The Sun. — London, England, 1840-07-11 00:00:00

E VEN lN G I.IDI I II ON. tinge of the Scotch Judges, which was greatly in favour of the former—they bad scarcely any vacation, and had (Ally 2,300!. per annum, while the Scotch Judges j had seven months' vacation, and were paid trmn ' 5,000/. to 3,0043/. a. fear. The Jud;es, too, had grosaly neglected their duty in making Act; of Sederunt, as they were called, which were rules fur the guidance of the r ~oceedings of their Courts ; they hal not been re visec daring the last hundred years. It was is evidence be fore the. Committee that it was now impossible for any one t) say what were new in use, or what bad fallen into dis use. The Judges bad allowed their Coerta to get into such state of confusion as to give great di satisfaction is Seotland. To show what a state the Courts were ho bilged to state that he held in his hand a return of the number of appeals to the Home of Lords from March, 12.3, to June, 1536, from which it appeared that the whole number of appeals n,s il3 ; and that, out of that number, 593 were appeals Irr.ls Scotland. Would any man credit that the Juslges of Scotland, were in such disrepute with his coun trymen, that appeals were made in every case in which _money could be found, to the House of Lords. His mo tion related not only to the duties of the Court of Session, blt also to the office of his Right Hon. and Learied Friend the Lord Advocate. It was all very well, in times of AN t oietness, to have an office filled as it was at present, in tYll1:11 great danger was to be apprehended from confiding the ;i.,pointment to a political character. It appeared to hlnt that the Lord Advocate was the representative of all Scotland, for nobody else could represent it without his and concurrence. He was al.o commander-in-chief of all the Parliamentary business of that country, and no independent Member could move a pen, or get a Bill fur warti a single stage, without his consent. hhe Noble and Learned Lord was also the keeper of the conscience of the genera'. Assembly. A great deal had been said "with I . :i-ard to the criminal duties of the Queen's Judges, but t!-:e tact was, that the matter was now a mere farce. If any ens went into the Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh, had been so much lauded, they would fii.d three ju,l:Tes sitting there—namely, the Lord-Advocate, the S3lienor-General, and one or two deputies, trying ~.wo er three children, ten or twelve years old.—( Hear.) He had endeavoured to narrow the subject as much as pussible, considering its importance; and he had re ceived a salutary hint from his Friend opposite, that it was dangerous to interfere with the learned persons called Judges in Scotland. Under these circumstances, and not being encouraged by the Noble Lord opposite to expect that 'he Crown would command the Scotch Judges, in ac e.,H.rice with the Act of Parliament, to continue their pion two months longer, he would not take apon him set the responsibility of taking the opinion of the I - louse upen the motion, but he would leave it to the Noble Lord, and those whom be consulted, to let them take the cons? - pence. He therefore begged to withdraw—that ,:as 7.) say, not to move the motion, of which he bad given notice. The LORD ADVOCATE, although the Hon. Member had concluded without making the motion, felt hound to say a few words in answer to what he must call the :.,:ross (he was sure, unintentional) miz-statements of the Honourable Member.—( Hear, hear, hear.) That _Honourable Member had fallen into errors so gt ievous, that had he not known the great attention ho had paid to ex subject, he should certainly have thought that he had teken up the subject without knowing anything about it. —(klear, hear.) It was true, as had been stated by the Hun. and Learned Member, that at a certain period of the year the Courts rose, but there was always one Judge in town to attend to any urgent business. Alter great de lbc.-ation on the subject, he was convinced that the number of Judges in icotland could not be diminished without prcju,lice to the administration of justice in that country. With respect to the statements of the Hon. Member as to the extraordinary powers of the Lord Advocate, he, for one, was not aware that any extraordinary powers existed at .the present day, whatever might be the case in f o rmer l imes. On the whole, he thought that nothing hid been shown by the Hon. Member which called upon the House for its interference. After a few words from Mr. GOUL BURN, the subject dropped. LOVETT AND COLLINS. Mr. T. DU NCOMBE then rose to make the following raor.ion that " Whereas, in the month of June last, two respectable respectable working men, named William Lo ,,•ett and John Collins, were convicted of publishing a se c'jtious libel, and for the said offence were sentenced to ono year's imprisonment in Warwick gaol; and whereas a fare number of persons have since been convicted of offences of a similar character, and the greatest portion of those persons, contrary to custom, are, as well as the above-mentioned William Lovett and John Collies, placed on the criminal side of the gaols to which they have been respectively sent, and are there treated after the manner of persons convicted of the most heinous and detestable crimes ; it is the opinion this House that such mode of carrying out sentences of Arorisonment for political offences, being as uncalled for as unprecedented, ought to be discontinued; and that no greater restraint should be imposed or rtegradation inflicted upon this class of offenders t'oan their safe custody requires and long us4ge sanctions." The grievances that had been complained of by many pe titioners relating to the treatment of persons convicted of potiocat eausse.s .ae‘ee, evuel. inhuman, and unprecedented. pia 1.:..ad many well authenticated eases to establish this nronosition, and when he had laid the facts before the House no hoped they would agree to the resolution he intended propose. Before adverting, however, to the statements c o„iloctod with the parties now suffering punishment for • offences, ho would briefly call the attention of the 1 - lou -, e to cases of a similar character, that had recurred in :.',:rmer times. He would not, however, go further back than 179:2, during which year a vory great toitmLer of political pracutions were instituted. The Honourable Member then • the cases of Ridgway and Symonds, in 1792 ; that cf cif clic Rev. William Winter , s ass attorney, in 1793; I, 3 tzoul. whn, during the !male he was in pr:scm, wrote his ij istcry of and was allowed to get married ; the case ,fitr. Iteillead Yorke ; of Mr. Gilbert Wakefield ; of .3,7. Lt od ; and William Crabber% who carried on his Re- ' gi;ter while in Newgate ; and of Messrs. J. and Leigh Hunt. it these parties were convicted of political offences, either by publishing libels, or uttering treasonable and seditious speuehes, but they were none of them subjected to any restraint, while undergoinct the different periods of imprisonment to which they were sentenced, than was atimlurely necessary to the security of their persons. In Maj ir Cartwright and others were convicted of ac • practices in assembling to elect persons as mem of a National Convention ;but they were all ire- o.oed on the debtor side of Warwick gaol. Subse- vele ly Henry Hunt was convicted of a eon piracy and an ntormpt to subvert the Government, are] was imprisoned ;e s lichester gaol, where he experienced rather harsher treatment than previous political offenders had been sub jected to, and for which he afterwards obtained redress eeainst the gualer. The first time that this rule of sle , :inguishing political offences from ordinary midernea sesrs in the mode of treatment of the parties convicted was 'eroken through was in the case of Lovett and Col- Fes. Now in every word of the libel fur the publi eltior of which Lovett and Colas were found guilty, he ( Mr. Duneon.be) entirely concurred. The words Ist. That this Conventioa (Mr. Lovett was score ter,7 to the National Convention) is of opisCen tint a trenton, flagrant. and unjust outrage has been made upon :es,:)ple of Birmingham by a blood-thirsty and uncon force from London acting under the authority ..:2n who, when out of office, sanctioned and took part in tire meetings of the people ; and cow, when they share ie the public plunder, seek to keep the people in social r;;seery and political degradation. 2. That the people of P.ii,niegi.am are the best judges of their own right to meet Coe Bull-ring or elsewhere; have their own fedings to cneetit ; and arc the best judges of their own power and re. •irces to obtain justice. 3. That the summary and eee.eie arrest of Dr. Taylor, our respected colleague, another convincing proof of the absence of all jur es,e, iu Kagland, and clearly shows that there is no accurity fife, libsrty, or property, till the people have some con over Ole laws they are called upon to ohey " Singe the 7i7;.''' - :oitien of these remarks on the metropolitan police, an iseesiry with regard to the conduct of the police upon that eceasion had been instituted by a Committee of the Toren f, swell of Birmingham, Mr. Joseph Sturge being Chair- Tile result of the inquiry was expressed in the very rse, used by Mr. Lovett himself. They declsied that it we proved that a brutal and bloody attack bad b; en .31We upon the people of Birmingham, and it was their _Onion that if the police had not at.acked the people, no rider ever would have occurred, and they considered tem &he riot was incited by the London police. The ::ernitteo of the Corporation of liirmingliam stated that it ttos practice of the police to assail men with blocs who e,e.' here been easily apprebewded. Why not, after tf-i ,iresecut• Mr. Joseph Sturge ?—(Cheers.) This uguage quite as strong as that used by Mr. Lovett. Cemmittee went to say that it was a matter of deep e that the Magistrates should have deemed the ser of these men (the London police) matter for corn 7e.eentary notice, and that such a proceeding oo the part Magistrates, was altogether uncall e d' fur and un- Hear, hear.) At all events, then, there 7.,eT two opinions upon this subject—(Cheers)—and he s s e-:...,1 ask, were Mr. Lovett and Mr. Collins to suff,r degradation in Warwick gaol for having expressed e pi e i o u with regard to the conduct of th e , •, in which a great part of the people through put she country concurred ?