part of others, ought at least to have taken care not to fall into a similar error himself. He had insinuated, that all on that side of the House ob-ledge the extreme but unmerited accuracy jected to this bill on account of the lower class of publications which were sold for two-pence being about to be placed in point of duty upon a footing with other newspapers. He would appeal to the House whether that construction of their arguments was not incorrect. So far from objecting to this equalization of duties, they had, and more especially himself, distinctly stated that they had no sort of objection to this part of the measure. But what was most extraordinary on the part both of his right hon. and learned friend and of the right hon. gentleman opposite was, that they had totally omitted what was the real objection to this bill, and that was the clause which called upon booksellers to enter into recognizances, in London of 6007., and in the country of 400l. If this were not a fetter upon the liberty of the press, in the name of God let the bill pass. It was no less, in fact, than saying, that whatever might be a man's talent or virtue, if he attempted to enter into this sort of speculation, he would immediately become tainted and suspected, and must find security for his good behaviour. His right hon. and learned friend and the right hon. gentleman studiously avoided the great objection to this bill, that the danger to the liberty of the press with which what he had said had been reported), that no sentiment of his could be found at variance with the opinions which he had expressed on the present occasion. [The right hon. gentleman was now making some reference to the Whig opinions of his right hon. and learned friend, which he regretted had not been given more Whiggishly, when he was seized with a sudden indisposition, which for some time deprived him of utterance. Having partially recovered, he proceeded.] He hoped the House would excuse him. He was entirely exhausted. Indeed he felt unequal to the task of addressing them when he rose. But were it the last time that he should ever be allowed to speak in that House, he was most solicitous to avail himself of it to record his protest against the system of measures now pursuing. He believed it in his conscience to be wholly ineffectual to its proposed object, while he feared it would be most prejudicial to the liberties of the people. He conjured the noble lord to make the present bill one of experiment. He conjured him to consent to its limitation to one year. If its advantages should be illustrated by the result, the noble lord might then with good reason call upon parliament to prolong it. If, as he believed it would, it should prove injurious, the noble lord would then have the opportunity, as he had no doubt he would have the inclination, to relieve the country from its operation. The Attorney General defended the law officers of the Crown from the charge preferred against them by an hon. and learned gentleman of having neglected their duty by permitting the most atrocious libellers to escape unprosecuted. Mr. Brougham was explaining, when he was called to order. If the House thought him not entitled to explain, he would make a motion-it was indifferent to him. Mr. Martin rose to order. If the hon. and learned gentleman intended to frighten the House-— ment, was, with the sanctuary, repealed The The Speaker observed, that any hon. member in calling another to order, should be careful not to commit disorder himself. It was customary to allow hon. members to explain; but as it was matter of cour-tection, a man banished, and consequently tesy, the privilege ought to be used moderately. deprived of protection, owed any allegiance to the British government? He would also ask, could the children of a man so banished, and born abroad, be entitled to claim as British subjects? Was it intended that forfeiture of property should follow from such banishment? But how was the expense attending the banishment of a man to be defrayed? If wealthy, he could of course pay that expense himself, but if poor, who was to pay? Again, if all the world should be at war, as was the case some time ago, where was the banished man to be sent ? These were among the questions to which this measure naturally gave birth; but as to the difficulties which he had stated with regard to the legal consequences of such a proceeding, he called upon the Crown lawyers to solve these problems, in order that the House might thoroughly understand upon what it was about to legislate. Mr. Bernal said, that his feeling of duty upon this subject was too strong to allow the present motion to be carried without entering his earnest protest against a measure which he conceived of the most noxious and dangerous character. This was, indeed, in his view, one of the most Mr. Denman felt it to be perfectly imodious of the coercive measures which mi- possible that he should allow the Speaker nisters had thought proper to obtrude upon to quit the chair, without taking the opparliament, with a view to reduce the li-portunity of warmly protesting against the berties of the people. But there was one clause in this bill which he deemed peculiarly abhorrent to the genuine spirit of the English law, and to the liberal feelings of the English people. He meant that which authorised banishment. For a period of enactments of this bill. He should cautiously abstain from looking at it, in any observations he might offer to the House, except upon those general principles by which it was connected with the other bills. The grounds, then, upon which he objected to it were virtually the same as those upon which he had proceeded on a former night, with respect to measures effecting the press; and they were resolved into this one, namely that the |