The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-12 00:00:00

OLD BAILEY.

ABSTRACT OF THE RESULT OF THE COMMIT.
MENTS TO THE LAST SESSIONS.
Convicted. Acquitted, see.
Worship-street Office 49 12
Marlborough-street 46 14
Marylebone
Hatton-garden
Bow-street ' 24 11
Thames lB 15
Whitechapel l7 10
Queen-square l2 13
Coroners and Country Magistrates 11 10

242 107
Lord Mayor and Aldermen 65 21
Of the above cases—
Mr. Justice Park tried
Mr. Justice Gaselee
The Recorder
The Common Sergeant 134
Mr. Sergeant Arabia

BUILDING.—It is not uncommon in Italy
for palaces and churches to be in hand during many gene-
rations, and to be left incomplete at last. It is proverbial
in Italy, that great people never finish any thing, and the
proverb may be applied in other countries. An English
Baronet being asked when he should finish his house, very
ingeniously answered, " Sir, it is a question whether I
shall finish my house, or my house finish me."
LORD ASHBURTON.—JOHN DUNNING wan
born at Ashburton, in Devonshire, on the 18th of October,
1731, and, being destined by his father for the profession
of the law, received a liberal education. Of the early
part of Mr. DUNNING'S life few details have been pre-
served. The assi,tance afforded him by his father being
necessarily very small, he was compelled while a student
to live in the most economical manner. At this period
of his life his intimate friends were Mr. KENYON, after-
ward■ Lord KENYON, and the celebrated HORNS Tooxe,
then, like himself, a student of the law. "It would ap-
pear," says the biographer of the latter, " that none of
the parties were very rich at this period, for they lived
with a degree of frugality that will be deemed rather sin-
gular, when contrasted with their future wealth and cele-
brity. I have been frequently assured by Mr. HORNS
TOOKE, that they were accustomed to dine together, dur-
ing the vacation, at a little eating-house in the neighbour-
hood of Chancery-lane, for the sum of sevenpence half-
penny each. 'As to DUNNING and myself,' added he,
we were generous, for we gave the girl who waited upon
us a penny a piece ; but KZNYON, who always knew the
value of money, sometimes rewarded her with a halfpenny,
and sometimes with a promise.' "--Dr. Lardner's
Cabinet Cyclopedia, Vol, VI.

The Bishop of LONDON obtained leave to bring in a
Bill to dissolve the marriage between Elizabeth Hickson
and Thomas Buxton. The case was one of such a pecu-
liar nature that he expected the willing support of the
House to his measure. ' The lady was an infant in law,
and was inveigled into a marriage by a regular conspiracy;
in fact, the case was one of conspiracy and abduction ; and
though the marriage had not been consummated, it, having
been solemnized prevented the .eceiving of such evidence
as would show informality in the proceedings before the
ceremony. In the present instance, the banns were pub-
lished sixty mile! from the residence of either party, but
according to the law this circumstance could not, as he
fun' stated, be received in evidence. Hence the necessity
of the present measure.
The Loa CHANCELLOR and the Bishop of BRISTOL
said a few words in support of the measure.
EAST RETFORD DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
The hearing of evidence on this Bill was then resumed,
and continued till nine o'clock. Nothing new was elicited;
several witnesses, freemen of the borough, deposed to their
having received packets, containing twenty guineas each for
their votes at East Retford.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(LAST NIGHT).
Lord MILTON presented petitions from Halifax, Wake-
field, and several places in the county of. York, against
Negro Slavery.

The NoBLE Loan then presented a petition, to which
he wished to call the particular attention of the House. It
was from the merchants and bankers of Huddersfield,
praying that the crime of forgery might not be punished
with death ; and another petition from Huntingdon, i❑
favour of a free trade in beer.

Sir CHAS. HASTINGS then presented a petition
from Liveston, against the East India Company's Mono-
poly.
Sir WAT. HEATHCOTE presented several petitions
from different places against the Beer Bill.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from the county of
Lanark, praying for a regulation of the Church in Scotland.
Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL presented petitions
from the Licensed Victuallers of Canterbury and Roches-
ter, against the Beer Bill.
Mr. LITTLETON presented a similar petition from
Walsal, Staffordshire.

Sir H. PARNELL presented a petition from Qusen's-
county, against the proposed increase of Duty on Stamps,
and also praying for a reduction of the Doty on Cock
Übe Hon. Member presented another petition from the
City of Worcester, against the Beer Bill.
Lord EBRINGTON presented a petition signed by
more than three hundred inhabitants of Exeter, in favour of
the Bill for the Emancipation of the Jews, and another
petition from Tavistock, against the monopoly of the East
India Company.

Mr. S. RICE presented a petition from the letter-
press printers of Limerick, against the proposed alteration
of the Irish Stamp Duties.

Mr. MONCK presented a petition from certain inhabi-
tants of Reading praying for the abolition of the punish-
ment of death in cases of forgery.
Lord ALTHORP presented a petition from an indi-

