Star. — London, England, 1823-07-08 00:00:00

uniformly perpetrated at night. Ile would protest, however, against throwing urn the army the re sponsibility and the odium of carrying the Act into execution without the co-operation of the Magistrates. Earl FITZWILLIAM never gave a vote with more satisfaction than that which he had just given ngainst the House going iuto a Committee upon that Bill, to which he felt the most decided hostility. The 13111 then went through a Committee.—On the bringing , up of the Report, The EArl of ROSSLYN objected to the vagueness which the clauses exhibited. Lord HOLLAND condemned the manner in which a Bill which went to deprive the people of Ireland of a great portion of their liberties cam= before their Lordships, and which completely prevented the pos sibility of making any amendment in it in that House. The Earl of LIVERPOOL contended that the Bill, in its pi esent shape, had existed for many years, and %vas perfectly well understood in Ireland. The Report was then agreed to. APPELLATE JURISDICTION. The Earl of LIVERPOOL moved that the Reso. lutions founded on the Report of the Committee should be entered on the Journals as Standing Orders. Lord DACRE suggested that such Members of the Royal Family who were Members of that House should be exempted from, the operation of the fourth ‘lanse, which went to compel the attendance of Peers. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said that subject had been considered, and it was deemeti mote respectful not to exclude the Members of the Royal Family as suggested by the Noble Lord. The Earl of DSRLINGTON objected to the intro duction of any pecuniary penalty at all to compel at tendance; but if it should be determined to have one, it should be in such an amount as would secure its object; now it was manifest, that a Noble Lord resi ding in Ireland or Scotland would prefer paying 501. to coming to London to attend his duty. Ile should therefore move to substitute the sum of 1001. instead of 501. in the clause. _ Lord HOLLAND objected to make any distinc tion in the Members of that House; as Peers of Par liament, all there were equal ; but he wished to ask the Noble Earl opposite, was there any precedent for compelling the Noble Lords to their duty on a penalty of a sum of money ? The Earl of LIVERPOOL concurred in opinion with the Noble Baron ; the attendance of all Peers without distinction ought to be enforced. After some further conversation, in which the Earl of ROSSLYN, Lord ELLENBOROUGH, the Earl of LI VERPOOL, Lord HOLLAND, the Earl of DARLINGTON, and Lord BEXLEY took part, the clause for fixing the penalty at SOL was adopted. The Resolutions were then ordered to be entered on the Journals of the House as Standing Orders. The remaining Bills were then forwarded in their espective s tages.—A djourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at four o'clock. Mr. HUME moved that the Committee appointed ternquire • into the practice of engrossing Bills should have leave to send for persons, papers. and records.—Ordered. The Gas Light Establishment Bill was ordered to be read a second time that day three months. The Irish Passage Regulation Bill was read a third time and paced. - - The Marriage Act Amcndment Pill, after some observations front Dr. PHituatons and Sir J. AIACZINTOSIf, was read a se- end time, and ordered to be co-ninitted to-morrow. Sir J. MACK IN TOSII postponed his motion for the instruc tions given to Sir W. A'Cuurt. The Hon. Member fixed no future day for the motion. The Irish Church Rate 13111 was read a third time and passed. The Irish Malicious Injuries Bill was read a third time and passed. The Irish Exchequer Court Bill was read a third time and passed. The Killearnan Union !MI was read a third time and passed. The Cork General Sessions Bill went through a Committee, the report was brought up, and ordered to be received to-morrow. The Irish Exchequer Court Establishment Bill was reported to the House, and ordered to be engrossed. The East India Half-pay Bill was read a third time and passed. The Report of the Committee on Lord St. Vincent's Annuity Bill was brought up and received, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. Mr. GOULBURN moved the Order of the Day for receiv ing the Report of the Irish Linen Manufacture Bill. Mr. RICARDO objected to several clauses of the Bill. Sir G. HILL replied, and defended the BiR. The Order of the Day was then read. On the motion that the Report be now received, Mr. HUME moved, as an amendment, that the Bill be read this day siz months. Mr. GOULBURN opposed the amendment, anti entered at some length into a defence of the Bill.