HL Deb 27 January 1840 vol 51 cc566-72
Lord Brougham

held in his hand a petition from Mr. Owen, in which he expressed his desire that the body of which he had been the founder- the Socialists—and the principles which they profess, should be inquired into by the House. That petition had been in his possession since Friday last, but as he had been late in arriving at the House, and as the Right Rev. Prelate (Exeter) had commenced his address, he, on that occasion, had no opportunity of presenting it. He had another petition from the same gentleman, which had been placed in his hands since. He did not know whether, in point of form, it could be received. He had but little doubt that it could not however; but still he felt bound to state its contents to their Lordships. He of course knew that no allusion could be made to any thing done, or any speech made, in the House, and that the public were supposed only to be acquainted with the conduct of the different Members, or the acts of the House as a body, by means of the printed and published votes. But still he thought that the petition, though it referred to the report of words used in the House on the other night, might be brought under their Lordships notice. The petitioner stated that his views regarding the general stale of society, and the means which he proposed for its amelioration, had been- misrepresented in the newspapers of Saturday and Sunday; that these misrepresentations purported to be the language which had fallen from a noble Member of that House; that, being published in all the newspapers, they had gone forth to every quarter of the globe where the English language was known; and that he claimed as an English subject, to be heard in reply to such misrepresentations, and prayed for a full and fair inquiry into the principles which he professed, in order that his defence might be as widely circulated as the unfounded charge which had been made against him—that his whole system might be honestly and fairly laid open, and that the world might know the whole truth. He had forgotten one circumstance when he addressed a few words to the House on Friday. The petitioner was not only a person whose whole character for humanity was extremely alien and averse to all those principles with which he was charged, but he was a man who advocated only the most peaceful changes. Not only so, but he was bound to state that, when Mr. Wilberforce, in the other House, vouched for his respectability and character for philanthropy, he had stated that Mr. Owen had such a regard for the propagation of his principles, which he thought entirely for the benefit of the human race, that he had reduced a very large fortune to a small one, and this was a strong test of his sincerity; and that his philanthropy was so great that he had spent more than any hundred individuals, however charitable they might be, had spent during the course of their lives. When the British and Foreign School Society was first established, he immediately transmitted a donation of 1,000l., which was much more than the most magnificent gift they had received; and to show that his philanthropy was not sectarian, about twelve months after, when the National School Society was established, he immediately transmitted the munificent donation of 500l. Such a person as Mr. Owen, whatever might be the peculiarity of his views, ought, he thought, to receive credit for sincerity and honest intentions, after having spent scores of thousands of pounds in acts of indisputable charity, in the doing of which he could not possibly have an interested motive. Often as that gentleman had been attacked, he had never before alluded to the injustice which had been done him; but he now deemed it his duty to set himself right with the public, and he did so without the least regard to the consequences. For the discharge of this part of his duty, he knew that he should be attacked in every variety of way, and be exposed to every sort of abuse for the next twelve months. He might be called an Owenite, he might be said to favour the views, and to agree with the principles of the Socialists, from which their Lordships knew he entirely dissented; but in doing an act of strict justice to an injured individual, he cared little for the abuse of slanderers.

The Bishop of Exeter

was not likely to know what would be brought forward by the noble and learned Lord, and he had not expected that the subject concerning which he had presented a petition the other night would be received. He knew that it had reference to the speech which he had had the honour of addressing to their Lordships on Friday. He could not enter again into the discussion, but he wished that the noble and learned Lord would take the course of moving in a committee for inquiring into the whole facts of the case. He had stated to the House the reason why he had not taken upon him that duty. The reason was that he wished to avoid a course which might savour too much of an inquisitorial character, that it was not right to act the part of a grand jury. Having presented a petition against the system, and having felt it to be his duty to stigmatise, in the strongest language, the character and conduct of its advocates, such might appear to be the case if a motion for a committee came from him. But the case was very different with the noble and learned Lord who had presented a petition from the parties affected by the inquiry. He could not move for it himself, but he would joyfully concur in such a motion coming from the noble Lord. The goodness or morality of Mr. Owen's character he had not said any thing against. The noble Lord had stated two facts—two splendid facts in favour of the character of that gentleman. In short, he had said that he was ruined by his liberality and his eagerness to promote the good of others. He trusted that it was so. No one could more rejoice at a circumstance exhibiting in so strong a light, kindness of heart, and benevolence of disposition. He had, however, heard the character of Mr. Owen represented under very different circumstances on many most important points, and had been informed that the ruin of his finances had not been caused by the reason so charitably assigned by the noble Lord. He would abstain from discussing the character of Mr. Owen, but he thought it only justice that the facts of the case should be fully inquired into, and he hoped that the noble Lord would make a motion to that effect.

