Star. — London, England, 1822-02-09 00:00:00

r `i~ AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. 1411. HENRY HUNT. I :) certainly stu•-_ measure for the consideration of the House. He felt that he was compelled thus early to call their Lordships attention to a subject of so much importance. The Earl of LIVERPOOL replied, that it was not his in tention to propose any plan in reference to the question ad verted to by the Noble Lord : he understood, however, that a Noble Friend of his would take an early opportunity of intro ducing some measure in the other House of Parliament, which he hoped would meet the eel gency of the case. It was certainly 1 1 more advisable that it should originate in that House than with their Lordships, as the question was one which assumed a dis tinctive character. The Earl of SOMERS presented s Petition from the Agri culturists of the Hundreds of Wisbeach, in Cambridgeshire. complaining of distress, and praying for relief.—Read and Mt the table. . • STATE OF IRELAND. The Earl of LIVERPOOL understanding that the Sins re specting Ireland, which were in progress through the other House, were not likely to come down at a convenient boor to night, submitted to their Lordships whether it might not be ex pedient that the order for suspending the Standing Orders • should be discharged, and that it should stand for to-morrow, with the view that they should then meet, at five o'clock, to discuss the question. He hoped their Lordships would see no objection to this arrangement, and should therefore move that the Order for this day be discharged, and that the Standing Or der* be suspended for tomorrow. The Marquis of J.ANSDOWN, though he thought it an ob jectionable course for a Bill to be read three times in one day, at he understood was contemplated in this instance, would not, however, oppose the motion, presuming, as he must do, on the • necessity of the ease as the only reason that could be offered in support of it : but he hoped that to-morrow the Haulm would be as wen attended as on any other day in the week. The Ordtr was then discharged, and the Standing Orders were ordered to be suspended for to-morrow.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. At a quarter before one o'clock the Sraaxxta entered the _House, and immediately took the chair. The SPILAIIII then adjourned the House during pleasure, and proceeded with the Mace to present the Address of the House to his Majesty. The House did not resume until a short time before five. The STJAKICR was then proceeding to acquaint the House that the House had been to his Majesty, when Lord FOLKSTONE rose to enter his protest against the manner in which the House had been that day adjourned. He believed such an adjournment was without precedent, and that there was no instance of the House meeting in the early part of the day, and then adjourning over beyond four o'clock on the same day, the usual time for proceeding to business. One in convenience, at least, would attend such an adjournment, that if art important question was to be agitated the same night, and that a new Member wished to take a part in it, he was precluded from doing so by not having an opportunity of taking the oaths, for by the practice of the House no Member was allowed to take the oaths after four o'clock. He did not mean to say that the inconvenience of which he had spoken occurred that day, but be wished to guard the House against this being made a precedent for future proceedings. He would say, If it was tree that any ' Member had been precluded from taking the oaths that day, that he thought the debate which was expected should be post poned until such Member could have an opportunity of qualify ing himself to take a part in it—(Hear). The SPEAKER explained, that the circumstance which obliged the House to meet at an early hour this day. was to go up with the Address to the King. His Majesty's answer as to when be would-be pleased to receive the Address, was not re ceived till a late hour this morning, and as he fixed upon one o'clock as the hour for receiving it, the House had no alternative but to comply with his Majesty's desire. As the whole House was going up, it was necessary for the Speaker to take the chair first, and it was then necessary to adjourn the House, else the Mace could not be removed. But when there was an adjourn ment at all, it was as competent to adjourn for twenty-four hours as for three. There could be no imputation upon the Chair, because the adjournment had been moved by a Member. With regard to the inconvenience which was said to arise from Members being precluded from taking the oaths, he would re mark, that if any Gentleman was disposed to qu alify himself, be might have taken the oaths when the House met at one o'clock. There were instances without number of the House meeting twice, and making two sittings in the same day. Tice Marquis of LONDONDERRY, referring to the Jour nals, said, that on the 29th of January, 1917, this House met at half-past one, for the purpose of presenting an Address to the Prince Regent, and did not meet again until five. Lord FOLKSTONE, in explanation, denied having meant to cast any imputation upon the Chair. The SPEAKER then reported to the House the gracious An swer which his Majesty had been pleased to give to the Address of the Home. Mr. DRUM MOND brought up the Report of the Committee upon the Edinburgh Police Petition.