The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1825-06-29 00:00:00

r tad said so much so remind the House that the present Was; not an isolated ease, and to prove that he had not rested the whole charge upon a single case, lie had heard it said that the witness in this tax had conducted himself in a manner which laid him open to animadversion. In considering this aSIWTtiOII, he (34.1 Donioan) could not shut out from his view that the House of Cont. mons was a kind of Special Jury of Magistrates. He saw around hire many lion. Members who were in the commission of the I peace, and exenised their jurisdiction, no doubt, with great cretin to themselves, and great benefit to the public. These gentlemen naturally felt a sympathy tor an individual filling the office of a Magistrate, and he was far from wishing to deprive Mr. Kenna of the good opinion of so respectable* body of gentlemen. lie insisted, h uwewer, that the conduct charged upon Mr. Kenrick was most Tepee. hensible, and such as, if genereny practiced, would deprive the office of much of its usefulriess. It was the opinion of some gentlemen that the witness's manner on his examination was flippant and at.. cogent. Even if this was admitted, it made nothing. unless the wouess's evidence was shaken. The object of Crider in petition. ing could be of no consequence either, unites the facts he bad stated could be disproved; but as to his manner, could it be won. devoid at ? He felt himself In a situation in which he was never before placed. He necessarily became agitated, and attempted to screw up his courage. Besides, it was well known to those accus. touted to cross.esaminatton, that when a shrewd answer is made to a not very sensible question, he who asks the question is always sere to consider the witness a most impertinent fellow. He thought he should do the witness gross injustice it he abandoned him to any censure for his manner, which only arose from the peculiar situation in which he was placed. He now came to the circumstances of the rise: Mr. Kenrick he a petition presented as well as Mr. Canfor. He now held the two petitions in his hand, and he assumed, that what was asaertel in the one and not denied in the other mar be received as proved. Taking this evidence, the case appeared to be that Canfor had a numbed a sheep gearing on a certain common. tie lost twenty of those sheep, and at the end of a fortnight found one of them, a ram, in a manner which evinced his acuteness. He finds the sheep in the fold of a person named Beale ; and it should be remarked that when he finds it, it is shorn, whilst the sheep' when it was lost had on its wool. The petitioner claimed the sheep from Beale, who denies that the sheep is Cantor's, and asserts that it is his own. Cantor asks him to produce the fleece and this was refused. Under these circumstances Cantor thinks he has a com plete chain of evidence, and he goes before Mr. Kenrick, states his case, and asks for a search warrant to find the fleece, which had not been produced. lie also asked Mr. Kenrick to receive his depoo. two upon oath. He (Mr. Denman) was willing to admit that Cenfor was not entitled to the search warrnnt. o grant a search warrant is itself a strong act, especially when the person charged polarised a good character; but though the Magistrate should refuse a search warrant, it was his duty to act in the most concili atory manner, so as so secure the truth with justice to the individu als, and not to dismiss the case altogether. Wear.) After refusing the search warrant, Mr. Kenrick gave the witness a letter, which he said would have the same effect as a search warrant. Th is note re quires Beale to produce the fleece; but Mr. Kenrick did not think proper to back the note by a search warrant. Mr. Kenrick asserts In his whim _that he believes be sent a constable with Canine. Beale Mirrepoded the note, and claimed the sheep as his own. By the way, there should have been some proof that the sheep was his own. Both Cantor's objects had been defeated : he could neither recover his property or commence a prosecution. One of the most important duties of a Magistrate was to trace out lost property ; and a search warrant ought not to be granted as a matter of layout., but ass duty, when the facts were of such a nature as to warrant a suspicion of felony. At all events, nothing should have induced the Magietrate to dispense with the proffered deposition upon oath. Alter Beale had disregarded Alr. Kenrick's note, Canfor returned to Mr. Kenrick to inform him of this fact, and was then informed, for the first time, that the matter had been referred to two persons who wore to deride whether the sheep was Canfor's Cr Beale 's property. When Beale produced the fleece, although it was twisted sad otherwise disfigured, the referees decided that it was Canfor's, and desired him to take it with him. Cantor soon after repaired to Mr. Kenriek's, taking with him the fleece. He told Mr. Kenrick that the referees had acre,d that the sheep was his, and gave him Ont . :lean. Although two respectable neighbours had agreed, after an examination of the ease, Mr Kenrick, it seemed, stated, that he Was by no means satisfied that the fleece was Cantor's. How such a doubt could arise in Mr. Kenrick's mind, could not easily be im. agined, nor was it easy satisfactorily to account for his not then receiving evidence to. explain how Beale became poosessed of the y which it was decided was not his. If by this method Mr. properly eci Kenrick intended to preserve the respectability of Beale, he had token the very worst method of doing so. There was a prima facia case against 'Beale when the investigation had ended with the ciecision that the property was not his: and, at least, it was the duty of the Alagietrate to desire him to come forward and con front his accuser. But Mr. Kenrick had done no such thing; he had only written a foolish note which was disregarded. ho far he had neglected his duty, and disregarded what he owed to the public. As to Cantor's threat to apply to his Solicitor, when Mr. Kenrick refused to take his deposition, it was clearly no justi fication, he had no right to exercise his functions as a Magistrate in so capricious and arbitrary a manner. But in his (Mr. Den. man's) opinion, this was by no means the wont of the case. The Other circumstances. as tar as he knew, were without any precedent. Wu there ever so monstrous a case, as that, when an individual came before a Magistrate to obtain redress, he is made a prisoner, and his person outraged and assaulted ? Ile was told, he was Mr, Kee rick's prisoner, who made his butler a special constable for the occasion, and ordered him to search Canfor. A Magistrate had no right to evince his partiality or dislike in the exercise of his juificial Jenctions. Ile should disregard all feelings of wounded vanity or slighted dignity when he took the judicial vest. Air. Kenrick asserted that Cantor was importunate and violent, and that he threatened to go to another Magistrate. Mr. Kenrick had pro.' diced no evidence in support of these 'lineations, although it was surely within his power. There was the butler—there was Beale—there were the arbitrators ; all these persons had been pie. sent when Canfor was before Mr. Kenrick, and not one of them bad been produced. There was Batchelor the constable too, he who was called upon in so extraordinary a manner to search Canfor, be might have been produced to give evidence of cantar's conduct. Oa his own judgment, therefore, Ale Kenriek had no cause to complain of Center's conduct. It was said at the outset of his case that there was no felony, because the sheep was found straying on a common. If the property was taken a iuh a felonious intention, it Was no matter from whence it was taken. But to return to Mr. Kenrick's conduct. He ordered the butler to search and take from Center's person what use as much his property as any Hon. Oen tleman's purse. He said that the fleece had been got through his note, and that he must therefore have it. The reason he now ad. vanced was, that he wanted the fleece to substantiate the charge of felony. Now it was quite impossible to reconcile