HL Deb 05 July 1820 vol 2 cc194-5
Lord Holland

said, he had a petition to present relative to an act of parliament, which, having now ceased, he might without scruple describe as most unconstitutional. There were points contained in this petition to which he wished to direct their lordships' most serious attention. Besides stating broad constitutional grounds against the measure, the petitioners urged particular reasons for not passing the act at the present moment—reasons which showed how often it happens, that when governments deviate from the strict line of constitutional principle, they were very apt to involve themselves in embarrassment and difficulty. He therefore trusted that their lordships would not pass the bill at all if it came before them; but if they did proceed with it, he hoped they would introduce a clause to secure against its operation all persons called as witnesses on either side in the important proceeding upon which they were about to enter. This he should think would be but just and fair at any time or in any case; but how much more so when the proceedings in which their lordships were about to be engaged were of a judicial nature, and had for their object acts alleged to have been committed abroad? The petitioners stated, that the act, if passed would put it in the power of ministers to send out of the kingdom all foreigners who might be able to give evidence, or whom they might suppose to be able to give evidence, in favour of her majesty, and to give protection to all who might now be disposed to give evidence against her, or hereafter be brought forward for that purpose. He thought the particular objection highly important, and the constitutional ground on which the petitioners prayed that the bill might not pass would surely obtain their lordships' most anxious consideration. It was necessary that all ground of suspicion of partiality should be removed. Hostile as he was to the act, he was most desirous that it should be rejected; but if it were entertained by their lordships, he thought it would not be possible for them to pass it without introducing some clause to protect the witnesses alluded to in the petition from any authority which might otherwise have the power of molesting them.—The petition, which was from certain inhabitants of Westminster, was then read, and laid on the table.