—Leave was given to bring in a Bill founded upon the same. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY gave notice of a motion for this day sennight (Friday) for taking into consideration that paragraph in his Majesty's Speech, relating to the distress of the Agriculturists. Mr. Alderman WOOD said, he held in his hand a Petition from Mr. Henry Hunt, with whose name this House was not entirely unacquainted. This indivi dual was now confined in Ilchester Jail, and his Pe- tition to this House was to complain, that he had been prevented by the Jailor from seeing his family, his solicitor, or his medical adviser. Mr. Hunt com plained, that for some time past his confinement in H amster Jail was aggravated by every circumstance of inhumanity and inattention to his wants and feelings which his Jailor could offer. It would be recollected, that upon the representations of Mr. Hunt, a Com mission of Inquiry was made out for lichester Since the first sitting of that Commission to the pre sent time, Mr. Hunt had been placed in an extraor dinary situation—he had been treated in every respect as a felon, and debarred from all communication with his solicitor and physician. From long and close confinement his health had been much impaired, and as his medical adviser lived five miles off, he was exposed to all the consequences of a weak state of body, without the immediate aid of medical advice. He (Mr. Alderman Wood) understood that there were certain rules for the regulation of this prison, framed by the Magistrates, under an Act of Parliament, and signed by two or three of the Judges. But it was a littleextraordinary; that though these rules had been made for several years, they were never signed by the Judges until the last Assizes for the County of So merset. He certainly thought this an extraordinary circumstance, and he could not account for it other wise than by supposing that the Judges refused to sanction these rules, on account of their severity— (llear).—The Petition set forth, that Mr. Hunt was debarred all intercourse with his family, his physi can, and his solicitor. He h.td applied to the Cowl of King's Bench, and the Judges of that Coutt made an order that he should be allowed to see his physi cian and solicitor, but beyond that the order did not extend. He (Mr. Alderman Wood) had not seen the rules of the prison, but he understood they were very severe. He believed there were other jails, where even felons were allowed to see their Families and so-, P lace, who would - confirm his statement. He thought it his duty to give notice that, on a future day, he would bring the whole matter under the considera tion of the House. At present he would not take up more time, but express a hope that the prayer of the Petitioner for relief would be attended with effect.— The Jailor had no right to aggravate the sentence passed upon Mr. Hunt; and it was stated expressly by the Learned Judge who pronounced the judg ment upon him, that he was not to be kept in solitary , confinement —( Hear).—He concluded by moving that the Petition be brought up. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that the allu sion to the judgment upon Mr. Hunt called upon him to . state some circumstances connected with that event immediately within his own knowledge. He should state to the House that an application had been model by Mr. Hunt to the Court of King's Bench, com plaining that he was prevented from having inter course with his solicitor, and medical adviser. Upon this application the Judges made an order, calling upon the Magistrates to s ho w cause why this indivi dual should not be admitted to the exercise of the rights, of the loss of which be complained, and the cause was still depending in that Court. The affida vits in answer had not yet arrived in tows; but when they did argive the whole matter would be put into a train of satisfactory judicial investigation in the Court of King's Bench, and if any individual was to be charged with impropriety, that would be the pro per place for inquiring into it. He only mentioned; , this circumstance, as the application to the Court of King's Bench was alluded to by the worthy Alderman who presented this Petition. Mr. DICKINSON was rising in order to say a few words, when Sir FRANCIS BURDETT rose and said, that' when he heard the answer given to this Petition by Gentlemen at the other side of the House, he could no longer remain silent. He asked, was this Peti tioner to be told that, because he had made an appli cation to a Court of Law, his case was not afair sub ject of discussion in that House?