The Sun. — London, England, 1846-03-11 00:00:00

THE SIJN I LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING MAR - CH 11, 1846. stld n ev'"e. , el se eu Lord of that opinion, that he not only used t ( e.t midnight. On their arrival in the town they were to ten i ~ : - -se ; -ref: 'al ate - eels , ts ' ' "e: - irr e see - r -•.-- s -ef'. .- , s e .e lot t e s e e ar a e-reee the ' " 4, , lie t. • % •e ' s" - ' ' - - •- • . ' . • , to 1 mien le i c" - " tslaa ell in his, ea ass t I ' , . •-• t ' .i -s , ;r.ir - :i : s is: l ,i aai he sep ti b le eased. The House would recollect the feeling in stopped, and its non-arrival was to have been the signal at Sf fleee lc,, dat the time the men were under the rentence Birmingham and the northern districts that they had posses ainielt salon. ti lt tit : i le favouTr o h f er a e was a petition signed by about four sion of the town, and a general rising of the people was to free pardon. It was not to be denied follow.—( Hear.) Now, what were the facts proved ? At the executed ntentinn of the Government was to have the prisoners trial, the Crown was represented by the present Lord Campbell, het t h e ;the sc a ff o l d, i t was well known, had been prepared, : who was t h en Attor neyaGeneral, and by the Solicitor-General, lief r:„ , ec utioner was ord ere d d ow n, a n d he was there in the present Member for Worcester. Chief Justice Tindal, a '%lit e e th a thee , to exercise his calling. Whet was it that pre- most able, distinguished. aed hue - cant , Judge, chirped the jury Nit g „ f tr execution? it woo well known that but for the Orion that occasion, and in that charge he characterised the i ll ) b the Pe"Pleof 4 . see - this counts y they would most undetibt- offence as ore of high treason. During the trial the prisoners Olst en been executed. So iteent erre her .slsjesty's had a 1 the advantages of having for their defence most able 'sllkk had .earrying out the sentence, that sir Frsderiek ' and learned counsel ; that defence stood unrivalled for legal i%en a Zt,i e wait e d six times upon ti e Secretary of State for ingenuity. and evary source of legal eloquence and law uses 1:111; h old eunt igt!.rtment, and the result was that he could not he exhausted in their favour. The jury weighed well all the e t . ; h wn _ ~ he slightest hopes for a remission of the sen- evidence with the greatest care and deliberation, and the result ;ke n : al. ula as he could not make the 'lightest impression of that deliberate care was a verdict of guilty. Here the 'is e i„ _ After the sixth interview of the Learned Gentle- . Right Hon. Gentleman read an extract. from the sentence of tts eu th e i t nia tri Government, t‘ he waited upon Lord Brougham the Learned Judge, which was to the effect that the offsnee of him, thry I can make no impression on these man, and high treason had been clearly proved against the prisoners, and (Ord I:at-he will be sacrificed." The Noble and Learned sentence of death was passed' upon them. He (Sir James tv, a id to ',.. 9 ate him, 'Go again and say to them that if they Graham) then continuesi to say, that a difference of opinion Se the k..,"ygrntsort illegally extreme toenail of the sentence, they will be ' having, however, arisen with regard to the slide: legality of and unconstitutionally, and the men will be the sentence, in consequence of the point raised, her Majesty 2 41. th-red 1 eat s a i d .. , i executed, for it is against all law." It was . was recommended to commute the sentence to transportation. i` .. tr kt ,,,..E,% the time, th t the men ought not even te Now, let him ask the House to consider whether that, sentence ern t r e "e,9, for they had been convicted against the law of was one which ouht to be remitted. He did not with to aggra in seeteetteueit would be a transportation most illegally. After i vale the case, bullet him remind the House, that in conse- Z i n w n a., had keen romirdited to transportation. fresh i quence of Frost having been considered a person possessed of made by the public to prevent that punishment I great influence in that part of the country, he had confided to es ii so g earn ed f ee sers sh out. The Government said then that if the I him her Majesty's commission for the preservation of the peace, conduct themselves well while abroad, after a and that confidence he had abused in the manner already known i tte Y pe etr rd s o r tuhuerlde might possibly be a chance for their having a to the House, and therefore, in considering the justice of 11:s ~_te W ai n: Th e unfortunate men were sent out to New sentence, he could not overlook this gross breach of confidence. Zia bale;' and they were f o r two or three years kept work- —( Hear, he a r.) Nor could he stop here, for he should call Zing e k n- gangs. It was well known that in this country the attention of the House to the providential circum • 'Otte, Dean amnesty took place upon any great public re- stance that the night upon which this descent was to have Oily hi , u they treat prisoners so in France ? England was been made upon Newport was dark and tempestuous, i e ee si r' l e ce Where, at the times of great public rejoicing, and this, he thought, showed the special intervention of Divine 01` . al e , th ae Pardons granted. On the birth of the Prince Providence, for it prevented those people from entering the IC.,3 l pre e ! r e Nere to be sure some pardons, but not to po- town before day-break.—( Hear.) When the columns of men stiof th e Look at France on the occasion of the ex- arrived in the town, one of those columns was ordered up to a tel i t il i l i t e p ue e rrince de Joinville, there was a partial amnesty certain point by Frost, who, let him (Sir J. Graham) remark, " t rY, and political as well as other prisoners were was not to be found at the head of that column, but lie was *re ' All of those political prisoners were Bonapartists. found in a hiding-place. How much of the sentence of those e a t hle aa s° Me of those who attempted, with Prince Louis prisoners had already been enforced? Only five years. Now, ittnandtittle carrying out of a mad attempt to upset the according to all the ordinary rules of such cases, it wa! not n e _rtl e : a,stY of that errantry. That Prince was not to be usual to commute such a sentence until after the expiration of etit sect but L. poe ti ' he hoped that he soon would be, as well as at least ten years ; but in the present case, considering the iinesaieteal prisoners. The pardon of Frost, Williams, and circumstances under which the punishment had been inflicted, L t illt NI a ,,b in accordance with the feelings of the people he certainly could not recommend to her Majesty that it should I C' rire a rY• He knew there was great alarm abroad in be commuted. He was far from not sympathising with per ti tli b ed !on this subject. He regretted much two letters sons condemned to punishment, but in this case he should say, 'lle nia ,Peen written by the Hon. Member for Edinburgh that all his sympathies were enlisted on the side of the widows tellies "tuents, wherein he assailed those unfortunate men, anti orphans that had been made by the conduct of Frost.— $ e aat g them great criminals. He (Mr. Duncombe) (Cries of " Hear, hear.") He did think that this sentence Isle Bane deny that they were great criminals, but should be allowed to take its full course, in order to show to lijrtl e 'arahle Member for Edinburgh, in these others, who, though bold in counsel, were not so in action, or Motee?' stated that they had not been sufficiently punished. foremost in the ranks they urged on, that when the to hi . ett w . 1 3 constituents that the petitioners for the pardon law reached them they would be sure to receive punishment.— te, ol 'litmus, a n d Jones, were men whe wanted to cause a (Hear, hear.) Far be it from him to say that mercy ought s e anon in the country. Now, with respect to the pri- not, in certain cases, to be exercised, but under the present cir - LAse e e tt (Mr. T. D uncom b e ) b e li e ved that their object was cumstances he could not recommend her Majesty to remit the Oen great moral demonstration when they assembled at sentence.—( Hear, hear.) Clo t t , But men with arms in their hands it was impos- Mr. MACAULAY, whose opening observations were not O sti. t'ost and his fellow prisoners to restrain. He felt that audible in the gallery, was understood to say that there existed tte as lelnber for Edinburgh had acted Mat unjustly to- no connexion whatever between the letters produced, as some lie s d t he intentions in his letter, and that he most unjustly cha- Hon. Members were disposed to think, as the letters had been .e intentions of a large mass of persons signing the written at different periods • and though published, he doubted Ne l ' i neh he (Mr. Duncombe) had presented to that if they could in any way influence ' or prejudice the case then `k ' Te e - i te ltas si Right Hors. Member said that the national peti- before the House. With respect to the first of these cile ak gried by men whose sole object was to create a na- letters, of 1842, he thought it would be very much out of place te l t_ttle s ru Ptn, and that to give them their claims would be were he then to go over the grounds which he did on the for- VM, t,'S to put a razor into the bands of a man who said he mer occasion ; but he could not refrain from saying that these Ott er cut his own throat. (Here the Hon, Member read letters contained not a single observation or word by which O a : alluded to.) He felt that the Right Hon. Gentle- lie was not then fully prepared to abide —(Hear, hear.) c t ilet t ,,, r : i nst unfairly used his (Mr. Duncornbe's) name in However, he would not suffer himself to be turned away from 1 / 41 wh e ''; 'lnd with respect to placing a razor in the hands of a the line of discussion, but would merely ask Hon. Gentlemen, til lt tee 'rushed t o cut hi s own throat , h e (M r . D.) w i s h e d h e an d s i m ply request each of them who entertained a doubt on Ltlas st i ' i e ar the Right Hon. Member's hand at the time he the statement, to fully enter with him on the consideration of Ve kse ? write those letters, for he would most certainly the matter.--( Hear, hear.) Now, setting aside the ki l %a ree , i n him the pen. —(Lauehter.) The Hon. Member question of the he rs by which, he repeated, he was pre- Use les s' the petition, said he did not think that that &mu- pared to stand, he should declare that he had a preliminary tli t ,.'ed the name that had been applied to it by the objection to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, Mr. Dun crissee-ae Gentleman. It complained of a monopoly of the combe. He had a strong objection to any interference by Ven ni ' Monopoly of religion.—(Laughter.) etas there that House with the exclusive prerogative of the Crown. No ,Olie r f "Poly of religion? If his Honourable Friend, the doubt the House had a right to advise her Majesty, through Vllo eni er !-lirminghem, Newt present, he would say there was her Ministers, as regarded the exercise of that prerogative SK e Y in that. He much regretted tee absence of his but certainly discretion should impose a restreaint in such is t a i :l Captain Rosen for he had prominel to vete for the cases that they should not overlook or disregard. He ad klt, i a . ( )se prisoners, and he had written a letter to that misted that there were torn.- prerogatives vested in the Crown, %le i 'swer to an application meat tiumerout.ay and re- in the exercise of which Ministers would be much to blame lonei, 4ed by the people of Westminster. He (Mr. if they did not seek 'the a !vice of that House—such as e ) would read that lever- It wa• as folloes i—n It matters connected with the commatid of the army, and other S'iles ei ru e great pleasure to vote for the release of Frost, important branches, in regard to waich the House should be l iN i te s i v ' e and Jo nes , an d lam 3r,.., that they are more likely most chary. It was through no superstitious feeling for the ktt,„ t pardon from Sir It. Peel's Government than birth of a Prince of Wales that treason prerogative was i t ti er Ministry." He He(the Hon. Member for Fins- prayed to be exercised ; but the was obvious, for it ts, e ' r t ef thin opinion also. was sure that the-, would have never was exercised save at the advice and by the recommenda- A i ti e eli 'alee of pardon through the instrumentality of the lion of these with whom the respensibility of the safety of the On e i ,it• Baronet than through any other Minister. He community rested.