Star. — London, England, 1819-02-27 00:00:00

of Parliament were concerned, .the House disposed to relax from the letter of justice i n c e di4approbation manifested by the Ministe -4 unless where the case was so important as it could not be passed over slightly. But at all It s, he was confident that it was not unbecoming Parliament to reconsider a Resolution to which had previously assented—(Hear, hear.) He that the House would permit him.to read the . Honourable Member then read the let ich is as follows: " Boulogne.cur-Mer, October 19. I hare received no answer to my letter, delivered C. Smyth, I presume you do not mean to answer cv,: , that shall not divert me from the course I mean to the baiiness. Underneath you have the copy of a jottly t nt• to a leading Member of Opposition, with whom ce been the lost, week in London, who ficnished me with and precedents from the Commons Journals, for the and to whose advice I have committed myself. I think ,to aisure you, that. I have not, and sliall not, curnmunf. this or any future step with Mr. C. Smyth, much less a y body else on the other side of the Irish Channel. I to any idea of a threat ; but, as I have often:done before I advantage, I offer you advice. I advise you to restore o w his office, of which you d prived him, by an appoint. ,f ar hie, before the Ist of next January, and by your answer defter to inform me that you mean to take my advice. •-r, I Phan consider as rejecting the advice; and it will ~,K e isary for you to write, if you are determined upon re. o pt. your answer or your no answer will he here, or *ill be here, the 12th of Ncr. ember ; and to save you further and me further del.iy, I think it right to observe, that r , g g,stion of any middle term will not fall within the scope ge r air:ce.—Sir, your obedient servant, (Signed) •ro •••••,, C lkc. &e. " THOMAS OR/,IDY." l ing considered this letter over and over again, he A that he should require the aid of the Ho- Member (Mr. Wynn) to explain it to him, he could see where it contained any bread' of Tile charge against the Member for Li ck was an improper traffic of an office. The was, that the charge was untrue. There was attack upon the Member in his Parliamentary aler ; and if it were to be construed into a libel, would ask where was the libelous matter to be AP Ile begged to assure the House, on the part Mr. Grady, that that Gentleman felt the utmost fur the kindness shewishim by several Gen , in Opposition, particularly a worthy Alder- Hoitourable Member for London (Alder tin Wm.') who had so much distinguished himself hi, efforts to soften the rigours of the different es of confinement in the Metropolis. .He was that the Honourable Member for Dover J. Jackson) should have stated, that he would consent to release a man on Friday who had li the House on Wednesday. But there was no . against it. Ile begged to inform the House, he appeared on behalf of Mr. Grady without the itest solicitation from that Gentleman, and in- , that his cause might not receive any prejudice the supposition that he (Mr. Grady) had urged lay Member to defend him. He (Mr. Hutchinson) declared that he had no motive whatever for his exer tions besides that general one which, as a Member of Parliament, he was bound to act upon. He denied that the language of the Petition sent by Mr. Grady oa Thursday contained any offensive matter to the se; on the contrary, Mr. Grady stated, that he • 1e ct 0: • be (Ili! ~ S trong di f a t ride), ut that it coul d • • ant s, he w or had p wgged that The i t, which is Su—As 1 by Yu . . it . b 3; cv , " hits the tau; ova by I n ', Ito , been - tE als o and and tc P urtb4 lat pt t 0 assu thls t feb-4 Dad y te. any i , • foe Advani wan to his I si r far hte, b later to s, 3; tomr, I gr.:Keisary jgu. Yt . a h± here, e st',:, - end In fsgtstion ivy air:a.