The Sun. — London, England, 1822-02-09 00:00:00

as soon as the necessary, atidavits could be - procure d, th e question would-be decided by the Court. - Mr. DICKENSON said a few words which were inaudible in the gallery. Sir F. BURDETT spoke in strong terms against the sen tence by which Mr. Hunt had been consigned to these hard ships:and sofferings. That sentence was as disgraceful a one as any sentence that had ever been passed since the worst times of the Stuart 4. • It Was like one of those had laws and judgmeots of which Clarendon speaks as bringing doWn punish; meat upon the person, not upon the crime. It was a sentence of vengeance and not of justice. What could be more dread ful than an imprisonment fur three years ? They had better at once take a man's life. And if it was to be accompanied by the sufferings of whiCht he petition complained; they might as well have other species of torture. The Hon. Bart. lite') went ilrrongh what he considered to he Mr. Hunt's meritari , clis conduct at Manchester, and stated that it was his mis'fors tone to have been judged by a Jury; for t hat-the Judge would have acquitted him upon his trial. How. such-a sentence could hare been acceded to by that Judge afterwards he was at a loss to conceive. But it was scandalous that its severity should be alloWed to lie aggravated by a Gaoler or Magistrate. Thernles of the prison could only be made applicable to felons. Bat the whole business showed the Auo animu with which the individual was persecuted. He begged to be understood its only regarding Mr. Hunt as an aggrieved man ; and it should be borne:in mind, Chat whatever was inflicted illegally "Upon Mr. Hunt, might he inflicted illegally upon any other man. ,Mr. BA THURST said, it was rather curious that this sen tence, which was so disgraceful in the eyes of the Hon. garo net, had wholly escaped his notice for the first two years of its bring carried into effect. If he considered it to be of such a nature as he had deicribed, why had he not brought the sub ject befori the House. But when be heard our Judges coin• pared to those of the time of Charles, he was astonished. Ile —di,! have expected it from nobody hut the Hon. Baronet ; and infted, ke could hardly hate imagined that even he would have done it. He knew that it was quite unnecessary for any Lody to stand up in that House to defend the characters of the Judges of the land ; but he had been .induccd to make these remarks by the language which fell front the Hun. Bardnet.. 'Mr. G. BENN.E'rf said he should like to know the names of Magistrates and Judges who had made the rules by which these severities were enforced against Mr. •Hunt.. He should like to know the persons who bad presumed to make such rules, and to inflict such punishment upon Hit individual con fined under a sentence like .Mr. Hunt's. That sentence he would always call an iniquitous judgment. -The reason why he had not brought it before the House was, that he'knew he haul no chance of obtaining 'justice for the individual. When ever he had had an opportunity to express his opieion of th e sentence upon Mr. Hunt, he bad always declared that sen tence to be founded upon iniquity 'and folly. It was for a crime Mr. Hunt had never committed. He (Mr. B.) should be glad to see the names of .the Magistrates and .lndges who had closed the doors of Mr. Hunt's spell against. his son and hi. solicitor. Mr. DICKENSON said, the rules complained of had been. prepared a considerable time before Mr. Hunt's imprison ment, but were afterwards signed by the Magistrates. They were for some time pass e d ov e r by the 'different Jmiges who went the Circuit, but they were ultimately signed by Mr. Baron Graham and by Mr. Justice Best..--(liear, hear 1) — He believed the roles were selected from the best rules of other goals. He thought, however, they bore hind upon Mr. Hunt s and be had stated his opinion to Mr. Justice Best; but . on Mr. Hunt's complaint that " his family" had been denied access to him, Mr. Justice Best remarked. that which was notorious in the whole county of Somerset: namely, that the female, forming a part of his family, was not bis wife : and the Judge observed, that,she was not a proper person to be admitted to the prisoner. Sir ISAAC COFFIN said, had he known thumb-screws were used by the gaoler, he would never have brought him elf to approve of the general discipline of the gaol Hear.) Sir THOMAS LETHBRIDGE said, be had no doubt that the indulgences granted in the first instance to Mr. Hunt were the cause of his many complaints, and that from the concessions had arisen all the subsequent troubles.—(Hear, hear!) -fug to the Magistracy of the county of Somerset, they were a body of men incapable of acting from impure or un wortlry motives, and were as respectable a Bench as any in the kingdom. With respect to the preSent Petition, he could only say that if any ulterior proceeding were proposed he should steadily oppose it ; for he, thought it unconstitutional in that:House to attempt to reverse the sentence of a Court of taw. HOBHOUSE, in answer to the observations of the hist Speaker, said, he should be glad to be informed whether Mi. Hunt's son was to be considered as an improper person to bare access to his fattier ?—(Hear.)—With regard to the female in question, he knew nothing of her, and he would not stand up in that House to defend immoral conduct; but he would say that exclusion from the society of this female h . was no part of Mr. Hunt's sentence.—(Hear, hear, ear.)— The Hon. Baronet had attributed much of the mischiefs to the concessions widen he said had been made to Mr. Hunt, Was the removing of the thumb screws a concession?— (Hear, hear, hear !)--'-or was it in the eyes of the Hon. Baronet a mischief?—(Cheers.)—Surely the Hon. Baronet could not have known of the existence of these practices, or be never would hare justified such conduct. In-a list of sen tences for political libels, he observed a judgment- upon one man of four years and a balf.—(Hear, hear, hear !)—This was a sentence unknown even in the atrocious times of Charles the First. It had been said that an improper time was selected for the present complaint; but, in his opinion, complaints of such a nature ought always to he brought for ward. He thought -Ministers would be highly culpable if they did . not send down an order to relax sortie of the severi ties complained of. The sentence itself upon Mr. Hunt he had always condereneT; and as long as he had a seat in that Hove, or a tongue in his head, he would pronounce it to be one of the most outrageous sentences which ever dis graced the Bench. The Judge who tried the case, he be lieved, did not expect a conviction. Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, the last Speaker, and the Hon. Member fur Shrewsbury (Mr. Bennett), had made a most unwarrantable and unprovoked attack upon the Judges of the Court of King's Bench. If the Honourable IVlembers in question entertained the opinion they had expressed, why had they not brought forward a charge in ri proper shape ?—(Hear, hear, heat !)—The proper course would have been to make a specific charge on so grave a subject ; and not to introduce it collaterally upon a motto?' for bringing np a Petition. (Load cries of " t hear, head") The Honourable Member for Westminster had selected a case of heavy punishment for political libel. He (bar. Attorney-General) did not know the case, but lie pre sumed it was Carliles. That individual had been punished, not for one libel, but for a series of libels of the most aggra vated.description; Alluding to the last remark of the Hon. Member for Westminster, he begged to observe, that that Hon. Member was mistaken iii supposing that r4lr. Justice Bayley, who tried Mr. Hunt, did not expect a conviction. The charge of that Learned Judge to the Jury, impartial as the charge was, clearly shewed the opinion of the Judge upon the count in the indictment on which the Juryreturned a ver dict. Mr. Hunt had bad a most impartial trial; he was tried in a County of his own selection-by a Jury of his own selec tion, and after the trial, he himself complimented the Judge for the impartiality he had displayed on the trial. And nor: that Learned Judge was arraigned ;—(No, no, from the Opposition,)—he was arraigned.—(Cries of ao, no, from the Opposition.]—He (Mr. Attorney-General) contended, that the Learned Judge was arraigned for the sentence which he had afterwards passed. To remove any 'doubt which could be raised as to the opinion of Mr. Justice Bayley on the case it., self, it would be Only necessary to refer to the language of the sentence, which declared that the Judge was satisfied with the verdict, and that thu offence approached very near to the crime of High Treason. Perhaps the Hon. Gent. opposite tf►ought the Manchester Meeting was legal,—(Hear!)—But the Jury, the .ludges, and the majority of the country thoufght otherwise. However, it was unnecessary to discuss tl►al question at the present moment. All that he complained of was, that the Hon. Member had not brought the subject before Parliament in a proper shape. With respect to the rules of the prison, he did not profess to know any thing about them ; but be knew that the moment Mr. Hunt com- plained to the Court of King's Beuch by letter, that Court -bad made an order for giving' him redress; a circumstance which sheaved that Mr.timit himself had not that opinio►► of the Court of King's Bench which appeared to be enter tained by Hon. Members.. It was therefore unfair to arraign the conduct of the Judges of that - Court upon general cen sure, without reducing then to a specific charge. Mr. HOBHOUSE, in explanation, said, it was not Car lile's case to which he had alluded, though he knew very well the motive of the Hon. and Learned Member in men- tiuning.Carlile with' reference to him (Mr. H.)—(Cheers from the Opposition.)—The case he alluded to was a sentence passed, not by the Court of King's Bench, hut by the Quer ter Sessions, and therefore could not be Carlile's ; as that iudividusl was punished only bir the Court of fiing's Bench. Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained: He declared, upon .his honotir, that he had no motive whatever in men tioning the name of Carlile with reference to the Hon. Mem ber. As the Hon. Member was complaining of the conduct of the Court of King's Bench ; and as the case of Carlile was that in whiCh the Court had passed the heaviest of its sen tences, he (Mr. Attorney-General) naturally concluded that his was the ease.alluded to. , The Petitiou.was then brought up and read. It complained of the denial to'the 'Petitioner and the females of his father's family of all access to him; and that OA applying for redress, . . . . thefiverelohl that Mr. Justice Best bad 'signed tberules, aid thai-fhey'coUld not be depart ed.from. • Mr. Alderman WOOD said; it appeared that eren - t 11;0 Sheriff himself could not interfere. It had been said that complaints had been madr against Mr. Hunt hitwelf; but ►t was only a tew. days 'since that he had spoken to the jailor, Mr. Hardy, on the subject, and Mr. Hardy made no corn• plaint whatever. It was true that the rules might have been made some time since; but it was worthy of remark, that they had'notheeh put in execution until lately. Tlte.Petition was then ordered to be };rioted. MISCELLANEOUS. Lord A. HAMILTON moved for a new writ Icitllietotihty of Argyll, in the room of Lord John Campbell, who has ac cepted the Chiltern Hiindreds.—Ordered. 'Lord A. HAMILTON gave notice of a motion for the Abo lition of some Office in the . Commissary Court of Scotland; lint the noise w•as'so great that neither the day nor the Office Mentioned by the Noble - Lord could be heard. . Mr. LrnIEToN presented a Petition from 'certain Shop keepers of. Newark, complaining of the injury sustained by the competition of Hawkers and Pedlars, and praying - for the imposition of an additional duty upon their ficenses.—Cfr dered to lie-on the table. Mr. W. SMITH moved fora return of the number of Ex tents in aid, issued from the King's Remembrancer's Office in the•course of last year.