The Sun.
London, England, 1839-03-22 00:00:00

the calendar—in_Weeford, Chief Justice Bush—in Tip
perary, Baron l'ennefather—in Sligo, Judge Burton-:
in Clare, Baron Foster —in Carlow, Baron Smitn
in Limerick, Cork, Kildare, Roscommon, Down,
King's County, the Learned Judges all coneratuted
the Juries upon the paucity and lightness of the calen-
dar, generally stating that they felt called upon to make no
observations whatever. What stronger evidence would their
Lordships require of the diminution of crime in Ireland ?
( Hear, hear.) It they were to go into Committee surely
this was the very evidence they were to rely upon.--(Hear,)
The manner in which Baron Pennefather undertook the
mission to Tipperary, at his (the Noble Marquis's) request,
was one of the greatest instances of devotion to the cause.
Their Lordships had had a great many references made to
the state of Munster, and he would read part of a letter
which he had received from Mr. Matthew Barrington, the
Crown Solicitor, in which he stated that Clare and the
surrounding counties were comparatively free from agrarian
tumult, and that fever convictions had taken place there
just now than bad been known for many years. In Lime-
rick, although he (the Noble Marquis) admitted, tranquil-
lity was not so well established as it was in many parts of
Ireland, yet theta was more of it there now than there
had been, and the general surface of the country presented
a very general state of comparative tranquillity. In Cork,
it appeared from the letter he had read, that the calendar
was equally light there, although that had been hitherto
one of the most disturbed counties. With regard to the
other circuits the information of the Government was not
complete, but in every county, according to the re-
turns, where the trials had been proceeded with,
there had been no appearance of intimidation on the
part of the witnesses, and the juries had decided in
general according to the charges of the Learned
Judges. The Noble Earl still said the present was an
unparalleled:tate of the country. Did the Noble Earl re-
collect the year 1534, which was during the Government
of the Noble and distinguished Marquis ( Anglesea), who
had preceded him. A Rev, and eloquent Emissary, who
was sent over to this country to inform the people of
England the state Ireland was in, stated in Liver-
pool in 1834, that it was difficult to convey
to this country a notion of the state of Ireland, hi which
there was an abserce of all security for life and property.
" Imagine," said that Rev. Gentleman, "yourself secure in
every respect, as you might suppose, in your own house,
at night, awl, having ascsntied your isolated habitation, you
observe fires around you as numerous as those seen from Bire
mingham to Wolverhampton, and at each fire there is a
victim, then you will have but a faint idea of the unfortu-
nate condition of many parts of my unhappy country."—
( Hear.) This was bringing up to a very late date that
comparison which the Noble Earl was now rather disposed
to abstain from taking notice of. The Noble Earl
had said he (the Noble Marquis) would not grapple with
crime, and vindicate the law, but how had those who
preceded him grappled with crime and vindicated the
law? As he should not have another opportunity of
addressing the House, he felt it necessary to anticipate
some of the observations likely to be made against him ;
especially as somewhat similar observations had been
made elsewhere. One was in reference to his answer
to the memorial of the Magistrates of Tipperary. It
had been thought right merely to read a sentence from that
answer, and to observe upon it, although that sentence was
a truism. Their Lordships should hear in mind, what the
memorial was, and that it was presented immediately
after the murder of Mr. Weyland and Mr. Austin Cooper.
(The Noble Marquis read an extract from it.) In the first
place he would say there was no instance of any Juror ever
haling suffered for any verdict he had given, and upon the
whole, the result of the trials had produced an equal num-
ber of convictions, as compared with trials which had taken
place before. In reference to the ancient custom of chal-
lenging Jurors, it seemed to be the opinions of the Magis-
trates who'siened the memorial, that the Government had
abandoned that right even in any case of necessity, but
that was an entire mistake, and his Noble and Learned
Friend ( Lord Plunket) informed him that the practice
prevailed when he was Attorney-General. With respect
to this expression with reference to landlords, if it were sup-
posed that he meant to say they were bearing more
hardly on their tenants than landlords had been in former
times accustomed to do according to their tenures, he
could only say that he never entertained any such inten-
tion, and that he had sufficiently explained himself after-
' wards by that answer. He could not but suppose that the
change of the situation of the forty-shilling freeholders
would produce a very great alteration, and in that opinion
he was sufficiently borne out by the language of Sir
George Murray upon the discussion of the Catholic
question in the House of Commons. lie now approached
that melancholy and most distressing occurrence--the
death of Lord Norbury, which had created a sensation and a
sympathy so universal, but still that was a topic upon
which he could say nothing as to the cause of it. He had,
however, no evidence before him to cause him to think
that that murder was the result of any extensive conspi-
racy. Indeed, looking at it in reference to what was
proved before the Special Commission on the occasion of
the murder of Mr. Weyland and Mr. Cooper, he was more
inclined to regard it as the result of a local con-
spiracy, or of what they must consider as the
atrocious system of revenge, for having disposed
of lands. fie would allude, before going further, to the
conduct of two gentlemen who had been instructed by the
Government to inquire into circumstances attending that
murder, and the Noble Earl opposite bad moved for the
return of the appointment of these gentlemen, but which
he had not thought proper to comment upon, although that
return had been furnished. Those gentlemen (as we un-
derstood) were Mr. Brownrigg and Mr. Hayley, inspectors
of the constabulary force, and men appointed to that
situation upon testimonials of the highest description.
