Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

their submitting to him, they had made him their master. He meant "the insignificant little fellow in the wig." The speaker directed the serjeant-at-arms should collect the persons under his command, to remove Mr. Fuller by force from the house. It was with difficulty that the serjeant and four messengers, after a severe struggle, were able to take him into custody.

March 1. Mr. Perceval rose and stated, that he had been authorized by Mr. Fuller, now in the custody of the serjeant-at-arms, to express the deepest regret for the outrage of which he had been guilty, and to request, in Mr. Fuller's name, that he might be discharged. As Mr. Fuller had thus expressed his regret for his conduct, therefore, and had thus apologized, he trusted the house would think that it expressed its sense of the impropriety of such conduct in a manner sufficiently strong, and that enough had been done to support their dignity and authority. He concluded by moving, "That Mr. Fuller be now discharged out of custody."

Lord Temple was sure that the house must be aware how unpleasant it was to rise to speak in opposition to the most lenient proposal upon a personal question. But he couldnot, consistently with his sense of what was due to the house and to the speaker, suffer such outrageous conduct to pass with so slight a mark of the resentment of the house.

Mr. Charles Wynne felt exactly as his noble friend (Temple) had described, in rising to speak on a personal question of this nature. But he was convinced that the house would not discharge its duty to itself, if it agreed to the motion now proposed. It was said that this was the first offence; but the

house would recollect, that it was not one offence only. The house had, in the first place, been insulted by the most improper and unparlia mentary language: and when it expressed its sense of such conduct, Mr. Fuller had burst out of the custody of the serjeant-at-arms; had rushed into the body of the house, and committed the most violent outrage. After such conduct as this, it was proposed to discharge the offender at the first sitting of the house. There was no precedent of any case similar to this; but even where members had been committed for improper language, the house had directed that they should be reprimanded. But if this motion was carried, the entry on the journals would be, that, after this unprecedented outrage, Mr. Fuller was discharged at the next sitting of the house,

Mr. Whitbread said, that he had sat for twenty years in the house, and never witnessed such a gross outrage as had been committed the other night. He was present; he saw it all; he heard all; but would not quote the language used. Those who were present would recollect that it was only by an accidental circumstance that the outrage had been prevented from proceeding to the utmost excess of violence. After this Mr. Fuller sent the house a sort of an apology directed to the chancellor of the exchequer.

[Mr. Perceval here interrupted Mr. Whitbread, and said, that he understood the apology to be directed to the house, though it had been inclosed in a letter to him.]

Mr. Whitbread, in continuation, insisted that it was directed to the chancellor of the exchequer, and taking up a paper from the table, read, "I beg you will inform the house that I am sorry for what 1

have done, and beg leave to apologize for my conduct." This was directed to the chancellor of the exchequer. The paper itself showed that such was the fact, and it was impossible they could deny it. Of the letter inclosing this apology the house knew nothing, as it was not on the table; but after all, the apology was far from being couched in very strong terms. Gentlemen had talked a great deal lately about their privileges. One man for a violation of them had lately been reprimanded at their bar, [see. next chapter,] and another had been sent to Newgate; and was the house to suffer an outrage within its walls, the greatest outrage that had been ever committed, to pass with this slight mark of its sense of such conduct? When an honourable baronet, who was present at the time, thought that he who committed this outrage ought to be sent to the Tower, it would not perhaps be considered as harsh, that he (Mr. Whitbread) expected a much more ample apology; and even supposing an ample apology to he made, he could not have thought it possible that the offending person should be dismissed without a reprimand from the chair. When gentlemen who saw the outrage doubted, if it would be consistent with the dignity of the house to allow the man who had so insultingly violated its privileges and rules ever to sit there again, it was proposed to dismiss the matter with this meagre apology and slight confinement. Many gentlemen present had seen the outrage; all of them had heard of it; the whole public rang with it. He affirmed, that not the house alone, but the speaker had been insulted; he had heard the language used. He would not quote it, unless he was challenged to do

so.

