The Sun. — London, England, 1821-02-23 00:00:00

Sheriff ought-la called to the Bar of that House. Although -the- Irish • Parliament acted a part almost deserving its annihilation, /et when it heard that a Sheriff had dispersed a County Meeting, they , did call him to their Bar.--,- (Cheers.)--During a late disturbed period, when a great question agitated this country to such a degree, Ireland did not join in any ex pression of feeling upon the question. Some of 16 friends had complained to him that Ire land was tranquil during. that period. She was indeed tranquil, because she. was heart-broken with her own calamities, without bringing others upon herself. He was one who thought that. under all circumstances,. Ireland should express no opinion upon the question which had been. the cause of so much disturbance. Observing this-state of quiescence upon her part, it had been attempted to force upon Ireland the Loyal Addressing System. But, although a blundering nation, she was able to distinguish between his Majesty and his Ministers.—(Hear, hear, hear !) ---He did not charge the. Right Honourable Gen tleman opposite (Mr. Grant) nor the Irish Govern ment with this attempt; but there was a little Party, a petty kind of cabinet, a sort of jive ium in imperio, composed of men, who were inclined to ride over the measures of Go vernment on every occasion.' The Irish were naturally . a loyal people, and loved their Sovereign, It had been said that his Majesty was likely to visit Ireland shortly. If. he did so, there was no doubt_but.th.at he would he received ,with the utmost enthusiasm by that brave and _loyal people. But he was convinced that his _ Majesty would add to the satisfaction of that People, if - when he. was " half seas over," he would consent to 66 throw his Ministers over-. board.”.. —(Loud and continued laughter.)—The non. Member concluded by recommending a par liamentary investigation, which he thought would do more to soothe and satisfy Ireland, than any other course which could be pursued. - Mr. ELLIS (Member for Dublin) bad been Present at the Meeting at Kihnainham, and he had received a letter on the subject from the She , riff,.who was entirely unknown to him,. He-should be shrinking from his.duty if he did not produce the information of which he was thus possessed, ..for the consideration and guidance of the House. He would. not impute wrong intentions to the in !dividuals who made the statement which the Peti tion contained ; but he would say that all its con : tents were coloured and overcharged, and some 0 f- the facts to which it spoke wholly unfound , ea. The Honourable Member then proceeded to eulogize the private character of the Noble mover and his family connections. ,He must say, however,thatit was matter of suspicion to him, see ' •irig as he did, the contentiof the petition so over- Charged and heightened beyon.d the truth, that the : Petitioners had selected the Noble Lord to under , . take their cause, when their own Representatives were so capable of advocating it- to their advan _ tage. He agreed in the propriety of what had been done by the Sheriff up to the proposal of -,-the amendment. And although he would con ' •less . that he himself should not.have adopted such a course with regard to that amendment, yet at Vte same time it did not folloW that the course s , laajui.tifiabla..:- -But evert-it it was,.neither the Petitioners, nor any one else, had attributed to the Sheriff any corrupt motives. And because he fti t ad exercised an erroneous ju-dgment,was he to be wagged t to the bar of th a t H ouse, even w i t h out c nsation?—(Hear, h ear hear.)—For he- would ctend, that in all Co ur t s of Law,. it was ne • , i e , s sarY to prove a corrupt motive : and if in vr"ils case no corrupt motive w a s c h arge d, th ere 1 as no accusation.—(Hear, hea r , h ear !)—He lad it-frorn the officer of the guard, that no per ' 1°44 violence was- offered to any one by the mi irtarY• Th e N o bl e Ch a i rman was h an d e d out the Chair.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)—But Ze repeated, no personal violence was offered to t n ,Y.One• The muskets of the soldiers were cer a'nli not loaded ; but whether they, were or ja , o t) he thought,. was of very little consequence: c 4l - the, military h a d b een ca ll e d i n , ex i s ti ng ne cessity must be shewn which demanded such a ti 'P--(Ch eers f rom th e 0 ppo;ition.)