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.