LORD COCHRANE. (Hansard, 21 March 1815)

§ Mr. Speaker
acquainted the House, that he had just received a letter from William Jones, esq. marshal of the King's-bench prison; and the said Letter was thereupon, by direction of the House, read by Mr. Speaker, and is as followeth:

§ The Speaker.
—Under these circumstances, any honourable member may suggest to the House the course of proceeding which he conceives ought to be adopted.

Lord Castlereagh.
—From the nature of the arrest, and the circumstances attending it, I do not think, Sir, that the House is called upon to interfere. I am not aware, as the House was not actually sitting, with the mace on the table, and the Speaker in the chair, when the arrest took place, that any breach of privilege has been committed. But, if any gentleman entertains a doubt on the subject—if any gentleman conceives the privileges of the House to have been violated—then it is proper that a due degree of jealousy should be manifested, and that an inquiry into the circumstances should be instituted. It is not, however, incumbent on me to propose that inquiry; for, as far as I can judge, our privileges cannot be affected by any occurrence which may take place in the chamber appropriated to the sittings of the Commons of the realm, when they are not regularly assembled there. On one point, I think there can be no difference of opinion. It must be quite obvious to every man, that the marshal has not acted wilfully in violation of the privileges of the House.—(Hear!)—No blame can attach to him, since he has submitted himself to the judgment of the House of Commons, after having done that which he considered his duty as a civil officer. Having had lord Cochrane in his custody, from which he had escaped, the marshal was bound not to pass over any justifiable means of putting him under arrest, whenever a fair opportunity occurred. As far as the individual officer is concerned, it is quite clear that he acted from a sense of duty; and that it is only necessary for him to know what the privileges of Parliament are, to act in conformity with them, on any future occasion.

Mr. Wynn.
—Sir, it certainly appears to 311 me that the present arrest cannot be considered as a breach of the privileges of Parliament. Let us, in the first place, examine whether an arrest of this peculiar description could be prevented by parliamentary privilege. I do not know under what circumstances any member of this House is privileged from arrest, having broken prison, where he had been confined in consequence of a regular conviction. I cannot conceive how an arrest in consequence could be opposed. Now what are the circumstances attending the arrest of the noble lord? He was taken on one of the benches of the House, the House not being then regularly sitting. This must be considered in exactly the same light as if he were arrested in his way down to the House; and it cannot be maintained, that the privilege of a member of parliament would, in his peculiar case, protect him in his transit. The only other point to be considered is, the entrance of a peace-officer, or of any other person, who has no right to come here, but by the permission of the House. Undoubtedly, if any officer, acting under a warrant, or any other authority, entered the House without having received its previous permission, I should hold that to be the highest breach of its privilege that could be committed, and it should not be suffered to pass unpunished. But, Sir, this applies only to the House when sitting, and not to the place in which we usually assemble. These walls are not peculiarly appropriated to our use. If, at half-past three o'clock, this day, a message from the Throne came down, directing us to meet, not in this House, but, for instance, in the Painted Chamber, or in any apartment in the King's palace, we must proceed thither; for we assemble here only under the writ calling on us to meet in Westminster; and, therefore, I do not think that any privilege is attached merely to these walls. If it were otherwise, that privilege would be available in the case of any stranger. Any man coming within these walls, guilty of an offence against the laws, and sitting himself down, would be placed exactly in the same situation as the noble lord. If the House were sitting, he would, of course, be ordered out, and he might then be taken; but if he came in here when the House was not sitting, I can see nothing peculiar in the place which is used for our assembling in, that could privilege him from arrest. It appears to me, that the noble lord could 312 only be considered as coming down to take his place—and, in that case, I know not of any privilege that could exempt him from this particular species of arrest. If, however, any gentleman has serious doubts on the question, the regular course would be, to refer the letter to a Committee of Privileges; because, in a case of this kind, if any difference of opinion exists, the greatest attention ought to be paid to the perfect examination of all its circumstances.