— • fo ,h ar ing cons co nfessed th suable 11 Wore he co rriviiege. str..ick was defence was, to attack c 6.iratter ; le would as ;tend? Ht ctllr. Grad ratitude fo semen in ( an, the H ran Wocd) hy his effort Faces of CI seprised tl ( Sts J. Jack tot consent hled the } reason again that he apps slightest so treated that from the su any Membc declared th; Lions beside Parliament, that the fan en Thursda House; on Li no inte aatp r.ta3e o imeneon w sertion of tl for as igtio trading on )ienibers, thou, to 2 • involv 77:c7ing- 0 cf the Hot frtinv custo Sir ROI He intreati honer had y to for le might country. atd front conduct t solved. to throw surely the cointenan tee feeiin2 Grad?, sc there was! was prove in the ca the course the parties the rn eaas position onlimited failed, let went wh ample sat Dover (m of the pel went. It k new Mr, as asserti, Mr. Grad 11-, ase , a , tazt indiv :eason of Mr. C( I more p aace to ti from his agave the H o n hi the ton, Ltlc totl:d no tu n , late to d the H.),11 thz;:tle Ct , :ale nc . Piat h . ( 6 :1 uitil p 1 Inc bre 4 only voce radian Inte r el • - no intention to offend the House of Commons in stale of the business ; and if suck absence of bad iunt:on was true in fact, could it be deemed an as sertion of the privileges of that House to punish him . as ignorant offence? He begged pardon for in trading on the House so long. He called on the Nembers, whose experience he could confidently rely, spoil, to assi,t him. This was no party question, rid involved no party concern. He concluded, by racing—b• That Mr. Grady be conducted to the bar : the House forthwith, in order to be discharged Ina custody." it ROBERT WILSON supported the motion. lie nitrated the House to remember, that the Peti tioner had stated his liberation as essentially neces sity to forward the proceedings, which were now, It might say, fixing the general attention of the country. His son was a l a d about 20 years of age, atd from his necessary inexperience, unqualified to conduct the important cause in which he was in volved. Surely that House ought not to attempt to throw any impediment to the course of justice ; steely the Honourable Member (Mr. Quin) would not cointenance any measure that was not in unison with toe feelings which he e n t er t a i ne d w ith regard to Mr. Grady, so much to his credit—(Hear, hear.) —But there was no charge whatever proved : and if nothing vas proved, and if one of the most important persons in the cause was precluded from interfering in it, the course of justice must inevitably stop. Let not the parties say hereafter, that they were deprived of the means of establishing truth by the hostile inter position of Parliament: let the opponents have the' snlimited power of producing evidence, and if they failed, let it be for want of evidence, and the punish mutt which should fall upon them would be an ample sacrifice to .justice. The Hon. Member for Dover (Mr. J. Jackson) had said, that the language Of the petition was offensive to the dignity of Parlia tent. It was no such thing. He (Sir R. Wilson) hew Mr. Grady's sentiments too well to allow such art assertion to go uncontradicted. He knew that Mr. Grady did write a most submissive letter to that 'Luse, and forwarded it to an eminent Member; but taw: individual was prevented from producing it, by :eacn of the informality of the proceeding—(Hear.) Mr. COURTENAY said, that there could not be a more painful duty than that which required resist ,lce to the extension of clemency and mercy ; but from his view of' this case, and he had viewed it as agave and important one, he could not accede to the Hono ura bl e G ent leman's. Motion— ( Hear , hear.) I f the House should,, on more deliberate considera tion, take a different view of the: case, the House could not hesitate to retrace its steps, and confess its 1:1.6 r. He, for one, would not for a moment hesi tat. e to d o so . H ut he opposed the Motion, because Honourable Memb er h a d ma d e out no case to t tl , :fie the petitioner to his dischar e, either by the t '' ll eaey or the justice of the House. The first ;,: 4 lt he w o uld argue was, the House had deci _el,without p roo f t h at t h e letter was a high breach 7, :4 privileges. The reasons for considering it a t : ea breach of privilege hid been so eloquently and stated by the Mover of the Resolution, that E only repeated them for the sake of those who had "'t 4C en Pres'At. The brea c h was not comm i tte d ip" the Member for Limerick was Membe r o f .. tr !iament, h u t because the petitioner had written a a direct threat of using the power 42d iaauca ce Parliament to obtain money. Any Court, whose power or influence should have been so used, would find it contempt of Court, and have the power in itself to punish it. It was on that ground—on the general force of the letter, and not on particular words or particular lines, that the Re solution had been founded. The 'second point urged was, that the petitioner was not the author of that letter. The House would not forget the testimony of the Honourable Member far Limerick on this point. But if the letter was not his, it was an abso lute forgery of his name and 'signature. Were the House prepared to believe this ? Were they prepared to say, that the letter for Thomas Grady the son, was not written by Thomas Grady the father ?