—And w he iler th a t necessity existed. in reality or not, ` th ey had the declaration of the Sheriff, that to I ri s mind there w a s no o th er mo d e o f di sc h arg i ng r s duty. He thou g ht that th e C o u r t s o f J us ti ce ~!re th e p roper tr ib unals f or d ec idi ng upon the "its -of this question. He had net suffered a .I; . ° Pular o u t cry to d e l u d e hi m f rom d o i ng a l l i n o ls Power t o give the Gentleman who was ac ti}id an opportunity of exculpating himself from • li,roputations that had been cast upon-him. :a c 7 41.. ..r. NEWPORT- thought that it would be an aggravation towards every Freeholder in , t i l 'arid for the House to refuse an. inquiry into e c ircumstances- of this case. It was, in his vi ew t o b of the subject, a great public grievance, fit (.1 04 e inquired into, and no where could it be so properly as in the Commons House of Sh er !,Tnent. They hail heard Complaints against ~,i e England, and the House had discussed • to I...„Conduct ; but that.conduct had been nothing e, Q at-was complained of in the Petition. He ~4 r 4 til t elided th at w h en t h e Sheriff left the Meeting A the Pe er o f t h e R ea l m h a d ta k en t h e Ch a i r, Et Sheriff had no control over that meeting what ver h, By what right had he dispersed it? Did A v . read the Riot Act ?—(Hear, hear, hear.)- 7 - Ithout the Riot Act having been read, he con ile_Nied t hat no power had the ri g ht- of disp ers i ug ,"„rms. ee ting constituted as. th a t was . Th e Petition ai,,,had a ri g ht t o come to that (louse for redress; f~ d Surely that House would not tell them to go -Vre rdress t o a C ourt o f L aw. It did not become House to entrust the discussion of so sacred a 11- 14 Es that of petitioning, to. the jurisdiction of Courts of Law. • If the llouse did so, he 'e4red the people of Ireland wo , ild have but too ` muc hreason to reg re t th e loss,of their legal pro ors in the. destruction of their own Parlia loent. Mr. D. BRoWNE opposed the motion, and eu logized the late tranquillity and loyalty of the Irish people. Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT said, that when, he gave his vote in favour of the restrictive measures of last Session, he did so because he conceived• them necssary as temporary expedient s , b u t by nO t eatts jutifiable principle. lie had:conceivi:d that the unfortunate events at Manchester caused partly by the imprudence of the Magistrates ant partly by accident, were kept in discussion for no other - purpose. than that of irritating the public feeling.---(llear, hear, hear !)—He had listened with great attention, as he always did, to the ar guments of the Right Hon. Secretary for Ire land, but every thing which had been advanced by that Right lion. Member cos►vinced him of the prOpriety of appointing a Committee of In quiry on the present question. He thought it, was the bounden duty of the Government to chew that those restrictive measures had not been abused ; and he should therefore be sorry if the Government were to throw any obstacle in the way of inquiry ; for he was persuaded that In quiry alone eteti satisfy the country, or those who contr*uted to form the majority by which the restrictive measures in question had been carried. Mr.. BATHURST said, he thought he could satisfy the Hon. Bart. that there was no connec tion between the restrictive measures he alluded to, end the question now before the HouSe; and that a support,of those measures did not neces sarily call for a support of this motion for a Com mittee. The question was not upon the conduct of the Sheriff, 'but upon the tribunal by which that conduct should be examined. It was not that the-Sheriff was answerable to the law; but whe ther that House. should overleap the law in . tak ing upon itself to try all the questions raised by the. Petition.. rf the state cents' , in the. Petition were true, enough had been shown to sustain pro ceedings against the Sheriff . at- law. With re spect to the degree of violence which had been offered to- the Noble Chairman, it was clear that the degree of violence was perfectly immate rial in a legal-point of view. The slightest force would be sufficient upon which to maintain an action or an indictment. The punishment of the Sheriff could be of little utility with the view to his fu ture conduct; for he was now out of office, and the object, therefore, could only be to prevent simi lar conduct in future Sheriffs.—(Hear, hear! from the Opposition.)—But if separate actions could be sustained against_ the late Sheriff, at the snit of every individual injured, the object in the way of example would be fully accomplished.— (Hear, hear ! from the Treasury Benches.)