The Sun.
London, England, 1840-08-04 00:00:00

TE-T 1 grN, LONDON,_TtrESPAY, Arorsfr 4,

-•- . -
of the courts of equity will rest, as it ought to rest,
upon the Judges. They will be constantly amenable
to public opinion for the conduct of their courts. and
how much soever they may be di.posed to adhere
to old forms, and to protect abuses profitable to
professional men, but injurious to public justice,
and ruinous to litigants, they will not dare to pre-
serve either the one or the other. It is a die inction which
ought never to be lost sight of, that while the judges may
be most safely trusted as regards their awards, they may
not be so safely trusted as to the details of farms and pro-
cess. It is well, however, that they should have the re-
form of these things committed to them, as they are best
acquainted with the subject, and must prosecute the task
under the strict superintendence of Parliament and of the
public.

the third reading should take place now, and :then he
would propose an amendment, on which the debwe might
be adjourned. With regard to the case of Mr. Childs,
the Judges at Norwich were county practitioners; but their
practice seemed to be a more merciful one than the Lon-

den practice.
Mr. BERNAL thought his Right Hnn. Friend had
been rather harshly treated by the Hon. Member for
Finsbury. Was he, in a case of this sort, to wait in order
to see what was the Norwich, the Manchester, or the Li.
verpoel practice? His Right Hon. Friend could not have
acted otherwise than he did, and there did not rest the
shadow of an imputation upon him on account of his con-
duct in this matter.
The Bill was then read a third time.
The
and passed.LinenMafacturers (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time,
The Order of the Day for receiving the Report on the
Infant Felons Bill having been read,
Mr. EWA RT felt bound to offer a few remarks on the
Bill. He believed hose who had introduced the Bill were
actuated by the most humane motives ; but be thought it
extremely pernicious in principle. The interposition of
the Court of Chancery bad nothing to do with the crime
of the _child.; it referred to the conduct of the
parents, and their capability of bringing up the child in a
moral course. It appeared to him that the interposition
(if necessary at all) should take place before the crime
was committed instead of afterwards. Where a represen-
tation was made that the parents were bringing up their
child in crime, that, in his opinion, would form a good
ground for the interference of the Court of Chancery. He
regretted that a Bill of so much importance should be
passed at so late a period of the Session, and in'a compa
retively empty house, when so many Hon. Members.
who w, re likely to give expression to their
sentiments upon that measure had left town. Even now,
if it was inie.ided to pass the Bill, he thought. it would be
advisable to place some control over the power of the
Lord Chancellor, by causing a reference to be made in
the first instance to the Secretary of State for the Home
Department.
Mr. BERNAL gave every credit to the Hon. Member
for the motives tuat had actuated him, but he thought the
suggestion which he had just thrown out would be ex-
tremely injudicious, and would not effect the objects he
had in view. He could not see how the apptication was to
be made to the Secretary of State, or what practicable
result it would effect.
Sir C. BURRELL supported the Bill,
Mr. LANGDALE thought the Bill bad been very
carelessly drawn up, and many parts of it were objection-
able. He thought the Bill gave a monstrous power to the
Lord Chancellor, and he should therefore use every means
which the forms of the House allowed to prevent it passing
into a law. Under the Bill the child of a Jew might be
brought up as a Christian in spite of the wishes of its
parents. He would find it his duty to oppose the Bill in
a future stage.
Mr. HA WES supported the MI. The objections to
the came rather late, and applied more to the whole
penal system of the country than to the Bill.
Mr. E STC 0 URT opposed the Bill. It was cruel not
only to the children but to the parents, who had no option
as to whether their children should be taken from them or
not. There was not even a provision fur informing the
parents of what was going on. These children had been
tried and convicted for felony, and had suffered the punish-
ment for their crimes, why then were they to have this
further punishment inflicted on them ? He did nut think
it right to leave to the Lord Chancellor, or to any other
person, the power of taking a child from its parent. He
thought the Hon. Gentleman had acted most unwisely in
drawing the attentie n of the House to the religious in-
struction of the children ; there was this difference between
the cases of the children and of the convietsiialdlrluednehdatdoubay.
d
the Hon. Member for Lambeth, that the convicts were un-
dergoinge,e theirs.
nthe i r sentence, and that these children
Sir C. GREY bad to propose as an amendment a
eleuse prohibiting the sending the infant during its mino-
rity beyond the seas without the consent of the Lord
Chancellor. He believed that this amendment was ap-
proved of by her Majesty's Government. He thought it
would obviate many of the objections which bad been
urged against this Bill. He earnestly begged the Nicol-
ber for Knaresborough not to persevere in his intention of
taking every means in his power to oppose this Bill, and
hoped he would reconsider his determination. He thought
his Hon. Fiend the Member for Wigan had taken too
narrow a view of the subject. 'lnc fact was, the
Bill was a BM to provide, for infant felons on
their quitting prison.—( Hear, hesr.) There was a
novelty in mixing up the Lord Chancellor with criminal
