The Sun. — London, England, 1831-09-28 00:00:00

r. UER 27. en to the fo , ns Bill ; the e Bill. Th e CELLOItt RICHMOND' two peti ti° , . 14 1 against the )etition fro° favour of the on from Ma' ted two peti• if the elective on from th e , Noble L ol l neeting calle om Hartvic iL !scription Li' t., and tbo.' was there 01 ,ected with ai°l Vas brough t ; the charge t l° l , ~ He certsi e ' , eir LordshiP s , pure ter ly P e . r . ouch more dit' d of ne,2lig e ! b i But he w" r t would app ea r ne gligence re or elsewhe.7 tit of the i'l°T e r urn was, that [1 g his duty by' fr _ without cau4.--- ;ecessity or g oo d le 1. The N"u e of talent an e added that li ors. Now , d, the place vl 4 l, I ;eded, yet, wniie happen tha t f of the Cou rt ! ;n1 to merit nde vhich he F oul , was, in aC O , ii, Illy things, " I s , les of his sd ° ;times be a g ° :, ded by P a ' n tY oli' him with e.var,) —(Hear, n party feeli,ng; ,nnception 01.; es.) From tt,, f the HotoeYe't n um ber of th "; the OpP°'' t t i ne nd bow tao; I laugh on ter i only the ao b er i least but a ' OO , the Noble It cr e ring his lat charge ' ces, w circunvi tan e t o the candaarre, that his &l e o is adverted t oo ; if he bad „ fi r the Noble ',1,15 he services ,°' bie ; and the l'eo down the a tre oo from that 0° de, ould wish t° , 0 (1 4 Learned F r " 0 ,3 Chancellor; - le ft ar, they ba d , pad so—fur the) pop 0 3 bases of de° i9 IA tlie before ' : 4 0 1) 1 ' ! when the if $l4 ;uaded that 10,1 would not i f el exit to hill ° l i d tranger, if ha bad lught that ve dQ e in bring i q ast. He had °i9 e Noble IW•r;tlJ, rately as be ei fo ro I been absent ,ich the weep 00 11 He ha d the once during be en he bad n° t , t hat e had state ban' 0 . .e Court o f gotyS ave of th' ng ac !ffort to b ri .,, g oP ;eded bring" • o 9l The reas on •, t ero iancery Barr the season/ rate, town at an y d e r sing. Il e un said (Eldon) 113 ",11 00 e Lord Chat te very ° P) 0 he was o i e e rl had no t ' P oo r •liate Pre de f - ,. , ed nless he "'as 001 Earl had ott t rej I d Chancellor of he bad bee° ar,. to , l e d n h o e c :N a • s a i s ori rea f o r tb i 3 l ; ollected, all e for e • of importance, ; it only ea lsf part' e pt no vt , , a bs,„ le was 00_ it, 3. each nigh' a be I attended, f a i n fe at , ) himself. s iti °l ce lecte d, tha 8 a few (I° Y t o f at the C ..° _ur, lets sides atten ;a t WO n ece-' d bad llnl" )ee de a had O' a ) InCerY e ar. Heart ; bo le given up 3 : „ have been L" %untry, to the hearing of appeals in that House, and had taril and disposed of fifteen long appeals. He had even sat ; 4 1 the S aturday before Easter Sunday, and he hid sat on Easter alead a y for the hearing of appeals—the first time, Perhaps, that any person holding the Great Seal had ever gat on Easter Monday.—(Hear.) It was by following !)e rule that he had got through the iirrear of business in the Court of Chancery, of which, however, he made no boast. He had followed the maxim " take care of the toi tic, b utes, and the hours will take care of themselves." B et had never said word, implying that he was superior 1° his red a ceepctessors, or even that he was on a level with them, ex as to diligence, and an anxious desire to do I\l ' a r duty . Then, as to the last thing of which the Noble L at cl l l ' s had accu se d hi m —hi s a bsence from the House m g• ht-- -lie would tell the Noble Marquis how that He had mentioned on Friday that it would he ne seeessarY for hi m to be absent for a day or two , and that a ss'eputy Speaker would sit on the Woolsack ; but he had gat ° n Saturday from ten to five o'clock hearing appeals.— wi. s he had often done, so that no time might be lost. latever the Noble Marquis might think, he believed that the G (Hear of the Bar did not think that be was idle. . -- e ' ll : ti e : n r e ' d hear ) Oa one occasion he had heard three cars after the other business of the House was over. He this in order to show that he had not been idle s-a(stear, hear) and he could tell the Noble Marquis d v t had out h a not only brought up the arrears in Chancery, tord a. very nearly brought up that of she House of of this There were only two Scotch appeals remaining to "!_of all those that bad been entered on the first day Enter °n• As to the few English appeals that were could not them until tbe Judges came to wh e n ,: t a t ?' he could notea'l them to town at this time, fr ent ;',;_urY were enjoying in the country a short respite t — f ""eir severe labour's. He had already stated that he sat ten o'clock till four or ought n Saturday ; but wher e an circumstance that to be stated, Pass Wag, that he had been seriously ill for three weeks had' Batt that he could not have done better even if he av @° he been well.—(Hear.) He had felt weak and had ohs: L . lll 'd cough, and the Noble Marquis might have i n ri v ed that lie was every now and then taking medicine (1147) t"enable him to continue to discharge his duty.— state 11 0 had therefore been almost compelled to for 4 :"" it would be necessary for him to go to the North : 15W eelt in order to recruit his health so as to be able l o wed the fatigues of the next week. An invitation had,. th e et', been given him to spend two or three days in able Zi ur 'trY elsewh ere , an d h e thought, that even to en he ea ,_ 4l to discha rge hi s d u ty in their Lordships' House, ass to avail himself of that invitation. He could inta: t he Nobl e M arqu i s t h at h e h a d b ee n so ill that he for h: cu ghed f or two hours together w i t h ou t intermission ; else, co ugh was m ore lik e a looping-cough than anything h ad but now he would tell the No b le M arqu i s t h at h e the never felt better in his life than he did t o -d a y,— '''cle ar ' ea r.) He intended to resume his labours at ten N o jk t ho.anurrow and he hoped to be able to meet the vi'vvel‘larquis nest week. That was the short and simple twtilolou ttitdutefinitseihhvy e e t a aets. The discussions on the Reform Bill and long, but he hoped he would be able to all hi s d ut i es i n t h at H ouse d ur i ng the whole to t e d ' As for the standing orders, they provided that the as 8 Chancellor should be ordinarily present in the House it a Pe ." l 'eri and therefore he must not be absent for weeks it/N. 1 ; 11e . But then the words " ordinarily present," al a t " eia le t, hat the Lord Chancellor might occasionally be appointand therefore Deputy Speakers had been usually L ora ed in Order to do the duty in the absence of the (In, C haneello r , and sonic of his friends had done that chf',.oc him. His Noble and Learned Friend, the t o " Justic e of the King's Bench, had beard causes eou th at House ill Spring instead of going to the r!!, ,, r). ', as he might have done, and by this means C a , - au been able to devote his time to the sZrt of Chancery. His Noble aud Learned Fliend, ev eri made a pleasure of his business, as be had ocea to—oi_°!ay of him before in another place. Now, in order , u% that for the Deputy to sit for the Chancellor, he had to refer to what took place in 1797, in the time of t r °I hi s predecessors. The House was informed that D e l 'Ord Chancellor was absent, and it so happened, the ra Speaker was absent also. No reason was assigned a t , -1 " , ; but what did the House do? They immediately 'e n tated th e D u k e o f Portland Speaker, and the occasion as no less than that of a prorogation of Parliament. It pat!' not the n so stranae a thing for a Deputy t o act in the mence of the ' Lord Chancellor, nor for the House to rap lot a s . both. He had saidall kshadt:ni:eaker in the absence of rith eb) because he was anxious to clear himself from .... with a ; of imputation of having treated this House a ,'"srespect, or of having been inattentive to his duty. (Near hear, hear.) Th e Earl of ELDON—It was necessary that the ~Peaker or his Deputy should attend, in order to protect sa e , .