—( Hear, hear.) Jr was a sol mn anti 1 , - "te mi silt Sir F. Pollock% condom towards these men was awful duty to be charged with the trust of the public peace ; e%itsesprane, and so certain was he at the time that the to preserve peace ad oder to society and property, and at I do l : war e under the sentence of death, that that sentence the same time to dons with the smallest i n fliction of suffering k pi et ' e 'e tarried into execution, that he went and took leave compatible with the attainment of the great end and object.— tZ . t h e Ji their prison.—( Hear, hear.) It hail beers ( 'sear, hear.) Now, his view of the question was this—he 1., 4 it was never the intention of the Go- conceived that the prerogative of mercy was less likely to be l i Zetl, b of that day that those men should be abused when exerted in conformity with the advice of those k ki d tif that had been the case would that Hon. and whose high and important duty it was to watch over the pu bl ic I Fi sk entleinan have paid them such a visit? Supposing security and the public peace, than if it depended upon the Ili Tr ess a nd Learned ‘ iember for Cork hart been tried for birth of a Prince or Princess Royal. —( Hear, hear, and a that'll- could and convicted—and it had been said in that laugh.) But if once the precedent of an abuse of that privi taat'lle could have been tried for that offence—supposing loge were set, by that House entertaining every prayer that 1 he had, would he not hare been k deprived of that might be presented by Honourable Gentlemen on behalf Miie" . in his case, most justly set aside the verdict of their constituents, they need have no apprehension cse of sieted bin. If F ros t, Williams, and Jones, had the of its not being largely followed up —(Cries of " Hear, hear.") ts e , a P a Peal they also would have had the same issue as in Were there no scenes occurring in the country that might serve 4 1 , I ' 4 that Hon. and Learned Member. He had said, to act as warnings against the exercise of such a sympathy ? %ara", in all her rejoicings, released not one of her There were such scenes in abundance. They had the case of tl ea erisoner s . To be sure they had done so in one case, the hypocrite who, about twelve months since, had been con- It s i f ' . were the Canadian rebels as they were termed. vieted on a charge of poisoning an unfortunate woman, who was 0 1 , 41 4 1 a vast difference between the offence of those pri- bound to him by many ties, and in whose favour was pleaded svne a „ . nthat of Frost, Williams, and Jones. The Canadians religious character, standing, society and position, yet they had es si " t a,d in arms fighting against her Majesty's troops— petitions crowding the table, praying the exercise of the royal t . a,,,,_nen had committed much bloodshed, and had carried prerogative. Again, had they not learned and pious dignitaries ss - "' i S for some time through that country; but the unfor- interfering for an unhappy woman, and representing her as an elti s r e 'inners in whose behalf I appeal to you had no such excellent woman, one who would be most invaluable in the 04. nor indeed had their offence given such colonies, as a teacher of morality, a woman, in fact, perfect in k it il i e , e ti an, yet how great has not been their punishment. all the cardinal virtues, save that she mixed a quantity of arsenic e a tild ask was, that the case of Frost, Williams, and in her father's breakfast one morning?—(Hear, hear, and S % CCM be taken into consideration in proportion as it laughter.) Now if the House interfered in these matters, every th. found that they had the public voice, the public lion. Gentleman would be constrained and required to prea.en't t e eise e i and the public wishes with them. He thought he petitions, praying the clemency of the Crown on behalf of the e - sUfAcient proof that this was the fact, and if he had most serious offenders ; so that it was absolutely necessary to 11' 1 n w auld say he sincerely hoped that the Right Hon. make' a stand on the present occasion. As regarded the k(ll l . b. tdd give his moat serious attention to the subject. clemency of the Crown, he would much rather entrust oat tincornbe ) would not say one word more beyond it in the hands of the worst Ministry , than to IZ,S ees e would add his most ardent prayer to that of the the best House of Commons. There was a plain L e , and he would now conclude by saying that lie course before them ; and while they had a Minister in whom t o b e g e leave t o m ove that an humb:e address from this they could confide, and in whom they did not declare their present e d to her Majesty, praying that her Majesty want of confidence, it was their plain duty and evident wisdom 11-ti e pleased to consider the prayer of the peti- to leave the question in his hands; and as far as he was concerned lk, 'lead presented in favour of the restoration of Frost, he could not contemplate why the present measure should meet 4 elk ' and Jones, to their native land, their families and with support. If he should be at all influenced to interfere in ikiJ. such cases, it would be in the event of such severities being il l , G RAH AM said he should be extremely sorry indeed practised, as were exercised in the reign of James 11. Some such iSet,pistin g this motion, one word should fall from him case as that would make the blond boil ; but was the present IVI it ed by acrimony or ill feeling.—( Hear, hear.) He that description of offence ?—( Hear.) What were the einem -74 ;greed with the Noble Member opposite that they stances? Three fellows assemble together four thousand or i ea Proach,,the consideration of this question coolly and five thousand men, armed—some of them with guns, scythes, 1 . 4 te lY, and without the slightest regard to party or pikes, and other deadly weapons. They march at midnight, til I, k 4 t-g ia tueren ees ,_( Hear, hear.) On that ground he (Sir attack a house, fire on the Queen's troops, and wound one of Vtdi t r a) regretted that the Hon. Member should have her Majesty's justices of the peace while in the discharge of his li ii S t ir eess ar y, i n support of his argument, to have thrown duty—and wound him badly also.—(" Not badly,' from an ti e ne e a _ance other cases of a somewhat similar description, Hon. Member.) Unless his (the Right Hon. Gentlenian's) l e Nsi t Zen regarded more or less favourably. He was ready recollection served him badly, Sir Thomas Williams was badly 0 ii: i at the"number of petitions - which had been presented wounded on the occasion.—( Hear, hear ) Now what was the Ss t itlej ti a se upon this subject were very large.—(ilear, hear.) object of the movement? • Was it not intended to have been yte ne admit also, that the memorial to her Majesty, which general ?—( Hear.) It had been proved in evidence that the i t li g ; i uted last year, in favour of Frost, Williams, and Jones, object was to excite to a general rising and he should assert s, i ',4 e l: l by a very large portion of the working classes. that the language of Chief-Justice Tindal on the occasion was Nih'' bound to say that the course which the Govern- by no means too strong or too severe. Let them imagine E ‘i 'Of ,„ t aken with reference to those convicts, was the the fearful struggle that might have ensued between the two 4 ' lea Presentations made upon the most mature considera- parties which the outbreak woull of necessity call up ; no man Vittn e `ae circumstances of this peculiar case. He did not that they had ever read or heard of could convey to them an '`ria ti -r npeteney or tie right of parties to interfere for a adequate notion of its ferocity. The ware of the White and Ik e " this sen t e nce, but he would say that in all cases of Red Roses, or of the Cavaliers and Roundheads , would bear no is'etni rfl 'renee, or remission of sentence , they should be comparison with the scenes that might' and would result from cla il fr ith discretion ; such interference or remission that awful outbreak were it not s r speedly crushed.—( Hear, n 1 Dot he lightly undertakes, and the line of demarkation hear.) All that tie - imagination could conceive could not Vtis e -itt shonld be strictly observed. In all cases where come up to the reality; and a shock would have been pro %iiittslf the benevolent. prerogative was exercised, all the dueed, certain to be felt, not alone throughout England, but f i et tt t b - r . ' , the vag e s ;:7 l ld e be carefully considered and well throughout the universal world, the consequences of which agent of the Government. In the would in ages to come be deplored by their children and their i lk 11 :' s li::: e h 5 r e w s Thi s ' nos shrink fr o m that responsibility.— childrens' children.—( Hear, hea . r.) Such were this objects itt s tais s i•e The Han. Member in his sp ee ch had described which the unfortunate men had in view . on whose behalf the N!4i,4 e i ,. a s misguidtsd and unfortunate men. That they House was then solicited to interfere ; hut . would Ve r ,,,."ett he fully concurred with the Hon. Member, for the House treat the case leniently? . Before it did so it should I te ei l i b eh eeting under the directions of those who should have first inquire what the motives were that impelled the unfottu , L e '" e bet ter advic e ; but that they were unfortunate he nate men to act as they had done. Was their motive a trifling N ‘itt l t t„ . iop Habib- crimes their lives had been spared. Taking into con- one ?. Quite the reverse.- 7 ( Hean . hear The 'rime was one I N liatee crimes of which they had been convicted. which that included all other crimes against society. ) . He spoke not 1 ti ts ` to the punishment of death, he did con- then of the unhappy multitude engaged in the outrage, but , of ta aer, " they were fortunate in not having the the ringleaders, to nhom severity should be practised. Ihe ti - ,;') , of the law carried out, but to have motive of Frost lie doubt was success, and the hope of changing e, e s , it' Crimea with a less punishment than that his position from a linendraper to the protectorship \ste n 3 ' were now undergoing, would. he conceived, of the kingdom—the leading Member of the ' Committee of k e s is t a highly dangerous course to pursue. That the public safety, a second Robespierre, possessing boundless means Cstle al' of the remission of their sentence was strong of gratifying his love of distinction and flattery of the highest le t a l' h" admitten, but he did not agree with the Hon. degree—that was the motive which he believed impelled him. / s l ti t % (cat the feeling was universal. But he begged So --(Hear and a laugh). Now, was it possible that that House t ,tt li st a i i ttur a hl e Member that there was a large body of could think of awarding less punishment to the men . convicted t tti :itaa ales who entertained the opinion, that the sentence of high treason, and of the intention to subvert society,. than likki l a k te a jt and e nould nit be remitted. Her Majesty's would be awarded a mere clerk for the robbery of his ern , Ni t ` e ntertainesel the same opinion, and they had the ployer's till .or a shopman for the abstraction of a few yards of 4 etkiriee that juaeice had been done. The Honourable ribbons ?—( Hear, hear.) It was impossible that there could ', 4 to S tated that this conviction was not a legal one, be an end of crime e under the existence . of such temptation. L. • 4 41 j s tate d very erlearly and accurately the point of law unless the punishment bore some proportion to the crime cam \4 \lis ii i et. t en raised i 5 favour of the cony:eta at the Special mitted. The Canadian rebels had been instanced ; but there le t h ad Rut it sh.euld be remembered, that though the was no analogy between the cases, for as regarded them, the k kil : % L i bee n aees e ee d of high treason, every ad- ringleaders were hanged, and then an amnesty granted ; tool ''''' been afforded them, such . as . getting whereas, in the present . case the ringleaders : 4 ,. I t w itnesses, copies of the indictments, had not been hanged, whilst an amnesty had h a e g ar e . %a ) n' t ar ere vr al welt known that preceding . in t d h i e etm tr e ia o l ts th a e sb granted. t a al b s o u u t beentr o h ) conce n iv e ed he w h as ad s n a l id t y i s e h c a os I (tiettr ( ‘S tl a l lsi g blean a z ft i e u r us th t e o i lo ie b s ee u n i h found by the grand sufficient in u vindication of what he had set out with. He ap sii) 4 1 a ol icinni-Ger . .eral, who appeared on behalf of the proved of the part taken by Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite, )00)j el e qually anxious tel do so, and accordingly they had and he trusted the House . would not interfere to wrest from Y also 6 ," days berore the last day for greeting thcm, the Crown the exercise of a great and high prerogative.