' proceedings, and if the power had been given to a Judge
who tried the child, instead of to the Chancellor, he thought
there would not have been so many objections to it. Its
~bject was in fact to substitute education for imprisonment
or transportation. With the amendment which he now
proposed, he thought the Bill was a very valuable one,
and was deserving the support of the House.
Mr. BRISCOE suggested that the best course the
House could adopt was to postpone the measure till the
eext Session of Parliament. Every one must admit that
sue Bill had been very hastily drawn up, and no discussion
ead taken place upon its principles when any considerable
:lumber of Msmbers were present. Under these circum-
stances he trusted the Bill would be postponed. lied they
cot already postponed the Administration of Justice
and opposed the Bill with regard to the abolition of capital
flinishinents, on the ground of the lateness of the Session.
The main objection he had taken to t :e measure was that
it was an undue interference with parental authority and
the liberty of the subject. He should therefore join the
Hon. Member for Knaresborough in offering every opposi-
ion in his power to th.• passing of the 13111.
Mr. FOX MAULE said the present was the third or
fourth time the principle of the Bill had been diseuFsed in
that House, and notwithstanding at that had beets said by
the Honourable Member satin had last addressed ti e
House, he would take upon himself vie respons
of passing it during the present Session.—( Hear. beer.)
file object of the .3111 was that the mining which had
.ed the child into the conim.ssion of crime should not be
continued. Tnere was nu objection to make this Bill a
-object of periodical legislation. The Bill for the tegula-
eou of prisons it. Scotland; which wan of equally grave a
nature, tires a Bill of only ten months' duration. The
principal measure was new only so far as it was compul-
sory; for the children, who were its objects, were already
Taken into the schools, when the parents consented; and it
was found that the greatest benefits were derived as re-
arded the children themselves, where the parents did not
interfere or take them away. Believing th t the Bill was
calculated to do great good, he was anxious that it
opis
inion
Ell, b
eTeacuosuel d
it nothad admitbee
n
precluded from at all re-
htt ttoHpunasosurawbiltehoGutentdleemiaayn.
of its beneficial
di
u
Granville Somerset) the principle was
'ti
r':raol:rctuinih:Hgrgicharacter,tsdtomependta: shbNatLitaheeohAdenari without
Ndi pbesVr:Ghi r esai
rcLnahwdi dpLw: ireEhasteyhho itefSaod annOtn
Right
too important for him to allow it to pass without stat4ng
his objections to it. In one respect alone it was highly
objectionable, if there were no other objection to it. Its
effect would be to extend the punishment of all infants
ueyond the period which the law at present adjudged to
their offences. An infant who had once been convicted
for an off nee would have the record of that conviction
fastened upon him for the lest of his days ; and would con-
tinue in a state of complete coercion as regarded his present
employment up to the age of tvvelity.one, and ell the
c prosp • icts of his life afterwards. He firmly believed that
no house of one hundred Members would pass such a Bill.
He should, therefore, use every means in his power of
throwing it out. —( Hear.)
Mr. AGLIONBY asked the Hon. Secretary (Mr. F.
Maule) whether a clause to the effect that due regard
should be had to the religious profession of the parents,
might not be introduced on the third reading, so
is to meet the objection of the Honourable Mem
tier for Knaresborough? He took the opportunity of
aenying that the Bill would have the effect of
continuing the punishment of the children beyond the
terms of their legal sentence. On the contrary, he con-
ceived it would confer upon them the greatest blessings.
It would rescue them from the contamination of bad
example, and 'rem the temptations to which they were
before exposed, and would confer on them the blessings of
'ducation, physical, moral, and religious. As a Magis.
Magistrate would oepase
Hanley had found for many years
ttiriatsteßbiell
Dill.—(
eilueraprr,i sheeda
rt.h)a t
it the Quarter Sessions, that there was no part of
the Magistrates' duty so difficult and distressing as
to deal with those children, whom they were
'compelled, under the prssi nt state of the law, to send to the
contamination ofa gaol, with the poseive cei ;witty th it
they would, at tile expirato i of men se t me, be re urned
,o their old haunts and habits, and he presented at the bar
.it the next sessions—( Hear)—and so on, from year to
year, until the commission of weightier offences caussd
them at length to be sent out of the country. lie
loped the light II :n. Gentleman the Under Secretary
would not withdraw the Bill,
Mr. MUN 1 Z said the object of the Bill was to make
all infant felons wards in Chancery. At present all those
persons were regularly restored, after their term of punish-
ment, to their o'd education in the arts of thieving, until
they were fully accomplished. He could not see what
On the question that the
the Usher of the Brack
ob-
jection on earth there could be to place these poor chil-
dren
ooeaßoduds
appearedsi
House
uoa
ss a
el
attend
t tbehonaaudtdt
tat
ho
beedivide,n
:R yn
rct
co
ando w:ii :
neenis
under the protection of thßeeLpoorrtd
be brought
summonedon. the House to the
.s,uptv'hethree
House
H. use
her Majesty's Royal Assent was toasieveral Bills, for
On the return of the SP EA K R, he stated that
th
K hid] sec Lords' Report.
The House then divided on the question that the Re-
port on the Infant Felons Bill be received. The numbers
were—

