The Express.
London, England, 1847-01-29 00:00:00

law office, who introduced a friend into that de-
partment, and received a sum of money for so doing.
Mr. Lewis examined Jones with respect to the tran'aetion.
Joneshad been guilty of what amouided toe misdemeanour,
end it was the duty of Lewis, as his superior officer, to cau-
tion him that anything be might state would be used in
evidence against him. Did ho do so? No! With the
poor-law commissioner's perfidy, he got all he could from
Jones, and then, acting as a principal prosecutor in the case,
used ell he had said against him ! 'the present Atterney-
General, speaking of this caw, said in open court " The
commissioners do not want to go on—the Attorney-General
does not want to go on—hut Sir James Graham does—that
man is a perfect demon." That was the present Attor-
ney-General's opinion. lie (Mr. Ferrand) did not quote it
offensively to the late Homo Secretary—( " Oh, oh," and a
laugh)—but he was quite prepared to juetily the use of the
expression. But now be would tell them what Mr. Coode,
the late assistant poor-law commissioner, said of those with
whom he acted. When Parker fell into disgrace, Cootie heard
of it accidentally. He wrote to Parker, telling him that there
was a plot against him in the office. He told him in his
letter that though he knew enough of the commissioners to
know that they would sacrifice anybody, yet be was amazed
and disgusted at the cowse they were taking with regard to
" Therefore." said he, " pray use me without eciruple;
prescribe to me any course you please; and if I do
not do my possible, count me one of the manes fit to
serve my present masters." (Hear, hear, and laughter.)
That was Mr. Coode's opinion of the commissioners;
the opinion of a man who knew all that was going on,
both at the poor-law office, and at the Horne-office ; who
was deep in the secrets of the government and the commis-
sioners, and who, consequently, was well able to judge of the
character of the parties concerned. (Hear, hear.) Now,
having given these little specimens of the opinions of the
parties carrying out the law concerning each other, he'.
would relate to the house three scenes which had taken place
at the Home-office, in the committee-room, and in a police- I
court. First, for the scene at the Home-office. It would
be recollected that early last session Mr. Wukley put
a question t 3 Bir James Graham as to whether he
could give any information respecting a practice said to
be prevalent in the Andover Union Workhouse of feeding
on rotten flesh, and picking rotten bones. Tue right hon.
baronet seemed horror-struck. He promised immediate
inquiry. He said he would write to the poor-law commis-
sioners that night. Ho did so. The poor law commissions's
sent down to Andover, to institute an investigation, a par-
son, in his (Mr. Ferranti's) opinion, ve7 improper to have
been appointed, namely, the very weistant commissioner who
had charge of the Union. (Hear, hear.) But though a
very improper person, the assistant commissioner did his
duty. He made a report. On his return to London, be
had an interview with Sir James Graham at the Home-
office. During the interview, Sir Edmund Head came in,
and a discussion ensued as to the course the government
should take. Would it be credited ? The right hon. bare.,
a member of parliament, a minister of England, the home
secretary of the Queen, actually tried to induce these two
gentlemen to be parties to a statement which was untrue,
for the purpose of deceiving the parliament of the empire!
Behold the picture! A home secretary instructing two
public officers in the art of dissimulation—(a laugh)—a mi-
nister of the crown trying to make two gentlemen
parties to a falsehood, by talking them over, and
trying to bamboozle them ! " Now," said Sir James
Graham, " what shall I tell the house ? It will never do to
produce this report it will be stock in trade for TAe Times
for • twavemouth. I will tell you what I will say. I will
say, that I immediately caused inquiry to be instituted
that the assistant commissioner who was sent down has
verbally reported to me the result of his investigation that
he found that there were some persons in the workhouse' of
depraved appetites,' who had taken to gnawing bones. If
I confine the report to this, the statement will probably
suffice. As for the report, it must not be produced . it must
be treated as if it never had been made." (Hear, hear.)
That was the evidence given by Mr. Parker before the Ando-
ver committee. It was made at the committee, in the presence
of the Under-Secretary of State (Mr. Manners Sutton), who
was now sitting next to Sir James Graham, and who never
contradicted a word of it. If it was not true, why, indeed, did
not the late home-secretary go down to the committee and
contradict it himself? He was too wary for that. He took
good care not to go down to the committee-room, but to
keep himself out of the reach of the inquiry. No one
Gould doubt, however, that he was the prime
mover in all the schemes and plots which were
divo'ged. Lewis was only the puppet: Sir James
Graham pulled the strings. But now as to the Nene in the
committee-room. Mr. Christie, a member of the committee,
proposed to ask Mr. Parker whether the commiseioners were
in the habit of giving instructions to their clerks as to the
statements they should make concerning proceedings in the
otfice. There was nothing wrong, as it seemed to him, in
that inquiry. An investigation wan going forward as to the
proceedings of these people, and it was highly necessary that
such facts should be investigated. Mr. Manners Sutton,
however, got up in a great state of agitation, and exclaimed,
" I must have the room cleared if that question is to be per-
sisted in." The room was cleared accordingly. During
the interval, Mr. Manners Sutton rushed out of the room
in a state of great agitation followed in a short time
by the judicial Mr. Jas. Stuart Wortley, Judge• Advocat-
e laugh)—and it was speedily rumoured that ?dr,
Manners Sutton bad challenged Mr. Christie for asking
the question above recited. That question, he (Mr. Ferrand)
would here remark, had never yet been replied to. It was
one of great importance, and the country would never be
satisfied until the whole facts were elicited. It was said
that the main cause of the challenge which passed between
Mr. Mennen Sutton and Mr. Christie was this: Mr.