— e t .. I ts a a s ad the lists of the witnesses within the limited (Hear, hear.) 1 N 1. 1 ,- , th t lerence to this subject, the point raised at the Mr. DISRAELI said he was very glad that the Hon. ketiitlt oast the delivery of the copies of the indictments and Gentleman, who had just sat down, had vindicated his letters. snt itt hawrittnesses west- not simultaneous—that was the it was always to him (Mr D.), as also, he felt, to the House ~leit via all ', e h ,een reserved. The Hon. Member had said, agreeable to listen to 3 the Honourable Gentleman vindicate % l es %" be a right ,of appeal in criminal cases as well these celebrated letters,. which produced an effect at kvt‘ 'II 4II W-101 he had instanced. Now he (Sir J. Gra- the time not yet quite forgotten. He wished other hold d S ay that • se ~e , in reference to this point, he never Honourable Gentlemen, filling as eminent a position ~ A s th e a 1"' the exp a seta tion that there should be an as the Right Hon. Member four Edinburgh, would r i se ari d if t ;las e I ti le o "e alluded p 1 oin cases of this description. Now vindicate other letters which had very mtre li influence on inao , i ttt th e rnion arrived at by the fifteen Judges in re- public opinion. He believed if they followed that example '% l :sti rer e ei: P n iat reserved? . It was this—nine out of the the present debate would be able to stand comparison with any t \e te ' s 4l itti ° Pinion that if the objection had been taken t h a t o n previous occasions had occupied their attention. He 11°IV : t he 21 :: it woul t ha ve been a valid objection, but the begged to assure the House that he trespassed on it with great 4 . 1'- ' , u4 hr-en judge s were un t a h n o im o o n u i sl •of opinion ' that if reluctance ; but he could not refrain from stating that many ' , l t ;lia lP tii ° ,,ulcl li b aci beenunanimously tthat would years ago he (Mr. Disraeli) was in one of the smallest Nta k . " l lo Ai r a POStysoot taken, tt f the trial.—(. Ilear, hear.) minorities that ever came off in that House upon the present 'kit sit-',Ptill‘ter repeat his Postponement that, considering all the subject; a minority, in fact, of feaur, on which occasion he voted c Li lt NI" tl ,lrfeurnstancri under which ' the prisoners were in favour of the present identical question. He had not the A 4 k - t ar ' r',i an t that the s ex tr eme sentence of the law had moral cou rage to refrain from coming forward to ex opinion which he then vindicated by his vote. He, Ni id t:e t l i tie s i ti T t. °u .. t against them, they had been most forte- press an N.-4 4 -4 5i n b e . He no w came to the next point m had been convicted—it was a made by however, thought it . was impossible to put out of view the 0:llt e. mer ere namely, that this offence should have been b la Y as a moral demonstration in favour of ' le UNe,,, crime of which the prisonerse crime that included all others.—( Hear, hear.) He was bonnd also to say, that he had ever considered the sentence to which e se kt s -vein 'l, i i i ' , efi'' hur e L'E begged to explain what he had stated they had been subjected was as lenient as any sentence . could be % J. t aak bee af I - leo le came down from the hills, for the A C l ll 'art a ns P, under the circumstances.—(Hear, hear.) It might be well said that, in a case where the crime was so awful end the seri ' 4 1 , 0 e e , ek el ks . ts ral (remonstration. tOt t ,'lte a :slt w as .". I aid he understood the Hon. Member tepee so lenient, it was not the duty of that House to come i ii`t t ftts them ( nl r t° _,.n lake a moral demonstration- Now this forward on the present as on previous occasions. It would I . )e 11, 1 , 1 1, % ' , 4 : %let t , c i• Graham) to call the recollection of the very a hneeelt to meet an objection . which found syrri . patliy e in r de e i e 4 h e w ' thee transaction, as they were elicited at every breast; but they should consider the circumstances urn 4 'll se tlit st 'an erie o ald tell them that he entirely concurred which all human teanseetions occurred. On the previous .oe ; O g ) q,.. V'• thi: ver t at by the jury. It would be rememe casino, being time only Tory alentiber that voted in the minority, set t , ?,1 or I, s t at ilisuperio, i, in the mining districts of South he eould not forget that they heed in re period of great political excitems-ef, pee to e a "lisi ons ' es s ',Prevailed, wages were low, theand that a system called r‘ arestetioni existed eli,"„thent'e b een were high, and general disaffection tip- f or severa l wars, by which men became Bs:nen/el, 1,% 1,, s e e ;dte rties silrerse ing, and it was under chose circum- parties had been transferred, and Administrations raised . to Qtal'es, :".• It ;‘re -exercising great influence upon the power, the members of which previously held seats at opposite sa n i t at e _Qi n , i _ had ti, aen arranged that Frost, Williams, sides of the House, whether Secreraxica of State or not. he ITh itr lr t rire e -diffaeeronee, st• with others, were to divide them- was not going to say.—(Laughter.) That that report had i Y Was t e at p ashes, each headed by one of those, o Mike a descent upon the town of New-- I been very prevalent, and that there existed a loose and de.. Wished state of public feeling in the minds of ignorant and inexperienced persons, induced by the great example set them, n . , .:..1, L , a ..,.,. 1 :. 'W,-60n r o, , 0551 in the riled ; and, doubtless, it vsas itdiaenced by such exempla that led these men to play the part they did. Therefore, he thought they should not decide on the conduct of these men without reference to the circumstances. He would not think it right to tell them they had waged war against the Queen's troops, for such was most inexcusable conduct. Neither would he tell them they had excited passions, and held out expec tations which ?fere illegitimate ; but which, had they succeede I, would cease o be so.—(Hear, hear.) Although their crime was great, and the judgment on them let lent, still, when it was brought before the House before. he had felt it his duty to record his vote in their favour. Had any circumstances occurred since to change his oeinion ? The finn. and Learned Member was certainly very happy in all his flights of eloquence, but never more happy than when he illustrated his arguments. He said, " Look at this case— look at the morbid and effeminate sympathy it stirs up in the public mind ; it was this sympathy that said that a murderess roust be sent to the colonies of this country." It was this sending to the colonies that influenced him in the course he had , ak-n. It had been said that there had beer, a great insur rection, and that the parties raising it were traitors ; but they were not only not punished. but were rewarded for their crimes. Ho did not wi'h the people of England to feel (although he did not want to do otherwise than palliate the punishment of the sufferers)—he did not want them to feel the difference between colonial and native punishment. He was so far an advocate of native industry that he did not wish the people to feel any exception in this instance. - (Loud laughter. ) It was this sestem tat made Frost a slave, and Papineau a Member of the House of Assembly. The Hon. Member appealed to the House to turn to the reign of James 11., which they would find replete with instances parallel to the present case. That would be an interference with circumstances on which they were not called upon to de ride. Here her Majesty's troops were fired upon ; he might ask were not her Majesty's troops fired upon in Canada? He should like to have from the Right Hon. Baronet the return of the magistrates that had been wounded in Canada. When the lion. Member appealed to the reign of James 11. a 3 the model reign for treason and sedition, was not the blood of Sedgemore as costly as the blood spilt in the town of Newport ?—and was the House to be appealed to to show no mercy because there was in the reign of James 11. a rebellion in which they suffered greater evils than in the late disturbances ? He could not deny that the observations of the Hon. Member were always inte resting to listen to, but they had no valid arguments against the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. One of the most remarkable arguments of the lion. Gentleman wag, when he told them that they were bound to support the Crown in the exercise of the prerogatives at present in question, because it was necessary, under all the circumstances, that they should not question the conduct of her Majesty's advisers, but look at the position of the Government. The Crown must not be questioned because it receives advice from an individual who has tog us that in the present case he takes a peculiar responsibility. He (Mr. Disraeli) would ask if the Government possessed the confidence of that House, although it was supported by 112 gentlemen—the regenerators of this country by their change of opinion. The Crown in the exercise of its perogative was advised by a Minister, and to support these perogatives the House must also support the Minister who advised the Crown. The House was bound to consider whether that Minister possessed the confidence of Parliament, and whether in a week hence he might not consider it necessary that the exercise of prerogative should be of a far different nature from the one then in question, and that it should be exercised in that House, because another Minister might be ready to accept the responsibility of office. The Right Honourable Baronet, the Home Secretary, had commenced his speech in what he ( Mr. Disraeli) considered to be his right position. Whatever might be his (Mr. Disraeli's) opinion on the main question, he could have no doubt that the Minister of the Crown was to come forward and dilate on the enormity of crime, and also re mark that the prerogatives of the Crown should be delicately exercised. Nothing could be more just and politic than the position the Right Honourable " Baronet as sumed and then dwelt upon. He (Mr. Disraeli) knew that a grave feeling prevailed amongst those around him with out conversing with them. It was difficult to answer the ques tion put by the Right Hon. Baronet. It was a matter of surerise that her Majesty's Government had a fixed set of opinions. The Right Hon. Baronet placed himself in a clear position, both in point of constitutional feeling, and he hoped he might say. in loyal sentiment of feeling, and yet at the last he says —" Press me." (looking at the Hon. Member for Fins bury as if he ( Mr. Duncombe) had discovered that he was of a squeersble naturt ), "to bring forward this question on another occasion —in another session perhaps in another Parliament, and I will treat you in a liberal manner ; at present, I wish that the exercise of mercy should be delicately and discreetly used. Press the Crown and Ministry then. But although crime is enormous, the exercise of merry may be necessary, and this House will he the last to interfere with ir. Bring forward the motion, then ; end although we cannot be in a maiority now, we shall know what to say to them " He (Mr. Disraeli) had voted fur these men years ago. and, whatever might be the opinion now, he would not desert them. They had committed a great crime and had received a lenient punishment. The Government had only two courses—these men should be pardoned, or they should be punished as an example to society; If they were pardoned, it would be an encourage ment. to others to feel tied though they might be criminal the dsvine faculty of mercy was still exercised in this country. Sir J Graham had said " Bring forward the motion again and Ido not say that we will resist your appeal." What would be the result of that ? It would be that, if these men were par doned by the remission of their punishment, one of the dearest qualities of the Crown, a quality attributed only to Majesty, would be exercised at a late period ; but would the people feel gratitude to the Crown? No, they would only comment on the timidity of Government. For the:a reasons he would support the Honourable Member. if he persisted in coming to a division. He however proposed that he should be satisfied with bringing the question forward to pubic attention and sympathy. The Crown might be in duced to view with mercy the conduct of these misguided men. If, however, the Hon. Member pressed to a division, he (Mr. Disraeli) should vote with him. Sir J. GRAHAM said that he was sorry that he had been misunderstood. The House