But if he should be challenged to quote the words,. he thought they were such as would leave no doubt of the correctness of his conclusion. He must therefore oppose the motion.

Sir R. Williams thought he might move, as an amendment, "that Mr. Fuller be brought to the bar to apologize to the house; and that if the apology should be deemed sufficient, he might be discharged."

Mr. secretary Ryder did not rise with a view to diminish the sense which the house appeared to enter. tain of the insult offered to it. With a view to example, however, he would propose an amendment to the motion of his right honourable friend, viz. "that Mr. Fuller be called to the bar to be reprimanded by the speaker, and then discharged."

The speaker said, that he thought it right to state to the house, in justice to the individual whose con duct was now under discussion, that he had received a letter from Mr. Fuller, with an apology for expres sions which he had not heard; and if he had heard them, the house would give him credit, when he said that they would not have operated in the least on his mind, except as connected with the dig nity and authority of the house.

The ques ion was then put, and the amendment carried; when the speaker ordered the serjeant-at-arms to bring Mr. Fuller to the bar. Mr. Fuller was accordingly brought in the course of a few minu es, when the speaker addressed him in substance as follows:

"Mr. Fuller, You stand at that bar, in the presence of the commons of the united kingdom in parliament assembled, to receive the declaration of their high displea.

D 3

sure,

sure. During the progress of the business of a committee of the whole house, engaged in a most important and solemn inquiry, your offensive language and disorderly conduct required an immediate appeal to the house. When called upon by the house to apologize for your error, you aggravated your offence by insuling its dignity; you disregarded the custody to which you were bound, by every consideration of propriety and duty, to have submitted, and broke into the body of the house with clamour and out rage unparalleled. This is the head and front of your offending. As for myself, I feel no sentiment towards you, except that of regret, that any member of this house should stand where you now stand, under such circumstances. But we hope from the apology you have

made,, from the early contrition you evinced, on the very night in which the outrage was committed, that you have a proper sense of your error. The moderation with which the house has acted in your case deserves your best acknowledgment. But let not that moderation mislead you, as to the motives by which it has been actuated: for if in future you should fall into the same or any similar offence, there will remain for the house only one measure to rescue its authority from disgrace; one which must render it impossible for you ever to renew so presumptuous a contest. I am directed by the house to order you to be now discharged, and you are discharged accordingly, paying your fees."

Mr. Fuller was then taken from the bar, and discharged.

CHAPTER III.

Sir Francis Burdett's Notice of a Motion respecting Captain Lake-Debate on the Embezzlement Bill-Debate in the House of Lords on His Majesty's Mes sage respecting Portugal-Mr. Yorke's Motion with respect to Gale JonesExamination and Commitment of John Dean-Examination and Commitment of Gale Jones-Dean admonished and discharged-Sir Francis Burdett's Motion to discharge Gale Jones from Newgate-Mr. Brougham's Motion on the Slave Trade-Debate on the Marine Pay-Office Bill-Debate on the Ordnance Estimates.

F

EB. 15. Sir Francis Burdett in the house of commons rose to call the attention of the house to a subject which he thought demand ed their serious consideration. He had no other authority relative to

the fact than the statement he had seen in the public newspapers, in which it was alleged, that a sea captain, in the British service, had been lately brought to trial by a court-martial, for a most inhuman

act

act of wanton and deliberate barbarity towards a British seaman on board his own vessel. It was sta ted, that he had put this seaman ashore upon a barren rock in the Western Ocean without provisions, and exposed him to perish by famine; a circumstance which accidentally reached the knowledge of government through the American newspapers. This officer was brought to trial by court-martial; and on being proved guilty of the fact, he was merely sentenced to be dismissed the service. What the honourable baronet wished to know was, whether the government of the country meant to stop here with such a fact in proof-before them, and brought to light by the merest accident? or, whether they meant to take any further steps upon a subject so disgraceful to the service, so materially interesting to the life and security of every seaman in his majesty's fleet; a circumstance which, if so slightly passed over, might have the most serious effects in the naval service. As no further steps were taken, nor seemed to be intended, by government, he felt it his duty, in his place as a member of parliament, to call the attention of the house to this subject. He hoped, however, that government would not allow it to pass over without taking some further steps; for, if such wanton and tyrannical occurrences were once suffered to obtain with impunity, there would be an end of all order and good government in our fleets.

