Imagens da página
PDF
ePub

96

Ch. 15.

1771

Contumacy of the printers

Thompson.

ARREST OF THE PRINTERS.

to exalt privilege above the law; and they felt that this was no time for reviving a pretension, the very name of which was enough to exasperate the nation. No man of credit, therefore, supported these rash proceedings. Every man of sense felt that the time was come when the particular privilege which it was thus sought to revive and enforce in all its rigour, should be allowed to fall into neglect and decay.

As the printers paid no attention to the order Wheble and of the House, the Serjeant-at-Arms was directed to take them into custody. But that officer in vain attempted to effect their capture. When he applied at their houses, they were denied to him, and his enquiries were treated with derision. On this result being reported to the House, an address to the Crown was carried, on the motion of Onslow, to issue a proclamation, offering rewards for the apprehension of the offenders. The proclamation itself was made the subject of mockery. Wheble and Thompson were collusively arrested, and taken before the city magistrates, by two of their friends, or servants, who accordingly claimed the rewards. Wheble, no doubt, also by previous concert, was taken before Alderman Wilkes, who immediately liberated him, and bound over the person by whom he had been apprehended, to answer a charge for an assault and false imprisonment. Wilkes, with a view to another state prosecution, immediately wrote to the Secretary of State, who then happened to be once more his old

MOTION AGAINST THE NEWSPAPERS.

antagonist Halifax, to acquaint him with what he had done. Thompson was taken before Alderman Oliver, who was content with discharging the prisoner.

Ch. 15.

1771

Onslow's

When it became apparent that the order of the Debate on House, the Serjeant-at-Arms, and the royal pro- Motion. clamation, would be alike set at nought by the printers and their allies in the city, Onslow and his friends resolved upon extending the warfare to the whole newspaper press. On the 12th of March, three days before Wheble and Thompson were taken before the city magistrates, Onslow, in a speech of coarse and misplaced jocularity, announced his intention of having three brace more' of the printers summoned to the bar; and accordingly moved, that six persons connected with the principal newspapers in London, should be ordered to attend. This gave rise to one of the most angry debates on record. Lord North was so ill advised, as to make the matter a government question, keeping his voters in the House all night; notwithstanding that the king had enjoined him not to make the affair of the printers a serious business. His Majesty, indeed, had wished to transfer the matter to the other House, as their lordships could fine as well as imprison' the miscreants;' and were just then better able than the Commons to bear the odium of such a salutary measure.

[ocr errors]

6

[blocks in formation]

97

98

Ch. 15.

1771.

Scurrility of the

STYLE OF PARLIAMENTARY REPORTS.

There was some ground for the proceedings against Wheble and Thompson. The journals of which those persons were the printers, had not Newspapers. only published the debates, but misrepresented them. It certainly was not desirable that the proceedings of Parliament should be reported in this form Utopia: Some account of the proceedings upon the Nullum Tempus Bill. Jeremiah Weymouth, Esquire, the d-n of this country,'f and so forth. And, perhaps, the mover had some right to complain of being called a little scoundrel,' and 'little cocking Onslow.' Such scurrility as this is harmless, unless the person to whom it is applied is so indiscreet, or so wanting in self-respect, as to notice it. However, as it is undoubtedly a breach of privilege to defame a member of Parliament, as well as to report his speeches, whether correctly or otherwise, Onslow was in strictness entitled to have the printers of the Middlesex Journal' and of the Gazetteer' brought to the bar. But the case was different with regard to the other printers against whom he moved. No complaint was made of those men as having libelled any member in their newspapers. The only ground, therefore, upon which they could be condemned was, that they had infringed the order of the House by publishing the debates. But, as the House could have, or at least could avow, no other object than that of vindicating their

f Jeremiah Dyson sat for Weymouth.

[ocr errors]

VIOLENCE OF THE DEBATES.

privileges, their assent to a motion of such a compendious character, brought forward also with such indecent levity and haste, could be ascribed only to vindictiveness, or hostility to the freedom of the press. The proclamation, offering rewards for the apprehension of Wheble and Thompson, had issued only three days previously; and it was reasonable to expect, therefore, that they would be brought in; but even if they escaped, that was no ground for visiting their contumacy upon all the newspapers in London.

Ch. 15.

1771.

99

Obstinacy of

The Opposition disputed every step of the pro- the Opposition. ceedings against the printers. On the first day, they divided the house no less than twenty-three times, and the debate lasted till four in the morning. The following day the battle was renewed with undiminished pertinacity. It was justly argued, that the best way to prevent misrepresentation was to permit the free publication of their proceedings; some members even went so far as to state the broad principle, that the constituency were entitled to be informed as to the proceedings of their representatives. It was shewn, too, that scurrility and falsehood were not confined to one party. Barré, in his strong language, spoke of a villain, a dirty scoundrel,' who wrote in the service of the Government, under the signature of Panurge and Cinna. One member, to throw ridicule over the whole proceeding, divided the House upon an amendment, that the printer should attend, together with all his compositors,

6

100

Ch. 15.

1771.

[ocr errors]

VIOLENCE OF THE

[ocr errors]

pressmen, correctors, blackers, and devils.' The excitement of the debates was heightened by frequent and bitter personalities. One of the Onslows, who seconded his cousin, the member for Guildford, boasted of the part which he had taken as peculiarly becoming the descendant of three Speakers. So palpable a mark for ridicule was immediately hit. I have not the advantage,' said Burke, of a parliamentary genealogy. I was not born, like the honourable gentleman, with 'Order' running through my veins. But as that gentleman boasts of his father, his son will never boast of him. The parliamentary line is cut off.' Burke then turned round upon Conway, who had spoken against the printers, though with his usual moderation; and, urged by former animosity, assailed him with the fiercest invective. Barré also, who excelled in strong sarcasm bordering on abuse, dealt his blows with more than usual vigour on this occasion. The Speaker interposed several times to stem the torrent of invective, but in a style very different from that to which the parliaments of Victoria have been accustomed. I am heartily tired,' said he, 'of this business, and should be glad to put an end to it.' Again he endeavours to stop the quarrel between Conway and Burke, by exclaiming, when it was at the height of its fury, For God's sake let us go on with the debate.'

[ocr errors]

He was the son of the great Speaker, Onslow.

« AnteriorContinuar »