Mr. DOHERTY said —" Sir, in the absence of my
Noble Friend, the Secretary for Ireland, I cannot permit
this motion to be put without offering a few observations.
am much surprised to see that the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman should bring it forward as a matter of course,
and that lie should call upon the House for these docu-
ments without laying down the grounds upon which they
should be granted.—(Hear, hear.)—This motion, Sir,
has come upon me without notice ; I was altogether un-
prepared for it; still I must raise my voice against it, for
it would tend to convert this House into a Court of Ap-
peal, in all criminal cases, from the decision of Juries in
Ireland, and, consequently, if this is to be tolerated, there
are no cases which might not, upon the simple motion of
a Member, be brought up to this Court, as if it were to a
Court of Review. Now my attention has been drawn to
this by a notice I have seen upon the books of the House
of Commons, stating that the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man will move for the depositions of certain witnesses, and
for a copy of the Judge's notes who tried the case respect-
ing which he moved, and several others. To rise, Sir,
this appears to be the moat monstrous thing that ever was
attempted. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman told us
that on no one evening—on no one moment—would he be
absent from his place, or from this House; but, Sir, there
was a very important evening on which he was
not only not in his place, but not in this House,
and this, Sir, was the evening on which the Hon. Mem-
ber for Mallow gave notice that he would move for certain
papers respecting those persons who were tried for the
Doneraile conspiracy. Now, Sir, to all who have lived in
Ireland—to all who have observed what has taken place
there for many months past, it must have been a matter
of notoriety that this was a question to which the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman stood pledged ; and it was an oc-
casion on which I fully and anxiously expected to meet
the Learned Gentleman face to face—(Loud cheers)—be-
cause he had made the strongest allegations against my
personal character (and highly as I do, and I trust ever
shall, regard my personal character)—because he had done
that which affects me still snore nearly, he had brought a
charge against the pure administration of justice in Ire-
land. I had, therefore, a right to expect he would have
been in his place to bring my conduct, or, as lie had
threatened, to drag me before this House—(Cheers.)-1
looked for him, but he was not to be found—(Loud
cheers.)--Why is it, however, that I introduce this now?
To tell the Hon. Gentleman, that, if be had been present,
he would have heard a discussion upon the propriety of
moving for the notes of a Judge. And here, be it re-
marked, the objection was not made upon the part of the
Government, for they have nothing to fear and nothing to
conceal; but it was objected by an Hon. Friend of mine,
and I cannot refrain fi om now expressing my surprise that
such a proposition should be made by a lawyer of thirty
years' standing—(Hear, and laughter.)—But, Sir, my
Hon. Friend contended that although cases so strong
might occasionally arise as to induce the House to violate
the principle, yet that there was no instance whatsoever in
which a Judge's notes had been produced before us, and
that such a proceeding could never be justified, except
upon the strongest grounds. Now, this becomes personally
interesting to me, and I will tell the House why it becomes
so. lam net, Sir, in the habit of entertaining suspicions
respecting the conduct of Hon. Members of this House ; but
when I clearly observe a man meditating a retreat, and if he
at the same time happens to be a lawyer, applying to his
object all the cunning and dexterity supposed peculiar to
his profession, I curiously watch every stone he lays down
to construct the !midge on which he intends to run away.
—(Loud and continued cheers.) But now, Sir, I have
at length driven him by my taunts, again and again re-
peated, to take something like a decided course. I have
compelled him, for the first time, to take courage in th s
House—(Loud cheers)—and he has told you—l will
bring forward my threatened motion about the Doneraile
trials if the House will grant me these documents for which
I ask ; but, if not, I will let the matter fall to the ground
—and then, after twenty-four hours' deliberation, what
does he do ? He moves for documents so contrarysto all
the principles and practice of conducting the business of
this House, than, however anxious, we cannot grant them
without a violation of all those rules which should guide
us as lawyers and Members of Parliament. Thus it will
appear the Learned Gentleman has laid down two steps for
his escape. He has given notice of a motion upon the subject,
and he has told you he cannot go on without certain docu-
ments, which, if you grant not his motion, must fall to
the ground. Now, Sir, his allegations depend upon facts
that are public and published.—(Hear, hear.)—l did
hold a brief not containing things which it ought to
have contained ; and witnesses did swear things I had.
no reason to expect. And, admitting this, I con-
fidently appeal to the House, if it were likely that I
should abuse the high office with which I had been en-
trusted for the purpose of producing the conviction of
innocent men ?—(Hear.) The Learned Gentleman has
declared he has two distinct charges to make against me.
First, that I have yielded the powers of my office for the
protection of the guilty. The next, and deeper charge is,
that I, in concert with others, as honourable and high-
minded gentlemen as ever belonged to the legal profes-
sion, formed a league to produce the conviction of inno-
cent men, while even the conspirators were in possession
of documents to prove the paying of the witnesses we had
to bring forward on the part of the Crown. These are the
charges—and I admit the facts on which the Hon. and
Learned gentleman founds his allegations. I will not
trouble :him about documents; and more, I would suffer
him, unanswered and unheeded, to make any assertions
respecting me he pleased, if my own character alone were
implicated. I would not trouble the House with any de-
fence, for there is something here that tells met there is
not a second gentleman present who would believe it pos-
sible that I could be guilty of the conduct attributed to
me by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman.—(Loud and
long-continued cheering.) He has unsparingly brought
charges against ale in taverns—in the streets—before the
rabble—(Loud cheers)—before those amongst whom I go,
net as a volunteer, but as the delegate of the Lori Lieu-
tenant, with important and sacred duties to perform,
which, I trust, I do perform faithfully, fearlessly, and, I
trust, notwithstanding the assertion of the Learned Gen-
tleman, mercifully.—(Continued cheers.) They are du-
ties-in which I can be swayed by no personal feeling, actu-
ated by no improper motives. This, I maintain, for the
character of public men is public property. And if this
be the case in this country, it is far more so in Ireland,
with respect to those who are connected with the admi-
nistration of justice. And I trust that, whenever the
Learned Gentlemamshall find courage to bring forward hismotion, I shall beiable to prove the utter falsehood of his
da daily
lya and
resumedor d ordinary ry
his s
seatand e
amidstrs l
.
hoeuild Hon.
nheeanrsd Learned Gen-
tleman.

