The Sun. — London, England, 1832-06-21 00:00:00

fck as iodiguant at these attacks as any man could—they were most atrocious in themselves, and most deeply to be regretted from the time at which they were made. Sir C. WETHERELL did not think the topic intro duced by his Right Hon. Friend was at all irrelevant to,. the subject, to the time, or to the circumstances. His laight Hon. Friend had in.roduced no matter of political i,(nsion ; he knew no political question that he had ap.' proached by a hundred l e agues.—(Cheers.) All he said'• was, that the introduction of the doctrine—that the use of physical force was justifiable—was calculated to pro duce the utmost mischief in the minds of ignorant and deluded p e rsons.—(Hear.) The Right Hon. Secretary, however, had endeavoured to fix another meaning on what he (Sir R Peel) had said, and he censured him for it four times. The Right Hon. Gentleman was a clever de hater—so he was acknowledged to be on all sides ; and ac en, ding to Selwyn, the great object of a clever debater was, to make his opponent say what be never said, or never intended to say, and then to get his friends round him to cheer him.—(Hear, hear.) Thus the Right lion. Secretary attributed to his Right Hon. Friend the introduction of a political question which be had never in troduced, and then he was most punctually and admirably cheered by Lis able friends around him.—(Cheers and laughter.) Ia conclusion, he expressed his entire con currence in all that bad fallen from his Right Hon. Friend. Sir F. BURDETT felt so strongly on this subject, that be was unwilling to speak lest he might fall into the same error he would deprecate in others. He had heard of these attacks with great regret. It was most deeply to lamented that any body could he found in England to com mit an outrage upon the person of the Duke of Welling ton, whose fame and whose reputation were a part of the public property, and whose name our children's children, to the most remote generations, could never hear without an overflowing feeling of gratitude. It was shocking, therefore, to think that there should now be persons in ex istence, at a period so little remote from the glorious ac tions and distinguished services of that great man, who could be guilty of such an abominable display of the vulgar malignity proper to their base natures.—(Loud cheers.) He should have thought that there was not a man in England capable of exhibiting himself in so horrible a part.—(Continued cheering.) And with respect to the wretched :can who bad assaulted his Majesty, if he were not absolutely a maniac, he must certainly be a strangely excited individual. But this obnoxious conduct of his was no shame to the country ; because any country might have the misfortune to give birth to such a person.— (Hear.) The Learned Gentleman opposite had, he thought read a lecture rather to the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) than to the Right Hon. Secretary (Mr. Stanley); and he concurred with the latter in regretting that the in dignation which they all felt should be mixed up with any extraneous matter. He protested not only against the attacks alluded to, hut against others of an even more atrocious description, which had not been alluded to, and which must excite disgust unutterable in every true hearted Englishman—in every manly mind; he alluded to the vile, the loathsome, the execrable attacks upon one whose sex, not less than her illustrious station, ought to have been her protection—(Loud cheering)—the attacks upon an illustrious lady—(Continued cheering)—who has teen brought forward in a way most deeply disgraceful to Englishmen, and which gave him doubt and apprehension where this incipient spirit of baseness might lead to.— (Cheers.) Ile had now finished. He was anxious to stop at the point where all must concur. His only feel ing of apprehension with respect to the motion was, lest they might appear to give too much importance to the people, and, in the eyes of foreign Powers, to an event which was only important from its reference to the highest quarter in the realm.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. CROKER had heard the lion. Baronet with great pleasure. He was particularly glad that such such ob servations had fallen from him, who had stood up, in the first instance, to complain of his Right lion. Friend hav ing unnecessarily introduced political subjects. But, in fact, the Hon. Baronet had gone much further than his Right lion. Friend. Hid hisßigbt Hon. Friend thought it necessary to allude to the brutal attacks that had been made by the Press on a personage, whose sex, if not her station, ought to have protected her ? No. He had alluded ge nerally to the state of excitement which prevailed, and he left each man to draw his own conclusions from the par ticular atrocities which might have struck his mind.— (Hear, hear.) But the Hon. Baronet followed this up, and alluded, as he had justly observed, to attacks still more atrocious than those before adverted to.—( Hear, hear.) lie (Mr. Croker) said that attack on his Majesty was the woik of an individual maniac. —(Hear, hear.) He be lieved the wretch was road. At least, if it be mania to be one falsely reasoning from false premises he was as mad as if he had just escaped from Bedlam. But did this con duct of his arise entirely from madness? Was he not pur suing the same course with others? Was this the first insult which had been offered to his Majesty? Had he (Mr. Croker) not read in the papers of the day, that his Majesty, in corning to town from his palace at Windsor, had been obliged to change the road by which his grand father, his father, and his brother bad been wont to travel ? And was it possible not to connect this with the other insult to his Majesty ? He did not mean to connect rhea personally—he did not mean to connect the two seta of people. He oily spoke as to the preva lence of the excitement—an excitement which, he main tained, it was the duty of all men, and especially of his Majesty's Ministers, to endeavour to allay—(Cheers)—and certainly not one word would he say which was calculated to increase it. There was another thing to which he wished to call the attention of his Majesty's Ministers—he meant those detestable publications which were circulated in the streets, and forced gratuitously into the hands of passengers, and which excited to outrages on the King and Queen more horrible than that of which they were ,Tout to express their detestation. But this was not all : lie had alau heard that in a theatre of this town—and they all knew the effect of scenic representations on the people, there had been a representation directly tending to bring the King and Queen into odium ; and lest the piece itself should not be sufficiently strong, the pl gave at full length the grossest libels upon the King and Queen.— (Cheers.) He was in possession of one of those play-bills, and he ventured to say a grosser libel never was published. (Hear, hear.) He mentioned this as a warning to the Mi nisters. They might not have heard of this. He hap pened to have received the bill from a man who brought it from the theatre. lie now warned the Ministers. The act of this maniac was to be scouted as the act of a maniac, but it was not to be despised ; fur the nature of those, your political maniacs, was, to be excited by public excite ment. There was no instance in which such persons were not excited, and urged forward by some degree of public commotion, produced by agitation, by the press, and by violent and gross attacks upon the King and Queen and e asier high personages of the realm. Therefore, it was irit irrelevant to connect these matters with the subject before them ; and he hoped the Government would take into their consideration.