The Sun.
London, England, 1855-07-25 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVEN 1. JULY 25 1855

charge of the bill in the hope that it might pass this
session ; which, though it might not give the tenant-
right party all thEy desired, yet, on the whole, might
so far satisfy one party without inflicting injury upon
the other. But the Government had been very much
disappointed in that expectation. The progress of the
bill had been retarded by lengthened discussions and
divisions in great number, and they had now arrived at
a period of the session that he thought they might con-
clude, without any great stretch of imagination, that
the bill, the further progress of which, it was announced,
would be likely to be attended with further discussions
and divisions, they could not with any rational expecta-
tion look to it as likely to become law this session.
This being a final day in the house for receiving bills
from this house, and for the other reasons he had stated,
he moved that the chairman report progress. (Hear.)
Mr. F. FRENCH expressed great astonishment at
the course taken by her Majesty's Government on this
bill, which he understood they had entered into an
arrangement with lie Irish members, that they (the
Government.) would bring their whole force to carry.
Mr. KENNEDY rejoiced that the bill was not to be
proceeded with this session, because he believed it would
inflict injury upon the tenant class of Ireland.
Mr. DUFFY considered that if the bill had passed it
would have been a cure instead of a benefit to Ireland.
Mr. J. G. PFrILLIMORE defended the vote he had
given on this bill, particularly as regarded the 14th

THE LATE DISTURBANCES IN HYDE- '
PARK. 1

INQUIRY INTO THE ALLEGED MISCONDUCT
OF THE POLICE (YESTERDAY).
Examination of Sir Richard Mayne.—Continued from
our first edition of yesterday.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley—What do you un-
derstand by that ?—Was it the police or the people who
were hurt ?
Sir R. Mayne—Some of the people ; but some of the
police were likewise injured. The report further stated
that no prisoner had been taken to Vine-street previous
to their arrival. All was then tranquil. A return he
had made front the charge-sheets showed that 10 per-
sons were apprehended for felony ; 20 for assaults on
the police, of whom 9 were discharged, 5 of them by
entering into their own recognisances ; 13 for re-
sisting the police,' 13 of whom were discharged ; 24.f0r
throwing stones, none of whom were discharged. He
found that, connected with the proceedings of the Ist
July, 4 police were assaulted ; 1 struck in the
back with a stone slightly, 1 knocked down by
a blow on the head, and slightly cut ; 1 thrown
down and slightly injured ; one eye blackened from a
stone thrown at him. Sir Richard then read further-
-45 assaulted, 7 kicked, 25 struck with stones, and 13
struck with sticks and pieces of hurdles. One prisoner
rescued, but not injured. He considered Superinten-
dent Hughes eminently qualified for such a duty as that
on the Ist of July from his antecedents, and Sir Richard
entered at lesgth into his past services, observing
that public bodies had petitioned for his services
on account of his tact and judgment where large num-
bers of persons congregated. The stewards of Ascot
recently presented Superintendent Hughes with 101.
gratuity for his services at the races over his expenses.
Every policeman has a book of regulations presented
him before his appointment, and he belongs to a pro-
bationary class, where he is questioned as to their
regulations, before he -goes on duty.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley asked Sir Richard,
seeing that in the regulations inspectors had the power
Of taking bail in cases of petty misdemeanour, or offences
of summary conviction, how it was that bail was refused
to persons apprehended on the Ist of July ? Were any
special instructions regarding bail sent by him to the
police-offfoe ?
Sir R. Mayne—There were.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley—What were the
instructions ?
Sir R. Mayne—At 10 o'clock on Sunday night the
superintendent of Vine-street station sent to know, as
the cells were crowded, if he might remove some of the
prisoners to Marylebone station. He was at that time
speaking to an inspector as to the propriety of taking
bail, and be (Sir R. Mayne) thought, from looking at
the act, that the persons in custody, being apprehended
for rioting, did not come within the meaning of the
act relative to bailable' cases. At that time
probably the parties might have been charged with the
serious offence of rioting. It was not until after consul-
' tation with the law authorities that he knew how the
prisoners were to be charged. It was a matter of pru-
dence, and not of law, that mace the charges of
summary convictions, that the feeling of excitement
might sooner die away.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley—On Monday night
bail was taken Were any fresh instructions given ?
Sir Richard Mayne—No, none whatever. He pre-
sumed then it was known the persons were to be charged
with minor offences. He had seen no occasion to alter
his opinion. It was not his duty to inspect the cells in
Vine-street ! The station was the old watch-house, and
had been much improved of late. The cells were neces-
sa'v for ordinary purposes.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley said the commis-
sioners had inspects' the cells, and considered them in
tolerably good condition. They were small and dark,
but Many of the witnesses they thought had been mis-
taken es to the ventilation.
IVIr. Commissioner Armstr mg—The long cell, it ap-
re ars to me, can never keep dry.
Sir Richard Mayne said he must refer the Commis-
sioners to the surveyor with reference to the state of the
cells. _

