The Sun.
London, England, 1823-05-03 00:00:00

etieveral commission grand -jtrities of 1819, 11120,1821, and 1822,
,with the exception of the panel which is not forthcoming ?
it have.
Can the witness state the number of corporators, sheriffs'
peers, aldermen, .or common councilmen which were on the
..commission grand juries for ;1819-20-21, and 22?--I can. In
Feb. 18W, six common councilmen were sworn on the grand
jury. In June there•werel4 common councilmen on the panel,
,-of.whomfive were-sworn. There were several others summon-
w,lko did not attend.
Were they fined for non-attendance ?—No. In October,
.4819, there were 11 common councilmen on the panel, but none
were sworn on the grand jury. In December, 1819, there were
.four common councilmen on the panel, of whom three were
. sworn on the grand jury.
Let the witness now proceed with the return for }1320 ?—ln
February,lB2o, it appears there was one common councilman
.on the grand jury ; but I have not got the panel. In the June
xonimissron of the-same year, there were 11 on 'he panel, of
whom 2 'were sworn. In October, there were 3on the grand
jury, and son she panel. 'ln DecembertAllere were 3 on the
grand jury, andl6 on the panel.
By a MEMHEIt.-I understand you to say, there were 16
summoned, besides those who were sworn. •
By the CHAT It understand the witness to say, there
were 3 sworn, besides 16 not sworn ?—Exactly so.
By a MEMIIEII.—There were 19 altogether ?—Yes. •
The witness continued.—ln February, 1821, there were 9
common councilmen sworn on the grand jury, and 13 on the
panel who were not sworn. In April, there were 2 sworn on
- the grand jury, and 2on the panel not sworn. In July, there
were 7 sworn, and 13 not sworn. In August, there were 8
sworn, and 32 not sworn. In October, there were 8 sworn, and
-- 9 not sworn. In January, 1822, there were 2 sworn, and 2en
the panel not sworn. In February, there were also '2 sworn,
and 2on the panel not sworn. In April, there were 2on the
panel, both of whom were sworn. In June, 11122, there was
rw coinmon councilman on the panel. In August, there was
~.but one on the panel, and he was not sworn. In October, there
• were 5 sworn, and 14 on the panel not sworn. In January,
1823, there were.l4 common councilmen sworn on
,the grand
jury, and 13 on the panel who were not sworn.. ,
I will ask the witness, with respect to the last panel, of how
many individuals did it entirely consist ?—There were 50 names.
Does the witness, daring an experience of nearly 30 years,
know any instance where the panel was confined to so small a
number as 50 ?—I do not.
What is the smallest number lie has ever ascertained the panel
to consist of in that time ?-:.-The panel in February, 1819,
consisted of 61 ; in June, 72 ; in October, 95 ; in December,
87. In June 1820, the panel consisted of 71 ; in October, 66 ;
in December, 71. in February, 1821, the panel consisted of
1;7 ; in April 107; in July, 82 ; in August, 79 ; In October,
61. In .larmary, 1.822, the panel consisted of 77; in February,
. 87 r in April, 68 ; in June, 72 ; in August, 85 ; in October 62.
In what manner did the grand. jurors answer upon the panel
of January, 1822 P.._There were regular answers to the 26
. names first called, I think; and out of 33 names so called, there
were only three absent.
Did the witness ever before know such answers,given in such
rotation P—l do not recollect any such occurrence.
Out of the Ilanel of 50 of which the list was composed, how
many commoncouncilmen were sworn, and how many not?—
`There were 14 sworn, and 13 not sworn.
Have you ever before known a commission gran') jury, on
which the common council formed a majority of those sum-
moned P—l do not find any such circumstance.
By Mr. l' NKET T.—Do you not recollect the numbers on
• the panel of 1821—I mean of common councilmen ?—Yes, the
panel consisted of 79, of whom 40 were common councilmen.
The witness then gave some explanation to reconcile his
last with the preceding answer, but it was quite inaudible in
the gallery.

By Sir J. NEWPORT.—Were the 14 common councilmen
sworn in the panel of last January at the head of it ?—We un-
derstood the w►tness to answer yes ; they all, except two, an-
swered in succession after the foreman. . .

