vernment in time of peace, to reduce that debt; and this would be the effect of the present bill. public, after that in favour of the contractors. He considered this arrangement to be just and equitable, not only to the present generation, but to posterity. The Marquis of Lansdown said, that It was, besides, the only mode of coming having been one of those who had strongly at once to the diminution of the taxes. recommended the reduction of taxes, he Had the five millions of half-pay been could not withhold his consent from a bill kept on the present footing, the sum fall- which would have that effect, at the same ing in every year would have been so time the observations made by the noble small, that it would have been difficult to earl rendered it necessary for him to quaapply it to the relief of taxation. No lify his consent. There had hitherto been greater burthen would be thrown on pos- two modes of proceeding with respect to terity than that assumed by ourselves; public burthens: either to increase that but even if that were the case, the coun- which we bore ourselves in order to relieve try would have been placed in a better posterity, or to remove the weight from state to bear it than it now was, by the our own shoulders and place it on those operation of the sinking fund and its ac- of posterity. It had been reserved for cumulation by compound interest, which the noble earl to act on both systems at in ten years would raise that fund from once, by creating a sinking fund of five 5 millions to 7 millions. He did not be- millions, to extinguish so much of the lieve that any reduction of taxation which national debt, and, in the course of the could be proposed would have a consi- same session, adding 2,800,000l. to that derable effect in relieving agriculture. debt. This bill created a set of commisThe people reasoned as though the taking sioners to sell annuities in the market, off of a tax from the payers would yield whilst there was another set employed in unmixed benefit. But that was not the buying them up. The fund market was case: loss might be incurred in another affected by the same circumstances as quarter, and no general relief be pro- markets for other commodities. What duced. The noble earl illustrated this would the most common farmer think doctrine by the example of the reduction if, on going to the corn-market, he should of the 5 per cents. It had enabled go. find an agent purchasing corn for a genvernment to repeal 1,400,000l. of the tleman because he had not enough of it, Malt-tax, and had been productive of ad- and on moving a little farther, he should vantage to the consumers of beer; but it find another agent selling corn for the had also taken from about 150,000 indivi- same gentleman because he had too much duals one-fifth of their income, and had de- of it? And yet, only change the names creased their means of consumption to of agent and steward for those of trustees that amount. It was certainly desirable and commissioners, and it would be found that the peace establishment should be that his majesty's government were exfixed as low as possible, but in doing so actly in the situation of that gentlemany individuals must be turned out of man. As something was to be gained in employment, and a valuable branch of the execution of the bargain, he wished consumption must be destroyed. So far to know why the public should not deal from the reduction of taxes being calcu- for itself, and obtain whatever advantage lated to relieve agricultural distress, he might be thus produced? In another conceived that the only measure, and he place, a proposal had been made, which confessed it would be in the end a fatal had not been well received, to enable the one, which could have a direct effect on commissioners for the sinking fund to agriculture, would be a great increase of take the bargain in behalf of the public. the public expenditure. If that expendi- Notwithstanding the disapprobation then ture were augmented by ten millions to- expressed, a clause had been introduced morrow, the benefit to agriculture would into the present bill, giving them that be immediate, though purchased with an power; and he hoped that they would ultimate loss to the country. He believed avail themselves of it. Considering the that the present measure would prove use- object of the bill to be both legitimate ful, not so much in the way of relief, as in and useful, he should give it his support. contributing to remove the artificial state He should not follow the noble earl in his in which the war had placed us. As it remark concerning taxation, farther than was unavoidable in time of war to contract to say, that if his principle were carried a debt, so it ought to be the object of go-to its fullest extent, it would not signify if the whole property of the public were absorbed by taxes, as it would revert to them in some other shape. of absurdities, and he should not oppose it. The Earl of Lauderdale agreed with the sentiments expressed by the noble earl opposite, that the sudden check given by peace to the increased demand occasioned by war, had been the chief cause of the agricultural distress. He then took a view of the proposed measure. It would put annually 2,800,000l. into the hands of commissioners, who would pay 4,800,000l. into the Treasury, whence the money would go into the hands of individuals, who must expend it in procuring the necessaries of life. Upwards of two millions would thus be taken from the rich, and given to those who would go to market, and create a demand with it. The effect would, therefore, be most salutary. But it would be entirely counteracted by keeping up a sinking fund of five millions, which acted on quite a different principle; for the money paid to the commissioners for that fund, instead of