clause.
'Colonel GREVILLE approved of the conduct of the
noble lord in withdrawing the bill at this late period of
the session. He expressed a hope that another Irish
bill (the Dwelling Houses Bill) which had been intro-
duced by a right hon. gentleman a late Secretary for
Ireland (SirW. Somerville), would not be persevered in
this session.
Mr. V. SCULLY expressed great astonishment .at
the withdrawal of the bill, a course to which he
begged to say he was no party whatever.
After some observations from Mr. Kirk, Mr. Ma-
guire, Lord Name, and Mr. J. D. Fitzgerald,
Mr. DE VERE regretted the postponement of this
measure, because be believed it would give rise to the
renewal of that agitation which bad been the curse of
Ireland. He hoped after the explanation that had been
given by the noble lord at the head of the Government,
the noble lord would recollect the pledge they had
given on this measure, and would carry it out to the
letter in another session if they were in power. (Hear,
hear.)
Mr. BRADY deprecated the course that had been
pursued by the Government with respect to this mea
sure, and felt no doubt that its withdrawal would create
great discontent and dissatisfaction in Ireland. The
measure was calculated to improve the value of property
in Ireland, and it was to be regretted that it should be
withdrawn,' as it was a measure calculated to cement
the people of the sister mintry to England. (Hear.)
Mr. NAPIER felt afraid that, in the state of circum-
stances at present existing, the noble lord at the head
of the Government could not have adopted any other
course than he had done at this the eleventh hour.. The
house had been asked to accept the bill as an instal-
ment. He objected to the adoption of any arch prin-
ciple. If they were to legislate on this question at all
let them do so in a spirit that would set it at rest.. He
trusted the Government would, before next cession, con-
sider whether the measure could not be made more
efficient.. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. SCULLY thought the present had been a
most uselese-discussinn ; for, while they had been talking
about the withdrawal of the measure, and the provisions
of the bill, they might, in the 2i hours occupied with
such a discussion, have got through the committee on
the bill, and adopted its clauses. •
After some observations from Sir W. Verner, Mr.
Maguire, Mr. Whiteside, and Mr. Horsman,
Mr. STAFFORD congratulated the noble lord at the
head of the Government in bringing forward the bill and
withdrawing it— (laughter)—and could only lament the
exertions that had been made for a measure that had
been now brought to its last gasp.
The house then resumed, the chairman reported
proa•resl, and the order for the proceeding with the bill
n the course of the present Reqgion was withdrawn.
PARTNERSHIP AMENDMENT BILL.

On the order of the day for the house going into cons-
rnitt-e on thi. h 11
Mr. BOUVERIE proposed to postpone the bill to
12 o'clock on Thur-day, as at the present hour it was
impossible to get thromeh the c .mmittee on this mea-
sure and the Limited Liability B 11.
Mr. GLYNN and Mr. MITCHELL deprecated the course
pursued by the Government, and complained that mem-
bers had been brought down most uselessly to the house
to consider a measure that it was evident the Govern-
ment intended not to press forward.
Lord PALMERSTON was sorry that members
had been inconvenienced in coming down to the house,
but denied that the Government were to blame. It was
his intention to proceed both with this bill and the
Limited Liability Bill on Thursday, at 12 o'clock.
Mr. HASTIE trusted the noble lord would not per-
severe with the bills, believing that they were dishonest
in principle and totally at variance with the opinions of
the public.
Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE hoped the bills would be
persevered with, as he considered the best results would
follow from them.
Mr. CARDWELL would support the bills, for the
purpose of having them well considered. He looked
upon their principle as well founded, but they might
require some alterations in their details.
Mr. MUNTZ objected to both measures, especially
the last, believing that they emanated from a Board of
Trade that knew nothing about trade.
Mr. HENLEY doubted whether any practical good
could be accomplished by proceeding with these bills
during the present session, because he believed that no
one would say that there was the least chance of their
passing in the present session.
Lord PALMERSTON, considering that these mea-
sures would lead to great improvement in the law, must
persevere with the bills, considering that there was
plenty of time to discuss the great principles involved in
them. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. GLADSTONE entreated the noble lord not to
persevere with these measures, on the ground that there
would not be time before the end of the session to dis-
cuss them fully.
Mr. BOUVERIE believed the country was anxious
these bills should pass, and that it was, therefore, the
duty of the house to do all they could to persevere with
these bills.
Mr. MUNTZ moved that the chairman should re-
port progress.
Mr. BROWN moved as an amendment that the chair-
man should leave the chair.
Mr. GLYNN said there was no chance of proceeding
with these hills in the present session, as they would
doubtless be referred to a select committee. He trusted,
therefore, the noble lord would withdraw both bills.
Mr. BRIGHT said that wherever he went he was
continually asked whether these bills were likely to
pass. He believed the public were in favour of them,
and he trusted the noble lord would persevere to
press the measures forward, and if he did so he was sure
he would be backed by the country, and that the House
of Lords for the purpose of passing them would remit the
strictness of their regulations with respect to receiving
bills.

