Star. — London, England, 1828-07-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 15. VMS -v. LORD yA RIK/ROUGH. Lord Chief Justice Bass attended to-day to give the opinion of the twelve Jtirlgisfin this questioNwhich,wpi. argued -before theii Lordships some days Since: it related to a piece of ground from which the sea had gradually and imperceptibly withdrawn; and the point was, whether soihfurmed by allusion belonged to the Crown or to the owner of the lands adjoining The Coon of Kipg's Bench, in which the case was tried, decided that soil thus projected by allusion did not belong to the Crown, but to 'the ad joining proprietor. 'rite opinion of the twelve Judges concurred with that of the Court of King's Bench, it being held that he who bestows labour on land so recovered, bestows it on that which is his own. and acquires a'titk to it by improving it. The LOILD CHANCRLLOR and Lord ELDON expressed their'entire assent in the opinion of the Learned Judges, and the decision of the Court of King's Bench was accordingly confirmed. OWNER V. LOAD LORTON. This was an appeal from the Court of Chancery in Ireland; and one of great importance to the parties interested ; it was a suit in stituted in that Court to compel the performance of a marriage set tlement, but which deed of settlement had been destroyed during the rebellion of 1798. The Court below thought there had been sufficient evidence adduced to prove the existence of such an in strument, and that a copy produced was an authentic copy, and decreed accordingly : this decision was appealed against. The LORD CHANCELLOR addressed the House.—His Lordship was of opinion that the judgment of the Court below was a proper one, and therefore moved that it be affirmed; but, as it was a proper case to be brought under their Lordships consider. ation, it uught to be without costs.—The appeal was then dismissed without cons. The Royal Assent was given, by Commission; to forty-seven public and private Bills, among which were—The Promissory Notes ,(Scotland) Bill; the Stamp Duties Regulation Bill; the Packet Vessels Regulation Bill ; the Corn. Laws Amendment Bill; the Church Briefs Repeal Bill; the County Lunatics Asy lulu Bill; the Malicious Injuries (Ireland) Bill; the Constabulary Acta (Ireland) Amendment • Bill; the Manchester Improvement Bill • the Registry Office (Ireland) Bill ; the Alehouse Licensing .(Scotland) 13111; the Cities and Boroughs Poll Bill; the Prize Money (India) Appropriation Bill; the Administration of Justice (India) Bill • the Larceny Laws Amendment (Ireland) Bill ; the Liverpool C harity Bill; and the Storey and Sussex Road Bill. The Lords Commissioners were, the Lotto Clisircituata, the. Earl BATHURST. and the Earl of SI;ArITISBULY. The Earl of SHA FTESBURY presented a Petition from New castle-under-Lyne for the Abolition of Negro Slavery. The Duke of GORDON presented a Petition from Inverness against the Importation of Foreign Wool. • uessmse TAWS THS COXISORS. Sir A. Gaawr and other Members brought up the Pilotage Bill and fie Savings Banks Bill, which were severally read a first time. Mr. Snirosn presented an Account of the Receipts and Expen diture of Dover Harbour, front the 10th of October, 1826, to the 10th of October. 1827. 'The Market Towns in Ireland Watehiog and Lighting 13ill, and the Holyhead Roads Bill, were severally read a second time. • The Marquis WELLESLEY presented a Petition from the Chamber of Commerce in Dublin against the Promissory Notes (Ireland) Dill. •The Disembodied Militia Bill and the Insolvent Debtors (India) , Bill passed through Committees. . The Charing Cross Improvement Dill was read a third time mid' passed. ' ' The Duke of WELLINGTON begged to postpone the third vending of the lrbils Promissory Note Bill Until Thursday. • FO R RIG N WOOL. Lord WHARNCLIFFE said, the House would re• collect that when the Noble Duke at the head of his Majesty's Government contented to a motion made by ~Noble Friend of his for the appointment of a Com mlttee . to inquire into the state of the Wool Trade, be expressly stated that he did so with a view merely to convince the nutiterous Petitioners who bad approached the House that an addition to the duty upon foreign wool would uot be beneficial, but injuriout .to the Bii tish grower, and that his Majesty's Government would not consent to the imposition of any additional duty. The Committee had bet', appointed, 'and had entered upon a moat laborious and complete inveitigation of the. subject, and the evidence collected