(From the Courier.)
Our good friends of Paris are a mercurial race, and
would die of puro inanition if subjected to the monotony
of common lite and labour as here, and in other sober
and industrious communities. A new sensation is to
them a primary necessity of every day existence, and
the salons would be tristes, if not deserted, if the people
who deal in politics—qui font de la politique—and
congregate in those high places, had no special excite-
ment wherew th to season bons bons and give zest to eau
sucre. And if such be the ordinary tenour of their ways,
we cannot wonder that such SR event as a political caper
of Lord Palmerston, and his fickle exchange of an old love
fir a new one, should set all Paris in a blaze and abso•b the
public mind, to the exclusion of all other feelings and feuds.
Fairly to speak, however, they have solid cause now for asto-
nishment, indignation, ...rid complaint, for of the fresh qua-
druple fantasy of the Foreign office, displacing its more
antiquated sister with so little of form and etiquette, not
the slightest forewarning appears to have been aff )rderl, and
but for an unlicensed cum-pondeat of our contemporary,
the Post, Parliament might have separated without
the least suspicion of the sword temi,ered at Da-
mascus, which the Foreign Secretary had ingeniously
contrived to suspend by a hair, Damocles like, over the
destinies of the nation, and the Parisians, in like manner,
would still have remained in happy ignorance of impending
fate. That concen.ptuous rupture of existing relations,
and utter disregard of the commonest courtesies of good
breeding and neighbourly feeling un the one side, should
beget distrust and defiance on the other, need not there-
fore create surprise ; the miracls would have been, on the
contrary, that a high spirited, gallant, and mighty nation
should be found crouching tamely to unmerited insult,
and the inth;lent assumption of airs of superiority.