—(Hear, hoar.) It was not to be endured that these persons should not be visited with the highest penalty of the law, who presumed, for base lucre, to make such gross and atrocious attacks upon the Sovereign and her Majesty, that they might fill their filthy house with the still filthier rabble.—(Loud cheers.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL complimented the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. C.) on having abstained from all political or party allusions. He agreed with him respecting the noxious character of the libels in circulation. The only question was how they were to be put down. He had observed, with great regret, with pain, and with disgust, that the presence of their Majesties in the capital had been accompanied with insult; and particularly had he been affected with indignation at the vile attack directed against a person, illustrious by her rank, and deserving of all respect and regard from the character which she had maintained ever since she reached her present exalted situation. With regard to the libels in the street, he really knew not what course should be pursued. He feared that prosecution would only have the effect of giving them in creased circulation. But as to the performance at the theatre, be had now only heard of it for the first time, and he had no hesitation to soy, that in this case the law of the country ought not to permit such proceedings.— (Cheers.) He was told, however, that the theatre in question was not within the Lord Chamberlain's jurisdic tion. He repeated, that this theatre should be visited with the execution of the law, and that such psrfortnan eea should not be suffered to exist as a disgrace to the British metrop Mr. CROKER said the theatre was an ob , cure one, (inder the jurisdiction of the Surrey Magistrates. He pledged himself that the playbill was as atrocious a libel on the King and Queen as ever was published. Mr. Alderman VENABLES said it was only the low eat rabble who bad attacked the Duke of Wellington in the City. T. DUNCOMBE stated, that the Dramatic Com mittee had had Davidge, the Manager of the Cobourg, be fore them, and that he had stated this Bill was published during his absence from town, and that he had suppressed it on his return ; the play alluded to was Tom Thumb. It was performed in the usual manner, and had not been by any means attractive in consequence of the play-bill. He un derstood, too, from what be considered good authority, that an Illustrious Duke, the object of one of these attacks, had gone in person to this theatre to witness the performance, and had returned perfectly satisfied that Tom Thumb there Was just the same as it was every where else. Mr. HUNT concurred in the motion. It was wrong., after having connived at the great excitement which had ; been produced in the public mind, to talk of paltry little I publications, and pass over that great giant the Times. He should feel that he acted most unworthily if he did not say that the columns of the Times had been filled with articles tending to produce excitement. Had not Gentle men opposite heard of the manner in wish the King and Qeen had been treated in going through Hounslow and Brentford ? Had they not heard of the gross insults which they had received on their visit to the exhibition at Somer set-house ? Yet nothing was said of those matters then. If, therefore, they connived at those matters when they occurred, it was a little too late to express extraordinary astonishment at what had recently happened. Day after day there been published attacks on the King and Queen in the Times. The King was accused of having been led by the Queen, and the most opprobrious epithets were used on the occasion. He should be ashamed of himself when he heard little publications accused of creating excitement, if he did not say that the Times was much more culpable. The Right. Hon. Secretary for Ireland might laugh ; he congratulated him on being able to do so. To him it did not appear to be a laughing matter. He thought it a most dastardly and cowardly act to attack an individual, as the Duke of Wellington had been attacke I, however unpopular he might be. But enough of excitement bad appeared in the Times, without charging smaller publi cations. Did not the Times say it was possible the mob might tear the Duke of Wellington to pieces as they had done De Witt? And was it not too bad to attack little publications for exciting the people, when such articles had appeared in the Times? He very much regretted that such an insult should have been offered to the King, as that which had been offered to him yesterday. But his Majesty had been insulted elsewhere. An individual keeping the turnpike at Hammersmith, had offered his Majesty a gross insult in the presence of the Queen. But who was it that had brought his Majesty into such a state of unpopularity to be thus insulted and hissed ? He hoped they would always be ready to denounce an attack upon an individual, whether that individual was the King or the Duke of Wellington. Such an attack was must dis graceful and cowardly; and he should consider himself as acting in a most dastardly manner if he did not do every thing in his power to reprobate it. Sir E. SUGDEN observed, with reference to the at tack on the Duke of Wellington, that it was made by the lowest of the rabble. Several gentlemen came forward and gave him their strenuous support; and the neater ended in a sort of triumph to his Grace, who was at tended home with the greatest demonstrations of honour and respect. Mr. LAMB, adverting to what had fallen from an Hon. Gentleman opposite on the subject, allowed that there were many publications which had laid themselves per fectly open to prosecution for libel ; but the policy of pro secuting sometimes became a question of difficulty. With respect to the play performed at the Cobourg, there was no alteration in the usual manner of performing it. So soon as the Magistrates at Bow-street heard of the circum stance, they sent for Mr. Davidge, and the piece was stopped. It was but justice, however, to Mr. Davidge to say, that he had expressed his intention of stopping the piece before the interposition of the Magistrates. Mr. CROKER repeated, that it was the commentary in the Bill which was the offence. That cammentary went through the piece scene by scene, and song by song, and pointed out the parts which the writer supposed applicable to the King and Queen ; so that, although the Play might have been performed as usual, yet, by this commentary in the Bill, it was rendered a most atrocious libel. Mr. LAMB said, that of course be could not be under stood as vindicating the occurrence in question ; he hid merely adverted to the nature of it rendering the conside ration of its prosecution a difficult question. The address was then read a second time, and agreed to ; and it wat ordered that the H nose of Lords should be