—(Hear, !rear)—lf the Honourable General would allow him to ask him a question, he would ask one. Who gave him the paper giving the names of the witnesses to be summoned to attend ? Sir ROBERT WILSON.—It was the pe itioner who gave it to him. He afterwards explained, that he meant Thomas Grady the father, and that he un derstood the paper to be that upon which the orders of the House, for the attendance of the witnesses, was founded. Mr. COURTNAY proceeded. The paper was writ ten then by Thomas Grady.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He had mentioned this, because he was anxious that there should not be the least doubt that the letter was the hand-writing of Thomas Grady ; and he would appeal to the Honourable General, whether he had a doubt that both, papers were in Mr. prady s 's hand writing ? He had moved his immediate commitment, on the suggestion of others, lest Thomas Grady should withdraw himself from the power of the House. The Petitioner did not throw himself on the mercy of the House. He would not attempt to dic tate to the feelings of the House, and he would make all allowances for the circumstances of the Peti tioner ; but it was too much to say, that a man, who complained that the House had done him wrong, threw himself on its mercy; The last point which he had to reply to was, that the assistance of the Pe titioner was necessary for conducting the prosecution. Whit was the case made out by the Petition against the Honourable Member ? That there had been a conversation between the Honourable Member and Mr. Carew Smyth ; that this convers•tion had been committed to writing by the latter, and handed to the former ; was this adopted by the Honourable Member or not? This was the whole case. What part of this case required the Petitioner's presence and assistance ? Was he necessary for making up the evidence of Mr. Carew Smyth, who, he understood, was a respectable man in Dublin ? If he had felt that it was necessary for the purposes of inquiry, he should be most ready to consent to Mr. Grady's liberation. Mr. BOOTLE WILBRAHAM said, that as he was not a party to the vote by which Mr. Grady had been sent to prison, he should resist his enlargement, merely upon the Petition he had since presented, and the documents that had been published. He con tended, that neither submission nor contrition had been shewn by the prisoner, and the appeal he had made was couched in terms scarcely respectful. He was not, by any means, disposed to be unnecessarily severe, but no sufficient claim to lenity had been established. Mr. N. CALVERT had read the printed papers containing the evidence of Mr. Grady, and he felt called upon to say, that the answers of that person were most unbecoming the station he had filled of a Barrister and a Gentleman. He should vote against the motion. Mr. BENNET observed, that he should not have offered himself to the notice of the House, if he had not been anxious to do his utmost to bring it back to the line of duty and discretion. He was persuaded that there were not two Lawyers to be found in the kingdom who would give it as their opinion that Mr. Grady had been guilty of any offence. It was of no consequence to this question whether the allegations in the second letter were true or untrue ; that on which the commitment had been grounded merely spoke of the supposed misconduct of a Member of Parliament ; it was put merely hygoothetically, and no man with the right use of his understanding could construe that into a breach of privilege. Supposing the facts stated to be well founded, all honest men would join heartily in the opinions which the writer had expressed. A Member who had so misconduct ed himself