The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-26 00:00:00

THE SUN, LON DON, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 1837.

lege claimed. Mr. 'Waldo argued that in this case .
there was more than one petition, viz., first, the peti-
tion from the parties impugning the return, and se-
condly, the petition from the parties praying to be
heard in defence of the return. Mr. Thessiger and-
Mr. Austin, protesting that they were taken wholly
by surprise, replied with much ability, contending that
within the intention of the Act of Parliament there
was here hut one petition—that the Legislature did
not in this clause contemplate such a petition as that
hich merely prayeed the substitution of a defence
by electors for defence by the sitting Member. The
point raised, then, was this—was there one pe-
tition, or more than one petition, before eie.House ?
' On this point, for the raising of which the Mem-
bers on the Conservative side of the House were
wholly unprepared, and upon which it was impossible
for the House to seek information, the doors being
locked, and all access even to the Journals in the
Library prevented, the King's Attorney-General for
Ireland, Mr. \Voulfc—and the master of 'the King's
Attorney-General for Ireland, Mr. O'Connell, deli-
vered elaborate orations. They had had intimations
which had not been given to the House ; they had
had glimpses of coming events which had not been
exhibited even to Mr. Speaker. Sir Hobert Peel was
left to the hasty decision of the moment, and Lord
Stanley might refer to cases with a doubtful memory ;
but, to secure perfect impartiality, it had seemed ne-
cessary
to send the Solicitor to the Member for Kil-
leenny, and to furnish the Attorney-General with a
brief. The Attorney-General moved that the House
give leave to the High Sheriff to join in striking the
Committee. However, these two Learned Gentlemen
argued in vain that in this case there were within the
meaning of the Act of Parliament two petitions. After
a discussion, in which several Members took part,
an appeal was made to the Speaker, who decided
that all the Parliamentary law of the Attorney-General
and his master, though studiously conned and elo-
quently delivered, was bad law ; that within the mean-
ing of the Act of Parliament there was here only one
petition. Mr. Hardy moved, as an amendment to the
motion previously made by the Irish Attorney-General,
to affirm the decision of the Speaker, " That there was
but one petition before the House." This motion
was negatived by a majority of 10, the numbers being,
on a division, for Mr. Hardy's amendment 118, against
it 128. There remained the main question upon the
motion of the Irish Attorney-General, " That the
House give leave to the High Sheriff to join in
striking the Committee;" for the Speaker, though
pronouncing Mr. Woulfe's law bad, and Mr. O'Con-
nell's argument wrong, nevertheless by a different
road, had come to the same conclusion at which
those exemplary gentlemen, by their bad law and
their wrong argument had previously arrived. The
Speaker, construing an " and" in the dtsjundive which
every other gentleman who had taken part in the de-
bate had construed in the conjunctive sense, and—
possibly construing it rightly so—had expressed an
opinion that, though there were but one petition, the
House might, in the exercise of its discretion, allow
he High Sheriff to join in striking the Committee, at
;he same time suggesting that such a discretion had