— And it would not be denied, that from the ad vantages possessed by the Courts of Law in the modes of inquiry, they had better means of ascer taining the truth than those of the House. With regard to the case mentioned by the Right lion. Member for Kerry. (Mr.. M. Fitzgerald) it was not a little singular that, on examining the J ournals of the Irish Hr use ,of Commons on that occasion, it wOuld . be found that that House had resolved the condttet of the Sheriff, and the Military Offi cer who acted with hiM, to be praiseworthy, cal culated to secure the_ public peace ; and to entitle them to the-thanks of the House.—(Cheers.) — (The lion. Member here read the Resolution, which was to the effect he had stated.)—lt was not,. be believed, improbable that .the Right Hon. Member opposite had. himself Concurred in t`hat Resolution.--(Cheers)—With reference, Nowever, to the present Petition, he should ob serve that he pronounced no opinion upon the Meeting alluded, to in the .Retition. , The question was highly iinporttint, and was - fit for the consideration of. those tvho could legally inquire into it. Indeed, it was intimated to him by his Right Honourable Friend the Secre tary of Ireland, that legal proceedings were now in progress. It might therefore happen. that upon the result of a committee, the Sheriff might be acquitted, and yet be afterwards - convicted .by the Courts of Law. This alone rendered it clear 'that the punishment. of the, Courts of Common Lawwoulil have the intended salutary effect ; and assuming that this House,. and the Courts of Law, possessed concurrent Ju risdiction on the question, it would be more pro per for the House not. to interfere. More sit ting down, he would first observe, '(with refer ence to the calling in of the military at the meet ing in question,) that the military was thenrd 7 - dina.ry Gaol Guard of Ireland, to which the Sheriff would, therefore, under the circumstances, very naturally resort. Mr. MallatcE Frrzartteen explained. He alluded to the King's Counts , 'Meeting, to shew that a parliamentary inquiry had followed: Mr. BATHURST also explained. Mr. J. P. GRANT said, there was now a grave case before the House which . called for Parlia mentary investigation. It appeared to him that all the arguments of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and of those who had pursued the same line of observation,proved this . , if they proved any thing- 7 - that there was no case where private individuals, having remedy - at law, ought to 'be allowed to come for redress to that House. If that were indeed the, case; he wondered why they sat at all as a House ..t l‘rliament—(Hear I)—because he always u iderstood that their fiat and most solemn d Ity wss to'protect the - rikicts of the people, and not to leave thow rights in grave and important cases, particularly cases connected with the rights of petition, to the vindicationof Courts of Law still less to the protection. of -individuals, who might be prevented by - a thousand_ circumstances from instituting proceeditCgs at law. Mr..Eeets read a passage from the Petition, to show that the allegations contained in it were different from the account he and others gave 'of the transaction. Mr. MARTIN, of Galway, considered the pre sent subject not only as not desirable for the consideration of a Committee, but it ought not to occupy the attention ofl the House. A legal remedy could be obtained far the, injury, and that too without the interference or - the order of time Ifouse. If the parties injured were unable from poverty to obtain redress, the _House might order legal proceedings ; but the .Noble Chair man of the , meeting (Lord Cloncurry) was not only one of the millionaires_ of the county, but was.su pported_ by his lawyers, .M . r. O'Byrne and Mr. O'Connor.—(A laugh.) , —He Thought, be sides, that. the house ought not to prejudge the proceedings, for it could not he doubted that the opinion of the House would have a,strong ten deacy *to prejudge the accpsed ;•incleee!, iLwould 'be- like a -,Barl ' 3-ariat :throwdug his sword into ti e • scale, anti he hoped the Hotise . w3Ula not exer ciseits sword in this manner-.--(Laughter.). , Mr. PEEL, in voting against the Dre3ent motion, wished to guard against any possible unisconstrtic-. elm), for he certainly could not express any ap probation of the conduct of the Sheriff in the introduction of the military. Such an approba tion indeed would poittradict the,principles upon which he had nuifdrmly acted when h e held an official - situation in Ireland. Ile had been ac cused of extreme severity in the measures Which. he adopted at that time, but .he thought it better to put down the systeLn of illicit distillation by. strong and coercive laws, and to discourage the constar,t interposition of the military. He re-. 