—Ordered. Mr. BERNAL moved for a Return of certain Payments made under the Act for facilitating the Abolition of the Traffic in Slaves. Dr. LUSHINGTON gave notice of his intention to more, on an early day, for leave to bring in a Bill to consolidate the several Acts of Parliament relating to the Abolition of the Slave Trade. RUSSIAN TARIFF. Mr. BERNAL wished to ask the Noble Marquess opposite, whether he was prepared with any information on the con , . duct about to be taken by Russia concerning the proposed relaxation of her Tariff? It would he in the remembrance of the Noble Marquess, that Igst Session there was a❑ under standing that he should'make some inquiry on the subject. The Marquess of LONDONDERRY answe►ed, that he would inform himself on the point, and give an answer upon a future day. • DISTURBANCES AT KNIGHTSBRIDGE. • Mr. Sheriff GA ft RAIT appeared at the Bar with a Petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of the City of London, in Common - Council'assembled. The pe tition went at considerable length into the affray that took place at Knightsbridge in August last, on the occasion of Honey's funeral, and concluded by praying, that the House would institute such inquiry into the subject as would iii fu ture protect ths,civil power -against the attacks of military force. Mr. Alder Man WOOD said, he would not enter into the suhject of the petition upon this occasion: After moving that it should: he received and printed, he would then propose, !bid the evidence taken before the Committee of the Common Council, and the Report founded on it, should be laid upon the table for the information of the House. A copy had, he believed, before - been sent to the Secretary, of State. If these motions were agreed to, he would, at some other time, name an early day for going into the inquiry. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, he did not rise for the purPose of objecting. to the petition being received. He - thought the - Hai'. Alderman bad better change the order of his proceedings, and give notice first of a motion for laying the evidence before the House. It did not follow as a matter of course that the evidence and the report were to be laid on the table with the petition, or that they were immediately to institute an inquiry on that evidence. With all defer e nce for the Common Council, the House would nut, he believed, feel disposed to delegate their powers to them. Me. HUME wished to know whether there was any objection to produce the evidence taken by direction of Lord Bathurst. He rather believed such examination took place. It appeared hiM that the House bad a right to have the whole evidence before them. The Hun. Alderman did not say that the in quiry must be tune into as a matter of course because the -evidence was laid upon the table. He wished to know whether the examination taken by order of Government would be pro duced for the information of the House. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he did not mean the slightest disrespect to the Hon. Alderman. He merely pointed out what appeared to him to he the regular mode of proceed ing. With respect to any evidence taken before the Secretary of State, it was as little a matter of course that it should be laid upon the table as that taken before a Committee of the Common Council. 1111...BENNET said the complaint was grievous and notori. uus. Ministers had made inquiry into the subject, and he thought it quite proper that the result of that inquiry should be made known. It 'would he an act of discretion on the part of Ministers to let the country know what the nature of their case was, in a full and authentic manner. They ought not, upon a subject of so much importance, to defend them selves, as the Noble Lord (Londonderry) often did, by pull ing letters from his pocket, and trading from them such garbled extracts as. might suit his purpose. Ministers ought to consider that there was another tribunal besides that House or the Common Council—he meant the tribunal of public opinion. The Petition was ordered to be printed. After a few words from Mr. Alderman WOOD and the Marquis of LONDONDERRY, the former gave notice that be would, on Monday next, move that the evidence taken be fore the Committee of General Purposes, and the Repot thereon, should be laid upon the table. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. - The Marquis of LONDONDERRY moved the reading of that part of his Majesty's most gracious Speech, which related to Agricultural Distress, with a view to an order being made for taking the same into consideration on F r id a y n ex t. Th e paragraph was read, and the order made accordingly. IRISH INSURRECTION BILL. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY moved the Order of the Day for the House resolving itself into a Committee upon this Bill. On the question being put, that the. Speaker should leave the Chair : Sir JOHN NEWPORT rose and said, that he understood the Noble Marquis to say that the measures now before the House were called for by the Noble Marquis at the head of the Irish Government without modification.—(The Marquis of Londonderry assented).—That Noble Marquis was entitled to every confidence ; and he (SirJ.) was therefore disposed to waive his opposition to-the Bill. Ile did so, from a conviction that, if the House adopted any modification of the Bill, suggested by so humble an individual as himself, and the Bill itself should be found ineffectual, it might be said that the Bill would have been found effectual had the modifications not been introduced. He therefore should not say another word about modification ; but he begged to declare his conviction, that the present Bill would not effect its proposed object. He thought a law exe. . cuted by troops.; and administered by judges, without prejudice or passion, without resentment for the past, or unworthy in ducement for the future, would be the propel' measure, and the one most likely to sacceed ; but ',won the ground only of Lord Wellesley's asking for the present Bill, he agreed to it. He begged to be allowed to make one observation upon what had fallen from an Ilon. Member opposite (Mr. Dawson) in the course of last night's debate, respecting his (Sir Jobn's) mo- I don in the year 1817, for a Committee on Irish affairs, and re specting the opposition of an Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) to that motion. It was said, that he (Sir John) wanted to make the office of Secretary a shop for the encouragement of com plaintsand grievances. Now he thought that if the motion had no other merit than that which was attributed to it as a fault,- that alone ought to have ensured its success ; for he considered it highly important that the humbler classes should have that, protection afforded them winch the rich c ou ld o bt a i n f or therri I selves ; and it was his belief that had that motion been carried, much good would have followed. Having repeated his confi dence in Lord Wellesley, and that he would use the power given to him wisely and humanely, the Right Hon. Baroliet sat down, observing that he should offer ne fuither opposition to the Bill. - Mr. DAWSON said, the observation respe - cting the Right Honourable Baronet's desire to make the Secretary's Ogee a shop for the encouragement of complaints was made, because his Right Honourable Friend, the then Secretary, had sheWn no indisposition to encourage Committees of Inquiry in that House. If the Right Honourable Baronet conceived his mo tion on that occasion was of so much consequence to Ireland, why had he not brought it forward befo re t he p ass i ng o f t h e Insurrection Act, which he shortly afterwards supported ? The Insurrection Act was passed in May, and the Right Hon. Baronet did not move until June in the year in question. Sir JOHN NEWPORT explained. Lord FOLKESTONE, in rising to oppose the Bill, declar ed that there was no authority in that House to which he would sooner refer than that of the Right Hon. Baronet.