informed of the concurrence of the House of Commons. Lord ALTHORP and the other Members of the Con ference immediately left the House for that purpose. CORONERS' BILL. The House then resumed the consideration of the Coro ners' Bill. Mr. CAMPBELL vindicated himself from the charge of precipitancy in the conduct of the Go ne..al Registration Bill; and observed, that it was a measure in which he had no personal interest, and that he had been induced to in troduce it only in consequence of his conviction that if adopted, it would prove a measure of great public utility. After a short explanation from Sir E. B. StJODEN, and a few words from Lord ALTHORP and Sir C.WETHERELL, the House resolved itself into a Committee on the Coro ners Bill. Mr. HUME thought it was of importance that Coro ners should understand the value of medical evidence, and he should therefore propose that at the end of clause 8, there should be inserted words by which it should be re quired, that before any man should be admitted to be a Coroner, he should produce certificate of having attended two courses of lectures on medical jurisprudence. Lord ALTHORP said that men might he called on to offer themselves for the vacant office of Coroner, who had not anticipated that they should do so, and who, though perfectly fit, from previous education as lawyers, to fill the office, would not be able to produce the certifi cates required by the Hon. Member, and then who was to act as the substitute, until these persons had qualified themselves? Mr. C. WYNN thought it unnecessary that the Coro ner should he a medical man, for that was the object of this motion ; but he was clearly of opinion that it was ab solutely necessary for the Coroner to know the general rules of the law of evidence. Mr. O'CONNELL said, that when a case of a charge of poisoning came h,fore a Coroner's Jury, the Coroner could not properly direct the Jury as to the value of the medical evidence give❑ before them, unless he had re ceived the instruction proposed by the Hon. Member fur Middlesex. He should therefore support the amendment. Mr. STRICKLAND observed that legal knowledge was absolutely necessary for a Coroner, and he believed that the profits of the office were in general much too small to enable them to hope to obtain men to fill it, who in addition to their professional education as law yers, had also obtained a knowledge of medicine. He knew that there was a mistaken notion abroad as to the profits of the office, because there had been a contest for it once or twice; but he believed that those contests pro ceeded from very different causes, and he knew with re spect to one of them—the most expensive that had oc curred—he meant in the county of Stafford—that it was a contest between two political parties who wanted to try their strength, and who gladly adopted the opportunity off red them by the election of a Coroner. The expenses of that contest were defrayed on both sides by these poli tical parties. lle should oppose the amendment. Mr. FRANKLAND LEWIS should also oppose it. He recollected an instance in early life when the greatest inconvenience had occurred, because the Coroner was not acquainted with the law ; and on that occasion the Grand Jury were advised by the Judges then on the Circuit to select a man who knew the rules of evidence, fur that legal knowledge was absolutely necessary fur the situation. Every subsequent event hid only confirmed hint in the justice of that opinion. He thought the emoluments were too small to require medical in addition to legal knowledge in the candidates for it. Mr. SCHONSWAR likewise opposed the amendment, and expressed his belief that it was of the utmost import ance that the Coroner should be acquainted with the law, and be assisted by the evidence of medical men. There could be no objection to that practice, for the expenses of medical men on such occasions were always allowed. Mr. HUME said, with regard to the observations as to the small profits of the office, that when it appeared the emoluments were not sufficient, they might be increased. Medical education, too, might easily be had at the King's College, or the London University. Mr. BERNAL observed, that one of the effects of this clause would be, that Coroners must absolutely be medi cal men. This must especially be the case in poor coun ties, where young men could serve their articles as at torney's clerks, without coming to London, and might fit themselves in that manner to be attorneys and Coroners, but they could only obtain this medical knowledge by coming to London—an expense that would of course never be incurred merely fur the chance of afterwards being Co roners. After a few words from Sir R. Inglis, Sir C. Forbes, Mr. Hunt, Mr. Crampton, Sir C. Wetherell, Mr. O'Con n,ll, Mr. Courtenay, and Mr. Crippe, the Comenittee divided. For the Amendment ll Against it BO Majority -60 Mr. WARBURTON then proposed an amendment, in order to provide that all Coroners' Inquests should be held in open Court, to which the public might obtain ad mission. Mr. CRIPPS objected to the motion, on the ground that inquest , were most frequently held in private houses, from which the public could of right be excluded by the proprietors. Sir. O'CONNELL said, that if there were any obstacle opposed to the publicity of an inquest, on the ground that it was to be held in a private house, the coroner could ad journ to any other place. But now he had seen something of private inquests, be could understand why so many per sons were desirous of becoming coroners.—(Hear, hear.) Having the power to exclude witnesses and reporters, they might expect to turn the office to account. To put such a caw al bad been stated by the Hon. Member for Preston, he would suppose that a man had died in gaol—had been murdered in gaol—and such things had sometimes happened—(Hear)—what secutity was th , re that the coroner's inquiry would lead to a full and fair investigation, if the inquest could be held in secret ? In all such cases, the only protection which the people could have was by the free admission of the reporters for the public press. He looked upon the impunity of those who were concerned in the celebrated murders at Manchester to have been secured by the im perfection of the law respecting the Coroner's Court. The highest Courts of Law were open, although in them there was some guarantee for justice, in the education, experi c±nce, previous character, and responsibility of the Judge; whereas, neither experience, nor education, nor any quali fication whatever was required in the coroner, who had the power of deciding absolutely and in secret.—(Hear.) Mr. STRICKLAND looked upon the motion as one of the greater importance. He thought that publicity was moat desirable in all cases of judicial inquiry, and especially in those inquiries which, from their nature, were the most likely, when conducted in secret, to give rise to painful suspicions in the public mind. He should therefore sup port the motion. Sir R. INGLIS would not consent to the coroner's being deprived of the power of protecting persons who were accused upon insufficient grounds from the injury which an ex-parte publication might occasion. In extreme cases the Coroner ought to have the power to exclude all who were not concerned in the inquiry. Mr. O'CONNELL said that it was only by a Judge made law of no longer existence than the last 16 years. Mr. HUNT would not only support the motion, but he had heard enough from the opponents of the motion, to re mind him of the expediency of inserting in the Bill a clause to prevent the Coroner for Westminster from dis missing the Jury, which he might have called in the first instance, and summoning another, in a case where a murder had been committed in the Palace of St. James's. --(Hear, hear.) For he knew of a case of that kind, out of which had grown a prosecution for libel, which he believed was now before one of the Criminal Courts. A man was murdered in the Palace of St. James, and the Coroner having called one Jury, dismissed it, and MM. taloned another.