Lords Sitting of 2 May 1817

LORD SIDMOUTH'S CIRCULAR LETTER.
The Lord Chancellorstated the result of his inquiries respecting the cases of Spence and Hogg, mentioned in the opinion of the law officers referred to in Lord Sidmouth's Circular Letter. With respect to the case of Spence, it appeared, that on the 13th of April, 1801, an information upon oath was sworn before Mr. Ford, then at Bow-street, by a person of the name of Searle, that he had printed for Thomas Spence a work intituled "The Restorer of Society to its Natural State," and for that work Mr. Ford held Spence to bail, to appear in the court of King's-bench on the first day of the ensuing term. On the fir.-t day of the term, the then attorney-general filed an information against Spence, who was called on his recognizance, and appeared. He was subsequently tried and convicted. With regard to the case of Hogg, it appeared that an information was sworn before the then lord mayor, by a person who had purchased at Hogg's shop the trials for adultery. The lord mayor held Alexander Hogg to bail, to appear in the court of King's-bench on the first day of the ensuing term, and the recognizance was drawn up by the then attorney-general. On the first day of the ensuing term, the late Mr. Perceval, having in the mean time become attorney-general, that gentleman filed an information against Hogg, who was called upon his recognizance, and appeared. Subsequently, upon Hogg's delivering up all the books charged against, the prosecution was dropped. There was no opinion given with respect to these cases in any other way than by the proceedings he had stated.
Earl Greyexpressed his acknowledgments for the candid statement of the noble and learned lord, but observed, that

107
it did not appear that in either of the cases the point had been disputed, or that there had been any question raised as to the legality of the proceeding. There was only the opinions of attorney-generals, but no decision of any court of law that could be recognized as an authority. He still considered, therefore, the Circular of the noble viscount as unconstitutional, in attempting to interfere with the administration of justice, and he feared it would lead to a practice productive of the greatest mischief to individuals. In this view, after taking considerable pains to inform himself upon the subject, and having been able to find no competent authority to sanction such a measure, he felt it his duty to bring it under the consideration of the House, and on Monday se'nnight he should move for the case referred to the law officers of the Crown, upon which their opinion had been given, and which was of great importance, with a view to form a proper estimate of that opinion.