§ Mr. Sheridanrose to present a Petition upon a subject which he should recommend to the serious attention of the house, and of his majesty's ministers. The subject was not new to that house, for in the year 1800 he had taken a considerable share, with a worthy and hon. baronet (sir F. Burdett) whom he did not then see in his place, in the inquiries which had been made into the management of the Coldbath-fields Prison, and which brought the abuses in the government of that prison under the consideration of parliament. They had, on that occasion, established the case so clearly, that the distinguished person now no more, (Mr. Pitt,) who was then at the head of his majesty's government, was obliged to give way, and consent to a full investigation of the whole transaction. Accordingly a commission was issued under his majesty's sign manual, appointing commissioners, most of them members of that house, to prosecute the inquiry; and a report was made, which entered very much into the detail of the subject. But unquestionably the defect or error of that report was not, that it exaggerated the abuses complained of in the interior administration of the government of the prison. He found, however, that the means recommended in the report, for the redress of the abuses complained of, had not been carried into effect, nay, had been abandoned, and he very much feared, that the abuses had increased in consequence. The allegations contained in the petition, he had not felt it necessary to enquire into, previous to his presenting it to the house, because he had received the Petition from such a respectable quarter, and upon such high authority, that he could not entertain any just doubts of the correctness of the statements it contained, The Petitions was signed by Mr. Stevens, foreman, and by the other members of the grand jury of the county of Middlesex, as well as by Mr. Phillips, one of the sheriffs, a gentleman, who, infinitely to his credit, applied himself, with the most laudable zeal, to the execution of all the duties of his arduous office. He could assure the right hon. the chancellor of the exchequer, that this matter was not brought before parliament by him with any party views, nor had the petitioners any such object in their contemplation. On the contrary, it had been his practice, on every occasion when he had a petition to present, praying for a 663 redress of grievances, to submit the subject to the consideration of his majesty's ministers, whenever the redress could be effectually administered by them, rather than bring the matter forward publicly in parliament. This course had been followed in the present instance. A communication had been made to his majesty's government by the foreman of the grand jury, in an interview which he had with one of his majesty's ministers. As no steps had since been taken in consequence of such communication, he had thought it his duty to present the petition to parliament. But, he should, for the present, content himself with moving, that the petition do lie on the table, leaving the whole credit of the business to his majesty's ministers, if they should think proper to take it up, though at the same time he was bound to state, that if, after a reasonable time, no step should appear to have been taken, he should think it his duty to bring forward the subject by a specific motion.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerdid not mean to give any opposition to the bringing up this Petition, though after the statement of the right hon. gent. he felt called upon to make one or two observations. He agreed with the right hon. gent. that when questions of this description arose, the proper course to take was, to see at first how far the executive government might be disposed to interfere for the redress of the abuses complained of. An appeal to the government was, therefore, the most correct proceeding in the first instance, because it was competent to the executive to direct a thorough investigation into the matters complained of, and if the circumstances of the case should be such as to warrant the proceeding, to order a criminal prosecution against the offending parties. This was the view which he had of the subject, and the right hon. gent. himself seemed to acquiesce in it. The communication that had been made to government was conveyed in a private form, which could not regularly be acted upon, and he had, in consequence, recommended that the matter should be officially communicated to the executive; in which case, he pledged himself, that so far as he was individually concerned, no time should be lost, nor any means left untried to ascertain the justice of the complaint. He had thought this a course far preferable to bringing the subject at once before parliament; because whatever prosecutions the executive might find it necessary to order, 664 upon an investigation of the matter, must come before the grand jury, who would of course come to the consideration of the charge, with less prejudice upon their minds. After he had recommended this mode of proceeding, and upon the grounds he had stated, the petitioners, whether from a just or an unjust distrust of the government, had thought proper to bring the matter publicly before parliament. Though the presentment, it appeared had been made at the Michaelmas Sessions, it was not till after the commencement of the present session of parliament that the matter had been communicated to government. An inquiry too had been made by the magistrates, which, though he could not say whether the result of that inquiry was right or wrong, seemed, from the silence of the parties, a satisfactory answer to the complaint, and therefore no farther steps had been taken till the present time. It had even been inferred, from their not having made the official communication recommended, that the gentlemen themselves, who preferred the complaint, were satisfied with the result of that inquiry. He was sure the right hon. gent. would concur with him, that it would have been much better to have left the business, in the first instance, to the executive government; but now that the Petition had been brought forward, he had no objection to its lying on the table.
§ Mr. Sheridanobserved, that the petitioners had not shewn any unfair distrust of government, remembering as they did that no efficient measures of redress had been adopted, founded on the report of 1800, and because there could be no efficient redress without the dismissal of Mr. Aris. As to an official communication, it was impossible for the petitioners to make it, because the grand jury had been dissolved previous to the communication. It was as private individuals that they appeared as petitioners before parliament, and not in any aggregate capacity.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerrepeated, that the only communication made to government was of a private nature, and, consequently, was not a sufficient ground for a public proceeding. As to the report of 1800, he had only to observe, that it had been laid on the table of the house, and might have been made the foundation of parliamentary measures by any hon. member who might have thought such a course necessary.—The Petition was then brought up and read.—After which Mr. 665 Sheridan moved, that it do lie on the table, at the same time stating, that many more facts had since came to the knowledge of the petitioners, which however, he should on that occasion abstain from detailing to the house.—A short conversation then took place, as to the propriety of allowing the petition to lie on the table, with a description of the petitioners that was not borne out by the fact. Mr. Sumner first took the exception, on this ground, as even the right hon. gent. himself had admitted, that the grand jury had been dissolved previous to the inquiry, and certainly, before the presenting of the petition. Without any wish to oppose the petition, he thought the house could not entertain it, with such an unfounded designation of the parties who presented it. The Chancellor of the Exchequer recommended to the right hon. gent. on this ground, to withdraw the petition for the present, in order to have one prepared to present to-morrow, with the proper designation of the parties, in which case he should himself be ready to second the motion, that the petition should lie on the table. After a few words from Mr. Sheridan, who thought that the house ought not to be too critical as to the wording of petitions, the petition was allowed to be withdrawn, in order that it might be prepared to be presented to-morrow in a more correct form.