—(Hear, hear.) The consequence was, that the bloody and mysterious transaction had never un dergone a thorough investigation, for the person who was principally implicated had never been examined.—(Hear, hear.) He would appeal to the Chancellor of the Ex chequer, whether (in the present times, when so much was said by him and his friends of their regard for the liberties of the people) that Noble Lord would con tinue to the Coroners the power of secret inquisition, which they claimed, and which was little better than a restoration of the Star-chamber ?—( Hear, hear.) Sir CHARLES WETHERELL complained that the Hon. Member for Preston had made a most uncalled-for accusation against the conduct of the Coroner and Jury who had investigated the case to which that Hon. Member had alluded in a way which no one could misunderstand. The Hon. Member had thought fit to state that the pers, n principally concerned in a murder committed within the precincts of St. Jones's Palace had not been examined on the inquest. But the Hon. Member must be aware that the principal person—that is, the man who was guilty of the murder—had killed himself, and could not be examined by the Coroner, otherwise than by the inspection of the murdered body ; and from that and the other testimony, it was plain that the man had cut his own throat. The Hon. Member for Preston must have read the libel to which he had alluded, and he ought not to have made him self a copyist of so scandalous a libel.—(Hear). Mr. HUNT had read the libel as it appeared in the re ports of the Hon. and Learned Member's speeches.— (Hear, and a laugh). Sir C. WETHERELL asked what then was it that the Hon. Member for Preston had dared to say ? Mr. HUNT—Hear, hear.—(Laughter). Sir C. WETHERELL would a,k again, what was it that the Hon. Member for Preston had dared to state, in allusion to the case in which the name of a certain Illus trious Person was implicated ? Mr. HUNT—Hear, hear, hear.—(Laughter). Sir C. WETHERELL would tell the Hon. Member that his statement was not true,—(Hear, hear.) It was not true that the Jury first summoned had been dismissed, in order that another might be summoned. The law was, that if a murder should be committed in the Palace, the Jury must be taken from the King's domestics. But in the case to which the Hon. Member for Preston had thought proper to refer, a Jury of persons unconnected with the Palace was summoned, in order to preclude the ;eat suspicion of partiality.—(Hear, hear.) Having given that answer to the statement of the Hon. Member for Preston, he must say that it was the bounden duty of that Gentleman, as a Member of the House, to declare that what he stated was inaccurate and untrue, and that he (Mr. Hunt) had heen misinformed; for he (Sir C. Wetherell) could assure the Hon. Member that it was " physically demonstrated" upon the inquest to have been impossible that the man had died by any other than his own hand. " Face to face with Mr. Place"—(Laugh ter)—the Foreman of that Jury—the lion. Member for Preston would not have dared to state what he had Mac. curately and untruly stated in the House of Commons.-- (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Preston, were he in the presence of any one of those Jurors, would rather be in any other breeches than his own.—(Much laughter.) The statement of the Hon. Member for Preston was so audaciou., that no other man in the House would dare to make it. Mr. HUNT—Perhaps not. Sir C. WETHERELL continued—No other Member would have the temerity.—(Hear, hear, from Mr. Hunt.) There was no more reason to complain of the privacy of the Coroner's inquest, than there would be to accuse the Grand Jury of conniving at the impunity of a murderer, because they threw out the bills. In conclusion, he main tained that no reason had been given for altering the pre sent state of the law upon the subject in question. Mr. HUNT, having male no attack upon any Mem ber of that House, had, however, very little difficulty in accounting for the attack which had been made upon him.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member had, no doubt, professional reasons for driving hint to this, that, and the other, which he well knew he could and would do. The Hon. and Learned Member had dared to accuse him of audacity ; but at the same time he (Sir C. Wetherell) had not the audacity to say that the inquest had been satisfactory. The Hon. and Learned Member said that be (Mr. Hunt) had told untruths, but at the same time had shrunk from meeting the most itn , portant fact, which be (Mr. Hunt) had stated, namely, that the principal person, the Duke of Cumberland, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's client, had not been exa. mined.—(Hear.) He would therefore still say that the mysterious and bloody case had not yet been investigated. He hoped that it would.—(Hear, bear.) The Hon. and Learned Member had dared to say, in terms not the most refined, that he (Mr. Hunt) would not dare to say in the presence of Mr. Francis Place, that the inquest had not been satisfactory. But the fact was, that twenty years ago, four days after the murder, he told Mr. Place what were his opinions upon the sub ject. From all that he hail heard from Mrs. Sellis, and from the mother of the murdered men, respecting the ap pearance of the bed upon which Sellis was found lying, the basin full of blood, and the razor (placed upon a bu reau at some distance from the bed), he thought it impos sible that, if all the evidence had been heard, any honest unpacked Jury would have found the verdict which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman so much relied upon. It might be very well for the lion. and Learned Gentleman to way, in that House, that the principal person had cut his throat, but it was well known, that the person prin cipally accused in the opinion of the public had not been examined.—(Cries of Hear, and Question.) The person most implicated was still living.