—( Hear, hear.)—Per haps the question was a fit one for the consideration of the Judges of the Court of King's Bench, but it was not less so for the High Court of Parliament.— And suppose Mr. Hunt obtained all that he asked at present from the King's Bench—that they ordered him to have access to his physician, was it to follow that he was to be permitted to see no other persons? What right had the Judges of that Court to enlarge the punishment upon Mr. Hunt? What right had they to enlarge the sentence, which was but simple imprisonment—to aggravate a sentence which was already so disgraceful—(Hear, hear)—than which nothing was more calculated to bring the adminis tration of the laws into contempt--and than which there was no sentence on record so outrageous since the infamous times of the Stuarts?—(Hear, hear). — It was by such sentences, and the despotism which they attempted to uphold, that that family were hurled from the throne of this country. It was, as Lord Clarendon said, by inflicting punishments dis proportioned to the offence—by visiting not the acts, but the persons of the defendants—by executing law more in the spirit of vengeance than justice—by visit ing old sores, and paying off old accounts with indi viduals when they got them into their hands, that disgrace was brought upon the laws, and odium upon , their administration —(Hear). —Under any circum stances, long confinement was a dreadful punishment. It was so dreadful a punishment, that he (Sir Francis) would almost as soon be sentenced to death as to three years imprisonment—(Hear)—There was no doubt but that Mr. Hunt's health was impaired by confinement, and so would the health of any man by so long an imprisonment—(Hear).—He had no hesitation in saying, that so long a confinement was a species of torture—and torture of the worst kind too, because the sufferings were hid from the eyes of the Public. He could not let this opportunity slip without giving an opinion upon the sentence pro nounced upon Mr. Hunt. Looking at the course of the trial, and the summing up of the Learned Judge, it appeared to him that Mr. Hunt was acquitted of every count in the indictment except one,which con tained not a charge of fact but one raised by impli cation of law. Ihe charge of which Mr. Hunt was convicted was for having attended an illegal Meet ing ; but the illegality of that Meeting was a matter of law, and Mr. Hunt could not have known that it was illegal--(Hear).—Most certainly, abstracted from the illegality of the Meeting, the conduct of Mr. Hunt there was not only not illegal, but, on the contrary, exemplary and meritorious. In this case it was a misfortune to Mr. Hunt to be tried by a Jury ; for, when one looked at the summing up of the Learned Judge, one could inter, that if he had been tried by him alone, he would have been acquitted. Mr. Hunt was no more guilty of a knowledge of the illegality of the Meeting than any man or woman who was there. Indeed, from the circumstance of the Magistrates having called a similar Meeting before, he was almost justified in supposing that the Meeting was a legal one—(Hear).—The Meeting. therefore, might well be supposed to have taken place under the sanction of the Magistrates, and, up to the time that it was dispersed, nothing had happened which, in the judgment of Mr. Hunt, or any reason able man, could change its character. However, Mr. Hunt was convicted of bringing together an assembly of people, which, even amongst the lawyers, became a question whether it was an illegal Meeting or not. Surely, under these circumstances, one would think, the slightest possible punishment would th satisfy' e , justice of the case. But, on the contrary, the House would see the injustice of having the sentence ag gravated upon an individual who had done a great public service, and had exposed the conduct of an officer who bad abused the trust reposed • in If ins-- - 11 . ( ear).—He again asserted that it was scandalous to allow the Magistrates of Somerset, or the jailor. to aggravate the sentence of the Court. With regard to the rules of the prison, they were made for felon,. Whether they were severe or not, he (Sir Fratscis) could nut say ; as they did not apply to Mr. Huntsl were in a process being . served to shear the pa axiom with which he was still pursued—(Hear).