Star. — London, England, 1817-06-27 00:00:00

, - PARLI.I.4IEATAItr PROCI.E.DM4B. HOUSE OP LORD 4, HINE 26. The Order of the Day, respecting th o se !Blue s upon whicli their Lordships were sun .ed. b. ine read, • The Earl of LAIrDLP. Us E eseressed Ids surprise at the', thinness of the House, and his hope that the Noble Earl would tint, m such an anemia, c pre.s the stcond reading of Bills, fraught with such inapor aiii etinseiitiennes. The Earl of LIVER •;101. calki to the recollectiam of the House that it was the Noble Earl opposi.e mid some of his friends that had Steil this very Jay for ihe di-ecs-ion of the Bill !r. After the lone notice winch had bee , , given, he felt it Its duty to propose the secosid read.lig th:s .vennq the discus •.nyi of the subject, !weever, it desired, may be postponed to •!rol:er stage. Lord ERSKINE regarded the ciliestion as one of great Inept r.o:te, as going to offset powers which bad been vested in add ea- Erclsid by the Crown ter centuries. Would it be for tipo honour of . the House to thseuss it in such an ale:lda:lse ? At any sate lie thought the discusaion should take place oo a future stage, as on the quest' for going t o a Committee. The Earl of "AVM( POOL regained it as a consideration o' diity to urge rouse progress in the bill dye evening. tit eve, perfectly wiling re torego, for the accommosheion of Noble f.ortis, the delivery of any -perch on his pit that vVening, on the understuding that the discussion el oust take place on a sub bNpient -rage, Ihe Bill, were then severalty rea the second dole, and com mitted fur Monday as above.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, 'EINE 25. TaANSUSSraarrtav iota, lociLtTisous wusiseir. General !HORN lON ruse, pursuant to nonce, to move for leave to bring in a BiU to repeal such parts of the Acts of the twrn. y fifth and thirtieth years of the reign of King Charles the Second, as required declarations, in certain cues, to be made against the belief of transubstantiation, anal asserting the vior,hip of the Cbweh of Rhine to be idolatrous. He stated that the Acts in questilas had beets made at the end of the rain of Charles tt,t Second, when the Duke of York, the next heir to the Crown, was a declared Omsk', and when 'the country was agnated by nl9lOllO. us Popish plots Bishop Wooer, in the History of his own rinses, stated, that while examination: were going use, and peparvioti was making for the trial of the prisoner% a Bill was brought into the House of Commons, requiring all Members of ethics House, and all such as might come into the King's Coe.rt, or pi esetice, to take a test against Popery, in which see 0:.ly ransubstautien was renounced, but the worship of the Vs' gin Mary and the Saints, as it was practised in the Church of benw, was declared to be WO:amour,. 1 Ilia passed in the I this: of Commons without any dilh•ulty. Bat in the House of Leads, Gunning, Bishop of Ely, maintained that the Church ar kunte was out idolatrous. 'lle Lords did not much mind Coiatiing's arguments, but passed the Bill. Am' though Guo hing bad raid that be could oot take that test with a gaud storm:cher, )et as soon as she Bill was passed, he took it in the crowd wish the rest. .1 he General said, his motion was rot to interfere with the oaths of allegiance, supremacy, and shjuretion, which would remain in tiNCe, and which be tasougla would be a sufficient security to the Protestant iuterew. The in present seemed to la to be a proper tone for the repeal of Inure laws, as there nu longer existed any political neces sity for them. He thought it was hard on Prowstams, to make them declare the worship of the Church of kome to be idolatrous, as most of those who were so called upon, he coticeived, did mint know enough of the subject to be satisfied of the truth of the di . claration, and some might know it to be an unfounded eafumny. It was for another reason a proper time, as there was at present no clamour amongst the Catholics, whits had formerly been thou g ht a sufficient fcaSoli for out putting any thing to them. Mr bLAKE.secwideil the motion. Lord CAS I LEK EAGH was not disposed to provoke any dis cussiou then upon the ruhjsct. lie thought it would be more expedient to postpone the consideration of the measure to ano ther Session, and should thertiore move the previous question, which was carried. _ - ..----- JINNI 26 Sr J. CHETWOOD withdrew hie IT di for the Better ate*. very of Small Oasts. Lord PALMERSTON brought up the Report of the Esti. mates of the Expense of the Milii:a.