Cornwallis in 1800-1. He also
refers to some Acts of Parliament, no longer, however, in force. Sir
James Graham writing some days later to the Premier, says: "The
precedents for proceeding by proclamation from the Lord Lieutenant of
Ireland, and not by Order in Council, _are directly in point_;" adding
of course that such proclamations should be followed by an Act of
Indemnity. Surely, anybody can see, that for a Government to meet an
extraordinary evil by an extraordinary remedy, would not only be
sanctioned by an Act of Indemnity, but would be certain to receive the
warm approval of Parliament.
Sir Robert Peel wanted neither county meetings nor proclamations; so,
writing to Sir James Graham on the 22nd of October, he says,--all but
misstating Lord Heytesbury's views on proclamations:--"Lord Heytesbury,
from his occasional remarks on proclamations, seems to labour under an
impression that there is a constitutional right to issue them. Now there
is absolutely none. There is no more abstract right to prohibit the
export of a potato than to command any other violation of law.
Governments have assumed, and will assume, in extreme cases,
unconstitutional power, and will trust to the good sense of the people,
convinced by the necessity to obey the proclamation, and to Parliament
to indemnify the issuers. The proclamations to which Lord Heytesbury
refers may be useful as precedents, but they leave the matter where they
found it in point of law; they give no sort of authority. I have a
strong impression that we shall do more harm than good by controlling
the free action of the people in respect to the legal _export_ of these
commodities, or the legal use of them."[79]
The above passage naturally drew from Sir James Graham the following
remarks: "I enclose another letter from the Lord Lieutenant, giving a
worse account of the potato crop as the digging advances, but stating
that we are as yet unacquainted with the full extent of the mischief. _I
think_ that Lord Heytesbury is aware that the issue of proclamations is
the exercise of a power beyond the law, which requires subsequent
indemnity, and has not the force of law. _The precedents which he cites
illustrate this known truth_; yet proclamations remitting duties, backed
by an order of the Custom-house not to levy, are very effective
measures, though the responsibility which attaches to their adoption is
most onerous, especially when Parliament may be readily called
toge
|