The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-04-24 00:00:00

THE OFFICIAL EXPLANATION.

In the 'House of Commons, on Tileslay evening, Mr. Scour.
Sell asked the Secretory of State f r the Home Department
whether there was any inundation for a statement which had
appeared in some of the newspapers, to the effect that sir
Eardley C. Eardlev had been set free by his orders. on the
application of one of his colleagues. and wheth. r Sir E rraky
C. Eardley was at present in this country Fr nearly 21
years it had beets his list to hold a situation that brought him
into communication with the and lie could speak
with pert ct conadence as to the general care and imparti-
ality exercised in that office in cases of tins description.
Mr. Bruce: I might content myself by saying that for
none of these statements is there the slightest foundation.
But as insinuations have been made gravely impugning the
impartial administration of justice, the Howe stray require
some satisfaction, and will, I hope, allow me to state rather
more fully what are the real facts of the case. . Hear, hear)
Sir E. Eardley was convicted of bigamy in January, 1868,
and received a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment with
hard labour. About the month of July application was
made to the Home Office for a remission of his sentence, on
; the ground of ill-health. That appiication was referred. In
the month of October following the application was re-
newed, with a medical certificate stating that Sir E Eardley
was suffering strider grave tisorders, and that his life
would be imperilled by his continuance in prison. My right
hon. ft lend the then Home Secretary ,11. r. Hardy), not con-
tent with that which was the ordinary certificate, directed
a special inquiry to be made by Mr. Perry, the inspector of
Prisotis Sir. Perry made a caretul itiverdigation, and re-
ported that the prisoner was at that time suffering from
asthma anti bronchitis, that he also had symptims of pul-
monary complaint, and that on that very morning he had I
suffered from an attack of that most painful disease—angina
pectoris. Under these circumstances, in the case of an ordi-
nary prisoner, it would have been the practice of the Home
Office to release him at once ; but my right hon. friend Mr.
Hardy, only thought it to be his duty to allow this prisoner
to lie released on the coudition of expatriation—that Is,
that he was to leave this country fir the rest of his sentence.
Immediately after my accession to office I received an appli-
cation praying for a prolongation of the fourteen days' time
which my right hon. friend had granted him, in order to
alliw Sir E. E irdley to make preparations fir leaving the
country l refused to grant the prolongation of the fourteen
days, and I received information that on the 7th of January
Sir E. Eardley hail left this country. I have every reason to
believe that he has never returned to it, and that he is now
abroad. With respect to another portion of the question,
whether the sentence was remitted on the application of my
right boss, friend the First Lord of the Admiralty, I am au-
thorised to say that neither directly nor indirectly through
their common man of business did my right hon friend ever
apply for the release of the prisoner. (Cheers.) That state-
ment has no foundation. It is one of those statements which
if made upon such aethority against a private individual
would he received, I think, with general indignation, and as
made against a public man I leave it to the judgment of the
public. Cheers ;
Mr. Hardy said he could confirm what his right bon.
friend hail stated with regard to the First Lard of the
Admiralty Ile had had nothing whatever to do with the
release of the prisoner. The ea,e was treated in the ordinary
way, but with special care, as the Home Secretary had just
stated. Under the special circutwitances, he thought it his
duty to imp,ae conditions with respect to the relaxation of
the imprisonment. (Hear, bear.)