1 gretted that recourse had been had to the mi litary on this occasion. A local inquiry hito the circumstances would perhaps have been the less objectionable course ; but even then the benefit arising from . such an inquiry would have been More than balanced by the inconvenience of any interference on the part of the Government with the functions of the execu tive officer.—ln his opinion ,it would be much better to leave the question to the decision of a Court of Law ; not that it might not ;:e properly investigated by the 'louse of Commons, but, as he conceived, not so advantageously as by the le- . gal tribunals. The more the lion. Baronet and other-Hon. Members established the illegality of, the proceedings at Kilmainharn,. the more they convinced him that the matter ought to be submit ted.to a Court. of Laov ;_and ,w,ith respect to the ob serve dons. which had fallen from an.llon. Gent. as to the probable compoSition of. the Grand Jury before whom a bill of Indictment must be preferred, he (Mr. Peel) thought it woull be ex tremely bad policy on the part of the House of Comnionslo discountenance that 'valuable insti tution, the Trial by Jury, by shelving- that they supposed it possible that any such injustice Could be done as that alluded to by the lion. Gentle man. Whether on the general or on the particu lar principle, therefore, he must oppose •the mo tion of the Noble Lord. Mr. C. GRANT explained. S:r J. MactityroSx_ said this was not a local question, for it affected the interests of the whole country. It was respecting a right, the violation of which had hurled a family from the English Tfuole. It had been argued: by the other side, and h . . admitted the force of the argument, that it wo ild have been improper to dismiks the She-: riff from his Office without Judicial inquiry.— But, if the argument was just as applied to a Sher:ff, where had been the tenderness shewn to one of the most respectable Noblemen' in the country, who had been dismissed from an eminent office in the coarsest and rudest manner, with Out hearing him in his defence ? (Cheers from the Opposition.)---The case, he contended, was a case of constitutional right ; ,and it would not affect the jnrisdiction of that House, though every individual ,who had been injured could obtain his individual remedy at law. He denied, however, that there was a legal remedy at law for any injury occasioned by the Sheriff's conduct. The Sheritf, , it seemed, had originally spoken in a very- moderae tone of voice; but when.. he . called for the police, the . Hall resounded... , -lie -whispare.,4 questiew, xnd roared out menaces. For this conduct there could be no remedy at law. No one had ever read of the duty Of a Sheriff and 'President of a Cotiaty Meeting. Such a duty was no part of the Common or of- the Statute Law. It al) . - peared too, that he threatened to put down the peaceable Freeholders by the military.— _(c That is denieti,' was . observed by several Members on the Treasury Bench.)—lt, certainly was in the Petition.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.)—Take it, however, as denied ; mud it then affords a stronger argument for inquiry— (Cheers from the Opposition-Members.)—lt was undeniable that no action - whatever could be maintained against the Sheriff without proving express malice. The question in a Court of Law would he not whether the Sheriff had exercised his discretionary power with prop r iety ; but whe ther he had that discretionary power at aIL He re peated that no remedy could be obtained at law uithaat proof of express malice; and this circnua staacc alone formed a sufficient ground for the inter ference of that House. lie should not ground the vote he intended to give that'evening upon any consideration which could be deemed a reflection on the Grand Jury or the 'Petty Juries of Dublin: Ile merely grounded it on the general principles • e had laid dowth Whether there were means or not of private redress, his opinion would not be changed. Be could not consider that a satisfac tory reason for the , House of Commons not enteic 'ng into inquiry on a public qUestion. Mr, SRAw was desirouS of 'saying a feiv words on the subject, as. one • who (vas - present at the Meetiug in question. From his knowledge of the High Shertf of Dublin, acquired by Meeting him upon Grand J uries, and on other occasions, he felt confident that his contact' on the . day of the Meeting