§ Lord Mahonrose to put a question to the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department, and, at the same time, to call the attention of the House to the petition which he presented last Wednesday, from certain inhabitants of Bedford, complaining that their right of petitioning had been unwarrantably interfered with. The petition was signed by very respectable gentlemen, with one of whom he was acquainted and stated, in substance, that the person complained of, Mr. John Hyde, holding an office under the Crown—that of Receiver general of Taxes—seeing a petition against the Government scheme of education in the hands of an inhabitant of Bedford, seized, and tore it 94 into pieces. He looked upon the case as one affecting their privileges, and: he trusted that the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department, would feel it his duty, in consequence of the statement Of the petitioners, to institute an inquiry into the matter.
§ Lord J. Russellthought, that the statement of the petitioners was sufficient to warrant an inquiry. He might, however, state, that it did not appear, on the face of the petition, that the parties complaining had signed the original petition.
§ Mr. Alstonwas requested to state to the House, that, at the time the transaction complained of toot place, Mr. Hyde was dining in a private room at a tavern, with a Mr. Brown, when some person came in, and asked him for the Standard newspaper. He replied that he had not the Standard, but could lend the Morning Chronicle. The stranger retired, observing that he never read the Morning Chronicle, and that, if it were put into his hands, he would throw it into the fire. In the course of the same day, another person, unknown to Mr. Hyde, but whom tie believed to be the waiter of the hotel, came into the room, and placed a paper in the hands of Mr. Brown, who read a part of it. Mr. Hyde soon found out that the petition was against the Government plan of education, and being aware that the people of Bedford knew that he was a Dissenter, and a man of strong feelings and political bias, he felt that this paper, to which he was ignorant that a single signature had been attached, was sent in for the purpose of insulting him. He therefore took it out of the hands of Mr. Brown, and tore it; but he denied that he used the strong expressions attributed to him in the petition, which charged him with having uttered, at the time of destroying the paper, the words, "Damnation to the petition, to the parsons, and to the Church!" Mr. Hyde had assured him (Mr. Alston), and he certainly did not believe that a more honourable or high-minded man existed than Mr. Hyde—that such words never passed his lips, and that he should be ashamed to use them but, conceiving that an insult was intended him, he certainly did tear the petition, and said "damnation." Mr. Hyde had been in office since 1803, when he had been appointed by Mr. Pitt, and no public officer discharged his duties more satisfactorily. He did not attempt to justify his conduct, but only to palliate it, 95 which he attributed to the great excitement under which he laboured.
§ Lord Mahonsaid, that finding from the statement of the hon. Member for Hertfordshire, that Mr. Hyde was sorry for what he had done, and did not attempt to justify, but only to palliate his conduct, it was not his (Lord Mahon's) wish to carry the matter further.