—The House divided—. For the amendment 7 , Fur the original motion " Majority for the original motion —26 On the return of strangers to thk gallery, Mr. WILBERFORCE was addressing the House on a Petition which he presented from the Rev. John Lempriere, setting forth the manner in which he had been dismissed from his situation as head master of Exeter School. The Petitioner had presented a Pe tition last Session, which had been referred to the Commissioners appointed by Act of Parliament to inquire into Public Chat ities. The Petitioner prayed for an inquiry into the causes of his removal. Mr. T. COU RTEN A Y defended the Trustees of the School, by whom Mr. Lempriere had been removed. The Trustees did not proceed to those steps till they had felt it to be a necessary step, by seeing the School declining in numbers, from year to year ; they had appointed another Master, under whom the School had been progressively improving. Mr. BROUG II AM wished to know if it was true, as stated by the Petitioner, that the person appointed to succeed Mr. Lemptiere, was.nearly related to one .of the Trustees ? Mr. COURTENAY said, the fact was so. Mr. WILBERFORCE said, lie understood, when 'Mr. Lempriere was first appointed to the School, it increased rapidly, and continued to do so, till he was thwarted in everything be did, by the opposition of Mr. Collins, one of the Trusters; and he now sought to obtain redress for the injury he had sustained. Mr. COURTENAY had no objection to the fullest inquiry ; but he could not consent to this Petition, containing libels on tie Trustees, being printed and circulated. - Mi. BROUGHAM was in favour of printing the contained no greater libels than most Pe titions to the House, calling for redress in cases of in clividual injury. He thought this transaction savoured very much of a job : it was somewhat singular that Exeter had given more work to the Commissioners of Charitable Institutions than any other ten places in the kingdom. Alter a few words from Mr. Cohn rtNAY, Mr. BROUGHAM, and Mr. NVILISERFORCE, the Petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. ROBERTSON presented .a'Pe . tition from «'il- Liam Smith, m Aster-mariner, of the Commercial-road,l, setting forth, that in the year 1819, whilst sailing in 62 deg.ls min. South latitude, he discovered ceitain lands never before visited. Ile was offered consi. derable sums by America to induce him to impart his discover ies to that Gore' nment, but he determined • his native country alone should reap the benefit of his discoveries, and soon after lie met with his !Majesty's ship Andromache, Captain Shirreff, and communi cated his discoveries to Captain Shit eff, giving him information as to soundings, latitude, and such other observations as he had made, and Captain Shitreff had since visited the coast in question. The Petitioner had since peti:ioned the Admiralty for remuneration and reward for his discovery, but the answer inva riably made was, that the Admiralty had no funds; he had therefore come for relief to the House.—The Petition was received. Mr. MABERLY presented a Petition from I-lazard,a schoolmaster, complaining that he had been falsely apprehended and imprisoned on a charge of High Treason, as being concerned in the Cato•street conspiracy ; and after being confined for some time, was discharged as not guilty, but in the meantime, by his confinement, he had been utterly ruined. After a few observations from Mr. Piter., Mr.' Hues, Mr. BUTTERWORTH, Mr. Alderman Wono, Mr. BROUGHAM, Mr. CANNING, and others, the Petition was ordered to lie on the table. Mr. MABERLY then moved that the Petition be printed, and in doing so said, he had not presented the Petition without putting the Right Hon. Secretary in full possession of its contents. The Petitioner said he had kept a school for thirty•four yeats ; he had known Edwards for many years, and was induced to let him have the use of his house, quite ignorant of the purpose for which he wanted it, and having no thing whatever to do with him or the Cato-street conspirators. Mr. PEEL thought this was a case in which the House could not interfere, and therefore it was un necessary to print it. Mr. DENMAN was for printing the Petition. The House divided. For printing the Petition SI —Against it 60—Majority against it 29. ADMINISTRATION OP JUSTICE IN IRELAND. Mr. BROUGHAM rose to present a Petition from a person named John Quip, who was a surgeon, re siding at Belfast in Ireland. He knew nothing of the Petitioner, he had referred him (Mr. Brougham) to an Hon. Member, not then in town, who was ac quainted with his respectability, and as it was un likely that the Gentleman to whom he had been thus referred would again reach London before the pro rogation of Parliament, he felt that he could not resist the fair claim made upon him to lay before the con sideration of the House a Petition' couched in re spectful language, and meriting, as much is ever Peti tion deserved, their serious attention. a I hive said," continued Mr. Brougham, that I knew nothing of this Petitioner. I am equally ignorant of the truth of his statements; and I say this to guard myself from the possible suspicion of having made these chargei with any feeling of personal disrespect towards the distinguished individual whose conduct as a Judge is here so strongly impeached. The Petitioner brought an action against a person whose name I studiously abstain from mentioning, for an assault, and the cause was tried before Mr. Baron M'Clelland. There was a verdict for the defendant with costs, which the Peti tioner being urtable to pay, was taken in execution, and ultimately obliged to seek relief from his embarrass ments by taking the benefit of the Insolvent Act.