a \
IMPERIAL; PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EcSNING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
ROYAL ASSENT.
The House met to-day at a Quarter before Four"
&Clock, when the Royal Assent was given by
Commission to the following Bills:
The Regency Bill, Soap Duties Bill, Assessed Taxes
Composition Bill, Parliamentary Burghs Bill, Poor-
law Commission Continuance B;II, Insane Prisoners Bill,
West India Relief Bill, East India Mutiny Bill, Blenheim Pa-
lam Bill, Turnpike Trusts Continuance Bill, the Turnpike
Roads Bill, Caledonian Canal Bill, Drainage of Estates
Bill, Entailed Estates ( Scotland) Bill, Prisons ( Ireland)
Bill, Turnpike Roads (Ireland) Bill, Newgate Gaul
(Dublin, Bill, Clyde Navigation and Harbour Bill, Liver.
pool ( Herculaneum) Docks Bill, H irrington Docks Bill,
Ha.eford Improvement Bill, Weaver Churches Bill, Mon-
mouthshire Iron and Coal Company's Bill, Douglas
Estate Bill, Chambers's Estate Bill, Whalley's Estate
Bill, Scarborough's Estate bill, and Martyn's Estate Bill.
The Commissioners were—the Lord Chancellor, the
Marquis of Lansdowne, the Marquis of Normanby, the
Earl of Clarendon, and the Earl of Shaftesbury.
Their Lordship', then adjourned during pleasure.

Their Lordships met again at Five o'Clock.
Lord DA CRP:. presented a petition from Bishops Stort-
ford against idolatory in India.
The Militia Ballot Suspension Sill was reud a second
time rnd ordered to be committed.
ADMIRALTY COURTS' BILL.
Lord PORTMAN moved the third reading of the Ad-
miralty Courts' Bill.
Lord 13 RO UG H did not rise for the purpose
of opposing the third reedit)g of the Bill, but
merely to draw r th.,ir Lordship's attention •to the
fact that, though in the present Bill they prohibited
the Judge of the Admiralty Court from sitting in Par-
liament, yet in the Municipal Corporations (Ireland)
Bill they allowed the Recorder of Dublin, to sit in the
Hausa of Commons. The Noble Lord thought that
ought not to be permitted, and he trusted that at an early
period of the next Session a measure wouid be brought
farward to exclude all judicial' officers from sitting in
the House of Commons.
After a few observations from Lord LYNDHURST,
the Bill was read a third time and passed.
MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS.
Mr. 13itstriat, and other Members of the House of Com-
mons brought up the Consolidated Fund Bill, the Ex-
chequer Bilis Bill, the 13,,,,Age Bell, the Dublin Police
Bill, and one or two othor Bills.
On the motion of Viscount DUNCANNON the Metro-
polis Improvempnts Buil, the Sugar Duties Bill, the Court
Houses (Ireland) Bill, and the Insolvent Debtors (India)
Bill, were severally read a third time and passed.
NEW SOUTH WALES BILL.

Viscount DUNCANNON moved the second reading oi
the Nee South \Yaks Van Dtematt's Laud Bill.