by that Com mittee was now be.frre their Lordships. In these cir cumstances, he begged to ask the Noble D..ke if his aeatiments upon this subject had undergone any change, or if-he still adhered to the opinion he expressed on the motion for the'Committee? The most intense anxiety prevailed among the woollen manufacturers upon this •subjecr, and he trusted the Noble Duke would be en abled to give such an answer to his inquiries as would hive the effect of removing it. ; The Duke of *WELLINGTON must say, that the evidence produced before the Committee had not had the effect of causing him to change his opinion in any way whatever. His former opinion had rather been cott6nned by what had occuitred before the Committee. At the same time he must say chat a great mass of in • forMation had been villected, and had been promul gated so recently, that it would be improper for him to pledge - his Majesty's Government to any course what _ eseri A great fall had taken place in the price of wool, • but this was in some degree accounted for by 'the tide .44ioration of the quality. The improvements in agricul ture had been `attended with a great increase in the - quantity r f sheep, and by the systL m of br4ding to in crease the size of the animal. Er , m these curses thew was a considerable iticiease of the qu intity of wool, and a-considerable deterioration of its quality. Both these Circumstances weir deserving of consideration in any attempt to account fur the fall in price. At the same time a great change had taken place in vie habits of the peopleol-this ciuntry, and cloth of the finer de seri' tions was inote,g . enerally worn. :Ilesedesciiptions of cloths could not be rulculactured without a consider able intermiattne of foreign wool. In this, which he believed to be the corioct-view of the subject, to lay any additional duty upon foreign wool was not calcu lated ,to promote the intete‘t of the English grower, and was not, in fact, calculated to produce any other Effect than to transfer the woollen manutactoie to other Countries, and to give encouragement to smuggling. These Here his ideas upon the subject, and the ideas of his Majesty. Government, and without pledging him self absolutely upon the present occasion, he thought that the'manufact•itess need nut entertain any appre hension of change.. • Earl STANHOPE said, that if no method could be found of relieving the distress of the British wool growers, the sooner they were apprised of this the bet ter, Ps they might then form their arrangements with lespect to breeding,' and to the rents they would con -tract to pay. He held in his hand a petition which forcibly descrilti4;the situation to which this class of the. cotcmunityliatere seduced. _ Lord 1V DALE expressed ad opinion, that the Noble Duke had formed a hasty opinion upon the sub-' was as much a corn question as a wool question. ,ju r i STA NHOPF. presented a Petition from the Ownrrs and - Occupiers of Land in tile neighbourhood of Mahon, praying fur protection to Agricukure. pr. Pourassuas and 'other Members, brought up the Cinque Vent Nu. Mr. &UUCP' presented the Fourth Report of the Commissienesi. fur Buildingt.'hurches in the Highlands. The DeiseofitlCHMOND, in rising to present dPeti. tion from the. West Riding of Yorkshire, praying prom. tioa for the won' grower, said. he had been absent when the question was put by his Noble Friend to the Noble Duke, He regretted that the question should so hastily have been put in his absence. fle had heard what the answer was,. and he thcasglit the Noble Duke could , ' hardly be aware of the gloom and - despondency which that answer wootd occasion throughout the agricultural districts'of England.. denied that ktritistr wool was deteriorated. The Chairman of the Woollen Manulae-, Ituras had.published a pant phlet.on'the subject, in which. ] he anode no mentiOn of tltis deteriorktion. o.hers of the witnesses had been examined befOre, and then they said nothing about deterioration. There could be no doubt that this assertion of deterioration was the forlorn hope of their case. He ertreatect the House to compare the straight•forward and candid evidence of the British farmers examined before the Committee, with thethpo retical and speculitive, and he might saypreieriCating,' testimony of the Leeds Delegates. The Noble Duke had heard only one side ofthe question. it was now too late in the Session for him topropose any mea s u re , b u t he felt he shotild not discharge his duty as tt Peer of that Howe, if he did not