„ ab se r e ' . r e r"gative of the Crown, but the House in their she "( had the power to appoint a Speaker, and this tni we d that there might be times at which the Chancellor gll , t be absent, and also that his Deputy might be occa tnnaLlY absent. and there might sometimes be good reason ts r l, t " e ir being both absent. But the rule had been, that tai l : t he Lord Chancellor was absent, one of the . most l l t e rtt Jud ges at the lead of the Courts in Westminster h ad - s hould b e appointed Speaker. As for himself, he no t been a then be never recollected able toget rid of the arrear of appeals in tin th at H se; but u° e the House sit had till the m ont h o f ()doer, and this year the Session h a d '"tomenced in June, or at the beginning of July. He th at l4 ,ed all th e exert i ons to b r i ng up the arrear of appeals 1 n , A t ue forms of the House as they existed at that time al. th e ,;, t 'hu- And th en , a fter all that had been said about hoe - tv e t i aYs in th e C ourt o f Ch ance ry, he was not the per the . ' l° ought to he blamed far them. In consequence of witi"PPointulent of the Vice-Chancellor, he had been th e 'drawn from the Court of Chancery for three days in itila e le , e ek in order to attend that House, and it was impos 'is, ',dispose of as much business in three days as in /ni ght Vie rule as to this House was, that the Speaker at h " absent if he had a good and sufficient excuse . for vari a a h;"dino ; but in the times of his predecessors the in out Ole was, that the Speaker was never absent with ',tit 4 :tug to the Deputy-Speaker that he was to be ab ‘vas),ll‘. the reason for that absence. Last night there (L 1.4 most important Bill—the Pluralities' Bill—before e td e l u se, to which a Noble and Learned Friend of his ahle 'VYnford), not now present, had stated unanswer- W % Neetions, to tvhich no reply had been given ; and it 1 114 ° t ithe highest ' importance that the Lord Chancellor confessq have been present on that occasion, for if he had tai ß hed that the objections were unanswerable the Bill 1)14-4 might have passed. He thought that, alter the OZ. Lea rn t ‘4 which they had heard from the Noble and 4 ati,, Lord, they ought to put an end to the conver- Pas;'; but lie should certainly not let the next Session titeh 44 '"Y tter to without su b m itting to their Lordships a motion Le provid e aga inst the in conveni..nce complained of. to nal l HOLLAND would not enter into any of the per ten t uerits o f t h e N o bl e an d L earne d L or d t o whom that fsl " "sation principally related, after the clear and power ait,lltlaniition which his Noble and Learned Fr i en d h a d ti t of his absence. Neither would he say anything of he t i l l l PPosed injury done to the dignity of that House, for Noble4 l a that that dignity was best consulted where the w ax Lord was engaged in dealing out justice where it Whif"°st wanted, rather than in sitting on the woolsack 4t t h a fete of their Lordships might be taken the oaths " table. The Noble Marquis opposite had . given "Py tiee a matter of order ; but yet he had riot directed tish.,`?der to be read, neither had he made anymotio . n n u te p n o t n - h e ' their Lordships could say content or notco tu ' llgtal their Lordships to look at what the orderw Th e° ". at its date, and at the constitution of that d House. he tite order bore (late so far back as the year 1660, an d t ed if that House had ever before acknowledge the ti nt - t° f the Lord Keeper to sit as their Speaker. At h th , e tWe e e „ v4 , l en the order bore date, a question had arisen is- Poi n ; til e Crown and the House as to the right to apa the n ; a Sneaker, and a compromise took place betveeali ap poirit ;0 n whi c h t h e H ouse res olved, that if tie person Pro eee ,ed by th e C rown (lid not attend, they would then au y to in , appoi n t a Sp ea k e r theseli es. Suppose by Ilona the C rown did no t a ppoint a Speaker to that ei %e e( the Minister who advised the Crown not to exer t° e e l pr g ative in that manner would be liable Loueure; hut low could such a circumstance affect the Lord and dignity of the House of Lords? The Noble i solau ti : e4 referr e d t o var i o u s orders and parts of their was nut Journals, for the purpose of showing that it a ttea: (4) ligatory - On the Lord Keeper to be in corestant geed an te; he ob serve d f u rther that the Lord keeper Oppo e- be a M em b er o f th a t House. The Noble Earl gals f or had re' erre d t o an en t r y in their Lordships Jour tatd the purpose of establishing the position that the to 01 , C hancell or was not at liberty to absent himself even 4 t e t" le nce to the c ommands (al his Majesty, but that W 0: l anguage of the minority. He confessed that it fer n ratbernew to have the doctrine of protests brought 11 14 4 ,1 4 as autho r ity i n th a t H o u s e, and lie confessed too, Rai`'e c ircunistauce somewhat tickled his vanity, for he (A 1, 4 „ 14 ,°re experienc e d protester than the Noble Earl.— Ate tlgft.) Ile looked upon the sudden predilection of hli t "e Earl f o r pr o tests as a g oo d ome n, for it plainly te hti ' t ed that b e l oo k e d f orwar d to a l ong prospec t o f pro- Wou n hf .-- -(A laugh.) Be that, howev er , as it might, he eo tdi contend that neither upon any rule of order, or ac attael',lg to the constitution of that House, could any blame ( th '' to the Noble and Learned Lord. be h - e e , N iarquis of LONDONDERRY, in reply, said that "' never questioned the assiduity of the Noble Lord in getting through the business of his high office, neither did he question the knowledge or the talents of the Noble Lord ; what he contended for was this, that the orders of the House should be complied with or meinded. Here the conversation dropped. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition from Bromsey (Southampton), in favour of RefOrtn; and one from the weavers of Glasgow (as we understood) to the same effect. The Report on the London Coal Bill was received, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. The Game Bill was considered in Committee, and the Report ordered to be received to-morrow. The Report on the Administration of Justice (Ireland) Bill was received, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. The Decrees in Equity Bill was considered in Com mittee, and ordered to be received to-morrow. Lord AUCKLAND moved the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Wine Duties' Bill, but after a remark from the Earl of ABERDEEN, it was postponed to Thursday. The Special Constables' Bill was considered in Com mittee—the Report to be received to-morrow. The Beer Bill went through a similar stage.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, SEPTEMBER 27. The SPEAKER took the Chair to-day at a Quarter be fore Four o'clock. Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice of his intention to post pone the cab of the House to Wednesday week. Lord CASTLEREAGH presented a petition from Glenarn, in the county of Antrim, in favour of the grant to the Kildare-street Society. Great dissatisfaction was experienced in that part of Iteland which the Noble Lord had the honour of representing, in consequence of the measures intended to he adopted by his Majesty's Mi nisters with reference to this subject, considering that they had been treated with a want of care and attention by the Government. Mr. RUTHVEN observed, that in the North of Ireland a great division of opinion existed upon the subject, but generally speaking that part of country was greatly obliged to his Majesty's Ministers for the course they had thought fit to pursue with reference to this measure. After a few words from Mr. D. Brown, Mr. O'Connell, Sir Robert Bo t,son, and Colonel Sibthorpe, the petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. DUNDAS presented a petition from the Principal of the University of Edinburgh, the Lord Provost, and others, the trustees of a charity in that city, complaining of a certain portion of the Reform Bill. In 1817 certain pro perty had been bequeathed to the charity, and the trustees in the same year obtained an Act of Parliament to sell the superiorities, all of which gave the right of voting, but of that right they would be deprived by the Scotch Reform Bill. The Hon. Member appealed to any Member at all acquainted with Scotch law, to say whether or not this superiority did not give a clear and distinct right of voting, and if such be the case, which was clearly conferred by a special Act of Parliament, the deprivation of that right, which was a valuable property, should be followed by compensation to the injured. In every in stance in which private property was taken for the public benefit compensation was given, and upon that principle the petitioners prayed an investigation into their case with a view of being compensated. Mr. PRINGLE spoke in a very low tone, but was un derstood to support the prayer of the petition. Mr. CAMPBELL said the House had not heard of a single petition from a proprietor of English rotten boroughs praying for compensation, and lie regretted it should be left to the Scotch to be the first who should claim it, for the loss of that which they never had a right to.