—( Cheers ) Mr. Joseph fituret and the Town Council of Birmingham ought to have lseee eent to Warwick gaol just as well as Mr. Lovett and Or. Collins. What did he find boldly assorted in the ;supers of the day? The following strong remarks ap veared in one of the paily papers on June 24th last : I.Ve call public attention to a police case, which appears eoner the head of Worship-street this day. In the course '!1(' last six months we have bean compelled t• make eadversions en the illegal, tyrannical, and intolerable r' et of the new police force, and every fresh occurrence 27;1r:firms us in the belief to which that ecnduct has e ;. I rise, that the metropolitan police is the greatest t b a t ever afflicted a free people."—( Hear, hear.) Thk . - as pretty strong language ; it appeared iu The Sun Tle,Vi'Jpaper of the 24th of June, and had tie uovernmeist dared to prosecute The S . 'a n for the: publication ? No. is•ituted Tire San newspaper Any prosecutio n were u e t euld be supported by two-thirds of the people of this emetry.—(Cheers.) But to go back to the case of Lovettand Collins : representetions were made b treoli to the itlagistrates of the county of Warwick ' ru' n • privations and hardships those persons were ees in Warwick gaol, but they were told that tile source whence any relief could be ob. !niece was the Secretary of State for the Home Depart mete. From time to time applications Were made to the cretary of State, who referred the complaint:. to the vi;iti.s. Magistrates, and tire visiting Magistrates sent them beck again to the Secretary of State; and so, iietw:.-n one and the other, no progress was made rolieliorating the treatment of these men until i nearly one half of the period of their imprisonment e:;pired. Mach improvement in that treatment tdtirnately tank place, but they ware still kept on the re- leive side of the gaol, and were subjected to various other :harsh and degrading regulations, that could never be justi titb to political offenders, who, in the opinion gment of society, had committed no moral offence, ' 4 ,;•. 2th oT this month the term of imprisonment to 7 ,1-; - which Mr. Lovett and Mr. Collies were sentenced would ex- 1 ,iire; and he believed that it was the desire of certain ind;_ ! viduals that these injured men should assume a better and fatter appearance when hey came out of gaol than they had tome during their confinement there. The consequence was, that every day for the last ten days they had been ]laving port-wine negus—( Laughter)—in order, no doubt, I when they came before the public that they should appear in good condition.—( Laughter ) The Hon. Gentleman here read a letter, dated 22d June last, which Mr. Lovett had addressed to a friend, describing the n a tur e o f th e ) treatment he had experienced since hi; incarceration In Warwick gaol, and the effect it had produced on Lie mind and health. " You can form (said the writer to his friend) 1 but a very imperfect idea of the feeling and tone of mind which the restraint and monotony of the discipline of a prison entail on those persons who have been used to activity and the exercise of the body, to cheerful conver sation, and to all the varieties of political and literary ex citement. I posses; very little descriptive powers, but I will endeavour briefly to describe the melancholy routine in which 1 have passed the greater number cf days I have been here, varied only by exchanging the loneliness of my cell for scenes of vice and crime, where I have been com pelled to mix with persons of the worst description. In the midst of such circumstances you may easily suppose that ! even books begin at last to l ose th e i r attract i ons. At half , past five in the morning the p r i son b e ll r i ngs; at s i x i n the morning you arc expected to have your bed rolled up 1 and your room cleaned. Formerly we were obliged to go ' instantly down to the yard to answer cur names when the roll was called, but that has lately been dispensed with. We have to wait some time before we can get a tiro, for we are not allowed to have either flint or steel. We then retire and sit in our dark cell to read or wile away the time." That was written on the 221 of June. Since then it appeared that Mr. Lovett had seen a statement with respect to his sleeping with Collins ; on the 24th he wrote a letter stating that that the reprenentation was not quite correct. It was true that Collins and himself did sleep together in the first instance ; but Lovett being ra ther a restless and sleepless man, Collins preferred sleep ing with the other inmate of their cell. And here Mr. Lovett made a statement, which demanded the serious at tention of the House ; for, if correct, it was too 1 atrocious to be endured. Mr. Lovett stated that Collins had had four different persons to sleep with him since he had been in prison : the first was con victed of rape, two others were imprisoned for assaults, and his present bed-fellow was convicted of passing bad money. Fortunately, said Mr. Lovett, lie and Collins had escaped catching the itch ; but their fellow political offen der, Edward Brown, was not so fortunate, and he was obliged to undergo the itch bath.—(The Hon. Gentleman then read a letter written by Collins to his wife, describing the injurious effect his confinement bad produced upon his health, and more especially the very serious encroachments it had made on the less robust constitution of his fellow prisoner, Lovett.) This, then, was the hard treatment which these two men had experienced for a political offence which had never been considered in the estimation of so ciety to cast a stigma on the moral characters of those who were convicted of it. What would have been said by the present Government if any among those whose cases he had referred to in the commencement of his speech had been subjected to similar treatment by the Tories of former days ? But he wished it was only Mr. Lovett and Mr. Collins that had been so treated. If gen tlemen would take the trouble to read die petitions that bad been presented to the House, he might refer them to Fisherton Gaol, Ilchcster Gaol, York Castle, Oakham Gaol, and Wakefield House of Correction. Mr. Roberts, an at torney of Bath, had been recently discharged from Fisher ton Gaol, and had returned to Bath, having been released by the Secretary of State. A person, who was a member of the town council of Bath, had written to him ( Mr. Duncombe) on the subject, and very naturally asked why Carrier and Potts were not equally released. The ground for liberating Roberts must equally apply to the cases of Carrier and Potts, for all throe were tried at the same assizes for the same offence, and the Judge said, when sentencing them, that he saw no difference in their degrees of guilt. He, however, made a distinction In the punishment, for Potts being a poor man,—( Hear, hear,)—ta as sentenced not only to imprisonment but to hard labour. Mr. Carrier, he believed, could not boast of the same high connections in life as Mr. Roberts could do, who he ( Mr. Duncombe) understood was a near connection of Chief Justice Tindal. But, notwithstanding, neither Carrier nor Potts could claim any high connections, it equally behoved the House of Commons to take care that justice sheuld be done to their case. In Ilchester gaol there were two persons confined for political offences, named Bartlett and Baldwin ; and: if they passed Oakham gaol they would find three individuals, Vincent, Shellard, and Edwards. They were convicted at Monmouth, and sent to Monmouth gaol. They remained there some time, and were then sent to the Penitentiary. Notice was taken of the removal, in consequence of a discussion upon the subject in the House of Commons, in the course of which it was contended that their removal was illegal, and that the Government had no right to send them to the Peni tentiary. Since then they had been removed to Oakham, and their petition deserved the attention of the House. After having been imprisoned for nearly nine months on one charge, on account of an offence committed in June, Mr. Vincent was again indicted for an offence committed in the January previous. This appeared to him nothing more nor leas than a vindictive proceeding. Had it occurred during Tory times, the .country would have rung with the in dignation of the public. The next case to which ha would call their attention was that of the prisoners at Wakefield. They had heard the petitions of Richard White and Jo seph Crabtree. White, an oh man, aged 62, petitioned on the part of his sow, - one of the convicted party, who had been originally confined in York Castle, but was re moved to Wakefield without his (the father's) knowledge. From another person, however, who had been confined in Wakefield gaol, the petitioner had heard that his son was reduced very much in health—that he was compelled to work on the treadmill with felons—that he had twice fallen off the mill in a:state of exhaustion—and when the petitioner went to the gaol, the gaoler would not allow , him to see his son—(hear.) Now, this man was sen tenced to imprisonment only, not to hard labour. The case of Joseph Crabtree was perhaps the worst of all. In Lis petition he stated that he was locked up in his cell from six at night until six in the morning, the cell being a small room, eight feet by six—that while so lucked up he was not allowed to make the slightest noise, nor even to walk about his cell—that on being liberated in ti.e morning he was placed among convicted misdemean ants, olal'gcd to hold his face in a particular position, so that the gaoler might see it, and prevented from holding the slightest communication, either by look or by word, with the other prisoners. In this state he was kept until the evening, not being allowed to stand up, or even to look another prisoner in the face, under penalty of sub_ jecting himself to solitary confinement in a dark room for three days, on a diet of bread and water only. The pri soner had been convicted of having been present at a meeting of a seditious character at Barnsley, but in ]iii petition he solemnly declared in the presence of God that Ise wits riot there present—a fact which could be proved by another prisoner, named Owen. He could have proved this on his trial, but was told that his cane would be loulsed upon as one of meire unimpoitance, and that he had better take no steps of the kind. The only other ce.se with which he would trouble the House was that of Mr. Feargus O'Connor, which wan not ore-fifth as Lad as the others which be had referred to. The treatment which that gentleman received was at first outrageous and disg raceful to the country, but it had recently been much improved. Still it was vs hat, as a political offender only, he ought to be not sub jscted to. The avowed elij, et. of it was to prevent him Irem continuing to pelohsh his Paper. But Mr. Cobbett Red Mr. Hunt were allowed to continue to write their Papers under similar circumstances, and why should not Mr. O'Connor? He was not allowed to see his friends txcept in the presence of his gaoler, and then only across a passage six feet wide, and through iron gratings, in order that he might not transmit any writings to the public. He knew that he should be told that all these things were t h e acts of the visitiag Magistrates—that the Government were not to blame—and that the amendment recently made in the Prisons Act would set all to rights. But the alteration in ger stion was a perfect delusion. The alte ration in the Prisons Act did not make tire law of the land d,fferent from what it had been before. The Secrett.ry of State, as had been evidenced in the case of Mr. O'Cor.