would remember, that he had deprecated any interference with the execution of the sentence, and said, that the exercise of the prerogative of the Crown ought, in his opinion, to be dispensed with ; but at the same time, ho would not be responsible for any , advice to her Ma jesty, nor would ho presume to attempt to place any limit to the prerogative of mercy. Mr. S. WORTLEY said that the Hon. Member had told them, that some years ago he had voted on this question in favour of these men, He ( Mr. S. Wortley) was not surprised at the course now taken by the Hen. Member, in giving the same vote. He doubted, however, whether the House would be swayed by the reasons which seemed to influence the Hon. Member's mind. He could not think the House would feel, it was just to the parties whose case was under consideration, to introduce into this discussion the party feelings of common debate and remarks of a personal tendency. He could not help thinking that it was unhappy when any Hon. Member, on light grounds, thought it necessary to bring for ward a motion to interfere with the prerogatives of many. The Hon. Member would find that the motion had been considered with the greatest respect by those who were opposed to it, but it would very little advance his case if there was a feeling on the part of the people—( Hear, hear)—for the remission of this sentence. He could not conceive a more unfortunate in- terruption to the course of that feeling than the course now pressed, because by removing the atrocity of the crimes these persons had committed, it interfered with the prerogative of mercy, and rendered it still more difficult to be exercised in this case. With regard to the representations made by the lion. Member as to the state of public feeling on this subject, he (Mr. S. Wortley) begged leave to differ from him. He believed that at this moment, if the Crown were to exercise the prerogative of mercy towards these persous, it could hardly take a step more calculated to sheek public opinion. He would fur ther say, that to remit the sentence of these persons would be an act of gross injustice to many other minor criminals whose crimes had been committed under circumstances far more deserving of mercy, but who had not received it. What was the nature of the crime that had been committed ? The Hon. Member spoke of it as a tumult, but it was prepared for a week before. Would th - y take the case of Frost, whose position had enabled him to exercise a great influence over the people ? The House had heard from the Hon. Member for Coventry whatwas the state of that part of Wales where Frost resided? The Hon. Afember had spoken of the act as the exercise of a particular right.—( Hear, hear.) Were they convinced that these personswere under the belief that they exercised a particular right—that they were under the impression that their right was interfered with by law? Thistlewood had some such motive, and he struck at once at the highest apparent cause of the evil ; but the persons in hiss' case were aware of the pur pose for which they were led. It was proved that Frost led his men to invest the town, and attack the military regardless of the misery he inflicted on the townspeople. What was the charge given to the jury by the Lord Chief JustMe ? He asked the jury, did they believe that the prisoner had sn innocent intention, or a guilty intention? did he intend to resist the Queen's troops, and sacrifice the lives of his fellow subjects? What was the answer of the jury ? Ile recollected the sugeestion of his Learned Friend, and the ob servation of the Lord Chief Justice in passing sentence. The Secretary for the Home Department had referred to that trial, and he (Mr. S. Wortley) would also revert to it. The point left to the jury for their consideration was whether the intention was innocent, and whether they believed that only a harmless demonstration was intended, or that the intention was guilty from the first. The Lord Chief Justice declared that the verdict met with his entire concurrence ; that his learned brethren, along with him : self, were all of the same opinion.—( Hear, hear.) It was clearly proved that Mr. Frost came into Newport at the head of many thousands with dangerous weapons, in order to take possession of the town, preliminary to a general insurrection throughout the country. (The Hon. Member here read an extract from the evidence of one of the principal witnesses examined on the trial, to the effect that the object was to ex• tend the insurrection all over England.) He ( Mr. Wortley) believed that the disturbances in the north of England were intimately connected with this movement of Mr. Frost. He doubted if the' outbreak in YOthshire, especially that in Sheffield, would have takers place, had it not been for the proceedings at Newport. So strong was the opinion, of not only the Noble Lord then at the head of the Home Depart ment, as well as Lord Melbourne, of the extreme attrocity of the acts of the leaders in this insurrection, that they were most unwilling to remit the sentence of death, which was the usual course in extreme crimes, when the Judges were divided in opinion, as they were in the present case, on the point raised on behalf of the prisoners after the trial at Monmouth. It was only when strongly pressed that they yielded. This was the case in which the House was called upon to solicit the Crown for the exercise of clemency and mercy.—( Hear, hear.) This case, its his opinion, was not one calling for any especial in terference, which was only to be exercised in extreme cases. It was not justifiable in the present instance, for the objection raised on behalf of the prisoners, and on which the Judges were divided, now brought forward as an argument for the exercise of mercy, was purely of a technical chartscter. It arose out of the too great indulgence of the Crown. Mr Maude, on being strongly pressed for a copy of the indictment, in order to enable the defence of the prisoners to be got up, having supplied it four days sooner then he was - required by law. They took advantage of the hurried manner in which the indictment had been got up, and raised the technical objection to which he had referred. Yet, on this point, the prisoners had counsel of the filet legal ability, and the case was areued before the 6:teen Jteigcs, where every consideration and attention was paid to it; yet the majority of the Judges decided against the objection. If so, on what grounds could they now remit the sentence ? These par ties had been guilty of au offence o!' the gravest nature, the punish ment for which was the loss of life, and but for the technical error he had referred to would have been visited with the extreme penalty of the law. If, on any future occasion, any cause should be made out fur the exercise of mercy, God forbid that the House should stand in the way; but he must say that on the present occasion, and in the case under consideration, there were no grounds for any special interference now.—(Hear. ) rsirr, AGLIONBY exprens d his sorrow at the speech which had just beep sHivered by the Hon. and Learned Nlember. He (Ur. Aglionby) bail wished that the Hon. Member for Finsbury, after the speech fsolu • the 4laht Hon. Baronet ( Sir .1. Graham), had left the question to the 'hands of the Government, as that speech indicated that the course refight y e , opened for the exercie of mercy ; but after hearing the last speCen, are L e so,iopley) centeesed the Honourable Member for Fins'bory di&nceit cnur-e. to pursue. He considered the Honourable fileinbei for 'Stir'wOury have misunderstood the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet. We (Mr. Aglionby) did not understand the Right Hon. Gentle- man as inviting violent discussion, but he understood him, tha, f opposing the motion now, it did no t s h u t th e d oor o f mercy ,• • , ~• ,f,er„ —( Hear. hear.) On this ground i e (Mr. AAitonhy ) did net V. ish the motion pressed to a division, but the question was placed on different grounds now; the country would read with regret the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member for Buta (Mr. Wortley), as the question was now raised not on minute points of evidence, or the strict rule of justice, hut on that of general policy. The country was perfectly quiet now,' but a strong feeling existed among the population on this subject which ought not to be neglected. The parties for whom mercy was now solicited had suffered for the last six years punishment of the severest character; and, 'if he was correctly informed, their conduct in the colony had been such, as to lead them to a re laxation in their favour. In fact, their con•iuct was stated to be excellent. Their release, therefore, would not at all inter fere with the public peace. In conclusion, he must say the Hon. Member for Finsbury was placed in a difficult position now, after the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member who last addressed the House, though he (Mr. Aglionby) confessed that, in the (first instance, he should have taken the advice of the Right Hon. Baronet, and not press the matter further at present. ,Sir R. H. INGLIS said that the Hon. Member for Bute had represented the speech of the lion. Member for Shrews bury as full of acrimony and bitter feeling, and with that statement he dismissed it. But to that he ( Sir R. 11. Inglis) would venture to say, there was no expression in it of party feeling.--(lronical cries of " Hear, hear.") He repeated the expression that such was the fact. The Hon. Member for Shretvsbury went no further than this, that the light which led astray was light from some other place, if not from Heaven ; and that, after what had been done in the North American colo nies, some consideration might be paid to the parties on whose tehalf was now sot ght the exercise of mercy.—(Cries of " Hear.") Would any nee deny that the traitors of Canada were deserving of more consideration than these unhappy men? The man who had saved Canada—Sir Francis Head—succes sive Governments had neglected, while the men who had sup ported Papineau had been honoured. No man was more deep'y persuaded than he (Sir R. Inglis) was of the guilt of the three persons, whose case was then under consideration. He had never voted for them before and be should not vote for them now. He had been pleased with the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Home Depart ment, until the last part of it, which certainly did not satisfy him. It seemed to him to hold out an encouragement for the repetition of this motion. He (Sir R. Inglis) hoped the Hon. Gentleman would withdraw .the motion, but if he did net, he trusted that it would be rejected by a large majority. Mr. WAKLEY could not see how the Hon. Baronet was to be satisfied. He had commenced his speech by complaining of the tone of the Hon. Member for Bute (Mi. S. Wortley) and he (Mr. Wakley) therefore thought that the Hon. Ba ronet, overflowing with the milk of human kindness, was about to support the motion. But the Hon. Baronet went on in his criticism, and came to a review of two speeches, one that of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary, and the other, the speech of the Right Hon. Member for Edin burgh. Both speecne s s pleased him, with the exception of one portion ; and what nortion was that? Why the one indica tion of a merciful and humane feeling on the'part of the Right Hen. Baronet. Was that the position which the represent: ative of the Church of England ought to assume in that House? He (Mr. Wakley) was most astonished and con -ounded at the spectacle he had witnessed. He had supposed that the Hon. Baronet would be the first to advocate the merciful motion which had been made, but he was mistaken. Now he would rejoice if he could bring back the feeling of the House to the impression which was created by the conclusion of the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet the Home Secretary. He ( Mr. Wakley) was at the time sitting by the side of his Hon. Colleague, and he then remarked to him that he feared subsequent discussion. He literally feared what would transpire during this debate. The Right Hon. Gentleman wanted a vote of that House to justify him in keeping Frost and his companions expatriated. It was absurd to talk of the perogative of the Crown—it was, in fact, an appeal to the discretion of the Minister. It was the act of the Minister—and the Home Minister. He considered that the Right Hon. Gentleman had made a fair speech. There was nothing to complain of either in its tone or temper. It was what they might expect from a Secretary for the Home Department. The Right Hon. Baronet was placed in a situation of great responsibility. He had in a great measure the conservation of the country under his especial control. It would be a very great exercise of discretion on the part of the Home Secretary to recommend that persons charged with such offences and found guilty should be liberated and restored to their country. His Hen. Friend had taken special care not to go into the merits of the question. His Hon. Friend deprecated such offences as those of which the parties had been found guilty. He spoke of them as cases of the worst character, and he reminded the House that out of a million of the petitioners who had addressed the House on the subject, none of them attempted to justify the conduct of Frost and his companions, but the millions of petitioners were of opinion that if the prisoners hid been in a higher station of life, arid had had money at their disposal, and had carried their case to another House, they would never have been transported.