The Sun.
London, England, 1840-08-06 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION.

.
therefore an inquiry was imperatively necessary. Again,
a grave charge bad been made against Mr. O'Connor,
that be had taken upon himself the degrading offices of
sweeping and washing his own chamber, &c., for the pur-
pose of getting up grievances to complain of to the
House ; that Mr. O'Connor denied ; again that point
demanded inquiry. Mr. O'Connor went on to say that
he was to be tried again upon another indictment,
yet his legal adviser was not permitted access to him.
The Hon. Member then read a letter to the Magis-
strates, in which it was stated to be the opinion of Lord
Normanby that they might " not improperly" allow him
to see hie professional advisers. He (Mr. Aglionby)
hoped not—he hoped we were not come to that yet.—
(Hear, hear.) Although it had been asserted in that
House, and in the House of Lords, that Mr. Clarkson
never was refused admission, as the professional adviser
of Mr. O'Connor, yet that gentleman assured him
that he had applied expressly in that character, and
that he was refused admission—that the Magistrates
told hiss be had better apply for permission to the Se-
cretary of State ; and one of them (Sir John Carlyle)
told him he would write himself to the Secretary, to
know what could be done. Yet, up to the month of
June, Mr. Clarkson received no communication. He
(Mr. Aglionby) had certainly heard since that Mr.
Clarkson had been permitted to see his client ; but
surely it was necessary to inquire why the permission had
bean so 100 delayed. The Hon. Member then wept into
a detail of be steps which had hitherto been taken in
Parliament in reference to this case. The first time
the matt': was brought before the House of Commons
was when he, having been informed by a friend of Mr.
O'Connor's to what treatment that gentleman was sub-
jected, inquired, in his place, whether the Hon. Gen-
tleman. the Under-Secretary of State, was aware that
Mr. O'Connor was subjected to the same punishment
as the felons, and the Hon. Gentleman answered in the
negative. On the next occasion when the subject was
mentioned, the Hon. Gentleman denied the allegations
of Mr. O'Connor ; and in the other House they were
alsp denied. The next step was the sending down a
gentleman, Mr. Crawford, an Inspector of Prisons,
to inquire respecting the truth or falsehood of the allega-
tions—that inquiry being instituted in consequence of
what passed in the House, and more especially of his
request made to the Hon. Gentleman in his place.
Afterwards he put a notice on the Paper that he would
move far a report of Mr. Crawford, and of other docu-
ments connected therewith. The Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. F. Maule) undertook to lay them on the table,
but on the return being made, he (Mr. Aglionby) found
that it did not include the instructions to Mr. Craw-
ford. Ho complaed, that when an inquiry was insti-
tuted by order of that House, that the instructions
given to the Inspector of Prisons were merely verbal—
that two formal examinations were taken, and that a
verbal report merely was to be given to the Home-
office. Now, he complained strongly of that conduct,
and he hoped the House would not sanction it.
Where so wnuch mystery and concealment was prac-
tised, there was evidently something wrong, and
be contended the House was bound to sift
the matter to the bottom. (Hear, hear.)
In a letter of Mr. O'Connor's it was stated that he bad
learned from his fellow prisoners that Mr. Crawford, the
London Inspector, had been there that morning (4th
June) ; that he had taken the evidence of John Addey,
the turnkey, who contradicted every statement in
petition of Mr. Feargus O'Connor. The In-
spector afterwards saw Mr. O'Connor, and told him
wLo he was, but that he was there merely by accident,
and had called to see the state of the gaol. Mr.
O'Connor said he would be able to prove every allega-
tion in his petition, but Mr. Crawford distinctly told
him that he had no authority to do so. It was rather
singular, however, that on the 9th of June these denials
ce' Adley to the allegations of Mr. O'Connor fiend
their way into the York papers, of course evidently for
the purpose of prejudicing him. On that day Mr.
Crawfor4 again saw Mr. O'Connor, and then said he
Lid conic officially to ievestigate the allegations in his
petition. The evidence of the turnkey given on a former
eccasion was then read over, and he retracted every
;Toed of it. Mr. O'C. sail he hoped the evidence
with the word " retracted " would be preserved, to
schleis the Inspector at once assented. The evidence of
Mr. Hague and others was evidently given on the
authority of the turnkey, for, in several cases the addi-
tion or explanation was "so and so told me." Tee
ezazmiziation dosed at five o'clock, and was adjourned
oe.-r ten the next morning. On the following day,
inthzsed of proceeding with the investigation accordi:g
te arrangement, the Magistrates' clerk called upon hint,
anti said the Inspector was in a great hurry and could not
re.nain another day ; he requested Mr. O'C. to sign
hi; depositions. Mr. O'C. did so, after entering a long
prt...est against the conduct of the Inspector, and be
scoutal observe, that it was distinctly stated at the time,
that the depositions were all to be prepared
and arranged in proper form for being laid
before tho Government. Now, he would ask where
were those depositions and the report of the
information ? The Honourable Gentleman, the Under
Seeretary, had informed him that there were no depo-
sitivnl and no report. Why should not the evidence be
before the House, that it might be able to ascertain
,c pother Mr. O'Connor's allegations were true or false.