enh
ohnee brought i
nfogr;
subjects lost his life, and, continued he, I would have
been ready to explain
ward referred re°feirCre7toNE anLLssaid,
occasion
the
with the case, and my object in submitting the motion,
all the circumstances connected
upo
upon
motion
io
if the Hon. aid Learned G. entlemaan had asked me a ques-
tion upon the subject, instead of indulging the House
with a tragical display.
upon the Constabulary Bill,. If he
eAuhd I had
wouldask haysed
I woultodldhiliavnea
told him that I wanted this document to bring it to bear

CASE OF M. WILLIS.
Lord MILTON begged leave to call the attention of the
House, and more particularly of his Right Hon. and
Gallant Friend opposite, to the ease of the individual
whose petition had ben intrusted to his care. That indi-
vidual (Mr. Willis) had held the office of Judge in Upper
Canada, and from that situat on he had been suspended,
and he 4lieved, ultimately removed, by the Governor of
that settlement. It appeared that the Court of which Mr.
Willis was a Judge had been established by an act of the
colonial legislature, and consisted of a Chief Justice and
two puisne Judges. While Mr. Willis held the office of
Judge in that Court, the Chief Justice obtained leave of
absence from the Government of the Colony ; and in the
course of the performance of his duties, it occurred to him
to inquire as to what was the legal constitution of that
Court, and whether he could legally proceed to business
in the absence of the Chief Justice: Now, whether the
conclusion at which he arrived at was correct or not, he
would not attempt to decide. It was 'enough for him to
observe that a legal doubt existed as to whether the busi-
ness of the Court would go on in the absence of the Chief
Justice. Mr. Willis apprised the Governor of Upper Canada
that it was impossible for him to sit in the Court for the pur-
pose of administering justice there in the absence of the
principal Judge. The consequence was, that the business
of the Court came to a stand, and the Governor of Upper
Canada thought proper to suspend Mr. Willis from his
function. He did not mean to arraign the Governor of Upper
Canada, but there certainly was something singular
iu the way in which he had proceeded. By the constitu-
tion of the colony, the Judge could not be removed but by
the Governor and council ; but it appeared that the Go-
vernor had removed Mr. Willis on the 26th of June, 1828,
by his own authority, and there was no document to show
that the subject was under the consideration of the council
until the 27th, when they concurred in the previous act
of the Governor. In consequence of his removal, or
rather suspension from office, he applied to the Govern-
ment at home, he believed at the office which his Right
Hon. and Gallant Friend held at that time. In conse—
quence of this application his Right Hos. and Gallant
Friend referred him to the Privy Council, and his whole
case, he believed, was entered into before them. The
Privy council undoubtedly came to a decision different
from the opinion which Mr. Willis had expressed, and
which exposed him to animadversion sad the punishment
of loss of office.

Sir G. MURRAY said, Mr. Willis was recommended
by Sir C. Wetherell, when Attorney-General. He went
to act in the capacity of Judge in Upper Canatla,-in 1827.
In the course of the following year the ChierJaitive
tained leave of absence, and he returned to England, after
being seventeen years i■ the colony. In the first term •
which succeeded his departure, Ur. Willis continued to
perform his duty; but, in the intervening period•betweon
the first and the second terms, he came to the conclusion . -./
that the court was incomplete, in cotisequesee of V e ab-
sence ..,*
of the Chief Justice, because the "Colonial Ststut.
,said, that it should consist of the Chief Justice awl tw =
puisne Judges. He made known his opinion to the Go-
vernor, and declared his intention of promulgating it in
court on the first day of aext term. The other prime

Judge differed from him, and proposed to adjourn the
court till the following day. To this he objected, statirg
that as it was not a legal court, they could not adjourn it.
He afterwards transmitted a letter to the Secretary to Go-
vernment, stating not only that he could not act without
the Chief Justice, but that all decisions come to in his ab-
sence were illegal. He (Sir G. Murray) thought that
this was a question of law, and it appeared to him that
the best course would be to bring it under the considera-
of His Majesty's Privy Council. He made some objection
on the ground of expense, to that proceeding. But to
obviate that complaint, Government undertook to defray
the expense. The case was argued in the Privy Council,
the Lord Chief Baron, the Vice-Chancellor, and Sir C.
Robinson being present ; the charge of Mr. Willis amount •
ed to this—that his removal was unwarranted, illegal, and
void ; and the decision of the Privy Council was, that his
removal way not unwarranted, illegal, or void.
The petition was laid upon the table.
Lord MILTON presented a petition with from 13,000
t., 14,000 signatures from bankers, merchants, manufac-
turers, and other inhabitants of the borough of Leeds,
praying for retrenchment and a reform in Parliament.
The Noble Lord observed, that there was scarcely an alle-
gation
or wish contained in the petition in which he did
not entirely concur.
Mr. MARSHALL supported the petition, and stated
that it was most respectably signed. After a few words
from Mr. DUNCOMBE the petition was ordered to be
printed.
Lord MILTON presented a petition from Rotherham,
Yorkshire, for economy and retrenchment. The peti-
tioners also expressed a hope, as the currency had been
placed on a solid basis, that Parliament would not further
interfere with that intricate subject,
Sir H. VIVIAN presented a petition from Licensed Vic-
tuallers of New Windsor, against the Sale of Beer Bill.
Sir T. ACLAND presented a petition, agreed to at a
county meeting of inhabitants of Devon, and numerously
signed by individuals who were either owners of land, or
payers or receivers of tithes, praying for a commutation
of tithes. •
Lord EBRINGTON expressed his entire concurrence in
the prayer of the petition.—Ordered to be printed.
Nis I'. ACLAND presented a petition from Teignmouth
and its vicinity, for a remission of the duties on coal and
calm.