—Ordered to be referred to the Committee of supply. Sir .1. NICHOL moved the third reading of the Clergy Resi dence Bill. After a short objection from General THORNTON, the Bill was Men read a third time and passed. Mr. BROUGHAM res.:lla a Petition from a person named &Olean. now a pauper in Mounratreet workhouse. who hut been in his Majesty's Navy from a boy, and had suffered most dreadfully front numerous wounds. It appeared that he could not get the pension to which lie was entitled, on account of his being unable to procure a anon ticket. He was sorry to say that this poor man had bean treated in a very improper manner by curtain persons at the Atittairahy, whom be should not name— a manner which common humanity repuptd at. Sir G. WARREN DLit wished the Honourable Member bad informed him of hislutention to bring up this Petition. He was rot aware of the particulars, but he would assert. that every at tention was paid to the cases at sick and hurt seamen by himself and his eut.easues. when they applied at the Admiralty. He wait quite certain this person had been guilty of some gross misrepre. IbClPation. There was a rule Maven by the law, which it was nut In the &attics of the Officers of that department to meet!. The Petition was biougut up, read, and ordered to be on the tale. Mr. I IllilblEY wished to postpone his Financial Resolutions, at the at the Right lion. Gentleman opposite. At presort be maw Tueeday.• He then moved the substance of his Resolutions, eontainimg, as musk the amount of the National Debi, the d income and charge, the deficiency. dtc. &c. as 'muslin the Budget. He trusted the Right Hon. Gentleman would have no objection to have them printed. The Resolutions being read Irian the Chair, CHANCELLOR of the EXCH4QUER thought the bete* way could ice to move that the farther debate on these Resolutions be ai:jouniril till Tuesday.—Agreed to. rittes lif oN t.Y. Mr. BENNETT, seeing the Noble Lord' in his pl,cr, Was dedircus of receiving from him some ex planation of the reasons upon which it had been de. ci:'cd that medical men who happened to be em pl,,yed in the duties of their profession at Brussels, or other depots of solArs, sick an wounded,. in the cdn,paign which led to the second capture of Paris, were not entiaed to a share of the prize-money, re taking from that short campaign, although other, persons who bad not been engaged, either directly or indirectly, in the victory of Waterloo, or who had only joined the army on its rook to the French capi. tal. had been considered to be entitled under the P:ise Acts. What could be the cause of this unjust reference he could mit conceive, and he begged the N ble Lord would of lige him by giving saint moon to the House upon the subjEct. He had been', surprised to filed that Officers serving and cu-ope. rating in the operations of that campaign in the Ne therlands—such, for instance, as those gafrisoning the city of Antwerp, and others in the neighbourhood of the places where those decisive actions at Quatre Bras and Waterloo, were found—were not permitted to share, as it had been expected they should. Lord PALMERSTON should have felt a plea sure in affording the information required, had he been by any means made acquainted previously with the intention of the Honouralsle Member, to put the question in the course of this day. It now came upon hfraphe confessed, altogether unawares; and he must my he reluctantly withheld the desired information, bemuse, in point of fact, he was not prepared to speak decidedly upon the grounds upon which their application had been refused. CAST OF title. WI2OLEIL. Sir F. I:II.IRDETI' said he rose for the purpose of calling the attention of the House to a Petition which be Ii in his hands, involving in it cuesiderations Of the highest importance. The individual by whom that Petition wits slentel, had exper!enced great suf. ferings and privations, owing to the mar, to say the least of it, of the Judge before whom he had latelybeen tried.. It was from Mr. Thomas Woeler, the author andelinter of the publication called The Marl Dwarf, at present in confinement in the Kiag's Bench Prison. The Petition stated the number of hardships which this Mr. Wooler had undergone. In the first place, he was taken up and committed to prison on an It !fide information filed by the Attorney-General, and he thus underwent a considerable punishment before he was br aught to trial. In the next place the Pe titioner stetted that two ex eine Informar;ons had been filed against him. - When he wa . ; brought to trial, it was impossible for him to know on which et the infrumAttoub he was first to be tried ; of course he mild not he so well prepared with his defence, as, under other circumstances, he might have been. And it so happened that on that information which was km filed, fie was contrary to his expectation, first brought to Erie'. In the trial again of this informa tion so much irregularity had taken place on the part of the Judge, in