—(Loud cries of Hear, and Question.) Mr. CRIPPS said, that the policeman who first en tered the room acknowledged to him that he had, in a moment of agitation, removed the razor from the bed to the bureau. Mr. ADEANE was desirous to put an end to a conver sation which had so little relevancy to the question. He would oppose the amendment, because he thought it in expedient that the preliminary proceedings of such a court as that of the Coroner should be made public without the permission of the Judge. Mr. O'CONNELL contended, that before the Coroner there should be no secrecy whatever. The Grand Jury was at present a secret tribunal, and that formed the best possible reason why the Count of the Coroner should he thrown open. He would take his stand upon the broad principle that every Court of Justice ought to be open to the public. Mr. PORTMAN would support the clause contem plated in the Amendment of the Hon. Member for Brid port, but not on the ground taken by the Hon. and Learned Member for Kerry. Ou the subject of the se crecy of Grand Juries, he had on'y to say, that if Grand Juries ceased to be a close Court he feared that great-r in jury would arise than could be comp e nsated for by any advantage which publicity could insure. Mr. WARBURTON said, that the question of the pub licity of Grand Jury proceedings was not before the House. He should certainly take the sense of the House upon his Amendment. Mr. CRIPPS admitted the great v4lue of publicity, generally speaking, but thought that a discretionary power might safely be vested to the Coroner. Mr. C. W. W. WYNN was also of opinion, that the observance of secrecy, or otherwise, might safely be in trusted to the Coroner. The Committee then divided— For the amendment enjoying publicity Against it 54 Majority —4o On our re-admission, we found Mr. F. LEWIS expressing a strong feeling of surprise that his Majesty's Ministers bad taken no decided part in the discussion of a question of so much importance, and one brought under the consideration of the House at a time when all the institutions of the country were undergoing such extensive and fundamental changes. He really thought it was the duty of the King's Government, pos sessing as they did the means of influencing a majority of that House, to protect the country from such violent and sudden changes as those which the Amendment then agreed to had the effect of producing. Neither did he think it was fair that the Law Officers of the Crown should abstain from delivering an opinion upon a subject of that importance, and one so intimately connected with the administration of justice. He, and those with whom he was in the habit of acting, looked with the most feverish anxiety towards the progress of events; and re garded changes of that and a similar nature with minds full of apprehension ; and they had therefore a right to have their votes guided by the authority and judgment of the Law Officers of the Crown, on a question involving such an important change. The Coroner's Jury was one of the oldest institutions of the country ; and he thought that, when the nature and constitution of that institution were invaded, the Leader of the Ministerial party in that House—the Chief of the Government in that House— should do something more than merely state his own in dividual opinion—(Cheers)—he should assume the re sponsibility of the measure, or oppose it altogether ; for it was one of too much importance to be treated otherwise. Lord ALTHORP was never more surprised in his life than by the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman who bad just addressed the House.--(Cheers.) In the early part of the present discussion he certainty had given an opinion ; but he had done so merely in his in dividual capacity, nor did he feel himself called upon to address the House in any other upon the present occasion. If the Right Hon. Member desired to know the grounds upon which he (Lord Althorp) supported the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bridport, he should state then to be, that he had always been of opinion that all Courts of Justice should be open to the public, and especially that every proceeding should be open to the public which in►olved, or which had any tendency to interfere with the liberty of the subject. After all, it was a mistake to suppose that the present was any great innovation—practically, the Court of the Coroner had always been open, and it was surely not too much to sup port an Act of Parliament which merely went to declare that to be the law which was in perfect conformity with the acknowledged practice. Some cases bad been adverted to in which it was stated that much difficulty and disad. vantage had arisen from the disclosure of the facts ; but in all those cases the facts had been published, and in every one of them the publication proved advantageous. In fact, experience had fully established the truth, that the evil of admitting strangers to these Courts was much less than the evil of their exclusion. Up to the present time the right of their admission was doubtful, but it was now proposed to place it beyond all doubt, and the proposition had certainly received his support in his individual capa city, for he thought that no inconvenience of moment would arise from it, and it might be productive of much advantage. All this he thought himself fully at liberty to do, and he knew not upon what authority it would be inquired of him to make every question of that nature a Government question. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL could not deny that he had remained silent during the present discussion, for having been kept away from the House by accident, and coming in towards the latter end of the conversation, be did not feel himself in a situation, otherwise in the busi • ness of the House, than to give his vote, which he did without the slightest hesitation, convinced as he had pre viously been, that in supporting the amendment, he could not go wrong. He never for a moment doubted that the Court of the Coroner should be an open Court. The oath of the Coroner's Jury binds the Jury to no secrecy, while that of the Grand Juror does ; then the inference which he should draw from that, as a lawyer, was, that the law of England did not authorize a Coroner to exclude the public from his court; and as some uncertainty hung about the matter, he could have no objection to a clause in an Act which went to declare that to be law, which, as a lawyer, he had always held to be law. There was no Court in the country had the right to exclude the public, and why should the Coroner's? Mr. GOULBURN observed that the Noble Lord op posite, as well as the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen, seemed to say, that no proceeding affecting the liberty of the subject ought to be otherwise than public—why, then, did not the Law Officers of the Crown state their opinion, and the grounds upon which it rested, before they went the length of impugning, as the Hun. and Learned Gen tlemen in effect did, the decision of the Judges ? Lord ALTHORP explained. He contended that every Court should be open to the public--not that every pro ceeding before a Magistrate should be made known to all persons. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought that it would not be decorous for him to take a part in their proceed ings, arriving, as he did, at so late a period of the debate. Mr. O'CONNELL confessed that it did appear to him the oddest charge that could possibly be broilgilt against his Majesty's Ministers, that they had left the House to its own unbiassed choice; the present Government, in adopting that course, was certainly not imitating the example of the Government to which the last speaker had belonged. By a vote of the Court of King's Bench—it could not be called a legal decision—they had declared their opinion to be, that it would be more convenient to leave the Coroner to himself asto the expediency of making his Court open or closed upon any particular occasion ; but now an Act of Parliament would put an end to that piece of Judge-made law, leading the way to a better state of things. Sir R. INGLIS complained that the Ministers, on a great constitutional question, had suffered the House to come to a decision without favouring the House with their opinions. He complained, too, of the Law Officers of the Crown not having given an opinion previously. He was surprised at hearing the opinion of the Solicitor-General, when every Justice of the Peace could exclude every person from his Court. Mr. FRANKLAND LEWIS explained, that he had complained of Ministers sitting and voting, and giving an effective influence on this question, without having stated their reasons for giving that support. If the doctrine of the Solicitor-General were carried to the utmost extent, it would get rid of the oath of the Grand Jury, and would make the Grand Jury Court open. What, then, would become of the Court of the Privy Council ? Was that also to be an open Court ? He wished for time to deliberate on the question further, as it was of great importance. Mr. EASTHOPE thought, from what had passed, that be bad voted for what was the law, and was, therefore, much surprised to hear what had fallen from the Solicitor- General. Mr. WARBURTON was glad to learn from the Solici. tor General that his amendment was consistent not only with general reason, on which ground alone he had de fended it, but was also consistent with the old constitu tional law. There would be means for hereafter consi dering the clause, so as to prevent any surprise. The clause was then read a second time. Mr. BARING wished to ask, if an inquest was to be held in a private house, was that house to be open to all the blackguards of the street ? Would it be imperative on the Coroner to open all the doors of the house to the public ? Mr. O'CONNELL said, the Coroner was not bound to hold the inquest in the room of the person. He wished to know what was meant by all the blackguards of the street The Courts of Chancery and of the King's Bench were open.—were they intruded upon by all the blackguards of the street ? The Coroner might keep order in his Court, and exclude disturbers, just as well as the Lord Chancellor. Mr. CRIPPS asked, would the clause not compel the Coroner to open his Court, though he held the inquest in a private room ? Mr. O'CONNELL said, the Coroner might do that at present, and might admit all the blackguards in the streets if he pleased. Sir R. PEEL said, if the Court were open, without using the word blackguards, an inquest in a private house might be attended by persons improper and disagreeable. He wished to know, therefore, whether the view of the body in a private house w as not a judicial a c t, and ought to be performed in public like any other part of the Coro ner's Inquest ? Mr. PETIT was understood to say, that the visiting the body could not be consideted as a judicial act at which the public should be present. The visitation might take place, though the inquest might be held in another spot. Sir R. PEEL said a few words, insisting that the visi tation was a judicial act, at which the public, according to this clause, would be entitled to be present. Mr. O'CONNELL said, the public might undoubtedly be present, but it was only part of the public which could be conveniently admitted. The principle of the clause was to take away from the Coroner the power of making his Court secret and close. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had nu other objeetii,ta to the clause, but that it was unnecessary. He thought the Coroner's inquest was, strictly speaking, an open Court, and a Court which, above all others, ought to be com pletely an open Court. It was at the Coroner's option to hold his inquest in a house where a body was, or he might have the body removed. If there was any danger from a brutal crowd, such as was talked of by the Right Hon. Member, the Coroner was bound to provide a sufficient force to guard against any such improper intrusion. Mr. JOHN CAMPBELL was of opinion that the Co roner's inquest was an open and public inquiry. Privacy only gave birth to unjust and injurious suspkions. The King's Bench had lately decided, that a meeting of two M .gistrates before whom informations were laid under any penal statute, must be an open Court, at which all the public, blackenards and all, might be present. Mr. HUNT was happy to hear that this clause only confirmed the old law, which the Judges, however, had set aside. Mr. FRESEIFIELD doubted the law of the Attorney- General. Many persons bad, from time to time, been excluded by the Coroner ; and in two solemn decisions the Court of King's Bench refused to recognise the Co roner's Court as an open Court. They ought not lightly to throw doubts on the decision of Courts of Justice, and he did not think the House ought to alter the law alter such decisions. Mr. HUME could not consent that they should be shackled by any decision of the Judges; it was their duty to execute the law, hut of the House to make it. After a few words from Mr. FRESHFIELD and Mr. R. WASON, Mr. WARBURTON trusted the Bill would be re printed, to allow the House to consider the clause 4. The clause was then agreed to without a division. Mr. O'CONNELL expressed a wish that the Hon. Gentleman would introduce a clause to prevent the ex .• tension of this Bill to Ireland ; it would require more ex tensive machinery in that country. It was then agreed that the provisions of the Bill should not extend to Ireland and Scotland. The House then resumed, and the report was ordered to be taken into further consideration on Monday next. Mr. CROKER, in reference to a statement that the Duke of Wellington bad witnessed an exhibition at one of the theatres, reflecting on an Illustrious Individual, begged, on the part of his Grace, to deny the statement. BIRTHS' REGISTRATION BILL. Lord NUGENT moved the re-committal of this Bill Sir R. INGLIS considered this Bill as a specimen o that pruriency of Legislation which was so prevaPent, The Hon. Baronet concluded by moving that the Bil be read that day six months. Mr. J. CAMPBELL seconded the amendment. Mr. RUTH VEN objected to the Bill being made ap plicable to Ireland. Mr. V. SMITH supported the Bill, though he should be glad to see some alteration in it. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL concurred with Mr. J. Campbell as to the propriety of a general registration; and he recommended that the Bill should be withdrawn for the present. Mr. GOULBURN also recommended that the Bill should be withdrawn. Mr. CRAMPTON acknowledged the utility of having a register on which they could rely ; and he should there fore vote for going into Committee on the Bill, in the hope of the measure proving useful. Lord NUGENT was ready to postpone, but would not withdraw the Bill. The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none took place; and it was agreed that the further proceedings on this Bill 'aliould be postponed till Wednesday next. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Half-past Two o'clock. LIST OF THJ OF NINETY-FOUR WHO V TON'S CLAUSE, TO MAK ? MAJORITY 'OTED FOR MR. WARBUR- E ALL INQUESTS BEFORE CORONERS OPEN COUR' Althorp, Vis.—tiorthamptonsh. Baring, F. T.—Portsmouth Berkeley, Captain—Gloucester Brougham, J.—Winchilsea Brougham, W. —Southwark Burrell, Sir C.