such an assertion with his conduct in dismissing the charge. He had nothing to do with the evidence taut as a Alagisttate, anti he had neglected to take the deposition, There was no defence offered to the charge of outrage and assault upon Canfor's person. Suppose Canfor for had resisted and bloodshed had ensued, would at be said that the Magistrate had acted properly? Was this the wsy, in which a man suffering under a serious injury should be treated, when he re. stated to a Magistrate for redress? It was, in his opinion, a charge et* serious importance, and if the Ilouse viewed it with I ndifference, it became more important. But it was said Mr. Kenriek had paid the penalty of his misconduct, and this would be a very good reply it Cedar now came forward to ask be more. It was difficult in deed to know on what oectoion the House of Commons should be applied to. If a case was brought forward which had not gone into the Courts of Law, it was said, " establish your ease in the Courts rat Law, and then come to the House of Commons." Now, the pee s e case had been established in a Court of Law, a judi cival t wined advised a compromise, which admitted the fact, and now, when the ease is brought into the House of Commons, the reply is, the ease has already been sealed in the Courts of Law, and the House of Commons has nothing to do with it. Was the circumstance d those facts having been proved in a Court of Law a reason why Mr. Kenrick should hold himself free from all imputation, and should be allowed to continue in the full plead. Mile of the power he hsd abused ? %Vas he, because his iniscon. duct had been established in a Court of Justice, to continue to the end of his life eowered to deny justice whenever it might please him so to do? Was it to he tolerated that because the verdict of a Jury had imposed dameges on him, that therefore he was to be held a fit lieseessor of those powers which that verdict had pro nounced him capable of misapplying Ile would suppose the case of a servant convicted of larceny, and sentenced to the tread-mill, coming back to his master and requesting to be teetered to all the advantages of the situation of which his previous delinquency had justly deprived him. His master would naturally say to such a servant, e• I cannot again trust you; you bare abused my con& elance-eyou have proved yourself unworthy of holding any respon sible situation ; it is impossible I can a second time take you into my service." He would suppose the servant, not at all satisfied with such a reply, immediately to answer, " All that is quite a mistake. Why not trust me again ? "Fie true I have been con victed. but then I hare paid the penalty of my offence, and it would be unjust and oppressive to punish me any further. I have received • fair trial, and been sentenced, and have served out my time in the tread-mill ; I now claim to be minted to my former situation, front which it would be the extreme of severity to exclude time." hitch exaetly was the case with Mr. Kenrick. He had becu con. sicced of conduct which proved him unfit to hold the office of Jus- Loe of th• Peace. It is said on his behalf that that cantrictton shosld itself be a reason why he ought to be continued in that very dice. However anxious he must be to see maintained at all times the independence of the judicial character, and although the Act of William, which secured die Judges from the degrading attttstion in which they stood with relation to the Crown, was at all times entitled to the utmost respect, yet he must own that he thought tide judicial office was altogether flee from the degree of responsibility which ought uniformly , to attach to it, and he fur ther thought that dist responsibility was wanting in all depart teen's. lie was perfectly sure that in making that observation, he lk jUid have with him the gregt majority of the Hon. Magistrates in t.,at H ous e, for doubtless tney mu-c be anxious to obtain relief from the disadvantages of that power with which they had been unduly infested. No mss coestil be more disposed than lie was to pay the nsracter of an upright. istrate every tribute of affectionate respect Magistrate discharging his duty with judgment and impertia los. The improper extent of power at prasent enjoyed by . Magic- Oates was such pis every good Magistrate in the commission of the peace week' wish to see abridged ; hut with that extraordinary power in their hands, it was then for them to determine whether or ao Mr. Kenrick hat! abused time authority of which he was still in possession. Magistrate% in Ireland, without leaving had proved against ;hem any acts of misconduct such as had been established again,. Mr. K.. had been struck out of the commission of the peace, and such. until within the last five-and. twenty years, had been (ITC practice in this country. His lion. Friend the Member for Win. at dem (Mr. Brougham) had furnished him with a case in which, in the time of Lord Loughborough, a magistrate haul been deprived at the commission. As the power of magistrates appeared to he on i the Increase, so in the same proportion the control of the Govern. i Lent deceased. In fact, the Government appeared to have lost all . S control. With such views he had brought the question tinder the leonsideration ofthe House, and in doing so he would disdain to disclaim any feelings of a persorral nanny. He wee no enemy to I Mr. Kenrick—he was no friend either. Be had on the store et " friendship no faith to break—he had on the score of enmity no (editors of revenge to gratify. lie never sat at the same table with Mr. Kenrick he had perha^s undid then never been under the same roof with him. Ile hail never exchanged a word with him, therefore he felt that became his duty which he was then executing under circutnatanees of peculiar freedom, lie felt it absolutely ne cessary that the House should move in the matter, for without the interference co the House the Government did not appear diaposed to take any step whatever. The resolutiors that he should then submit for their consideration he w ou ld wad, which he accordingly." did. They were t• the following erect :—lst, That it was the opt. Mon pf that Committee, that the allegations contained in the peti tion of Manin. Money Cantor, presented to the House, hart been fully established. 2illy, That 31r. Kenrick. in refusing to grant a search warrant, or to take the depositions of Cantor upon oath, bad been guilty of neglect of duty and partiality ; and 3dir. That by hi; staequeat conduct, in imprisoning, and otherwise ill-treating the petitioner, he had been guilty of conduct illegal and oppressive. 31r. Secretary PEEL assured the lion. and Learned Gentleman that not one amongst his most intimate acquaintances more Com. pletely than lie did acquit him of being in the slightest degree irfuenced by any undue motives. Those who had any knowledge of his high character would find it impossible for a moment to lm. putt to him ally motives of a private or personal nature. At the same time, in making these observations in reference to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, he must claim for himself a similar free. dom from motives of that nature. He had no feelings of friendship to influence his mind: he could have no personal desires on the subject. His only wish was, to see the point decided satisfactorily according to the Parliamentary usage, and the true principles of equity. Considering himself thus tree from any imputation of partiality on either side, he would proceed to consider the question which the Committee had to decide. It had been referred to that Committee to inquire whether or no there had been enough proved in evidence to justify a removal from the Commission of the Peace? Now, that -as not what the lion. and Learned Gentleman moved at all. It had not been committed to them front the House to in quire into Frank:, case. Ni - hat they had before then) was the in quiry respecting Cantor ; and in the investigation of that question he had no doubt, that the Members who were Magistrates would give their votes in perfect freedom front any feelings of partiality to an individual of their own order. I