voicing the verdict, that he had put the individual tried in a very extratirclinery predica ment. The Judge had received the verdict before the Jurymen were all us Court. He (Sir F. Burdett) happened to be in Court at the time, and to be sitting on the same Bench on which the Judge sat. He could see only the Foreman of the 4ury. and it was impossible not to see that there was some difficulty with respect to the delivering of the verdict. The Foreman, in answer to a question from Judge Abbott, whether doe verdict was guilty or not ? smd, " The verdict was guilt.; but some of us wished to say so and so." The verdict. nevertheless, was recorded. It was impossible that such a verdict could have been legally received, as the Jury were not in vie* of the Judge at the time, and nie a question was put to them, whether they were all agreed as to the verdict? The verdict was hastily taken without any question ; and althoneli die Foreman did say guilty, yet he ac companied this with other words, which evidently showed that there WAs a difference of opinion among the Jurors. Some explen ation ough t to ha ve taken place. There were such circumstancee attending the delivery of the verdict, that it was impossible for any person not to be aware that there was a difference of -opinion among the Jurors. And under all circumstances, but under those circumstances more particularly. it was incumbent en a Judge to have had all the Jurymen before him, and to have put the question _to them — Are you agreed as to your verdict ? But the thing was not done in that way, and the verdict of milky was recorded. When the circumstance of a deer. ence of opinion among the Jurors was first stated to the Court, the Judge ought to have inquired if the Jurors were or were not separated ?—and if not .se parated, they ought to have been sent back to consi der the verdict. It appeared that three of the Jury. men were not agreed as to the verdict.--that special reasons were given by them, on the condition that if these reasons were not received they did not agree to the verdict. .Of this they made affidavits, but the affidavits were not received. And why were they not received ? . After a great deal Of argument ha $ been used, mush-ability had keen displayed by the Cote sel employed on the occasion, and many peel:Oasts had been quoted of the affidavits of Jurymen its other times, having been received, it was decided that they could not be received, atter a Rule for a new trial had been gratsted.-.(Hear, hear, hear).— Mr- Justice Holroyd, than whom he was sere a more consciencious and independent Judge never sat on the Bench, stated that the affidavits could not be received atter such Rule. In this case Mr. Wooler had no opportunity of urging reasons why the rule shiiiild not be granted. But the Court made.the Ruleiti the first instance, and then made the Rule a reason why i he was deprived of that to which, according to every principle of justice and equity, he was entitled. It was very hard on Mr. Wooler that the affidavits of the Jurymen could not be received, because the court had made it a Rule, at the request of Ur, At. torney-General,against the making of which Ride he bad no means of urguing. But the circumstances stated in these affidavits were heard by the bystanders in Court. . One of the Jurymen expressed his disie greement with the verdict loud enough to be beard in Court. Mr.'Justice Abbott, however, foood that he had got himself into considerable difficulty in this Case. He had received a verdict on which sentence could nut be passed, and at the same time lit. Woo ler was under confinement till he should be delivered in due course of law ; and he could not be delivered , till sentence was passed against him—and the verdict at the same time was so vitiated, that no Conreeould venture to pass a sentence on him. It wart some what singular that in an early part of our history the same number of three Jurymen disagreed as to a verdict, when the Judge proceeding to pass sen tence on it, he tad the misfortune to get flanged.