would well merit the severest censure the House could inflict; but, on the contrary, if it were proved that a foul conspiracy subsisted, the chastise ment of Parliament was equally due to the authors of it. The real and only question wigs, whether the letter produced by Mr. Windham Qffin was or was not a threat—(hear, hear)? He (Mr. Bennet) begged to state most distinctly, that in his judgment the letter of the 19th of October was not meant as a threat. The fair construction of it was no more than this— " I have known you for fifteen years, and our inti macy has gradually increased; you have removed my son from an office he has long held, for political reasons ;—retrace the steps you have so unadvisedly taken—recollect that you are about to commit a high political offence—replace my son, and I, in consider- 1 ation of our friendship and your incautiousness, will do—what for no other human being in similar cir cumstances I would do—l will drop this matter :— my object is not revenge, but justice, and I will net expose that profligacy which I am cOnfident you your self will repent." Such was the natural interpreta tion candid minds would put upon the letter, and even the Honourable Member had so considered it in his reply ; this was upon the supposition, that no, offer had, in the first instance, come from Mr. Quin. A great deal had been said about the sacred privi leges of the House; perhaps he (Mr. Bennet) did not look upon them as quite so sacred or important as many gentlemen; they were, however, no doubt, of considerable value, though now and then em ployed for bad purposes, and sometimes put into odious exercise : they were, however, intrusted to the House, not as a scourge, .but as a protection to the people--( Cheers). this subject, he had and was happy to state fion was as comfortab) admit; at first, his With regard to his . could bear testimony had represented it ; any for the severe remarks tual defect of his vision. was obliged to put there appeared no paper.4Hear,hear hear !) Since he had risen, the setter to which the gallant General (Sir Robert Wilson) had alluded had been put into his (Mr. Bennet's) band; it was addressed to the highest authority in the House; but.unfortunately, as had been observed, the only in dividual who could not communicate its contents. He begged leave to read it, as it showed that Mr. Grady had been actuated by no improper or unbe coming feelings at the time be wrote the Petition, which had been objected to as disrespectful. The Honourable Gentleman then read the following Let ter, addressed to the SPEAKER: " Newgate, Friday, Feb. 27, 1219. " Su—Having observed In the public prints of this morning, that It was the intention of in Hon. Member of the Ilouse to call the attention of the House to my Petition, to some passages of which another I lonourable Member is reported to have ob jected, on the ground of their not being sufficiently respectful— I hope, Mr. Speaker, that yon will permit me to request you tp assure the House, that if my Petition was not couched in the most respectful terms, •r was otherwise informal, its defects or s Inaccuracies were quite unintentional, and not to be attributed to the most remote design to question its justice or to offend its authority. Perhaps it may he some apology for these defects, that when I drew up that Petition, my mind was incapable of discharging its ordinary functions, for I was then, after passing fourteen hours of a dreary night in an apartment not calculated for repose. " Permit me, Sir, with the highest consideration, to request, that I may through you, be suffered to assure the House, that in nothing I said in that Petition, and that in nothing I ever said or wrote in my life, hurl the remotest intention of infringing the privileges of the House, or of hinting an insinuation against the exercise of an authority calculated to sustain those privileges, which I know to he the bulwarks of the British Constitution, and the best safeguard of the liberty of the subject. " Suffer me, Sir, to add, that my son is pledged, under peril of the severest censure of the House, to prove the allegations of Ms Petition within the course of nine days ; and that there is nobody now alibut him upon whom ha can rely to prepare an adequate case in that interval' and to do all that is necessary for bringing him with credit to the liar of the House of Commons. Here it is impossible I can do any thing ; and every hour I con. time here, will render it more difficult for him to redeem his pledge.