If they were false, that was a sufficient vindication of
the conduct of the Hume-office; but if they were true,
the House and the country would demand some inquiry.
Be asked for that inquiry on behalf of Feargus O'Con-
nor, on behalf of every British subject, and on behalf
of every independent man it: that country who did not
wish to see the liberty of the subject so grossly out-
raged. Mr. O'Connor bad been charged with false-
hood, and yet his vindication from that charge had been
suppressed. He had not laid before the House the
whole of the facts on which he founded a prima
fteit: case of hardship and oppression, which he
doubted not would excite the indignation of that House.
Upon this he claimed inquiry into the circumstances
of the case. It waeraid he was claiming a great boon
for Mr. O'Connor ; be asserted that hie was doing no
such thing, and that he was only claiming for him that
hid) was his right.—(Hear, hear.) Allegations had
been made against Mr. O'Connor, and he had been
turned into ridicule about the state of his health, and
the manner in which he bad lived in the Queen's Bench.
"low far those assertions were facts he would not say ;
but he considered if there were anything against him,
it was necessary that it should be proved. It had been
said that be had visited York Cathedral before his in-
carceration, and that when at Preston he played at
racket—what there was to complain of in all this be
could not say. Mr. O'Connor had been accused of
stating falsehoods, and making up a case for himself,
stud upon all these grounds it was that be demanded
inquiry. The Hon. and Learned Member then pro.
ceeded to argue that a Commission was the proper
course to pursue to make the inquiry, and concluded by
stating that nothing had been hitherto stated to the
House which ought to induce it to believe the Vi-
siting Justices before Mr. O'Connor. He consi-
dered the present subject Nig of great importance, and
was determined to divide thrHouse upon it.
Mr. T. DU NCOM BE seconded the motion.
Lord J. RUSSELL did not feel inclined to revive
the discussion on this question, which had taken place
upon a former occasion. What the Hon. Member for
Cockermouth had then_ stated was substantially what
he had stated before, when the matter was debated in
a House far more full than it was at present; and when
the motion was negatived by a large majority. Tho
present question, upon which the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman founded his motion, was with regard to cer-
tain complaints made by Mr. Feargus O'Connor with
respect to his treatment in York Castle. In conse-
quence of the first of those complaints certain direc-

Lions were given with respect to the treatment
of Mr. Feargus O'Connor in York Castle. The Secre-
tary of State stated what he thought ought to be
allowed to Mr. O'Connor ; and he believed the Hon.

tain all the honours of martyrdom, without any of the
sufferings of imprisonment. It appeared to him that
that would be going too far, and giving a direct incite
ment to persons to pursue the same course. With re-
gard to Mr. O'Connor's petition, he must say that
one part of it was most dangerous. He complained
of having been put into the same cell with
felons, but it was at his own especial request,
he preferring their company to being in solitary
confinement. What was the gaoler to do? Was he
to send in innocent persons to bear company with Mr.
F. O'Connor ? and yet that was one of the grounds mt on
which it was attempted to excite the sympathy of the
public in his behalf. If the House was of opinion that
libellous publications, for the purpose of exciting the
people to violence and rebellion, should not be prose-
cuted, or that the parties guilty of them should be
treated with peculiar leniency, and were entitled to a
particular indulgence, let a legislative measure to that
effect be carried, instead of moving for a Commission,
which could do nothing more than inquire whether the
law was carried into effect or not. That Commission
could pronounce no opinion upon the conduct of the
Visiting Magistrates, and would, therefore, entirely fall.
If any charge was made against the Government, they
would be ready to meet it, but they would net be deter-
red by the fear of any petitions, or any motions, from
doing what they conceived to be their duty for the
preservation of the peace of the country, and the pro-
tection of her Majesty's local and peaceable subjects.—
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said no one complained of
the prosecutions that had been instituted, but that the
sentences were not carried out as the Judges intended.
His Hon. Friend complained that the examinations
taken by the Inspector were not forthcoming, and he
really could not understand how his Hon. Friend the
Under-Secretary could state that such was not the fact,
when he assured the House that no depositions had been
taken. In several other gaols, Warwick, Manchester,
Northallerton, and other places, parties were suffering
the same illegal species of restraint, and he would remind
the House of the case of Martin, a petition from whom
he had presented that evening, and which appeared to
him to be one of peculiar hardship. The Judge dis-
tinctly stated in that case, which was a conviction for a
political libel, that he was not to be sentenced to hard
labour, and yet he was sent to the treadmill as soon as
he entered the House of Correction. If the Commis.
sion was issued at all he thought the cases of all these
persons, amounting altogether to upwards of 200, should
be included.
