The Sun.
London, England, 1831-09-16 00:00:00

CASE OF MR. AND MRS. DEACLE.

Colonel EVANS next presented a petition from the
town of Cranbrook, in Kent, praying the House to inves-
tigate the cast, of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, with a view of
affording them relief. The petition was signed by 150
persons, and he (Colonel Evans) was desired to refer to
the Hon. Member for Kent (Mr. Hodges) to vouch for
their respectability. When he presented the petition of
Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, it was charged to him by a powerful
publication, that he hadit in his po-cket three or four weeks
before he presented it, which was not the fact, for he only
received it on the Thursday, and he presented it on the
following Mont*, Httittitted':on tt.ftirtner night that there
was a very itiong feeliq';'thfoughtittt the country upon
this subject, and that his Majesty's Government ought to
adopt some measure respecting it ; he now repeated what
he then said, but he way. unwilling to force any isolated
case on the present Government, who were bent upon Re-
form, and who had, by their conduct, established them-
Belt,. in the esteem of the whole country.
Mr. WI K‘: concurred in the statement expressive of
a ery general fe linq upon this subject. He, too, had a
pentio,. ant to kiln, in which the petitioners expressed
their abhurr,liCe at the treatment received by Mr. and
Mrs. Deacle, and specially at the want of gallantry
and, the cruelty practised towards the unhappy lady.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said it was obvious that at pre-
ent nothing could be done in this case by the House, and
any discussion upon it was premature. It was said
on a former occasion that the defendants intended
moving for a new trial as soon as the forms of
the law would permit, and therefore until they had that
opportunity, which would be during the first four days of
next term, it was premature to discuss it. Should those
four days of next term pass without the defendants taking
any steps to challenge the verdict, then he hoped the Gal-
lant Member would bring the subject again before the
House. At the same time he must say that Mr. Deacle
had been greatly prejudiced by statements which had been
male in the House by individuals who did not perhaps
think at the time that they were all powerful there, and
that the parties were. without the means of replying.
Mr. HODGES spoke to the respectability of the peti-
tioners.
Mr. PRINGLE spoke very inaudibly ; we understood
him to deprecate the feeling which had been excited by
certain Members of the House upon this case, and which
bad been carried through the country by the instrunteriks
tality of the Press.
Mr. O'CONNELL said the case of these iindividuals
had certainly excited a considerable interest throughout the
country. He regretted that the present discussion was pre-
mature, as the case was to come again before a court of
law; but he observed that two petitions, one front a
place in Kent, and the other from the town of Wolver-
hampton, had been forwarded to him to present, praying
that the case of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle might be taken
into consideration.

Mr. C. FERGUSON thought the feeling that had been
raised was highly creditable to the country, for certainly
it at present appeared that Mr. and Mrs lieacle had been
most uraustly treated. He was of opinion that it would be
better to wait the result of the proceedings in the court
of law. before any further steps were taken in the House.
Mr. F. PALMER said the House should recollect the
diffieul•ies with which the Magistrates of Hampshire
were surrounded, amidst riots and burnings, and then he
would ask, was it possible that they could act as calmly
and dispassionately as if they were sitting in the House
or in their own drawing-rooms. There were no less
than seven large mobs, and Hampshire mobs too,
sallying forth from various points, and to accuse Magistrates
who had, under such circumstances of difficulty and danger,
a little overstepped the strict line of duty, particularly as it
appeared they had information respecting Mr. and Mrs.
Oracle, was in his opinion very unnecessary.
Mr. LAMB deprecated these preliminary discussions
pending proceedings in a court of justice.—(Hear, hear.)
He hoped the House would see the impropriety of conti-
nuing this discussion, which could not go ou without rip-
ping up the whole of the case.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BARING assured the House, that from the cir-
cumstances in which he was placed it was impossible for
him to have acted otherwise than he did. He hoped
Hon. Gentlemen would perceive that a feeling had already
been excited from one end of the country to the other
which would have the effect to a certain degree of preju-
dicing the case.—(Hear.)
Colonel EVANS was not aware until sow that further
proceedings were intended to be taken, or he would not
have said so much ; he now begged, under those circum-
stances, to deprecate any further discussion on the subject.
The petition was read, and ordered to be laid on the
table.
The Hox. MEMBER then presented, without obser-
vation, a similar petition from Leamington-Priors; in War-
wickshire. Ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. LAMB brought up a copy of the letters . patent
under which the Governor of the Isle of Wight was ap-
pointed.
Mr. F. PALMER presented a petition from the re-
toilers of beer in the neighbourhood of Reading, playing that
nu alteration might be made in the Beer Bill, and that the

