The Sun.
London, England, 1824-02-11 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

At four o'clock the SPEAKER took the Chair.—Shortly after-
wards the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER appeared at the
bar, with his Majesty's Answer to the Address of the House.

RETURNS.
On the motion of Mr; GRENFELL, a raturn was ordered to
be made out of all the Bank Notes and sank Post Bills in cir-
culation during the last year.
A return was also ordered of all the Copper imported and
exuorted for the same period, distinguishing the different, sorts.
On the motion of Mr. CIMTEIS, a return was ordered of all
the Colonial Corn at present in the warehouses of this country,
distinguishing
London from the outports.

PETITIONS.
ford LOWTHER, presented a Petition from certain Pro-
prietors of Sheep Farms, in the county of Westmoreland, pray-
ing for the remission of the duty on Shepherd's Dogs.
Mr. CPR, WEN supported the Petition.—Ordered to lie on
the table.

Lord LOWTHER also presented a Petition from the same
quarter against the use of Foreign Flax in British Cloth.
The Noble Lord also presented a Petition from Kendall
against the importation of Woollen Rags.
The. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
there was no duty legally on woollen rags, unless imported for
the.purpose of being converted into wool, and used in the
manufacture of British cloth.
The Petition was then read, and ordered to lie on the table.
SUPPLY.

Mr. BROGDEN. brought up the Report of the Committee
of Supply, recommending that a Supply be granted to his
Majesty.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that
the House resolve itself into a Committee of the whole- House
to-morrow to consider of a Supply to his Majesty.
This motion having been agreed to, the Riaht Honourable
Gentleman moved for Returns of the usual Estimates for the
year to be referred to the said Committee. -
VAGRANT ACT.
Mr. HUME said he had a Petition to present, complaining
of a grievance, which, in his opinion, involved an infraction
upon the liberty of the subjeet, It' was the case of a man who
l saccosted had been convicted under one of- the provisions of the new Va.,
grant Act, which empowered Magistrates to commit individuals
to gaol upon the evidence of one watchman making a charge
of improper
was practicer
of
working streets atvg The c
ea.the in
woman in the streets as he was returning home, and upon his
aBeby
question in a
sopping to, give her a direction to the piaca she inquired after,
was taken in custody with the woman by a watchman. On the
following morning they were brought before the Magistrate,
Sir D. Williams, who decided the :upon the single testi-
mony of the watchman, arid ordered them one month's
sonment at the tietid=tnill. He (Mr. IL) contended, that if the
charge were true, *hich the Petition denied, such.a punishment
was too great for the offence. The charge was strongly denied;
and it was even asserted that the evidence itself disproved, it, and
that it was only made to get the money awarded by the Act
upon conviction under it. lie was await that a certain diacre;
tion must be exercised by Me„gistrates ; bat no one, he was
sure, would uphold such Magistrates as Messrs.. SwabeV and
Williams in the way in which they exercised their discre-
tion. With. reference, for instance, to the admitting to
bail, it seemed impossible to lay doWn any rule ; but
what was the consequence of leaving that to the discretion
of certain Magistrates ?.' In the case of a certain Prelate, who
was charged withan undoubted crime, he was at once admitted
to bail; but' the same Magistrate, in the instance of a 'respect-
able individual at Chelsea, who was only charged with having
plants not his own in his possession, he declared that rici bail
could be taken ; and this individual, who had never before been
charged with any offenCe, but always bore a most respectable
character, was sent to prison. The only security that he could
conceive in these cases, was that of the Secretary for the Home
Department should exercise a proper discretion in the selection
of stipendiary Magistrates. He believed that relief had, in
some instances, been administered through the intervention of
the Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr Secretary. Peel), but it
was not so in this case. Here the man was sent on Monday to
the tread-mill, and it was Thursday before his friends even
knew where he was. They then by the assistance of a Solicitor
got the Magistrate to consent to send the matter to the Quarter
Sessions ; but this was done only at the expence of fifteen
pounds, to repay which the poor man's labour was mortgaged
for a considerable time to come. At the Quarter Sessions the
prosechtion was quash, d ; but what became of the unfortunate
woman ? She had no 15/. to Put down, and she was therefore
obliged to work out her month at the tread-mill. What sort of
justice was this ?—there was law to be sure in the country, but
none for those who had not money. Among the many reflec,
tiona that grew out of this occurrence, that which to him ap-
peared most deserving of attention, was the difference observable
bet Ween the number of convictions following commitments in
the city of London, and those from the police offices. An
Hon. Friend of his, when Sheriff of Middlesex, had in-
formed him that this difference was very striking. For
the year 1823, it appeared that the numbers committed
by 'the • Police Offices were 1652, of which number, when
brought to trial, 478 were acquitted, against 195 no bills
were fo‘and, and six were not prosecuted. In the City cont.
mitrnente for the same year, the propOrtion of those who
escaped conviction was not more than one-forth, instead of
one-half, *high the statements he had made skewed. He was
satisfied that, in this respect, paid Justicesdid not answer.
But it was his intention shortly to move for the number of
commitments for each year, and if possible, the commitments
of each Magistrate. The house would • then have the acts of
Messrs.. Dyer, Swabey, and Williams, who had hitherto been
shrouded in the silence of authority before them. The Act
which gave five shillings to the watchman, upon commitment,
and empowered the Magistrate to act upon a single oath, would
expire in. September next, and he hoped. theseprovisions
then be amended, for he thought theta decidedly • bad. With
reference to the case in point, he hadput the petition into the
hands of the Right Hon. Secretary, and he hoped' some faats
might be Stated, to 'mitigate the ill appearance which upon the
face of the petition it-Presented.
The petition'having'been brought up_
Mr. DAWSON stated to the Noose the 'circumstances of
the case as they had appeared
upon the inkuiryintiei them which