heat Session bring fbrward area. sure upon the subject. LOT d WHA RNCLIFFE bad .through *Mere inadver . - tence asked the question in the absence of the Noble Duke. He contended that the evidence .4 the manu facturets was lull, entitled to credit. Bohr as regarded , an increase of duty, the wool gro%ierahad.nocase at It would be more for neir own advantage to take or the duty now in force. Lord TEYN HAM cont-ndrd that the general interest of agriculture required further protection toßiltish wool. Earl STANHOPE that the manufacturing wit nesses before the Committee appeared not like men of business, but like so many political economists. They contended that the more foreign wool was imported, the better for the British grower. This opinion the Noble Baron opposite appeared to share ; but it was one which appeared to him the most extraordinary and in credible he had ever heard. It this were so, wool must be entirely different from every other, commodity. Lord ELLENBOROUGH had no wish to prolong a discussion which had already been protracted to au incnnvenient length; but, having attended the Com mittee, lie hoped as an impartial Member, he felt it his duty to say, that the evidence of the manufacturers ar peared to him to be as good and as worthy of credit as thet of the agriculturists. The Noble Earl had scarcely done justice to the former description of witnesses. If they had offered opinions which appeared to be drawn from the doctrines of political economy, it was fair to state that those opinions had been drawn frbm them by the questions of the Noble Earl, who, in . conducting the examination, appeared be himself a political eco nomist, but a political economist, as he had endeavoured to convince him in the Committee, of a bad school.. It was certain, however, that whin the manufacturing witnesses spoke of the deterior:.t.on of British wool, they spoke as practical' men. It was plain from therevidihce, 'that British wool" had deteriorated, betweesi 1817 And 1824., to such a degree, that its employhtikt in the Ma outactUre of fine cloths had been diminished holm Sixty bix to six parts. Me Duke of RICHMOND would :repeat:hii,exfifes sion that tie manufacturing wimesies had beep.guilty of prevarication. aresof them, fist lustoce, had broadly stated that the farmers in Sussex would - -noutiike the, market price lor their wool, and on being pressed to name a single farina who had - ierused, Shad no other answer to give: than non mi ricer& They 'often ap plied to change their answers to questions froth - no to ye , , and from yes to no. They also applied; and-were permitted to expunge large pasts of the evidence,, both questions and answers. He had a right to state these things to vindicate himself in having Made the charge of prevarication. They took the liberty he had men tioned with questions put by him, but not with those put by the Noble Baron opposite (Lord Wharnclitfe). The Marquis of LANSDOWN• admitted the pro , priety of allowing witnesses to alter clerical awl's, but condemned the practice of allowing them to alter any' 'thing else, which it was very natural they should . wish to do if they had the opportunity, and if they had said any thing unfavourable to their own case. Earl STANHOPE contended that their evidence did not bear oqt the assertion ..that British wool had been deteriorated. The Eail of ROSSLYN agreed in opinion with' the Marquis of Lansdown, that their Lordships could not pay too much attention that the evidence given before Committees was not perverted. • The Marquis of SALISBURY referred to the evi. dence to show that the fill of price was occavioned by the introduction of foreign wool. The Petition was then read and laid on the table. Lord CALTHOII PE presented a Petition from Birmingham, complaining of the Act of 1826 relative to the Currency. Lord HOLLAND presented a Petition from Tewkesbury, in Gloucestershire, against Slavery In, the colonies.. . . The Marquis of LANSDOWN presented a Petition from the Builders of Dublin, against the Doty on Glass. BLTHAII PALACE. The Marquis of LANSDOWN•would.make no-apo logy to rfiefflouse for the motion of which he bad given notice. He thought nothing could jostify the destruc tion of remnants of antiquity, and of architnittral beauty and 'grandeur, but the necessity of removing them, in order to make way for great improvements; such, for instance, as the St. Katherine Docks, and the other improvements which had taken place io the me. tropolis. Bat if they were occasionally called upon to