— This step, though it procured for him a temporary relaxation of his difficulties, served only to plunge him ultimately in still deeper misery. His hopes were utterly blighted, and his professional character ruined by the very means in whith he sought for the alle viation of his difficulties. The charge contained in the Petition divided itself into two parts. The first charge is against the Sheriff for packing a Jury, and the second against the Judge for misdirection. An application was made on the part of the defendant, to have the cause made a Special Jury cause, and this was refused ußon the ground, that the application was, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, made too late. To this decision no abjection is stated. The Petitioner next complains that thyncommon panel •fronewhich the Jury were taken was not the ordinary 'panel of the year, but of the year preceding. He then says, that notwithstanding the cause was not to be tried by a Special Jury, it was made a Special Jury case by the returning officer four days before the Assizes. This is indeed a novel practice; at least, we are not yet acquainted with it in this country. How a returning officer should appoint a Special Jury, and still less how such an appointment should be enter- . tained in the roper quarter, I own I am at a loss to ascertain. However, the Special Jury was now printed, and the cause set down as a Special Jury cause ; and then, says the Petitioner, the Special Jury was composed of the defendant's own particular friends, all of them reputed, and the majority armed Orangemen ; while he, the defendant, was a Clergy man of the' Established Church, and the plaintiff a Roman Catholic. He adds that the Sheriff was re lated to the defendant, and that the Returning Officer was Law-Agent to the Sheriff. The cause was now a Special Jury cause, yet it was called on the first thing in the morning on the first day of the Assizes— a circumstance very unusual in England. It was tried before Baron lkl , Clelland, the Judge who pre sided in the Crown Court, and not before-the Judge of what the Petitioner termed the Record, but what we call the Nisi Prius Court. This, too, was a prac tice certainly never resorted to in this country before the gaol was delivered. An objection was then made by the Petitioner's Counsel', that the Special Jury had not been obtained properly, but it was overruled by the Judge.—l have now stated, with as much eau- . racy as I could, the substance of the fi rst head of this charge. I shall endeavour now to detail the' other part of it with scrupulous exactness. The action was for an assault, and it appears upon the Petitioner's statement to have been a very aggravated . assault. The Petitioner was sitting in the pit of the Theatre at Armagh, withhis hat on during the performance. of the Royal tune GOD save Me King. The de fendant came up to hint and-abused . him, or chid him fur remaining covered oat of contempt to the music. The Petitioner said that it was not from contempt to the music he remained coveted ; and several other persons who were near him also kept on their bats, declaring at the same time they did so not from any disregard to the tune which was then playing. Upon this the defendant persisted in hisabusi ye language, and swore, by the immortal GOD 1 that if the Petitioner did not take off his hat he would knock his head off. Then, when Patrick's Day, the na tional tone, was played, he again approached the Pe titioner, and stood over him with his hat on, to pro voke him, if possible, to imitate his own violence. — Such was, according to the Petitioner's statement, the ca , e proved at the trial. The defendant called no witnesses ; and the charge atti ibuted to the Judge is certainly as singular a speech as ever escaped from the lips al a Judge. It is inserted in the Petition as the words pf the Judge, placed actually in inverted com mis—, According,' says the Learned Baron, ' ac cording to the specific letter of the law, you should decide against the defendant; notwithstanding, you w ill find your verdict for him, in honour of our good old Icing, who may justly be termed the father of his people'—( Laughter). All this .the Petitioner states he is ready to prove at the bar of this House, by cre dible testimony, and, therefore, he has a fair claim upon our attention. lam afraid, however, we can not grant the request which he proceeds to make, and with which he concludes his Petition. Having already applied to the Court of . Exchequer in Ireland for a new trial, and his application having been re fused, he now prays for that which the House has no power to grant—a new trial; but he solicits, too, that which, it the House could grant such a trial, is a very natural request—that such - trial should take place at Westroinster—(4 laugh). Having stated the nature and the substance of this Petition , I move, Sir, that it may now be brought up."—The Petition was then brought up. Mr. Secretary CANNING regretted that a Petition reflecting upon the character of a Judge should be presented at this late period of the Session, when it was utterly impossible to investigate its merit., and when it was quite certain that during the recess it would circulate widely. It was evident, from the statement of the Hon. and LearnecrGentleman, that mistakes of the grossest nature were contained in the Petition. He had no objection, however, to receive the Petition, but would not agree to its being printed. Mr. BROUGHAM said, that the Right flon. Gen tleman had just anticipated that which he was him-! self prepared in the next stage of this proceeding to have urged upon the House—the impropriety of giving countenance to a Petition which rested its au thority upon the statement of one with whose cha racter he was utterly unacquainted, by printing it on their votes. Mr. GOULBURN begged to remind the House, that an application had been made to' the Court to set aside the trial referred to in the Petition, and that application had been refused by all the Judges. So that this was not the act of one Judge, since it re ceived the sanction of the whole Court. _ Mr. BROUGHAM, in explanation, said, that he had already stated that fact, certainly with the view of shewin* that Baron McClelland was not alone re sponsible in this case.