The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had mule two divisions of the subject, and in that he l ale Peel) would follow his example. He would consider, first, the conduct of 11r. Kenrick in refusing a search warrant when applied to by Cantor for that purpose; and secondly, in that portion of his conduct towards Cantor, in con junction with his butler and the parish constable. He would be. gin by calling upon the Committee to look at the evidence, and say whether there was that in it which called upon item to accede to the propositions of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman, fur it was to no purpose that they were told he had been guilty of impro. priety. He (Mr. Peel) did not stand there to vindicate 31r. Kenrick from every imaginable act of impropriety with which he might stand charged. Al! that was necessary to justify the Com. malice in negativing the resolutions then offered to them was, to show that Mr. Kenrick had not been guilty of partiality or cor ruption, or rather to show that there were no grounds to justify any imerierence on the part of the House. As to the first case. of Mr. lienrick's having withheld the search-warrant, he must free him from any imputation or partiality. lle could not, in that case, help acquitting him of any, die slightest intention, to do otherwise than execute strict and equal justice. Ile would then address him. himself mare particularly to the circumstances of the case. There was an ilea vidual of the name of Reale, with whom he had had, up to that period, no particular intercourse. This Beale was a man of whom Mr. Kenrick had always heard a good character, and he had every reason to believe that that character had remained at all times unimpeached. He was a man of some substance too, for the fold in which the ram spoken of was, contained 70 or 80 other sheep. Cantor came to that man, and charged hint with stealing hit rain, he having lost twenty sheep including that ram. Yet though he so caarged Beale with stealing his ram, he found that rain in an open field, before the observation of all men. It hod been alleged that the ram was shorn, but it should be recollected that that was the season of the year at which all sheep were shorn. He could not conceive how there was possibility of founding a charge upon such a circumstance. IVas Mr. Kenrick, on such grounds, to is sue a warrant which would compromise the character of a respec table man ? lie then noticed the evidence applying to that part of the case as dello:red tat the bar of that Howse, and declared that he. had never witnessed anything in his life more quibbling or evasive. When Cantor was asked whether he had stated to Mr. Kenrick that Beale had made a claim of property in the ram, his replies were any thing but satisfactory. Had Mr. Kenrick been apprised that such had been the case, he would at once have seen that it was a dispute' about a matter of property, and instead of proceeding-in the manner' which Cantor wished, he would have left the matter to be decided. by the proper authority, and not have issued a search warrant against a man of good character, and who, perhaps, in a great mess .sure, depended upon taat character. lie then referred to the ed. deuce, and read some passages in support of the view which be took of that part of the subject. It appeared from the passage be read, that the witness had stated first, that he had not informed Me. Kenrick that Beale had made a claim of property to the ram, then said he (Mr. Peel) after several evasions, and refusing any ex plicit answer until lie was pressed to the extent of tire or six' a uestions, he asserted that he had apprised Mr. Kenrick of Bale's ' claim of property. Bait, another part of the evidence he found that there exiatett a most positive contradiction to that, which was a part of the case that he conceived was most material, and respecting which he was sure there could not he a difference of opinion. Under these circumstances Mr. Kenrick, knowing the unimpeached cha racter of Beale, he would put it to die Committee whether be had done right hr wrong in refusing to issue a search warrant? lie, for Ills own part, had no hesitation in saving that it would have been a case of great severity indeed if he had so issued a search.warrant. Every circumstaiice in the case negatived the idea that there was any feeling of partiality in the mind of Mr. Kenrick towards Beale. 'reifies proved that fan as strongly, if not more so, than matters of importance; for instance, 3lr. Kenrick was ignorant of even the (.hrinion name of Beale. The butler of that gentleman, who appeared to be much in his confidence, did not appear to have the slightest idea that Mr. Kenrick had the least wish to screen Beale ; for he (the butler) tendered to Mr. Kenrick for signature a search warrant against Bede. On that part of the ease there was a very general impression that Mr. Kenrick had been guilty of some impropriety; but still he contended there was 'not die slightest ground for imputing any thing like an undue or corrupt motive. An action had been brought against Mr. Kenrick; he had paid damages, and the Committee was then to determine whether or not they would animadvert upon the conduct of that gentleman in the terms proposed by the Hon. and beamed 3lem ko opposite. He was free to admit that Mr. Kenrick had done wrong, in permitting his temper so fir to be ruffled as that he should have treated Cantor in the manner he had been betrayed into. But in speaking of the state of Mr. Kenrick's temper, he could not forget the state of that person's temper with whom he had to deal. That witness had been before the Committee, and front what they had seen of him they could probably form some estimate of what might be the state of his maid when he came before Mr. Kenrick, after riding 000 miles, and blood running out of the kcces of his breeches. In such a state it required, he thought, a little stoicism to hear with calmness and equanimity the attacks which such a man might be expected to have made. They were told by the lion. and Learned Gentleman of the nervous con dition in which Cantor had appeared at the bar of that House—how excited his feelings of respect were, and hew strong his apprehen. slob in being brought before the Commons of England; in fact, that such was his state of agitation that he could not collectedly tell a plain story. Their own observations on the witness would be, in his (Mr. Peel's) opinion, sufficient to enable them to judge how these Oats respecting that witness had a foundation is fact, and how far the conduct of such a man was likely to irritate and put off his guard a Magistrate to whom be might have applied, as he did, to Mr. Kenrick. Certainly no provocation ought to hare induced Mr. Kenrick to act as he had done; but whatever a Court of Justice might think of the matter, the Committee ought not altogether to lose sight of the provocation which he had experiences'. It had been said that the practice with regard to the removal of Magistrates was different in Ireland from what it was it this country. Now with reference to that, he would say that he had often heard lion. Gentlemen compare the conduct of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland with that of the Lord Chancellor of England, disadvantageously to the former in matters of that nature. He then referred to the case of master and servant, so strenuously insisted upon by the Hon. and Learned Member, and maintained that there existed no analogy whatever between that and the case of Cantor. lie (Cantor) never had brought the case to trial; he accepted a verdict for live pounds, seal in doing so left the Government without any authentic information as to the real state of the cese. From the proceedings of a Court of Justice they were riot cognizant of any part of the facts. But though Cantor found it convenient to accept such a verdict as had been before alluded to, yet he then came forward in the further prosecution of the proceedings before that Committee, from no motive, as lie stated, but these of promoting the ends of public justice. Still, earnest as he was in promoting those objects, he slept on the Matter