--( Cries of " Oh, oh.) He was only speak ing of what was the opinion of the petitioners, and what was the impression which universally prevailed. They all knew what was the decision upon technical grounds. which was came to about four years ago in another place. What was the state of the country now ? Was there sedition abroad ? Were there any signs of rebellion—was there discontent to any great extent? No nothing of the sort; but if there were public commotion, and public agitation and discontent, all of them would immediately say, "Why you are absolutely encouraging rebellion hy calling back these men." This then in his opinion was t'ae period for the Crown to exercise e —er rather for the Right Hon. Gentleman to exercise— his discretion. 'I he speeches however he had heard this night had thrown new difficulties in the way, and he found in that House the bitterest enemies of Frost, Jones and Williams. Did Hon. Gentlemen recollect that the Worthing people had no repre sentatives in that House ? That was a fact they never would remember. Millions were asking for the liberation of three men whom they believed had been unlawfully transported. Well then, he asked, was there never to be any concession to popular feeling in that House? Were they always resolved to treat the petitions of the people with indifference, con'empt, and scorn? In his opinion they were absolutely en dangering the existence of the constitution and the country by such a course of proceeding. The Heine Secretary was now relieved from his responsibili' y by the speeches of the lion. I?arenet the Member for Oxford, the Hon. and Learned Mern,ber for Bute, and the Right Hon Member for Edinburgh. He (Mr. Wakley) felt that it would be no advantage to prolong this discussion, and he therefore resumed his seat by imploring the Right Hon, Baronet the Secretary for the Home Deportment, not to care oae straw for what Hon. Gentlemen had said, who were de sirous of excluding from the country these unfortunate men. He called them unfortunate, for he considered all unfortu nate. He begged him again to consider the case, with re ference to the legal objection that was taken on the trial, and maintain the principle, that whenever a doubt existed, the benefit of that doubt should be given to the accused. Mr. G. W. HOPE said the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Oxford, had stated that the persons convicted of rebellion in Canada had been permitted tt, ierive honours by the Govern ment of the country. Now ' e assured his Hon. Friend that such was not the case. No persons convicted of being engaged in that rebellion had been employed at all. The lead ing - es i sorts connected with that rebellion had undoubtedly been allowed to return to their native country. They returned under no special pardon of the Crown, they returned under a flaw in the mode of proceeding, by which the conviction win held not to be available against them. There was no pardon, therefore, asked for, and of course no pardon was granted. Lord JOHN MANNERS thought there was an erroneous impression abroad, that the opinions of the unfranchised were tr _led with contempt by that House; but he was sure tha' to t various arguments which had been used, and the speeches nich had been spoken on that occasion, would convince people out of doors that there was no indisposition on the part of Parliament to listen personally to the representations of those classes. His chief object in rising, however, was to express his regret at a considerable portion of the able and eloquent spete r els of the Hon. Member f or Edi n b urg h. H e (Lord J. 111at7krs) did not know whether it arose from a peculiar orga :sation of his own mind ; but he had an impression that a re s gence to historical facts tended to promote the principles of Chartism rather than to militate against them. But the Hon. Member for the city of Edinburgh, after eloquently denouncires the crime of which these unfortunate men had been found guilty, proceeded t o say, that it fell very little short of the crimes committed against the State in past ages. The comparison, however, in his opinion was decidedly too severe, and certainly the crime which these unfortunate men 'had committed would by no means justify such a punishment as being hanged, drawn, and quartered, which was the punishment inflicted upon offenders against the state in times gone by. Mr. NI ACA ULAY explained that he never thought of con veying to the House the impression that he was favourable to such a mode of punishment. . . . Lord J. MANNERS continued—At all evants, the Plight Hon. Gentleman drew no distinction between the offence of Mr. Frost and that of state criminals of a former age. That House, last year, voted a sum of money as a tribute to the memory of Hampden. Now, what did Hamp den do ? Why, that gentleman, like Mr. Frost, levied war against the constituted authorities of the country. Many people said Hampden's cause was a perfectly legitimate one, but that was a question of opinion. There were many who thought Mr. Frost's case a perfeo' ly legitimate one. He would go further than even many Gentlemen in that House, who were prepared to vote money towards erecting a statute to Oliver Cromwell—(Cheers)—for the purpose of encouraging the efforts of future generations.—( Cheers.) Now, he pro teited against this system of palliating the conduct of regicides in one age, and dealing harshly with the conduct of those vvl-o excited rebellion in another—it was a dangerous and fatal policy, a policy to which he could never lend himself. He was prepared to oppose any .such proposition as that to which he had alluded, and in all consistency he was justified in not voting for the proposition of the Honourable Member for Finsbury.—( Hear, hear). Sir It. PEEL said that nothing more than the speech of his Hon. Friend behind him had tended to confirm his impression of the fatal consequences which must result from a discussion, in a'populsr assembly like that House, of the policy shown in the exercise of the prerog atives of the Crown. The Hon Member for Finsbury had declared that there was a strong ien pression among millions of t heir fe l lo w - subjects that the sen tence passed upon Mr. F rost was ille gal , and had that party btoeetnh p ossess e d ou e of wealth, Lord s it would have ena bl e d hi m to appeal who would have overruled it. But surely if there were a quest:on about the legality of the sen tence, that House was not the proper tribunal to decide it, But the Crown had taken every opportunity of obtaining the best legal advice upon this point, and certainly there was nothing on the ground of informality in the proceedings to justify a remission of the punishment. But, said the lion. Gentleman, is there to be no concession to popular feeling? Most certainly not, in a case of this kind, where the popular Opinion was altogether erroneous. If that imp ress i on was an improper one, or was decidedly unjust, that House ought to resist it, whatever might be the number of persons who pre sented petitions in its favour. The question then for them to consider was this, namely, was this popular impression a correct one or not ? For his part he was decidedly of opinion that it was incorrect. Ile was net founding that opinion upon any impression of his, rev n but upon the decision of the highest legal authority. The whole of the 15 Judges bad considered this question, and had deeide.l against it. The judgment had been delivered by a man who, of 411 others, was the most forbearing and the roost disposed to give a prisoner the benefit of any doubt or advan tage in his favour—he meant Lord Chief Justice Tindal—and, in fact, the whole of the 15 judges were:influenced by a sincere desire to give the prisoners every advantage. The Judges de cided ensaiast the allegation relating to the informality of the delivery. But they not only decided upon this point they went further, and considered what the effect would have been had th.. informality of the delivery been taken at the et-epee time. Now, what would have been the effect, in point of law, of the objectioa, urged had it been taken at the proper time? Would it have been the remission of the sentence, or would it hive been the delivery of the prisoners from all punishment? Not at all. It would merely have had the effect of postponing the trial, in order that the Crown might 41,r- an opportunity of correcting the informality, and seriing tia4 . neticeti according to law. But the Judges decided that !Ito ollatiatio 4 "On' Op shoie, a pPrfeo l good one, and therefore the Crown had a pet carry it into effect. 'vow, he apprehended he was correctly statieg the legal decision of the Judaes upon this case. This popular iiiipi•eaSion, than, of the millions was erroneous, and it was the province of the . Hoßse, nohtitbatandhl the FQt4iops yillicjl had been presented, to resist it. Nothing could be more Buh -1 versive of the first principles of the administration of the law, than !het the Rouse should bens!. to Impeller opinion in a matter of that kind—that popular opinion being at the same time founded upon wrong and erroneous grounds. The Hon. Member for Finsbury did not wish to throw any impediment in the way of the Crown; and he went so far as to admit that it would have been left more free and open in the exercise of its prerogative had that diseu=sion not taken place. Why, that would be the natural result of the discussion, for it was difficult to exclude party considerations from discus sions of this nature; and the debate - would rather prejudice than prove of advantage to these unfortunate men. Some allusion hod been made to the insurrectionists of Canada. Now what had they to do in this discussion with Canada? In that ease there were no im pediments to the exercise of the free pardon of the Crown, and i; only showed that the Crown had not been indisposed to exerts: cise its prerogative whsn it could do so without subverting the ends of justice,. Now he could not invite tl.e Hon. Gentleman to withdraw this motion, nor hold out any hopes of a cumpro mion He thought the Crown ought not to retire from a dis cussion of that kind with any sort of understateling, ex pressed or implied, as to the course it would hereaf:er take. He thought it ought to be left unfettered in its discretion When his Right lion. Friend would not undertake to say that under no circumstances and at no time the mercy of the Cross n should not be extended to those unfortunate men, he did not intend to influence the Hon. Gentleman in the course he might think proper to adopt. The debate upon this subject ought to close in its being distinctly understood that the Crown was under no obligation whatever to take any other course than that which the ends of strict justice might dictate. If the House persisted in carrying this question to a divi sion, he maintained that the relationship of the Crown to the House would he inverted.