—The Petition was orderid to lie on the table. EAST IfIDIA TRADE BILL. Mr. WYNN moved the Order of the Day for the third reading of the East India Trade Bill. The Order having been read, Mr. HUME said he could not suffer a Bill to pass, which deprived the natives of India of the rights of British subjects without entering his protest against such a measure. _ _ _ Mr. FORBES agreed with the Hon. Member for Aberdeen in his estimate of this unjust measure. Mr. MONEY thought the Bill unjust and perni cious ; but he believed, at the same 'time, that the Directors acted according to the.best of their judg ment, and in an anxiety to promote the best interests of the people of India. The Bill was then read a third time; and, after a few words from Mr. Holm and Mr. Wiwi, passed. PRISONS BILL. Mr. COURTENAY moved the Order of the Day for the consideration of the Lords' Amendments to the Prisons Bill. Mr. BENNET said, that he could not see without regret the introduction of tife word—so obnoxious to every manly feeling—" flogging" in several of the amendments of this Bill.' The Hon. Member alto gether objected to the mode of flogging ; and if he lived long enough, be would never lest until he could rescue the people of this county from such a beastly, disguiting, and disgraceful punishment. Within the last seven years, there were 6759 persons flogged, mostly in private. So much for example. It was only the other day that two destitute boys had their backs'%cerated, and. were imMediately after turned out into the street to rob. Such was the brutality of this flogging, that he had a painting made of their backs, and which he had lithographised. He would have had them put up in the streets to excite the dis gust of such a punishment in and out of this . House, but that he feared it might render him liable to a pro secution in another Court. It was a God-send to get anytbing from the other House in the shape of amend ment; and even with the flogging, he was glo I to accept the present Bill. The Hon. Member concluded by inoving,'that the words " authorising the punish ment of flogging" should be omitted. Mr. W. COLTSTENAY thought the House were much indebted to the House of Lords for many of the Amendments in this Bill. The Hon. Member pro posed .several verbal Amendments, which were agreed tot The House divided on Mr. Bennet's Amendment, For the Amendment. 22; against it, 36.—Majority 1 4. The several Amendments were agreed to, and the MU ordered to carried np to the Lords for their concurrence. NEW SOUTH WALES. ' Mr. WILMOT-HORTON, in rising to move the Otder of the Day for the recommitment of the New South Wales Jurisdiction and Regulation Bill, said, it was unnecessary for him to state, that this Bill was founded on the Report of Commissiriner Bigge, which was adopted by his Majesty's Ministers, and for which they were responsible. It appeared by the Report, that three places were pointed out as proper to place transported persons in—one of them a healthy and abundant island, in which it was intended to have a Imige'Penitentiary, where the prisoners would be kept to useful' Iribour. This was most desirable, in order that the greater offenders sent over, and those who committed outrages or offences, shc nld be selected from amongst the mass, and suffer punishment in a more intense 'degree than ordinary dffenders. The adoption of these, with other suggestions founded on . • the Report alluded to, would change altoget!ier character and nature of the punishment of transpo, Cation from that which it now bore, and convicts their return would not encourage hardened offend by the accounts of the easy life they passed whilst New South \\Wes, but give them to understand ti it was a state of painful privation to the greater fenders, not a means of escaping from punislkme rl Que thing was very desirable on their coming of which was, that the convicts should not be permit-, to have any communication with the colonists bt4 they were lauded and had been clas , ,ed accordin go their desert or the nature of their offence, by whi,y means care might be taken that the convicts shoal find that the offences of those who committed shit under aggravated circumstances would not be f e „ gotten. It was with this view that he should pat pose that these persons should not, at least for se ek considet able time, be suffered to join the characte r i convict and colonist, or receive any money for chi, labour, which was the property of the State, or ev e; make any lawful gain upon any speculation or err,; tion. In this Penitentiary, as well as throughout a t colony, it was intended to decrease the frequ e , and the quantum of corpoipal punishment. Th eft important object to by attained was the placing ri [convicts rather in an agricultural state of life,spa t i over the face of the country, than locating then towns. They would then