Manners Sutton said that Mr. Christie would not have
oohed the question, if he had not known that the Times
reporter was present—tea insinuation which Mr. Christie
declared that he treated with thorough contempt. But
here he came to the scene at the police court. Upou hearing
of what had passed in the committee-room, Mr. Parker,
who was a barrister, immediately proceeded to the police
court at Westminster, where he obtained an interview with
the presiding magistrate—the magistrate, be it re-
membered, who was responsible to the Home Secre-
tary for his proceedings—(hear, hear,)—and to whom he
applied for a warrant against the Under Secretary of State—
(a laugh)—very much, of course, to the worthy magistrate's
surprise and consternation. However, a warrant was made
out, and " a policeman of great size and strength "—(a
laugh)—was despatched according to the report to bring the
body of the Under Secretary of State before the court, where
he was bound over afterwards to keep the peace. But the
interruption had had the effect intended it had checked the
answer. And he (Mr. Ferrand) asked, with all gravity, was
it right, was it just, was it honest and honourable, to refuse
him an inquiry whilst a question calculated to elicit as
unjust and as infamous a proceeding as had ever been heard
of remained till this day unreplied to. (Hear, hear.)
But what was the opinion of the committee about these
revelations ? They declared that on a review of the
proceedings of the et nnotissioners, especially in the case of
?dr. Parker, there appeared to be much that Was irregular
and arbitrary, not in accordance with their functions, and
of a character to shake the public confidence in the adminis-
tration of the law. Addressing himself, then, to the present
Beereary of State for the Home Department, he begged to
ask, "Are these men yet in office? " (Hear, hear.) Were,
they WM exeraising power over millions of their fellow-
matures? (Hear, hear.) And he would ask further,
was it the intention of the government to screen them
from further inquiry into their conduct? Was it their inten-
tion to league themselves with the members of the late
administration for that purpow, and had they coalesced
to stifle this inquiry? (Hear.) If they had, they
might be assured that the country would not rest until
they had changed their course. Bat now he came to
another question. 'Three or four years ago, he bad brought
under the consideration of the house an attempt which was
being made by the poor-law authorities to erect a tread-
wheel in the union workhouse at Halifax. Oa that occasion,
gir James Graham denied, in the flattest manner, that any
such thing had been proposed. At the very moment that
denial was given, the specifications for the works, and an esti-
mate of the cost, were recorded upon the minutes of the
union board. Mr. Clements, an asaistant commissioner,
went down to the board of guardians, and was inetrumeutal
in obtaining the passing of a minute condemning him (Mr.
Ferrand) for what he had stated. That was a breach of
privilege; and he (Mr. Ferrand) being anxious to uphold
the privileges of that house, came down and protested against
Mr. Clemente's proceedings. Well, how did the helm act?
The right hon. member for Tarnworth, exercising his usual
plausibility, induced the noble lord at the head of the go-
vernment to save Mr. Clemente by sacrificing the privileges
of the house. What was the consequence? Mr. Clements
grew bolder and more audacious, until at last, on
one occasion, he shook his fist in the face of the
chairman of the Halifax board of guardians, and told
him, " What you say is false; and you know it to
be false." ( Hear and a laugh.)'But now to return
to the great Jenkin Jones case. When Mr. Jenkin Jones
found that he was to be brought up for judgment he wrote
a letter to the late Home Secretary. lie told him that he
deliberately charged Mr. Lewis and another of the com-
missioners with acting in direct contravention of the act of
parliament, by individually issuing orders under the seal of
the board, with the name of another commissioner fraudu-
lently added thereto afterwards. He requested the atten-
tion of the government to the fact that the commissioners
were actually committing this misdemeanor daily. He
(Mr. Ferranti) could imagine Sir J. Graham's alarm on re-
ceiving that letter. Of course, he would have sent for Mr.
Lewis. " This," he would have said to him, "is an alarm-
ing businem. This fellow is going to tell all ; he mint be
made safe, for he knows a great deal too much." (Laughter.)
Whether this passed or not Jenkin Jones's communication
bad a potent effect. Two days after, a letter was addressed
to him, saying " that Mr. George Lewis and the com-
missioners had no wish to injure him, and that if
he would plead guilty, they would net press for judgment."
He had been brought up for judgment despite their dietiuct
pledge to the contrary, and he was sentenced to twelve
months' imprieonment. Before be had been long in prison,
he petitioned the Home Secretary, but obtained no answer.
la three months afterwards, he wrote to Mr. Coodc,
recall-
iog to him that the petition he had unavailingly sent to the
Home Secretary had been approved of by the eommiseioners,
that Mr. Lewis had promised to support it with the were.
hary, and that, unless something was done, he would not
endure such treatment, but would take his own course. Mr.
Coode called upon him, told him not to be hasty, and very
shortly afterwards, without any further proceedings on his
part, he was released front prison' having undergone only
eight months' emifisement, instead of the twelve tis which
kirhad been adjudged. To show how little the persecution
of Mr. Jenkin Jones by the commissioners had injured him
in the opinion of those who knew him, it would be sufficient
to say, that the assurance-office to which he bad been at-
tached, before he entered the service of the commissioner.,
reinstated hint in his old position immediately on his quitting
pwson, and made him a present of 100 gs. In the committee
Mr. Christie bad attempted in every poreible way to extract
from Mr. Lewis an explanation of the mode in which he
conceived Mr. Jenkin Jones could have injured the commis-