RESOLUTION. (Hansard, 20 March 1876)

COLONEL BERESFORD
, in moving that the Petition of Mr. Charles Hen wood [presented 16th February] be printed with the Votes, said, he had not taken charge of the matter without receiving from Mr. Henwood an assurance that he could substantiate the allegations contained in the Petition. Mr. Henwood placed in his hands an Admiralty Paper and other documents which had satisfied him (Colonel Beresford) that he would be able to prove his case before the Committee of the House, for which he (Colonel Beresford) intended to ask. As to the reception of the Petition, the opinion of counsel had been taken, and he would remind the House of a statement made some years ago by the late Viscount Palmerston, to the effect that charges amounting to libel ought not to be held a good reason for refusing to receive a Petition. The present Prime Minister had also expressed a similar opinion. The hon. and gallant Member concluded by moving the Resolution.

§ MR. E. J. REED
said, the Petition was the continuation of an attack upon himself and others extending over 10 years, during which time his character had been dragged through every description of mire. The real facts of the case were these. A design was sent into the Admiralty for a ship with a 3½-feet freeboard, the Captain having been lost with a 6½-feet freeboard. The Controller of the Navy himself, and his assistant, now a high officer of the Admiralty, investigated the design, and found the information accompanying it as to weights delusive. They corrected these weights upon official information; and that was the only ground for any insinuation that there had been falsification of documents. The same individual sent in another design with 4-feet 3½-inches of freeboard, and if they had constructed a ship of the kind it would have led to a great catastrophe. The result was, that he had simply, in the interests of the public, rejected the designs placed before him, and personally he would be glad if the House would undertake an investigation of the case, so that once and for ever he might disprove the atrocious calumnies which had been levelled against him. He must speak a word of remonstrance against the course pursued by the hon. Member for Southwark. He had always understood that it was the practice of this House when one hon. Member assailed the character of another he should give that hon. Member private Notice of his intention to do so. No Notice, however, had ever been given to him by the hon. and gallant Member for Southwark of his intention to bring forward the question. This Petition was so libellous that no newspaper would publish it; and he hoped that if the House printed the Petition, it would follow up that step by appointing a Committee to investigate the matter.

§ MR. HUNT
said, when this matter was first brought before the House he moved that the Petition be discharged on the ground that the petitioner had his remedy if he were aggrieved by an 344 action in a court of law, and that not having adopted that course the House ought not to be made the medium of circulating his charges against public servants. He understood, however, that now the hon. and gallant Member for Southwark said that he held in his hands proofs of the allegations set forth in the Petition. He also understood that the hon. and gallant Member vouched for the accuracy of the statements in the Petition, and was prepared to prove them. [Colonel Beres Ford: I do.] Under those circumstances he would not make the Motion he did the other night, but would leave the matter in the hands of the House.

MR. GOLDSMID
complained of the amount of "lobbying" which Mr. Henwood and his Friends had carried on in connection with the matter, and would move, as an Amendment, that the Order that the Petition lie on the Table be discharged.

§ Mr. DODDS
seconded the Amendment.

COLONEL BERESFORD
hoped the House would do justice to a man who had been half ruined. He would have sought redress in a court of law, but the fact that his design had been altered did not come to Mr. Henwood's knowledge until he was debarred by the Statute of Limitations from taking action. He had documents in his hand which showed that Mr. Henwood's plans were over-weighted.

MR. SULLIVAN
maintained the right of public petition, but reprobated an attempt to entrap the public Press into the publication of a libel.

§ LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH
urged the Government to express a more decided opinion on the question whether the Petition ought to be printed or not.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, he had taken no part in what occurred the other night, neither had he seen the Petition; but after the explanation which had been given he certainly thought they ought to support 345 the Amendment and discharge the Order for printing it. While the right to petition ought not to be limited, care should be taken that Petitions should not be allowed to be made the instruments for libelling honourable men. If the hon. and gallant Member for Southwark was still unsatisfied he could bring the whole subject before the House upon a distinct Motion.