- noe, I ad before the peer to alter the regulations of tie visiting Meg'strates, fur he had been transferred from the felons' to the debtors' side, in consequence of the interfe t (-nee a the Secretary of State. The new Act still 1 , -ft it to the visiting Justices to make the regulations or the pri sen, and whether the prisoner was confined on the debtors' or the feloes' side, still he would be subject to those regu lations. What guarantee had Parliament as to the nature of those regulations ? If ;hey were to be anything like n hat they now were, the only effect of the alteration would be to leave it in the power of the Secretary of State shy whom the regulations of the Magistrates were liable to be revised) to treat political offenders (who might possibly be personally offensive to him) in a manner never hitherto contemplated by the law. Ile called, then, on this !Luse to affirm, by resolution, the principle on which those prison tegulations should be based—that there should be only so much restriction an was necessary to secure the safe custody of the person of the prisoner. —(Hear, hear.) But w hst a ere these irersons convicted for ? For attending seditious and illegal meetings. What was an illegal meeting? V e ry different sentiments had been entertained by those wh o now formed part of the Government, or who sup ported it at other periods, from those upon wh.eli these individuals had been convicted. In Decem ise-T, 1 sio, after the Sedition Bill had passed the House of Lords, a prerst was entered upon the journals, whichi c ontained these sen ti men ts : for"ceFdi,rsit,lay‘..e Becausehsl.u:fting:tilearandt , t w o l i i ) e r n ev d e n n i t y a e n n y . confusion eel : 4 r e f ro m popular meeting s, or to p unish an y disturb ers of the'publie. peace ; sbteeen lawsf oun of and a too ready acquiescence in the suggestions of Ministers for imposing new restraints upon the riehts and usage of the people (even if the pro , visions t f the Bill were in themselves neither heist' nor unreasonable), appears to us more calculated to add ' 1 , weight to calumny, and to exasrrato discontent into hostility, than to defeat the designs of turbulent men, or to reclaim the al;ene•ed affections of a mistaken meltitude. " Secondly. Beeau c the powers entrusted by this Bill to ' Migistrates are liable to great abuse, end those who dis °Ley them exposed to dreadful and disproportionate punishment. on the surmise that a stranger is present in a crowd, or on the appi:eation of a vague definition to the 1 words of a notice, or to the language of an orator, a Justice of Peace may proclaim a meeting to be unlawful, and an Englishman may become a felon fur continuing, even through inadvertence, half-an-hour in a spot where no ) breach of the peace has been committed. " Thirdly. Because the numerous assemblies alleged in the prestruLle to be the occasion and justification of the Bill have been confines to particular districts, but the restric tions and penalties thereof are generally extended to the whole kingdom, and even to Ireland, \vberp co such prac tices bare eyer prevailed. 1 " Fourthly. Because this Bill, combined with the res trictions of the press, which have already passed, or have been announced in this House, is obviously in,. to re . ion of public opinion. Large if not stifle, the ex p ress tended to fetter all free discussio n s, and . —presa, meetings, in periods of political ferment furuish the - means of ascertaining the designs and rneasu ing the strength of the malcontents ; they tend to disunite anti discredit the rash and mischinions agitators of a mistaken multitude. and they not unfrequently SerV2 as a vent, comparatively innoxious, of that ill-hurn.,ur and discon tent which, if suppressed, might sei k refuge in secret cabals and cGuspiracies dangerous to the safety-et indivi duals in authority, and subversive of the I.eacc and happi ness of society. " ( Signed) " VASSAL HOI,LAND, DONA:Gid:3Ia, ACGUSTUS FREDERICK', GROSVENOR, THANET ERSKINE." Similar sentiments were expressed during the last recess by the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies. He (Mr. Duncombe) wished that with regard to these unfor tunate men the Noble Lord had acted upon the doctrines ' so laid down by him at Liverpool.—(llear.) He com plained also of the different mode of punislnnent which was observed with regard to different effenders. While Messrs. Lovett and Collins, and the other persons to whom he had referred, were treated in the manner that had been described, the Rev. Mr. Stephens, who had been convicted of a similar offence, was actually living in the gaoler's house, and enjoying the society of his friends.—( Hear, hear. ) Mr. Bronterre O'Brien and Mr. M'Douall were also treated in Chester gaol with much less severity than was observed towards Messrs. Lovett and Collins, though not so well as the Rev. Mr. Stephens. As an instance of the petty severities that were inflicted sn Mr. O'Brien, he would mention that his snuff-box was taken away from hind.—(A laugh.) This might appear to some lion. Mem - bets an absurd ground of complaint; but those who were in the habit of taking snuff (as Mr. O'Brien was) would tell them that to be prevented so doing was a source of much annoyance and inconvenience. The sort of treat ment which he had described as being inflicted on these prisoners was not sustained by public opinion. The effect which it would have, if continued, on the minds of the lower orders was deserving of the attention of the House. He implored those connected with the rural districts to lend their aid on this occasion, for they might depend upon it that there was scarcely a village or a hamlet in which the reports of the sufferings of these prisoners did not penetrate, and where there did not exist a strong feel ing that these prisoners were unjustly detained, and treated with undue harshness. The address which he was about to move did not in any way trench on the prerogative of the Crown. He did not ask for a curtailment of the im prisonment of the parties, but only that an end might be put to a system of treatment which, thank God, had never been beard of in this country since the days of the Star Chamber, and which was very little exceeded by the worst cruelties of the Spanish inquisition.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Member concluded by moving the address. Mr. WA KLEY seconded the motion. He would ask whether it was intended to restore the punishment of the rack ? Was it the intention to restore the days of torture, sufficient to disgrace and brutalize those who suffered it ?—( Hear, hear.) Not one of those per sons could come out of their prisons without entertaining feelings of the bitterest vengeance. He trusted it would be proved that the complaints had been made to the House before they were sub.nitted to the Executive Government, for he could not believe that any Govern ment whatever could have heard of such continuous and excessive cruelty inflicted upon persons convicted of no felony, but merely of political offences. All gaols ought to be placed under the immediate control of the Secretary for the Home Department, and he ought to have a seat in that House, so that he might be questioned from day to day, whenever grievances such as those contained in the petitions before the House took place. Contrast the treatment of these men with that of Sir F. Burdett, whom he had certainly expected to have seen in his place upon such an occasion. He was convicted of a seditious libel, was sentenced to three months' imprisonment, under a Tory Government. He was allowed to walk out and take the air—to hold his levees— no torture was shown to him—indeed, his treatment after con viction did honour to the Tory Government of the day. He knew not what course his Hon. Colleague in tended to pursue. lie had fully brought the whole cases of torture under the notice of the Executive, and unless that system was entirely altered, the entire blame must rest upon the Government, and with them alone. Ile trusted his Hon. Colleague would not divide the House, but that the Under-Secretary for the Home Department would assure him of a change in the system, which would be satisfactory. Sir G. STRICKL AND bad long intended to have brought forward the ease of the political offenders incarce rated in Wakefield House of Correction, but he thought it was better in the hands of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, because he considered they were treated in a most shame fully harsh and severe manner. He considered that their punishment was wholly illegal—that they should be put to the hardships of diet and dress of the worst felons—that they should be put upon tho silent system, was, in his opinion, wholly illegal. He was glad to see that an Act of Parliament was to be introduced to classify such offenders as those of whom he was speaking, and he trusted that all ability of abusing their powers would be taken from the Magistrates, and the power of regulating gaols, be kept in the hands of the Home Secretary. _ _ Mr. F. Alit treE could assure the House that nothing was further from the intention of the Government than to press harder upon political offenders than their sentences warranted. He would pass to the cases mentioned. First was that of Lovett and Collins. Their case had been fully discussed. Their first sufferings were admitted to be hardships, and the Government had greatly amelio orated their condition. The Hon. Gentleman, however, had gone out of his way to palliate the offences of which they had been convicted. They were fairly tried by an im partial tribunal, yet the Hon. Member said he avowed the very same expressions as were contained in the pia. card upon which they had been convicted. Ile was sorry to hear that such language was at all counten anced by any Member of that House, especially when it was remembered that it was issued the day after Birming ham had been the scene of a gross and dangerous riot. The placard was published at Birmingham on the sth of July, after a public meeting condemnatory of the interference of the London Police, and caused great excitement against that body, in consequence of which, and speeches there and in various parts of the country, such opposition was excited to the London Police as caused the disturbances on the 15th. These police, however, did not interfere, until their intervention became absolutely n messary, when they dispersed the crowd without any person being able to say that a single person was injured by them. Compare this with the die- ' turbances which took place on the arrest of Sir Francis Burdett, and how wide the difference between the two ~vents. There was no good citizen in Birmingham who did not admit that they were largely indebted to the police, on that occasion, fur the protection of their life and p7operty.