— This was fro be found stated in the Mirror °Elastic's. But in this' ate the matter was carried stun farther than was done by Justice Cambden—be put in other three Jurors, and the case was tried ever again...bre what was now doing in this cue ? Those twelve OM only who first sat on Wooler Would try his came-- They were his only legal tribunal; and yet the Court now rulpd that not three fresh men. but twelve fresh men should betaken. Now this was a eidetic's) of the first principle of common law, that a man could not be twice in danger for the same offence. There was another instance in the same invaluable book, the Mirror, of a Judge who was so unfortunate as to get banged—On/A—because he passed sentence in a case where the Jury were doubtful; for, as the I Mirror says, where there is a ny doubt there ought to be an acquittal. You cannot, says Mr.Wooler, grant a rule fur a new trial, because, if the verdict is re corded, no new trial can take place, thougle the ver dict were of such a nature that it set the Court at -defiance. But Mr.WoOler had the indulgence of the [ Court forced on him—(Hear, hear)—tbongh, in his opinion, the word indulgence in a Colin of Law ought never to be used ; for a Court could only gent what was agreeable to justice, and they bad no right to grant any thing that was got strictly just.. However, the Court, by way of indulgeace, 'Weevoured to impress on Mr. Wader how Ouch injury he did himself, by allowing a verdict to• reatein recorded against him. Mr. Wooler, however, wee not to be shaken. Let the verdict be whnt-it wield, lie was resolved not to accept the advice ei those' who are said to be of Counsel fur the Psisonee—(Leezh). Mr. Wader, however, wield not accept of the India. Bence of the Court. The Court. however, like Squire Western, who, when he locked his daughter tip, said, I *ill break her heart but I will make her happy— were resolved, notwithstanding his protesting agaihst the indulgence, that he should have a new trial.— 'Suppose he were brought out to undergo again a new trial before a new Jury, all his defence was already known—he had laid himself • completely open to the prosecutor, who might take. an unfair advantage of it, and avail himself of circumstances which he had formerly overlooked or neglected. Mr. Wooler was not, therefore, standing in the same situation in Mach he was when he Was tit st brought before the twelve men who were sworn upon h.s trial. liader ih?se circumstances, were he Mr. Wooler, he would posi tively refuse to submit tl a new trial, and leave the Judges to act as they thought proper. lie conceived, that standing on the verdict of contilmnation he stood equally clear of them. These were strange and un usual proceedings. All this inconvenience arose to• wards this Gentieman, and the Jastice of the Coun try, not from any false conduct on his part—he had been precluded from a great many advantages from circumstances over which he had no controul—his affidavits had been refused in consequence of a rule over which he had no controul—and the error in the verdict was also owing to the ovee•hastiness of the Judge, and not to any fault of his. It would become the imperious duty of the House to take into conside ration the situation in which this subject was placed, owing, to say the least of it, to the hasty proceeding in the Judge ; and it would be incumbent on him to make some farther proposal to the House on the sub ject, than merely moving the presentation of the Pe tition of Mr. Wooler. But the preliminary step was to present the Petition of Mr. Woofer, stating these facts. He had only further to state, t the Pets lion was expressed in a becoming and ighly proper manner. The Petition watt brought up and read. it de tailed at some length the hardships and inconvenien cies to which . Mr. Woofer had been subjected, the ram prominent of which have been alluded to in the speech of the Honourable Baronet (Sir F. Burdett). He had not been furnished with a copy of the infor mations Sled against him, though a promise to that purpose had been made him by the Attorney-Gene ral. He complained of the hardship of being obliged, contrary to his expectation, to enter on a second de fence on the same day. Sir FRANCIS BURDETT thenemoved, that the Petition do lie on the Table. The ATTORNEY C ENERAL declared he ne ver was more astonished in his life, than at hearing the assertions it contained, particularly with respect to some mattersrelating to himself, which he declared were totally withoet foundation. The petitioner stated. that some communication had taken place be tween him ant) the Attorney Genera!, w; o had pro misedihim some accommodation respecting the pro curing a capy of the informations against him, and that this was afterwards refused. !de-would say. that there never had been the smallest communica tion of any sort whatever between him and Mr. Woofer, or with any agent on his behalf ;—that he never saw him till he came - into Court to take his trial; and it he had heard from him on the subject of a copy of the informations. his answer would have P been, that those proceedings , must go on as all others bed done ; be would have told him, that his applica, ' tion must be made to the Solicitor to the Treasury who would do in this as in any other case where a criminal information had been filed. lie would have told him, that, if he had pleaded, he might have had an official copy of the information. by paying the usual charge