Mr. W. SMITH presented a petition from about 500
owners and occupiers of public-houses in the city of Nor-
wich and its vicinity, praying for some modification of the
sale of Beer Bill, with a view to prevent the consumption
of beer on premises where sold. The Hon. Member pre-
sented a petition from the Mayor and Magistrates of Nor-
wich to the same effect. He also presented a petition
from spinners of Oldham, praying that the regulation with
respect to the employment of children in cotton mills,
might be extended to their employment in silk mills, and
in woollen manufactures.
_ _

Mr. MARSHALL presented a petition from certain
Protestant Dissenters in the county of York, against
Negro Slavery.
Air. O'HARA presented a petition from letter-press
printers of the town of Galway, against the proposed ad-
dition to the duty on newspapers ; also a petition, to the
same effect, from merchants, traders, and other inhabitants
of Galway.

Mr. FERGUSSON presented a petition from certain
&Mere in wines and spirits in Castle Douglas, complaining
of the conduct of the magistrates in refusing them certifi-
cates in order to obtain licences for the sale of small quan-
tities of the above liquors.
Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from the Mayor,
Aldermen, and others of Worcester, against the renewal of
ti:e Insolvent Debtors' Act.
_ _

Mr. F. PALMER presented a petition from Reading,
in favour of the Sale of Beer Bill. The Hon. Member
stated, that the petition was higned by 1,500 persons in the
course of Saturday last. The Hon. Member presented
another petition, signed by 100 shopkeepers of Henley-on-
I homes, to the same effect.
- _ _ _

MONCK agreed with the petitioners, that the sale
of beer could not be evade too free, and the only point in
which he differed from them was in thinking that every
seller of beer ought not to turn his dwelling into an ale-
house.—The petitions were then read and ordered to lie on
the table.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY moved for a continuation, up to
the present time, of the returns respecting public charities,
and the number of informations filed respecting them. Also
for a return of the fees and emoluments for searches for
judgments received during the last seven years, by the
Jerks of the judgment offices in the Courts of King's
Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer, stating the names
of the persons receiving them, and whether such persons
performed the duties of their office as deputies for others,
and if so, for for whom.—Ordered.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER presented
a petition from. Armagh, against the prijected increase in
the stamp duties in Ireland.—(Hear and laughter.)
Mr. BROUGHAM supported the prayer of the petition.
Ile hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would not turn a
deaf ear to the wishes of his constituents,—(Hear, and
laughter.)—The general opinion was, that the prfdeeted
impost would annihilate the newspaper press in Ireland.
---The petition to lie on the table.
Mr. WARBURTON pre seated a p•tition from Bridport,
in favour of the Sale of Beerßill, w:th the exception of that
clause of it which allowed the beer to be consumed on the
premises. Also a petition from the owners of the Brid-
port brewery, against the practice of billeting soldiers on
retail dealers in heer.—To lie on the table.
_ _ _

Mr. DICKINSON presented a petition from victuallers
of places in the county of Somerset, against the Sale of Beer
Bill. —To lie on the table.

Mr. Alderman THOMPSON gave notice, that on
Wednesday, the 19th inst., he should move for leave to
bring in a Bill to declare in what cases public charities
should be assessed for parochial pui poses.
FEES OF OFFICE ON DEMISE OF THE CROWN.
Mr. HUME moved for leave to bring in a Bill to abolish
the taking of fees on the renewal or continuation of office
in case of the demise of the Crown. Leave given. Bill
to be brought in by Mr. Hume and Mr. WARBURTON.
LORD LIEUTENANT OF IRELAND.
Mr. lIUME said that the saving of the salary of the
Lord Lieutenant was, on his view of this question, a
subject of minor importance. If the change he new pro-
posed had been made 25 years ago, many millions would
have been saved. No less than 10,000,000/. and a half
had been paid since 1800, towards the charitable institu-
tions of Ireland and for other purposes, which it was said
would promote the internal government of that country.
If this money had really been spent for the good of Ire-
land, he should not regret it ; but as he knew that a
great part of it had gone towards keeping up party spirit,
and setting a few over the mass of the people, he could not
help lamenting that the money of England had been so
mis-spent. The local influence of the Government of
Ireland had occasioned the greatest mischiefs. When a
Committee of that House, with the Noble Lord, the Secre-
tary for Ireland, at the head of it, recommended that great
repuctions should be made in the expenditure of Ireland,
and when these recommendations had been so little at-
tended to in the estimates laid upon the table, to what
could he attribute this fact, but to the local influence of the
Irish Government, which was too strong even for the
Government of this country ? At the time of the Union
Mr. Pitt, and his Majesty who then filled the throne, de.
dared it to be intended that Ireland should be blended with
England, and be united in all respects to this country.
Instead, however, of being made an integral part of Eng-
land, Ireland had been converted into a province, and
subjected to all the vices of a colonial government. They
had passed separate Bills for Ireland ; the establishments of
that country were on a different footing from the establish-
ments of England. The retainers of the Lord Lieutenaut
were different from the people of Ireland. This could not
fail of displeasing the mass of the Irish, and there
could be no union till the system was altered. Of
the Irish, too, the Orange party had the preference.
In a word, we had treated Ireland exactly as we had
treated the rest of our colonies. Canada and Ireland pre-
sented the same picture of misgovernment. The only way
to get rid of the evils of this system was to retrace our
steps—to place Ireland on the same footing with respect
to its internal government as Scotland and England. The
question then came, what would be the obstacles to the
removal of this sys►em of deputed government in Ireland ?
He had seriously considered the subject in every point of
view, and be saw nothing which would prevent his plan
being carried into immediate effect. In the present mode
of government, no Irishman could have the same feeling
of independence as an Englishman or a Scotchman. He
must feel his country degraded to the condition of a pro-
vince or rather a colony. She was governed in the same
manner as Jamaica or any other colony. The Lord
Lieutenant, or Governor-General, was appointed in the
cue case by the King in Council, and is under the control
of the Colonial Secretary. In the other case he is appointed
in the same manner, but under the controul of the Secre-
tary for the Home Department. The Hon. Member then
went on to contend that this deputed power led to abuses
which could never exist if the country were governed as
Scotland or any other part of the united kingdom. One
great cause of the strength of England would be found in
her complete union with Ireland ; while the latter was in
a weak or impoverished state, England must feel the ef-
fects in a diminution of her resources. When Ireland had
a separate Pai liament_when she had a separate militart
force, a Secretary at War, g separate artillery and corn,