—(Cheeis.) Sa much for this part of the Honourable Gentleman's case. With regard to his ass,rtion that the police were employed as spies, it was an assertion altogether unfounded, that body not being employed in any way but was just and necessary fur the prevention and detection Of crime. It was very easy' to throw out insinuations of this nature, but he trusted to the good sense of the people of this country to properly appreciate them. With re bard to the imprisonment of Lovett and Collins, that was now drawing to a close, and but a short time since they bad been offered a remission of their sentence, era the lowest condition that could be offered to them, that of entering into recogeizreces for their good behaviour for twelve months. They had, however, by advice, or of their own free will, rejected this offer, and therefore upon themselves and their advisers rested the respen sibility of the two months' imprisonment which would otherwise have been remitted by the Government. The next case adverted to by the Hen. Gentleman was that of Bartlett and Baldwin. These persons were not im prisoned for political libel, tine form, r beine convicted of a direct act of sedition, and all they prayed for he wee in formed, was to be placed on the fueling of Mr. F. O'Coir eor—they complained of no hardships whetever. He, fterefnie, passed on to the case of Edwards ; arel with re ference to this person, and Vincent, and Shy Har!, these persons admiled they should not have p titioned, hut fc;r an applicatien from a Member of Parliament that thy should do Si) on any complaint y e ight have to make. Mr. DU N COM BE—I wrote that.—( Laughter ) Mr. F. M A UL E proceeded_ The only , inniplaint these persons made was the very reasonable one, that they were Lot ;Woe ed a knife to eat their food, bit were compelled to use a spoon for that purm.e, which, on being hemmed of, the Goveinment immediately ordered to be reeeified. Gl' the two former no other complaint was made ; but, with reference to Shellard, a statement of his (MSC wins drawn up by himself, but up to that moment had never been trans mitted to the Secretary of State. The next case was that of Crabtree and Wright. The latter was sentenced to hard labour, and it was one of the grounds of his com plaint that he Lad been put to hard labour, which, being his sentence, could not be matter of complaint against any persan whatever.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentle , man said he would have a Secretary of State whosepower should extend, in these cases, all user the kingdom ; but if such a system of centralization were adopted, he thought the Hon. Gentleman would be the first to cry out against it, and to agree that this power could be placed in no bet ter hands than that of the local Magistrates. With re. spect to Crabtree, he would only state that his case was now under consideration. de would now ask whether there was any ground for the accusations of the Honour able Gentleman of the u inecessai y infliction of torture upon persons who were incarcerated for political offences ? He thought the conduct of the Government throughout was a sufficient guarantee that they had acted with no feeling of revenge towards any individuals, but solely with a desire to maintain the peace and good order of society. He could not but think that the persons who advised these misguided men to acts of commotion and sedition were far more worthy of condemnation than those whom they de luded. A Government which punished these unlawful proceedings must be subject to sonic degree of odium, but the Government which on this account shrunk from th e discharge of their duty would not only be unworthy of the confidence of the House and the country, but would be guilty of indirectly promoting those crimes which it rT3ii their duty to restrain and punish.—( Cheers.) Mr. D'ISRA ELI said the question was whether a great change had not taken place in the punishment of political offenders ?—( Cheers.) Was it denied they were treated as felons—( Hear, hear)—and that this treatment had been carried on on an extensive scale. The Hon. Mem ber for Finsbury' had shown that since the year 1792 no political offenders had been treated as they had been by the present Government. He would maintain that in no period except worst period of history had they beers so was a constitutional maxim that the primary punishment of these persons was the se c u r ity of the State , a nd even in the da y s of the Star ChaniLer this had been adm itted, as was instanced in the celebrated case of Mr. Prynne, who, when imprisoned for political o tl i t c pe t of thelt the offences, revenged himself on Laud by writing forty pam phletslhci badevßiisihop been Bishops.—( Laughter.) The Nobl e conceded by the Star C l e e m thought, a ha d Lord that the h lem sa tiite worldr. (1 Ie n a o r , hear.) t d r i e vi d r .) Gentleman c the but iti after the speech of the Honourable Under secretary, he would net be doing hie duty to the country gnlei,s ho did so.—( Hear, hear.) He thought the House should not separate until they had remedied these grievances, which ! THE SUN, LONF)O' SATURDAY ) JULY IL 1:40, sere us great and intolerable as Isal ever been suffered in this country. Was not the punishment enorincus, and_ its infliction more severe, than the law permitted ? The case of Mr. Roberts had been treated with great levity be this Hen. Under-Secretary, who stated he was now free. But why was he free ? Because he had broken a Hood vessel. But did that effect the case against the Govere nt ? Had he not already suffered far more than that sentence passed upon him ? Ile had. He had suff red as much as was suffered by the political outcasts of Siberia, and it eas the duty of tise House to inquire into his case, and redress his wrongs. It was important the Huse should bear in mind the statements of his petition. He (Mr. D'lsraeli) did not question the sentence, bu: the manner in w hich it had been carried oat..—( Hear, hear.) He did not approve of the conduct of Mr. Roberts, but there was a questiser which would be asked throughout England, and it was this—were the same crimes which were rewarded in Ireland to be punished in this country? Tile Hon. Member had before seen the triumphs of Mi nisters over the liberties of the people, but he hoped that in the present instance they would be successfully resisted. Mr. WARBURTON was willing to give the Govern ment credit for the suppression of the disturbances which had lately agitated the country. The result justified the course which the Government pursued, for in every case which had come before juries a verdict was found against the prisoners.—( Hear, hear, hear. ) That showed that the feeling of the country was with the Government, so far, at least.—( Hear, hear.) But it was manifest, in his opinion, that the bounds of jus tice had been overstepped in the punishment of offenders, and hence it was that public feeling now ran in their favour. The lion. Member proceeded to show how much more severely political offenders were now treated in pri sons than they had been in former times. Ile would give as an instance the case of Mr. Cobbett, who, so far front having been refused the use of paper, which was denied to prisoners at the present day, actually conducted his newspaper during his imprisonment. There was a material change also in the diet and other comforts of pri slaters. The Hen. Gentleman having referred to individual cases of severity protested against such harshness, which was calculated to make cne's blood boil.—( Hear, hear.) Such a course of proceeding only served to defeat the pur pose for which it was intended, and enlisted public sym pathy in favour of prisoners. Such a course was not con sistent with the policy which hadin former times been pur sued by the Whig party, who used on all occasions to put themselves forward as the friends of the oppressed. Not withstanding the present severity of the law, he believed that Ministers might, if so disposed, have effectually in terfered in miti g ating the punishme n t o f offenders, and he thought that they had not done their duty on that head. —( Hear.) The Magistrates, also, might have acted with more leniency than they had done. They might, for in stance, by the Prisons Regulation Act have removed pri soners from one ward to another, and in other ways miti gated the harshness of their sentence. It was only neces sary that the Government should interfere, and they would certainly influence the Magistrates. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by advising his Hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury to withdraw his motion if the Government would now give any pledge to interfere for the purpose of miti gating the punishment of the parties, but if they were not disposed to give such a pledge he should certainly feel it his duty to divide in favour of the motion. Mr. WARD did not think that, as the law now stood, the Government was responsible. He thought that some change should be introduced in the law, and if the Go vernment did not give any pledge on that subject, he should like his Hon. Friend the Member for Bridport to divide in favour of the motion. Mr. BRUGES said that the statements contained in the petitions of Potts, Carrier, and Roberts, imprisoned fur political offences in the gaol of Wilts were, in very many particulars, incorrect, and the charges contained in them of ill-usage on the part of the Magistrates, had no founda tion in fact. He therefore thought it would be well for Honourable Members, before they presented petitions, to ascertain that they were founded on facts.