to the o ffi cer of the Crown. In order that Mr. Woofer might be brought to trial as speedily as possible, he, the Attorney General, had pressed for the trial to take place out of course, althatigh it was a Special Jury Trial, and thus he was not kept till the Sittings after Trinity Term, which lie otherwise would have been. He received regular notice of the trial, and so far from his being unwilling to be tried , at the same time on the other indictment, he, or his attorney on his behalf, handed up to him (the At torney General) in Court, a note, demanding a tale:, in case a Special Jury could not be formed, that he might be tried at that hour. And now this man presumed to say, that be (the Attorney General) forced on the trial— (Bear, Lear)—when he might have had an impedance over till next Term. Nay, he (Worrier) eyen made it a sort of triumph in the Court. that so long a pause had occurred. He was now standing forward, not merely to vindicate him aelf, but to justify the law of the country, and the mode in which justice ,was administered, and he trusted he should satisfy toe House, that nothing had been done but what the law demanded. The Jury were not always perfectly in view of the Judge. but on this occasion he would take upon himself to say, that shofar who were not in view were close to the ✓est, alai must have heard the question put. He would also say, that twelve persons, or at least twelve voices, answered when the names were called. The Foreman said the verdict was Guiltji, but that three of the Jury wished to give their reasons for agreeing to the verdict. The Judge's answer I will, receive any thing that comes unanimously from the Jury; but I cannot receive particular reasons from particular Jurymen. What is your answer ? "f he Foreman said, Guilty. The JuJge asked him again, • Is that the verdict of the Jury ?" Foreman, Yes." On which it was recorded. The second then went on for nearly three quarters of an hour, and then, after the Jury had gone ;. and unless his eyes very much deceived him, after the defendant had confer red at the door of the Court with one of them, no man had come forward to say that they had not agreed in their verdi&. It was then th it the Judge said he could not relieve him there, and that he might make his application elsewhere: This was the law , as laid down by Lord Hale, C o ke, an d ever y lit h e; eminent judicial writer, that a Jury, after they have 'delivered a verdict, cannot retract it. Ile described the course subsequently taken by the Learcei Judge, and declared be (the Attorney General) under peculiar circumstances of the case, had called for a new trial, that the defendant might have no just cause for complaint. He shewed that it had lit-tn ided by the great e st l aw authcrnies, that in such a . the verdict being recorded and the Jury separa ted, a- trial de min must necessarily take place. At all events, he contended, there could be no grounds for entering a verdict of acquittal, whiter was called for by the defendant. Mr. PONSONBY said, lie wished to know whether the usual question had beets put w the Jul 9 —Who shall say fir yot: whether ti•eq that queEtkn ! The ATTORNEY GENERAL saint, 71,. gnestkn had been me:, as to the 31swer t speak to it. - Mr. PCNS014:1W—"11:. ci:- .. ..r-e.vnte. al toniey•ut-aerat app....3"pelec!! , ; ‘. - ero.:;."—r /f ear . 1.,-er,o Lord 0 P 1111! Attorney Genetal were correct. I:e felt qui.e at a lots to know why a new trial was grarted, as that Ho,. and Learre.d Genterr.an would give them to belt..., that every thing v. as perfectly regu!ar. liewr, /VII'. 3 He felt incompetent to argi e the question a. lawyer, but it was exceedingly twtortunate, to va the It asr, that any accident had occurred wli-.1 might be supposed by rotre to.have an tintAvetert;, : _• bearing towards the prisoner, in a ,:axe la vtlit.tt tr. • liberty of the press was concerned. VrIS inott ..e -p.mtant to take away even the shadow of susp.ctunia. these cases. Mr. LOCKHART thought the Honcurable Ba= whet (Sir Francis Burdett) from his known candour and manliness, should not have insinuated that the Worthy Judge was disposed to catch at a verdict .t Guilty. The Judge seemed to him to. have acted with the greatest fairness. Mr. PONSONBY asked again on what grouads the new trial had beets granted ? • The ATTORNEY GENERAL said. that Mr. Wooller contended either for as acquittal,. or for briny. fried Ly the t..tme Jury. 'Ube answer was, that the Jury not being the view of the Judge, it was no verdict ; and iltretore ther: should be a yew trial. Ibe application fur tee same Jun• was re. fused, because nine of thein were for finding the defend.altg..:l;ty. Mr. BROUGHAM wished to know whether there was any truth in the statement, that when tt.e man for the last time was asked whether Gt.o was the verdict ? answered " Yes," and also that I.e wa ded " but," mad being about to proceed, I'," !Fitly! was taken of it. He wished to know whether " but." was the' expression The ATTORNEY GENERAL said lie 'yes.'He did not he.