going to hands that would spend it in the market, would be locked up in the purchase of stock. The funds might be raised in that manner; but would the noble carl raise the funds, by taking from the people five millions, which it would otherwise have spent in the purchase of commodities, at the same time that he acknowledged that the great want of the country was a demand? Why should he refuse to give up the sinking fund, and thus increase public industry and consumption? In the time of sir Robert Walpole, the city of London dreaded nothing more than the establishment of a sinking fund. Dr. Price had drawn up three plans of a sinking fund for Mr. Pitt, and had always said that Mr. Pitt had taken the worst. By suspending the action of the sinking fund for a time, the noble earl would increase the expenditure and consumption of the people to the amount of five millions. He would also augment the revenue, and thus afford fresh facilities for reducing the The bill was read a second time. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Tuesday, June 25. CONDUCT OF THE LORD ADVOCATE WITH RELATION TO THE PUBLIC PRESS OF SCOTLAND.] Mr. Abercromby, in rising to submit his promised motion, said, he could assure the House, that whenever he rose to address them on any subject, he felt it necessary to solicit their indulgence; but on the present occasion he felt it particularly necessary to claim it; seeing that the subject to which he wished to call their attention related exclusively to the people of Scotland. It was a grievance affecting them alone; but he trusted that on a great public question, the right of the people of every portion of the empire to a redress of grievances would be fully recognized. If he should be able to show, that the learned lord advocate, and his colleagues in Scotland, had connected themselves with the Press of that country, in a way which was incompatible with the duties of their situa. tions-if he should make it appear that a system had been adopted in that country to traduce through the medium of the press, the public and private character of individuals, by means which every man of feeling must detest, and in a manner which no man who was alive to a sense of honour or character could bear-if he could show that this had been countenanced and encouraged by the learned lord and his colleagues-if he could prove that he had abused his high authority, that the forms of the law had been perverted, and perverted from bad motives if he could prove these facts to the satisfaction of the House, he did expect that they would not allow evils of such a nature to be without a remedy-even though they should exclusively apply to Scotland. In the course of his speech, he would not state any thing which he did not firmly believe to be a fact. He had a narrative of plain facts to support the conclusions to which he should come. With respect to the time of bringing the motion forward, he had given notice of it before the holidays, but had put it off from the 20th until after a trial, which he should assert was most improperly delayed from time to time. The trial was the expected one of William Murray Borthwick, in which he felt that interest, that he wished to defer his motion until it was concluded; because he naturally expected that it would throw light upon the subject to which his motion referred. The trial was fixed for the 17th instant, but it did not take place. And now that all chance of that was over, he took the earliest day for submitting his statement to the House. He should comprise his remarks under these heads: first, the powers of the lord advocate; next, he would show how that learned lord and his colleagues had misconducted them selves by their connexion with the public press in Scotland. He would then proceed to the case of Mr. Borthwick, which he should prove to be one of unparalleled hardship. After having submitted his statement, he thought that, for the credit of the learned lord himself, the facts should be fairly investigated by a committee; and after that committee should have given its report, then he would call upon the House for a definitive opinion upon the case. First, with respect to the powers of the lord advocate. For the lord advocate had been claimed all the powers which had long been exercised by the privy council of Scotland. Before the union, the lord justice clerk, the lord chamberlain, and a few other official personages, constituted the executive power of Scotland, and what remained of their power was claimed to belong to the office of lord advocate. That these powers were great was admitted; and, in 1804, they had been boldly claimed by the then lord advocate.. Neither he nor any one else knew their extent; and this rendered them the more dangerous; because nothing could be more dangerous than the existence of a power which was not defined. He did not mean to say that the learned lord would exercise all the powers which had once been claimed by the privy council-one of which was, that their authority superseded that of every court of criminal judicature in the kingdom, and that they might bring all parties before themselves for trial. This was a power which he was satisfied the learned lord would not attempt to exercise if he could. But from the existence of this power, which was claimed and exercised by the privy council, one must infer that there were many minor powers claimed, which were not less oppressive in their nature. If the power of the lord advo cate was to be limited only by that which the privy council had exercised, there was no act of injustice, violence, and outrage, for which it might not be cited as authority; but, without inquiring whether it extended so far, he would come to what were the powers which it was admitted did belong to the learned lord. He was