—(Hear, hear.) In fact, it was not intended to take any property from the petitioners ; their property remained, but the power of voting was taken away, and the sooner that was done the better it would be for the country.—(Hear.) Mr. DIXON was surprised to hear the Hon. and Learned Member class the case of the English rotten bo ' roughs with that of the petitioners.—(Hear.) If the House would institute an inquiry, it would be seen that the superiorities in Scotland were legal qualifications, and ought not to be taken away. Mr. GILLON observed, that the property would re• main, and only the right of voting, which should never have been possessed by the superiorities, would be taken away. The only way by which the petitioners would be injured would be, by the lessening the pride of the supe riorities, which was enhanced in consequence of the power of voting being attached to them. Sir E. SUGDEN said the proprietors of boroughs in England never contemplated such a thing as to demand a compensation. As these superiorities were in the nature of burgage tenures, and as the English burgige tenures were to be done away with, he thought the petitioners should not he entitled to compensation. Mr. KENNEDY observed that the Bill merely deprived a person possessing superiorities of the power of enhancing their value by a system of political jobbing._(Hear.) After a few words front Mr. DuNnAs, Mr. CAMPBELL, and Lord STOItMONT, Sir C. FORBES said, if their were any political jobbing, it lay with the Ministers and the Lord Advocate—(Hear) — who, to effect the object they had in view were robbing and plundering, not only the freeholders of England, hut also those of Scotland. He contended that the freeholder'. of Scotland had as much right to their superiorities as any Member of the House had to his estate— MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. The How. ME:1111E11, was interrupted in his spi ecb by the entr aloe of the Usher of the Black Rod, who sum moned the House to the bar of the House of Lords, to hear the Royal Assent given to several Bills. The Speaker, attended by several Members, then left the House, and on their return the Right Hon Gentleman read a list of the Bills (for which Fee the Lords' report) to which the Royal Assent had been given. Sir C. FORBES then proceeded to contend, that as the superiorities were to be taken away for the public good, the owners were entitled t, compensation. The Hon. Baronet proceeded at some length to declaim upon the effect of the Reform Bill, which lie designated a revo!utionary measufe, without which the country had long flourished, and would still continued to do so, if his Ma jesty's Ministers would let well alone. The great body of the people in the Scotch counties (lid not want Reform ; they desired 110 such measure as that proposed, and he, for one, would take care that not one of his tenantry should have a vote under it inflicted upon him.—(Hear, hear, and laughter. ) He considered it the greatest curse on the tenantry of Scotland to make them politicia6s, they had no desire to have votes, and be would take care, that instead of leases for seven years, his tenants should have leases for six years and eleven months, and instead of pay ing 501. a year, tiny should pay him 491. 193. 6d. Sir E. SUGDEN had nut at all objected to the so periorities of Scotland, but could not see the justice of the principles which would give compensation to them, while it was refused in the case of burgage-tenures. Sir R. INGLIS supported the prayer of the pAition, and stated his convictien that the petitioners had asked much less than they were entitled to obtain. Mr. GORDON brought up the report of the Committee on papers relative to Windsor Castle. Mr. O'CONNELL said, in moving that the Order of the Day for a call of the House be read, with the view of postponing it till Monday, the 10th October, he had been induced to do so M consequence of an intimation be hail received that the Hon. Member fur Oakhainp ton (Sir R. Vyvyan) meant to move an amendment. The Irish Reform Bill had been deferred till the Bth of October, and he was desirous tit avail himself of all con stitutional means which the orders of the House put in his power to enforce upon that ocea-ion, and upon the ensu ing Monday the fullest attendance of all tiie Members of the House.—(Hear.) The Hun. Member then moved that the order of the day for the call of the House be read. The Clerk having read the ruder, Mr. O'CONNELL moved that the House be called over on the 10th of October next. Sir R. VI! VYAN said, that in consequence of the un usual course which the Hon. Member for Kerry had on this occasion pursued, to the great inconvenience of the House, be should move as an amendment, th a t t h e or d er of the day be now discharged. HUNT seconded the motion. Sir J. NEWPORT thought that whenever the subject of Reform was to lie submitted to consideration of the H ous e, whether in the shape of Engltsh, Scotch, or Irish Bills, it was the duty of all Members to be present —and the fullest attendance of the Howe ought not to he sacri ficed to private interests or arrangements. Mr. C. FERGUSSON agreed with the course pursued by the lion. Member for Kerry, and would vote in favour of his motion. Mr. HUNT rose to repel the insinuations cat upon t h e Members ttf the House by the Hon. and Learned Mem ber (Mr. O'Connell), and asked where that Hon. Gentle aim was when the division on the Scotch Reform Bill took place—certainly not in his p lace in that House. General PALMER said he had a personal reason for supporting the motion, dictated, as he hoped, by his se n s e of public duty. Having hitlairto failed in ltts endeavours to speak on the sulnect of Reform, lie was still anxious to do it, whilst the attendance of Menthols Justified the a ttempt, and encouraged him to make it, ins omuch that the view he had taken of the question was different from all who had risen in the debate ; and that, notwitbstand lug the speeches of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite upon the Bill which had passed the House, he confidently hoped, if allowed the opportunity upon the one before it, to sa tisfy every mind that was open to conviction of the neces sity of the measure. After a few words from Colonel SIBTHORPE, Lord ALTHORP denied that the affairs of Ireland had been in any degree neglected by the Legislature, as the ex perience of 26 years had thoroughly convinced him of the contrary.—(Hear, bear.) He thought it was highly de• sirable that there should be a full attendance of Members on the discussion of the Irish Reform Bill ; and therefore should not oppose any step that might be taken for the purpose of securing it. Sir R. PEEL also denied the charge of indifference to Ireland, in which the Legislature must always have as deep an interest at it could be supposed to possess in any other part of his :Majesty's dominions.