•r any other wind. The SOLICITOR GENE Red. also said tlat r.e neverbead the word " but." Mr. BIWUGHAM said, :':.at he' WAS satisfied the word had not been used, or that it ct:llit have .come to the hearing ct th.: Honourable al Learned Gentlema.r. lieekoped it was not true that such a word had been utteted. It vr:s paitaul is him to be obliged to comment upon the priceedings of a Judge in the Court with whoni he pr, , etked, and from whom personally he had received nnthing civility. But as a Men'tber of that House, he had a pa-amount duty from which he cculd net shrink.— lie should lay entirely aside the stcement et Wean-, be:airse it h.r was to credit the assertion of the Attor ney Cereral, it seemed impossible that one of &e facts mentioned by Wooler was net false. He sired, that he had been hurried on to the second against his will, aryl when he was fatigued, being without the aid of Counstt ; whereas the Attsrner. General stated, that he had himself begged a war. rant from him tr pray a ialef. The ArI'ORNZY GENERAL here said, that lie (the Attorney General) had ireended to go on, but while be paused, a note was sent him to thi. „effect ) from tl:e defendant, or his attorney—" I de mand your warrant to pray a tales." He repliell, that he should use his own discretion. Mr. BROUGHAM proceeded. He also under. stood, that in the course of the trial the defendant rather took credit to himself that he was more ready to proceed than his prosecutor: he saw nu possibility of reconciling this statemeet with that of the akeot [ley General, and he should therefore leave it out rf the question, and confine himself to those accounts re, which nu suspicion had been thrown—he meant that of the Judge, and that of the Honourable Baronet, (Sir Francis Burdett) which seemed to agree wit: it. The conduct of the Judge, after the objectica had been made to the verdict, was exceedingly pro- per ; but there was one part of his previous cendirt: which he lamented, though the facts did not warrant any charge of a corrupt motive. When there was a difiiculty in the returning of the verdict, why did he not take the obvious course to satisfy hirrEell that is was heard by all ? He knew that all the enuns were not in his sight, that it was possible all did not &tear. He afterwards admitted that pnssibil:ty, and the Court concurred in his view ut it. When he liii heard that the Foremen v.iseed to give a (palled verdict, he should have called all the Jury lets tee Court, and should have satisfied himself that they had all made up their minds, or have ordered them to sa tire, to come to that determinaeoa As to tleraitets tion—Who shall speak to yoe ? it WAS a mere mat ter of form ; it was always answered by the who put it—ii Wire shell speak fur you ? your Free man ?" To which the Fetene.te gernraLy nodded assent. It he had been satittied at the time, Ii ne he put two qeceiocs (rertaitily :tot an usael toed: of proceeding) ? Why did he not put the second vestion in their hearing ? He might have P l - 1 twenty questions without any effect, it he did not tisfy hirns.ell that :hey heard it. There was zeotle• reason for supposing that the Juke was cot stlisfiel with what had been done ; before any nraiec was made, lie begen to er.scuss time me:ter in Coe::. It then appeared that there war serztea:g of doubt in his mind. It was matt neve:mew uccu:• rence had taken place in e. ea • e in which ;' .l ty's Ministers might he soppine.: to have rote inte rest than the community et lv-ge ; end i: v. inec to he desired in rich cases, that the reette: s heatld be fully and openly canvassed :r. rarliarree.:—:Le fit place for such a disci:mon. Th sowcrroit GENERA the dot': had occurred to the mind or the •edze t: ern v.!: 1 passed subsequently, vi:. die ste:ereait 'J r . a 0111 : of the disagreemeat of the Jurie Sir FRANCIS BURD:.: 9 : - : 'rid; rrpl:ed- I • Attorney-General had said, th:it t! , e 10.; aQUM brought on with no ( )tiler ietente)n then t o di,ere , .: the administration of joreace. Tke Atterrey-Getee:, had a right to rx--f.:o informations ter Leee., te• he had no right to e bel.the Members of 4, Wl' • • The new trill, he egain contended, was nu heeled t.O Mr. Woofer, a-m e- .reing to Mr. to whose :41.:thn•i•7 every man would bow, he had that judgmert c.),;:d rot he given on 0 , 4 He uodetstood thet en offer had beenrtd.: to : . • rate Mr. Wooler, if he cense to o we: The ollrsis't°u2EcYum*GpElaNinEttlaat't S. "1 Oltlintd 1:1141 to) U. lit:Writ:64,li