officially the sole public prosecutor in Scotland. It was true that a private individual might institute a prosecution by consent and concurrence of the lord advocate; but then there were so many obstacles in this way of proceed ing, as to throw the whole power of prosecution into the hands of the lord advocate himself. It was also to be recollected, that in his official proceedings the lord advocate was not controlled by a grand jury. He could at all times proceed on his own authority. There were, it was true, some restrictions to his autho rity with respect to the bringing parties accused to trial, by an act passed in the year 1701. Now what were these? By that act a person accused might, if he pleased, issue a precept to the lord advocate to bring him to trial within 60 days; but the lord advocate might come in on the 59th day, and then "desert the diet-pro loco et tempore," and this would have the effect of postponing the trial for 40 days longer. At the end of that time, he might repeat the same process, and thus defer the trial for 40 days longer. So that he might thus arrest any subject in Scotland, and keep him in prison for 140 days. At the end of that time of course he must be acquitted; as it was not likely that the trial would be delayed so long if there was any chance of a conviction at an earlier period. But, where was to be his remedy or redress? Then, with respect to public prosecutions, the practice in Scotland was, that when an agent for the Crown conducted them, the expenses were all paid by him; but in the case of a private individual carrying on a prosecution, he had to pay all the costs if he did not succeed; and in many cases he was not allowed to proceed until he gave security for the payment of all costs in case of failure in the case. might also, if the defendant chose, he called upon to take an oath before trial, that he was not actuated by hatred or malice, and that he believed all the evidence on which his case was to rest was true. In addition to this, the prosecutor was bound to be present in court during He the whole of the trial. No private individual could prosecute, unless he could prove some personal injury. Even in case of murder, he was bound first to prove his propinquity to the deceased, before he could prosecute; and even where an indictment was to be preferred for a public nuisance, it must be by the procurator fiscal, who was, as it were, the lord advocate of his district. The consequence was, that very few private prosecutions were carried on in Scotland, and nearly the whole were thus thrown into the power of the lord advocate. Now, this immense power was exercised by the lord advocate, the solicitor-general of Scotland, and officers who were called advocates depute. These were appointed by the lord advocate. There were generally two or three appointed for a circuit; but the learned lord might multiply himself as many times as he pleased, and appoint an indefinite number in the country. There were some other subordinate officers of his appointment, but he would only call the attention of the House to those he had named. Now he would ask, whether the possession of so much power ought not to be looked upon with caution-whether, in proportion as it was great, its exercise should not be guarded against partiality and abuse? It was essential, that the man who held such authority in a country, should exercise it in a manner so as to be free from all suspicion, and should take care that he did not so mingle himself up with any transaction, as to become a party to that which might come before him in his judicial character. He did not charge the noble lord with any crime of omission; he charged him with crimes of commission. The learned lord had at his disposal considerable patronage; he had at his command large sums of money; he had also in his power all the sanction of office; and, sorry was he to say, that all these advantages the learned lord had given away, in order to promote a system of gross libel and atrocious calumny upon private individuals. Now, the House would feel that this was an important consideration, when he informed it that the learned lord, in addition to all his powers as public prosecutor, was in Scotland a co-existent secretary of state for the home department, and was in constant correspondence with the secretary of state in England. Every body would therefore see, how much those might gain by his recommendations, who had the good fortune to be in constant communication with him. In every country the bar attracted to itself much of the talent and industry of the community. This was particularly the case in Scotland. As there was no parliament in that country, the bar was the arena which those whose talents had been improved by education selected for the display of their mental powers and qualifications. The number of persons practising at the bar in Scotland varied from 150 to 200; and upon these individuals the learned lord had at least 80 places to bestow. Now, it was evident, that this patronage would give the lord advocate great influence; and if he employed it properly, it might do much for men of talent and knowledge, and encourage them in their exertions to improve and benefit society; but if he gave it an improper direction, he was inflicting a heavy curse upon his country. Indeed, if he turned it to supporting in the press a system of detraction and calumny, there was no greater misfortune that he could heap upon Scotland, or heavier reproach that he could fix upon himself. He now came to the facts, to which he particularly wished to call the attention of the House. In the year 1820, there was published at Hamilton, a paper called the Clydesdale Journal, which was afterwards transferred to Glasgow, and published under the name of the Glasgow Sentinel. This