CI C.,
been never or rarely used, and ought to be used with
the greatest possible caution. 'With this warning
ringing in his ears, the Irish Attorney-General pro-
ceeded to repeat his claim on behalf of the High
Sheriff of Carlow. And who was the High Sheriff of
Carlow, ard what was the claim made for him ? The
High Sheriff of Carlow was Mr. Keogh, as
stout a supporter of :Mr. Vigors as Colonel Bruen
may be supposed to have been of his opponent.
The claim made for him was that he should come
in as a third party, distinct from Mr. Vigors, to
exercise a separate right of striking for the Com-
mittee. The effect of the admission of the claim would
have been this—that Alt. Vigors and Mr. Keogh, heir
interests being, to all practical intents and purposes,
identical, would have had the power of striking off
two names, where the opposing parties would have had
the power of striking off but one ; and thus it was
expected to forma Committee upon which even Mr.
O'Connell might have smiled his approbation. Lord
Stanley, we are informed, exposed this despicable chi-
canery i 4 a most powerful address. He pointed out
the absurdity of representing the High Sheriff as
having a " distinct interest" from Mr. Vigors, when the
Counsel for Mr. Vigors had beat observed prompting
the Counsel of Mr. Keogh in his speech, and ‘s hen the
agent for Mr. Keogh and the agent for Mr. Vigors was
a;:tually one and the same man. He appealed in most
energetic terms to his political. opponents, " as gentle-
men and as men of honour," against the gross and
scandalous iniquity which the House was called upon
to commit, and asked how any reliance could be placed
hereafter upon decisions of the House on these ques-
tions if the House, from obviously party motives, should
now deliberately pack a partial tribunal for the trial of a
question on which legislation had done all in its power
to secure a perfect impartiality. Reason is 'sometimes
heard, and honour is sometimes remembered. After a
discussion, in which the views of Lorcl Stanley were
ably enforced by Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Goulburn, and
other Members, and in which the wrath of Mr.
Woulfe and the bitterness of Mr. Roebuck were equally
ludicrous and disagreeable, the question was put from
the Chair, in words, that the High Sheriff be per-
mitted to strike ;" in fact, " that Mr. Vigors be per-
mitted to strike two for one." Thirteen Ministerial
Members crossed the floor ; and this scheme, of
which, without imputing motives to its concoctorS,
we may say that its effect would have been all that the
meanest trickery and the foulest injustice could de-
sire, was defeated by a majority of 16 ; the numbers
being, for givinr. to Mr. Vigors only his right, 131—
for giving to Mr.' Vigors twice as much as his right,
115. We will add an anecdote, instead of comment.
In the trial of the Dorsetshire election petition against
Lord Ashley's return, in 1831, it was proposed by
some of the legal advisers of Lord Ashley to prefer,
on the part of the returning officer, a similar claim.
The propriety of preferring such a claim was referred
to some of the Conservative leaders, and the claim was
at once declared by them unfair and indefensible. Per-
haps Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Charles Wynn may for-
get that, in 131, they discountenanced. a demand, by
urging which, 'in 1837, Mr. Woulfe and- Mr. O'Con-
nell, and 113 more Honourable Gentlemen, have earned
nothing but the uncomfortable recollection of a dis-
creditable defeat.---Morning Post.

DUELS Olt JUDICIAL COMBATS IN NEW HOL-
LAND.--" It has long been known that the Aborigines of New
South Wales leave all quarrels between individuals to be settled
by a solemn judicial combat, the community interftiring no
farther than to see fair play. But their notions of fair play
differ considerably from ours if it, indeed, does not appear
clearly which is the party aggrieved, they fight it out, man to
man ; the tribe being present as by-standers, while the com-
batants engage with spears or waddles (wooden swords) till
the satiefaciion is complete. But if one of the parties is ad-
judged to have the preponderance of justice on his side, lie is
allowed to bring a friend with him as an auxiliary - and in
every flagrant case, even two or more, according to the cha-
racter of the offence to be avenged. In all cases the offend-
ing party, however clear his guilt may be, is allowed to fight
fur his life; but in some cases, of course, against such odds as
render it next to impossible he should escape."—Account of an
Expedition into the Interior of New Holland, edited by the
Lady Mary Fox.

HULL AND SELBY RAILWAY.—A Meeting of
the London shareholders in this railway was held in London
on Tuesday last, when Mr. Broadley made a report of the
past oi.erations, which was unanimously approved of. Mr.
Walker, the engineer, attended the Meeting, and explained
fie line of the railway, which he stated to be superior to almost
an, other as respects straigi to ‘ss, cheapness of forning, work-
ing, and maintaining aft 're a As. Tl,is railway, he said, was the
last link of the (Treat chain of railway communication between
Liverpool and Hull, or the Atlaotic and German oceans. The
railway between Liverpool and Manchester is already in ope
ration ; then comes the Manchester and Leeds, which is now
in progress. This connects with the Leeds and Selby, which
has been opened for several years, and which the Hull and
Selby will continue to Hull. The length of this last railway
is thirty miles. It requires comparatively small capital, and
being under Hull directors and managers is little known in
London; but, looking upon it as the completion of the great
line across England, it may
well be regarded as a national
underttesing.
Notwithstnnding the unfavourable state of the wea-
ther on Monday, 4,453 persons - passed over the line of the
London and Greenwich Railway, thereby realizing to the
Company the sum of upwards of I 77/.
ROBBING A CONNOISSEUR.--A correspondent of
the %Newell/a, who attended the late sale of Sir Francis
Frecling's pictures for the purpose of reporting the result to
that journal, states that the sale was attended by " artists,
picture-mongers, and pickpockets," and that some of the lat-
ter, " from love of vertu—not virtue, appropriated our pocket-
book, in which the prices were registered."