Lord PALMERSTON was determined to pass these
bills in the present session, and he would divide the
house upon the question of proceeding with them.
Mr. VANCE had consulted with several commercial
men upon the subject of the first bill, and their decided
opinion was that it would turn out a dead letter ; and as
to the second bill, it was generally looked upon as a
measure to legalise fraudulent scbemes.
The committee then divided, when there appeared—
For Mr. Muntz's motion that the
Chairman report progress B9
Against it .
Majority for the motion —43
The CHAIRMAN then left the chair, and the house
resumed, and leave was given to the committee to sit
again on Thursday at 12 o'clock.
NAVIGATION WORKS (IRELAND) BILL.

The committee on this bill was postponed to Thursday
at 12 o'clock.
LUNATIC ASYLUMS (IRELAND) BILL.
The committee on this bill was postponed till Thurs-
day at twelve o'clock.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE BILL. - -
The committee on this bill was postponed till Thurs-
day at twelve o'clock.
INVERNESS BRIDGE BILL.

This bill went through committee, and was ordered to
be reported to-morrow.
ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) ACT
CONTINUANCE BILL.

This bill went through committee, and was ordered to
be reported to-morrow.
TURNPIKE ACTS CONTINUANCE (IRELAND)
BILL.

This bill went through committee, and was ordered to
be reported to-morrow.
BURIAL OF POOR PERSONS BILL.

The Lords' amendments to this bill were considered
and agreed to.
The house, shortly before 4 o'clock, adjourned to 6.

The SPEAKER took the chair at 6 o'clock, but at five
minutes past, after some unimportant matters had been
disposed of, the house was counted out.

THE COUNT-OUT ON TUESDAY.

The following Members wi
Mr. Kerehaw. - _ .
Sir Robert. Peel.
The Marquis of Blandford.
Mr. Vincent Scully.
Mr. J. G. Pbillimore.
Mr. R. Phillimore.
Mr. Alcock.
Sir John Shelley.
Mr. Francis Scully.
Major Reed.
Mr. A.- whm.
Mr.
Colonel Dunne.
Captain Scobell.

'ere in the Count-out :
1 Mr. M'Cann.
Mr. Tite.
Mr Meager.
Sir Thomas Baring.
Colonel Lindsay. '
Lrd Seymour.
Mr. Crook.
Mr. John Ball.
Mr. Apsley Pellatt.
Mr. George Hadfield.
Mr. Brotherton.
Mr. Egmonde.
Mr. Gore Longton.