— But as the Right Hon. Baronet had withdrawn his opposition on account of his confidence in the Marquess Wellesley, a con- fidence arising from an approbation of former conduct; and as 'he (Lord F.) had not that confidence, it followed that there was nothing to alter his Apposition to the Bill. He was - astonished at the decision to which a Majority had arrived last night. Ile was astonished that the Gentlemen of England had so readily consented to sacrifice the . liberties of their fellow-subjects. But the practice of thus surrendering the Constitution was increas. ing every day. It was the favourite practice of that House, but it was not less the object of his indignation and horror. If that Which was so valuable a part of the English Constitution were abandoned on Wight grounds, what would be the unhappy conse quence ? A remarkable circumstance in the present subject, was the delay which had taken plice in assembling Parliainpnt; and it was as remarkable then to hear so extraordinary a speech from the Throne, a speech distinguishable principally for its omissions, and a foorth part of whiCh was occupied about the affairs of Ireland. It Was, he thought, impossible to - reed' his Majesty's Speech and believe 'such a state of things existed as laad been described. But if it really did exist, it was a disgrace to Ministers. - - The papers laid before the' douse were most meagre when examined for the purpose of supporting such a measure- as the presentae-A, Noble L6rd, . (Mouritcharlee,)' who had supported these measures, appeared to think that 'Ministers were to .be blamed for not havirg brought for Ward those measures - earlier ; and were thoSe the persons to whom this extension of power *as to be entrusted ? If he (Lord F.) would give this power-to others, be would deny it to Ministers. As to the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, he could riot see how it applied to the present 'disturbances. No supporter of that measure had pointed out its application. One fionbUrableMember had ap proved of the InsurreCtion Bill, and had disapproved of the Suspension Act ; anthrather supported both, that he might not divide his vote. Rebellion had been spoken of ; hitt rebel lion was not mentioned i n hi s Majesty's Speech, nor in any do cument which was produced to the House; and he (Lord F.) could not consent to suspend the liberties of a whole country, because a small portion of it was in a disturbed state. It was . said indeed that Lord Well es l ey d es i re d t h ese extraordinary , powers ; but of this there was no evidence whatever. It appear ed to him doubtful that the Government of Ireland thought these powers necessary ; there was no evidence of it beyond the word of the Noble Marquis opposite, which he did not ques.- tion ; but he did not think the House ought to grant such large powers upon the ipse dixit of a Minister. ord Wellesley was the sort of man who, from the energy of his character, was most likely to wish for despotic p ower . Th at N o bl e L ord had run a brilliant career in India, but it was by the means of des potic power, and the use he had then made of that power was not such as to induce him (Lord F.) to grant it to him again. The authority of name also failed him with regard to the other Act, which the Noble Marquis opposite told them was drawn up by Mr. Plunkett. He remembered, on the occasion of the Six Acts, the definition which that Learned Gentleman gave of liberty, which was, that it was power to do that which the law permitted. He also stated then, that the people of this country had become so well informed, that they required such measures. Now that the people of Ireland were sunk into the lowest state of ignorance and wretchedness, he thought the same measures of coercion applicable. Neither therefore could he support these Bills on grounds of confidence in the individuals from whom they sprung, and by whom they were to be executed, nor in consideration of their own inapplica bility to the particular circumstances they were destined to meet. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY felt himself called upon to give an immediate answer to each part of the Noble Lord's (Lord Folkestone) speech, as applied to himself. He alluded 'to the opinion of the Noble Member, that the declaration of a Minister of the Crown, in his place in that House, was not suf_ ficient to legislate upon, but that the fact M us t b e es t a bli s h e d by . document before the House. He meant to combat that po sition—( Hear, hear, hear !)—A Minister who should in that House state as fact that which should afterwards turn out to be false, would be as liable to impeachment as if he were to forge dispatches. And there could be no doubt, that any one who could so expose himself to the i n di gnat i on o f t h e H ouse, to the penalties of the law, and the contempt of mankind, by deceiv ing his Sovereign with false facts, would, with the same apathy to public opinion, commit the forgery of a public dispatch.— (Hear, hear !)—With great d e f erence , therefore,_ to the Noble elaord,he mast beg to ques ti on the constitutionality of his opi nion. What he had stated was on his responsibility. It was not the first time that the Noble Lord had 'made a point of forming a contrast in his sentiments with those around him.— He (the Marquis of Londonderry) thought lie had been ex tremely happy in that character to-night: for it appeared to him he had risen more for the purpose of attacking the charac ter of the Marquis Wellesley than any thing else.