—Mr.'Hunt did not stand alone, and it was the duty of the House to look with jealousy at the conduct which was observed towards him, as the same oppressions might continue to be practised with the same impunity upon every member of the community—( Hear). Mr. BATHURST deprecated discussion upon Mr. Hunt's case in this House, whilst it was. still under investigation in a Court of Law. The Right Hon. , Gentleman defended the conduct pursued by Govern ment towards Mr. Hunt, whose offence he represented , as one of an aggravated nature. Mr. BENNET said he was anxious to know the, names of the Magistrates who frained the rules in question, and of the Judges who sanctioned them...., He wished to know who they were that ordered a per. son in Mr. Hunt's situation to be shut up, in direct violation of his sentence, which was that he should not be consigned to solitary imprisonment. He would like to now who the Magistrates and Judges were that treated him as a felon, and shut the doots against his family, his physician, and his solicitor— (ffear). He knew no jail where even felons were pre vented from seeing their solicitors and families. He was at a Lou to imagine how any Magistrates could dare to assume such powers. He wondered that as men, as fathers, they would be guilty of such acts of inhumanity. But it was said that this was a question more fit for the King's Bench than this House. He had no complaints to make against the Judges of that Court—he believed them upright and honour- Airmen but he asked by what authority the order was made for preventing him from seeing those who had an undoubted right of access to him ? Was it for his security ? Did he try to escape ? ff he did, he ought to have been put in irons. But if he did not try to escape, why place him in solitary con finement ? Instead of harsh treatment, he rather de served credit for having detected guilt and exposed misrepresentation. But at the same time that he (Mr. Bennet) stood up for the oppressed, he did not wish to have it understood that he was an advocate for any of Mr. Hunt's acts. In looking at these acts, however, he could not help calling the judgment ini quitous—(Hear, hear). The Hon. Member con cluded by saying, that he would haie made this case the subject of a motion in this House before now, but he knew that the inevitable result would be disap pointment and failure—(Heat). Mr. DICKINSON defended the conduct of the Magistrates, and denied that Mr. Hunt became a vic tim to any severe rules, merely because he had pro. cured an investigation into the state of the jail. The rules had been drawn up and signed by the Magis trates, and were conformable to the rules of the other jails. It was some time before they received the ap probation of the Judges. They had been, however, signed by Mr. Baron Graham and Mr. Justice Best. A representation had been made that a Mrs. Vince had sought to be admitted, but from the cha racter of that person it was judged proper no: to grant her admission. Sir ISAAC COFFIN said, that he would not have borne testimony to.the correctness of the Jail of Il chester, if he had known thumb-screws were used init. Sir THOMAS LETHBRIDGE said that all com plaints which they had heard of Ilchester Jail arose since Mr. Hunt was confined there. He knew the Magistrates were incapable of such conduct as was ascribed to them. They were most worthy men. He would reserve himsel f until he should know what measure was intended to be founded on the Petition. Mr. HOBHOUSE expressed his astonishment at the reason assigned by the lion. Member for the county for excluding persons who required admis sion to individuals confined in the prison. Mrs. Vince was to be excluded because she was a person of an improper character; but was the son excluded for that reason? Ought he to be shut out from seeing his father ? Although he was not a person to en courage immorality, yet he would contend that she also should be admitted. The Hon. Gentleman ad verted to the case of a .prisoner who was confined four years and a half. Never, since the time of Charles the First, was so long a period of imprison ment assigned to any prisoner. But it was said three had now elapsed, and no one came forward during that time to state those grievances. That was the very reason why they should attend to the present Petition—(/feer, hear).—lt was never too late for a Member of Parliament, in his place in that House, to bring forward a claim for the redress of grievances —(Hear, hear).—Those gi ievances ought to be made the subject of pet petual complaint, until redress could be obtained ; not in that place, indeed, for little good could be expected from statements of grievances in ' that House, but they ought to go forth to the coun try. He did not, indeed, know whether it was com petent for them to make an order; but some resolu tion ought to be adorted, in order to admit his fa mily to Mr. Hunt. The sentence passed on him had been repeatedly complained of, and as long as he had a tongue, he would say that it was a most severe and unwarranted sentence. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he could not suffer such harsh charges to pass unnoticed. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. liobhouse) complained of the severity of a long imprisonment in a case to which he alluded. No one could mistake the case to which the Hon. Member alluded: it was the case of Car lile, who was found guilty and sentenced, not for one offence, or for one crime, but for a succession of li bels. That pet son suffered for his repeated and daring violations of dtt law ; and it was for him the Hon. Gentleman complained. The Hon. Baronet and his Hon. ColleN t e et the Members far Westmin ster), and the Hon. ber for Shrewsbury, com plained of the severity of Mr. Hunt's sentence. He, hoWever, would say, that a more impartial trial had never been known than that at which he (Mr. Hunt) was found guilty. He was tried by a duty, of every one of whom he himself approved : he was tried in a county chosen by himself, and to which he him )elf had the venue changed, by an application to the • :actiegh :101:treiorwasiothe),tviedopuyesbity;atiritheindui,e.: lid when the trial was ove r • duty - to , defend the condu c t indite, which was now arraign ed subsequent conduct is the king., - brou ght up for , ilidgMeat j 4 'HO TreilllO . Dikfe, other side unitht think othe r : Judges did not disk it lit& o r —ant, and the country went along with them is that opinion. He thought it sacessery to ally se much in defence of the Judges of the ding's Bette With respect to the rules of the prises, which f ormai the subject of complaint, they were male fo r t h e* generally, and not fir Mr. Hant particularly. Th e , went through the usual forms, and were suban us i to the Judges, and approved by them. It was ea fair in general charges to attack the Judges. At th. r e rate, no one could be found to administer justice i s the country—(Hear, hear). Mr. HOBEIOUSE wished to explain. Th e H on . and Learned Gentleman (the Attorney• General) raid that he meant Carlile's sentence. He well knew why the Hon. and Learned Gentleman made that inios a . tion, and he might, on another occasion, have an op. portunity of answering him (Hear, hear).—He could assure the House he did not mean Carlile: he alluded to another sentence, and did not know the name If the person , but the sentence he had on pa pe r, and it was imprisonment for four years and a half. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained, and said that in consequence of the Hon. Gentleman net naming the person to whose sentence he called the attention of the House, he tu s k it. for granted he meant the sentence passed on Carlile. He could say, upon his honour, that he had no intention of con necting the Hon. Gentleman with Carlile. The Petition was then brought up, read, and or dered to be laid on the table. Mr. Alderman WOOD observed. that be bad lately met Mr. Hardie, who was connected with the Jail of lichefer. He was acquainted with him in consequence of having knows hien is Newgate, in the City. He inquired into the conduct of tir. Hunt, and Mr. Hardie did not seem to have any complaint to make. It was on this account that he was surprised Mr. Hunt was accused of violating the rules of the prison. The worthy Alderman then moved that the Petition be printed.—Ordeeed. On the motion of Lord A. Hasamms, a link was directed to Argykshire for the return of a Member to Parliament in the room of Lord John Campbell. Lord A. HAMILTON moved for copies of certain Papers connected with Scotland; and gave entice, that on Wednesday nest he would move for leave to bring in a Bill for abolishing the inferior Commissary Courts in Scotland. Mr. WILLIAM SMITH moved that there be laid before the House as account of the Extents in Aid issued from dos Court of Exclosiner during the last year. Mr. LITTLETON moved for as account of all sums ex pended on account of the Spanish and Portuguese Slave Trade. Mr. LUSIIINGTON gave notice that be would on Tuesd.y next move for leave to bring in a Bill to consolidate the Laws respecting the Slave Trade. Mr. BERNAL seeing a Noble Lord (Londonderry) in his place, wished to know if he was prepared to give the [louse any information with respect to the Russian Tariff—whether Russia was disposed to grant a remission of the duties on goods e The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he would be Mil prepared on a future day to inform the House on that subject. . _ . ..... • , . . . . • • •' • ' '' " . .. . . . • . • • o . , lla wl ek - ..w ..Ir---.o ll i lieitots. It was certainly extraordinary, that because:, who was confined for a political misdemeensiar only. Judges of tlz ai liim': Ben PA RIAMM 1R IiOCEEDINGS.. Mr. Hunt had, throoglr his ileartious, obtained a —Mr. Runt should not be visited ' vtldr posnishninot whom he wed ---..„1. Commission of Inquiry Into the ahem of Ilchester . beyeed the bare sentence of the Court, !high *as Ss (Hear, view) .