for five aid: months, but hearing that the case of Franks was to be revived, he thought that a good opportunity for bringing forward another charms against Mr. Kenrick, and so the accusation then before them was prepared. The lion, and beamed Gentle man had said that no resolution of approbation should be passed. He was as tar as that Right Hon. Gentleman could be from wish. ing to have any resolution of that nature passed ; but though he made that admission, he did most positively deny that any case had been made out to justify an interference on the part of that House. There was another point which he wished most particuiatly to urge upon the attention of the Committee, it was, that they could do 'nothing more injudicious than adopting any intermetbate measure. To adopt any course shott of an actual address to the Crown, on the one hand, or of the course he hail previously recommended, on the other, would be a most Improper Interference with the hide " pendence cf the lilagistracy, and altogether inconsistent with the line of conduct which that House ought to pursue, lie would con. elude, by moving a resolution to the edict, that the. nrnittee had heard the evidence against, and the counaci on f Mr. Kenrick, and that it saw no reason for recommending House any further proceedings. 31r. TIERNEY thought that nothing could be less satisfactory than the speech of the Right lion. Gentleman; but there was one , part at least of it distinguished lot its candour. It was that in which he acknowledged that he could not support a motion ap proving of the conduct of Mr. Kenrick. lie would go still further, amd say that he disapproved of the conduct of that gentleman; and he would go further still, and say that the character of that House would be much lowered, unless some step be taken to mark with becoming severity such outrageous conduct. The question was not whether sufficient atonement had been made to Cantor, but whether the (louse Ind sufficient security that in future practices like those of Mr. Kenrick should be indulged in ? The whole of the evidence I provid fully to his satisfaction that Mr. Kenrick was exactly the r .1 i 6 • ' 1~ t 7 4; ~'-=~ sort of person who was unfit to be intrnited nith the powers which ' even formerly belonged to Magistrates, and which, by later Acts, were considerably augmented. perhaps unduly augmented. The Right Hon. Gentleman had stated that Cantor might have been in in a state cf extreme irritation—that the blood was running through the knees of his breeches. That exact condition he was not very well acquainted with, or whether travelling might have produced that removal of the skin which left Cantor blending at the knees ; but he took it for granted that at least he was very much chafed when he came before Mr. Kera-sh. When he goes in seatli of his ram, and does not find him in the condition which he had reason to expect, being almost sure of his identity, asks for his fleece, with a view to obtaining confirmstion of his adapiciona ; but what did . Beale do ? he aid, that Cantor should have neither the ram or the fleece, or should be gratified with any information or satisfaction on the subject. He then mat naturally came to the nearest Magis trate to obtain a search warrant. He went to Mr. Kenrick, and de. mantling what he had a right to expect, he received for answer, that he should get what would answer as well as a search warrant, and a note wrs given to hint, addressed to Beale. That certainly might have answered as well, and might have succeeded in an ordinary case, but he, Mr. Tierney, was entirely unable to comprehend why Cantor had not been examined upon oath. lie (Mr. Tierney) did not mean to say but Mr. Kenrick had been quite right in sending for Beale, to see what be had to say for himself, before he issued a search-warrant, had it not been for the peculiar circumstances of that' case. He had followed a practice not unusual among Magistrates. and had sent for Beale, a man, in favour of whose character testimony had been borne by a Noble Lord in that House. He (Mr. Kenrick) summoned Beale before him, for the purpose of ascertaining what the real facts of the case were. But however good the character of Beale might be, his conduct as to the ram was most extraordinary. He lost a rani with a mark on its rump, and seeing that ram of Cantor's with a mark on its side, he thought that it would suit hint well enough, and took possession of it accordingly. He freely admitted that none but a man very well acquainted with a sheep could know it after it was shorn, but Cantor asked to have the fleece shown to him, that he might remove from his mind any uncertainty as to the identity of the ram, but Beale refused to let him see the fleece, or to give up the rant ; and in such circumstances, what remained for Cantor to do but to apply to the nearest Ma.. gistratc for aaearch-warrant. Accordingly he went to Mr. Kenrick, front whom lie got a note to Beale, who disregarded the application entirely, and refused to attend the Magistrate. In that situation of affairs Cantor. wen to another Magistrate,M r. Burgess,and he observ ing the customary etiquette bct ween Magistrates declined interfering. He then had recourse to Mr. Kenrick. and at his house he 'taw the butler George Adams, from whom he received for answer, that Mr.Kenrick would interfere no farther, sad have nothing more to do with the transaction. It was strange that in the proceedings before that House Mr, Kcarick had cot.* tempted to contradict that part of Cantor's seatetnent, and he (Mr. Tierney) had a right -to infer from that circumstance that that was a fact Which could not be contradicted ; therefore it was to be assumed that he had at that part of the affair completely washed his hands out of the whole transaction. lie would put a case—suppose a gentleman had lost a piece of plate, and suppose he had reason to suspect some indi vidual of having purloined it, and that he went to that person, and having asked to see the plate in order that might be able to iden tify it, by seeing his arms engraved thereon, and then received for answer that he should not be permitted to look at it„ what would remain for hint to do but to make application to the nearest trate for immediate assistance, lest the engraving of his arms should he rubbed out. Should a Magistrate in such a case have conducted himself as Mr. Kenrick had done? Should he, without any de-' position on oath, have issued a summons, and, on that summons being disregarded, was the complainant then to be told that the alagmtrate would interfere no further? On the occasion of the re. ference, Cantor's only object appeared to be to convince the referees that the ram really was his. At that stage it was extraordinary that the whole of Mr. Kenrick's conduct underwent a change ; as (Motor cooled he grew hot, and seemed particularly incensed against Canfor, because, when the arbitration was over, he, to convince Mr. Kenrick of the justice of his cause, brought hint the fleece. In cuch a cue Canfor might have gone home from the arbitration, but he, under the influence of a very creditable feeling, went for the purpose of convincing the Magistrate that his claim to the ram was founded in truth and justice. He went to show him that he had been before two referees, Nash and Ede, and that they had sanctioned his claim. With every possible disposition to speak of Mr. Kenrick with respect, he must say that he could not bring himself to believe that the reasons fur Mr. Kenrick's conduct, as contained in his statement, were founded in fact ; nos could he ever lose sight of the circumstance that throughout the whole of the transaction they bad to deal with a man not of ordinary information on matters of law, but a Judge, whom they had a right to presume was well ac. quainted with the duties which he was called upon to discharge. For what purpose the fleece had been detained the House was only left to conjecture, and Mr. Kenrick had hesitated to produce Nash and Ede, the referees, and his servant Adams, who could have been able to cast some light upon the transaction. His con. duct throughout the whole of the second interview with Canfor had