—(Hear!) — With regard to what had fallen from him on that topic, he should merely say, that the case he alluded to was matter of history, and he did not think that Nobleman need fear the opi nion with which it would go down to posterity. It was true that that Nobleman returning after a splendid career of public service such as it seldom falls to the lot of an individual to per form, to enjoy those laurels which he had so laboriously earned, found himself in a situation of being obliged to travel through a long course of examination into his public conduct, at the in stigation of an individual, Mr. Paul, he believed. But al though by this means the reward due to his honourable exer tions was much delayed, lie received it at - last. The sense of Parliament was decided upon that point, and never was an accusation dismissed from the walls of that House in a man ner more calculated to mortify those who had laid it than this was.—(Hear hear !)—He had made us e of th e wor d cruelty as appli e d to that Noble Marquis,' of the unfounded harshness of which he referred him. to his friends around him to be assured. Whilst all around the Noble Lord (Lord Folkestone) united in giving praise to the character of Mar. quis Wellesley, and heaping confidence upon him, and almost ready to invest him with supreme power, the Noble Lord stood ' a splendid exception to that line of conduct. He would how ever not press that subject further, leaving the Noble Lord to all the glory to be acquired from such a course, and fully as sured that the glory of Marquis Wellesley would in no respect suffer from the attack he had made upon it.—(Hear, The Right lion. Baronet (Sir J. Newport). had given up his opposition to the Bills, because he was satisfied that the Mar quis Wellesley would not ask for them if milder measures would be sufficient. But lie must defend himself and the Marquis Wellesley against the charge of the Right Hon. Bart., of having selected the most vi o l ent o f t h e coerc i ve l aws applica ble to th state of that country. He wished the House to know the nature of the law which the Right Hon. Baronet was will ing to pass in place of the Insurrection Act. This was the Martial Law Bill, a Bill which was not restricted in its appli cation to particular districts, and that only on the application of seven Magistrates of those districts ; but a Bill framed solely to be used in cases of flagrante hello, and where the object is to secure the co-existence of civil administration, with - military law. The law would apply to the whole of Ireland, and were they to be called upon to put the whole country under the ban of such a power as this ?—(flear.)—lt furnished the same reply to the objection to the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act ; for by the Martial Law Bill, it was a sufficient return to the Judge's writ of Habeas Co r p us , th at th e i n di vi d ual was in the hands of the milita ! Ile was not pr e p are d to go a l ong wi t h those who advocat e d this law in their flight towards military over civil force. Hp could not go along with them in thinking that marching regiments were better organs for the administra tion of justice than the magistrates of the country.—(Hear.)-a He repeated, he could not agree to deliver Ireland over to marching regiments. fie thought that Marquis Wellesley had not aslied greater powers than were necessary in asking for the Insurrection Act. The time might arrive when more vigorous ,1 measures might be necessary ; but he was happy to say that it had not yet arrived—(Hear.)—The lase that was contemplated in the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act was the laying hold of itinerant emissaries, to relieve the country from the baneful effects of their pernicious labours.—(Hear.) Dr: LU$l-IIICG TON could not feel satisfied that the state of Ireland required those measures, or that they would have the effect antiej,pated. Ile thought alSo that the Noble Marquis Opposite hear kept them too long in the dark. But lie did nut believe the Noble Marquis knew himself what he meant to do, for it appeared that the haste was not proportioned' to the exi gency, but to the diligence of the engrosser. He would have been content to pass a Bill arming Marquis Wellesley with powers suited to the exigency of the occasion ; but these Bills he could not think necessary. He must also advert to the se vere animadversions of the Noble Marquis upon his Noble Friend (Lord Folkestone) in consequence of his having deli. vered his honest opinion of the conduct of the Marquis Welles ley in India. When the Noble Marquis said that his Noble Friend stood alone in his sentiments on this subject, had he forgotten the declared opinions of Sir Samuel Romilly, Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Sheridan, and Mr. Wyndham, delivered in that House to the seine effect, and in language as unequivocal in meaning and pointed in expression as ever fell from the lips of man ? Ile (Dr. Lushington) believed that the MarquiS Wellesley in his public conduct in India had lost sight of some of the most solemn obligations, in his amleition to enlarge the British dominions there. But putting; that out of th e quest i on , was this a case for confidence? TheMarqieis Wellesley might wish to' do his duties fairly; but so complicated were they in their nature, and so numerous, that he could not safely exer cise large powers. As a proof of this, he would call to the re collection of the Noble Marquis opposite, A case which occurred under his Administration in Ireland, wherein heeigned a war rant without knowing the name of the individual, He did not impute any blame, but stated it merely to chew the danger in curred in such cases. The Gentleman he alluded to was a Catholic of large property, and who had not been out of his house for many months. His son heard of the warrant, and applied at the proper quarter in Dublin, where he was informed that he might rely upon it there was no -truth in the report....._ The son however was afterwards more positively inthrined of the fact, and again applied in Dublin, and by perseverance elu cidated the Matter and obtained a counter-warrant, and by, tra yelling post was in time to-prevent its execution. This was a Gentleman of 50001. a year, who personally assured him of the fact. With regard to the 'Magistrates of Ireland, the Hon. Members froM that country . had all tad to n they were not to be trusted. Under these circumstances he could not agree to the passing of these Bills. Mr. -LOCKHART could not agree with those around him, that td pars these Bills, was to sacrifice the Constitution of this country. The Constitution was already sacrificed In most of the districts of Ireland, under the most aggravating circumstances, by those against vhom the measures were directed. Thew persons had already Set at defiance tha Constitution, by secret nightly Meetings, by Carrying fire and sword into, the d c;el.