CORN LAWS—MR. JACOB'S REPORT. (Hansard, 8 May 1826)

Lord King

wished to mention a subject of importance, inasmuch as it was materially connected with the privileges of their lordships' House. He had lately seen, in a printed pamphlet, a statement which was a gross and a scandalous libel upon the House. He did not mean to say that it was also a false libel; for, libel as it was, it might be very true. But then their lordships well knew that, in the eye of the law, the fact of a libel being true was a greater proof of malice, and only added to the guilt of the libeller. He had seen the statement of which he complained in the first edition of the libellous publication to which he had alluded, and which he understood was now undergoing a second edition. The libel, he believed, would make its appearance in the second edition also, and thus be further propagated. He should now read it to their lordships, and when they heard it, he had no doubt that it would have on them—as had been said of libellous publications in another place—the effect of making their hair stand on end; and he was sure they would agree with him in considering it a scandalous libel and breach of the privileges of their lordships' House. It was a passage of a memoir circulated among the landowners of a part of the continent [Appendix 9 of Mr. Jacob's Report]. Alluding to the post- 957 ponement of the corn question by parliament, from session to session, it was said, "Our ardent hopes for a rise in the prices of corn, founded on the expectation that England may open its ports, have unhappily again vanished. The new liberal policy adopted by England, with regard to commerce, has not been extended to the corn trade; and the motions of Mr. Huskisson, and Mr. Whitmore, as well as the numerous petitions that were laid before parliament, did not meet with any success. It is doubtful whether they will have a better fate next session, should even a new parliament assemble; the influence of the members of the House of Lords, whose interests (in this instance) are at variance with those of the community at large, being too prevailing." He did not know whether it would be proper to call the printer to the bar, and make him answerable to their lordships for the libel, as it appeared that the pamphlet was published by the House of Commons. This he collected from the votes of that House. On the 14th of March last, the instructions given to Mr. Jacob were laid on the table of the House of Commons, and the report made by him in consequence of those instructions, and in which the libel appeared, was stated in the title-page to be printed by order of that House. He saw, therefore, no other way of proceeding, than by their lordships having a free conference with the Commons. There were precedents for such a proceeding, though he believed there had not been a free conference between the two Houses for a century past. On that occasion, the members of both Houses got warm, came to high words, and, as tradition informs us, actually to blows. In the present, he did not know whether the noble and learned lord on the woolsack would not be so animated in defence of the landed interest, that the president of the Board of Trade might be induced to lay hands on him, and the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to give him a back-handed blow. Such a result, he was afraid, might be expected from the temper of the parties. Of course their lordships would all take part in the fray; they would step in and rescue the noble and learned lord from his enemies. He did not know, however, what would be done in the mean time with the seals: he was afraid some mischief might happen to them in the scuffle. If, however, it was the opinion of the House that this mode of proceeding 958 should be adopted, he would move that a message be sent to the Commons to ask a free conference.