They had discharged their duty in the most satisfactory
manner—as he thought the Noble Lord oposite (Lord
Charleville) would state, because he was at the spot on the
occasion, and took the opportunity of then expressing
Olfin, terms of the highest disapprobation of the,,Gswern-:
ment; although, as he said, he supposedthose;.ollepers bad
reeerv~private instructions how to act—a sort of pro-
'eeedieg.whieh he thought did not very well become even
eti"oppenent to the Government. In reference to the
meeting of the Queen's County Magistrates, he should
be able to disprove every topic introduced by the
Noble Lord---( dear, hear, and cheers.) As regarded
the persons who had been guilty of shooting at Lord
Bloomfield's steward; a very few days after he (the Noble
Marquis) arrived in Ireland, Lord Bloomfield waited on
him and handed to him a memorial signed by three cler-
gymen, and five justices of the peace, representing that as
the extreme sentence of the law had been carried into
effect on the principal offender, it would be better for the
peace of the country that the other men should hay°
their sentences commuted. He told him it was
a serious offence, that he could not think of commuting it
at that time, but that he would commit the Chia;Justice
upon it. The report of the Chief Justice was, that there
was nothing in the circumstances of the case to call for a
commutation of the sentence, but that the con-
sideration of the peace of the country was a
consideration for the Executive. Upon this he (the Noble
Marquis) decided that the law should take its course.
Four months afterwards he saw Lord Bloomfield, who told
him that the feeling of the county on the subject was still
stronger than it had been, and that it would be better that
the sentence should be respired. He (the Noble Marquis)
consulted Mr. Justice Perrin, who was very strongly in
favour of a commutation. He (the Noble Marquis) was
still reluctant, and he told Lord Bloomfield that he would
commute the sentence the following spring provided the
state of the country was better, and that Lord Bloomfield
would then inform him that it was still expected to be bet-
ter. One year after this, when Lord Bloomfield came to
him upon a new replication, he commuted the sentence to
two months' imprisonment and hard labour. This then
was the case which he was represented to have derided in
a summary manner upon a memorial, because the Catholic
peasantry had memorialized him, and the Catholic priests
had interfered in favour of the prisoners.—( Hear, hear.)
This statement was made by the Noble Earl, who living in
the country ought to have informed himself of the fact
before he had brought forward a charge against
him upon it, and upon which charge a Noble
Marquis, not then in his place, bad boldly reiter-
ated the accusation. It was but due to Lord Bloom-
field to say that he was so strongly sensible of the erroneous
impression of the Noble Earl that he wrote to him upon Ma-
rquis)
quis) also upon it, enclosing a copy of the letter ie
the subject, and that he wrote to himself (the Noblel Mha
sent to the Noble Earl. He would now refer to another
statement made by the Noble Earl with respect to the
Murder of Lord Norbury ; he had stated that a person bad
come to the gate for the purpose of making inquiry imme-
diately after the shot had been fired. Now the lodge
keeper stated that the person she had met on that occasion
was a native of that part of the country, he was not even
an Irishman, but a Seotchman, an old soldier, who had been
through the Peninsular war, and consequently had some
experience in gun-shot wounds, and when he was
told that a man had been shot, he proposed to go back to
sec if he could do any good. This was the person con-
cerning whom the Noble Earl bad made this statement,
concerning which he said he had evidence. But when
asked by Mr. Brownrigg', be said he badhewhiehlaiacrdhd,shbeaeudnt
thought it of no consequence, such was the inaccuracy of
h
the Noble Earl. There was another extraordinary thing
with regard to the conduct ofthctism
theao Steward,
adthat
never yet been explained ,
the Steward, who bad naeveersttopolpdedhitmheoafssaistTinif! lie
only told him he might have
There
was another statement of the Noble hisE Noblearl which had been
made the foundation of an attack by and Learned
Friend at the commencement of the Session, who on the au-
thority of the Noble Earl had stated in proof of the
existence of a conspiracy that it had been determined to
h ntr de
r
who
murder a man and a woman, upon which one of the con-
spirators objected, not to committing ther
hi
crime of murder,
but that it would be more convenient
l fnodnioetrotroo
. General,mk not
to to
m
mur-
der the woman, and thereupon the murdering the woman
(Lord
th
was transferred to another, and ho n
the man. Now this case vras perfeecsolie
ty w to
Normanby), and he had sent to
who had no recollection of such a circumstance ever having
occurred, and he then referred to the Crown-Solicitors
on the six different circuits, who stated that no such case
had occurred within their knowledge ; he was therefore
satisfied the statement of the Noble Earl was unfounded.
The Noble Earl had adduced as a proof of the existence
of an extensive conspiracy in the county of Tipperary,
the evidence on the trial of the murderers of Mr. Wey_
land and Mr. Cooper before the Special Commission, cer-
tainly that was a most atrocious crime, but not unparalleled.
The case of the murder of Mr. Chadwick was a worse case,
and of a somewhat similar nature ; but the evidence before
the Special Commission in Tipperary offered no proof
of the existence of a general conspiracy, and that
Commission was very satisfactory as a proof that wit-
nesses would come forward and juries give verdicts
according to evidence. There was another state-
ment to which he would allude with regard to the
Special Commission in Tipperary—he bad been accused
of having commuted the sentences of certain prisoners
because they had killed their victims with stones, and not
with weapons. The case had been tried before Judge
Perrin, and Judge Burton. He (Lord M.) had received
two memorials for commutation of sentence, but he had de-
cided that the law should take its course. The Jury had
then memorialised in their favour, and he had referred that
petition to the Judges stating his own opinion that the
law should take its course, for the purpose of showing that