at.Kilmainham did not proceed from any corrupt motives. He was far, however,from thinking that he had u6t used very; indiscreet measures on that occasion ; And if there were no other way of _calling him to account for that con duct, he would certainly vote for the Committee. But as he was certain that the matter was open tn the courts of law,; and he assured the House there was a general opinion in Ireland that legal proceedings were likely to be adopted, he thought it would be a great hardship upon the High Sheriff to bring him to the liar of that House. He thought such a step would also, have the effect of prejudging the case. Lord CASTLEREAGH assured the House that the few observations he was about to make would not be founded on, the merits : of the,charge : made against the High Sheriff of Dublin. He entirely concurred with his Hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Shaw) in the sentiluents-he.hadexpressed on the subject." 'He regretted -the circumstance of mili tary force.having been used.; but his opinion wai grounded on what he thought it most prudent and wise for the House to do. He was not at all surprised at the advice given by the Hon.and, Learned Gentleman (Sir J. Mackintosh); for it wasApite:consistent-with:the able argument 'he had indulged House with, in erderto shew that an inquiry :ought .to be instituted - into The proceedings which had taten place at Man chester:. The Hon. and _Learned Geuileitian would, he hoped, forgiVe him, for obserVing- that he had in the speech that he had just delivered, so closely followed the line Of afgument he had Pursued on that occasion; in which he failed to convince the House, that he had not even whit- . ted the topic of Lord Fitzwilliaufs dismissal. For his own part, he . confessed he could - not see wllat_ comparison could be made betwixt _a- Lord Lieutenant of a. Conilly and a High Sheriff, in respect of their connection with the Government: He had never heard that the High Sheriff of a County was a confidential officer of the Government, - or that the s ame de gref. of confidence 'should exisLbetween such an -appointment and the existing Govermnent, as in the appointment of a Lord Lieutenant. In fol , lowing up his former speech the Hon. and Learn ed Gent. ought not to have omitted to sinew that 'thy two cases were - precisely similar; and as he was unsuccessful in his. attempt to persuade the ,HouS - e to institute a Parliamentary inquiry into the Manchester transactions, the same fate ought to attend his attempt on the present occasion.— In the Manchester case the Magistrates called in the Military, and certainly they were em ployed under more diSastrous circumstances than in the present case. Therefore if the House did not think fit to institute ail inquiry on that occa sion, by parity of reasoning it could not do so now. The Hon. and Learned Gentleurian had not attempted to show that the parties aggrieved had not the means of pursuing their complaints in the Courts of Law ; and it followed therefore, that he would have the House go into the inves tigation of every complaint made against every Magistrate in the kingdom, whatever the offence charged, and by whomsoever. Sir J. MACKINTOSH.—h every case affecting the Constitutional rights of the subject. _ _ _ . Lord CASTLE4EACTIL—That be di:!. not think would much narrow the scope of their Parlia mentary duties—(llear, hear')—lle (Loral Ca's tlerengh). was the last man in the House who would wish to circumscribe the Constitutiona functions of that House ; but he really did not think that this was a proper case for Parliamen tary inquiry. In this opinion the course of Par liamentary practice bore him out. An Hon.Gen tletnan on the third bench opposite quoted an in stance of such inquiry from the time of Charles the Second; when an Hon. and Learned Gent, on the floor said he did not think those times the hap- piest that could be-quoted from. and protested against any precedent drawn from such a source being acted upon in the present day. And with this exception in the Reign of Charles H. there was not a single inquicy 9f this description on the annals of Parliament. He could not admit the jus tice of the reasoning that because the Irish Par liament had adopted a certain course under cer tain circumstances, the United Parliament was bound to act in a similar manner. But the cases were entirely different. Ilad the Commanding Officer at Kilmainham c,lled out a large military force to overawe. the Sheriff, then as such an act would appear to he authorized by the Crown against the Constituted Authorities, it would very properly excite the jealousy of. Parlia ment._ Here, however, ..the case was-1 , 640y different, for the military were called out by the Magistrate, and acted under his autho rity and directiou, and the only question was, whether he was justified under the circum stances of the case in using military force. In the case alluded to.; as having undergone _ _ investigation in the Irish Parliament, a large military force was drawn up in the neighbourhood, with cannon pointed, to overawe the meeting.