—l have the honour to be with the most profound re spect, Sir, your most obedient and humble servant, " THOMAS GRADY." The letter was received with many cheers, arfd Mr. BENNET sat down, after observing that he was strongly persuaded, that had the decision of the House been delayed for only twenty-four hours, it would not have thought it proper to send Mr. Grady to prison. Mr. BANKES maintained, that the proceedings of the House on Wednesday were warranted.by pre cedents in the best times of parliamentary history. The Honourable Member (Mr. Hutchinson) had said, that 'he had not concurred in the vote ; but if he (Mr. Bankes) jecollected rightly, the Honourable ' Member had net withdrawn until he found that Mr. Grady did not avow or deny the letter : he had con curred, he believed, in the first resolution, declaring the letter a breach of privilege. Independent of the breach of privilege in the threatening letter, Mr. Grady had been guilty of most discreditable preva rication. As to the assertion, that no man ought to be called upon to criminate himself, he could only say, that such had been the uniform practice of the House from the earliest .date : the party was always put to the Bar, and called upon to avow or deny what was charged against him. To the Honourable Member who spoke last, and who could not perceive that the letter was a threat, he knew not what to say ; he (Mr. Bankes) was bound to believe him, but if any other individual had told him that the good sense of the Honourable Gentleman bad been so im posed upon, he should have burst out into involun tary laughter. If Gentlemen would wish to know the practice of Parliament in similar cases, he would, with permission of the Speaker, refer them to the very highest authority, to that of his eminent prede cessor in the Chair (Mr. Abbott, now Lord Colches ter)—( Hear, hear, from all parts.)—He would refer them to the case of Mr. kuller, a late Member of that House, who was taken into custody, and con fined in the prison rooms up stairs, and not released till he presented a respectful petition acknowledging his offence, and praying for the pardon of the House. He did not wish to bear hard upon the petitioner; but the House could not, consistently with its cha racter, deviate from its usual course—(Hear, /war.) Mr. Alderman WOOD declared that he was one of those who had voted against Mr. Grady's being sent to Newgate. If it was considered as a great breach of privilege, there were many other breaches of privileges ; but thsre were shades of breaches. If Gentlemen looked around them, they find themselves surrounded with what might be construed into breaches of privilege. The Honourable Member (Mr. Courtney) bad confessed that when he was the means of calling Mr. Grady to the Bar, it never was his in tention to order him into, custody, far less to be im prisoned. The Worthy Alderman, therefore, hoped that the House would consent to relax somewhat ,from their usual rigour, by the speedy release of the prisoner. " To be sure (continued the Hon. Member) one cannot but say that he (Grady) was the writer of the letter—(hear, hear)—l told him so in Newgate." (Hear, hear, hear.)--The worthy Alderman then ap pealed to the Member for Limerick (Mr. Quin), if the prisoner were not released, that a wrong impres sion might be made on the public mind ? It would no do injury to his cause to consent to his release, and prevent all idle clamour. That the accommodation of Newgate had been much improved, could not be denied ; but then it was still Newgate at best ; and if any Honourable : Member were sent thither, whatever might be his accommodation, he would • certainly Irish for a speedy release—(hear, hear). The prisoner' was a Barn. ter,. aged, and the adviser of his son, who could not proceed without him. Under all these circumstances, the worthy Alderman implored the House to consent to his release, as the prisoner had already been sufficiently punished. . Mr. MARTIN was disposed, as he was sure the Member for Limerick and the House were, ko act with lenity on the present occasion; but he begg ed to suggest that the present Petition should be discrged, and another presented in a more proper form. Mr. PETER MOORE apologized for the vote which he had given when this subject was last dis " - which ! pacific; but Mr. Fuller's passion against the House was so inflamed, that had his eccentric mind not been artfully subdued, he would have knocked down the Speaker !