§ The Lord Chancellor produced a bill which he proposed to be read a first time, for the purpose of obtaining the opinion of the judges on this question, which arose out of the bill of indemnity to those who should give their evidence on the trial of the impeachment of Henry lord viscount Melville, viz. "Whether, by law, a witness can be required to answer a question the answer to which has no tendency to accuse himself, but which may establish, or tend to establish, that he owes a civil debt?" which bill he moved might be now read.
§ The Earl of Carnarvon had no objection to taking the opinion of the judges on this point, as it was desired by the noble and learned, lord, but should have been better satisfied if the question had been put upon the bill of Indemnity which came from the commons, and which the house had passed.
§ The Lord Chancellor explained his reason for taking this measure to be this: his opinion had been asked, and he had given it to 822 the house, on the subject of the liability of a witness to answer a question not tending to criminate himself, but tending to establish a civil, debt against him. Upon that Opinion he might be considered to be bound as if it was unquestionable law; he had given that opinion conscientiously, but to hold him to be bound by it at all events, would be to cast on him a burthen which he ought not to be called upon to bear, for he old not chuse to take upon himself to determine that he was right, on a point which he wished for a further opportunity of considering; for which reason he proposed that the house might have the opinion of the judges upon that question, which opinion might be formed in the course of the recess; for which reason he proposed to put this question to the judges, and moved, "that the judges do attend the service of this house to-morrow," which was accordingly ordered, and after the bill had been read a first time, the house adjourned.