— The question for the decision of the House was, whether the question could be better investigated in thßt House than in a Court of Law. In this point of view, be thought nothing could be more unsatisfactory than the proposition of the Noble Lord whose motion was before the House. Ac cording to his proposition, all the witnesses, which it was obvious could not be few in number, were to be transported to that House. Even if they were prepared to transfer all their angry feeling from Dublin to this country, he asked the House how it would be possible to send all that up stairs ? It was plain that if the House went into the matter at allOt Must be at the bar, turd not in a Select. Committee. The utmost that could he done by a CoMmittee up stairs would be to perform th-e part of a Grand Jury, and report to that House if' there were grounds to go into an inquiry. He submitted then to the House, whether it would be prudent to adopt such a course in a case like the present, which was little less complex than that of Manchester, which in spite of •the Hon. and -Learned Gentleman op-• posite (Sir J. Mackintosh); the House had re fused to go into ? Looking evert at the points of the case itself, be did not think it was one which the House would feel disposed to charge itself with. Great difficulty would be felt i❑ determin ingwhetlker the Meeting, after the departure of the Sheriff, was a t legal one or not. Neither. could he believe that the Hon. and Learned Gent. would be able to persuade the Mouse to go into all the details of the Meeting, before and afterthe Sheriff left the Chair. The House must consider, , that by establishing •such' a preCedent they pledged thernielves .to become the future umpires, to see fair play at every public meeting in the. • United Kingdom. He apprehended that some of the largest legal questions that' ever had been in volved in any matter, would arise .out of an inves tigation of this subject,--Such as it would, not be -likely they would ever •be• able to settle. First, there would be the question.of wh?thor it was a legal or illegal meeting after the. Sheriff left the Chair. Sir J. MACKINTOSH said he had particularly excluded that question. Lord.,CAsTt.crtslott observed, in continuation, that it was „particularly .conveniet.t for the Hon. and. Learned Gentleman to exclude the discus sion of every topic not likely to• fall in with his view of .the : case, and perhaps• he meant to go ,on with' that system. 11,e would permit him ,(Lord Castlereagh), however, to say; that he could not : consistently with his duties as a Member of the • Legislation vote for.. his Bill of Exchtsions'--1-(A _was .sure the House • would see the riannifold -difficulties into *Licit these legal questionS vvould involve thew, if they were to enter upon such an in qUiry-as th - e'rziotfon'brthe . Atob Lori would pledge thetn• to. - He -did'uot'*igh 'fa-give ant opinion on these points himself ; bu-t : was sure the House must Perctiite the obstai.leS"they must overcome before they conlftforin a d - ciOott on such topics satisfactory to thernseive;rt4 ict upon. The parties aggrieved the - tuna's:oi bringing the case to ati issue in a 'Cottrt• of sits,;t for if Lord Cloncurry-was forcibly removed from the Chair, he might have his remedy .in an action or an indictment Etgainst the Sheriff 'kJ authorised that removal—and in that Vtit;t: the whole question ;night be put in issue; It was truly, surprising and curious to observe how this- love o Parliamentary inquiry had zrown up of late. it was no later, he believed, than last night tha.t . 'ke had heard it stated in that House that it was trfit to he trusted with any grave-matter wh'atovec- ff ,.- that it was not worthy the confidence of the n tion.--(1/ ear !)