Lord Brougham

said as to the "ruin" of Mr. Owen's finances, which had been alluded to by the right rev. Prelate, he had made use of no such term. Mr. Owen was not a ruined man. He had never said that he was—he never thought so, and it would be a most injurious thing to go forth that such was the fact. He had never even mentioned it, and he would just show how accurate people were in making such statements. Now, what he said was this, that Mr. Owen had reduced a large fortune to a moderate fortune;—but was every one ruined who had only a moderate fortune? If so he was ruined. The right rev. Prelate, who was a zealous, faithful, active servant of the Church, had only a moderate fortune, and, therefore, according to that interpretation, he was a ruined man. The man who once possessed a fortune of twenty-two thousand pounds a year, and now had only one or two thousand, would have a reduced fortune—would have a moderate fortune—and yet he could not be called a ruined man. All he had said was, that Mr. Owen had very much reduced his fortune, but this statement as to the "ruin" of his finances showed how accurate people were who were very zealous. The right rev. Prelate said also that he had heard a very different account of the causes of the reduction of his fortune. Now there was no doubt that Mr. Owen had a great many enemies, and that envy and malice had worked their spite on him, as on all good and great men. But he was acquainted with the whole circumstances of the pecuniary and commercial transactions in which Mr. Owen had been engaged, and knew very well the source from which the false statements came. He ought perhaps to move for a committee of inquiry, and, considering the part he had taken, and the petition he had presented, it almost seemed the proper course. He thought, however, that enough had been said in vindication of Mr. Owen. It would go forth that he denied the charge against him, and, what was better, challenged inquiry. He had, moreover, borne testimony to his character, and he thought it better to let it rest at the point where it now stood. He should be very unwilling to promote an inquiry that would have a tendency to propagate the knowledge of such extremely bad, and, in his opinion, dangerous doctrines, since even such absurdities might find converts among the uninstracted part of the community, and particularly those labouring under distress, when they promised to relieve their sufferings and remove their distresses. That would be the effect of such proceedings being circulated in all the various channels of public information.

The Bishop of Exeter

proceeded to say that he had a petition numerously and respectably signed from the inhabitants of the town of Huddersfield, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, strongly pressing upon the House the necessity of instituting such inquiry, and taking such steps as might seem desirable for the protection of religion, morality, social and domestic happiness, and the rights of property, and in moving it should be upon the table, he begged leave to state that, in consequence of what had fallen from the noble Lord, and also the noble Marquess on a former occasion, he thought it necessary that something more should be done. He did not assent to the opinion that they should abstain from the prosecution of crime, because it would be the means of publishing it to the world. If he thought greater danger would result from such an inquiry he should be content not to act a vindictive part against the propagators of such monstrous doctrines—but he felt it absolutely necessary to take some steps to vindicate justice and the morals and religion of the people. He was not speaking on light foundation, for he had that morning received a letter from Hampshire, giving an account of horrible and chilling blasphemies uttered at a Socialist meeting, in the neighbourhood of a place where they had lately purchased a farm of 500 acres to try their experiments. The right rev. Prelate read the letter alluded to, which was written by a clergyman, "of the highest respectability, and towards whom he entertained the highest respect," in which an account is given of a visit paid to the Socialist meeting by the writer, accompanied by a magistrate of the county, and of the obscenity and blasphemy there used. This letter was not a solitary one. He had this morning received several containing similar accounts. Now these things, he thought, called for immediate inquiry, and, considering what had been stated by her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Home Department and the noble Lord, he would to-night give notice of a motion after the petition had been laid upon the table

Lord Brougham

said that he only wished to make one remark. The right rev. Prelate laboured under a grievous mistake if he had understood him to lay down as an abstract principle, that the prosecution of crime should never be undertaken in consequence of the increased publicity which would necessarily be given to them by such proceedings. He also did not understand the noble Marquess at the head of the Home Department to have laid down a proposition in the abstract so absurd, as that in no case should publications or pernicious principles be made the subject of prosecution, for fear of increasing the publicity. In many cases, though the present publicity might be increased, eventually, the spread of the poisonous principles might be prevented. His objection also was not so much to prosecution as to going on in irregular debates on the subject in that House.

The Bishop of Exeter

said, he felt the inexpediency of irregular debating, and he would at once therefore give notice that he would move an address to the Crown to take steps to prosecute persons who were, or might be, guilty. He would not and could not be expected to state the precise words; but the effect would be to interpose its protection on behalf of religion and morality, against the horrible blasphemies of Socialism.

Motion to be made on the 3rd of February.