--4/...alihter.) Mr. MASTE RTON URE.—I think the dignity and consistency of the House is materially interested in, the decision on this question. On a former night the Petitioner was, after an examination at Your Bar, declared guilty of high breach of privilege, and in consequence sent to his Majesty's Jail of Newgate. The House adopted this measure unanimously, on such evidence as to them appeared proper. The Petitioner now arraigns the judgment of the House, and the evidence on which it was founded. We can not therefore comply with the prayer of this Peti tion, without implying a censure on our own deci sion. And after the satisfictory manner in Is hich the letters alluded to have been proved, I thiek the House is bound to refuse the Petitioner's liberation. When he comes before the House and states his con trition for the offence, k will then be the proper time to extend the clemency of the House to him, if thought right so to do. Mr. LAMBTON thought the best mode would be. to withdraw the motion, and commune with the Gen tleman who was the subject of it, after which a more respectful Petition might be framed and presented. In avoiding any share of the last discussion, he had yielded his opinion to those who were much better acquainted with the rules and usage of Parliament than he could pretend to be. The letter might cer tainly be construed into a breach of privilege ; the Gentleman had already been sufficiently punished. Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN respected the privi leges of the House. But if it should turn out that the allegations of the Petitioner were well founded, Gen tlemen would form a very different opinion of the merits of the case. It appeared to him that it was a bargain; that it was an illegal bargain; but that it was gone, off. And the House would do well to pro ceed no further in the infliction of punishment. Mr. C. H. HUTCHINSON said, he was sorry to find that inany of the Members who had spoken on this question bad totally mistaken his argument. It never was his intention to deny that the letter was written and sent by Mr. Grady. On a former night he had only supported the motion of the worthy Al derman, who was one of the Members for the City, that the Letters and Minutes of Evidence should be printed. He did not then say, nor did he on that night argue, that the letter was not Mr. Grady's. But he had brought it forward as a great constitu tional question, namely, whether, admitting the letter to be a breach of the priv,ileges of that House, Mr. - Grady was to be deprived of the first right of a Bri tish subject—that right which was recognized by the principles of the Constitution, and be compelled to stand at the Bar of that House to criminate him• self, while the only eviuence of his guilt rested on the evidence of the Honourable Member who was himself the accused? Since he had last addressed the House, however, he had received a communi cation from Mr. Grady, in which he expressed him self anxious to make every concession the House might think fit to demand—( Hear, hear).—With this view, he (Mr. H. Hutchinson) had no objection to withdraw his present motion agreeable to the wish of the I lo• nourablei Member (Mr. Lambton). He did not wish, at the same time, to pledge himself to the particular nature of the Petition Mr. Grady might cause to be presented. He had taken up the subject on public grounds, and from the support he had received, he was gratified to perceive the House understood him to have done so. . The Motion was then withdrawn. Mr. PHILLIMORE repeated his announcement of a Mo. Lion on Thursday next, for the Amendment of the Marriage Act. The Report on the Usury Bill was ordered to be received on the 26th of April. Mr. BROG OEN presented the Poor Paws Report—lt was read, and its further cpsideraciurs ordered for Thursday next. The Dal for Ascertaining the Tonnage of Steam Boats was ordered to be read a third time, and reported on Monday nest. Sir JOHN STEWART, as Chairman of the Comniittee appointed to try the merits of the contested Election for Woot ton Basset, appeared at the Bar, and reported th 4 Ann Hall, Martin Stout, and Sarah Greenaway had been guilty of prevari cation, and had refused to give their evidence. The Report was brought up, and motions were made by Sir Julia Stewart, that each of the persons respectively should te taken into the custody of the Serjeani. at Arms .