—The country, and Hon. 0-ectle tnen opposite, were naturally attached to tit?... Trial by Jury, and the laws of the country, in contradistinction to the - privileges of that House.' How came it then, he should like to know, that when the.y had all the tribunals of a Copstita tional nature open, they should prefer the 1 - fon:>-3 of CoMmons? Was it because it was wished t propagate an opinion abroad, that- the House o Commons, in referring the matter to the Courts of Law, were thereby guilty of another abdicutipa of their duty ? He hoped the House would act in thii case as they had done in the MaticheSter case--,-re • fer the - matter to the Courts of Law. And . if he did not see that the parties availed thernselves of this remedy, he Should come to the' Same Conch!. sion he had arrived at in that ease, viz.—that either the cOMplairiants had ho case, or that they preferred to leaVe unredressed their own w ro n gs , in order to have an exti'atopic of inflammation. in that House and the Country.—(Hear, hear.) He would offer 'no opinion in condernnaticn otherwise, of the High Sheriff. He merely sti rnitted that the House could not-go into the quiry. consistently with the justice of the case, or with the practice of the Constitution ; and if they established a precedent for charging tham selves with a duty which the Courts of Lavr could better discharge, they might at ono fay down all their ordinary functions in favour of the. new and ample field which would then be opened to them.—(Hear, hear, with cries of " Ques tion!")_ Mr. M. FITZGERALD explained. ' Lord BECTIVE said a few words in explanation of what had been insinuated by an Hen.Alember, to the effect that the Loyal Addfesses fi:om Ire land had all .been set on foot in, conseqUence of hints from the Ministers. He belted to assura the Hon. Gentleman, that the Loyal Address to the Crown from the County of Meath 'was not 1,1 that predicament, and had not proceeded fro7n any hint froth any Member of. his Majesty's Go. vernment, or person connected with them.— (Hear, hear !)—With respect to the qufistipn be fore the House, he should vote against the mo tion, as he thought the High Sheriff of IJubl;4l had acted with judgment and propriety.. Mr. CILEEVEY said, that eight years after the light of lietitionin.! had .. ;been - interrupted trt military power, the people of did justice on the author of it, James the Second, and if ever such an attempt were made - ag.-0.171 he hoped the- same salutary-lesson. wo nld .be re peated. Mr. WYNNE spoke against the motion. - Itle thought there were grounds for a criminal infor ,mation against the Sheriff of Lublin in tlie3i g's Bench, but he . could-not agree to that Ho* terferincr in the matter. The only result of as inquiry by that House would be, an ,Address his.Mesty, praying him to order the 4ttot:ney - General to institute proceedings in . the _King.:s Bench against the parties. It was itlaiii,Jher. - fore, that to agree to the motion of the Lord would be an useless waste of the time,of tta4 House. Lord J. RUSSELL shortly replied, and after % few words in explanation from Mr. C: COLAN 7, and Mr. WYNNE, the House divided ; he - nu- bers were— For the Motion . Against it Majority 1 .2 - i Lord BINNING obtained lave to - bring 'in a Bi 1 1 to appropriate the unclaitned prize-moliey uf in dividuals in the East India Service. STANDING ORDERS. Mr. W. W INNE moved " That the House do not accede to any motion fol. an Address to the Crown, praying that' any money he issued,; or any expenee incurred, .unless in' a Commiktee of the whole House, and that the-same be entered OTi the Journals as a Standing Order." Mr. CREEVEY gave his support to thellesol4- tion ; be saw that the House had, late lasltAii,-,Nt, and when there were only perhaps three- Nie-n -bers and the Clerks present,--(A laugh D . -Lye:ed. a sum of 50,000/. as a remuneration to Clei•ks is Ireland. After a few words from Lord C.1. - 14 - rt..Eht: tc.lt and Sir J..NEweokT, the motion was cartle.2.. On the motion of Mr. W. WY NNE,, a Select Committee was appointed, to consider of the best means of introducin,g Public Bills into that House. General HART presented a Petition frorn. the Gentlemen, Clergy; and Freeholders or the County of Donegal, prayi ng th e H ouse to recon sider the Act of last Session for the Preventit,n of Illicit Distillation. •After alew words from the Chancellor 'of •,tbe Exchequer, Mr. D. Browne, Ceueral nart, and Mr. Rice, the Petition was ordered tobe TIIE PATEN RIGHT% BILL Mr. CurtwEN moved th.e second reading:of the Patent Rights Bill. - -.• The AtTOZNEY-GENERAL OppOSCOfrethotion, and moved, as an anietOment, that the bo read a second time on this day six months. After a few words from Mr. Hume, man, Mr. Curwen, and Mr: J. P. ,Grant, the. was withdrawn, with lit understanding thit would be introduced different forna4 the course of the Session. On the motion of. Mr. KENNEDY the Scots