—(Hear, hear.) It would be most difficult for the Crown to exercise its prerogative if the ' House of Commons sh iuld arrogate to itself the power by the motion before the Reuses And what would be their con dition ? In this case Frost was a man of property—a man of intelligence —( Hear, hear)—a man who stood in a special relation to the Crown, having been intrusted with a Com mission for the preservation of the public peace ; arid if the House were to act in compliance with the petitions that were presented to it in such cases, they would be placing themselves in a very awkward position with regard to the Crown—they would, in • fact, be attempting to deprive the Sove reign of the prerogative of mercy. And he could hardly cenceive a case in which the House of Commons might not be warranted in a similar interference, if they agreed to the motion of the Honourable Member for Finsbury. He had no wish to bring the facts relating to Frost before the House, because the very bringing of those facts by the Minister of the Government appeared to bring an impediment in the exercising of the prerogatives of mercy by the Crown, but in this case it was hut right that the facts should be brought under the consideration of the Honourable Members'; and what were those facts? That a magistrate made an attack upon a peaceable town with a number of armed men, which attack was the signal for an innovation by the multitude. The pub lic bridge was to be thrown down, the mail was to be stopped, and the stoppage of the mail was to be indicated by the burn ing of the town of Newport, which was in the possession of rebels, against the authority of the Crown, and that after six years' imprisonment, the House of Commons was to come forward and petition the Crown to exercise its preroga tives. He should deprecate the establishment of a precedent t that.—( Hear, hear.) If the Hon. Gentleman the Mem ber for Finsbury thought fit, in his good sense, after what had been said, not to press his motion to a division, he must not suppose that the Government had now entered into any obliga tion whatever, passive or implied, with respect to the future exercise of the prerogative of mercy by the Crown. He agreed with his Right Hon. Friend, that that must be left to the Crown ; and he thought that it would not be wise, either in the discussion or in the division, to hold out any expectation of mercy.--(Hear, hear.) Mr. M. PHILIPS said he had not intended to say a word in common with the subject, hut as several numerously signed petitions in favour of the present motion had been forwarded to him from the town which he had the honour to represent, he thought that after what had fallen from the Hon, Member for Finsbury (not then in his place), he should not be justified if he did not make a few remarks. He denied, that in taking the course ho was bound to take in reference to the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury—that was to say. that in voting against his proposal, that he was treating with scorn the peti tions of the people. He had no such intention. His (Mr. Philips's) belief was, that in his judgment he was right in the position which he was about to take with respect to this case. He might be wrong, and so might they, and he denied that in voting contrary to their petition, that he was treating them with scorn, contempt, and derision. He denied every one of those imputations in tote. He had merely risen in order to justify himself in those expressions, because he conceived that they were made without any proper founda ion. With regard to the justice of the sentences, he considered the security of the public peace required that they should be carried into execu tion and not be altered. In conclusion. he would say, he believed that there were several Hon. Members in that House, who, whilst they intended voting against the motion, had not the slightest intention to treat the petitioners with scorn.— (Cries of " Divide, divide.") Mr. P. HOWARD hoped that the Hon. Member for Finsbury would not insist upon a devision.—(Hear, hear.) lie trusted that he would be satisfied with having brought the ease, with his usual ability, before the House, and he (Mr. Howard) thought that the House would be of opinion that that Hon. Member would not be advancing his case by forcing the House to what would appear an adverse division.—( Hear, hear.) 'He (Mr. Howard) had been entrusted with a peti- Clod which had been numerously signed, and prayed for the release of ; the individuals tamed by the Hon. Member. He willingly bore tribute to the becoming and decorous man ner in - which the working classes had advocated their case ; they had entered into no combinations ; they had in the most decorous manner demanded from the mayor of Carlisle the use of the town-hall for the purpose of holding a meeting to adopt a petition, praying her Majesty to order the release of Frost, Williams, and Jones. Their peaceable conduct in the advocacy of their ease was worthy of the greatest praise. He thought, that from the very feet of their not hav ing a direct representation in that 'House, their petitions ,hould, in the words of his Noble Friend, be treated with at tentien and respect. But deeming that it was not proper kir that House to interfere between the Crown and the ex ercise of its prerogatives, except in very extraordinary cases, he could not give his support to the motion of the Honourable Memter for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley). He was anxious to say so much to the House for the purpose of showing that he did not treat the opinions and wishes of petitioners to that House with disrespect, and for the purpose of bearing at the same time a tribute to the orderly conduct which now dis tinguished the working classes of this country. Be wished also to say that of all the petitions which he had seen bearing upon this question, there was not one in which the petitioners did not express their abhorrence of those crimes of which Frost, Williams, and Jones had been convicted, and it was only because they conceived that these persons had undergone con siderable punishment, that they supplicated for the mercy of the Crown. He quite agreed with his Noble Friend, that it would be extraordinary for that House, at the same time that they condemned modern conspirators, to erect anything lik e a memorial to Oliver Crom well, who had assisted in bringing his Sovereign to the block. —( Hear, hear.) He had risen for the purpose of showing that he entertained sincere respect for the opinions and feelings of the working classes of this country; but, as ho had before said, as this motion went so far as to interfere with the Crown's prerogative, he should be obliged to vote against the Hon. Member for Finsbury.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," and " Divide, divide.") The lion. Member proceeded, amid loud cries of "Divide, divide," to state the, he considered the Commons of England, if they refused to grant the request of the peti tioners, would at least have treated them with respect. Lord J. RUSSELL would say a few words with reference to the speech of his lion. Friend who had sat down, and other Members who had taken a similar line of argument, and had found fault with his Honourable and Learned Friend the Member for Bute, for stating circumstances which seemed, in his opinion, and in the opinion of other Hon. Members of this House, adverse to a favourable consideration of the subject by :hat House. He considered that it was quite impossible to dis cuss any motion of this kind without considering what was the nature of the offence he was cornmitting. It was quite impos sible that lion. Members should enter into a debate of this =oft and not state upon the one hand those circumstances which they thought tended to extenuate the crime ; and upon . the other hand those circumstances which, in the opinion of other Hots. Members, would make it inconsistent with the du ties of the prerogative of the Crown to show any extension of mercy. Was that a desirable course? It was impossible on the one hand to avoid a discussion which must bring out the , unfavourable circumstances of the case ; and, upon the other hand, was it desirable that Parliament should be considered as adverse to the extension of mercy by the introduction in the debate of circumstances tending to aggravate the crime. The Hon. and Learned Member for Bute had stated circumstances, as far as he remembered, most fatally. He felt himself obliged to state (and this was one of the in conveniences of this sort of debate), that except for the differ ence of opinion of the Judges upon a technical point, the Home Secretary of that time (Lord Normanby) had seen no reason why the punishment of death should not be inflicted on the prisoners ; he thought it necessary, however, it being a great question of State, and not a mere ordinary ease of criminal law, to:consult the opinions of his colleagues, and lay the case before the judges. He (Lord John Russell) did not recollect, ex cept in one point, that there was any difference of opinion among the Judges as to the justice of the punishment. He felt obliged to say this much, because his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Bute, had been censured for expressing that opinion. His lion. Friend the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Macaulay) had also been censured for making a similar statement of his opinion ; he must say that same extraordinary misunderstanding seems to have been made with reference to his Hon. Friend, by his Hon. and Noble Friends the Members or Shrewsbury and Newark ( Mr. Disraeli and Lord J. Manners), What his lion. Friend said was, that there might be a case where the punishment was excessive, and in that case Parlia ment might interfere, and he gave for example the 3ionmouth rebellion. It was well known that in that case three or four hundred persons were executed, and among the rest a lady ad vanced in years, not because she had been instrumental in fo menting the rebellion, but because she had harboured and given refuge to one of the parties. In cases of such extreme cruelty and injustice he (Lord John Russell) could conceive Parliament were bound to interfere. When Hon. Gentlemen would interfere in . a case of this description, he begged them to recollect that the laws of this country were executed with mercy ; they were living under a constitution to which tyranny was at least a stranger.—(Bear, hear.) The only question, then, to consider was, whether questions of that kind could be disposed of in a popular assembly, or vsla ther they would net be hotter left to the mature opinion of the Secretary of State—the adviser of the Crown. For his part, lies wished to oppose no obstacle to the consideration he thought it was the duty of the Secretary of State to give. it. But all these circumstances might be more impartially consi dered in that manner than if discussed in a popular manner in a debate in Parliament, where some Members would take a more lenient, -and others a more aggravated view of the case. For those reasons, arid those only, he would give his vote against the proposition of the Hen. Member for Finsbury. Lo.d FRANCIS EGERTON perfectly concurred in the opinion expressed by the Noble Lord, who had just sat down. lie also perfectly agreed with the opinion expressed by the Right lion. Baronet, at the head of the Government, that such subject= as the present were not fit matters for discussion. Mr. 'l'. DUN COM BE c insidered that he had been hardly dealt with in the course of this debate. It hail been said by Hen. Members, that the present motion would be an interfer ence with the prerogative of the Crown. Why was that principle exhibited fur the first time this evening? Why was it not exhibited when his Bost. and Learned Friend, the Member for Bath ( Mr. Roebuck) brought forward his motion three years ago, moving an buelble address to the Crown, praying it to extend a full and free pardon to all the Canadian rebels ? Not one word was then said ab:lut inter fering with the prerogative of the Crown. What is this pre rogative of the Crown ? Is it to be kept as a lx.uble— a plaything—or a fire-work to he discharged or brought forward at the will of the Minister? lion. Members heard nothing of this prerogative then.