— Ordered. The Netherlands Slave Trade Bill was ordered for a further consideration on 3lotiday neat. Mr. LUSHING'f ON, of cr moving several Revenue Bins through their several stages, brought up the Report of the Bill for Building a New Church in St. Luke's, Chelsea. It was a firir time, and ordered for a second reading on Monday.— Adjourned till Monday. A LIST OF -THE MINORITY ON TUE REPORT or THE 11110LUTION AGAINST GRANTING £lO,OOO TO THE MET OF TORT. Anson, Hon. G. Foley, Thomas Phillips, G. Aubrey, Sir J. Fitzgerald, Lord W. Phillips, G. jun. Illandford, Marquis Findlay, IL. Price, Robert Baring, Sir T. Gordon, Robert Pryse, Pryse Barham, Joseph F. Graham, J. R. G. Ran-laden, J. C. Barnett, James Graham, Sandford Rancliffe, Lord Bankes, Henry Grenfell, Pascoe Bickford, J. Benyon, Ben. Gurney, R. H. .Ridley, Sir M. W. Birch, Joseph . Guise, Sir W. Hobart'', W. T. Bennett, Hon. H. G. Griffith, John W. Bohan. ' A. Braddyll, Thomas Gastell, Benjamin Rukeell,Dard Wm. Bernal!, Ralph Harcourt, John Russell, Lord G. W. Brand. Hon. T. Hill, Lord A. Rumen, Lord John Brougham, Henry HarTey, D. W. Rumen, R. O. Browne, Dom. Heygate, Alderman Rumbold, C. E. Byng, G. Honeywood, W. P. Sinclair, 0. Belgrave, Lord Hurst, R. Scarlett, J. Churchill, Lord C. S. Hutchinson, Hon. C. Sebright, Sir J. S. Campbell, Hon. J. Lamb, /lon. W. Sefton, Earl of Calvert, Charles . Lambton, J. G. Smith, William Calcraft, John Lemon, Sir W. Smith, Sam. Carew, R. S.' Lloyd, J. M. Smith, Hon. Robe, Carter, John Lyttelton, Hon. W. Smith, James Coffin, Sir L Marryat, J. Spencer, Lord It. Coke, T. W. Macdonald, James Stewart, Wil li am Colclougls, Czsar M acdonald, Roderick Synioods, T. P. Concantion, Lord Maitland, J. B. 'Related', Marquis Clifford, Captain Martin, John Tattler, C. W. Crompton, Samuel Methuen, l'aul Taylor, M. A. Curlew, J. C. blilbanke, Mark Tierney, Rt. 110n.e. Davies, T. H. Monck, Sir C. Thorp, Alderman Denman, Thomas Morpeth, Viscount Tremayne, J. H. Denison, W. J. Moore, Peter Waithsuan,Alderman Dickinson, William Newman, R. W. Walpole, Hon. G. Douglas, Hon. F. S. Newport, Sir J. Webb, Edward Dundas, Hon. L. Nugent, Lord • Wearaley, W.P.T.L Dundas, Hon.-G. Neville, Hon. R. Western, C. C. Dundas, Thomas North, Dudley Whitbread, Irm a* Dirndls, Charles OM, William Maas, Sir Robots a Crelpigny, Sir W. O'Callaghan, J. Wiliam% Wlltasp Avails William Pares, Thomas aWbeeeso, Jolts Edwards, John Palmer ' C. F. NlNiid , Aidentan Bbrington, Viscount Parnell, Sir 11. Wliall. C. W. Edward Pekoe IL Wilkins, W. ?Lissa, Ifk . A. wank •M. R A inTA I n i tZ (~ NA. ' eVe -- In o rder to be bitter prepared on vented ne nau given wnen uo 4IM s suo j c‘s W ,au. um '- ,: c u lt s . ,7 4 ~ td visited Mr. Grady in Newete, cussed. Had be seen the papers which he had since Doug las, Hon. gate to the House, that his ma- examined, he would have voted differently. But he Dundas, Hon. Portable as circumstances would considered hituself perfectly innocent, and only under Dundas, Hon. s condition had been much worse. the temporary guidance a misconception: The letter Du, s 2L as, II" 1 nearsightedness, h e (Mr. p el m e t) from the Honourable Member (Mr. Quin), which he D 7r„,,, e ' 7 ny that the fact was as Mr. Grady had , that day., read, was a complete release to Mr. Evans, iii and th at there was no •folladatiall - Gridi., # 'Refaced VD him (Kr. Moore) an amicable Edwards, Jot irks that had originated io thou- . 1 4tQuatit#14 qt:4l differences , The prisoner ought, rbrinron,Vi ii t h e When, Igr o ,Girady read, he r . .Or leased. &sufficiency of impish- E 1" dad z i the paper so Paw WU__ _ _key% that /inn* 7 •'' ' • y, •is oq hitu. IPoir.yuller• ''''" '— space, betimes ibeApoliskaad six SaI..AA,,, .41 1 0214. lift. rigirr. I#4 essit ►li :i ii ii 11 i~