Mr. WAKLEY had hoped the Hon. Gentleman
the Under Secretary of State for the Home De-
partment would have favoured them with his senti-
ments on the subject. He was obliged to the Hon.
Member for Cockermouth for having brought this
subject forward. The subject was such a disagreeable
one that the bare mention of it drove Hon. Mem-
bers from the House. He did not know how they
would be able to explain their absence on the hus-
tings, and he hoped the public would know the state
of the House during the discussion. If the Govern-
ment did not dread inquiry why did they refuse this
Commission ? They had endeavoured in vain to know
what it was that Mr. Crawford reported as the re-
sult of his investigation at York Castle. If the allega-
tions of these prisoners were untrue they were the
only parties who would suffer ; but he believed they
were well founded, because the Government shrunk
from the inquiry which would raise the veil under
which these iniquities were shrouded. Did the Hon.
Gentlemen below sanction this infamous treatment of
political offenders ? He commended the sagacity of the
Hon. Member for bringing forward what occurred in
1812. In a reformed Parliament a motion of this sort was
met by the Noble Lnrd with the same answer that a si-
milar motion was met in 1812 by Lord Castlereagh.
Was this to be the course of Reform—to support Libe-
ral principles out of office, and to repudiate them in
office? Such conduct was worthy the severest repre-
hension. He was surprised at the conduct of the Go-
vernment. He had expected they would have said,
they would at once institute an inquiry. The Hon.
Gentleman opposite must have felt delighted at the
•Noble Lord falling into the trap which had been so
a hoitly laid for him. The Noble Lord had divided
his political offenders into two classes, and was disposed
to tre it leniently such offences as that of S'r F. Burdett
in 1819. He was a man of education and large pre-
perty, and therefore, perhaps, was to be treated le-
niently ; but he thought that these were the men to be
treated with severity, and not such men as W. Lorett
and J. Collins. He agreed with his Hon. Colleague,
that the Commission ought to extend to all the gaols of
the kingdom, and he trusted that his Hon. Friend
would amend his motion in that way. There would be
a division, and unless the Commission were appointed.
there would be no Horse ; but as the Government did
not care about that, he supposed there would be no
Commission. The Hon. Gentleman below bins was of
sanguine temperament, and always spoke his mind of
his political opponents. He might be out of office, and
in two years might find himself in Warwick gaol.—
(Hear, hear.) How would he like to be placed upon
the tread-mill ? how would he like to keep his face in
one position for twelve hcurs ?—( A laugh.) It he were
a member of the Government, he would not continue so
a moment longer, if this Commission were refused.
Mr. F. MAULE said that the speech of the Hon.
Gentleman savoured much more of the marquee in
which Lovett and Collins had been entertained, than of
that House, and it had so much of the serio-comic
in it, that he did not thi k his Hon. Friend would thank
him for it. The only case in which the House had con-
sented to such an inquiry was the case of Thos. Holden,
but he was not confined for a crime but for a simple
debt. The Hon. Gentleman might have referred to the
ease of Mr. Hunt, at Ilchester, but the charge brought
forward then was not that the gaoler had been guilty of
any coercion towards Mr. Hunt, but that his conduct to
prisoners generally was such as to unfit him for his offce.
This was a specific charge against a particular indivi-
dual, but here was a Commission to issue to investigate
the treatment of prisoners in all those gaols in which
political offenders were confined. The first case was
that of Joseph Crabtree ; he was a very peculiar per. on,
for he petitioned the House, complaining of his tia at-
ment, and he petitioned the Home-office, offering to
make disclosures relating to his brother Chartists.
He complained of liver complaint and of disease of
the lungs, but the surgeon of the prison certified
that he was not suffering under these diseases. His
next complaint was that he was confined in the cell and
prohibited from walking about. The gaoler said that
he might walk about provided he did not do so at im-
proper hours so as to disturb the other prisoners. The
remaining statements were exaggerated accounts of
the silent system under which Wakefield Gaol was con-
ducted. It was a system productive of great good
where many prisoners were confined together, and cer-
tainly Crabtree was prevented from holding communi-
cation with his fellow prisoners. The Visiting Justices
state that he has had repeated visits from his family, and
has corresponded with them, that he has not had his
hair cut, and has been permitted to wear his own
clothes. His offer of communications had not been ac-
cepted, because it was not considered right to receive
communications from a person in that position. With
regard to Martin, if he had been placed on the tread-
mill without being sentenced to hard labour, it was a
wrong which ought to be remedied, but he should have
applied to the Home Office immediately on the occur-
rence, for the purpose of having the wrong remedied.