—(Hear.) This frequent postponement of the call of the House appeared to him very objectionable and inconvenient ; and, seeing that no such measure had been taken with reference to the English or Scotch Reform Bills, he should vote for the motion of the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Oak hampton. Mr. SHEIL contended that the postponements of the order for the call of the House were not at all attributable to the Hon. and Learned Member for Kerry. Mr. H. GRATTAN supported the motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. Sir C. FORBES, in allusion to the precedence cif the Scotch Reform Bill, insisted on the right of Scotland to stand next to England, and would not allow any thing that the Hon. and Learned Member could say to convince him that Ireland ought to be thrust in between two countries that stood in such direct juxta-position.— (Laughter.) The Irish, therefore, had no reason to be dissatisfied. Mr. O'CONNELL, in answer to the Member for Pres ton, stated that he had choice of three counties at the last election, and decided for his native county of Kerry. This was entirely owing to the opinion which his countrymen entertained of him, for they knew his honesty—(oh, oh) —t ey were sensible of his candour—(oll) —and they were aware that double-dealing was not amongst his habits. He had never, like the Member for Preston, spoken on one side and voted on another ; the Ultra- Tories hail got the benefit of his speeches, though they lost his votes, and he wished them joy of their bargain.;.- , - (Laughter.) He did not mean to contend that the post ponement of the Irish Bill was a slight to Ireland, but there could be no doubt that lit was an injury to her in terests, which he considered a still more serious ground of complaint. But when he was told that Englishmen had brought forward the Catholic question—it was easy to say that Mr. Fox had brought that question forward, but it was convenient to forget other circumstances of Mr. Fox's. conduct with respect to it. It was convenient to forget, that two years after his having brought it forward, Mr. Fox entered into office under an agreement with George EL that he was not to bring forward that question while in office. Sir R. VYVYAN said that the Hon. Member should not have the satisfaction, which he seemed to desire, of making a complaint that his call might be put off. He should have the call on the day which he named for it, for he (Sir R. Vyvyan) would withdraw his opposition to it. —(Cheers from the Opposition.) The Hon. and Learned Member, who wished to bear down that House.—(Cheers) —would find that Englishmen, and Scotchmen, and Irish men, would not allow themselves to be borne down by him, or to he driven front their purpose by any course which that Hon. and Learned Member might please to take. Mr. HUME said, that the charge of the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Oakhampton, that his Hon. Friend, the Member for Kerry, wished to bear down the House, was most unjust and unfounded.—(Cries of " No, no.") He repeated that it was. The course taken by his Hon. and Learned Friend was perfectly justifiable. Ile postponed his call, because the second reading of the Bill to which it applied was also postponed. What other course could he have adopted ? The conduct of the Hon. Baronet and those who supported him on this occasion was such as be had seldom witnessed—and such as. in his opinion, was unbecoming English gentlemen.—(Cries of "No, no," and " Order.") He would assert that it was—it was at least unbecoming English legislators. If Hon. Members wished to be treated as English gentlemen, let them behave as English gentlemen.—(Loud cries of "Order.") The SPEAKER—It must be obvious to the Hon. Member himself; that such an imputation as his language conveyed was quite out of order.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME repeated, that the conduct of several lion. Members to his Hon. and Learned Friend (the Member for Kerry) was altogether indecent and unbecoming them is Legislators.—(No, no.) Such opposition was most unfair, and his Hun. Friend was justified in complaining of it as he had done. Sir R. VYVYAN wished to ask the Hon. Member for Middlesex whether he accused him of acting in a manner unbecoming an English gentleman. Air. HUME spoke of the Hon. Baronet's conduct as a legislater.—(Cries of " No, no.") lie believed he had used the words " English gentleman," but he did not mean it as personally offensive, for he had no wish to hurt the feelings of any man, but he had goal reason to cotn plain of the conduct of several Hon. Members to his Hon. and Learned Friend, who was perfectly right in the course he had adopted. Lord ALTHORP wished to correct a mistake into which the Hon. and Learned Member for Kerry had fallen with respect to Mr. Fox. The Hut. and Learned Mem ber stated that Mr. Fox had taken office under a pledge or agreement with George 111. that lie would not bring o n the Catholic question during his administration. Now this was not the fact. On the contrary, it was well known that Mr. Fox and his friends went out of office in 1807, because they found they could not carry the Catholic ques tion.—( Hear, hear.) The question was then put and carried, that the House be called over on the 10th of October. FRANCE AND BELGIUM.—GREECE. Sir R. I'YVYAN said he rose to call the attention of the Noble Lord (Palmerston) to a subject connected with the present state of Belgium, and to ask a question con cerning it. The House was aware that the affairs of Bel gium had now arrived at that ,tate at which they might congratulate his Majesty's Government at having obtained that which he had no doubt they would obtain by a firm perseverance,—at having obtained from those at the head of the Government of France a promise that the whole of the French troops should be withdrawn from Belgium. This was, in his opinion, a most important Hot gained. and he congratulated Ministers upon it. But he had been given to understand that an arrangement had 1 itchy been entered into between the Governments of France and algium, by which officers of high rank and great reputation in the French armies were to be allowed to enter t' iieleian service, and to take die chief com mand of her armies under the Kite, and to he placed at the head of the several tlivisions of the army in different ;tarts of the kingdom. Now it :vas well known that the troops of one country, officered by the subjects of another, were, genereliy speaking, under the controul of that country to which the officers belonged. This was the case with the native troops in India, which were all officered by British officers. The question which he wished to put to the Noble Lord was, whether it was correct that such an arrangement as he had mentioned had been made between France and Belgium, and whether that arrangement had become the subject of any commu nications between the Governments of France and of this country ? Another question which he wished to ask re- Itted to the present condition of Greece. Ile understood that disturbances had recently broken out in several parts of that country, which made its internal condition as un settled as when the war was carried on there between the Turks and the Greeks. What be wished to know was, whether the three Powers who had taken an active part in the offal's of that country, bad made any arrange went as to the future government of Greece, or as to who should be placed at the head its Government. Lord PALNIERSTON said he would not then enter into any discussion on the subject which the Hon. Ba ronet hail himself voluntarily postponed yesterday. As td the first question which the Hon. Baronet had put, he (Lord Palmerston) must again throw himself on the in dulgence of the House, when lie stated that he ought not to be caked upon to answer questions as to the arrange ments which an independent sovereign whom we had ack nowle,fged might think proper to adopt with respect to his own army, or to the defence of his country. He must therefore decline to answer the Hon. Baronet's first ques tion. As to the second question, respecting the state of Greece, lie would admit that accounts had reached this country of the occurrence of some unfortunate events in in Greece; but he trusted that they were only temporary derangements, and that by this time they were at an end. The conference of the three Powers were still continued, for the purpose of making arrangements by which the tranquillity of that country might be restored and placed on a permanent basis. Here the subject dropped. CASE OF JOHN LEARY. Mr- O'CONNELL rose to submit the motion of which he had given notice, for the production of any correspond ence which took place between Baron Pennefather and the Irish Government on the subject of the conviction and sen tence of John Leary, at the late special commission at Cork. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman here stated in detail the case of the trial and conviction of the prisoner, which will be brought sufficiently to the recollection of most of our readers by the following brief outline:— ! Leary, who was a small farmer, was accused with three or four others of a conspiracy to murder. He was tried se parately and found guilty and sentenced to death, without any hope being held out of any mitigation of his sentence. On the next day one of the conspirators was tried on the same evidence, but the jury could not come to an agree ment as to the verdict, and were at length discharged with out giving any. The two others were afterwards tried, and though the jury were, he might say, selected by Government, there having been no less than forty-seven jurors challenged by the Crown before the twelve were sworn, they acquitted them without leaving the box. The prisoner about whom the jury could not agree was tried at the following assizes and also acquitted. On this Leary was respited, and at length his sentence was commuted to transportation for life, though the Judge before whom he was tried had made two or three communications to Govern ment on his behalf. Now it appeared to him that this pri soner's case was an extremely hard one. The alleged con spirators were all acquitted by the breaking down of the chief witness against them. Had that even taken place on the trial of Leary, he also would hare been acquitted. Or had he had the good luck to be tried second or third, he would now be at home with his family instead of being tinder sentence of transportation for life at New South Wales. What I , e contended was, that if the Government believed the evidence against the man sufficient, they ought not to have mitigated his sentence ; hut if they did not believe it, he was entitled to a full acquittal from all punishment. 11 order to let the House see what was the opinion of the Judge who tried him as to his case, he now moved for the production of the correspondence between that Learned Judge and the Irish Government on the subject. Mr. CALLAGHAN seconded the motion. Mr. STANLEY said, that this not the first time this subject had been brought forward by the Hon. and Learned Member, though now for a very different object from the former occasion. On that occasion he had moved for the production of the Judge's notes of the trial, which the House refused on the same ground on which he (Mr. Stanley) now objected to this motion,—that the House was not the: proper place for the introduction of such a question, as a sort of court of appeal from the decision of a court of justice. The breaking down of the chief wit ness against Leary and the others was not from any con tradiction in his testimony, but from the mention of a fact—an important one, be admitted—which he had omitted to state in his original depositions, and which did not come out till after the trial of Leary ; but a most re spectable jury afterwards convicted two men on the testi mony of the same witness. Mr. O'CONNELL said the men who were thus con , victed were not for the same offence of which Leary was accused. They were accused of firing at a Magistrate in his carriage, with intent to kill him, and the fact was pu: beyond doubt. The charge against Leary was quiLe a dif ferent thing. Lord ALTHORP objected to the motion. He thought it would be a dangerous precedent that the communica r tions of Judges respecting the case of prisoners should be submitted to Parliament. • Sir C. WETHERELL also objected to the motion on the same grounds as the Noble Lord. I Mr. JEPHSON would have felt satisfied if the Ga -1 vernment had undertaken to investigate this affair; but as • the case stood he must support the motion. , Mr. CRAMPTON objected to the disclosure of confi i dential communications, and contended that even if the House were to agree to the production of the papers called , for, the object of the mover would not be obtained. Mr. CALLAGIIAN supported the motion. He said that the objections made to it were altogether of a technical nature. Mr. H. GRATTAN maintained that the papers moved for were of a public and not a private nature. Mr.D.W. HARVEY concurred in the observations which had been made respecting the general inconvenience of making that House a place of appeal from a court of jus tice ; but be thought that a case like the present, in which so many attestations of innocence had been made, formed an exception to the general rule. Mr. HUME supported the motion. Mr. STANLEY said, that those Hon. Members who spoke in favour of the motion, proceeded on two assump tions,—that John Leary was innocent, and that no investi gation had been made into his case. Now the fact wa., that the late Government went into a full investigation of his case, and came to the conclusion that that person was guilty. Whether his own opinion on this matter coincided in every particular with that of the late Government he would not say, but he thought the present mode of pro. ceeding improper. After what had occurred be should ccrtainly investigate the papers.—(Hear.) ' Mr. O'CONNELL thought that after the promise made by the Secretary of Ireland to investigate the case, the dehate•might now be allowed to terminate.—(Herr.) The lion. and Learned Gentleman then withdrew his motion. CASE OF THE DEACLES. Mr. P. MILDMAY rose to present a petition from the City and suburbs of Winchester, most respectably signed by the local authorities, by professional men, clergymen, honkers, and tradesmen, on the subject of the charges which had been preferred against certain Magistrates, for their alleged ill-treatment of Mr. and Mrs. Deanle. The petition had been signed by 330 persons in the space of 'LS hours, and many more signatures would have been ob tained, if longer time had been allowed. The petitioners had been induced to come forward for the purpose of statina how much they were indebted to the Magistracy for their persevering exertions to put down riot last year ; and th e y desired that a full and fair investigation might be set on foot to clear one of that body from what they be lieved to be most unfounded calumnies. lie was anxious that the gentleman who was more immediately connected with this trans.iction should, as a magistrate, have an op portunity of removing the imputations that had been cast on him, and, as a friend, he wished that steps should be taken to put an end to that suspense of mind which every honest arid u pright man must teel to be the severest afnie tion.—(llear, hear.) The petition was read at length. Colonel EVANS said he had to present a petition from Tunbridge, in Kent, also calling for investigation, but con taining sentiments and opinions very different from those which had been expressed in the petition just presented. Claim s of indulgence had been made for the conduct of the Ay said, he L e not entered into the Magi s tr a t e s in conseq uence of the excitement which had prev a il e d at the time , a nd h e thought that a similar claim might b e put forward On behalf of the misguided people, when their distres s was considered . Mr. HUME said he hail, on a form e r occas i on , pre sent, d a petition on this subj ec t f rom Wi nc h ester , w hi c h in si x hours had been si gned by 210 individuals. In it pre senting that petition h e ha d not entered into the merits of To that rule, ho wever , t h e H on . M em. her the case, because he und erstood that nothing was to be i stat e d w ith respect t o it until a f ter it had been investigated by a Col . ee s . ter had not adhere.