PETITION OF MR. THOMAS GRADY. (Hansard, 25 February 1819)

§ Sir Robert Wilson
presented a Petition from Thomas Grady, committed yesterday evening to Newgate, for a breach of the privileges of the House. The petitioner, he observed, had an additional claim on him to present this petition, in consequence of the introduction into it of a letter which had been in his (sir R. Wilson's) possession for three weeks. This letter, dated the 2nd of November, purported to be from the hon. member for the county of Limerick. It was given to him (sir R. Wilson) by the petitioner, in order to show the manner in which the hon. gentleman had replied to the letter written to him by the petitioner; and also, perhaps to impress his mind favourably towards the petitioner, by showing the consideration in which he had been held by the hon. gentleman— He (sir R. Wilson) would not pretend to say that the letter was genuine, although it had the appearance of being so. It had the proper post mark. It had the signature of the hon. member, and, above all, it expressed those kind feelings which, as he understood from the hon. gentleman's friends, were so natural to him. But then it varied much from the tone of the reply which, he understood from the hon. gentleman last night, he had sent to the petitioner's letter. Perhaps he (sir R. Wilson) was wrong. The hon. gentleman would soon have an opportunity either of acknowledging the letter, or of disclaiming it. He would, therefore, confine himself to a statement of the contents and prayer of the petition—The petition sat forth,
"That the petitioner was committed to Newgate by order of the House for breach of privilege, in writing and sending to the hon. Wyndham Wyndham Quin a certain letter; that the petitioner humbly submits, that the said W. W. Quin neither showed any superscription or address to him upon the said letter, nor an envelope or post-mark; neither did he show to the House how lie received or came by the said letter; and the petitioner is informed that the name of the said W. W. Quin is no where to be found in the said letter; and that the said 661 W. W. Quin offered no proof that the said letter was intended for him, or sent by the petitioner; that the petitioner has presumptive evidence, coming from the said W. W. Quin, to show that he did not conceive that the said letter stated by him to have been received from the petitioner, was of the offensive nature on which the proceedings of the House were grounded last night; for on the 17th November the petitioner received a letter from the said W. W. Quin, dated the 2nd November, a period subsequent to the time of his alleged receipt of the letter produced by him to the House, and which letter is as follows, the original having been for three weeks in the possession of the hon. member who presented the petition of Thomas William Grady: 'Adare, 2nd November, 1818. 'I stand so perfectly clear of the charge intended to be brought against me that I shall cherfully commit myself to the judgment of the House of Commons; you say I have given you mortal offence. I am sorry to hear it, for nothing was ever farther from my mind, and if I knew when, I should have great pleasure of assuring you it was very far from my intentions; some long and rather angry letters have passed between us; I did not begin them; I cannot forget that you were very kind to me in early life; and I cannot behold our ancient intimacy, now on the point of being severed, without deep regret: if I am cooler than you, you are much the abler man of the two; but I think you are now rather hasty; however, though perhaps you choose it should be for the last time, I will still subscribe myself, your's truly, (Signed) 'W. W. QUIN.' The Petitioner states, that afterwards, on the 15th December, he received another letter from the said W. W. Quin, couched in nearly the same terms of friendship; but which letter the petitioner has not brought to this country; and the petitioner never since that period has received any letter from the said W. W. Quin, of which the petitioner is ready to make oath, subject to the pains and penalties of perjury; further, the petitioner humbly shows, that the said Thomas William Grady being only 23 years of age, and too inexperienced for the important task of instructing counsel, and arranging evidence for the approach- 662 ing inquiry; there is no person here for that purpose in his behalf, except the petitioner, and unless the House shall be pleased to make an order for the petitioner's liberation, the said charge will be ineffectually supported, and may fall to the ground, to the prejudice of public justice; the petitioner begs leave to add, as a secondary consideration, that he was confined for two months before his arrival in London, with a severe rheumatism in his head, and for the first month after his arrival here, was afflicted with the same disease, of which he is ready to give satisfactory proof; and the petitioner being in his sixtieth year, is apprehensive that further confinement may be attended with serious consequences; the petitioner begs leave to observe, that he might have left the House during the discussion with respect to him, and before any order could have been made for his detention, but he declared to those around him, that he would keep his place, and firmly abide the issue; the petitioner therefore humbly prays. That such order should be made on this his petition, as to the wisdom and dignity of the House shall seem expedient.

§ Mr. Quin
said, he had no hesitation whatever in avowing that the letter quoted in the petition had been written by him. He did not conceive, however, that it contained a single sentiment which could be turned against him. The fact was, that when the petitioner first hinted to him his intention of bringing forward a charge which should be made the subject of parliamentary inquiry, he did not believe that he was serious. He had concluded his correspondence with the petitioner with the letter which he had read to the House last night. The petitioner's letter, he had last night observed, was only the first of a series of letters. He admitted that he had answered the petitioner more mildly than perhaps he deserved. He did not, however, wish to visit the act of the father on the son; and he was not ashamed to say, that he recollected that the man to whom he was writing had been kind to him at an early period of his life. In reply to the letter which was quoted in the petition, the petitioner re-stated the substance of his first communication. He (Mr. Quin) then finished the correspondence with the letter which he had read to the House 663 last night. With respect to the prayer of the petition, he could sincerely assure the House, that there was no hon. member more earnestly desirous than himself to show the petitioner every possible indulgence [Hear, hear!].

Mr. Hutchinson
observed, that the hon. member for the county of Limerick, had, both on the last and on the present evening made so favourable an impression on the House, that it was a matter of great delicacy to venture any observations on the subject. He trusted that the hon. gentleman who had hitherto conducted himself in so handsome a manner on this occasion, would eventually acquit himself from all imputation discreditable either to himself or his family. He must say, however, that he thought the course pursued by the House towards the petitioner extremely severe. It did not appear to him that the letter in question, even if the production of the petitioner, contained an offence against the privileges of the House of Commons. The petitioner's conduct had been most proper and respectful: sitting below the bar, observing the course the discussion was taking, and hearing the vote for committing him to Newgate, he still patiently waited the execution of the orders of the House, it was his intention, therefore, unless the gallant general should do so, to take an early day of calling the attention of the House to a motion for the petitioner's discharge. He should be very sorry to do any thing that might appear in the slightest degree to reflect on the hon. gentleman, or that might imply any insinuation against him, and therefore he could assure the House that in the step which he was about to take his only motive was to protect an unoffending individual. He gave notice that he would to-morrow make the motion to which he had just adverted.

§ Mr. Bootle Wilbraham
said, he possessed no information on the subject but that derived from public sources, but he confessed his surprise at the character of the petition which had been just presented. The first part of the petition appeared to him not to fall short of stating that the House had wrongfully imprisoned the petitioner. It was evident that the petitioner arraigned the conduct of the House towards him. He by no means thought that the petitioner was entitled to the peculiar indulgence of the House and feeling that it was too much for the 664 man who had on Wednesday been committed to prison for a breach of the privileges of the House to expect that he should be set free on Friday, he should certainly oppose the motion for his liberation.