With regard to Mr. O'Connor he would admit that
during the first days of his confinement his treat-
ment had been unnecessarily severe, and the
Government had given directions for its amelioration.
Mr. O'Connor complained that those directions bad

not been carried into effect. The Magistrates stated
they had been. Mr. Crawford was ordered down to
York, not to take examinations, but to ascertain whether
the directions had been carried into effect. The exa-

and Learned Member did not find fault substantially minations had been taken by the Magistrates to satisfy
with the directions given by the Secretary of State Mr. Crawford that the directions had been carried into
with regard to this person. Another question raised effect ; and Mr. Crawford reported that he was satisfied
was, whether the Visitht Justices had complied with that those directions had been carried into effect. Mr.
those directions, and an Inspector of Prisons war sent O'Connor complained of the manner in . which that
down to York to ascertain that fact, who vitiiis satisfied examination had been conducted by Mr. Hague. He
that the directions of the Secretary of State had been (Mr. Fox Maule) had referred to Mr. Crawford, who
complied with, and that the Visiting Justices were not stated that the examination into the whole of the idle.
to blame ; and that they were not guilty of enforcing gations of Mr. O'Connor's petition was continued for
the prison regulations against Mr. O'Connor ; and then one day—that during the absence of Mr. Hague, Mr.
stating publicly that they had not done so. If the O'Connor proposed the adjournment of the inquiry to
House was disposed to think the Visiting Justices had the next day—that when the subject was subsequently
suppressed facts, then it would agree with the motion of mentioned to Mr. Hague, that gentleman had refused
the Hon. Member ; but if it did not it would not allow to continue the inquiry the next day—and the other
it to be carved.—(Hear.) For his own part his firm Magistrates did not deem it necessary. Mr. Crawford
oonviction was that the complaint was made had no power to order the examination to be continued.
by Mr. O'Connor in the spirit of disappointment and His mission was ended ; he had been sent down to
anger, because he could not bring about a revolution ascertain whether the directions of the Secretary of
in the country, and thereby enable parties to get rich at State had been carried into effect, and had ascertained
the expense of honester and better men ; and because that such was the case, and reported accordingly.
for the course he had thought proper to pursue he had Then it had been said that his professional adviser had
incurred the punishment of the law. With regard ge- been refused access to him. Two professional gentle-
sterol's, to the present case, he had no objection men bad applied to have access to him. Mr. Clark-
*to state it to be his opinion, that a great deal son, had applied to the Magistrates on May 22—the
of sympathy had been given to thesa parties on Magistrates immediately wrote to the Home-office,
account of a confusion not only in the minds and the Secretary of State immediately wrote down
of persons, but in the law itself, respecting their to York, stating it was his opinion that Mr. Clarkson,
.offences. Vie Noble Lord then referred to some or any other professional adviser he might choose
'observations of Sir James Macintosh on the subject of should have access to him. Mr. Turner had applied
patties] libels, in which he pointed out the distinction to bead-quarters on the 25th of May, and on the 2Gth
between trenching upon
the liberty of the press and of May he had had a letter from the Secretary of State,
repressing the licentiousness and violence to which a giving him access to Mr. Feargus O'Connor, and the
portion of it was prone, and which too frequently were same day a letter had been written to the Visiting Ma.
productive of anarchy and rebellion. Now, with regard i gistrates on the subject. So far, he apprehended, no
:to the second species of offences which were calculated one would attach any blame to the conduct of the Go-
to excite the minds of the people against the law,and to v.:.rnment.—( Hear, hear.) There was another part of
council acts of violence and rebel:ion for the purpose of I the conduct of the Government in relation to Mr. F.
obtaining some advantage to themselves—he thought O'Connor, for which, how much soever it might be dis-
these cases were by no means deserving of the sympathy 1 approved, he was prepared to take his full share of re-
'which had been excited in their favour. It appeared to sponsibility, and:to justify, how much soever it might be
objected to, the determination that while he was in con-
him that Mr. Feargus O'Connor's case was one of the
worst of that class, he having made use of his news- finement in York Castle, Mr. O'Connor should not be
paper, which was published and widely circulated in the suffered to have anything to do with the conduct of the
north of England, to influence the minds of the lower Northern Star while undergoing the punishment for his
classes, and excite them to acts of violence. It was crime. He believed that it Hon. Members would look
found necessary to prosecute the proprietor of that to the manner in which the Northern Star had been
paper, in order to put a stop to these inflammatory ar- conducted both before and since Mr. Feargus ;
ticks, and to preserve the public peace. Now, that O'Connor's conviction, they would see ample
certainly was not a cose in which the party was to ob- grounds for this resolution. That paper had been u.
m-