Mr. Ward said, he knew no, thing more of the transaction than that the captain, to whom he sup. posed the honourable baronet had alluded, was brought to a courtmartial for the fact stated, had been found guilty, and sentenced

by the court-martial to dismissal from the service. That sentence had been carried into effect, and the admiralty had no power to do

more.

Sir Francis Burdett thought, that a mere dismissal from the service was not a punishment that could give could give satisfaction to the country for an act so atrocious. The honourable baronet was proceeding; but

The speaker rose to remind him, that unless he had some specific motion to offer, it was contrary to the established order of proceeding for members to enter into discussions, when no question was before the house.

Sir Francis Burdett bowed to the authority of the chair, but said, he did hope that on a matter so ex, traordinary, of so much importance to the liberty of the subject, the spirit of the constitution, and the well-being of the navy, he might be indulged in a few observations, without being restricted under the usual order of the house. (Here there was a call of Chair, chair, chair!)

The speaker again rose, and said, he felt it his imperative duty to remind the honourable baronet of the established order of proceeding in that house; and he must now call upon the house for their support and assistance. (Chair, chair, chair! on every side.)

Sir Francis Burdett begged leave just to remark, that he mere ly had risen to mention the matter for the notice of his majesty's ministers, in hopes they would take it up, and found on it some proceeding. It was hard to throw the onus upon his shoulders, as it was no duty that belonged peculiarly to him. However, he thought the subject so extraordinary, and

of so much, importance, that he should be prepared to give notice of a motion on it in a day or two. And on the 16th, sir Francis Burdett rose to move, "that there be laid before the house the minutes of the court-martial upon the honourable Warwick Lake, late captain of his majesty's ship Ulysses." He did not know whether any objection would be made to the motion; but if there should, he should turn his motion into a notice for Monday next.

After a short conversation between Mr. Ward, Mr. Charles Adams, sir Francis Burdett, and the chancellor of the exchequer, the motion was agreed to, on its being understood that the paper was called for by sir Francis Burdett, with a view to make it the foundation of some ulterior proceeding in that house. See Chap. IV.

Owing to some serious defalcations among persons of high consequence in certain public offices, noticed in other parts of this volume, a bill was brought in, entitled The Embezzlement Bill, to prevent the recurrence of such evils. It went through several of its stages, and on the 15th of February,

Sir John Newport moved that it be reconimitted. The house having resolved itself into the committee, Mr. Lushington in the chair, the committee was proceeding with the bill, when

Mr. Rose thought that some ease should have been laid before the house by the honourable baronet, as the ground upon which he had thought it right to bring forward this measure. He did not feel it necessary to augment the list of felonies, without cause and he was apprehensive, that if the bil were to pass in its present form, it would be productive of great in

[blocks in formation]

Sir John Newport expressed some surprise at this delicate sensibility on the subject of penalties when they approached a public office, where the son or the brother of a great man might be affected. He had stated the circumstance of a collector, who had absconded with 27,000l. of the public money in his hands, and had afterwards been taken with seven thousand pounds of it in his possession, as the ground of this bill. In that case, if the clerk of that collector had been guilty, he would have suffered death; but as the law at present stands, no adequate punishment could be inflicted upon the principal, and therefore the law officers had not thought it advisable to proceed against him. It was to remedy this glaring defect in the law that he had brought forward this bill. When he considered that the right honourable gentleman must have been a party to the passing of a bill imposing the penalty of death on the clerk or cashier of a bank for embezzlement; and also to the act rendering it a transportable offence to shoot, ensnare, or kill, deer in a close, park, or paddock; he could not help admiring his tender sensibility on the present occasion. But whatever might be the tender sensibility of gentlemen, he would contend, that it was the

duty

« ZurückWeiter »