Lords Sitting of 7 March 1806

WITNESSES LIABILITY BILL.
The Lord Chancellorquitted the woolsack, and stated, he had a declaratory bill to submit to the consideration of their lordships; he adverted to the proceedings and discussions which had taken place, and which had induced the proposal of the present bill. These, their lordships would recollect, arose principally from a question proposed by a noble and learned friend of his, "Whether, according to law, a witness were bound to answer questions, the answers to which did not tend to accuse himself, but to establish, or tend to establish, that he owes a debt, recoverable by a civil suit?" On this, the opinion of the Judges was called for, and a great majority of them were of opinion, that a witness had no such right to demur. After such a decision, and what had been stated by his noble and learned friend (lord Eldon), that in the course of his long experience, he never heard of such a claim, urged on

361
the part of a witness; after what his noble friend at the head of the court of King's Bench, had also stated to the like effect; and after what he knew himself, who was exactly in a similar predicament; he thought the best mode was, to declare the law as stated in those opinions and declarations. It did not appear in the event, that the question proposed by his noble friend, was, in point of fact, liable to any objection; neither did it appear, that the answers of the learned Judges were not satisfactory to the house: on this principle, the bill he held in his hand proceeded. His lordship then adverted to some subordinate legal considerations, which seemed partly to arise from a contemplation of the particular circumstance which originally gave birth to the measure, and which might be thought necessary to be attended to on such an occasion as the present; but he thought it proper to make the bill as generally and as purely declaratory as possible, and without reference to any proceeding then before that, or the other house of parliament. Their lordships, however, would have an opportunity of more minutely considering the bill, on the 2d reading. He had rendered its language and tenour as guarded as possible, and he could not help flattering himself, that, with the assistance he should receive in perfecting the measure, from his noble and learned friend, he should be able to make it so as to meet the approbation of their lordships. After a few further remarks, in which he noticed what had been thrown out, as to affording, in certain circumstances, an ulterior protection to witnesses, and the consideration whether the present moment, were the fittest for such an enacting bill, he presented his declaratory measure, which was intituled, "An act to declare the law with respect to Witnesses being liable to answer." His lordship then moved, "that the bill be read a first time;" which was accordingly done; and afterwards ordered to be printed.
Lord Eldonmade a few remarks on the nature of the opinions delivered by the learned Judges; of whom, seven, out of the eleven who delivered their opinions regularly, were, as the noble lord on the woolsack stated; at the same time, it should be recollected, that those who delivered a contrary opinion, did it as a general rule of law, which they admitted liable to many exceptions. This seemed, in the sentiment of the noble and learned lord,
362
to be an additional reason in favour of such a bill as his noble friend proposed. His lordship then alluded to a clause or provision, in effect, as he had stated on a former evening, which he should conceive necessary to propose, on the 2d reading of the bill.

WITNESSES INDEMNITY BILL.
Lord Holland observed, that in the course of the various discussions respecting the subject involved in this bill, several objections had been made to the bill which he had hitherto forebore to notice, but on which he could not avoid troubling their lordships with a few words, before he moved to discharge the order on it. After giving a short detail of the progress of the indemnity bill brought in last session, and of the bill now before the house, together with the questions referred to the Judges, and their opinions, he contended, that the present bill had been mistated by the noble and learned lord (Eldon), on a former occasion, to be an ex post facto law, neither was it the object of the bill, to alter the law as already existing. Those who had framed the bill, had done it with the best views and the best intentions, and in supporting the bill in that house, he had no other object than that complete justice should be done in the case to which it referred. He wished their lordships to keep in mind the precise grounds on which the bill stood; if a witness in any suit in a court of law was interested, he might be rendered a competent witness by means of a release; the present bill would have operated as a release to certain witnesses, of any debts which might be due from them to the crown. It was here that, according to the law, as stated by a majority of the Judges, and as about to be declared by the bill presented by his noble and learned friend, that a witness could not demur to a question on the ground, that the answer would render him liable to a civil action for a debt, but the bill went away to release the witnesses in the case mentioned, from those debts which could serve them for any ground of demurrer. He should not press the bill upon their lordships' attention now that a declaratory act had been presented, but should only observe, in addition to what lie had stated, that the bill was sanctioned by precedents, respecting which he would content himself with referring their lordships to Viner's abridgement, and Mr. Cowper's reports. There was, however, one objection to the bill which he had not

363
heard stated in that house, but which had great weight in his mind, which was, that the advantage sought to be attained by it, ought not to be purchased by giving up any sums of money which might eventually turn out to be due to the public from any persons whom it was the object of the bill to indemnify. He concluded by moving to discharge the order for summoning their lordships for this day, observing, that he should fix no other day for the 2d reading, not, however, giving it up altogether, until something definitive was done respecting the proposed declaratory law.
Lord Eldonsaid, he still maintained his former opinion with respect to this bill. As to the analogy stated by the noble lord in the case of releasing a witness, it did not apply to the bill, there being no such thing known in a court of law as releasing a witness in the event of his making a full and fair disclosure, the release must be unconditional, or else it was a nullity.—The order was then discharged.