Lords Sitting of 5 April 1814

Preamble
On the question for the third reading of the Writs of Assistance Bill, some conversation on its prominent enactments took place between the duke of Norfolk, the Lord Chancellor, and lord Ellenborough.
The Duke of Norfolkadverted to the extraordinary and alarming powers he conceived it would vest in the revenue officer; in authorizing one, by what was called a Writ of Assistance, to take a constable, or other officer, and enter any shop, cellar, &c. and in case of resistance to break open doors. He seemed to liken such a power to certain unconstitutional practices which were complained of in the time of Charles 2, and to certain proceedings under general warrants, which obtained at an early period of the present reign; and thought that some strong and adequate reasons should be assigned for such an enactment.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that the practice to which the noble duke had adverted, had continued from the time of Charles 2, down to the present time; and had been acquiesced in, from a conviction that the power, though extraordinary, was necessary for the purpose of protecting the revenue. If an officer entered a house in the manner mentioned by the noble duke, and found no smuggled goods, it was actionable; so that the writ must be executed at the officer's peril. But whether the system ought to continue or not, there could be no reasonable objection to this Bill; which was merely to provide against the expiration of the writ by the death or resignation of the head of the Board of Customs who might have authorised it.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, on an indictment before him, the objection was taken, that the writ abated by such death or change; and it appeared to him, that there was much force in it. He presumed, that it
416
was in consequence of that the Bill was brought in. The system was only justified by its necessity; but, at any rate, the writ must be executed at the officer's peril; and if nothing was found, the breaking upon was actionable. While the system was continued, there could be no doubt about the propriety of the present Bill.
The Bill was read a third time, and passed.