missariat,—then a Lord Lieutenant, as the head and di-
re ttr of the whole, was necessary; but now all these
were removed, and the business connected with them was
done in London. The Union—that measure, which, when
considered dispassionately must, he thought, be approved
by every friend to Ireland, as beneficial to the two countries
—had brought a change not only with respect to those de-
partments, but also with respect to the Customs, the Excise,
the Board of Stamps, the Post-office, and several other public
dep trtments, the direction and management of which had
been removed, or were in progress of removal to London; so
that, is fact, the Lord Lieutenant had little more to do than
the passing of some accounts laid before him by the Vice-
Treasurer of Ireland (an office, by the way, Which he
thought wholly unnecessary, and ought to have been abo-
lished if the Government showed a due regard to economy)
and the nominal eXecution of some orders which might be
as well done under the direction of a secretary for Ireland
resident in London. The whole, or nearly the whole busi-
ness of the departments to which ho had referred, was now
centred in the Treasury here. The Hon. Member then
took a review of the principal business performed in Dublin
under the nominal superintendence of the Lord Lieutenant,
and contended that the whole, with perhaps the police,
could be as well directed in London by a secretary as now
with the expensive pageant of a Lord Lieutenant and his
suite. The business of the Council office was, he ob-
served, but trifling, and might without inconvenience be as
well yerformed here. It might be said that there was a
great advantage in the fact of a Lord-Lieutenant holding a
court in Dublin, but of what importance was that to the
great mass of the people there? It might be advantageous,
or so considered by some little-great men in that country,
who affected great superiority over others by the fact of
being admitted to the castle on certain state occasions, but
it was certain that the holding a court in Dublin was de-
structive of that society which would otherwise be found
there. He had no doubt that if there were no court in
Dublin, many of the landed proprietors would go and re-
side there, as landed proprietors did now in Edinburgh,
and enjoy an equal and comfortable society from which
they were debarred by the existence in that city of those
state parties. When he last brought this subject before
the House, he was met by a statement of the evils which
the removal of the legislature had brought upon Dublin—
that grass was growing in the streets, and that a great por-
tion of her houses were, gone to ruin. He had since made
inquiries into the fact, and he would state the result. So far
then from its being true that Dublin had decreased since the
Union, it had increased in the number of houses and inha-
bitants. From 1800 to 1822, (the year before that
in. which he first introduced this subject) the increase
of the number of houses was 3,463, being nearly a fifth
cf the whole number of 19,864: The population was
then 223,000, having increased between 40,000 and
50,000. The increase in the shipping was also great. In
1800, the number of ships was 2,575 ; in 1822, it was
3,400, and at present, 4,000. The tonnage bad also in-
creased 113,000 tons. It was suggested that this increase
of shipping might have been occasioned at the expense of
the out-ports ; but this was not the case, for the out-ports
had increased in the same time. In 1800, the number of
vessels was 4,800 ; in 1822, 7,900 ; and last year, 11,700.
The tonnage in 1800 was 664,000 ; in 1822, it was
953,000 ; and in the last year, 1,470,000, being an in-
crease of upwards of 500,000 tons in the last seven yea's.
It was impossible, then, to assert with any justice that
Ireland had deteriorated since the Union. The exports in
the year 1790 were, exclusive of those to England (as we
understood), in official value, 3,450,137/. In 1820,
7,160,0001., being more than doubled within that time.
The Mon. Member then entered into an examination of
the business done in the office of the Secretary for Ireland,
which he said was divided into twelve departments, the
management or direction of the whole of which might, he
contended, be removed to London, and be performed by
an Irish Secretary resident bete. With respect to the de-
partment that related to the extension of mercy in crimi-
nal cases, he conceived that there could be no difficulty
whatever in transferring it. His only difficulty was the
selection of the way in which he should bring this subject
before the House. He might have moved that the House
resolve itself into a Committee, to consider on the expe-
diency of making some change in the form of Government
in Ireland. That, however, was not the shape in which
he intended to submit his motion, which was as follows :
—‘, That an humble address be presented to his Majesty,
praying that he will begraciously pleased to consider whe-
ther the office of Viceroy was any longer necessary in Ire-
land, or whether it could be dispensed with consistently,
with the advantage of that country, and the general inte-
rests of the United Kingdom."
The motion having been seconded, was then put from
the Chair.