- hogs of defencess innocence. The measures might not per haps fit as exactly as many Hon. Members might wish, but if their merits overbalanced the defects, that was sufficient in such cases. With respect to the loss of Trial by Jury, it should be remembered that if means Of intimidation were not re sorted to, that would not be necessary. But he did not see any ground for jealousy of the ha-is into which ths power was to go, as unless th e L or d Lieutenant,' and the King's Serjeant, and the Bench of Magistrates conspired, the liberty of the subject Was not endangered. • Mr. S. RICE deprecated the departing, from the usual way of scrutinizing measures brought before Parliament, by voting confidence in any individual. He could not agree with the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down in the view he had taken of the abolition of the Trial by Jury. He directed ;at tention to the conduct of late juries in Ireland as an answer to those who talked of intimidation. When the Report was brought up, he should propose some amendments, tending to establish a substitute for the trial by jury. He meant to ro pose that the abolitio n or not of trial by jury should be left to the,discretion of the King's Serjeants. There were also other amendments, which he would state to the : House when the proper period arrived. Mr. CALCRAFT said, that the opinion with which he had come to this discussion, that the afflicting state of Ireland called for those severe measures, had been strengthened by all he had heard on the subject. It appeared to him that his lion. Friends'looked at one side of the question only, when they en larged upon the evils which would be inflicted on the Constitu tion by the passing of, these Bills:. He (Mr. Calcraft) did not like Insurrection Acts any more. than they did, but he liked rebellion still less..—(Hear ! )—The alternetive- was either to suffer murder, massacre, and outrage, or these bills.—(Hear, hear, hear !)_He thought it was better to select these than measures more extensive and more arbitrary, which had been recommended.—(}fear.)—lle must here state that he' re posed the most perfect confidence in the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, feeling . no apPrehension as to the use . he make of the powers given him by these Bills: The application of the remedy Was at his discretion. Coercion, therefore, could only be applied to the diseased part, and not to the whole. From what he had heard in that House of the character of the local Magistracy of Ireland, lie certainly was surprised that it had fallen to his lot to know so many respectable Gentlemen in the Commission of the Peace in that Country. Some improper ap pointmenti there might be, but he would ask how they couid expect to cure absenteeship by informing the Gentry of Ireland that they were unfit to be trusted with power- to put down put- rage raging at their very doors. This was a pretty inducement held out to Country Gentlemen to reside on their estates. The Hon. W. LAMB said lie should give his vote for the measure on the ground of confidence in the Marquis of Wellesley, and of the public notoriety of the disorders to be re pressed. He could not agree to what had been said on the sub. ject of the character of that Nobleman. He would not go into the question of his conduct in India; but he would declare it as his opinion, that he was not more distinguished for energy of character, than for his love of public liberty, and his anxiety and solicitude for the happiness of those 'committed to his care.— ( Hear !)—But it was in him personally that he was willing to place this confidence. He would freely give it to every Chief Governor of Ireland. In the present case it was not only to that illustrious individual, but to all the Gentlemen from that country who had spoken on the subject in that House, that lie was giving his confidence to.—(H ear , hear !)—They had all declared that some prompt efficacious measure was wanting.— These were the grounds of his assent to the measures, which he could not deprive of their efficiency by acceding to any of the proposals which had been made to modify them. With re spect to the causes of the present state of Ireland, he must state that he was ready to enter into the consideration of her griev ances. But it should be remembered, that the defects com plained of were of long growth, end therefore not easily to he removed. They had been told that all her evils proceeded from the misrule of this Country, which had changed the cha racter of the people. Unfortunately it was a false propensity in human nature to attribute mishaps to the faults of others than ourselves. Persons had either been erroneously influenced, erroneously advised, perverted, or misled in some way ; and when we attributed our wrongs to the errors of others, we were also apt to look for a remedy from others. If laws of Eng land had been the cause of the evils complained of, he should be willing to entertain the consideration of the matter under that shape. But then it might be said that'the existence of middle men was the work of the laws of England, because they tolerated it. The laws might be perverted, but he should say, that those who so used the laws of England as to produce that evil, should also find the 'remedy. If Gentlemen of Ire land, from their eagerness to become Members of Parliament, chose to cut off their estates into forty shilling tenants, and thereby 'created an impoverished tenantry from which so many evils sprung, it was for them' to apply the remedy—the law of England could not.—(Hear, hear, hear !)