Crose-examined by Mr. Mitchell—He received no
eooeeunicatlon from , the Iloole-off? in particular
relative to the arrangements he made other than the
issuing of the notices. No orders were given him in writ-
ing, because it was not usual to do so.
Mr. Mitchell—As to carrying out the police arrange-
ments do you take the responsibility on yourself?
Sir R. Mayne—The question is so comprehensive I
cannot understand it.
Mr. Mitchell said he thought Sir Richard was inclined
ea fence with his question.
Sir Richard Mayne said he was not.
gr. Chief Commissioner Wortley said he thought that
was not the case. Sir Richard had been questioned as
to inetructione, which were of a confidential manner
between him and the Home-office, who was responsible
to Parliament, and it was not to be expected Sir Riche' d
would divulge any confidential communications. He
stated no specific directions were given by the Secretary
of State.
Sir Richard Mayne said that with the exception of the
issuing of the notice he received no special instructions.
On Sunday, the 24th June, he had about n men in the
pack, with-reserves placed near at hand. No instruc-
tions were given to prevent carriages• from going into
the park. Arrangements were made on the 30th June
to prevent a meeting taking place, and he was amazed
when he went to the park and saw the turn it
had taken and the people hooting. If necessary
he thought he might have had a thousand men in the
park in two or three hours. Although he had but 120
men in the park that day he had a sufficient force at
bend to interfere if necessary. There were instances
of violation of the law on that day, but the police did
lot take the persons into custody, because, he being
present, did not order them to do so. Ile thought it
would not have been judicious in him to have had no
larger force on the let July on the ground than on the
24th of June. That number could not have kept the
park in order on Ist July, but would have resulted more
serioselY. He looked m the Ist of July as a meeting
to intimidate the Legislature and frighten members who
ban taken a particular view with regard to the Sunday
Trading Bill ; and it was a fact that the following day
LOrd Robert Grosvenor, amidst significant cheering in
the HolAe of Commone, withdrew his bill. What oc-
curred at Lord Robert Grosvenor's, he thought, showed
the dangerous nature of the gathering, and its being
likely to lead to a breach of the peace. With regard
to persons addressing crowds, he should not consider
them always as ringleaders. At Lord Robert
Grosvenor's he considered it judicious that the
police should be secreted in the houses adjoining,
so that the people should not be attracted by
them. Superintendent Hughes had control of
the men in the park, arid he (Sir R. Mayne) considered
it highly injudicious for a superintendent to whip ladies,
or use improper language ; no rational man would snake
a rush at a body of people without first asking them to
move on. It would be highly injudicious for a police-
man to reply to an impertinentobeervation made to him.
In his comnais,ion to Superintendent Hughes he directed
him to "act vigorously," leaving it to him how he should
act.

Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley said that inno-
cent herons, remaining where g riot was going on, were
Considered as partaking in it. The difference after the
rending of the Riot Act waS, that after it had been read,
awl 12 remained, they ware not on;y then rioters, but
felons. _ _

Sir Richard Mayne endeavoured to explain that at
one part of the park, where then) was rising ground, it
was impossible for the men to move the people, unle;:.;
they ran up the acclivity. If he had known as much
then as now he should have taken the same course he
had with reference to bail. He had no idea whether the
prisoners were dukes, lords, mechanics, or the lowest

classes.
Mr. Commissioner Armstrong said, the pollee in-
spectors bad a limited authority in taking hail, which
was given them by the police act, and confined to the
metrepulis. He could understand now how it was pH-
sonem were refused bail by the inspector on Sunday but
bailed by them on Monday, be-cause then the offence
bad been reduced from the serious ono of rioting to one
bailable by an inspector.
Sir Richard Mayne, in reply to questions, said that
Seiperintendent Hughes was fined in 1842 40s. for en-
tering a house without a warrant. A complaint was
made against him by an officer of the Guards, for not
doing what he considered his duty during the time the
late Duke of Wellington lay in state. He was sus-
pended during the time the former case was before the
Secretary of State, but after that he was reinstated.
There is a regulation (except in special instances) that a
policeman shall be dismissed the force after being con-
victed by a magistrate. With reference to the bail he
gave instructions that bail should not be taken in cases
of rioting and actual disorder, and in other eases, such as
assaults, substantial bail should only he accepted. There
were four cases of injury to the police, one was slightly
cut on the head, and the other had his knee injured.
The second number of assaults, &c., read by Sir Richard,
in the former portion of his evidence, had reference to
the Bth of July.
Mr. Charles Reed, police surveyor, has charge of the
cells at the different metropolitan police stations. The
calls of the basement are the original cells belonging te
the watch-house, and not being considered proper f e. the
reception of prisoners were disused in genoial, and cells
on the ground floor had been constructed in consequence.
Everything had been done pos3ible to give proper ven-
t flat ion.
Mr. Chief-Commissioner Wortley said ke thought it
desirable the witness should look particularly to the long
cell, the floor of which was damp.
Witness said that was in consequence of the material
the floor was made of not absorbing the moisture quickly,
when the cells were cleared out.
Mr. Chief Commissioner Wortley said that when the
commissioners visited the cells yesterday at four o'clock
the cell was then damp.
Witness said trap pans were provided to the privies,
and the water was turned on from the outside ; there