he had instituted. There was nothing in the matter, in his
opinion, to call for the censure of the'House, or the language
used by the Hon. Member, in animadvertinaaan the conduct
of the Magistrates. The parties had • been fairly convicted
under the Act upon the testimony of the watchman,. and. there
Was no other course left to tht-Magistrate than to commit. The
only defence set up before the -.Magistrate was; that the watch-
man was actuated solely by aidesire to get money, and it was
said that.he.actually did get money for the charge. .-This was
totally unfounded, as the man had not received one farthing in
any shape whatever arising out of the charge. He had float.
his duty,' and so had the Magistrate: • They had both been
sent to the tread-mill, • but the matt only had been enabled. to
procure bitil. The prosecution had been quashed at the Quar-
ter Sessions, but that afforded no argument against the pro-
priety of the conlmittnent, sines it had been quashed upon a
technicality in the.
With respect
the, merits' not having been
gohe into at all. With respect to the woman, she was well
known as a bad character. He had.no doubt, therefore, the
House would • agree with him in thinking, there was nothing
extraordinary •- the course which. this case took.
Mr. LYTILETON said, he knew nothing of the case
which had been brought before the House. He only rose to
vindiCate the character of his Hon. Friend the Member for
Stafford, who was the Author of the Act of which the Hon.
Member for Aberdeen had, said so much. T.he House, he
hoped, would not -suppose that .his- Hon. Friend's Bill had
aggravated the law on this subject; for his object he knew
had been to mitigate its severity. In cases where, under the
old law, the punishment was transportation for seven years,
his Bill had altered it to two years imprisonment. Under it
also, two Magistrates were necessary to order a man to be
whipped, which could be done by one before. His Hon.
Friend was so well 'acquainted with all this subject, and fell
so strongly upon it, that he had requested .him to say, should
any' Hon. Member desire to abridge or amend, the Act before
its natural termination; he hoped he would postpone his mo-'
tion to that effect until his presence in the House, from which
he was at present detained by sickness. •

Mr. Secretary PEEL diSclaimed an intention of following
the Honourable Member for Aberdeen into the many topics he
had introduced into his speech. Not that he underrated those
topics, but he felt that he had some cause to complain that the
Hon. Gentleman had given no sort of notice of his intention
to advert to then:. 'lhe notice which he had given him, by
putting the petition info his hand, had rather had the effect of
misleading him than otherwise, for he could not suppose he
meant to bring in the names of other Magistrates than such as
were named in the Petition. With regard to the justice of the
case itself, and in how much he could be implicated in it he
could only say that neither the man nor the woman had ever
sent any Petition to the office for the Home Department ; he
had not, therefore, any opportunity ofadvising the Crown with
respect to them. In other cases, he certainly had advised on
the side of mercy; but it was rather hard, he thought, to ad-
vert to the discretion of the Magistrates. That might be quite
in place when the Vagrant Act was under discussion, but at
present had no rational connexion with the question. For his
own part, he did not see how the Magistrate could have acted
otherwise than he did ; the conviction was fairly made out by
the evidence of the witness, nor did it seem to him any
aggravation of the conviction, that it was upon the testimony
of a watchman, a class which, according 'to the Petitioner,
were " proVerbial for their poverty, cupidity, and ignorance."
The fee of five shillings allowed under the present Vagrant
Act that it it wasprevailed,ten ta that shillings
it
tw underaa tthe
the old was so fat from
oldla f. A
general being
opinion
right of the witness convicting; but he had early taken an op-
portunity of calling the Magistrates together, and informing
new
them that it was not so, at the same time recommending them
to use a proper discretion in the objects to whom they granted
it, and to distinguish betwixt eral for the public good, and the
desire for private gain. He thought the public were under
obligations to the Hon. Member for Stafford' for the act in
question, although he was willing to admit that it was capable
of amendments, some of Which he intended himself to pro-
pose. The House did not know the great necessity there had
been for the very Provision, and that act which was the sub-
ject of complaint. But yet he thought a distinction should be
drawn between a wanton breach of public decorum, and one
which might be either accidental or unintentional. He concur-
red with the Hon. Gentleman opposite, in thinking that great
care should be exercised in the selection of stipendiary Magis-
trates. It had always been, his opinion, and he had acted upon
it, that such an officer should have been at the bar and practised
three years; this insured respectability and a knowledge of the
law. In mentioning the names of Messrs. Dyer and Swabey,
tchaseedtilsietin:itaigo?stbreattwe eceonulmd ihsdoetmreefaunsoeu dinfetlhoan yot.
it appeared to him that the Hon. Gentleman had overlooked
helrnhteficeoounlde
not take it. With respect to the disproportion in the number
of committals in London and Middlesex, it certainly was im-
portant as stated by the Lon. Gentleman, and he wished he had
given him notice of his intention to mention it. That would be
better discussed when he moved for the returns on the subject ;
but he could not help thinking that many of the committals in
the one case were in execution, which the Hon. Gentleman
might have overlooked.
HUME said, the truth of the charge was totally denied
by the petitioner. If the. Right Hon. Gent. was so anxious to
have notice of ere n 7 t!tio,r he was about to do before hand, he
certainly should not object to give him the first edition of his
speech, and the House the second ; but he thought he would
find that rather an inconvenient course. There was no one in
that House not liable to a similar charge, whilst there were so
many women in the streets who might accost him, and no one
would be so unmanly as to refuse an answer.
Mr. Secretary PEEL explained. He begged to decline the
Hon. Gentleman's polite offer to favour him with a first edition
cf his sneeches.
The Petition was then read, and on the question that it be
printed the gallery was cleared for a division.
No division however took place, and we believe the petition
was laid on the table, but not ordered to be printed.