The Sun.
London, England, 1825-08-24 00:00:00

[NEW TIMES.]

We give in another part of the paper an ae-
cdunt of a trial in Cork of two persons accused
of the murder of the Franks family in that court-
try—(see THE SUN of yesterday). The details
of that murder were to the last degree hideous.
A father, mother, and son had their skulls beaten
in with crow-bars—a pitchfork was driven.

through the body of the son by thirty or forty
persons, who passed it from hand to hand for
the purpose, while a fellow remained outside on
guard, who, during the butchery within, whistled
a hornpipe, and danced with bloody buffoonery,
in joy at the completion of the atrocity. This
murder must have been participated in by 50 peo-
ple ; it must have been known by hundreds ; every
Roman Catholic Priest within•twenty miles of it
must have known the perpetration, and yet near
two years have elapsed without the savages being
brought to justice ! The trial of the persons,
which we give, will be seen to be a mere mockery,
for the witnesses for the Crown were either in-
timidated into perjury, or committed it designed ly
to baffle the aims of justice. We notice it only
because the Morning Chronicle, a few days since,
was very loud in proving the superior morality
of the Southern parts of Ireland over the
Northern, by the greater number of convictions
in the latter. Now, with all deference to our
contemporary, if in a particular district witnesses
be deterred from giving evidence—if a murder
remains unpunished, though half a County know
of it—if people be murdered, with a sort of
Cherdea barbarity, because they dared to ap-
pear in a. Court of Justice as witnesses
against murderers (which was the cause of the
slaughter of the Frankses), nothing can be more
certain► than that convictions will be more rare
in such countries than in civilized communities
We shall suppose that in New Zealand, where
eating people's neighbours is a customary amuse-
ment, or in New Orleans, where a black fellow
may be thonged to death for pastime every now
and then, executions are still more uncommon ;
but we must protest against the idea which
makes the punishment of crime, and not crime
itself, the standard of the morality of a country.

[MORNING CHRONICLE.]
Some time ago we copied from the Irish Pa-
pers into our columns, a charge delivered to
the Grand Jury of the county of Carlow, at
the late Assizes by Lord Norbury, Chief
Justice of the Common Pleas in Ireland.—
Thai charge is well Calculated to impress the
-public mind with a sense of the inconvenien-
cies arising out of the tenure by which judi-
cial places are held in these countries. Here
we have a man, full fourscore years of age, pre-
siding in a Court of Justice instituted for deter;
mining upon the most solemn and important in-
terests of the. community, a supreme Court, at
whose bar men receive doom of life and liberty,
and in such a Court, presiding in the character
of chef or sole Judge, does lie utter the strange
language which we introduced into our columns.
Yet this man remains upon the Bench year after
year; and there may remain so long as his de-
caying strength shall enable him to maintain his
seat. No matter how deficient in the proper
qualifications, any individual upon the Benches
of the supreme Court of Justice, may shew
himself; no matter whether his incapacity
arise from primitive vices .of constitution, or
be superinduced by age and infirmities, he
will be suffered to contiime.the exercise of the
judicial functions will}-what scandal soever to the
general administration of justice, or detriment to
individual suitors, until if becomes agreeable to
himself to retire. By the recent augmentation
of the salaries, and retired allowances of the
Judges, it has indeed been attempted to diminish
that temptation to linger upon the judgment-seat
Which the avarice or necessities of individuals
exposed them to ; but something remains to be
done in order to secure the retirement or removal
of Judges, who, incited by the lust of authority,
or in defiance of public opinion, choose to continue
on the judgment-seat. Prior to the famous Act of
William and Mary, the Judges held their seats,
durante bole placito, and, in earlier times, espe-
cially in the reign of James I , were frequently
• dismissed at the pleasure of the Monarch, arid
obliged to betake themselves to the practice of
the profession in a private character. By the
Act of William and Mary, however, the Judges
hold their seats quamdiu se bene gesserint, and
cannot be removed except upon an address to
the Crown, praying such removal, from both
Houses of Parliament. The practical effect
flowing from this, so highly vaunted alteration
in our system of Judicature, belongs to that
species of mischiefs which besets popular institu-
tions. The two Houses have never, in a solitary
case, exercised this discretionary power; so that,
while liberty boast an important acquisition in
having disenthralled the Judges from the capri-
cious dominion of the Crown, Jurisprudence has
to deplore the extinction of all effective superin-
tendauce and controul over the Judicial Body. Up
to this time, the names and shadows of things have
been in a degree of esteem, and exercised an in-
fluence over men's imaginations and ccnduct,which
the growing intelligence and more sound views
of the people will, if we mistake not, soon de-
stroy.T he paramount importance of a well digested
systent of judicature is beginning_th be properly
apprehended ; and we may assure ourselves that
the absence of all visitatorial power over the
Judges, constitutes one of those mischiefs which
must be abated within no very long period. The
Legislature would, no doubt, adopt the means
pointed out for the removal of a Judge, if a clear
act of corruption, or other palpable and unequi-
vocal crime were proved against him ; hut we are
told that infirmities or vices of character, such, for
example, as those displayed by Mr. Kenrick in the
case of Canfor, or Lord Norbury, would not justify
the strong measure of voting an Address to the
Crown; no folly, no weakness, no indiscretion
in the individual ; nay, not even a suspicion of
sinister motives actuating him, would warrant a
step so distressing to the personal feelings of the
obje"ct of it. That is, if an unfit man be ele-
vated to the dignity of a Judge, he is not to be
removed from that dignified elevation unless
such a crime can be brought home to him, as
would warrant his being transported as a felon ;
or whipped in the House of Correction. A
Judge need not be distinguished by any superior
integrity of mind, or strength and acuteness of
understanding, and extent of knowlege ; it is
enough if he be not among the more depraved
and unprincipled outcasts of society—the sound-
ness of his. intellects, the discretion of his deport-
ment, the composure of his temper, and his know-

ledge are !netters of trivial moment ; and, although
he be found destitute of recommendation in each
of those articles, to insist upon his retirement
would be an act of intolerable cruelty. This ten-
derness to individual feelings and interests,
however laudable in its origin, constitutes
one of the most grievous sins of the Houses
of Parliament. No consideration of public benefit
is sufficient to recommend any measure for reform
of any one deparment in the service of the State,
unless every personal interest which may, by the
remostest possibility, be affected, have been pre-
viously conciliated. How long has the County
Court Bill, for example, been delayed, if
it be not finally defeated, by the difficulty of
compensating the pretended vested rights
(forsooth !) with which it is apprehended to
interfere ? But we would ask with what justice
can the benefit of the State, be alleged to excuse
the capital punishment of a wretch guilty of
forgery, if the same principle be held invalid
as regards the selection of the Judge who pro-
nounces sentence ! We care not for the amount
of the Judges' pensions on retirement. We think.
the country well rid of a bad or incompetent Judge
at any cost ; and sure we are, that if the means exist-
ing for ridding us of such nuisances be not made
effective, others must and will be devised. The
best and dearest interests of the state are in-
volved in upholding the dignity and authority of
its tribunals, and in attaching to them the respect
and confidence of the people. Those, however,
cannot survive the fallen, nay, even tarnished re.
putation of the Judges, and so scum as one of the
body has forfeited public esteem by any in-
discretion or levity of conduct, to say no worse,
or that he has proved himself deficient in profes-
sional ability, it is essential to the advantage of
the community that he cease to act. Government
may be excusable for having made an ill choice
of a Judge ; they are inexcusable if they do not
do all in their power to correct the error so soon
as it is discovered.