— ( Hear, hear.) It was his firm belief that Mrs. Roberts, though represented as one of the petitioners, knew nothing of the petition—( Hear, hear)—but if she did sign it as had been represented, that she did so without any knowledge of the contents of the petition. An in dividual named Carrier, had said at a public meeting, " these is such a thing as lucifer matches_the people know how to use them. Talk of physical force ! You may have more physical force for a penny, than is to be found among a whole regimeet of soldiers." Yet it was said those were mere political offences and ought not to be punished too severely.—( Hear, bear, hear.) He could only state that property to the amount of 3,000/. had been destroyed in the neighbourhood in which that speech was delivered a short time afterwards, and that the loyal and peaceable well-disposed inhabitants were kept in the greatest terror and alarm.—( Hear, hear.) In his opi nion punishment ought to regulated by the extent of cri minality, and the dangerous consequences of the crime committed.--( Hear, hear.) Mr. Sergeant TA LFOURD having presented a great many petitions upon the subject under discussion, could not refrain from offering a few observations. What was complained of was, that where imprisonment was all that the law had assigned, and all that the Judge had awarded, that by some means or other that imprisonment had been turned into something different from what had been intended. They did not complain of punishment according, ; _ to law, but the complaint was that the punish ment was Eiirrted 4.,,,,,,,A tee hew.—( hear, beer.) It might happen that in some of the petitions that had been presented there had been great exaggeration; but the House was bound to see that injustice was not committed, and that moral torture was not inflicted. He thought that a new system had sprung up which called for the interference of that House. In the case of Mr. Cobbett and Mr. Hunt, the treatment complained of at the present time was unknown. At this time there were prosecutions for libels against some of the most respectable books, leers in London, Manchester, and other places. A prosecution had been instituted against a man for publishing the works of one of our greatest poets. Those prosecutions were disgraceful to the age .in which we lived, and would be disgraceful to the Attorney General if he did not slop them.—( Hear, hear.) He should vote fur the amend. meta of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, believing that it became the House to take some steps to put an end to this new system, which was contrary to law, humanity, and justice. Lord J. RUSSELL said that if any hardship had bean inflicted, the proper way would have been to have brought in a Bill to alter the prison discipline—( Hear, hear)—but the object of the motion before the house appeared to him to be to have some great sympathy excited f or p o li t i ca l atfenders.—( Hear, hear.) It was no easy matter, when a country was in a state of great disturbance —when the y heard of houses being destroyed in one place __of people marching in arms in another —mid pe :,, l corning on all sides, asking for the prot ect i on of trop i p e , for a mere vigorous enforcement of laws, an d fur n-w and more severe laws. It way: not an easy matter to met t all those dangers, and to epply the law as it should be ap plied, without being mistaken as to the cases, so as to (Armin the punishment of these persons who were putting in jeopardy the persons arid property of the well-disposed psrt of the community.—( Hear, hear.) That was no very easy task ; but when that task had been executed, an when nobody felt alarm airy longer, it was not very difficult to get up complaints of one person being harshly treated with regard to a prison dress, and another with having diet of a particular quality, and other grievances of that description. llce begged to observe that they had only been treated as persons convicted of misdemeanours. Then it had leers said they had been treated differently :roe those who were in forme r times convicted of political efFene. s, and seditious lib:ls, but he begged to state that exciting the people to rebellion, as many ( f these prisoners had done, could not be compared to an ordinary and se did not doubt th a t, i n sonic o f O leic a change it i our l aws w i t h regar d c tl a it s i :s ou , s th li e iw o l p . era l t i io e n of to prison disc:pline, might for a tune have borne with un due severity On some individuals ; hot he thought the cases in which complaints had been made, hail been treated by his ,hieh Collins,the Gov r e e r a ti r m g u e s tat o h , a c d o t n : n ik o t r .n , with an,, Noble Friend the Secretary for the flon.c D e p artment w i t h all the attention they canted. The No ble Lord then de r ty Sr) lug he trusted th e H ouse regardfended tet ;rid • s t reoluion of the lion. Mem rvii t c h m e l r d s, n a , n t d ag eo re n e cl t u o & t . i t i l e ~,guL . her for Finsbury. It was imposstb'e to say what would be the effect. t.f it, but it was one of those kind of resolutions that only Made cemplaint of the general administration r f justice, and could answer nu good purpose.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. II UM E was sorry that the Noble Lord had .t -tempted to justify the treatment which had been adopted towards the Charti-t prisoners. The complaints of the peti tioners were that under the present Government the treat ment of political offences was such as it had never before been in this country. He could not forget the agitation thru was created throughout the country upon the Refo , m Bill, when the whole country demanded constitutional reform. There was not one on the Treasury Bench who were not as Cul pable as Potts, Carrier, and Roberts, if these unfertuneto persons bad atte n d e d se di t i ous or un l aw f u l mee ti ngs . All that those meeti ngs h ad been celle d f or was an e xtension of the suffrage, and one of the largest petitiol s ever presented to that. House was i n f avour o f t h a t i neasuie. He was sorry that the Noble L or d h ad assume d the tone the House had heard that eveni ng , i nstead of loo ki ng t o the causes of the discontent that ex i sted among the wor ki n g closes. lie hoped his Hon. Friend would divide the House upon his motion, and he ( Mr. Hume) would cordially register his vote against that atrocious conduct which, for the first time in the annals of our history, lord been introduced by the powers. lie had present Government. ° for any new who were ignorant and who had been S'r R. PEEL believed he had a dvised the Government to try th '' effi cacy of the existing laws before they taught the fruit of the harvest. At the same t ime they „, oc r oem s e yn f t o p r a w th a y rd for and triter:: punishments wlich those goaded on to commit ought not to overt acts, than he had for those who deluded others, in order that if successful they might be subjected to any inflections the law did not warrant; but the question was, did the law w arrant the infliction of perienced ?—(llear.) Ii it did not, surely they had a re eny life gal imprison medY* The law would not tolerate ought to be altered wl ment, and if the law had been broken and they had been sub jected to punishment which the law slid not warrant, why did not those who felt a sympathy for them appeal to the Courts of Law for redress 2 parties no,c complaining lied ee _ ( Hear.) And if the law the House of Commons that Parliament for its alteration l' ?—( Hear, hear.) In 1824, • he ( Sir Robert Peel) had introduced a Bill which became law, re; elating th e discipline of prisons.—( Hear, not submit a proposition to hear.) It was not Magistrates or gaolers, therefore, but was responsible for the , deviating from th e f ormer system. It was formerly said the law m a d e no di stinctien b etween the rich and the poor, and it wee on account of the pre valence of those feelings that the law w as altered because men of education and men of intelli gence d eserved less sympathy, if they corn ei mitted offenc e s, th an these who were their deluded ve tints. —(Hear, hear,) But he would also contend that the House of Comm ons was not the pro per tribunal to appeal to in cases of this d escr i ption. H e did not mean to s a y the House of C72p o u r, l s d t wasaice notjurisdiction in cases et abuse, b u t if they onCo began mistrusting th e Executive Govern ment, the four n ights of the we e k on which such questi ons m i g h t b e b rou ght forward, would nut i t s h d e i c authority tion of these h which mattersch the State contemplate he stifficieet to adjudicate on those questions. He objected to dealing with the subject by resolution; if any alteration was requires', the only effectual way of accomplishing . that object was by altering the l a w. H e s h ou ld decidedlyvote— ag,inst the resolution. Mr. AGLIONBY, after all that i e had heard from the Right Hon. Barone!, the Noble Lord, and the Crider Secretary State for the Home Department, was coo. firmed in the opinion that it was his duty to vote for the resolution of the Hon. Member fer Finsbury.—( Hear.) The Hon. Member then referred to the rules and regula tions of the Warwick gaol, and contended that they were not only a disgrace to the laws of our country, but that they esc'ted sympathy in favour of offenders. The Right Hon. Baron©t said " alter the law," and it bad been propef ed to do so in that House, but had been rejected in another place. Was it a new precedent to refer to that House in cases of this description ? No thing was more common, and these complaints had been entertained at all times, and gene rally referred to a Scicct Committee. With respect to sympathy he begged to repudiate the supposi tion that in voting for this motion he had any sympathy whatever with persons guilty of sedition or other political offences.—( Hear, hear.) One great evil of the preseht system was the multiplicity of Acts, and the extreme un certainty of the las—( Hear, hear)—and though it was supposed it was understood in that House, he doubted whether there were many Hon. Gentlemen who did really onderstand it.—( Hear, bear.) The Noble Lord had somewhat rnistated the fact, and had been cheered in do- ing so with respect to the imprisonment of Mr. Fear gus O'Connor, who had himself stated in his first petition, that he was placed with other prisoners at his own request, and had not complained of tbis,;a3 he was represented to have done.