BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.

HL Deb 13 June 1833 vol 18 cc661-4

The Marquess of Westmeath

rose with great pain to make a complaint to their Lordships of as gross a Breach of Privilege on the part of a public Newspaper towards an individual Member of their House as had ever been brought under their notice. It was to him extremely unpleasant to trespass on their Lordships on a personal subject, but he felt it necessary to exonerate himself. It was not his intention, he begged to observe, to follow up his complaint by any motion, but simply to read the paragraph of which he had to complain, and then, in the presence of their Lordships, to refute its contents as a base, calumnious, and abominable libel on his character, as degrading from the source from which it emanated as, he trusted, it was unmerited by the individual on whom it sought to affix the stain. Having shown the calumny of the assertions, he should leave the individual who made them to the punishment of his own conscience. In the Dublin Evening Mail of Monday last he found the following passage:— LORD WESTMEATH.—By the lists in the London Papers it would appear, that Lord Westmeath voted in the minority on the Duke of Wellington's Motion on Monday night, and consequently in favour of Ministers. We are unwilling, upon that which has so often proved to be such erroneous authority as a newspaper list to say of Lord Westmeath what we think of such base, shuffling, and unworthy conduct as this, if he have really been guilty of it. But the moment we ascertain the fact—if it be so—we shall have occasion to direct his Lordship's attention to some letters of his in our possession—letters of so strong, furious, and inflammatory a nature—so grossly abusive of Ministers, and so virulently condemnatory of their measures and proceedings, that we used our best efforts with his Lordship, and successfully, to withhold their publication. We quarrel with no man for his politics, and we respect the person who, having made his election and taken a side, maintains his principles and adheres to his party. But we protest against, and all honest men will join in decrying, the creature who shifts his position as caprice or interest may dictate, alternating between Whiggism and Toryism—now a Conservative, and anon a Radical. It will give us sincere pleasure to find that Lord Westmeath did not give the vote imputed to him; if he did, he must abide the consequences. As he before observed, it was not his intention to follow up his complaint by any motion; and, having read the paragraph of which he complained, he would at once proceed to clear his character from the stigma which such an accusation, if capable of being corroborated, would attach to him both as a man and a Member of their Lordships' House. It would be in the recollection of their Lordships, that during the lust Session frequent discussions took place in their House upon the state of Ireland, many of their Lordships urging upon the Government the necessity of passing some measure to enforce the due collection of tithes, and the maintenance of the authority of the law. Such discussions at the time he had cordially lamented, and had even gone so far as to deprecate them on more occasions than one. On his return to Ireland, however, after the prorogation of Parliament, he discovered that the condition of the country was certainly as bad as, if not even worse than, it had been represented; and he might then have expressed himself, both in letters and in conversation, against the Government for having left the country so long without the protection of some such measure as had lately passed. He repeated, he did not doubt but he might have written letters, confidential letters, containing strong opinions upon the state to which the country was reduced; but he was confident, if any man should be found base enough to publish to the world his letters, written, as he before observed, in a spirit of confidence, and never intended for such publication, it would appear he had never stated in one of those letters that which, if be had not already stated, he was not afraid then to state in their Lordships' House. His opinion being this, as he stated, in favour of some measure to enforce a due observance of the laws, it was with great satisfaction that he found that a Bill with this view was introduced by the Government, and he, from the outset, determined to give it his support. Whether his doing so was called Whiggism or Toryism he knew not, and cared not. To himself, as a Member of the Legislature, and to his conscience, it appeared but common honesty to give his support to a measure which he firmly believed was requisite for the preservation of his country. He was accused of being instigated in his parliamentary votes solely by considerations of personal interest. But how was such an accusation supported? Was it supported by the fact of his having voted against a motion by which the Coercive Act was proposed to be made available for the collection of tithes? Certainly not. He was himself deeply interested in the collection of tithes, and yet on principle he had opposed a motion which, if carried, would have enabled him to collect with certainty a large portion of his income. The imputation of personal and corrupt motives contained in the paragraph he had read was, he submitted, a gross, an abominable, and a most unfounded libel. It was true, although he voted with the Government for the Coercion Act, he did not think it went far enough; but, as his vote was given solely on the principle that "a bird in the hand was worth two in the bush," it was but natural for him to allege, that the allegation respecting that vote was an abominable libel. Then with respect to the particular vote to which the paragraph referred. When he came to the House upon the occasion of that discussion, he was altogether undecided what part he should take; but, having heard the speeches on both sides of the question, and in particular the speech of the Noble Earl at the head of the Administration, it did appear to his conviction that, in giving the vote he did give—namely, in favour of Don Pedro as opposed to Don Miguel—he was taking that part in the discussion which, as a consistent man, he was bound to take.—Indeed, but for the fear of wearying their Lordships' attention, he would have risen in explanation of his motives for the vote he intended giving, and to have stated that he was at a loss to know how far it was consistent for those who had for years so strenuously, and, he would say, properly exerted themselves to strangle the rising influence of the Roman Catholic Priesthood in Ireland, to contend for a government like that of Don Miguel's, the main prop of which was the support and countenance it received from the Roman Catholic Ecclesiastics. Having thus, he hoped, justified his character against the abominable stigma sought to be attached to it, he had but to express his thanks to their Lordships for the patience they had manifested towards him, and to assure them, that, whether his conduct was in conformity with the wishes of the violent paper to which he had referred or not, he would continue to take that part which he believed to be honest, and which his conscience might dictate to him to be correct.