been extremely rash and highly blameworthy ; he appointed Adams special constable, to enforce the delivery of the fleece and note ; Cantor refused to deliver them to a person not legally authorised. Mr. Kenrick, in consequence of this refusal, despatched his set. vent for Batchelor, the parish constable, and Canfor immediately, and without violence , consented tive up possession of the fleece and note, the latter f' which, thou it was studiously kept in the back-ground by hlr. Kenrick, see the principal object through out. If the note had not been what Mr. Kenrick was desirous of obtaining, in what manner could Cantor's conduct be explained, who, on the entrance of the constable, held out his pocket and told him to take the note ? Farther, he would ask, what had become of the fleece ? There was no evidence to show what use had been made of it. In consequence of the violence and false imprisonment to which he had been subjected, Cantor brought an action against Mr. Kenrick, which had not indeed been trice. for this reason, because Mr. Kenrick did not wish it to be tried; at least his Coun sel had not permitted it to come to an issue, and in doing so they had only exercised a sound discretion, and he thought Mr. Ken. rick should feel much obliged to them for the course they had adopted. Mr. KentieVeguilt had, to fact, bolo acknowledged by his legal advisers ebnsehting to permit a verdict to be recorded! against him, with costs and a tine of .5/. Much had been said against the conduct of Canfor, but be thought unjustly; the in., formation he had originally given had been confirmed and sub- stantiated. The quation was, would the Committee shut its eyes upon a transaction of such a nature, on the ground stated by the lion. Gentleman (Mr. Peel), that it was a case unworthy the inter ference of the liouse ? He wished to know what circumstances could warrant the interference of that House in the case of a Ma gistrate, if false imprisonment and illegal violence did not? This was not the only offence Ale. Kenrick had committed in his ma. gisterial capacity; a circumstance had occurred, where a m a n (Franks) was accused of stealing from him a piece of timber, value Is., and imprisoned in consequence, and let ow of prison on a par. titular condition. The Hon. Gentleman said it was not the busi. neat of the House to determine upon the question, but he (Mr. Tierney) thought differently. Here was a Magistrate convicted of a breach of the peace, which he should have maintained, and of false imprisonment; ; he had acknowledged, by submitting to a verdict, that he had acted improperly, and Hon. Members did not attempt to vindicate, but only to extenuate his conduct. Under such circumstances, he (Mr. Tierney) thought it the duty of his Majesty's Ministers to advise the Lord Chancellor to remove Mr. Kenrick from the situation, the duties of which he was so incom petent to fulfil. He had never read or heard of a case more calcu. lated to excite suspicion and disgust ; and he felt persuaded no man could be less fitted to exercise in an adequate manner the power+, and discharge the duties of a Magistrate, than the individual in question. Whether the motion of the lion. and Learned Gentle. man (Mr. Denman) was the right way to come at the conduct com plained of, and adequately punish it, he admitted might be matter of doubt with some Hon. Members; but,. for his part, he saw nothing in the Resolutions of his Learned Friend at all objection able, or contrary to his opinion and view of the case. lie bore no to hlr;Kenrick, and, in fact, knew nothing about him, never having had any communication with him. He was free to admit the question of interference with the conduct of Magistrates was one of great delicacy, and that charge, which were often easily made were exceedingly difficult of refutation. On this principle, he had himself at different times declined to present petitions which he thought were not borne out or substantiated by facts, and he would not countenance or encourage the putting forth of statements of a prejudicial or ex-parte nature to the country, because such a pro. cording would be an act of injustice to the parties concerned. But, in the present instance, he thought the case had been fully made out, and it was important it should receive the consideration from the House which was equally due to justice and the good opinion it waddesirable for the Government to maintain. Blr. Secretary CANNING—The charge brought against Mr. Kenrick was neither sufficiently weighty nor sufficiently proved to warrant the proceeding proposed by the Hon. and Learned Gentle. man. There was nothing more erroneous than to suppose that if the House were not disposed to join in a vote of censure it must therefore concede its applause. The question was, whether or not a case existed or had been made out, to prove that the highest, last, and most transcendent power of Parliament should be exercised upon this occasion, and if such a case had not been clearly proved, as he was convinced it was not, he must object to any intermediate course calculated to brand the individual In question with such a grave and weighty imputation Ha would not follow the Hon. Gentle Man through the several details of the subject. With regard to himself, be professed the most entire and perfect unacquaintsnce with Mr. Kenrick, he had never exchanged a single word with that gentleman, and therefore could not be liable to the accusation of favour or partiality ; but confining himself to the incidents of the I ease, he was free to admit the impression upon his mind was, that the extent of blame Mr. Kenrick was liable to, was for a discredit. able and highly culpable want of temper manifested in the course of the second interview between him and Canfor. With respect to Mr. Kenrick's conduct in ?dosing to grant a search warrant, he thought that charge bad been long ago given up, and relinquished as entirely untenable, till tlae lion. Gentleman who had just sat down had revived it. Mr. TIERNEY did not impute blame to Mr. Kenrick for re. fusing to issue a search warrant, but ter not investigating whether it was necessary to do so or not. Mr. Secretary CANNING resumed—With regard to the accu sation of the suppression of a charge of felony, no biaire was im putable to Mr. Kenrick. Gentlemen within the House had stated, that they would have acted precisely in the same way, if similarly situated. In the second interview, he repeated his acknowledg ment of the misconduct of Mr. Kenrick, and his regret that he had so suffered the violence of his temper to overcame him, but he thought the Committee bound to bring the charge and punish.' ment together, and see that the latter did not surpass the extent lof the termer. But he asked, was this the case with regard to the punishment proposed to be inflicted on Mr. Kenrick? was there a just proportion between the degree of culpability and censure, or was a man on account of a loss of temper to be disgraced by being removed from the bench, and was such a proof of human infirmity to be estimated as an instance of guilt ? He thought not, and that when the crime and punishment were compared, it must be allowed, . . the fault did not deserve such a degree of animadversion. It could not be the proper course to adopt a line of proceeding incon. sistent w the interests of the country to stop short, indeed, as fae as tbs rig ht of a positive punishment was concerned ; but at the same time to render the individual unlit to hold office to the magis. tracy. That was the short and clear view of the case, and without attempting to defend the conduct of Mr. Kenrick, he was not pre pared to vote for the resolution of the Hon. (lent., which was in fart nugatory, unless followed up by an address to the Crown for the re. moral of Mr. Kenrick from the magistracy, which was a step that his conduct neither warranted nor deserved. And if the course of an address were not adopted, but the resolutions of the lion. and Learned Gentleman simply passed, could the House approve of such a proceeding, or send a Magistrate out to administer theduties and functions attached to his situation with the blame of that House fixed