—( Hear, hear.) It was to be remarked, with reference to the various statements that had been received, that the statements of the prisoners were received with great suspicion, while those of the Visiting Magistrates were immediately adopted as correct. The Right Hon, Baronet had not stated in his speech, and he begged to call his attention to the fact, that he ap proved of the treatment as felons of persons convictel of political offences. He voted for the motion, and not upoa technical details, thinking that no person convicted of a political offence should be treated as a felon. _ _ Mr. C. BUL LER rose amid loud cries for a division. He would detain the House but a few minutes. He begged to call attention to the fact that the persons whose cases were then before the House were guilty of those offences which had ever been designated as political. Their cases were the same in principle as those of Sir P. Burdett, Leigh Hunt, Mr. Cobbett, and others, who were never treated as felons, employed in degrading occu pations, fed on felons' fare, made to be their own tailors, or to suffer the illegal punishment of the itch.—(Laughter.) He thought this was not the time to increase the severity of punishment for these offences, and that the doing so would only create a feeling among the people that it was done with reference solely to the interests of a class.- -( Hear, hear, hear.) Mr. HAMILTON had told the Hon. Member for Finsbury he should support his motion, and, with all defe rence for the Right Hon. Baronet the leader of his side of the House, be had heard no argument which induced him to do otherwise. He hoped that the effect of the de bate would be to produce the desired alteration in prison discipline. Mr. WIL LIA MS rose to move that the debate should be adjourned to Friday next.—(No, no.) He thought the question was one of greet importance, and that as many Hen. Gentlemen were desirous of expressing their opinions, an opportunity should be afforded them of doing so.—(Go on, goon.) In compliance with the wish of the House, then, he would proceed. The Hon. Gen tlemen then proceeded to contrast the treatment of former political offenders with those whose case was now before the House. Would the Right Honourable Baronet have suffered Sir Francis Burdett to be im prisoned and treated in such a manner ?—( Hear.) He was certain that ho would not ; and, moreover, that if he had been in power, he would not have suffered it in the case of these persons. The question was not whether these men had been guilty of seditious offences of greater or less magnitude, but whether their treatment in prison was such as it ought to have been ?—( Hear, hear.) He thought the conduct of the Government had been highly reprehensible, and he should therefore vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury.—( Hear, hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said no one regretted more that he did any unnecessary harshness that m;ght have, been shown to those convicted in the recent prosecutions, He believed that when such cases were brought before the consideration of the Government, they had been corrected as soon as the information had been received; but when he found attempts made to excite sympathy in favour of those convicted by exclaiming against the new hardships of in stituting these convictions, he felt it his duty to enter his protest against it. In former times political offences were understood to be attacks upon the Minister of the day. Whatever gave offence to the feelings of individuals was a libel, and the Attorney-Generals of former times used to file informations ex officio for such publications as libels. He was not then going to enter into an invidious distinction between the present and past Governments, but the prosecutions for what were now called political offences, wore fur direct incitements to crime. He had Lad the honour of being Attorney-General longer than any individual during the present century, yet he had filed only one ex-officio information for a libel, and in con ducting that prosecution he had told the jury that unless they believed the defendant's intention was to incife to itiL surrection and plunder it would be their duty to acquit him.—( Hear, hear.) That question was put by the Judge to the jury, who, without hesitation, found a verdict of guilty. Now, he said the individual thus found guilty ought not to be treated with unnecessary harshness, but was this person to be considered as guilty only of what was called a political offence, and to have the sympathies of man kind called forth in his favour as one who was persecuted and oppressed ?—( Hear, hear.) He was engaged in pro secutions at Newport, Bradford, and Sheffield, in which the prisoners were convicted, and were now under going the sentences of transportation or impri s on ment. Mr. Feargus O'Connor boasted that he had not appeared in any of those transactions, but he (the Attorney- General) said that the publication of that which had a direct tendency, and with the intention to excite to crime, was one eq ual to that of which th ose persons h a d b een con victed. 1 his was the only ex officio information he had filed. He had presented Bills to the grand juries, and it was owing to these and the petty juries having done their duty, wad taken a different view of the case to some Hon. Gentlemen, that the peace of the country had been pre served.—( Hear.) He thought it his duty to protest against exciting sympathy in favour of those who had violated the law and committed offences which the safety of the country required should be visited with severe punishment. Mr. MU NTZ said some Hon. Members had expressed surprise that he had taken no part in the debate, but at the period the disturbances which had been adverted to occurred ha Birmingham he was 200 miles distant from that place, and all he knew on the subject was from hear say. But with respect to the motion before the house, whether the blame—for there was blame somewhere-- attached to the Government or to the Magistrates was the same thing to him, an , ./ to Lovett and Collins, and as the resolution only stated that blame attached to some one, he should support it. —( Hear, hear.) Mr. T. D UNCO MB E rose to explain, with reference to the petition which he had presented, and to which allthion had been made. Vincent wrote to him, informing him of the hardship he endured from the severity of the prison discipline, and added " If you thick that a petition would have any effect, and will make it known to us by letter, we will immediately forward one for presentation," whereupon he (Mr. D.) wrote him—" I have received your letter, and think the best thing you can do will be for each to send me a petition, setting for all the circum stances connected with his case, taking care that the al logations arc short and clear, and above all, that every fact touching your treatment is rather under than over stated, and I will again to call the attention of the House to the subject."—( Hear, hear.) There was, therefore, no ground for saying be sought the petitions, for the petitions sought him, and he felt it his dety to present them, as he now did, to take the sense of the House on the motion.—( Hcar, hear.) After a few words from Mr. F. MA ULE, which were inaudible, strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— the motion to rzo into Committee of Supp:y 117 For Mr. Duncombe's amendment against Mr. Duncornbe's amendment —BB The (;oin:.flittee of Supply was pos►poned till Mcnday vV The Report on the Poor-law Commission Bill was brought up, and that Bill wha ordered to be read a third time on Thursday. The Turnrike Trusts Bill was read a second time, and ordt red to he committed on Monday. The Population ( Ireland) Bill wLs read a second time, and ord, r d to be committed. Loid JOHN RUSSELL, in answer to a question from Sir R. Peel, said that it was not his intention to proceed with the New South \Vales Gavernment Bid during the prrst•nt Session. O n the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, it was ordered that the House at its rising should adjourn to Monday. The East India Mutiny Bill went through Committee, and tl.e Report was ordered to be read on Monday. The Prisons (Ireland) Bill was read a second time, and ordered to he committed on Monday. The Report on the Clergy Reserves Canada Bill was brought up. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ob tained leave to bring in a Bill to continue the Joint Stock Banking Act for a period of t:vo years. The other o:ders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Half-past Two o'Clock. RELEASE OF MR. ROBERTS. TO THE EDITOR or TILE WILTSHIRE INDEPENDENT. SIR,—II IS with extreme pleasure I forward you a copy of a letter from the Home Office, announcing the libera tion of Mr. Roberts:— (Corr ) " Whitehall, July 7, 1840. " MAD.OI,-1 am directed by the Marquis of Normanby to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 6th instant, and to acquaint you that your husband has been discharged from Fisherton Gaol on account of his bad state or health. " I am, Madam, your most obedient humble servant, S. M. PHILLIPS. " Mrs. Roberts, 21, Devonshire-buildings." This act of clemency on the part of the Government will tend more to the suppression of " sedition " than any amount of persecution could h.,ve done. I trust that the saute may result in the cases of other prisoners. Yours, Ste. Bath, July 8, 1840. R. K. PIIILP. We regret to say that no improvement has taken place in the weather since our last. The cold continues una hated, and heavy rain has fallen with little intermission ; but we should hope that t h e showers have been partial; for some of our letters, received this morning from the country, speak of the crops, of every description, as presenting a most hope ful and luxuriant appearance.