be kept more consub t l y to labour, and fully employed ; whilst being liab: t I to be constantly visited, a moral infi tence woulji t exerted over them, which the crowding together 4 towns now tended to defeat. This must be ama vial object with a colony which had swelled its pop 4 lotion, and was likely to afford to the mother couza an advantage and support unprecedented in ti,e tory of any colony in so short a period of timer Norfolk Island had, with these views, beeo tt • lected as a completely eligible situation for tier penitentiary asylum where, with scarcely any expee tt the class of enormous offenders could be kept able: ther apart from others, whom by their vices ores ample they might debauch or render equally depraved, A question had always arisen, what was to beclue in New South Wales with those sentenced for ler. gery ? Being generally useless for husbandry, the ! 7 acted as Clerks for the most part, and made MOW It was now proposed that the youth of the colt! • should avail itself of the knowledge of these 4 fenders, who were to be compelled to teach and & as the schoolmasters of the settlement, w ithout gran ing any emolument for such labour. Money H. meats too were in most cases to be substitutd instead of rations. The system of emancifiatto and tickets of leave was to be changed materialli; the latter were to be issued, but no permission vs to be given to return. In this manner the won classes of offenders would be drawn off from tilt mass, whilst those who remained would be alarm], and excited to amendment. With respect to encourage ment to convicts to settle--no convicts are to be po mitted to hold more than 10 acres of land (an abut dance for a family) unless he possessed a capital of a Acting on the recommendation of the Repot t founds on Mr. Bigg's inquiry, new Courts were to be min listed, in which indictments were to be prosecutd by information, and tried by the Judge, with it assistanceasf a4tisy, soroewbat„diffeting in numbs and character from a Jury in this country, and whirl would, therefore, be a ground of objection possildi with some in that House. It would be objected the the Jury or Assessors were, as officers, unfit to to cases of this description; to this he should reply, ths such a Jury was much fitter to decide on all case especially where settlers were concerned, than a.* of convicts would be. Besides, if both parties en. gaged should demand a Jury selected as a Jury was in England, it was intended to give the Court a power to order such a Jury to be struck to decide the cant The evidence of Mr. Reilly, wirery great landholder, and colonist, of wealth there, went to prove thati would be unsafe to trust to the verdict of remitted convicts the life or property of a free colonist a that part of our territories. 'leis opinion wasps. vernally entertained by most of those examined who framing the Report of 1:819. However, there wan power reserved by the Bill, of introducing the trial by Jury whenever it should be considered' desirabk The insolvent clause was exactly formed on theised• vent law of Newfoundland. Another clause wok* enact, that no regulation, or law should be propallit without it being certified.by the law officers of tk colony that it was not in violation of the laws of England. The Hon. Member concluded by mon* that the Bill should be recommitted.. Mr. BRIG HT felt a strong objection to the attempt which the Hon. Member was about to introduce, I! . drawing a distinction b e t ween a J ur y app li c able, the trial of causes . in New South Wales, and a 1 0 1 such as it was in England. This Jury was not** different in number from our Jury. but was to coAd, of mostly military men. The evidence of thecla Justice of the colony in 1812, Mr: Justice sent, vs favourable to a Petit Jury being employed in d 1 .11! mining civil and crimi n al causes.; an d t h at a ll ant nal cases should at first be submitted to a 41 61 Jury, as . in England. A Bill giving such a yang .. of powers, and establishing so many new grall4_ , , should not have been b roug h t i n at so l ate of the Session. On these grounds he proposed tilt the Bill be recommitted that day six months. TO only useful clause it contained, that respecting dons, had been withdrawn. Mr. BENNET said that Government could Itsee no motive for refusing the Trial by Jury, if the Or Jony were in a state to receive it. From all chador' niation he was able to collect, the conviction oa bu mind was chat it could not be inttosluced underlie& sent circumstances. Mr. Bigge, repot t staodf that out of the whole number of 4376 emancipated convicts, only 369 lived reputably on their propesq. To say, then, that the whole number of 4376 *dde fit to act as Jurors, would be a great mistake. E,s many of the free settlers were unfit to act as Jury; for some, who possessed the largest tracks of .laude the Colony, it was well known, had acquired it gross acts of swindling. He most cordially mooted to the principle of the Bill, and if any blame attached for the late period at which the measure was brought forward for discussion, he was ready to take iris alfi share of it, because the Bill bad been postponed WA or twice on his suggestion. I Sir J. MACKINTOSH objected very decidedly P the Bill, and opposed the line taken by. the Hop' Member.tor Shrewsbury. The Bill conveyed tads , Colony of Neer South Wales only one attributo ~~ ~~ NIIIIIiiiIi..