—'Those lawn which had the best effects in one country might be perverted to the worst in another without any blemish in them. Under the many difficulties in which Ireland was plunged, he thought the argument becaMe stronger for reposing confidence and adequate powers in a liberal, wise, and sensible Administration, —(Hear, hear, hear !) Mr. HUTCHINSON wished to give the Irish Government those powers which might be necessary to put down the dis, turbances in Ireland, but he did 'not think a case made out for suspending the Habeas Corpus Act, or for passing* the -other measure now proposed to Parlianient by his Majesty's Mini sters. He read extracts from the dispatches last received from the Marquis Wellesley, and thence argued, that ati increase of the Military force in Ireland would suffice to put down the dis affected, without the proposed suspension of the would not in any way compromise with rebels in arms, but it was his opinion that if the House - passed these measures, or any others, without at the same time pledging themselves to take into consideration the state of Ireland, and manfully to I sift its grievances to the bottom, they would not do their duty. ' Colonel DAVIS said, an allusion had been made to him as having treated this subject with levity. lie felt it necessary only to repel the charge. He had not acted the part supposed, but he was of opinion, that they ought not to occupy them selves with inquiring into the causes of the disturbances while the rebellion gained • ground. The Hon. Gentleman behiifd him wished for an extra military force in Ireland. But had he not voted for every reduction of the army that had been pro.. posed in the last Session ?—:[Mr. Hutchinson said " 1 — Where then was the additional force to come from.? 'Was an other army to be raised ? The conduct of the Hon. Gentleman seemed inconsistent—now calling for the army to retire —now demanding that it should advance. He was as friendly to con- ciliatory measures as the Hon. Gentleman himself could be; but when . it became necessary to employ measures of coercion, he wished to see such adopted as were likely to prove efficient. The question was then put and carried, and the House re solved itself into the Committee. The Blanks were filled up, and the House resumed Mr. BROUGHAM then brought up the Report of the Cont. which was agreed to. • • Mr. S. RICE wished to omit certain expressions which want to do without the intervention of a Jury ; and accordingly moved to omit the words, " without a Grand Jury, and with out a Bill found." —The motion was negatived.. • A second clause, proposing to omit the words, declaring that any conviction, judgment, or acquittal, procured without the intervention of a Grand Jury, or the verdict of a petty Jury, should be equally valid, as if obtained by means of a Grand Jury and a Petty Jury, was proposed by the same Hon. Gen tleman, and negatived. Mr. S. RICE then moved a clause which went to afford ad ditional faCilities for persons accused to give bail, and to obviate those inconveniences which might be sustained by individuals from being compelled to wait from time to time for the-hold ing of the Court of Sessions, by enabling a Kins's Sergeant or King's Counsel to re ce i ve b a il. • The Marquis of LONDONDERRY defended -the Bill as it stood. He saw no reason for annulling the powers of the Courts of Sessions, but they should sit front day to day to re ceive bail. Mr. SPRING RICE considered his Amendment to be ne cissary, as the Courts of Sessions in Ireland suffered days and weeks, and sometimes even a month, to intervene' be tween their sittings. The clause only went to propose that a person found out of his house, who might be able to establish his innocence the instant he came before the Court,'- should not be detained in custody for weeks together, waiting for the Ses sions. If the Noble Marquis meant to provide by this Bill that the Court.should sit from day to day, then his objection would be satisfied. The addition which he had proposed could do no harm, but !night do good, and therefore he hoped the Noble Marquis would not persevere in his opposition. •, The House divided — For the Motion , Against it - . 30 - - - 139 Majonly - - —lO9 The Bill was then read a third time and passed. When strangers were re-admitted, the SPE AK E m was putting he question that the House should go into Committee on the labeas Corpus Suspension Bill. On this the House divided, when the numbers.were— For going into Committee - 127 Agamst it - 36 —9l Majority - "When strangers had been re-admitted, The Bill laving been th roug h the Committee, Mr. BuociDEN brought up the Report, which was received and agreed to. The Nlarvis of LONDONDERRY moved that the Bill should be real a third time. Sir F. BUItDETT wished to . know in what way it was pro posed to indern i nify those who acted under this 'Bill ?, Mr. DENNAN Said . that, perhaps, the Honourable Baro- net was not aWatitethat the insurrection Aet. 7.oltained .'a •elatise of inciemnity--a clause which protected a, who acted tinder. it. He had not an opportunity of delivering hia sacitimenta upon the Bill during the evening, but he thought that 1:C : iris .quite unreasonable in the Noble Lord to pass this Bill tb.root4 l three stages without any previous intimation. He expected P. have seine exposition from the Hon.. Member with respect the insurrection in Ireland, bet nothing of the sort was at tempted.- A t the same time he was •quite _willing. to allow the first, and inde e d th e re..,j important object, was to convince ins deluded people of Ireliotd that , on every side of that H ouse, there was a determined spirit tp subdue, the •twil, • and that die, only question. was, as to the applicability of the propaSed mea sures. There was another point upon which. he w as , desirous.of saying a fe w words. The presenee of a King's Serg e a n t or a King's Counsel w a s su p pose d to neutralise mischief, -114 the words'in the Act were—" if such can be procured"---il e • should propose that a Barrister of ten years' standing should , in the absence of such an officer, be entrusted with this. a l " thority. He hoped that the causes of those outrages would be inquired into, for they could not but be regarded by,an strong proofs of a misgovernment, whi c h th e House was bowl". to inquire,into. He could by no means give his assent 4cr nat' ,4 " sures, which were in fact a total. subversion of the constitutnin in Ireland. There was one particular part of that Bill,. whteh left all redress for the most wanton act at the mercy of w e e , Judge, and an oth er t o t h at, h e .could not ; give his support; '"" theindemnity clause respecting the Magistrates. The ATTORNEY GENERAL apprehendedthat the tie' cessity for stronger enactments than the• -existing laws in IM land was not doubted by any Member of the Rouse. The only question, theretbre, was whether those laws which hatl'heo found effective on a former occasion should be enacted in order • to repress th e p resen t ev il s. H e t h ough t that the House had every ground, to induce them to enact them, not only from their having been demanded by the Irish Governnient, but from the melancholy admission made by the Irish Members,that.lrelan 'could not be reduced to a state of. tranquillity without th'nen- -- The Insurrection Act had beenipassed before.; .it v.is L ow re' 'garcled as necessary, and the Act for the suspension of Ha.!; , !