upon his conduct ? He could notlconcur in the idea that a l , moral fault was deserving of being visited with so grave nod weighty a punishment, or that the House of Commons ought to inquire into the private conduct of persons in the Commission of the Peace. And yet Gentlemen, before they consented to vote for such a resolu tion, it ust hold themselves prepared to go into an investigation of the private life, and • strict inquity concerning the moral conduct of individuals. It was quite sufficient to say nothing had been proved against the Individual in question except indiscreet conduct ; but he (Mr. Canning) put it to the House whether that alone was sufficient to warrant his removal from the bench of Magistrates. In one word, the House should not interfere to that extent, except circumstances had arisen of a nature to render every interferenee sl tort of that productive of great mischief to the country, and that the present wu not a case of that kind he trusted be had made suffi ciently apparent. Mr. H. SUMNER said the evidence of Cantor was consistent with the tenor of his petition, and his previous statement to him (Mr. H. Sumner) shortly after the occurrence. lilt. Kenrick could not be acid to have exercised a sound discretion, particularly on his second interview with Canfor. On the whole. he could not conceive! a case, which on the face of it rendered a magistrate more unfit to exercise his functions than that in which Mr. Kenrick had been concerns 1. A Noble Lord had borne testimony to the character of Mr. Kenrick, and stated him to be a good husband and father ; he had no doubt he was—he had also been said to be a good neigh bour. Ile (Mr. Sumner) did not agree in that opinion, and thought he could adduce instances of his unneighbourly conduct. Mr. W. LAMB rose to order—He deprecated the introduction of personalities—topic of character should not be introduced in a debate like the present. Mr. H. SUMNER resumed. As a Noble Lord had appealed to character In behalf of 31r. Kenrick, he thought himself at Liberty to adduce opposite evidence. Mr. DENISON thought Mr. Kenrick justified in declining to issue a search-warrant. His conduct on the occasion of the second interview had been rash and highly to he reprehended; but he could neither agree with the Resolution of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (31r. Denman). nor that of the Right lion. Secretary of State (31r. Peel), because he thought the one too harsh, and that the other cold not go far enough. The Opposition aide of the House had been arrayed against Mr. Kenrick, and along with it the almost omnipotent power of the Press, which in the present ins , ance had been unjustly exercised, in cntleavouring to bring about a con viction of guilt without a previous trial. Sir F. BURDETT could not agree in the principle meant to be promulgated, that some great act of oppression was requisite to in duce the House to inflict what was its greatest mark of censure and disapprobation. He thought Mr. Kenrick evidently unfit tor the situation he occupied. and that it was of importance to the public that Magistrates should know they were liable to be visited with punishment and censure for minor misconduct, as well as for greater and more grave offences. Such an understanding would make them much more careful and strict in the discharge of their duty. However, for his onn part, he felt willing to withdraw the resolution, and leave it to the Secretary of State for the Home Departmens to inquire into the whole of Mr. Ken rick's conduct, and take such steps as he (Mr. Peel) might think necessary. The Honourable Baronet concluded by adverting to the petit ion of a person lately holding a high and responsible situ ation, that of Chief Justice of Sierra Leone, who complained of hay ' lag been dismissed without inquiry, in a rash and inconsiderate manner. The petition was one of considerable importance to the individual and the public, anti he (Sir F. Burdett) would take an early opportunity in the next Session to bring it under the consi deration of the titmice. Mr. W. COURTENAY opposed the principle propounded by the Hon. Baronet who had just sat dawn, who offered to commit to ' Ministers the exercise of authority involved in advising the re moval of Magistrates from the Commisaion of the Peace, and that ' too in a case not strong enough to warrant such an act of interference. The light in which the Committee was to consider this subject was a very difficult one. They were to consider whether the facts which had beeneproved against Mr. Kenrick were sufficiently important to render It necessary that he should be dismissed from his judicial situation. He for one could not consider the case proved against him such as to call upon the Committee to recommend the House to enforce that power which it possessed, but which ought not to be used but on great and very urgent occasions. He would ask the Hon. Baronet (Sir F. Burdett) whether it was not of the utmost im. portance for the preservation of this law that it should be exercised most sparingly, and in those cases only where no doubt whatever could exist of the expediency of its application ? He conceived that' such was the principle on which alone the House could be called upon to interfere; anti when a case of such a nature did exist, then the power possessed by Parliament would be found to be of great and beneficial importance to the country. If such were not the principle to be observed, he thought the application of this power might be abused to the worst purposes. Then, if he were correct in this view, he would ask was the case now before the Committee of that nature as to make it safe or proper to proceed to recommend the House to move an Address to his !Majesty for the removal of this individual? Undoubtedly the lion. and Learned Gentleman who introduced this petition to the House did not think so, for he bad made no such proposition. He had moved a resolution ca. taioly, but not what he thought ought to be adopted by the Com mittee ; the either they should proceed to address his Majesty, or should dismiss the subject altogether. There was no intermediate course that could with propriety be puretted. If the Committee considered the only legitimate end wherein this power was to be exercised was where the ease imperatively called upon them to re commend his Majesty to dismiss a Judge, then he thought this Mgt was one which could only be considered as a light and trivial ease. He did not certainly mean to say that it was a light matter for a Magistrate to lose his temper when called upon to exercise his magisterial functions ; but the case, when compared with the power appealed to, was certainly light and trivial, and such as the Coro nuttee ought not to entertain. The course proposed by the Hon. Baronet (Sir F. Burdett) would be most mischievous, most danger. oils, and most unconstitutional. . . . . . Mr. DEN \I AN observed, that as it happened that no Hon. Member had come forward.to defend the corduct of 111 r. Kenrick, but that all had united in censuring it. some in terms even stronger than those used by himself, he should have thought there would have been no difficulty as to the course In which the Conimittee ought to proceed. After all it was a question simply of degree. That Mr. Kenrick's conduct was open to censure was universally admit ted, for even the Right Hon. the Secretary of State for Foreign ' Affairs had admitted it, although he disapproved of the resolution which had been proposed, for the Right Hon. Gentleman had cer tainly said that he considered that .Mr. Kenrick's conduct was a most disgraceful instance of want of temper t and yet the Right Hon. Gentleman thought it was a light and trivial case, and which did not require the power of Parliament to be exercised. He should have no reluctance in adopting the words of the Right Hon. Gentleman instead of those which he had done. No one could doubt that the charge had been most clearly proved against Mr. Kenrick. s He should like to know whether if any lion. Member, if on his oath as a juryman, were to have the question put to him " Aye" or " No" was the charge proved—he should like to