§ Their lordships having resolved into a committee on this bill,
§ The petition of Mr. Justice Johnson, presented and read last night, against certain clauses of the bill, which went as stated to affect his case in the nature of an ex post facto law, and praying, as in the concluding terms of the petition, "that his case might not be affected by a law which was not in existence at the time of the alleged offence," was read.—Mr. Adam and Mr. Parke were then heard, the former at considerable length, in support of Mr. Justice Johnson's petition. Mr. Adam went into a history of the former act to amend which the bill before the committee was intended; also the case of his learned client, from the time of its first being brought under the consideration of the Irish courts of law, to the present moment of its pending in the Court of King's Bench in England. He dwelt upon the consideration Of the bill in its present shape, going to affect the learned judge's case in the form of an ex post facto law; adverted to the point, that the act 623 under which he was to be tried, afforded no power of compelling the attendance of witnesses from Ireland, argued for the propriety of trying the learned judge before an Irish court of law, in a country where his person, character, and conduct, were better known, than they could possibly be in this. The learned counsel enforced principally these leading considerations, with his usual talents and scientific knowledge.—Mr. Parke supported the arguments of his learned brother. He dwelt forcibly on the objectionable considerations of an ex post facto law, and adverted to the circumstance of there being no act before the 44th of the king, by which the learned judge could be tried in an English court of justice; and stated, that the learned judge had no opportunity of being heard before the other house of parliament, because the clauses he principally objected to were not introduced till the third reading of the bill, when they were added by way of riders.—Mr. Adam, in the course of his address, referred to some clauses, the introduction of which, he humbly submitted, would, on the others being expunged, render the bill unobjectionable in the way complained of by the learned petitioner.—Their lordships then proceeded to the discussion of the provision; and several amendments, chiefly verbal, were made, on the suggestion of the lord chancellor.
§ The Earl of Westmeath, confessing himself not adequate to the task, said he would not trouble the committee with any law observations upon the subject, but begged leave to move the introduction of one or two clauses, which, we believe, were similar to those adverted to by the learned counsel.
§ The Lord Chancellor observed, that what was now proposed, brought on the question of the desired amendments, and the proposed clauses. The adoption of those as proposed, he felt it his duty to resist, as nothing could be more true, or clearer in law, than that for a libel published in England, one could duly be tried by the laws of this country. He meant not now to go into the consideration of the general law, as relating to the publication of libels, but merely to say that he knew enough to be convinced, that were he or any man to write a libel in London, and publish the same in York, or vice versa, no lawyer could say that such would not involve two distinct offences, and for which the libeller might be tried either in the counties of 624 York or Middlesex. With respect to the idea thrown out that there was no opportunity of compelling the attendance of witnesses, he observed, it was the general duty of all his Majesty's subjects to attend in, the king's courts of law, and that the process issued was the only means of compelling such due attendance. With respect to certain other considerations, which had been adverted to as applicable to the bill in question, he should certainly. give the points his best attention, and try whether he could not, either on the report or on the third reading propose a clause, which would be the means of doing ample justice to the country, and to the individual concerned; as he freely admitted, justice could not be done to the country, if it were with-held from the individual. What he proposed would go to obviate any thing which might result from the present bill, in the way of construction, to prejudice the pending cause. adverted to, and afford the party the means of compelling the attendance of witnesses on his behalf.—After, some farther observations from the lord chancellor, the clauses proposed by the noble earl, who seemed to express himself satisfied with the tendency of what fell from. the noble and learned lord, were negatived.