Lord F. L. GOWER was entirely at a loss to discover
the proofs upon which the Hon. Gentleman established
his assumption. He had asserted, that the defects and
abuses existing in the charitable institutions of Ireland
would have been remedied, but for the continuance of the
office of Lord Lieutenant since the Union. Now, he had
to request that the House would have the patience to sus-
pend its judgment until he should be enabled to disabuse

;he minds of Hon. Members who might give credence to

this representation, which he could do most effectually,
by showing certain redactions in the estimates hereafter
to be submitted. It was not judicious, in his opinion, to
debate the present subject so soon after the settlement of
the Catholic question, involving as it did, a great differ-
ence of opinion amongst the wise and moderate of all par-
ties in Ireland. He did not pretend to say, that it was a
question which the House might not with propriety take
into consideration, and still less was he inclined to affirm
that the Hon. Member had adduced arguments which
deserved to be treated with inattention or disrespect. He
was not, however, prepared to assent to his inference that
the subversion of the executive power in Dublin and its
resurrection at the Home Office, shorn of its usual
attributes, would be productive of benefit to Ire-
land. The Court of the Lord Lieutenant had not

merited the stigma which the Hon. Gentleman endea-
voured to affix to it, by stating that it was surrounded
by numerous needy dependents, who received profitable
promotion, and cherished at the same time a rooted jea-
lousy and dislike of the native inhabitants and all else
that might be considered peculiarly Irish. Such an ob-
servation applied to the courtiers who accompanied King
John when a guest in Ireland, but his own personal
experience of two Vice-regal Courts of the present day
led him to form a contrary conclusion. The argu-
ment that the Irish establishment tended to prevent an
assimilation between the habits of the people with those of
England was, in his judgment, equally destitute of
foundation. What had bren urged respecting a late
arbitrary act of power on the part of the Lord Lieutenant
but tended to convince him the mere of the utility of that
office.—(Hear, hear.)—As to the vice-regal influence on
the administration of the criminal law, it would not be

tifficult to prove by detailg, with which the Hon. Mem-
ber for Limerick was well acquainted, that a most bene-

ficial effect was thereby practically exercised on the work-
ing system as compared with that of England. He could
himself bear testimony to the success of the exertions of
two Viceroys continually directed to this subject. It was
not in his power to devise, nor had the Hon. Member for
Aberdeen suggested, any mode of removing the difficulties

which opposed themselves to the adoption of his advice.
The general advance of the prosperity of Dublin since
the Union, it was admitted, bad been demonstrated; but
.__

was it not rather illogical to conclude, that the system
under which that prosperity was created ought to be

changed ? In fact no 'case bad been made out which
could induce the House to adopt the proposed resolution,

and the discussion of the subject at present was both im:
politic and inconvenient.
Mr. S. RICE was particularly happy that the motion
was grounded rather on good government than on eco-
nomy; for although no one regarded economy more than
himself, he held the good government of Ireland to be a
point of more importance. He did not perceive that
local government was sufficiently recommended by local
considerations. In Dublin, it was probable that this
motion might be unpopular, but he was convinced that the
people of Ireland generally were far from opposed to the
change which it referred to. The speech of the Noble Lord
certainly prepared him for Ministerial concession, and he
had now little doubt that the time was Not very distant
when Government would come forward with a propwal of the
. . .

kind contemplated by the Member for Aberdeen. This being
his impression, it appeared to him that it only remained
for the House to quicken their motion and anticipate their
intention. If Hon. Members looked back to the frequent

changes of the Chief Secretary of Ireland since the Union,
they would see what must be the effect of the system of
shifting and changing. The average continuance of each
was 19 months. Just at the time when they knew some-
thing of business, they were led to abandon the country,

_
and deliver over a most difficult political task to a new
practitioner. This practice alone would lead to a system

of misgovernment; but in Ireland there was a small body
of gentlemen, called the Catholic Government of Ireland,
men who were unknown, and who did not deserve to be
otherwise, but who held the strings of office, and all the

efficient power, and became the instruments of party, the
discords of which they continued. Did the gentlemen of
Ireland believe that the Noble Duke, as Lord Lieu-
tenant, possessed the whole influence in Ireland ? No :
they felt that it was exercised by a small coterie at the
Castle. This was the general impression, and it was
founded on facts which deprived Government of strength.
He did not think that the institutions of Ireland received