—Dublin Everring Mail. SUICIDES. (From the Leamington Chronicle.) On Thursday last an inquest before G. C Green. way, Esq., the Coroner, was held at the Newbold Inn, on the bodies of the two unfortunate females taken from that part of the River Learn which adjoins Mr. Oldham's mill. John Smith, a porter, deposed to his discovery of two bonnets and a shawl on the bank near the mill-dam, as he was proceeding in that direction to his work a little before five o'clock on Wednesday morning. He went immediately to give notice to the parish constable, Mr. Roby, to whom he delivered the articles, together with a letter which he had found in one of the bonnets. Mr. Roby, without a moment's delay, directed the river to be dragged near the spot, where suspicion had been first excited ; and in a few moments the men thus employed drew up the body of a female, which proved to be that of Elizabeth Varney, a married woman, about twenty-one years of age, whose husband had lately enlisted as a soldier. On dragging again, they brought out the body of Anna Smith, who was stated to have been about three years younger than her unhappy companion in misfortune. Mr. Bushy, the surgeon, having been instantly sent for, arrived without loss of time ; but the bodies, which were perfectly cold, appeared to have been for several hours in the water, and all attempt to restore animation was of course perfectly useless. No marks of violence were discoverable on either ; and it was noticed that their, apparel seemed to have been se lected and put on with studied neatness. The first witness examined before the Jury on the inquiry respecting Elizabeth Varney, was her father, William Robins, who deposed to her having been in an unsettled state since her husband's enlistment, and that she could not be persuaded to remain at home. lie had not seen her since Saturday week. On the morn ing after the fatal occurrence, he had received by the post a letter which he produced, the handwriting of which was the same as that of the letter found in the bonnet. Jane Crump, on being interrogated ; deposed to the deceased having taken lodgings at her house, No. 24, in Oxford-street, on the same day as that on which the father mentioned having last seen her ; and that a per son named William Southam, whom she believed at first to be her husband, joined her there in the evening. On discovering the true state of the connexion, the wit ness gave them notice to quit. Southam left on Sun day, and Varney continued at the lodgings until about nine o'clock on Tuesday evening, when she went out, and never returned. William Southam's evidence agreed with that of Mrs. Crump ; and it appeared that he had been remon strated with both by his master and his companions for his improper intimacy with the girl. George Whorrall, a car-driver, in the employ of John Mellish, deposed to having seen the deceased at a quarter to nine on Tuesday evening, in company with another girl, whom he could not positively affirm to have been Anna Smith, though, on seeing the bodies, he thought that he recognised in that of Smith the as sociate of Varney on the evening in question. His evidence went to show that Varney had been inquir ing for Southam, who had kept purposely out of the way. He added, that, on wishing him " Good night," Varney had said, jocularly, " I shall drown myself to night," and the other had in the same tone said the same. The father of Varney, on being recalled, deposed to being on friendly te rms w i t h hi s daughter, and said his house might always have been a home for her if she wished to return. In the case of Anna Smith, after the same evidence had been taken regarding the discovery of her body, Hannah Ward, with whom she lived up to the time of her death, was the next witness brought under exami nation. From her statement it appeared that she had known her from the age of eight years, and in every fa mily wherein the poor girl had held a situation, her conduct had been pronounced correct, and her cha . -racter most respectable. This witness considered the deceased strictly virtuous, and had never seen any melancholy about her. She deposed to Smith having received a visit about a fortnight since from a young man out of work, who was proceeding to Coventry, and to her having asked permission at half-past eight on Tuesday evening to go out, and to the gown which she wore on that occasion not being the same as the one in which she was found dressed. The evidence of Eliza Willies, who lived in the same house, tended to prove that ever since the young man, above alluded to, and whose name was George John son, of Long Itchington, had been to visit Smith, she had always been in low spirits ; and that, whilst she and the deceased, who slept together, were in their room on the night before the sad occurrence, Smith had been more than usually agitated, and had said, crying, " It will go on, and on, till I kill myself." Mr. Roby mentioned having found a lock of hair. enclosed in paper, inside the unhappy creature's dress, and near her heart. The Jury, after some difficulty in arriving at an unanimous decision, agreed at length upon a verdict of " Found Drowned." The following are verbatim copies of the letters alluded to in the,. above report : Leamington, Juicy the 1. " Mrs. v y was my name i brought myselfe.to. greefe And shame by Leven one that near Lovede me So now my sorrau I planely see mark well the words that will be said by g w i was betrade At rest with him i near could be until he had his will of me to his fond tai!se I did give way And from the path of vurtew i did stray but o the oath he swore to me that i his lawful bride should be that if he proved falce he did say might he not prosper nor yet happey be. o i did promes on Sunday night to walk once more with my hearts delighte ore the human banks whear the billaus roare thear we did part to meet no more Since he As proved falce i ham resolved A watere grave this night to have ill plunge myselfe into the deepe Liveingen my frinds beinde to weep And for a token that t dide for Love thearo shall be sense A milk wite dove And over my watere tombe shall fly theare you will find my bode lie dear william when this you see remember how you silted me farewell vane world fake man A due i dround myselfe for Love you grant me one faveour this All i crave six young girls pray Let me have to bear me to my aileute gray All drest in wite A comeley show to take me to the tombe below o Ali young women wheare everc you be take warning of my Afful death teke w:'ruing then wile you Are young of niens deluden flatren tonges. " Departed this Life At ten o'clock this night July the 1 1840." " Leamington July the 1 1840. " Dear father And mother this comes with a sorafful heart to You And my brothers And to my Lovening Sister And to All that belonges to ma As you will see when you read this Letter that i ham no more on this earth As he Left me on Sunday morning And i have not seen him since and i couid not think of coming home Anney more And i did not know where to go And to stope in Learrington i couid not As i ham Bound on by every one so that i could not henre myself in this world Annoy Longer so i have rote this to you that you may feehte my close home And you will find them At 24 oxford Strete only to capes you will find at mrs no 4 king Strete and one Shife there And my pink frock you will find in wartvick stri•te At mrs pearse grene wetter A young woman that is there has note it lirr name is Ann hiknell And she will give yen too shillins or the frock A gainelier And my bonnet you will find at mrs meradeths so i have told you All that i have to say to Annoy one oily i2ive my kind Love to my brothers And to my S:ster but do not tel her of my death nor yet my hi other william dont weep my parents dear for your one child As the you had no other but i hope you will undo comfort in my youngest brother farewell vane world fake man A dew i drowoe myselfe for Love of you o i d;tl promes on sunday night to walk once more with my hearts delight ore the Imam banks where the belose roar there we did meet to part no more toy greele is greater than i can hear i ham disregarded evere ware i ham Like a flower that is cut down And on me now my Love dos frown. " Farewell my dear father And mother with A Akening heart ill bid you A dew tho in this world i shall not see you so i must conclude as i cannot do Anney more " So i remain your undutiful daughter -" E. V." A mystery yet remains to be unravelled, how and iacit she became so intimately and unfortunately ac quainted with the other woman, who exercised so power ful an influence over her mind as to induce her to com mit self-destruction. On the afternoon of Saturday last, the bodies of these iil-fated girls were followed by their affLeted relatives to the usual place of interment, amidst a large concourse of spectators ; and a scene of more heart-rending sorrow has seldom been w:tuessed within the sacred walls of the parish church, or the boundaries of its adjacent burial ground. The deepest sympathy was Evinced in the sufferings of their aged parents, thus heavily stricken both with shame and grief ; and surely, if we may judge from the behaviour of those present on this mournful occasion, more particularly among the younger branches of either sex, the sad spectacle cannot fail to have given many a salutary warning, and must have been productive of lasting benefit. There was one, at least, among the witnesses of this melancholy scene, whose deep contrition was almost as affecting as the deplorable circumstances of this double funeral ; those who noticed it believe it to have been sincere. The plates on tho respective coffins were thus in scribed :—" ELIZAETII VARNEY, Died 30th June, 1840 , Aged twenty-one years.''---" A. SMITH, Aged eighteen years, 1810." The pall that covered the remains of the latter wag supported by four young girls in neat white dresses ; and it WAS evident that her fate, from many previous recollections in her favour, excited the strongest com miseration, The Liberals of the county of Limerick are about to call a meeting requiring Colonel Fitzgibbon to retire from its representation, on the ground of his inability, from in disposition, to attend to its duties, EVENING EDITIOW FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE ST. JAMES'S PALACE, Jur.v 1, 18-10. The Queen was this day pleated to confer the honour of Knighthood upon John Fife, Esq., late Mayor-of Newcastle.. WHITEHALL, .1131.1 - 6, 1840. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Henry Perry. of White haven, in the county of Cumberland, Gent. to be a Master Ex traordinary in the High Court of Chan2ery. WHITEHALL, JULY 9. The Queen has been pleased to constitute and appoint Robert Ilandvside, Esq.. Advocate, to be Sheriff Depute of the shire or shjriirdom of Stirling, in the room of John Shaw Stewart, Esq., deceased. WAR OFFICE, 11l 1.1" 10. 11th Regiment of Light Dragoons—First Lieut. G. S. Jen kinson, from the Rifle Brigade, to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Smith, who retires, Jul . s 10. Ist Regiment of F oo t—L. Barron, M.D., to be Assistant- Surgeon, vice Brewster, who resigns, July 10. 2d Foot—Ensign R. Stephenson to be Lieutenant, by pur chase, vice Stock, who retires ; J. King, Gent , to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Stephenson, July 10. 4th Foot----E. J. Gibson, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Rice, appointed to the 72d Foot, July 10. 17th Foot—Lieutenant W. S. Hall, from the half-pay of the 18th Foot, to be Paymaster, vice Moore, deceased, July 10. 32d Foot—Gentleman Cadet C. T. King, from the Royal Military College, .to be Ensign, without purchase, vice Palk, deceased, July 10. 60th Foot—Captain J. Robinson, from half-pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice Bulinan, deceased, July 10. 72d Foot—Ensign J. C. Harris to be Lieutenant, by pur chase, vice Stuart, who retires ; Ensign H. Rice, from the 4th Foot, to be Ensign, vice Harris, July 10. 