paper was at that time nearly destitute of circulation; but as it was thought expedient by some supporters of administration, not to allow it to die away, great exertions were used to create for it an additional sale. A paper was therefore privately circulated in the neighbourhood of Glasgow, recommending it to the support of the friends of government on account of the principles which it professed to maintain. The learned lord had put his signature, with that of several other gentlemen, to the recommendation in question; and in order that the House might be fully aware of the nature of it, he would take the liberty of reading it to them. It was as follows:-" Considering the present state of the country, and of this country in particular, in consequence of the great industry used in disseminating publications which have a tendency to unhinge the principles of all classes, and to render the middling and lower classes discontented and unhappy, we are desirous of encouraging a periodical publication. which may counteract their baneful effects; and, from the experience already had of the Clydesdale Journal, we recommend it to the patronage of such gentlemen as have not contributed to, and may not be disposed to aid, such an undertaking." Now, as the lord advocate had put his signature to this document, the next consideration for the House was, in what spirit and temper this Journal had been conducted previous to the time at which it received the approbation and recommendation of the learned lord? He had seen many of the numbers of this journal entire, and also copious extracts from others, all published previous to November, 1820, on which day the learned lord signed that recommendation; and he would say, that there were libels in them against individuals as atrocious as could well be imagined. The most base, traitorous, and disloyal motives were attributed to gentlemen in that House who generally opposed the conduct of administration. He could also state a case in which the private conduct of a most respectable gentleman near Hamilton had been most unjustly arraigned, and in which motives had been attributed to him, which, had he entertained, would have rendered him incapable of admission into respectable society. He would not ask the House to believe these circumstances on his evidence. He would give them the testimony of a gentleman, who had himself signed the letter of recommendation, who was a person of respectability residing in Hamilton, and who had received a recent mark of favour from his majesty, which he was said to value most highly. This gentleman, in a letter which he had occasion to write respecting this Journal, made use of the following expressions-" You know that I never imagined that 2751. would be sufficient to set a newspaper a-going. Whatever merit there may be in the loyal principles held forth in the Clydesdale Journal, it has been greatly injured by the personalities it has directed against the people in Opposition. These can do it no good, and have greatly injured it in the eyes of respectable persons. If the paper is continued, I trust that all such personalities will be avoided in future, and that many other improvements will be also made." nal just before the learned lord took it under his especial patronage. How it had been conducted since, was proved sufficiently by the recent trial of Mr. Stuart, the death of sir A. Boswell, and the affliction of his widow and children. It was for the learned lord to show that after he had signed that document, he had withdrawn his confidence and support from this journal on account of the disapprobation which he felt at the mode in which it had been conducted. But the next point for the House to consider was, how the learned lord had signed this document? Was it done openly and without any concealment or mystery? No. A copy of this recommendation, with the signatures attached to it, was enclosed in a letter and sent round to those persons who supported the present system of administration, with so strong an injunction of secrecy, that they were desired to return the copy, after they had read it, to the person by whom it was sent. He understood that 200 copies of it had been circulated in this manner, and that only two out of all that number had not been returned as desired by the writer. There was another circumstance connected with the Clydesdale Journal, which it was proper that the House should know. The learned lord must have known that Mr. Aiton, the sheriff-substitute for Lanark, residing at Hamilton, was the principal writer of the journal in question. Now that gentleman, from his official capacity, was armed with great powers; he was especially charged with the conservation of the peace; he held a judicial situation, and thus might have been called to decide upon actions for damages instituted for libels which he himself had written as editor. Did the learned lord know of this fact, or did he not? [The lord advocate said that he did not.] It was a noterious fact, that Mr. Aiton had avowed himself the author of most of the libels that appeared in that paper. He had begun by libelling the duke of Hamilton-he then libelled his noble friend the member for the county-he then attacked the provost of Hamilton, because he was a friend of the Hamilton family, and he concluded by persecuting every person who was in any way dependent on or connected with The letter was dated the 13th it. His conscientious belief was, that the October 1820, one month before the learned lord did know the circumstance : learned lord had affixed his signature to but even if he did not, he (Mr. A.) could the recommendation of this very journal. prove that Aiton knew that this letter of Such was the character given of this jour-recommendation had been signed by the VOL. VII. 4 Q |