sacrifice such venerable relics, they ought so much the more to protect them when no important public object forbid their preservation. Now Eltham Palace was one of those monuments of antiquity which recommended themielves to their Lordships' protection, by the most interesting historical recollections. It was a specimen of British architecture of the reign of Edwird the.Pirst. In this Hall Edward the Third had held a Parliament, and it had been the scene of important transactions in the reign of Richard the Second. It was a specinien of architecture which modern architects had conaicended to study, and in so condescending they bad dope well. It was upon these grounds that he recommended his Majesty's Government, IF they did not think proper to restore it on account of the expense —and' ha did not know what the expense would be—at least to Preserve it as a venerable ruin. He should not be told of the mischief which might bosoccasioned by its fall, for all the mischief, if it should fall, would be, that it might knock down a few pigsties. He hoped no objection w,,uld be felt to lay the lease, and the other documents fur which he should move, upon the table. 'However the architecture of the presint day Might be admired, he must be a. bold man who would say that modern architects did not requit4 the severity of ancient models to check their aberrations. The Noble Lord concluded by moving, that there be laid before the House a copy of any lease which had been granted of the lands be- longing to the Crown, in the parish of Eltham, in Kent ; and also 'copies of arty Report, titieh had been made to the Commissioners of his Majesty's' Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues, respecting the slim of Eltham Palace. The Duke of WELLINGTON had no objection to the produCtion of the documents in question. The Go vernment had no alternative but to expend the public money to the amount ut about 6,0001. in the repair of this edifice, or to suffer it to be taken down. Certainly in these times he apprehended Parliament - would be re luctant to sanction suck an expenditure. Lord Viscount GODERICH said, that the Palace sit Malaria was in - a most dilapidated.. condition, and bad ~been for many years used as a barn. Ithad been late did titit t %lcuoitt when, and on the repretlntitiolitif the tenant ithaielpen repaired from time to time to, keep it standing. Last year ititaoeprqitinted that a slight repair would be of no ult.. It is 44)t pig -sties only, as the Noble Marquis had state47thatwouid be endan gered, by its fall ; thert.woulcfalso be some danger to human life. Mr. Smitke had. been sent to examine it,. and he report ed that •it was impossible it could stand, and that tO . repair it'would cost six thowsind pounds. l It was afterwards thought that the roof, which was . . esteemed one of peculiar beauty, might he applied to, .ome part or Windsor Castle, and Mr. Nash was sent down to examine it. His report was unfavourable, on account of the expense of removing it. .He thought there would be an indisposition on the part of Parlia— ment to incur the expense, although, as an individual, he would have wished to preserve a monument so ve. alterable and beautiful. Earl DARNLEY thought that the question was, whether so valuable a monument should be preserved? —it was penny wise and pound foolish.to stick at an 'expense of . 6,0001. The motion was then agreed to. SALE. OF GAME . BI'LL.. Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved the second reading of the Sale of Game Bill. The Earl of WESTMORLAND orposed the Bill, and moved it be read a second time this day three months. Lord FA LMOUTH WAS satisfied that this Bill would n' t prevent poaching. He drew that conclusion from the evidence of Mr. Hunt and Mr. Drummond.` It Was . proved I hat, notwithstanding guile in Scotland was sot in the market, poaching had itscreased.to a great extent. The witnesses generally,examined before the Com'osittee, had proved that the Bill would not prevent poaching. The Marquis of SALISBURY Supported the Bill.