% Die. for l \:\ 7 e case a t all, but merely stated the feelings and wishes of the petitioners. Mr. A. BARING said. his understanding of the matter was, that the question should not be gone into until after the investigation ; but he did not know that suck an agree ment could operate as an objection to the petition being read and laid on the table. With respect to the petition alluded to by the Hon. Member for 'Middlesex, he had gone to the Journal Office and examined it, and he saw affixed to it that were known in Win very few name s chester. The ignorance of the petitioners as to the facts wa s such, that they totally mis-stated the whole case, so that much weight could not attach to their representa tions. They went so far as to soy that Mr. Walter Long • had put on the handcuffs ; whereas, it was notorious that Mr. Walter Long was not present at all.—(Hear, hear.) H e hoped that the Hon. Member would take an opportu nity to read the petition, and to judge of its canten's, if he wished, as he said he did, to do justice to all parties. '1 he petition now presented was signed by the corporate autho rities of Winchester, by the heals of Winchester College. by professional men, by bankers, and by tradesmen, all we ll known in that town and its vicinity ; while that which bad been presented by the Hon. Member was nut s i gne d by six names which persons conversant with the town had ever heard of before. After some further discussion between Mr. Ilume, Colonel Evans, Sir C. Wetherell, Colonel Trench, and Mr. Hunt, the petition was ordered to lie on the table. Mr- HUNT presented a petition, calling for an investi gation of the case of the Deacles, from (as the petition had i t ) the undersigned " in behalf of the North Western Branch of the National Union. agreed to at a meeting held at the Bazaar Coffee-house, Castle-street, Oxford-market. Sr C. WETHERELL objected to the petition being received, on account of the irregularity of the manner in ..e , hich it was signed. It did not appear whether the par ties signing form e d a portion of the meeting at which the petition was agreed to. This gave rise to a protracted convetsation, which ended i n Mr. Hunt's consenting to withdraw the petition. Mr. HUME presented two petitions, one from High Wycombe, and another from Louth, Lincolnshire, praying for inquity into the case of Mr. tmd Mrs. Deacle; also a petition from Thomas and Caroline Deacle, complaining of the treatment they had received, and praying the Hou.e to grant them redress. On the question that the last petition do lie on the table, Mr, O'CONNELL breceived /um" Sal C al atO nication from Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, intimating that it would be more convenient if the subject of the in quiiy were deferred, and he recommended the Hon. and Gallant Member not to press his motion to-night. Colonel EVANS said, that if the ends of justice wire answered, he should not press it to. night. Mr. J. CAMPBELL was averse to the postponement of the motion. Mr. O'CONNELL said, it was only with the view of being better able to show that a Committee ought to be granted, that the parties wished the motion to be postponed Lord ALTHORP said he had admitted that there bad been some misunderstanding as to bringing forward the motion to-night, but he must say that unless the Gallant Member made out a case for postponement, he thought it expedient to decline bringing it forward. Mr. CAMPBELL said, that it had been distinctly un derstood that the motion would be opposed, and therefore the party had had ample notice. Mr. O'CONNELL observed, that on a former occasion the matter had been postponed for the convenience of the other party, when there was a motion before the House. important question, present there was no motion. It was an question, for it was a question whether England was to become like Ireland in respect to its magistracy. Mr. A. BARING began by making some remarks which excited much cheering in the House, but which it was imposible to hear. He complained of the offensive allusion made by the Hon. and Learned Member who had just sat down to Ireland, which be perfectly understood. What the Hon. and Learned Member proposed was the grossest piece of injustice, and the impression on his mind was, that there did exist in this affair a conspiracy to op press, and cruelly oppress, individuals.—(Hear, hear.) The Gallant Officer was undoubtedly at liberty to bring forward his motion whenever he pleased ; but he (Mr. Baring) was thus at the mercy of any individual who chose to bring charges of this de scription, and let them lay by. If the lion, and Gal lant Officer refused to submit a motion for an inquiry to the House, he (Mr. Baring) would submit one, for there was a notice in the paper, and the House would not be taken . by surprise. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman might, if' he pleased, bring forward his calumnies, night after night, and become the tool of those who were parties to this dirty conspiracy. He would bring the subject before the Ilouse, and not be condemned, night after night, to answer the calumnies trumped up against him.—(Hear.) Were Mr. and Mrs. Deacle the only persons aggrieved in this case ? Were the other party to be forgotten ? Let the Hon. and Learned Member bring forward his charges, and net goon in this way, dallying with the charges; let him, if he had any feeling in his bosom, bring forward his charges man fully, and not create delay, in order to add to the excite merit which prevailed in the country.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL said, that having been assailed, he hoped the House would allow him to defend himself.— Having been assailed by the Hon. Member in a inure brutal manner than lie had ever been assailed in that House.— (Loud cries of " Order," " chair.") Sir ROBERT INGLIS requested the Speaker to state whether it was conformable to the rules of the House, when an Hon. Member had been assailed, for him to apply to his attacker the expression " brutal?" The SPEAKER rose, but Mr. O'CONNELL said, he did not hesitate to recall the expression. He did not mean to use it. , He undoubtedly did feel dissatisfied at an attack which no man had ever less deserved. As a Member of that House he had been called upon by British subjects who complained of wrong. A woman had been handcuffed. The other party had been convicted by the verdict of a jury. But the persons thus treated had been denied advocates, because they were not persons of wealth and influence. But they had an advo cate now, and the people of England should have an inves tigation. " A conspiracy !" exclaimed the Hon. and Learned Member, " what have I to do with your Eng lish conspiracies?"