95th Foot—Ensign F. Smythe to be Lieutenant, by pur chase, vice Wood, who retires; J. H. Caress, Gent. to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Smythe, July 10. Rifle Brigade—Second Lieutenant and Adjutant E. A. Somerset to have the rank of Lieutenant, July 9 ; Second Lieu tenant W. S. Warren to be First Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Jenkinson, appointed to the 11th Light Dragoons, July 10; W. M. Aitchison, Gent., to be Second Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Warren, July 10. Royal Malta Fencible Regiment— With local and temporary Rank.—Brevet Major F. Bussiett, to be 'Major; Lie-tenant M. de M. Alessi, to be Captain, vice Bussiett ; Ensign N. Metrovich, to be Lieutenant, vice Alessi; Volunteer Cadet de Piro, to be Ensign, vice Metrovich, July 10. UNATTACHED.—lieutenant G. Monro, from 22d Foot, to be Captain, without purchase, July 10. MEMORANDUM.—The removal of Assistant-Surgeon G. B. Fry, from the 27th Foot to the 31st Regiment, and the ap pointment of Assistant-Surgeon J. Gillice, from the Staff to the Assistant-Surgeoncy of the 27th Foot, as stated in the Ga zette, May 29, are to be cancelled. Commissioned by the Lord Lieute nan t of Suffolk: Suffolk Borde rers Troop of Yeomanry Cavalry—The Hon. H. Major to be Lieutenant, vice Buttingham, resigned,June 13. _. . DECLARATIONS OF BANKRUTCY. EDWARD THOMAS, tailor, Aldermanbury, London. JOHN BAKER, tea-dealer, Taunton, Somersetahire. JOHN SAWBRIDGE, ribbon manufacturer, Coventry. BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED. JOB LEES, dealer, Manchester. BANKRUPTS. WILLIAM ROWBOTTOM, grocer, 11Iottram-in-Long dendale, Cheshire, to surrender July 18, and August 21, at ten, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Manchester. Pollitt, Hyde, Cheshire ; Appleby, King's-road, Bedford-row, London. WILLIAM ROBINSON, provision dealer, Liverpool, July 23, and August 21, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool. Hime, Liverpool; Chester, Staple Inn, London. ROBERT L &MB, iron -merchant, Stockton, Durham, August 7 and 21, at ten, at the Black Lion Hotel, Stockton. Lever, Ring's-road, Bedford-row, London ; Peacock, Dar lington. EDWARD TURK, factor, Birmingham, July 21, and August 21, at two, at the ?ew Royal Hotel, Birmingham. Chaplin, Gray's Inn-square, London ; Harrison, Birming ham. JOHN DILLON, brazier, Hereford, July 18, and August 21, at eleven, at the Green Dragon Hotel, Hereford. Guvelje, Skilbeck, and Hall, Southampton -buildings, London ; Bel lamy, Hereford. JOHN HOGG and FRANCIS SHARPE, cloth-mer chants, Leeds, July 25, and August 21, at twelve, at the Commissioners'. rooms, Leeds. Wilson, Southampton-street, Bloomsbury-square, London ; Payne, Eddison, and Fortt, Leeds. HENRY HUXIIASI, porter-merchant, Swansea, Gla morganshire, July 30, and Aug. 21, at eleven, at the Mack worth Arms Inn, Swansea. Pulling and Clayton, Temple, London ; Collinson, Swansea. ROBERT WILLIAMS, druggist, Llanrwst, Denbighshire, July 25, and Aug. 21, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liver pool. Norris, Allen, and Simpson, Holborn, London ; Robert and John Norris, Liverpool. - ADAM CLARK, draper, Market Rasen, Lincolnshire, July 25, and August 21, at twelve, at the Saracen's Inn, Lin. coln. Wilkinson, Lincoln; Wood and Ellis, Corbet-court, Gracechurch-street, London. GEORGE BROOKES, draper, Manchester, July 27, and August 21, at two, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Manchester. Alakinson and Saunders, Elm• court, Temple, London ; Atkin son, Birch, and Saunders, Manchester. JOHN HUNTON, joiner, York, July 27 and August 21, at two, at the Falcon Inn, York. Williamson and Hill, Ve rulam-buildings, Gray's Inn, London ;,Blanchard and Richard' son, York. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, 13asinghall-street. J. Pinkerton, glass cutter, High-street, Southwark, July 31, at eleven—J. G. James, wine merchant, Bucklerabury, Aug. 4, at twelve—S. T. Bidwell, common brewer, Chertsey, Aug. 3, at half-past eleven. _ In the Country. J. Cox, silk throwster, Nottingham, Aug. 5, at one, at the George the Fourth Hotel, Nottingham—J. Norbury, innkeepers Macclesfield, Aug. 3, at two, at the Macclesfield Arms Hotel, Macclesfield —L. Bendle, draper, Barnstaple, Devonshire, Aug. 4, at one, at the George Inn, Southmolton—J. Hoptom E. W. Peniston, J. Peniston, and C. Rose, dyers, Leeds, July 31, at four, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Leeds--W• Green, cattle dealer, Gorleston, Suffolk, Aug. 4, at twelve, et the Angel Inn, Great Yarmouth—E. H. Butt, innkeeper , Che'tenham, Aug. 3, at twelve, at the Royal Hotel, Chelten ham—G. Warburton, victualler, M anc h es t er , A ug . 5 , at ten,at the Commissioners -rooms, Manchester—T. Jones, draper. Patricroft, Lancashire, Aug. 4, at ten, at the Commissionere rooms, Manchester—W. Stone and J. Gibson, tailors, Bristol, . Aug. 5, at one, at the Commercial-rooms, Bristol--W. boy draper, Pontypool, Monmouthshire, Aug. 7, at two, at the Commercial-rooms, Bristol—S. Smith, cotton spinner, Stay' ley, Cheshire, Aug. 5, at twelve, at the Commissioners'-rooms. Manchester. CERTIFICATES, JULY 31. T. Tovey, innkeeper, Warminster, Wiltshire—J. Marsden, grocer, Summit, Lancashire—J. Baker, screw forger, Etting• shall, Staffordshire—E. Salisbury, sizer of cotton twist, Black burn, Lancashire—J. Green, oilman, Knightsbridge-terrace. Hyde-park—J. Matthews, corn factor, Bramby-upon-Dueoe Yorkshire. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. J. Angell, J. Angell, and J. Angt 11, jun (so far as regsa , J. Angell)—R. Dale, I'. Dale, and H. Boydell, timber use chants-11. Williams and E. Acton, vinegar merchants, Gl4 st" center—R. Selby and T. P. Bacon, wine merchants, 8ur1,4 b• street, Strand—W. Llewellyn and W. Naish, boot makft* Bristol—Musgrave, Carr, Rayner, and Co., wool scribb'Srns Pudsey, Yorkshire (so far as regards H. Wade)—W. Hods, and J. Cooper, ironmongers, Ludlow, Salop—H. J. Price and J. P. Jones, calico manufacturers, Manchester—J. stow and S. Tetley, machine makers, Halifax, Yorkshire--" Edwards and J. Glessing, musical string makers, Bell-lane* Spitaltields—W. Walter and S. Sargent, grocers, Hooe, Susses —.G. and W. Iligginbotto m , carriers, Manchester—R. and i• Shaw, Loot ma k ers, Bury, Lancashire—T. Cooke and Ci Coombs, w oo ll en warehousemen, Basinghall-street—B. N. an d 'F. L. Tripp, timber merchants. Gloucester—J. Parker and J• Parker, jun., painters, Bristol—S. Constable and J. Taylor, iron merchants, Wednesbury, Staffordshire. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. HENDERSON and CURREN, builders, Edinburgh, Jul! 15 and Aug. 12, at one, at the Old Signet Hall, Royal Ex change, Edinburgh. JOHN WILSON, soap manufacturer, Partick, near Gigs' gow, July 15 and Aug. 4, at one, at the Chambers of Messrs. Aluirhead and Pollock, Glasgow. JOHN DONALD, auctioneer, Glasgow, July 17 and Aug 7, at twelve, at the Black Bull Inn, Glasgow. SETS of PLATED CORNER DISHES, wi th or without War mers . Th e price of the Set of Four Dish 6". and Covers, without Warmers, varies from Eight to T eo Guineas. The Warmers are from Five to Nine Guineas the Set. Engravings of the various patterns will be forwarded, po t five, if application is made, post paid. The dishes are complete io themselves without w armers, and the handles take off, t" covers thus forming four extra dishes when required. T. COX SAVORY, Silversmith, &c., No. 47, C. , rnhill (Seven doors from Gracechurch-street ), London SHEFFIELD MADE : ) LATE[ DISH. CO"' VERS.—A. B. SAVORY and SONS, Golihvniths, No. 1 4, Corniull, London, opposite the Bank of England, submit for selection, in their show-rooms, every large variety 01 1111E11.- FIELD SILVER-PLATED DI N H COVERS, from F , teen Guineas the set; they :lave sliver edges and handles, at silver shields for engraving; ..• e'tst or coat of arms. Double Dome Pattzrii. - The Melon Pattern. Size...i d. £ d fr I Plated Dish Covers, 20 in. 13 IF! size. ! ;%-teil Dish Ccver, 20 in. 1 I ' 1 „ Di s h ('over, 16 in. 4 7 , Dish Cover, Ib in. 414 Dish Covers, 14 in. 5 111 tMt Dish Covers,l4 in. G 6_, Per Set els 1Z Per 5et......X1i 17 , Plated C urr i e or lla6h Dishee S even Guismas the Set. 17 A Current, Stamped as a Newspaper, containing- drawing , and every information relatiT, to the purchase of silver o r Shefr field plate, may be had on applicata m , or will he sent iota tke ountry, free of posta.e in to a paid letter. I RTHS. On the %II inst., at Brotherton, the lady of Captain John Bentham. of a daughter. On the 6th inst., in Myddleton-square, Mrs. R. W. Smith' , of a son. On the 7th inst., the lady of the Rev. Edward Tagart, Bays water, of a son. On the Bth inst., in Queen-square, Westminster, the lady of Stephen Vertue, jun., Esq., of a daughter, still born. On the Bth inst., Mrs. John Mullett, of Clapham-road-I)la°' of a daughter. On the Bth inst., the lady of A. J. Sutherland, M.D., of Fludyer-street, Westminster, of a son. Ou the Bth inst., in Earl-street, Blackfriars, Mrs. Thomas Freeman, of a son. MRD. On the 2,1 i ns t., at St. A n n e ! W estminster, Mr.J. B. Mal colm, to Caroline, second daughter of Mr. J. Millard, late of Cheapsid e . On the 7th inst., at Islip, Oxon, Thomas Stephens Davis, Esq., Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, to Catherine Sarah , eldest daughter of the late Charles Butler, Esq., of Cheams Surrey. O n the 7th inst., at Fulford Church, near York, Thorax; Fauleoner, Esq , of Goldington, Bedford s hi re , to Elizabe th Amelia, youn ges t d aug h ter of the late Rev. ' T. C. Rudston Read, of Frickley York. DED On the Ist i ns t., i n B I vo . ronn-square, Dorothy, relict of John Larking, Esq., former') of Clare House, Kent. On the 9th inst., in Manchester -street, James% Preseott Warde, Esq., of the Theatre Royal Covent-garden, aged 48. On the 9th inst., at Henrietta -street, Covent-garden, r• Clerlco, Esq., M.D., aged 62. On the 4th inst., in Kensington -square, John Silvester, Est!. On the sth inst., at Nun-green, Peckham-rye, Mr. Benja— min Pownall, aged 92, On the sth inst., Harriet Beresford Beverly, eldest daughter of C. J, Beverly, Esq., of the Grove, Hackney. On the 4th inst., at Hastings, Francis Scott James, womb son of G. P. 11. James, Esq., aged 4. ......---..,„,,,-- Lonflon : Printed and Published by :1111113)0 YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, at The Sun Orifice, No. 112, Strand, in the county of Aliddlesex.—Satinday, July 11, Ib4tk; room, the 844 AND; , 11( the G ttpital "T 'Prieto/ tile afl eottlki( at la r g " lt tailed 1 theref c The nt held I the n " 2,l sh 210,02 Surplus ] It Was In' t i r , at t 44t0 v , c1 b, e ctoThat t rs, t''"ed ti 4 '4 tt Th S e a t ir n, „ et Zionve:llEl h at Cl a ,, k f of Ut t" \\. "ti to Chai :'(tr a , I , "heB,