much advantage from the presence of a Vice-regal Court;
and he predicted that the accomplishment of the destiny
of that Court was not far off. He concurred in the mo-
tion of the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, which did not
pledge those who voted for it to the abolition of the office
of Lord Lieutenant, but called upon Government to exer-
cise their deliberation on the subject.
Lord L. GOWER explained.
Mr. MOORE opposed the motion. The general• im-
pression in Ireland was in favour of the office of Lord
Lieutenant. No circumstance would produce greater
exasperation of feeling, or increase an opinion which was
growing in Ireland, that Ireland was not regarded in this
country, than the abolition of the Lord Lieutenant and his
Court
Sir H. PARNELL supported the motion. As to the
feelings of the people of Ireland respecting the abolition of
the office, he (Sir H. Parnell) had had several communi-
cations on the subject, and he could only say, that
amongst intelligent persons, the opinion was that the lean-
ing of the people of Ireland was in favour of the abolition
of the office.
Lord OXMANTOWN said, it was only three weeks
since lie had left Ireland, where this motion was a sub-
ject of discussion : he had heard the opinions of many on
the subject, and never had met with a single individual
who was not decidedly hostile to it. He opposed the
motion on the ground that he conceived the abolition of
the office would greatly increase the number of absentees
in Ireland.—(Hear.)
Lord ALTHORP said, that as the motion of his Hon•
Friend the Member for Aberdeen was simply a motion to
have the policy of continuing the office of Lord Lieutenant
of Ireland taken into consideration, every Member who
felt the slightest doubt on the subject, ought, if he valued
his consistency, to vote in support of it. The question
which his Hon. Friend had that evening submitted to the
House was certainly a question of doubt; but still his
(Lord Althorp's) mind was nearly satisfied that the office
of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland ought to be abolished.
There was no more r••ason for having a separate govern-
ment kept up in Ireland, with the present rapid and easy
communication with that country, than there was for hav-
ing a separate Government kept up—he would not say in
Scotland, but—in the northern counties of England. If,
upon the abolition of the office of Lord Lieutenant of Ire-
land, there were appointed in each county of that kingdom
a Lord Lieutenant, enjoying similar powers and privileges
with the Lords Lieutenant of counties in England, all the
difficulties which some gentlemen apprehended from the
abolition would he entirely obviated. Putting out of his
consideration the pecuniary view of this measure, he
should certainly feel it to be his duty to give his support to
the motion of his Hon. Friend.
Sir G. MURRAY said that the vacillation observable
in the policy pursued by the different Secretaries of State
for Ireland was not attributable to the individual character 1
of the different Noblemen who had acted as Viceroys, but
to the system adopted by Administration in England.
That vacillation was now at an end, for a new system had
recently been adopted with respect to Ireland, which would
he beneficial, he trusted, not merely to that country, but
to the empire at large. He was of opinion that, as a piece
of machinery for conducting the Government of Ireland,
the office of Lord Lieutenant had been of great advantage.
It might, perhaps, be dispensed with now, but he was
convinced that up to the present time it had been essen •
tially necessary and positively useful. He confessed that
he was inclined to think that the residence of the Lord
Lieutenant in Dublin was of great advantage to that me-
tropolis, and also of no slight service to the country in ge-
neral. There was but one argument against it which ap-
peared to him to be deserving of any weight, and that was
founded upon economy, a consideration which the Hon.
Member for Northamptonshire was inclined to throw
overboard in his mode of treating this question. He ad-
mitted that a saving to the public would accrue from the
removal of the Vice-regal Court from Dublin ; but he
thought that that saving would be a minor consideration,
unless it could he distinctly made Out that Ireland would
receive no detriment in any other respect from having such
a measure carried immediately into effect.
Mr. O'CONNELL said, that if the people of Ireland
had supposed that this ;notion was seriously intended,
their sentiments upon it would have been made known to
the House in language and tones too plain to be misunder-
stood. He contended that the feelings of the people of
Ireland were decidedly hostile to the abolition of the office
of Lord Lieutenant; for they were convinced that it would
considerably increase the number of absentee• from that
country. Besides, there was an advantage in having a
Lord Lieutenant resident in Ireland, which ought not to
be overlooked. By his presence on the spot he gained an
influence and authority over contending factions, which
could never be acquired by any secondary species of a dis-
tant Government. In conclusion he declared himse:

hostile to the change proposed, because it would inflict
great injury upon the city of Dublin, where misery was al-
ready in the extreme.
Mr. I3ROWNLOW considered the motion of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Aberdeen entitled to the best con-
sideration and support of the House. Nothing like a
substantial argument had been offered by gentlemen on

the other side to convince the House of the propriety of
continuing to maintain the Vice-regal Court in Ireland.—
He had been much pleased with the speeches which he
had just heard from two of his Majesty's Ministers, for
those speeches convinced him that the real question upon
this subject was merely a question of time.—(Hear, hear.)
If there was no objection upon principle to the abolition of
this office,—and as yet he had heard none,—why was it

not the duty of Members of Parliament to press the ques-
tion upon the Government at present? He said distinctly
that the time was now arrived for getting rid of this sys-
tem of government for Ireland.—(Hear.) During the last
30 years continual efforts had been made to assimilate the
Government of Ireland to that of England. There had
been an union of the Parliaments of the two countries;
the Boards of Excise and Customs had been amalgamated ;
various other public bodies had been united. Why, then,

should not Parliament go a step further, and assimilate the
mode of governing the two countries?—(Hear.) Why
should not the English Cabinet tike the Government of
Ireland into its own hands, and administer the English
Constitution in Ireland as they did in England ? It was
mere folly to talk of the people of Ireland being strongly
attached to this form of local government.—(Hear, hear.)
They had suffered too much oppression from it; they had
seen too much corruption in its proceedings to have any
predilection for it.—(Hear.) He concluded by giving his
warmest support to the motion of his Hon. Friend.
Lord CASTLEREAGIT should be sorry to see the
office abolished without stronger reasons being offered for
the measure than had been adduced on the present occasion.
Mr. JEPHSON opposed the motion.
Sir J. YORKE wished to see Ireland no longer go-
verned like a colony, but as an integral part of the empire,
and therefore he would vote for the motion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed
the motion. He thought that upon questions of this kind

the House ought to legislate with deference to the feeling
of the people. It NV 4S notorious that the general feeling of
the people of Ireland was, that the office of Lord Lieute-

. .
nant was essential to the interests of the country.
Mr. HUME shortly replied, and maintained that his
arguments had received no answer. His object was to put
an end to the mal- government of a faction.
The House then divided, when the numbers were,
For the motion . ... 11 5
Against it
Majority against it ll4
On our re-admission to the gallery we found Mr.
BROUGHAM on his legs, but, owing to the noise which
prevailed, it was almost impossible to catch what fell
from him. We understood the Learned Gentleman to re-
commend the postponement of Sir James Graham's mo

tion respecting the salaries, &c., of the Members of the
Privy Council.