brewers sad retailers should bs subjected to the urns re-
gulations. The Hon. Member also presented a petition
from the mechanics, labourers, and inhabitants of Reading,
complaining of injurious representations respecting the
effect of keeping open the beer-shops, that immorality and
vice were thereby encouraged. They complained
that through the interference of clergymen who
were Magistrates, all their innocent games of skittles,
&c. were forbidden, and the petition prayed that
a similar surveillance might be exercised over the amuse-
ments and games of the rich, and particularly that cards
and the dice-box might be taken away from the Rev.
Gentlemen themselves who had thus interfered.
Mr. NORTH presented a petition from the Master of
the Rolls in Ireland, praying that he might have the
power of appointing his own secretary. The Hon. Member
gave Ibis Honour a high character for strict imparti-
ality, profound legal knowledge, and indefatigable
industry, and assured the House that the interests of the
public, as well as individual interests, were concerned in
the settlement of this question. The question was brought
before the House in consequence of a controversy which
had for the last thirty years subsisted between the Lord
High Chancellor and the Master of the Rolls in Ireland,
relative to the appointment of a Secretary to the latter.
The Master of the Rolls in Ireland hail a separate and in-
dependent, though subordinate jurisdiction, and every
one connected, or at all acquainted with him, knew
extremely well the great convenience, if not absolute
necessity to the comfort of the Judge, if not to the
interests of justice, that he should have in his own
power the nomination and appointment of his con-
fidential secretary. The patent, however, under which
the Master of the Rolle in Ireland held his office, gave it to
him to hold and enjoy in the same manner as the Master of
the Rolls in England enjoyed his, who every one knew bad
the power and exercised it of appointing his secretary.
In 1827 Sir Anthony Hart was appo'uted Lord Chancel-
lor of Ireland, and he, as his predecessor bad done,
persevered in his right to appoint the Secretary of
the Master of the Rolls. The Muter finding mat-
ters thus circumstanced, • for the purpose of try-
ing the right of the Lord Chancellor, appoiuted
the present Recorder of Dublin (Mr. Shaw) to the office
of his Secretary, the House would therefore perceive that
in that appointment there was no eye to the emoluments,
and an action was then brought for the purpose Of
recovering the fees belonging to that office. Sir Anthony
Hart then issued a similar order to the one promul-
gated by Mr. Ponsonby, namely, that no erder should
be received unless siped by the secretary of the Lord '
Chancellor, thus effectually putting it out of the power
of the Master of the Rolls to apply'to any other tribunal fur
redress than the Chancellor himself. Mr. Shaw petitioned
the Lord Chancellor on the subject, who, having heard
the subject discussed for three or four days, de-
cided that the Master of the Rolls had no authority
whatever to appoint his own Secretary. It then became a
question with the Master of the Rolls, in what marine'
lie should seek redress ; search was made for precedents.
but none were discovered, and no alternative was
then left him but to apply to the House. Lord Plunkett,
r on his appointment to the seals in Ireland, took the course
pursued by Sir A. Hart : that being the case, the Master of
the Rolls had determined upon presenting the present pe-
tition, which prayed that an Act might be passed whit b
would remove the barriers which now existed to the deter-
mination of the question.
Mr. CRAMPTON (Solicitor-General for Ireland) did
not mean to oppose the reading of the present peti-
tion, nor controvert any of the statements made, co
argue any of the questions of law that had been raised, es
this was not the time for them ; but he thonght it his
duty not to suffer the petition to pass without making a
few observations, in order to prevent misconception. He
quite agreed that the petition was entitled to great con-
sideration from the House, coming from the high
authority it did ; but, though he would pay ti e
greatest attention and respect to the opinion of the 111aste►
of the Rolls of Ireland ; be could not hut think, and in
that he had no doubt the House would go along with
him, that that opinion in the present instance was
pregnant with personal feeling, and could not be there-
fore taken in the light of a judicial one. Still, how-
ever, he could not go along with the Honourable
Member who had presented the petition, in thinking
that the present question was free from all doubt
or difficulty. The public, however, were not at
all interested in the present question, and he would take
upon himself to assert, that no such officer as Secretary to
the Master of the Rolls in Ireland was known to the law.
The Master of the Rolls appointed Mr. Shaw to the office
in 1827, and then the question was to be tried; but where
was it to he tried ? The Mover of the Rolls was anxious
fur an arbitration, but the Chancellor (Hart) was of opi-
nion that he had no right to take away the fees
of office of his own secretary, for the purpose of
giving them to the newly•appointed secretary. The
investigation was gone into. The Lord Chancellor never
disputed the right of the Master of the Rolls to appoint a
secretary if he were so disposed, but as that person wished
to have what all secretaries were desirous of having, viz.
something in the shape of fees, the question was whether
there was to be a new fee established—and God knew, that
suitors were burthened heavily enough already by charges
in courts of law—or whether the existing fees were to
be divided between the Lord Chancellor's Secretary and the
new Secretary of the Mister of the Rolls. The Hon. and
Learned Member adverted to an order of the Court made 21
years previously, and said that in the teeth of that
order, the Lord Chancellor could not have decided in
favour of the new Secretary, and no case had been made
out to justify the setting aside of that order.
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