— The measure originated in this House, and after con siderable discuAsion, was sent to the Commons, where it was thrown out. It was again brought forward in the Commons' with mete verbal 'alterations, and surely the Houle would riot siiiiiiss it after they had consented to the principle on 'which It was founded. The Eatl of CA lINARVON said, he should support ,the Bill, because he thought it would destroy the mo nopoly and check the commission of crime. He had some objection to the Bill, but that might be removed in the Corn mime. He objected to tbe mode of:enforcing penalties. He should move an alteration of the clause respecting penalties, arihe Bill should go into a Com mittee, and would.theiffote say. no more upon the Bill itritipmenz Stage. . • Lord VtriIItNCLIFFE replied. This Bill would Wank. us, as near the Scotch Law as possible. It was in evidenfe n that game, was publicly sold, and therefore it was clear, th,st,. in spite or their legislation, the higher and the lower Sank; of society were engaged, the one in buying, and she of in selling game. Wbuld they then sittliere.and: 4tas e to legalize lice, sale of that which was 'publicty.scold.in spite of theicenactments? It the Bill cosigner/ itself to the sale of game, continued 'obj•CiiOns would be made. to it ; and indeed it would be very hard ,that Notblemen and - Gentlemen of furtane should be enabled to realize large sums for their game) whi:egssvners of a few acres should be deptived of that advantage—(Hear. hear). Lord FA LMOUTif explained. After a tesr words Atom the Earl of ROULTN, the Bar was cleared for a divistwi„wben.shere appeared for the second reading; Present. Proxies. Total. Content . .•• • 37 27 . 64 Non.coafenbs • ' 36 • 58 94 'lllljority —3O The Bill was consequently lost. . Their Lordships then asljourned,Att HAL, sin Salim sler.ocr. 'nOt)SE OF COMMONS. . . 'The tt i nose was sutitniinted, in the usual manner. to the,llmise of Peers, to liar the Royal Assent given, by Commission, to several Bills. .. . . . The SP.EAVt4; on IA return, informed the House Ow the Royal Assent had fascia given, by Commission, to several, *inch he enumeiated.—(S;e report of Lords). . • ... Mr. SUGDEN brought 1n a Bill for Confolidating the Laid respecting the Propertif of Infants and Liitiatics:=Reid sl first time, and ordered to sise . printed and read it second . tune this (fat three months. • . Sir J. 31 ACi wrostr; in consequence at the delay °rimier% postponed Isle: moons' respecting the case of 7 Mr. O'Reilly; till next Session.—The Hon. Member prestnted'a Petition frotn Aberdeen shire against Slavery. • Mr. F. BUXTON presented similar Petitions from Alton, Dublin, Rodborough, Bandon, and Market Boswell. The Hon. Gentleman stated, that Mr. Brougham was prevented making the motion of which he )sad ; given notice, on the subject of slavery, by the state or Isis stealth,. but would bring the question before the House early neat Session. Mr. C. GRANT presented 4 Petition from the wool growers of Inverness, for, protection against foreign wool. . . . Mr. F. BUICTO/s1 'moved that an Address be presented to his littijesty,''statitig that the natives of South Africa had always been recogniied by the British Government as a free people, and praying that his Majesty would give directions that they should be's° treated. 'He felt great satisfaction that the Secretary for the Colonies had promised Isis support to the motion. Sir GEORGE MURR NY said, it waibis antious desire that the saute freedom should be extended to thosiatives of Africa that was enjoyed by his Majesty's other 'objects. He cordially sup ported the minim). Sir R. WILSON hoped that the condition of the Intlentoti would engage the attention of the Government, as it required to be placed itin•a very different footing. The motion for the Address was then agreed to. PREROGATIVI COURT OF CA NTRIORIRY. Mr. HUMS rose and said, that he had intended to present that evening the Petition (of which he had given notice) complaining of the Right Honourable Member opposite (Sir Jshn Nicholl), as Judge of . the Prerogative Court of Canterbury. In consequence of not having teceived certain affidavits necessary to substantiate the case, he had been advised not to present the Petition that evening, but to postpone it until to-morrow or Thursday. Sir J. NICHOLL said, with some warmth, that he was perfectly ready to meet the charge which the Hon. Member for Aberdeen had thought proper to bring forward against him. The Honourable Member, after having circu . !ated a charge injurious ti his character, ought not to keep the public mind in doubt or suspense, or vs expose him to inconvenience, by postponing it upon any such ground. He (Sir John Nicholl) bad offered him to admit chit affidavits of the alleged facts had been made ; and with this admission he was ready to satisfy the House that his conduct as Judge of the Prerogative Cotirt "had in every 'respect been correct. The Hon. Member ought to have satis fied himself-of the