know who was the individual that would on his oath or on his honour rise in his place, or by a single cheer declare that it was not ? Agreed then as they were es to the full proof of the charge, he would say that the nature of it was such that every epithet he had applied to it was perfectly well warranted, and most undoubtedly true. Under these circumstances, he did not re gret that he had brought the case forward, although the Com. mittee should think proper that they ought nos to proceed to any further measures. lie should therefore trouble the Chairman to put the Resolution, but he had no wish to enter into any further discussion on the subject. He would, however, observeothat the censure which his Resolution was intended to convey was not for Mr. Kenrick's refusing the search-warrant, but for his not enter taining the charge of felony. The doing neither was a neglect of duty on the part of a Magistrate which called fur the severest cen sure of this House. Mr. CROKER was willing to admit that the indiscretion, haste, and warmth of temper which was shown by Mr. Kenrick, on the occasion stated in the evidence, in his endeavouring to get back the fleece and the note, was very blameable—and if there were any lea. son to suppose there were any sinister motive on his part it would have considerably heightened the blame. It appeared, that how. ever great was the warmth evinced by Mr. Kenrick in ob. taining them, yet his object in doing so was praiseworthy: for he had stated by his Counsel, and also in his petition, that his reason for wishing to keep possession of the fleece and note was, because he thought there was a suit then pending between the parties, re. specting this transaction ; and the proof Mit such was the motive of Mr. Kenrick appeared in the fact, that the fleece and note re. mained in the hands of the constable tip to the trial or the action against him, and long before Mr. Kenrick imagined that he was to be attacked on the subject, or that Mr. Cantor would thus act against him. This observation cot having been made by any Hon. Member who had spoken on the question, he had thought it not unimportant to draw the attention of the Committee to the fact. Mr. I.OOKH ART rose for the purpose of observing that there was a very great inconvenience arising from the circumstance of including the names of persons in the Commission of the Peace who were at the same time appointed to a seat on the Bench. By these means they were often likely to become involved in cases where the question would almost unavoidably turn upon the propriety of their holding a judicial otlice, although the point would arise merely in. cidentally. If all gentlemen, therefore, who held such judicial situations, should--he would not say be struck out—but on a future occasion be omitted front the list of magistrates, it then could never happen that their names would be brouicht forward in any question where there competency to hold those situations might be meiden tally raised against them. (Wear. hear, hear.) Mr. H. SC MINER wished to know what was the authority which the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Croker) had fun stating that the fleece and the note remained in the hands of the constable till the period of the trial ? Mr. CROKER said it was in the petition of Mr. Kenrick him. self. The Honourable Gentleman then referred to, and read that part of the petition in which this statement occurred. Mr. C. W. W. IV YNN observed, that whatever course should be adopted by the Committee, he trusted it would not be that which had been recommended by the Honourable Baronet oppo site (Sir Francis Burdett). Any course would be better than what had been proposed by that Honourable Baronet. Ile must say, that in his opinion a course so turtle, so ineotripeutet, so likely to • ' disgrace the whole administ-sits,'.. e could not possibly be conceived. As to the individual so.o c conduct was now under consideration, he (Mr. Wynn) had ists beard any charge made against his conduct ass judge. Fr. t!,.v circumstance of his con. notion with that pan of the country where Mr. Kenrick presided on the Bench ' he was likely to have heard ouch a charge if any h a d ever been raised as to the manner in a Itch he discharged his duties. Ile had certainly many times asked time question of persara residing there, and the answer had uniformly been, that Mr. K.'s conduct as a judge had been !donee most unexceptionable. The Honourable Member for Surrey, (Mr. 11. Sumner) had stated. that as evidence had been given in favour of Mr. lionrick's charaeter, that therefore he might give evidence against it. Now, certainly lie bad never heard that in a Court of Law that evidence was ever i given against a .person, although it was uniformly the case tore-ceive (l :cc in favour of the individual. But in Courts of Law tile witness was open to cross-examination, and he might suppose that in such a case such questions as these might be asked hum : Are you disinterested in the evidence you give ? Have you no quarrel with the prisoner? The ouestlons might, perhaps, go farther, and it tuight be all in a fair course of cross-examination to ask—Have you had any lawsuit against this man ? (A laugh.) Have you at this moment any '..mtuit pending against him? (Much laugleer.) Such questions would be very naturally asked. Now, he had understood that the Honourable Gentleman was at this moment engaged in law with Mr. Kenrick, and which circum.- stance, according to the course of human nature, might be suffi. cient to bins the mind imperceptibly to the Honourable Gentleman himself. It had been said that front the irritability of temper evinced by Mr. Kenrick, he" might very properly be thought unfit to discharge the duty of a judge. But might not such an an argument as this be carried much farther? Might it not be said that gentlemen might he too intemperate to be tit to disesarge the duties of a Member or Parliament? Why it might happen that some person in a Committee of the House might display so irritable and ungovernable a temper as even to resort to open and personal violence against one of its members. (laughter.) Such a person could not of course be a legislator. (Laughter.) At all events he could not be fit for being the Member for the county of Surrey. (Much laughter.) If temper, indeed, were to be the only . test of qualification to discharge the important duties of a Magistrate or a Judge, then there were malty most upright and able Judges whom he remembered, whose tempers were not always of the most mild and forbeariog kind. IVlth regard to the charge before the Committee, it divided itself into two parts. The fleet was as to the refusal of granting the warrant. Now he had not heard any Honomabie Member say that he would not have refused the warrant under the circumstances. The summons was no proceeding whatever, nor was it necessary take the deposition of the party upon it. The second part of the charge was as to the detention of Canfor and the measures adopted for getting possession of the fleece and note. Here he thought the coraleet of Mr. Kenrick was censurable and blameable, but at the same time there was no reason to believe that it proceeded from any thing that was like a partial or corrupt malice. (With reference to the compromise of the action, he should observe that the law said, that a Magistrate should be entitled to a not'ce previous to any action being commenced against him, in order that he might bane an opportunity to tender amends; and if Mr. Kenrick had tendered suffic ient amends he would hare been entitled to a verdict. If it had been proved that that gentleman had acted from partial and corrupt motives, that would stamp the ease sufficiently for this House to address his Majesty to remove hint ; but if he did not so act, then he (Mr. Wynn) thought this wits too slight a case for the House to resort to such a step. He thought it was not enough far this House to come to a qualified censure upon Mr. Ktrriet's conduct, when the only question was, whether there were any grounds for removing him altogether from his judicial situation; and that therefore, as the case did not warrant such a