SECOND EDITION.
SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

nuE LONDON GAZETTE

OF THIS EVENING,

WHITEHALL, SEPT. 15, 1831.
The King has been pleased to direct letters patent to be passed
under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland, granting the dignity of a Baronet of the said United
Kingdom to the following Gentlemen, and the respective heirs
male of their bodies lawlully begotten, viz.—
Lieut.-General John Slade.

Lieut.-General Sir William Anson, of Birch-hall, in the county
palatine of Lancaster, K.C.B.
Lieut.-General Kenneth Mackenzie, of Glenbervie, in the county
of Kincardine.
Vice-Admiral Sir Robert Waller Otway, of Brighthelmstone, in
the county of Sussex, K.C.B.
Major-General Sir Archibald Campbell, K.C.B. and Lieutenant-

Governor of New Brunswick. -
Augustus John Foster, of Stone-house, in the county of Louth,
Esq., his Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipo-
tentiary to the King of Sardinia.
Sir James M.Grigor, of Campden-hill, in the county of Middle-
sex, M.D. Director-General of the Army Medical Department.
Robert Way Harty, of Prospect-house, Roebuck, in the county
of Dublin, Esq. Lord Mayor of Dublin.
Colonel John Thomas Jones, of Cranmer-hall, in the county
of Norfolk.
Robert Greenhill Russell, of Checquers-court, in the county of
Buckingham, Esq.
William Chaytor, of Croft, in the county of York, and of Wit-
ton-castle, in the county of Durham, Esq.
William Wrixon Becher, of Ballygiblin, in the county of Cork,
Esq.
Joseph Birch, of the Hazles, in the county palatine of Lan-
caster, Esq.
Robert Campbell, of Carrick Buoy, in the county of Donegall,
Esq.
Wilfred Lawson, of Brayton-house, in the county of Cumber-
land, Esq.
John Nugent Humble, of Cloncoskoran, in the county of Water-
ford, Esq.
James Martin Lloyd, of Lancing, in the county of Sussex, Esq.
James Gibson Craig, of Riccaiton, in the county of Mid-
Lothian, Esq.
Joseph Barrington, of the city of Limerick, Esq.
Theodore Henry Lavington Broadhead, of Burton, or Monk-
Bretton, in the county of York, Esq.
John Colman Rashleigh, of Prideaux, in the county of Corn-
wall, Esq.
•
J- Campbell, of Barcaldine, in the county of Argyll, Esq.
Percy Fitzgerald Nugent, of Donore, in the county of West-
meath, Esq.
John James Garbett Waltham, of Knill-court, in the county of
Hereford, Esq.
William Heygate, of Southend, in the county of Essex, Esq.
one of the Aldermen of the city of London.
Thomas M'Kenny, Esq. one of the Aldermen of the city of
Dublin.

AT THE COURT AT ST. JAMES'S, SEPTEMBER 13, 1831.
Admiral Sir Thomas Williams, Admiral Sir William Har-
good, Lieutenant-General Sir James Willoughby Gordon, Bart.,
and Rear-Admiral Sir Thomas Masterman Hardy, Bart., were
made Knights Grand Crosses of the Most Honourable Military
Order of the Bath.

ST. JAMES'S PALACE, SEPTEMBER 13, 1831.
Rear-Admiral Sir George Scott and Rear-Admiral Sir Tho.
mus Dundas were made Knights-Commanders of the Most Ho-
nourable Military Order of the Bath.

Henry Mex, of Theobald'spork, in the county of Hertford, Esq.
Charles Mansfiels Clarke, of Dunham Lodge, in the county of
Norfolk, M.D. one of the Physscians in Ordinary to het Ma-
jesty.