— ( Hear, hear.) There was nothing said then -about the improper eendeet of the Minister, either by word or action --to express er imply the determination of the advisers of the Crown 43 to the cheese they would pursue in advising the Crown, Why was not this brought forward with raference to the eanadian rebels? It was expressly understood upon that occasion what course would be adopted, by the Ministers of that day. His Hon. and Learned Friend knew what would be the result, and he said at the time that 119 was vorf;;;:tly satisfied saw they would be released, and . he would not therefore trouble the House with any further remarks. And, continued the Hon. I,lember, everybody in the country knew there would be a release, and they were released. All he asked was that the same weight and measure should be dealt out to the inhabitants of Waleeas to the French Canadians. He considered also that he had been unfairly treated by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bute, who had dwelt upon the aggravation of the case. The Learned Solicitor-General, be thought, might answer him well upon this point. But did he (Mr. Duncombe) press the interfe rence of Parliament upon the merits of the case. He said at the outset that neither he nor the petitioners believed the con duct of the parties to be right. He said they were guilty of a great crime—he said, and- the millions who had signed the pe titions had said, that these parties had already received sufficient punishment. Their conduct has been most exemplary in the colony to which they have been sent. The Hon. and Learned Member for Bute had left him (Mr. Duncombe) no option in consequence of his sanguinary and blood-thirsty speech. He said that they could not commit a greater outrage on public opinion than to release those parties. He denied that state ment. Had the Hon. Member seen the petition: from Leeds which he had presented to the Holed that evening, signed by 34,000 persons, headed by the Vicer of Leeds (Dr. Cook) by twelve members of the Town Council, and by the Board of Guardians ? He considered that the petition emanating from Leeds expressed the general feeling of the whole country. He begged to state that Sir Thomas Philips teceived no severe wounds whatever; he had cut his finger in the room of an inn, but he ventured to state that he received no gun-shot or sabre wound, which would entitle him to receive a pension from the country. In conclusion he must say, in justice to the peti tioners who had entrusted him with the care of their wishes, and believing that the general feeling of the humane was in favour of mercy, he would feel it his duty to take the sense of the House upon his motion. Mr. OGTAVIUS MORGAN begged to correct a state ment of the Honourable Member—Sir Thomas Philips had been wounded. Mr. HOPE begged to confirm the statement of the Hon. Member for Monmouthshire—he had been wounded by a gun shot wound. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion 3l Against it . Majority against the inotim —l6s .... __ _ CASE OF MR. KINDER. Mr. MARK PHILIPS rose to bring forward his motion, which was one, he respectfully said, .demanded the attention of the House, in order to prevent the merchants of this country from having their commercial affairs improperly interfered with. All he asked for was to produce the documents which her Majesty's Government had received respecting the decision which the Mexican Government had come to respecting the claims of Mr. Kinder. If those papers were produced he would not wish to say another word on the subject, but it was certainly, in his opinion, a very unjust decision, and he thought that the Government should interfere, as the justice of Mr. Kinder's claims were very strong. He asked for the produc tion of those papers from no selfish motives or grounds, but his constituents had an interest, whose property was involved, and he thought a case had been made out for the production of those papers, for the purpose of satisfying the country. Ire simply asked for the production of those papers without Wishing to enter into any extraneous matter. He wished for those documents in a national point of view as well as in a commercial point, and be would not say one word more, but simply read his motion, which was to the following effect : Copies of all reports or representations by Richard Pakenham, Esq., her Majesty's. Minister in Mexico, on which ter Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has founded the decision he has given on the applications of Mr. Thomas Kinder. Sir R. PEEL said that the Hon. Gentleman called on the Government to interfere with a question of international law. The facts were simply these :—Mr. Kinder called on the Mexican Government to decide the point, and the decision was against him • and, according to every principle of inter national law, there was no ground on which the British Government could interfere, which was laid down by the highest authority in the land. His Noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs consulted the highest authority, and his decision on the evidence was that there was no claim on the Mexican Government for reparation. As he said before, his Noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs came to the same decision that the Court of Justice had come to, that the claims of Mr. Kinder were inadmissible. Mr. M. GIBSON said that, in his opinion, the Right Hon. Baronet was not at all satisfactory. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs did not say that Mr. Kinder had no claim be cause the decision of the Mexican Government was against him. If the Right Hon. Gentleman had founded his ease npon the sentence pronounced against Kinder in Mexi co, he thought that a case might be adduced efaetly similar, when the Duke of Wellington had interfered. The answer of the Secretary of State was not, however, founded en a foreign tribunal, but upon the representation of a Minister of State. It was not an uncommon case, he contended, for the Government to interfere where a private individual felt aggrieved in reference to affairs of a like description. Mr. Pakenham may have been misled, and if Kinder had the report before him, he could be able at least to see the grounds on which the decision given against him was founded. Mr. Kinder was a man of integrity and intelligence, and he thought his case was one where the Government of this country should interfere with the Government of Mexico. He saw no reason why Mr. Kinder should not be told the grounds upon which his claim was resisted ; and he, therefore, contended that the papers moved for ought to be laid upon the table of the House. After a few words from Mr. FORSTER and Mr. Scoiv, Sir ROBERT PEEL said the Hon. Gentleman had masle a long speech on his view of this subject, and he did not think it quite fair that such views of the case should be carried out. He wished to make an objection to the decisions of the Mexican tribunals, and he hoped the House would not sanction such a thing. This was a question whether we should inter fere with the decision of the Mexican courts, and he was firmly of opinion that no such interference should take niece. He should like to know what their courts of justice would say if a Mexican subject were to ask the Government of his coun try to interfe with the legal decisions of this country ? We had enough upon our hands without doing this; and he did again hope that the House would not interfere with the decisions of another country. Suppose that a Mexican subject were to call upon the Government of his country to interfere with our Minister for Foreign Affairs—Lord Aberdeen—what would be the feeling here? He trusted the House would not sanction the proposed interference by the Hon. Member. Mr. M. GIBSON wished to state that Lord Aberdeen had founded his opinion upon Mr. Pakenhans's report. Mr. M. PHILIPS said that when th e y - had the assurance they had just heard in reference to this affair, he could but feel satisfied, but he at the same should say that this was no matter of minor importance. It involved the purchase of an estate to the amount of 40,0001., besides which the purchaser had to pay other dues into other hands. If those were the facts, he could not tell why the correspondence of Mr. Packenhant should not be laid upon the table. Sir R. PEEL said that that was the very point he differed from the Honourable Member upon. Interference was de manded, and the answer of the Queen's Advocate was, that this country should not interfere. Under those circumstances, the papers could not be laid upon the table. The motion was then withdrawn. • FRAUDULEN T VOTES AT ELECTIONS. Mr. NEWDEGATE said he would not trespass upon the House at this late hour of the night with this subject, but that he had attempted to de an several times before without effect. His motion was to this effect—to appoint a " Select Corn• mittee to inquire into an alleged organized and extensive sys tern of fraudulent and vexatious objections to the votes of a great number of duly qualified electors for the Northern Di vision of Warwickshire, the Northern Division of Staffordshire, and certain divisions of other counties." Mr. AGLIONBY hoped the Hon. Member would not press his motion at this late hour of the night, for there ought to be some consideration for Hon. Members who were obliged to at tend Committees all day and this House at night. Mr. NEWDEGATE said that if Hon. Members thought proper to adjourn the motion, they could do so. Mr. C. BULLER assured the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Newdegate) that the object of his motion would not be attained without a warm debate ; and ho therefore felt it would be more convenient for all parties that for the present the question should not be brought on.—( Hear, hear. ) Sir G. GREY gave notice of his intention to move an amendment to the effect, that the full question be opened on inqu Sir ROBERT PEEL having also expressed himself in favour of a postponement of the question at that late hour, Mr. HUME said that he thought it would be better in this case not to name any particular Committee, but to inquire into the subject generally. Sir W. JAMES entirely concurred in the suggestion of the Hon. Member for Montrose. Sir R. PEEL said that though he thought the registration laws required amendment, yet too much burden should net be laid on the improvement at first. Mr. C. BULLER then agreed to withdraw his proposed amendment. • After some further discussion, The question that a Select Committee be appointed to in quire into the subject generally was put and.tarried. Mr. SPOONER then moved the House should,take into consideration the petition of Joshua Toulmin Smith (presented sth March). . _ moved that an humble address be presented to her Majesty for copy of an order in council, dated the 7th\day of September 1838, for regulating within the colonies of British Guiana, Trinidad, St. Lucia, and Mauritius, re spectively, the relative rights and duties of masters and servants. Copy of a ,ircular dispatch addressed by Lord Glenclg to the Governors of the Legislative Colonies in the West Indies, dated the 15th day of September, 1838, transmitting copies of the said order in counse l, d ate d the 7th day of September, 1838. Copy of an order in council, dated Dec. 9th, 1841, abrogating so much of the order in council, dated the 7th of September 1838, as relates to contracts of service made in Europe. Copy of an order in council, dated the 4 th day of January, 1313, abrogaing so much of the order in council, dated the 7th day of September, 1833, as relates to contracts of service made iu North America —Agreed to. COAL WHIPPERS' BILL. This Bill was read a second time. SUPPLY. The report of the Committee of Supply was brought up and received. WAYS AND MEANS. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he in tended to propose that the House do resolve itself into a Corn mitteb of the whole House to-mor row , in order to take the usual vote, so as to p ass t h e W ays and Means' Bill before the end of the month. METROPOLITAN BUILDING (No. 2) BILL. The report of thi s Bil l, after a few words from Mr. FOSTER against its provisions, and an explanation from Sir J. GRAHAM, was brought u p and received, and the third reading fixed for that day week. - SOUTH-SEA COMPANY BILL. This Bill passed throUgh Committee. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the Iluuse adjourned at One o'clock. The public are speci,lly informed Lh et a few clays will complete the entire range of E. Moses and Son's new pre mises in Aldgate and the Minories, and that due notice will be given of the day of opening. 111ANUFACTU LINO WA a:3.—Front statistical returns officially sought from and rendered by the Messrs. Nicoll, the Court Drapers, of liege:lt-street, who have lately intro duced a new desc r ipti on o f cl oth into this couetr.u, entirely manufactured with Llatua wool, it would appear that " an extra and liberal payment of wages has imlueed a corres ponding and remunerative- exertion on the part of the opera tives at the loom; that such rise of wages, more espe,ialft in the f r ost of England, was rendered necessary in the 'fest place by the groat and unexpected demand for this peculiar fabric—a demand principally raised by the recommendations it at onoo obtained f rom th e faculty; and that, as it was found that the men themselves, encouraged by liberal wages - and short hours, took more than an ordinary interest in the sue cess of the greeter developme n t o f Inch novelty, the hig h lat rate of wages has been continued, and the resultl t almost daily evidence of improvement in this new branch of cloth-making is observable." It is likwise afact f more national importance, that the orders to the M essrs . Nicoll for the f Llama cloth aro proportionably far greater f rom the Continent than in England. PRICE OF SALMON IN TIIR NORTIL—The Duke of Richmond's salmon on the Spy are selling at the high ;trice of 2s. Gd. to Se. a pound in the neighbourhood of the fishing grounds. Si r 11 . IseclEi late tariff has in no way diminished the value of this noble Stub.