correctness of the facts, before he published his, intentions of bringing forward the charge.' He (Sir John) had disposed of all the ibusiness of the Court, and had intended to leave town to-marrow with his family. -Heshonld take the sense of the House, whether the Hon. MeMber should be allowed to post pone his motibn. The ATTORNEY GENERAL argued that the Hon. Member for Aberdeen had not stated sufficient groundrfor postponing his motion. Mr. HUME said, that if he had presented the Peti tion in question without giving notite,lhe:Right Hon. Gentleman oPposite would have 'Ka& much: better grotinds of complaint. " He was fully persuaded'of the groUnds of the Petition, but he had thought it necessary afterwards to call for the documents to establish the case. He should have wished to iftratpone the case co Thursday or Finlay,. if it had been; cativ,inient.to the Right Hon. Penileman.. .The caie : he had to bang : foe - ward was that of Voter Watts, ' shoemaker, of Dorhams, who had been in gaol many years on the process of the Prefogatiee Court, for not paying a petty Easterefer ing. He maintained that the Petition was just; and that whatever claim was made for offerings, it aught ,to be fixed. In 1822, the petitioner had been cited be.. fore the Court, on the demand of what was called an Easter Hen, or, in fact, a payment of three-halfpence a pieg for,; c 4 drakiwtyriggavaily=l:ll.4**Onar appeared before the CottrtA "parson for seven mcces sive days, when the Courtlierteimined. Ant.„rhit he • • Is a that . he w as to pay, e give iIL3 afilnillran. swer to the citationa•Tltislisiwei was to. be on stamped paper, the stamp alone-costing five shillings, and the whole suit being for teopence hal4peany—.(Hear, bear). The Petitioner was sent back to prison for;contempt, and, was confined 72 days.• and then discharged. - li e brought his action in the Court of King') Bench, bat did not succeed. He then appealed to the Clunter - Soiione at Dutham, composed for themott pact 'f Clergyme n , who confirmed the decision against him, and he was committed for the amount and expenses. amounting td upwards 0f . 25/.'Proceedings had since gone on, raisint the expenses to upwards of I.IBW. The .Honourable Member thought that these offensive exactions oughtmo be abolished. The Petition was brought up and read. The Fetid tioner prayed ihat the Bishop ought to place in time conspicuous part of the palish, the fixed and , regular Fees to be paid to the Clergy. The Hon. Malaita said, the Petitioner had nowbeen imprisoned four years; his wife died a few worths tsct, and his family were ruined by these severe proceedings against him. Mr. Secretary PEEL knew nothing of the partionlar case, and would suspend his judgment ur/ I he made inquiry respecting it. But he would observe that the refusal to pay this 101.1. might have inyolyedthe whole property of the Clergyman in question. He should ob. ject to the Bishop fiting .the rate of fees to be paid ty.y the parishioners. He would inquire into the case, and 4 - he found it to be a case of hardship, the prerogative of the Crown to administer justice in mercy woulti.ao doubt be exerci•ed. Sir 30 HYNICHOLL—Sir, the caie before the Howe is one which has arisen out of a legal demand /made by the Clergyman, and wilfully resisted by the Petitioner, whose sufferings, if he has suffered, have been brought upon himself. While upon my legs, i canrut avoid making a few observations upon my o*n case. The HOO. Member has given notice of a Petition, complain ing of my conduct as a •Judge, and heft I am in m y place ready to meet the charge. I am sure the /I , ,n„ e will see the hardship of detaining me and my tafttly in town, merely becausethe Hon. Member 1t4,1 been out of town, and•has not had 'time to read the papersa!sm. netted with'this chaige. Sir, the Hon. Member 0 0.g ht to take cate.and satisfy his mind that a charge was V. a foutided. . Mr. _HUP4E- 4 9 have satisfied my mind upon it:" Sir JOHN NICHOLL continued —ft 1 say the lich nourable Mernber t ulht to . satisfy his mind that there was some, foundation `for the charge before be impugned the ihatacter • cif a Getitle!nan who has tied a high judicial situation for now twenty yearc, within a few months, Without the slightest spot or imputition Upon his character. He ought to pause and consider beim he dragged . forward such an inaividu,l; and by doing st . gave pain not only . to that individual himself, inn* all those connected with him. Sir, every :Honourable Member who bears me must feel that