• 34 Corpus was merely annexed to it as a stron 7 support to. the Al3' gistrates in carrying the provisions of the former into etlect.--' The technical - objections of his Hon. and Learned Friend OP' posite did not seem to him to be ofany weight. . • Mr. BROUGHAM said that it was rather a matter of con' cern to find that even in the House of Ccremons while about to enact the Bill, the clauses of it were so variously understood that there were then various opinions respeetingetheir construction held by thedifferent lawyers. It was, therefore, a matter rieNdr to be deplored that such a Bill was about to be sanctioned. Th e same difficulties and the same diversity of opinion had existed in 1807, when it had been before enacted, with regard'to.the clause for the protection of the Magistrates. He could nut think that it was necessary to enact it, as even the Attorney-General ad mitted that it would not be necessary in England, and of couric not in Ireland. The ATfORNEY-GENERA.I. explained. There were specific acts passed for the protection of English Magistrates la special cases. Mr. BROUGHAM said, that not having read 3PNallr's JuStice of the Peace, it could not be expected that he should has 4 been acquainted with the Irish laws ; but he thought that if the Irish Magistrates had always acted .without protection, it was strange that the laws of James I. and George It., which Pr; tected the 3lagistrates in this country, had never been extended to the Irish Magistrates. Mr. 'BRIGHT argued at some length against several clauses of the Bill. The SOLICITOReGENERAL explained his view of the Bill, which, he contended, was not to be regarded as containing any obnoxious clauses.—The Bill was then read the third time. Mr. S. RICE proposed a clause, to he annexed to the Bait for the purpose of enabling the ! King's Counsel, S er j ean t a t LaW, or Assistant Barrister, to take bail. • The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was of opinion that the clause was unnecessary, inasmuch as the Session of Magistrates Would be authorized to take bail. Mr. DENMAN said, if that was the case, the enactment ef . the clause C ou ld p r Od uce no mischief., as it would b e n o m ore than a few words Wanted. • Mr. S. RICE supported the clause, which he considered" t/ be absolutely necessary for the ends of justice, as several Ver' sons might he c o n fi ne d f or weeks for no offence, without . possibility of release, as t h e C ourt authorised by the Act watto in all probability sit in future, as they had formerly done, rtt from day to day, but from month to month. An unfit/Wa le inaidmight be confined for three months, while th e m ean s of curing liberty was remove d f rom within his reach, by the Court S not sitting. Mr. WM. SMITH stipporteil the clause, as „one wtiicli might be useful without the possibility of being injurious., The SOLICITOR -GENERAL opposed the clause an iii'.`necessary. The off ence b e i ng mere l y a misdemeanour, ha • could be taken by any Magistrate. Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but the House did P 4 divide, as the clause was negatived without a division. Mr. S. RICE proposed another clause respecting the esta bli shment of a local Magistracy, under the 'tel. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY it, as tending to establish a Magistracy for a temporary purpose. The House divided on the question P.r receiving the clause!-- Ayes 31 Noes - 110 Majority against the clause A second division was understood to take place on a motion of Mr. DEN maw's, for omitting the Magistrates' indeinnitY clause— Ayes - - - - 32 Noes - - - - lOg' Majority - —77. the' _ - A division also to o k pl ace on t h e question for passing Bill— - Ayes - - - - 109 Noes - - _ 28 Majority The Bill then passed. The .House next divided on the third reading of the Habcgg Corpus Suspension Bill-- Ayes - - - - 109 Noes - - - - 27 Majority The Bill then passed without a division. Adjourned at Ilalf-past TWELVE o'CLoc_s-, t 2 312tiday_ .. .. iffe=r-.d..—,.. -, - -- _. __--- -•-. ...... COURSE OF EXCHANGk, February ,i. Amstet dam .. l2 9 C. F. Ditto, at Sight l2 6 . ' Rotterdam ' 12 10 Antwerp Hamburgh le 6 Attona .37 5 1.1 I.Tr. 1. :$7 6 9 4 7s• Ditto Paris, 3 Day's sight 24 40 0 (Ts. • B 2.5 70 i Us. ourdeaux, ditto Frank forton the Main Madrid Cadiz 364 Effect is 1 36 Effect ird - Bilboa ::04 EH - et:tics Barcelona . Seville .• OO O • :3 5351 Gibraltar ' . 3oi Leghorn • 47 Gei:4,a..........4si—Venice, Ital. Lir 27 so lkfalta . ,45 —Naples Palermo Lisbon . - 5 l 5l Oporto BioJaneiro Dublin .... 91 Cork 91 pet Cent. Portugal Gold, in Coin Foreign Gold, its Bars ' New Doubloons New Dollars 13:1,,,,.tanr1,Arri BULLION, I.o' 0 0 pe l t OP 11" 10i a. 3 13 6 0 4 91 . 0 5 114 COAL-MARKET, 1 1 Ell. 8. Ships at Market. Ships sold 59 Newcastle 23f 10i Sunderland Price. - 333 Od to 42s - 33 s (Tcl to 428 91 BIRTH. On the sth instant, at Preshaw House, Haws, the Rig Ile, Honourable Lady Mary Long, the Lad' of Walter Long, P.l" of a daughter. - MARRIED. On Tuesday, the Sth inst., at the Parish church of Etching , ham,. Sussex, Sir Joshua Colles3lere . dyth, Bart. of Matitlleens near Castlecomer, county Kilkenny, to Doligny, second dang l . l ' ter of the l a t e S amue l Ed war d s, Esq. of the count of lint, North Wales, and of Beaufort-buildings in the Strand. 11/ 1 -1 mediately after the ceremony the happy couples et out for I.loA logne-sur-Mef. • DIED. On Monday last, in his 62d year, Mr. Alexander Steirar t, Governor of St. Giles's Workhouse. On Friday, the 6th-day of February, at tbeirhouse, in „lAA: Grosvenor -street, aged 77, Mrs. f.yland, th e wife of :Win Weyland, Esq. of SWoodeaton, in C, County.of Oxford, Woodrising Dan, in the County of Norfolk. On Monday the 4th inst. in Upper lierkelcy.istreet, Portrrat'' square, aged eleven years; Sophia Catherine Fletcher, elchst daughter of the lat e l amen t e d Sir Henry Fletch er , H a rt- lof Ashley Park, Surrey. She survived 11.2 r father only five roo;itlst and expired on the anniversarr of Lis birth-day. 111•••••.imm....•••••••=1,,,,,...r...amOweesiftesw - Printed and Published for the PROPRIETORS, at the Okrlcz, 112, Strand, by J. B. , -ARSTAI RS. eti k. 4 1' he ()1\: r Y d t i ti te Fk Pr • f '• garter, lUt I, t„," re, fPqr, 417, , I„ e4 "' / 04 11 1 ,„, y 'llom ~iit,v G„ e 4444; 4 ja 'ect j 44 4, e 1, Ili_ s