§ Mr. Tierney
—Sir, I perfectly agree in the sentiments of the noble lord, with respect to the conduct of the Marshal of the King's-bench prison, on this occasion. He certainly has shewn no disposition to commit any offence against the privileges of the House, and he has taken the earliest opportunity to state what he has done. But, Sir, I do not agree with the noble lord in thinking, that this case presents no circumstances that deserve to be farther looked into. We are told, that lord Cochrane has broken prison. As a private individual I may know this; but, as a member of Parliament, I am ignorant of it. I know that lord Cochrane was convicted, because the record of that conviction was laid before us; but I do not know whether he did not afterwards receive a full pardon. I consider this to be the case of a member regularly elected to serve in Parliament, and coming down to take his seat. Now Sir, the House is regularly adjourned until ten o'clock in the morning—and I recollect occasions when the Speaker did take the chair at that hour. Suppose, then, a member, about to take his scat, came down here at an early hour, with the proper documents in his band, and desired to be instructed in the mode of proceeding—and, while waiting, an officer entered, arrested him, and took his person away, would not this be a case to call for the interference of the House? I know the individual who has arrested lord Cochrane has not manifested any wish to conceal the circumstance. But it might be the other way. Some persons might desire, from sinister motives, to arrest a member of this House under these circumstances. I do not think, therefore, that the case is quite such a matter of course as the noble lord has stated. Unless, Sir, I had your authority, which would weigh much with me, that the case was not such as called for investigation, I should wish that the House would institute some proceeding on the 313 subject—not against the Marshal of the King's bench, whose conduct appears to be open and candid—but to prevent the circumstance from being drawn into a precedent on some future occasion, where the principles that day laid down, might be made use of for an improper purpose.

§ The Speaker
—I confess I feel this matter to be very new to us all. In the short time which has elapsed since it occurred, I have given it alt the attention I could, and on particular parts of the case I have very little doubts. I think the Marshal, under the circumstances which occasioned him to act, is not likely to fall under the displeasure of this House. I am also of opinion, that the individual who came into this building, at an hour when the House was not sitting, could claim no special protection from the place in which he was. But I think it also appears equally clear, that he was legally returned to Parliament, and that he came down, in order to go through the necessary forms, and to take his seat. Whatever may be the grounds of inquiry, we ought to refer the matter to a Committee of Privileges, to see whether or not any foundation exists for a complaint of breach of privilege. This will be found the safer course; and if it be thought necessary, we are at liberty to adopt it.

Lord Castlereagh
—I stated, when I before addressed the House, that if a doubt arose in the mind of any gentleman, it would be competent for him to submit a motion on the subject. As a doubt has been expressed, and very properly expressed, think it right that some proceeding should be adopted. Indeed, even if less doubt were expressed, the jealousy with which any thing like an infraction of our privileges ought to be viewed, would render some proceeding necessary. I, therefore move, "That the said letter, and the subject matter referred to therein, be referred to the Committee of Privileges to examine the matter thereof; and that they do report the same, with their opinion thereupon, to the House."

Mr. Bennet
rose and said—Sir, I am just come from examining, as one of the committee appointed for that purpose, the state of the King's-bench prison. I found lord Cochrane confined there, in a strong room, fourteen feet square, without windows, fire-place, table, or bed. I do not think it can be necessary, for the purposes of security, to confine him in this manner. 314 According to my own feelings, it is a place unfit for the noble lord, or any other person whatsoever.

Mr. Wilbraham Booth
—When lord Cochrane was visited, not more than half an hour had elapsed from the time of his arrest, and perhaps the Marshal had not had time, to select that situation in the prison which would be sufficiently secure, and at the same time proper for his lordship's accommodation. I trust and hope, it is not the intention of the Marshal to keep the noble lord in the place so justly described by the hon. gentleman. I particularly rise to suggest, whether it would not answer every purpose, and save considerable trouble, if the Marshal were called in, and asked, whether the sentence of the noble lord had expired, or whether he had received his Majesty's pardon? This, I conceive, would clear the way for any subsequent proceeding.

§ The Speaker
—We have before us the record of conviction, and the sentence of imprisonment for 12 months. Whether this has been done away, in any other manner, than by suffering the penalty, admits of proof. The Marshal has, however, told us, that the noble lord escaped from his custody. It remains for the party complaining of breach of privilege to disprove the assertion.

Lord Castlereagh
observed, that as there was a question behind, of the principle whether a member arrested in the House had any ground to plead privilege of Parliament, he should recommend a reference of the question to a committee.
The motion was then agreed to, and the committee appointed to sit to-morrow.