--intkernese Canriele e jb! siA v io! pr• e .. s, : j ot Jon . oa . s_ 7 * l t r ti7cf.:ft .- .!_-- FIFTH REPORT from the SECT COMMITTEE ON RAILWAY BILLS CLASSI FICATION. SACCY The Select Committee appointed for the Classification of Railway Bills, according to the Resolutions adopted by the House, and who arc empowered to report from time to time, have further con sidered the several matters referred to them, and agreed to report as follows: Your Committee have had it represented to them by the solicitor for the London, Bristol, and South Wales Direct Bill, that the Com pany promoting that Bill have abandoned so much of their line as connected Chippenhamwith the Aust Passage over the River tievem, and that it no longer forms a line of communication with South , Under these circumstances, your Committee recommend that timed:lll be removed from Group No. 31, and placed In Group No. IS, in connexion with the London, Newbury, - and Ilatii line, and the Becks and Hants line, with which, as now curtailed, It com petes. Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GROUP. 36. Wake.'leld, Pontef rac t, and Goole, , and Fort, Sz,c. Goole and Doncaster. Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole Railway (Methley, Askern, and Oakenshaw Brandies). Ilan and Barnsley .Tunction. York and North .Midland (East lading Brandies, Nos. 1 and 2). Mallon and Driftleld Junction. New:a.stleand Darlington Junction (Thirst: and Mallon Brandies). Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GROUP, No. 37. Hot - Ivry Bridze and Calder. Midland, Barnsley, Sheffield, Dewsbury, Leeds, and Bradford. Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley, Wakefield, Huddersfield, and Goole. South Yorkshire, Huddersfield and Sheffield Junction (Darfield Branch). Midland Railway (airfield, Elsecar, and other Branches). Sheffield, Ashton, and Manchester (Barnsley - Branch). Manchester, Huddersfield, and Great Grimsby Direct. Your Committee further recommend that the Worsborough Branch of the Sheffield, Ashton, and Manchester Railway (Dukenfield and Womborongh, and Glossop Branches, and Sheffield Station), be pro vided for in a separate Bill, and referred to this group (No. 37). Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee:— GROUP, No. 35. Leeds Central Station Leads, Dewsbury, and Manchester (Deviations andßranebes). Leeds and Bradford (Alteration of Levels). Leeds and Bradford (Junction at Bradford). West Riding - Union. Leeds - , Dewsbury, and Manchester (Wakefield Extension). Braford, Wakefield, and Midland. Leeds, Wakefield; and Midland Junction. Liverpool and Leeds Direct. Huddersfield and Manchester (Bradford Branch). Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GRUM No. 39. Manchester and Leeds (Railway- Extension, &c.) Yuddersfeld and Manchester (Oldham Branch). • Oldham District. Oldham, Liverpool, Manchester, and Birkenhead Junction. North and South Junction (Halifax to Keighley). Huddersfield and Manchester (Cooper Bridge Branch). Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GROUP, No. 40. Leeds and Bradford (Guiseley Branch). Lancashire and Yorkshire (North-Eastern), York and Lancaster. Leeds and York. Leeds, York, and Midland Junction. York and North Midland (Leeds Extension). North Western. Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GROUP, No. 41. Blackburn and Preston. East Lancashire (Deviations and Branches) Liverpool and Bury (Branches). Manchester, Bolton, and Bury (Canal Navigation and Railway). Preston and Wyre (Longridge Junction). Blackburn, Darwen, and Bolton. North Union (Branch to Horwich and Wilderwood), two Bills. Preston and Wyre Extension, and Da wen Junction. Manchester and Bury Atmospheric. Manchester, Bolton, and Bury, and Canal Navigation. North Union Railway. Blackburn, Preston, and Eastern Lancashire Amalgamation. Preston and Wyre Barbour, Railway, and Dock Company. Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GROUP, No. 42. Liverpool, Preston, Manchester, and Southport. Liverpool, Orinsktrk, and Preston. West Lancashire. Blackburn, Chorley, and Liverpool. Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referre d to a distinct Committee : GROL, No. 43. Leeds and Thirsk (North-EasternTPExtension). East and West Yorkshire Junction. Leeds and Think (Nidderdale Dale). York and North 31Idland (Whitby and Pickering Extension). Great North of England (Bedale Branch). Great North of England (Boroughbridge Branch). Leeds and Thirsk (St. Helen's Deviation). Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GROUP, No. 44. Lancashire and North Yorkshire. Liverpool, Manchester, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne Junction. Northumberland and Lancashire Junction. York and Carlisle. Yorkshire and Glasgow Union. Blackburn, Clitheroe, and North-Western Junction. Clitheroe Junction. Fleetwood, Preston, and West Riding Junction. Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GROUP, Whitehaven and Furness Junction (Whitehaven Deviation and Kirk santon Extension). Lancaster tinil Carlisle Extension to the Caledonian Railway, and LancaSter and Preston Junction Amalgamation. Cockermouth and Workington Extension. Furness and Windermere. Ulverstone, Furness, and Lancashire and Carlisle. Furness Extensions. Whitehaven and Furness Junction. Caledonian (Carlisle Deviation). Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred a distinct Committee:— GROUP, No. 46. Newcastle and Datlington Junction and Tyne Dock. Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Edinburgh, and Direct Glasgow Junction. Wear Dock Railway. Newcestle and Berwick. Newcastle and Carlisle (Extension and Branches). Newcastle and Darlington, Durham and Sunderland, and Wear mouth Dock Purchase and Branches. Newcastle and Darlington, Pontop and South . Shields Purchase. Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee :-- GROUP, No. 47. Welsh Midland. Swansea Vale. Shrewsbury and Hereford. Shrewsbury cad Herefordshire. Brecon and 3terthyr Tydvil Jutietion. Vale of Neath. Monmouthshire. Your Conn/Van recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct CoMmittee GROUP, No. 48. Monmouth and llereford. Newport, A bcrgavenny, and Hereford. Great Eastern and Western. Swansea and Loughor. Tenby, Saundersfoot, and South Wales. Llynvi Valley and South Wales Junction. Taff Vale. Worcester, Hereford, Ross, and Gloucester. Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee :—. GROLTP, _No. 49. North Wales Chester and Birkenhead_ Birkenhead and Holyhead Junction. Mold Junction. Birkenhead and Llangollen. North Wales Mineral (Deviation and Branches). Shrewsbury, Oswestry, and Chester Junction (Deviation and Branches). Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GROUP, No. 50. Manchester and Birmingham Continuation and Welsh Junction. Shropshire Union and Canal, Newton to Crews, with Branches. Shropshire Union and Canal (Shrewsbury to Stafford). Shropshire Union and Canal (Chester and Wolverhampton line). Shrewsbury and Birmingham. Shrewsbury, Wolverhampton, and South Staffordshire Junction. Shrewsbury, Wolverhampton, and South Staffordshire Junction (No. 2). Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee : GROUP, No. 51. Great North and South Wales. Worcester And Portdynllaen. Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred a distinct Committee : - GROUP, No. 52. Runcorn and Preston Brook. St. Helen's Canal and Railway. Grand Junction (Huston to Warrington). Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire Junction. Chester and Manchester Direct. Liverpool, Manchester, and Stockport Direct. South Staffordshire (Showhill and Portobello Branch). Manchester and Birmingham. Grand Junction (Huston to Ashton, and other Branches). Your Committee recommend that the following Bills be referred to a distinct Committee • GROUP, No. 53. Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley. Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Stour Valley Railway (Dudley Line). • Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley (Stour Valley Lino). South Staffordshire (Junction). South Staffordshire Junction (Bilston and Prestfleld Branch). South Staffordshire Junction (Willenhall and Plozwich Branch). Trent Valley, Midlands, aid Grand Junction. Birmingham, Lichfield and Maachestcr. Derbyshire, Staffordsh4e, and Worcester Junction. d l i ' s o t u in r e C t o c n o im mu l i tt i c t e te r e e , c_o_mmend that the following Bill be referred to a GROUP, No. 54. Grand Trunk, or Stafford and Peterborough Union. Oxford, Coventry, and Burton•on-Trent Junction. Trent Valley (Alrewas Branch). London and Birmingham (Coventry to Nuneaton Extension). Leicester and Tamworth Junction. Midland (Leicester and Swanniugton Alteration and Branches). Midland (Burton-ou-Trent to Nuneaton and Branch). Direct Birmingham and Leicester. Leicester aid Birmingham and Branch to Coventry. • Coventry, Nuneaton, Birmingham, and Leicester: Your Committee recommend that the followin Bills be referred to a distinct Committee:— GROUP, No 55. Manchester and Hyde Sheffield, Ashton, and Manchester (Whalley Bridte and Hayfield Branches). Sheffield, Buxton, Leek, Potteries, and Crewe. Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland Junction. Congleton and Crewe. Manchestester, Shaneld, and Midland Junction. Sheffield, Ashton, and Manchester (Dukerdield, Worsborougb, and Glossop Branches, and Sheffield Station*). * Except the Worsborough Branch, which is included in Group No. 37. MONUMENT TO WALLACE.—On Thursday evening, at the end of the first part of Mr. Wilson's entertainment, the concluding song of which was " Scots wha hae wi' Wallace bled," a gentleman came to Mr. Wilson, and said that mag nificent song had powerfully impressed him with the fact, not commendable to Scotland, that there was not a monument to Wallace, the hero who had done so much for his cofintry. He gave his name for 501. to head a subscription for the erection of a monument to Wallace on the Abbey Craig, near Stir ling, and requested Mr. Wilson, who has done so mucli for the songs of Scotland, by keeping alive those parts of her history recorded in song, to give publicity to the intended monument, that all ranks, high and low, 'rich and poor, might have an opportunity of contributing to it. No spot in Scotland could be fixed 011 inure appropriate or more mag • aificent for a monument to Wallace, than the Abbey Craig —it would be an honour to Scotland, and an ornament to the district rendered class.le by the heroic deeds. of the Wallace and the Bruce. It may be mentioned, that the gentleman who has made this generous offer has been thirty four years absent from his native country, and has just re turned to it.—Caledonian Ittercury. [ADVERTISEMENT]. —SIGHT AND HEARING. -39, Psceadifly, Newly-Invented Sp ec t ac l es, Powerful Microscopes, &c.—Patroni ze d b y his Ma jesty the King of Hanover, her Grace the Dowa g e r D uchess of Bed ''rttirsmeZesie: s o tr p e e e r t :t .I,4ssts, Bed laid, their Graces the Krehhishops of Canterbury, York, and Dublin, the Dukes of Devonshire, Norfolk, Argyle, Marlborough, and Man chester, Bishops of Exeter, Lincoln, Cork, I.llphin, Kilmore, and Kil dare. • Messrs. S. and B. Solomons, oculists and opticians, have invented Spectacle Lenses upon a new construction. Immediately they are placed het ire imperfect vision, either by day or candlelight, that mist and dullness which appears before. the eyes is at once re moved, every object becomes clear and distinct, so that the most aged deOetive sight becomes 'bright and brilliant. and is brought to its youthful natural and original state. Also the most powerful Achro nsatic Telescopes, Opera Glasses, Microscopes, Invisible and all kinds cf Acoustic Instruments for relief of extreme deafness. Caution— Messrs. S. add B. Solomons, opticians, are not in any way connected with a person of the same name In their immediate neighbourhood. To prevent mistakes, be cautious, and observe— Only to be had at 39, Albemarle-street, Piccadilly, opposite the York Hotel. S U N • , 'OE • T , t- _ - 4 , .