it is painful to have such a charge publicly give n notice of openly handed round the country, and now postponed: Itns painful, I say, however triumphant the answer to. * charge May be, becatise there are Assays to befoui . ul Persons who will readily believe that there existedsoare foundation for it.. kis grievous that there should'etist a lion's mouth 'in this country, from • which charges may be. brought -without-the slightest foe OM jolt. if !the llots..Memlierdoes hot think proper to ptesent his Petition;end bring 'inward his charge this evening v lE shall not remain any longer in tlw n to elect. it, but will leave it altogether in the hands cf my friends.' Mr. HUMEbegged the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman tti understand that thousgh the delay tybick had occurred ;Wight be personal inconvenience to himsef, yet that the cause of truth was paramount.* all other considerations. He fully believed the slate. ments contained in the Petition; but wished to substan tiate them before presenting it. :He supposed hell* have a family as well as the Right Hon. and Leaned Gentleman— e (a laugh)—and might suffer equal.ineaa venience in his attendance in the House. He considered his time as important as that of the Right Ho_ nourable and Learned Gentleman. He should state The facts, end the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman ci.uld de fend himself. • This he was determined upon—to state nothing but what he believed. •S, far from concuttrng in the sentiment of the Right 'Hots: Ind Learnict Gen tleman as to the "lion's mouth," he believed that oneof the principal uses of thit Wine in its .lioe's mouth," nhich afforded the best check or. the condom of public men. tt Let," continued the Hon. Aleniter—' " let the Rigl t Hut. and Leiwned Member defend bines self it possible. from the charge which I shall midget ‘sgain,thim. All I shall. now say i , that on reading the Petition I , All not think he could, and I still.rlo net thirli tie can; but 'if to refute the charge aim will be better . pleated than' I Shall be." • • Dr. LUSfillilGTON—ir; 'the Hon; Member far Montrose has*Conclncled'hy stating, thafne think; magi of it e allegatbms in the Petition to which. he alludes will be established against the Right Hon. Gentler*. over the way. Now, if he makes it ss'essertitinupon the statements contained' in the Petition itself—and he col no other: inforMation on the subject—l beg is tea him that I was present during the whole inquiry, and am perfectly acquainted with all the facts of t ie case; and-I will undertake tOpledge my' character, that thtte neier was any charge introiuced into this House Mtge utterly destitute of foundation. I, who have pravid in 'that Right Honourahe and. Learned Jujge s Cola daily, for I may say the last twenty years, feel tha should not do justice to him, it I did not herr testi. ninny to the ability, the zeal, and tne impartiality *a which the RightH, nourable Judge has uniformly charged his judicial functions. I will only add, tha t this is not the Petition of the person whOse name a affixed to it, but that.of a petty fogging attorney,..* has been guilty of perjury and attempted extortion. ‘. Mr. fiecretary . PEEL'objected.to the Petition 1)64 printed. It was Ihe Petition cf a person who had fatiel in litigation, auld . it ts.euld be prostituting the,pri vilego of .thelfouse to pkimit the printing 'of a .petition cute taming allegations 'that might be totally :untrue.-- Nothing could be more unjust than the course %loci' the Hon. Gentleinan had pursued witfi respect to the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Sir J. That Vii another abate of the of the douse' (Heir). notice of a charge against tie Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman, was it fair in the Hon. Member to say" he had been out of town, and Rai unable to make himself Master - of the accusation ' — : (Cheers): The •chatacteruf the it igbt &(on; and Learned, Member was a su ffi cient protection against vague an d groundless accusations—(Chcers). But such might o °' be the case in every instance, and in his Or. Secretarf L 1 '‘,6 • 'E sec al .~ Ca . 10 I •1101 . 1117 1 .I)4j vrai *die die It 1i Sp: .of COO .%1 APei tote tote *TS I Me. bt., r ) Mai nest by) .i n i cons iFore thou Clair coot 'mere ble 1 tiih vatic tend ledge cetta of a to lE :rig, with vibiel air lieu hen ' n th, . `tate t in, iiiti s '. eti ' • ail eciil, d i eat ' et ii emb uod i lai n), ' 400, d t Mien nd it esorti . 1 ill ' very "atie as tit