—Shoreham IM , Namara, W. N.—Clare Co. Mackenzie, J. A. S.—Ross-shire Morrison, John—Banffshire Mullins, F. W.—Co. of Kerry Musgrave, Sir R.—Waterford Co. North, F.—Hastings Nugent, Lord—Aylesbury O'Connell, D.—Co. of Kerry O'Connell, M.D.—Co. of Clare O'Connor Don—Roocoin. Co. Paget, T.—Leicestershire . . , Bulwer H. L.—Coventry Chichester, Sir A.—Belfast Copeland, Alderman—Coleraine Creevey, T.—Downton Curteis, H. B.—Sussex Denman, Sir T—Nottinghamsh. Evans, W. B.—Leominster Evans, W.—Leicester Evans, Col. De Lacy—Rye Ewart, \V.—Liverpool Fazakerley, J. N.—Peterboro' Fergusson, Sir R.—Nottingham Folkes, Sir W.—Norfolk French, A.—Roscommon Co. Gisborne. T.— Stafford Gordon, R.—Cricklade Grattan, J.—Co. of Wicklow Grattan, H.—Meath Co. Guise, Sir B. W.—Gloucestersh. Harvey, D. W.—Colchester Handley, W. F.—Newark Heneage, G. F.—Lincoln Home, Sir W.—Newtown Heywood, B.—Lancashire 'lodges T. L.—Kent Peiha - m, C. A.—Lincolnshire Petit, L. H.—Ripon Penleaze, J. S.—Southampton Ponsonby, G.—Youghall Portman, E. B.—Dorsetshire Power, IL—Waterford County Payne, Sir P.—Bedfordshire Rantsden, J. C.—Yorkshire Itooper, J. B.—Huntingdonshire Russell, Lord J.—Devonshire Russell, Sir It. G.—Thirsk Scott, Sir E. D.—Lichfield Sheil, R. h—Co. of Louth Strickland, G.—Yorkshire Stuart, Lord D. C.—Arundel Tennyson, Right Hon. C. Stamford Thompson, P. B.—Wenlock Thicknesse, R.—Wigan Throckmorton, R.—Berkshire Tomes, J.—Warwick Townley, R. G.—Cambridgesh, Tracy, Charles—Tewkesbury Tyrrell, Charles—Suffolk Hoskins, K.—Herefordshire Howard, P. H.—Carlisle Howick, lA—Northumberland Hughes, Ald. W. H.—Oxford. Hume, Joseph—Middlesex Hunt, Henry—Preston James, \V.—Carlisle Jephson, C. D. o.—Mallow Johnstone, Sir J. B.—Yorkshire Kenyon, Hon. L.—St. Michael King, E. B.—. Warwick Lambert, H.—Wexford Co. Labouchere, H.—Taunton Lawley, F.—Warwickshire Leigh, F. C.—Wallingford Littleton, E. J.—Statfordshire Loch, J.—Hythe Marryatt, J.—Sandwich; Mayhew, W.—Colchester Mangles, J.—Guildford M‘Leod, R.—Sutherlandshire Venables, Ald.—London Vernon, 0. J.—Derbyshire Villiers, T. H.—Bletchingly Vincent, Sir F.—St. Alban's Walker, C. A.—Wexford Warre J. A.—Hastings Wagon, W. R.—lpswich Watson, Hon. R.—Canterbury Weyland, Major R.—Oxfordsh. Webb, E.—Gloucester Wellesley, W. T. L.—Essex White, Col. H —Dublin Co. White, S.—Co. of Leitrim Williams, W.—Monmouthshire IWood, Alderman—London TELLER. Warburton, H.—Bridix,rt LIST OF THE MINORITY Of ELEVEN WHO VOTED FOR MR. HUME'S MOTION "That every Person to be qualified to be elected Coroner, shall produce Certificates of having attended Two Courses of Medi cal Jurisprudence." Bulwer, H. L. Morrison, J. I Evans, De Lacy O'Connell, D. Ewart. W. lO'Connell, M. Hunt, H. Stephenson, H. F James, W. (Wood, Alderman Warburton, H. TELLER. Hume, Joseph LITERATURE. POLITICAL REFLECTIONS ON THE CRISIS. EDINBURGH, 1832. This is a translation from a long lachrymose, would-be philosophical pamphlet, from the pen of no less distinguished a personage than Prince Polignac. It is in reply to a work entitled " A History of the Restoration, par un Homme d'Etat," which appeared in Paris some time since, and is, as might be expected, an elaborate defence of the illustrious prisoner's policy, and, above all, of his f'amous ordinances. Little need be said of the pamphlet in its original form, for it contains few striking facts of any novelty, dealing chiefly in hypothesis and assumption, and dealing profusely in the very prejudices which it professes so strenuously to deprecate ; but of the translation we may say, it is rendered with great fidelity to the original text, and is the work of a gentleman and a schoolmaster, who has a perfect mastery over the graces of English com position. The style is indeed very polished, terse, and spirited. LIVES OF BALBOA AND PIZARRO. EDINBLIIiGH, 1832. Translated from the Spanish of Quintana, by Mrs. Hodson (late Miss Holford), the authoress of that pleasing poem " Wallace, or the Fight of Falkirk." The volume is very ably rendered, though it throws little or no ad ditional light on the character and conduct of the conqueror of Peru. In an historical p o i n t of view, the subject is already exhausted. The volume is, appropriately enough, dedicated t o Dr. Southey. The resolution of Ministers to make exten sive reductions in the Government offices, for the purpose of retrenchment in the public expenditure, is being carr i e d into effect on a large scale inthe Excise departni nts, and that too amongst the superior and more expensive officers of the establishment, Lord LILFORD, Colonel CAMPBELL, and W. PARISI!, Esq., have ceased to be Commissioners of the Excise Board. These ge n tl emen, who have for many years filled their respective offices, have " retired"— it is understood on a pension. It is considered that the Commissioners remaining are amply sufficient to conduct the business of the establishment, FRENCH PAPERS. (From Galignani's Messenger.) The Viscount de Chateaubriand, the Duke de Fitz- j trnes, and Count Hyde de Neuville, underwent another examination yesterday. It is said that the Noble Viscount learned, on Friday evening, at nine o'clock, that he was to he arrested the next morning. He went to bed at that hour as usual, and on the following morning the police officers found him in his bed. He made an apology for detaining them whilst he dressed himself:....." I knew very well, gentlemen," said he, " that you were to come, and ought to have been ready; but I sleep soundly, and therefore waited till you knocked. 1 beg you a thousand pardons for making you wait." The editor of the Quotidienne, M. de Briant, having appealed to the Court of Cessation against the decision of the Court of Assizes at Paris, condemning him to a month's imprisonment, upon a prosecution of the Prefect of Police, fur an article attacking the respectability of his agents, the Court quashed the sentence, on the ground that, on putting the question to the Jury, it was not stattd that the imputation was not thrown upon them for facts relating to their official functions, and therefore did not come within any article of the penal law, and, conse quently, ordered a new trial before the Court of Versaillee. _ M. de Genoude, Editor of the Gazette de France, sur rendered himself yesterday, and was taken to St. Pelagic, to undergo the term of three months' imprisonment, to which he was condemned for an article calling for the con vocation of the States-General. At Vannes, on the 14th inst., the Countess du Botdere was condemned by the Court of Assizes to two niontbs' imprisonment, a fine of 2,000 francs, and costs, for having publicly uttered the cry of " Vive Henri V. I." and distri buted medals bearing his effigy. We have already announced that the Marquess de Dal matia, French minister in Sweden, has succeeded M. Durand de Mareuil as Minister in Holland, the latter be ing called to fill the place of Prince Talleyrand, at Lon don, during his absence. The following further nomina tions and changes have just been made among the diplo matic agents of France :—The Marquis de St. Simon, Minister in Denmark, goes to Sweden, and is succeeded in Denmark by M. de Mortier, Minister in Bavaria. The latter is replaced at Munich by M. Bresson, Minister in Hanover ; and M. Martin, Minister in Mexico, succeeds M. Bresson. M. Desfaudis goes to Mexico. M. de Bourgoing, Chief Secretary