—(Cheers and laughter.) But he could bear with the flash of indignation from the Hon. Member; but in order to see if his anxiety to have an inquiry were real, he suggested to the Hon. and Gallant Member to bring forward his motion to-night. If the Committee were granted, either the accused party would have a triumphant acquittal, as he wished they might, or they would be con victed of gro.s oppression. Colonel EVANS said, that under the circumstances, be should bring forward his motion. The Hon. and Gallant Member complained of the want of a fair return for the moderation he hail employed on the former occasion, by ihe warmth which had been displayed on the other side. He did not recollect any expression which had fallen from the Hon. Member for Kerry which justified the observations which had been made upon him on the charge of conspiracy, which had been made in so unwar rantable a manner. To be told that all those who had any thing to ao with those petitions were raking about the country, and were the tools of a dirty conspiracy, was ::n imputation, an insult, which he would not submit to. Having been refused the papers he had asked for, he could only detail the particulars of the case from the public newspapers. The Honourable and Gallant Officer then stated some details of the trial, and some reported remarks of the Judge, and read a passage from the letter of Mr. Bingham Baring, on which letter, he said, lie should lay greatstress. When the debate took the turn it did on the former occasion, it was not possible that Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, out of regard to their own character, could refrain from farther proceedings, because there had been recrimination. There had been a conspiracy charged; the witnesses were assumed to be perjured, and the Judge's summina up false. Under these circumstances it became a totally unprecedented transaction ; and as it had led to imputations in that House which no tribunal in the country could take cogniz once of, and as the privileges of the House had been abused to the deteriorition of individual character, there arose a strong necessity of giving to the case some further inquiry. The Gallant Member then proceeded to show that there was nothing unprecedented in the House making the conduct of Magistrates the subject of inquiry, the right of doing which was establishedin the Manches ter affair, and in the case of Judge Kenrick. The Hon. Member concluded by moving for the appointment of a Select Committee. Mr. LEFEVRE thought that the public mind would never he satisfied unless some impartial inquiry was insti tuted into the case. He acknowledged that it was per. feetly illegal to put handcuffs upon any person unless they were in resistance to the law, but lie was convinced tits. no such orders had been given by either of the Mr. Brings. The verdict of the Jury was tantamount to a perfect acquittal of those gentlemen. Lord ALTHORP, upon the best consideration he could have of the case, was convinced that it was not his dm) to give his vote for the appointineut of a Committee. lie had rouse to this resolution without having had the slightest communication with the Non. Member for Theaord, and he stated this upon his word and honour as a gentleman He had the honour of the acquaintance of the Member for Toetford, and also of that of Mr. Bingham Baring, au lie felt the greatest pin in doing anything which could throw the slightest possible slur upon their characters, or tr i ton that of the Hon. Member for Portsmouth. He was quite aware of the imputations which might be cast from the course he was pursuing, but when he looked upon whole of the case, and what the result of the proposed in quiry would be, as to affordhig any satisfaction to the public, he could riot consistently with his duty con s ent t o instituting such an inquiry. Mr. and Mrs. Deacle had had their option of proceeding against the Magistrates, by indictment or action. They had brought an action far damages, and the verdict was given in their favour. if none of the parties had bten Members of that House, would anybody have thought it reasonable that a Corn. mittee of inquiry should have been appointed? If the course now proposed were to be pursued, the examination of such cases might be perpetually before the House, which was not a tribunal to try such cases satisfactorily, arid he hoped that seine other mode might be found by which the truth of such cases might be elicited. lie had moved for a Committee in the case of the Manchester Magistrates, but that was as different from the present as two cases oould possibly be. Upon a vices' uf the whole of the case, he felt himself bound to oppose the motion. Lord faBlliNuTON telt it his duty to oppose the mo tion from a sense of the great inconvenience which would arise from such an inquiry, and which, from the forms of the House, could not lead to any satisfactory result. Mr. HUME had hoped that the Noble Lord (Althorp) would have pointed out some mode by wltitth truth could have been elicited and pub:ie. justice satisfied. He bad read all the allegations upon both side!, and IT could say that there were none which were not open to inquiry and to proof. The public mind never could be ad:Ailed with out inquiry. He would not say if the allegations were true or not, but the Noble Lord ought not to refuse in quiries unless he could point out some other mode of ob taining the ends of justice. he ATTORNEY- GENERAL thought that the state of the country when the transactions took place ought to be duly considered, and lie difl ere d f rom t h e opinion of the Judge who tried the case, that the magistrate o ugait to have left the execution of th e warrant to the constables, without themselves bei ng present . Th e had trav erse d t h e t r i a l, an d t h e y mute se end " ' of affidavits tt 'I , h d e,n theanvsittisil disturbances; ael s e t st r o; o u n kt g h l e y , place. He th o ught a Committ ee of implicated Mr. an d M rs . D ea d e iu the House o ught not to compl a i n o f t h e conduct of the prosecutor ' s Stns the justicela t o i nu f s all c ha case. i tribunals calculatedhn be was the t there pro as t e trial of Mr. Deacle. He was acquitted, and after his acquittal Le brought his ail Con against tie Met srs. Baring t;ir a trespass and assault. The Jury finding the asau c and trespass proved, gave damages proportionate t e their sense of the nature of the injury cotrnit-ed. What founda tion, then, was there for the House of Commons to erect itself into a court of appeal upon this case ?—( Hear.) It was said that both parties to that action wished for inquiry inea the circumstances which gave rise to it. In his opi nion neither of them would gain by having such an in quiry instituted.—(Hear, hear.) It had ben likewise said that there were precedents to justify the institution of it but he was of opinion there was no resemblance between the present case and the preceden ts which bad bee n quoted. As to the Manchester case, the extent of the mischi ef done to human life, the violence of the yeo manr y , th e breath less haste with which their proceedings were welcomed with the approbation of the Government, and, above all, the many constitutional questions which were involved in it, made an inquiry by the House in his judgment ab solutely necessary. As to the case of Mr. Kenrick, which he had himself brought forward, it ought to he recollected that there were two grave causes of complaint against him as a Magistrate. Now Mr. Kenrick was also a Welsh Judge ; and two charges of misconduct which were brought against hint as a Magistrate, appeared to him (the Attorney-General) to disqualify him altogether front acting any longer as a Judge. There was no mode of pro ceeding against him as a Judge except by an :Wrest; of that and the other House of Parliament to the throne fur his removal; and it was quite clear that the House could not accede to such an address, without having some evi &Tice as to the misconduct upon which that address was to be founded. The case of Mr. Kenrick therefore was nut at all a case in point to this discussion. In conclusion he stated that he must oppose the :notion, as no grounds had been laid for taking this case out of the ordinary course of justice, or for erecting the House of Commons into a court of appeal upon it..—(Hear.) Mr. D. W. HARVEY was surprised at the course adopted by his Majesty's Ministers on this occasion. He wondered how they could consent to allow a ease of this importance, affecting, as it did, the conduct awl character of the Magistracy generally, to pass without notice and without inquiry. It was impressed strongly on his mind, those who were accused of misconduct in this case lied, on the first mention of it to the House, invited Hon. Members to suspend their judgment until they had taken legal measures to challenge that verdict of which the effect was to strengthen the imputation which the inquiry at the trial raised against them. lie also recollected the stat., rrient made by an Hon. and L.