Is it in the ordinary course, in calling over the commission
grandjury, that the number is completed, without going thro'
the whole panel ?—Very seldom at the first calling over, and
often not until called upon fines.
Will the witness look 'at the panel of proceeding years, and
see how far down the names were called before the grand
jury was completed?—Mostly not before 70 names were called,
and often 105.
The witness then gave some explanation respecting. former
panels, which we could not distinctly hear, and he was inform.
ed by the Chairman that be must refer to his documents, anti
.hr prepared on a future occasion to give specific information of
• the exact number of names called over on preceding panels,
.before the grand jury was completed.
Some conversation then arose between Mr. Peel and Sir.
Brougham, respecting the manner of ascertaining the above
. tact.
Mr. 13110110 HAM laid, that there were two ways of call.
ing over a panel : one was calling over the names simply, the
-other calling them on fines. lle then suggested . that the wit.
ness should be asked, if he had any means of ascertaining from
.his notes, or otherwise, which names were called simply, and
which on fines:

The witness, in answer to a question from the Chairman, re.
,plied, that sometimes this might be uscertalned on the face of
.the panel ; at other times not. He then promised to make the
~necessary inquiries for the purpose of ascertaining, as far as
„possible, that fact.
By Sir Joni NEwport.r —ln what manner and by whom
. is the panel delivered P—By the High Sheriff.
,By RICE.—In the January panel there were
,14 common councilmen sworn : is there any other occasion
within your recollection, when a majority of common council-
:.lnen were sworn on a commission grand jury ?—The witness
.(as we could collect) reified that there was a similar occur-
.rence in 1821. . . . .

Put was not that 'on the occasion of the King's visit to Ire.
land, and when no business.was expected ?—it was.

By Colonel 11,annY.—Is it not usual in the commission im-
mediately succeeding the triennial election of the common
'Council, to include a.greater number of that body than on other
occasions ?--The witness (as we understood) said, he was un-
prepared to state how that fact stood.
When were the elections of common council within your
time P—l believe there were elections in 1010, 1019, and 1822.
Have you the panel of February, 1020 P—No, I believe It is '
lost.
By the CUAIRMAN.—Have you any means of ascertaining
where it is ?--No, I have nor.
By Colonel Datum—Why is that panel missing ?—I can-
not say.
By Sir JAWES Mackiwrostr.—Das the witness any do-
.cuments which he believes to be equivalent to the panel which
give the names ?—Yes ; the names of the grand jury
-sworn.
By Colonel Banny.—Why does witness believe that list to
be equivalent to the original panel?—.Because it is copied from
the panel into the crown books.
'1 he witness then read over the names of that grand jury
frorn,the,crown books;_ and in answer to a question from 111 r.
linowsmow, he said that Mr. Sheriff' Thorpe entered into
'
office at Michaelmas 1822, and that the pannel of last Ja-
nuary was signed by both the shetifra. lie then repeated his .
former answer—that he could not say how far it was usual
to summon a greater number of the new common councilmen
immediately after the triennial elections than on other oc-
casions.
By Sir J. Macro NTOSIL—What was the number of corn.
anon-councilmen who were sworn on the commission grand jury
of 1821 ?-one.
(The extremely Inaudible tone of the witness, the noise in
the House, and the uninteltigble manner in which such quea-
tions and answers as were desired to be repeated, were read by
the short-hand writer, rendered every attempt on the part of
-those in the gallery, accurately to follow the proceedings, to-
tally futile. It is not in our power, therefore, to give snore
than a slight account of what took place.)
Wai4 that the panel immediately after the election of the Com-
-mon-ceuncilmen P---(Answer inaudible.)
By Mr. J. Erd.ta.—Have you any mode of ascertaining how
many of those who composed the graud jury of 1023 were corn.
mon-councilmen ?—I cannot tell.
(Two or three questions followed, of the import of which, as
well as the answers to them, we could gather literally nothing.)
By Mr. S. Rich.---Is the triennial election of common-
councilmen a matter of public notoriety in the city of Dublin ?
—1 believe so.
Was there a commission of Oyer and Terminer in Dublin in
the month of October, 1820 P--No.-
Are you aware who makes out the copies and returns of that
list of the grand jury, front which the commission is prepared ?
—I cannot tell.
By Mr. lintraiT.—Do you know whether, in point of fact,
members of the common council who had been last elected, were
on the last panel P—( Inaudible.)
By Mr. SrittNa RICE.—Do you know any thing of the si-
tuation in life of Mr. John Henry Moore, who appears to have
been one of the grand jury P—l do not.
By Mr. Ilusix.—Have you the panel of 1021 ?—No ; I
know not (we understood the witness) where to find it, for my
.clerk has died since that time.
By Mr. PLUNKETT (who had risen eight or nine times
previously, without getting an opportunity of examining the
witness).---I think you said that the first day you missed that
panel was Friday last P—Yes.
When, did you first search for it P—On that day.
By Mr. Bnows; ww.—Where are those panels usually kept
in Dublin P—The panels of old date are preserved in an office,
which is in a house in Queeripstreet,
Did I understand you to say that the reason of your losing