The Bishop of EXETER, seeing the Noble Marquis.
the Secretary for the Home Department, in his place,
would beg leave to present a petition gravely affJetieg the
interests of morality and religion, and the character of the
Noble Marius himself. In consequence of what had
passed in this House in reference to the horrible system o;
Socialism, committees of respectable persons were formed
in various parts cf the country, for the purpose of cheekine
the progress of blasphemous and immoral societies. Fla':
one ut those Committees, the petition was forwarded t,
him, which he had NOW to present. The Committee wa-
' composed of two Wesleyan ministers, two solicitors, fit,
inhabitants of Manchester, acid four other laymen. He
referred to the case of one Abel Heywood, who was pro-
secuted for a blasphemous libel to this effect—" What
wretched stuff the Bible is. Would it not be a disgrace
to a race of ourang outangs, much less to men ? It is a
I upon God and insult to man ; and every copy of it in
existence ought to be burned." Teis man man was pro-
teeuted, but at the trial be was persuded (at the avowed
instance of the Government) to plead guilty; whereupon
the Queen's Counsel declined to press for a punishment,
and the defendaet was liberated upon osti affidavit, that
discontinued and had ordered his servants to discon-
tinue the sale of the libel. But the fact was
that he had immediately resumed the sale of blas-
phemous libels, with which he (the Bishop of Exeter)
would not insult the ears of their Lordships, and the fact of
his having done so had been communicated to the Noble.
Marquis by one of the petitioners. The interest of one of
the Members for Manchester, and also of one of the Mem-
bers for Salford, had been exerted with the Noble Marquis
in favour of this man, who was not only a vender but all
habitual vender of bl .sphemous publications. He did nut
say that those gentlemen weio aware of the inipiou,
character ot the man, but the Noble Mai quis was so, anu
it was highly reprehensible for ti.c person who was charged
ail) the guardianship of the peace and morals of the com-
munity, to allow parliamentary interest to influence him in
such a case as this. The petition prayed their Lordships
to institute an inquiry into the facts of this case.
The Marquis of NORMANBY was most anxious to
take the earliest opportunity of giving the fullest explana-
tion of his conduct in the case referred to, but before he
did so he begged leave to repudiate with contempt, con-
sistently with his respect for the station of Right Rev.
Prelate the insinuation he had thrown out that he had been
operated upon ie the discnarge of his duty by the applica-
tion of three Members of Parliament. 1 rue, three gentle.
men had presented petitions on the subject of Abel Heywood,
but, as their Lordships must well know, they had merely done
as any, the Members of Parliament who were entrusted
with the presentation of petitions to the Home-office would
have done. He had stated to them that he could give
them no answer then, as the case of Heywoou
was under consideration, and he would act in a
great measure upon the Report that would be made
to him. Previously to that time he had received a memo-
rial faom Hey wood, and he had transmitted it to Sir
Charles Snaw, fur the purpose of having the facts
therein contained investigated. The defendant stated
that a prosecution had been instituted against hin,
her having published Harleues Letters to the Clergy
of all denominations, which he bad 4lterwards discovered
contained a blasphemous libel. The Right Hon. Prelate
had very unwarrantably contradicted a statement made tat
him when he had ocotured to set him right as
to the time at which the prose cution was instituted,
but it appeared the Right lionour..ble Prelate was not
justified by the fact in so doing. The petitioner stated
that he was a general publisher for the sale of all d..-
scriptions of books except those of an immoral of
obscene character, and that he bad sold five different
pamphlets, all condemnatory of the publication in
question and he distinctly stated that he was not aware of
the libellous character of the letters until the evening
which was asserted. He further stated that he had, since
then, wholly refrained from the sale of those publications.
Sir C. She% corroborated the main facts in Heywood's memo-
dal and his representations bad great weight with him
(the Marquis of Nurmanby) in the cause he had adopted.
He said that Heywood had materially assisted him in pre..
serving the peace of the town of Manchester during the
previous winter, at a time of great political excitement and
alarm.

(LEFT SPEAKING)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
(Continued from our Fiist Edition.)