HOuse. of LOnDS
were facilities for preventing these privies from becom-
.=_-_____________,....... 4" ing more annoying than under, ordinary circumstances.
Ds_ OF PRIVILEGES.—The The long cell was 18 feet long, 6 feet high, and 7 feet
Committee for Privile
purpose of hearing oafrnessl4, yesterday morning for the' deep. _ The others were less in length. The lower cell
- election of representative poerr.eerfages, and to vote at the, was bad for ventilation, and was not often used.. '
of Sir James Carnegie of, fientlaeak
or Ireland. The . claim Mr: Chief Commissioner Wortley--There could be no
tarowiTart., to the titles, hcaonronuegrei,elaionaird, and Pit- doubt' it must have been very hot on the- night of the
,:fl,diplities of Earl ' let, but he and the commissioners had no idea anything
of.' Southeek and , Baron innaird and was done purposely, to make the cells uncomfortable,
Viscountre.Mount-_ ,Inquiries would be made of the person in charge of
Leuebars, in Scotland, was allowed.
garrett's claim. to vote on the election of
4.3 q for _lreland was Allowed. : Tlie Earl ,A.nfood
representative . • ,
, them if they were kept properly cleaned, and were clean
t 5,76,!:, on. this coNaion. . • •
- - -•;- 'in 01- -84 P i.....M1-. Reel ~,i1 The'-' 'o
• '-• • lee .wera..loolsing oaf fOr -
Relay Pat-ton Bedingfield, of Oxborougb„ iiiilie cc:ifuts, ii.....i,_.a _ ' „-.,. aunt..{ r,u,
~....
...,...,..:,,,.
e!a::13 wes allowed. The hearin,..of: th.. 3. vial ' -
Ti-aset two, Gut ebuld find tire:
of Norfolk, to the barony of Grandison, was adjourned 1 Court was then adjourned till 3.1 o'clock to.
for a fortnight. floy,

Till E LONDON GAZETTE OF LAST _NIGHT.

---

At the Court at Osborne House, Isle of Wight, the 21st
day of July, 1855—Preseut, the Queen's Most Excellent
Majesty in Council—This day the Right Hon. Sir William
Henry Maule, Knt., was, by her Majesty's command,
sworn of her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council,
and took his place at the Board accordingl!.
Her Majesty having been pleased to appoint the Right
Honourable Sir William Molesworth, Bait., to be one of
her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, he was this
day, by her Majesty's cominand, sworn ens of her Ma-
jesty's Principal Secretaries of State accordingly.
Her Majesty in C uncil was this day pleased, on a re-
presentation of the Right Honourable tte Lords of the
Committee of Council on Education, to appoint the Rev.
Frederick Temple, M.A. to be one of her Majesty's In-
: speeors of' Schools, in the room of the Rev. Canon 3.1-ose-
lcy, resigned.

BY TUT QUEEN-A PROCLAMATION.

VICTOPTA, Et.

Whereas by ()11r Royal Proclamation, dated the 29th day
of March, 1854, after referring to our Order in Council,
bearing date on the said 29th day of March, 1854,
whereby we ordered that general reprisals be granted
against the ships, goods, and subjects of the Em-
peror of all the Russias, his subjects, or others in-
habiting within any of his countries, territories, or
dominions (save and except any vessel to which
our license had been or might be granted, or which had
been directed to be released from the embargo and had
not since arrived at any foreign port) so that our fleets and
ships should and might lawfully seize all ships, vessels, and
goods belonging to the Emperor of all the Russias, or his
subjects, or others inhabiting within any of his coun-
tries, territories, or dominions, and bring the same to
judgment in any of the Courts of Admiralty,
within our dominions, duly authorised and re-
quired to take cognisince thereof, we did order
and direct that the net produce of all such prizes taken by
any of our ships or vessels of war (save and except when
they should be acting on any conjunct expedition with our
army, in which case we reserved to ourselves the division
and distribution of all prize and booty taken, and also
save and except atiethereinafter mentioned), should be for
the entire benefit and encouragement of our flag officers,
captains, commanders, and other commissioned officers in
our pay, and of all subordinate, warrant, petty, and non-
commissioned officers, and of the seamen, marines, and
soldiers, on board our said ships and vessels at the time of
the capture, after the same should have been to us finally
adjudged lawful prize. And whereas We think fit that
officers and crews of any of our ships and vessels of war,
who shall be placed or sent in charge of any ship or vessel
which shall be hereafter captured or detained by any of
Our ships or vessels of war, shall share in prizes made dur-
ing their absence by the ship or vessel on the books of
which they may then be borne ; We do therefore hereby
order and direct, that all officers and crews of any of
Our ships and vessels of war who shall be placed or
sent in charge of any ship or vessel which shall be here-
after captured or detained by any of cur ships or vessels of
war, shall share in the prizes captured during their ab-
sence, by the ship or vessel of war on the books of which
they may be borne at the time of such prizes being cap-
tured, in all respects as if they had been actually on board.
such ship or vessel at the time of such prizes being cap-
tured by her.
Given at our Court, at Osborne House, Isle of Wight,
this 21st day of July, in the year of our Lord 1855,
and in the 19th year of our reign.
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.