-arned Gentleman, who had been professionally engaged in these transactions, and who, in commenting on the trial, had asserted that the defen dants were taken by surprise by the turn of that trial and by the evidence produced against them. Lie had likewise not forgotten the declaration of the Hon. Member for Portsmouth, that they intended to move for a new trial as soon as the Courts were re-opened in Westminster hall. Now, however, it turned out that the defendants did not intend to venture upon any further judicial proceeding-. He did not find fault with them for adopting that resolu tion. No doubt they bad been ably and judiciously ad- Ivised. He agreed with the Hon. Member for Hampshire, that considering the opulence of Mr. B. Baring, the ver dict on the trial at Winchester was a mere nominal ver dict. He supposed, therefore, that his legal adviser had told him either that that verdict would operate in his favour as an acquittal with the public, or that he was very lucky in gaining a verdict with such small dainates, and in having it tried in Hampsh ire, where his influence was so great, instead of having it tried in some county where lie most have met the plaintiff on a footing of greater equality. He would not conceal from the House, that after all the statements which had been made by the opposite party, it was his opinion that Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, and all their witnesses, had been most shamefully calumniated in that House.—( Hear.) But in his opinion, Mr. and Mrs. Deacle had little to do with the grave question which was then before the House. That was evidently the opinion of his lion. and Gallant Friend, fur he had submitted their case to the considera tion of the House long before he received any petition from them. His Hon. and Gallant Friend, on reading the newsparr report of the and the stringent remarks made on it by the Press, determined to bring it before th e House on his own responsibility. It was not until lion. Members had discharged the fire of their artillery upon these individuals, who were unknown in that House, and without any relations, friends, political associates to defend them—(Hear, hear)—it was not until their dia meters had been whispered away, and their witnesses had been traduced as guilty of perjury, and the jury which gave them a nominal compensation had been charged with partiality,—that Mr. and Mrs. Deacle telt themselves called upon to make, in their petition, it. full disclosure of the injury which they alleged that they hail suffered. He was surprised to hear that it was a matter of trivial importance that the Magistracy of England—hereafter to be an irresponsible Magistracy, if such oppression as this were to remain unnoticed—should possess the power of placing irons on the wrists of nnoffending individuals, who when brought up to trial were proved to be not guilty._ (Hear, hear.) He contended that by law the Magistracy possessed no such power ; he contended that even where parries were guilty, it was contrary to the law and Con stitution of England, both iu practice and in theory, to subject them to this iron degradation, unless they presented resistance to the authorities in whose custody they were. —(Cheers.) It was against this that the people of Eng land raised their protest—it was against this assumption of at bitrary rind irresponsible power that they bad in all quarters of the island given expression to their inelign ttion. Mr. BARING commenced his speech by observing that he had no intention, on a framer evening, to impute improper motives to the lion. Member for Ilidellestx for the share which he had taken in these discussions ; and Le regretted it exceedingly if he had made any such imputa tion against him. That he felt strongly on this matter, lie did not mean to deny. He felt strongly for his ricer relation, and the more so, because he knew that his near elation owed much of the persecution which lie had re cently suff -red to the political part which he (Mr. Baring) bad recently taken.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) He had learnt with regret that his Noble Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchr quer, would not grant ,a Committee of inquiry into this subject ; but in justice to his No -le Friend he must say, that until his Noble Friend got up to make his statement he did not k n ow what the decision of his Noble Friend was upon it. Ile f e l t question was no t a mere persona l (plea public question, in whi c h a lt the MA. and on that account it was on e the ti3O, a ta t r,a t ei l t i ywv. p a, r es e r s en e n ig : 7ltica;ed, which ought to be tharoughly sifted. He then pro d•. ded to stag how many prison. rs--(about 4 , oo)—were confined in Winchester gaol at the time tit this transac tion, in order that the Homee might consider the slate of confusion ira which the county of Hants then Iris. He did not oome forward at present as the accu er of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle certainly not. He and his f- lends were the accused, net the accusers; and all that he should now say, would be offered to the Hausa for the purpose of proving that the statements of Mc. :red Mrs. Dosele were not founded on facts, and that tiaere was a prima facie case fur their apprehension. He denied that Mr. Bingham Baring was actually present as hile the com plainant underwent the process ef handcuffing, and insis'ed 'h a t his, Hon. Relative treated Mr. Deacle with the ut mogt delicacy and forhearance that the case of a lady so situated would admit of. The Hon. Gentleman here went through the dete,i's of the affair, as mentioned at it ngt tin -a fanner debate, and added that Mr. Deacle hafi shaken hands with Mr. B. Baring at the close of the proceedings, to indicate that he bore that gentleman no animosity, and felt no dissatisfaction at the manner in which be had behaved towards him. He had also a right to observe that there were many facts set forth iu the present petiti in to which no allusion whatever had been made during the Mr. O'CONNELL thought that as the parties involved in the transaction had courted inquiry, the refusal to insti. cute that inquiry would only tend to increase the sl inder— hir slander he trusted it would prove to he. He was de decidedly in favour of inquiry, in order, if the allegafi,ns were false, that an end might lie put to popular agitation. Sir it. PEEL was sorry that a sense of duty obli,s•ed iiirn to Oppose a ineasura which be believed the parties themselves sincerely desired. He was opposed to it, be cause he was p ersua d e d t h at t h ose part i es were entirely innocent of the misconduct with which they trete charged, He did not think that House the fittest tribunal for insti iuting a trial of the kind. if an appeal were to be made to any tribunal, it should be to one of those where the truth or falsehood of conflicting stateuients was established on oath, lie discovered nothing in the present case more than in many others of alleged misconduct of Magistrates, , hit demanded or warranted extraordinary inierferenue, lie believed those men to be innocent, and he did so with iut having the honour of their acquaintance further than meeting them in that House. From his official experience, lie could see much in the disturbed state of the country chat might countenance the adoption of ," measures of snore than ordinary precaution. Pl a ci ng hi mse lf in ti:e t c o ha b r e ac a te7 . 7 ,if a grand juryman, and b e li e vin g these i t e o r" t a heir ogether guiltless of the proceeding n s ''' o f duty, ac eb cecie ' to ' he could conslitetAly v.-ith a se.e heir wishes for a new trial. „, e ly that it should go forth ;0 the country that that • IiUNT r:gretted exrese [louse was not prepared t o d o t A a t u rot a the country beli e v e th at justice to its pe titione n r 7o.4 d bCtivecn the Lard there was a" "