of the Embassy at St. Peters burgh, is appointed Minister at Dresden; and M. Sep time de Latour Maubourg, Chief Secretary of the Ern busy at Vienna, Minister at Brussels. It is not yet known who are to succeed M. d'Estourmel at Columbia, and the Count de Flahaut at Berlin, who are sent to Brazil and Constantinople. Gtneral Bowyer, who is in command of the Division at Oran, has sent several reports to the Commander-in- Chief at Algiers, from which it appears, that between the 3d and Bth of May, the Arabs made incessant attack' upon the town and its surrounding forts. On the 2d, the heads of their columns were perceived, and in the morning of the 3d, he was enabled to ascertain that their forces amounted to 3,000 horse and 2,000 foot. After making a short prayer, the Arabs rushed with impetuous fury upon the village of Legentah, and the combined firing of the musketry and artillery was insufficient to compel them to retreat. They bore down en masse upon Fort St. Andre; but being unable to get possession of it, they withdrew to Kerma, a small canton at a short dis tance. On the 4th, at day-break, they returned in still greater numbers, and succeeded in devastating one village ; but though they renewed their efforts on the bth, 6th 7th and Bth, they were unable to break through the French troops, which faced them at every point, and maintained every position. SECOND COUNCIL OF WAR OF THE FIRST MILITARY DIVISION. Tuesday, June 19. The Court, of which the President was Colonel Duro claeiet, of the 38th regiment of the line, assembled a t ten o'clock, when a man named Margot, a porter, in the employ of M. Bourget, a carrier, in Rue St. Msgloiret was accused of having firei, on the 6th instant, on the National Guard, in the Rue St. Denis, and with carrying a red flag unfurled. The President having declared the Court constituted, The Recorder read the different proces-verbaux and other documents relative to the case; and when he bad concluded, the prisoner was introduced. He was a tall , straight, powerful man, dressed in a blouse, and air peared extremely calm and composed. He stated dot his name was Pierre Francois Margot ; that he vin e born at La Tour, in Belgium ; and was thirty ii% years of age. On being asked the motive of his hal" ing taken arms on the 6th inst., he said he was in' formed the Carlists would come and plunder the 130 14 he belonged to, and he had armed himself to defend it' He was at the corner of the Rue St. Magloir e an d Rile, St. Denis, on the look-out ;he did not fire on the Nations' Guard ; he took no aim, fired in the air, but not until h e was fired upon. A young man handed him the m usket with which he fired ; he then returned it ; he was the hearer of 18 cartridges and 14 balls, which were given him by a hussar, whose luggage he had carried six month . before ; he had no intent to kill or to overthrow the G° . vernment. After the accused had sat dawn, his Counsel begge d leave of the tribunal to accept his protest against th e competency of the Court. The President said that question had already been, brought forward in the different cases already submitte u to the Court of War, and that a new protest would onlY protract the proceedings ; that besides the Council was in" competent to pronounce in such a matter. The Counsel said that he merely wished the Tribunal t 0 direct the Recorder to make a note of his having so pro tested, which was accordingly done. Evidence was then adduced on the part of the Croton' after which the prisoner called five witnesses, but the ir evidence was confined to the establishment of the fact that he was not the man who carried the red flag on the Po nt d'Austerlitz, and as to the time he passed at the reading room of M. Delongpre. The Reporter then addressed th e Court upon the evidence, and maintained that the fa° imputed to the prisoner were fully established. M. isin tv lin, on behalf of the prisoner, argued against the coloPT e tency of the Court, and M. Laudrin delivered an able speech, impugning the evidence, to both of whom the r!1 porter replied. The Court retired, and were eng4 three-quarters of an hour in considering their decision' On their return they declared, by a majority of six to 0 6 that Margot was guilty of the first two counts of the ac . cusation, but not guilty of the third—nam e ly, th a t of di e ' playing the red flag. The sent ence o f D eat h was then Pr ° ' nouuced upon him. (Private Correspondence.) PARIS, JUNE 19 ' t , The interest taken by the Parisian p u bli c , i n the O n ters passing before their eyes, is this d a y s t ronger than °_, any day since the 6th inst. but it is not s o e ngrossing . ':, to shut out from their view the dangers which tbre t e liberty in Germany, and, through liberty, France. Th e treaty alleged to have been signed on the 4th inst. at 1 3 e . lin, by the representatives of Russia, Prussia, and it ll tria, is not the only cause for the disquietude felt b e te l°, day. Private advices from Vienna are said to have r. see eins ocroemasmonu,nicisa,titohnai,t determinedreceived,t iatnofwe reference, chae commonb r epresent a n yo t campaignet h r e p o ' 's Power, r l Allied against tht hee principler Sovere igns ess, a() f non-intervention, will interfere between "the Allied S ° ' n s l o fa s oi r nirn b g v w ; a s m s hb s b ecomeeracabhan,jiagtcaf gentleman t roublesome—the n ooffice, . it German vereigns"—and their object —one which they will pO se : cute—one in which they will support each other by 0 ; 114 should the Liberals, in their respective dominions, revolt's made t O l the G ' e ~e neu h mab i s T jnne h m ciit e tr o i excited—that the one is to be replaced in schacklee—'4i; • that the others are to be held in, or reduced to obeaw ° , c- v; and that, moreover, Russia ) Austria, and Prussia, wi l " 't t hd their armies, assist each other, should any pot tion of " A to s the protests or representations of France on the prism pt resistance, without regar d le of non-intervention. t rrlY In corroboration of this int, Iligence we have l' ° ,, ef from every part of Germany reports of new movetne°'or troops. Mark the consequence of the annihilation of land. I have at this moment under my eyes a letter r o' lls e a r : air an of f e 0 • very recent date, written by a superior o ffi cer, ° O l O O Austrian cavalry regiment, which had been one Of . je constituting the powerful army assembled in Galiciatior consequence of the Polish insurrection, in which the w ho l acquaints his correspondent that ‘ 4 the Galician aruiyi,.? broken up for'the South—he believed awl hoped for The menacing aspect of affairs in Belgium I sha ll refer to, as your Brussels letters will have anticipate , oa t we could give you Rom thence, and shall m ere ly the horizon beyond the frontier becomes daily more IP; a t France would, under her present Ministry, renosisibie, peace if she could; but there are so many events 1 1 ° . w ar• nay probable, that I begin to fear that sh e must go t.`: If so, she might in the first in s t ance b e successfuqo posed by the disciplined million of men at the dilf t he the Northern " allied Sovereigns ;" but, a ided 'l w o Propaganda (nothing else would do), the ultimat e t oe of the contest would be the tri u mph of liberty. _ o ,ord not be misunder s t oo d—l d o no t mean by the " „at " liberty" French dominion. The day of Frene