Sir J. GRAHAM expressed his readiness to postpone
his motion till Friday if the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would acquiesce in allowing it take precedence on that
evening of the Orders of the Day.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could
not acquiesce in such an arrangement.
The conversation here dropped.
NEWFOUNDLAND.
Mr. ROBINSON proceeded with the motion of which
he had given notice for the appointment of a select com-
mittee to inquire into the state of the island of Newfound-
land. The people of that colony had a right to complain
that Government hitherto had done nothing to encourage
agriculture there, and though the surface of the island was
equal to that of England, the population was depending
upon foreign supplies for their corn and other agricultural
produce.
duce Whenever the fisheries failed, therefore, which
they did to a great extent last year, the greatest distress
prevailed in that island. The Government, therefore,
should encourage agriculture in Newfoundland. The
Hon. Member proceeded to state that the reasons which
had induced him to bring on this motion, and he justified
the course which he had adopted on the ground that the
question had not been taken up, as it ought to have been
taken up, by his Majesty's Government. He read a letter
from Mr. Forbes, now Chief Justice of New South Wales,
and who had formerly been in Newfoundland, corrobora-
tive of hie (Mr. Robinson's) sentiments as to the line of
policy which had been hitherto pursued towards that
colony, and that which it was now the duty of Govern-
ment and Parliament to adopt. To prove the importance
of the trade of the island, he should merely state, that

831 vessels had entered the ports of Newfoundland in
1827, and that 400 registered vessels were employed in
the fishery alone. This colony possessed the additional
claim on our consideration, that it did not require any pro-
tecting duties for its produce. It had, besides, no local
legislature, and could only look for justice to an English
Parliament. As to the revenue of Newfoundland, the only
expense to which the colony put this country was for the
support of its military establishment. The Hon. Gentle-
man concluded by moving " That a select committee be
appointed to inquire into the state of the island of New-
foundland."
Sir G. MURRAY was of opinion that the Hon. Mem-
ber had not made out a ease that rendered it necessary for
a Committee of that House to inquire into the state of
Newfoundland. The original policy of the Government
was to make that colony a nursery for seamen. That
system, however, had been altered, and colonization was
encouraged. The consequence was, that there was now
a population of 80,000 or 9QOOO souls. The old system
had been abandoned, they could not return to it, and all
they could do was to give to this nucleus of population
every possible support, and that he contended was done.
The Hon. Gentleman bad observed that Government
ought to endeavour to introduce the products, of New-
foundland into foreign countries on the hest possible terms.
He admitted the fact ; but he could not see the necessity
of appointing a Committee on that ground, unless it was
meant to be contended and to be proved, that Government
(lid not obtain such terms from other countries as they
ought—an inference the correctness of which he denied.
The Hon. Member had referred to the Treaty of Ghent as
disadvantageous to this country, with reference to the
Newfoundland fishery. He would ask was it fit that a
Committee should he appointed to criticise the Treaty of
Ghent? And what good, he demanded, could be derived
from such an investigation ? He had touched generally
on the topics introduced by the Hon. Member, and, so far
as he could perceive, the Hon. Member had not esta-
blished any sufficient ground for the appointment of a
Committee. In conclusion, be expressed his intention of
opposing the motion.
Mr. BERNAL was of opinion that the Hon. Member
for Worcester had made out a ease that required the imme-
diate and serious attention of the House.

Mr. LABOUCHERE hoped the Hon. Member would
persist in his motion.

- Mr. PONSONI3Y supported the motion.
Mr. HUME charged the colonial department with neg-
ligence in their conduct towards this colony; and con-
tended that the labours of a Committee could alone remedy
the evils occasioned by that negligence. He submitted
that the Committee alone was the place to obtain infor-
mation. He hoped the Hon. Member would not withdraw
his motion, but if he divided the House with only six
gentlemen, and he was sure he would have a greater
nucber of friends, he trusted he would persevere.
Sir G. MURRAY explained.
Mr. WARBURTON said, that those individuals whom
he had the honour to represent depended almost entirely
on the manufacture of ropes, lines, and ether things used
in the fisheries, and it was of great importance to them,
and to other persons residing in different places, employed
in a similar manner, that the utmost encouragement should
be given to the fisheries.

Mr. ROBINSON replied.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion 2O
Against it B2
Majority against the motion —s3
On our entering the gallery we found

Mr. BROUGHAM on his legs. He observed, as we
understood, that in the last session a Bill had come down
flour the other House, for effecting an alteration in the pre-
sent system of the Court of Chancery. That Bill dis-
appeared almost immediately. He now understood that
another Bill, which was in the p. esent session introduced
to the other House, was also about to he withdrawn. In
this situation of uncertainty, those who in that House
wished to make some reform in the law knew not how to
shape their course. He therefore begged leave to ask, if
one Chancellor of his Majesty's Government could inform
him whether the measure introduced by another Chancellor
was likely to proceed ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he
knew nothing whatever of the rumour to which the
Learned Gentleman alluded.

Mr. BROUG HAM—Oh ! then I suppose I am to con-
sider the report as utterly groundless.
Lord TULLAMORE moved, pursuant to notice, for a
Select Committee to inquire into a grant of 18,000/. from
the Irish Loan Commissioners to the Grand Canal Com-

pany for the extension of the navigation to the town of
Kilbeggan.
The motion, which was supported by Mr. TUITE, and
opposed by Mr. A. DAwsoN and Lord L. GOWEN, was
negatived without a division.

The other Orders of the day were then disposed of, and
Is House adjourned at Three o'clock.

OF TWENTY-NINE, IVII

iT OF THE MINOR
10 VOTED FOR THE APPO
QUIRE INTO THE STAI I

IINTMENT OF A SELECT
3 OF THE ISLAND OF

Graham, Sir J.
Hume, Joseph
Jeplison, C. 1).
Lamb, Hon. G.
Lester, B.
Marshall, J.
O'Connell, D.
Peachy, General
Porbonby, Hon. W.
l'rotheroe, E. -
Rice, T. S.

Stewart, Sir M. S.
Thomson, C. P.
Uxbridge, Earl of
Warburton, H.
Ward, J.

Whitmore, W. W.
Wyvill, M.

TELLERS.
Labouchere, H.
Robinson, G. It.

L
_it „,,,.,,, ---,,,
i„........ i ..‘,.,:,,,_„,
01.;PVia64t0-.N. j e:67 • t I?