-;:- was his HOU. 14 LORDil l iikkilUAßY a. Jail; and because he had exposit(' thy practices of a kossif dreadful enough. sut Ohs • the eiinduet to of that excellent Judge; This day the lA. Cumiczuos took his seat on tote Wool. Jailor, who was before deemed isbAsaeislate--(ilear, Isood.sowards this in'avideal confined to the ec th e House-4 Oise ti sack at Ave o'cleck. •.. hear)--that he should for this Child' be visited with ' which - he had been *tally convicted ? Datiltg last t e r=ned fir his subseq I `. N. .AORisositvrgADATRESS. . extraordinary severity. He (Mr. Alderman Wood) Session proceeding% were commenced against him Bench, when Hunt was I: -,. lA* DRIIIREZweibiI , { Liverpool ) is his place, could state some of the facts which were disclosed for selling imitation coffee, but it was said then that that C ourt. It was the n it wished to ask if it was his intention to propose any plan for the relief alb. Ariculturists? In the met a dee Noble Bert de- before the Commission in question, and he was sorry 'the penalties would not be insisted on. He (Sir crime was nearly that of I` • cu.* to do s o ,o he (Lord Deere) would certainly submit some he did not see the Hon. Member for Taunton in his Francis), however, had since learned that these penal- The Gentlemen at the of ——_ -........JA-.....3..... —. .L_ as—••••••• ii• fele that he •••11....• ushrt Wail id-etmfirm his statement. He thought : ties were in a process of being recovered, and this wise; but the Judges dic THE AFFRAY AT KNIGATSBRIDOtiIARRACEi. Mr. Sheriff Garratt appeared at the bar of the House with a Petition from the Lord Mayor, Alder men, and Common Council of London. The Petition being brought op, was read. It com plained of the attack of the military on the inhairi tants of London on the day of the late Queen's fune ral, and that two persons, named Francis and Honey, were fired on and killed by the Life Guards. It re presented also the attack of the Guards on the day of Honey and Francis's funeral, on Mr. Sheriff Waith , man, who, in his capacity of Sheriff, was in attend ance to preserve the peace of the metropolis. Mr. Alderman WOOD said he was anxious the whole of the proceedings to which that Petition re lated should be laid before the House. He would now only move that the Petition be received, and do lie on the table. He should after that, think it his duty to lay the evidence and the Report thereon before the House, and appoint an early day for an inquiry into the whole of that transaction. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said it was not only necessary for the worthy Alderman to give notice of the day on which he meant to go into the inquiry, but it was likewise necessary to give notice of a motion for bringing up the evidence. With all deference to the Common Council, he thought it re quired cause to be shewn that it followed as matter of coarse, that the evidence taken by their Committee should be received in that House—(Hear, hear). Mr. HUME wished to ask the Noble Lord, if he objected to receive the evidence taken by the Com mon Council, would he also object to the produc tion of the evidence taken by Lord Bathurst, the Se cretary for the Home Department ? The whole of the evidence should be laid before the House. The Noble Lord was cheered by those Honourable Gen tlemen about him, but they did not understand what the worthy Alderman had said. He only submitted whether the evidence should be received ;if not, would the Noble Lord direct to be laid on the table, the result of the inquiry by the Home Department? The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said the Hon. Member for Aberdeen had mistakes what he sai!. He only anticipated what was to follow the reception of the Petition—namely, that the worthy Alderman was about calling on the House to receive also the evi dence taken by the Common Council. Healsothought it as little a matter of course to lay on the table the evidence taken by Government as the evidenceoi the Common Council. Mr. BENNET said it was well known that evi dence was taken by the direction of Govern/nov.— ft would be a wise discretion in the Government t' ) lay that evidence before the House. The Petition was then ordered to lie on the table. Mr. Alderman WOOD rose, and said the Sherni, certainly had been instructed to accompany the re tition with the evidence on which it was foundedt-- The form in which he intended moving it, was to this effect, that the evidence taken of the affray at Knight bridge be laid before the House. He would now move that the Petition be printed.--Ordered. Mr. Alderman WOOD again rose, and gave rroa tice that be would on Thursday, the 21st inst. move that the Petition be taken into consideration. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, it WAS his intention to oppose the motion for bringing up the evidence, unless that* was notice; he con.idcred It matter requiring further notice. Mr. Alderman WOOD then gave notic: fur a mo tion to that @act on Monday neat. ~~ ~~ • 0 It th fa th fee to a C fi it 2 4 • • •fi " V 'I w 1 i hi J • a b sI t t t t I j h t • rs a is 7 it r- I. • t e- -4 e- •t- te ie IS e e- it 6 • 1 1