conclusion, the only course they could adopt was that recommended by the amendment of his Right lion. Friend. Mr. noLai E Sli MN ER remarked that the Right Hon. Gen. tleman (Mr. C. W. AVYNIsIi had alluded to the possibility of a ernss-examination, and supposed certain questions to be put, as to whether the person cross-examined had any lawsuit pending with Mr. Kenrick. Hutch a question bad been put to him, he should have replied that there was no such thing to his knowledge. nor had the Right Hon. Gentleman any right to imagine that there was any such titer the anvil. Then. ifthe Right Hon. Gentleman had pursued his inquiries, as to what be (Mr. 11. Sumner) thought was most irrelevantly and improperly alluded to. he would have received an answer. such as the queetimi which had so irrelevantly, improperly, and with such bad feeling, been supposed, would lave called few. 31r. MABERLY said, he felt It necessary, after the observa tions which the Right Hon Gentleman (Mr. C.Wynn) had made, to state, that be had seen an account of the dispute between Mr. Kenrick and a near relative of his, in a Morning Paper ; but that, till then, he was entirely ignorant of the circumstance ; and that, when he made his observations the former evening, on the present case, he knew nothing of the dispute which had been alluded to by the Right Honoureble Gentleman. After seeing the account, he came down to the house to-night, with the fall intention not to say one word upon the question, lest he should be suspected of entertaining feelings which might very naturally be supposed to I exist under the eirehnistances.. Mr. C. W. WYNN. in explanation, said, he was very sorry to have been misunderstood. He knew less of the cue alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman than he did himself. The fact to which he (Mr. Wynn) had referred, was, a suit that he understood was now pending in Chancery, between Bit. Keniick and the lion. Member for Surrey (Mr. H. Sumnery. If he had been misinformed, he begged pardon for the mistake he had been led into. Mr. DENMAN said there were one or two things which the Right Hon. Gentleman had stated that required observation. With regard to the character of an individual, it might be true that In course of the trial evidence was not admitted against the person ae. cused, but when the Court came to pass sentence on the individual the Judge then always inquired into character. This was certainly the practice. But the Right Hon. Gentleman, when the question was nearly concluded, cat-e forward and volunteered a character about Mr. Kenrick as a Welsh Judge, which; if answered, would lead to s debate that would be interminable. The Right Hon. Gentleman had afterwards indulged in supposing a case. as if it were of as most unimaginable a nature as any that could be picked out of the Arabian Nights, about the infirmity of 'temper of a Member of the House of - Commons. But nobody could be unaware of the allusion intended by the Right Hon. Gentleman. There was. however, no resemblance of a case wherein a Judge acts par. daily and vindictively and the one which the Right Honourable Gentleman had so ingeniously and hypothetically put. The originat Resolution was then put and negatived without a division, after which the amendment was cut and agreed to. MESSAGE FROM TIM LOH DS. Two private Bills were brought up from the ilnuse of Lords. Also a message front the Lords, requesting to be furnished with a copy of the Report of the Sleet Committee of this Houston the Combination Laws. PRINTED REPORTS OF THE POUSE. Mr. S. RICE brought up the Report of t h e Committee appointed r to consider the state and condition of the printed Repons and other papers of this House ; and also to consider the means for providing safe custody for them ; and also addition.:l accommodation for the public and private Committees of the House. The Report was reed and ordered to he laid on the table. A conversation then ensued; is which 'Mr. S. RICE, Mr. C. W. WYNN, Mr. CALCRAYT, and Mr. took part, as to the House going into a Committee on the Report, er only on the propriety of an address to his Majesty on the subject, when it was at length arranged that the House should postpone the consider. ation of the Report, and proceed only to consider the address. ADDRESS TO HIS MAJESTY. . The Howe accordingly resolved itself into a Committee to con. alder an Address to his Majesty, respecting the providing better means for the safe custody of the Records and other Papers of this House ; and also for providing additional accommodation for the Committees. Mr. SPRING RICE said, as the consideration of the Report had been deferred, he should, on his part, view the present Com mittee as one of mere form only, and should therefore forbear making any lengthened' observations till that Report should come to be considered. The Hor. Member then moved a Resoluticr, that an humble Address be preaer.tcd to his Majesty, praying that he would be pleased to give ditections for the creciion of additioral Committee Rooms, and a Library for the safe cus•ody of papers for the use of the Members, with convenient rce.not to the same. After a few words from Mr. Hut:mow GURNEY, and Mr. Hums, the ResolutiOn was agreed to—the House resumed and the Report was ordered to be received on Thursday next. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. In consequence of an observation from Mr. HUME, upon the receiving of the Report on Thursday, Mr. Secretary CANNING observed, that it had been his inten. Lion to move an adjoutnment of the House on Thursday, on which thiy it was necessary they should meet for the disposal of a few Public Bills. CRUELTY TO ANIIIAIS. Mr. R. MARTIN obtained leave to bring in a mill for altering and amending so much of the A ct of {Geo. 11'. chap. 54. es relates to the unlawfully killing, maiming, or wounding of cattle. LAW OF 311:1:4:41ANTS BILL. On the motion that the Law of 3lerchants Bill be read a third time, M. SCA R LETT opposed the Ti ll, at matins a most hijoriotra alteration in the policy of the law of England. By that law, as it now stood, no man was at liberty to dispose of any goods by hand. belonging to another person, without leaving the owner a power of pursuing and retaking them, provided he found them un changed. Now, by tie present Bill, any person producing a bill of lading, or docket, had the power of disposing of thou goods, as if they were his own property. This alteration, he contended, would produce the most injurious effects— It was not to be tolerated that a dishonest factor should have the power of borrowing mooey on the goods of another. The object of the Bill was to give great advantages to the money lender, and an increased facility to him anxious to borrow on property not his own. As the practice now stood, the bill of lading did not derow an ownership, but merely an authority in him who held it to re ceive the goods. It was also a laid down rule, that an individual receiving goods as a purchaser should have an invoice or letter at advice, as well as a bill of lading, which under the proposed alte ration was to be alone evidence of ownership. Ni'haf objection, therefore, could tbere be that the factor still should he compelled to produce the invoice and letters of advice ? The Hon. and Learned Contlanan went on to say. that any law which gave power to raise money, whilst it lessened the security usually required, must be productive of evil consequences. Another serious objection to the new law was, that it threw on the owner of the goods who might perhaps he living in a foreign country the burden of prosecuting a dishonest factor t so that after losing his property, he had the 'sus faction of being obliged to prosecute. A s t h e law now stood, the merchant or other person defrauded by the factor in this country. had the power of suing him. ,lfter some further arguments in support at his view of the case, the Honourable and Learned lien. dentin said he should oppose the Bill as being injurious to pro- rel cal l ~~ I: 1 kr I I ~a.~c -_.. } Mk L•• FA two wai for this it o eve the dee fur cha lir in rat gist hoi oft Sot Per 11 Iflo ePT Ala Ex! Grt Dit Dit ow Whi Wall lag SCSI