The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-04-15 00:00:00

1

k otl

• P.IRLIAMENTART INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Tevanwr, APaIL 1L

Yr. Adrian, from the Treasury, presented the annual Aceotatie
el the inerease and decrease of salaries, pensions, and expenses Of
the-public departments of Government.
Mr. Mitre Sumner. Mr. Davenport, and several other Meet.
hers of the House of Commons, brought up two private Bills,
irhich were read a tint time.
CATHOLIC CLAIMS.
• The LORD CHANCELLOR
.presented a petition from the
parishes of Wybuty and Whitley, in the county of Southampton,
mining that the House would not grant any further concessions to
the Catholics. His Lordship observed, that the petition was res-
pectfully worded and properly expressed.—Laid on the table.
Lord ARDEN mcsented a similar petition from the town and
neighbourhood of Ruth.—Laid on the table.
Lord KENT ON presented a similar petition from the inhabit.-
antts of Whitechurch, in Salop, signed by 4110 oldie most respect-
able potions in that town.—Laid on the table.
• The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented a similar petition from
Dan Helloed, in Nottmghamehire. The Noble Duke observed.
that he hoped the table would be covered with petitions on the same
'object. He was convinced that unless the nation stepped forward
and made known the feeling that so universally existed—the feeling
vt which every honest man must participate--there was cone'der-
ethle fear as to the result that might take place. The petition he had
now the honour to present was sot unworthy of their Lordships'
notice.
The petition was then read.
Lard KING said, that he felt it necessary to notice the observe-
t'ons of the Noble Duke, who had bored to see their Lordships'
table covered with inch petitions as he had just presented, and who
bad expressed his opinion that they must be supported by every
honest man ; thus inferring that one.third of his Majesty's subjens
were dishonest, and that rot only them, but all who did not come
forward to oppose them, were dishonest also. To this mode of res.
toning he (Lord King) would decidedly object.
Earl DARNLEY-also objected to the observations of the Noble
Duke.
Laid on the table.
QUARANTINE LAWS.
Earl DARNLEI then said, that he felt it his duty to take
rdeantage of the opportunity of calling their Lordships' attention to
ealeject at' very great importance ; the subject he alluded to was
:he Quarantine Laws. He understood from what had passed in the
oehire House that his Majesty's Ministers had granted permission
lo vessels to land their cargoes of cotton without examination. lie
Nought this subject should be treated with great consideration,
sad most deliberately. That their Lordships should pause before
they did away with those laws which had been so long our safe.
gnsris—which had fur more than a century preserved us from in.
initial. It was his intention to call the attention of their Lord.
Chips to this subject en Tuesday next.
SCOTCH PEERS TRIAL BILL.
Lard COLCHESTER brought up the Report of the Committee
en the Scotch Peers Trial Bill, and afterwards brought in a Bill
'ounded upon it, which was rend a first time.
JUDGE KLNRICK.
The Earl of ESSEX said, that a few weeks since he bad ven-
t:lmi to call the attention of their Lordships to the subject of the
Welch Judge Kenrick, who was also a Surrey Magistrate. He
then asked* question of the Noble and Learned Lord on the NVool.
rack, to whin question, however, he had not received a satisfactory
aoswer. Het Lord Essex) had wished to make the proceedings of
the Court of King's Bench the subject of a motion, but there were
scene technical objections to such a measure. Since the period he
slued to, another act of gross violation of justice had been cont.
-ratted by that Judge; hr would not state the particulars, as they
tad been fully reported in the public papers, together with the
epeeth of the Attorney-General, who marked, in the strongest
manner, his disgust at what had occurred, and several 31agistrates
°flaunty had earn-need similar sentiments from the Bench. lie
'tad heard that -Kenrick still retained his situation as a Welch
:age, and alic as a Justice of the Peace. Every one kneo- that
.he proceedings to which he alluded were a gross violation of jus-
tice. He only wished to know if the Noble and Learned Lord had
received any communication on the subject from the Court of
King's Bench. It must then remain for the Noble and Learned
Lord to act in he thought proper.
The LORD CHANCELLOR replied, that he had not received
any such communication.
The Earl of ESSEX said, If the Noble and Learned Lord did not
think fit to remove such a person from his office, he (Lord Essex)
cad not another word to say.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, that he believed the Welsh
,'edges stood in the same situation with other Judges, and could
not be removed, except by an address to the Crown.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that with respect to the
ofd2e of Judge, no Juclee could be removed except by an Address
to his Majesty from both Ilouscs of Parliament. But with respect
to the office of Justice of the Peace, great care should be always
taken by the Custodes notubestee of the different counties, as to
what persons they recommended to be appointed as lit persons to
fulfil the duties attached to them. If a conviction of a Magistrate
sooh place before the Court of King's Bench, the usual mode was to
communicate the fact to the Chancellor, who generally thought
re hit duty to remove the offending party. But he (the Lord Chan-
cellor) felt it necessary to mention a circumstance which bad oc-
eureW in Wales, and which might show the necessity of great
caution in such a case. A Magistrate in Wain had been accused
ley affidavit of en act which no Magistrate or Gentleman should be
gality or fle (the Lord Chancellor) was applied to to strike out
e name of this person from the magisterial list, as the offence
with which be was charged was, that of appropriating to his own
ace certain stems of money, which were levied as tines upon indi-
viduals convicted before him. Accusation. thank God, in this
country we, not conviction. He (the Lord Chancellor) had refused
to remove him, and it turned cut that the Magistrate prosecuted
!vend convicted of perjury every person who had signed the affi-
davit against him. How should he (the Lord Chancellor) have
eCit if he bed struck out from the list of Magistrates this guiltless
individual ? In cenclusien he would observe, that no communica-
tion had been made to him from many Court of Justice respecting
tit:spyEn (Kenrick), and he could not act on such information,
at he had received it only from newspapers.
The 'limn then adjourned.