For the Report 4O
Against it
Majority —3s
The Bill was then ordered to be read a third time to-
morrow.
The Report on the Administration of Justice Birming-
ham) Bill was brought up, and the Bill was ordered to be
read a third time to.morrow.
The Report on the Highway Rates Bill was brought up,
and thn Bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow.
The Court of Chancery Bill was r, ad a se and time,
and committed pro forma. Report to be brought up to-
lIIOITOW.
The Imprisonment for Debt Bill was read a second time,
and ordered to be committed tomorrow.
The Church Discipline Bill was reported, and orderod to
be read a third time to-morrow.
LABOUR OF CHILDREN.
f
theLHorodusAe Sthile
and the a iv,,nced periodthofe
the poorer classes employed in trade and manufactures.
arriked. His reason for
Ls Eu
subject
et
th eonf rt oh see
et
qo n bringdt on uonf dert
the
e the
children
ofo
aHkeinbtrooudgel!tpatihr,e
sseuebi.jzt forward with feelings somewhat
forward the subj,ct
at all was, that he had eenttiunted with devoting his atten
tion exclusively to the children employed in factories,
tshbcerainnstgyripialintenntdoa7heicobf
tMheeymbweeri:s
while there were so many other departments of trade re-
quiring the attention 44 iuterfeFeuee of Parliament.
.

Mr. BRISOCE was extremely sorry to see such a spirit
manifested by the churchwardens and perish of Chetms•
tord, and he believed that among many members of the
Church of England there existed a sincere desire to see
Church-rates abolished. He thought the justice of the
ewe would be satisfied by the churchwarduns receiving the
rate, and cansenting to Mr Thorogood's dibcherge.
In at,sw,r to M E WART,

ii;TLUSIIINGTON saidhe did not like to make any
alteration in tLe all in the absence of his Noble Friend,
but he thought the following proviso would suit the justice
of the case, that in cases of Church-rate the Judge should
be entitled to discharge the prisoner on the payment of the
rates and costs into Court.
Lord G. SOMERSET disapproved highly of the con-
turnacidts conduct of John Thorogood ; but conceiving the
amount of punishment he had received to be sufficient, he
thought he ought now to be discharged. Had the Bill of
Ira Hen. and Learned Friend been permitted to proceed,
this difficulty would not have arisen. He thought the
p positi•in of the Right lion Gewl,man was entitled to
t3.),ooderation, Aid therefore he would suggest that the de-
).te should be adjourned till to-morrow, to give time to
•itsider the subject.
Mr. F MA UL E suggested that the third reading
,hould take place now.
Mr. T. D UNCOMBE said that he would suggest that

Under these elec.:um:lb% _
apt ais'Relicsluillijzitn! previously be. I IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN T.
stowed much attenti'in upon
..........—es,
he felt it his they
to bring the subject under the notice of the House. He HOUSE OF LORDS, Auousr 3.
felt that the prosperity of the trade and manufactures of , OUTRAGES IN LIMERICK.
the cotry mainly deper.ided upon the state and condition . The Earl of CHARLEVILLE said that nothing
of thoseun employ ed in f'ae various departments connected but a .trong sense of duty could have impelled him to
therewith. The sue. jeer was one of the greatest inte-
trouble their Lordships with any matter relating to Ire-
rest, and few, 1,.e believed, wsre
acquainted with '
land at that lute period of the session. In about seven
the extent of the various demands which were made upon
miles circuit round the Hill of Ktibredy, in the County
the energies and the time of the children so employed.
He bad reason to believe that the children employed in of Limerick, the district had been for the last eighteen
these various departments greatly exceeded the entire I months past in a most disturbed state. Robberies of
number employed in the mills and factories, upon which houses for obtaining arms were greatly on the increase,
subject the House had already legislated. In the tobacco he killing of horses, the turning up of land, and the
trade the children were put to work at the age of seven posting of Rockite notices, were also common. In con-
years, and were generally employed for twelve hours per sequence of these outrages a meeting of Magistrates
day. In the bleaching trade the children were employed was held at the City of Limerick. The meeting was not
at eleven years of age, and they frequently labouied all of a sectarian character. They subscribed the money for
night and day for two or three days. In the potteries the
the purpose of discovering the authors of these crimes.
children were employed at an early age for thirteen
Mr. Massey, a Conservative, was in the chair. One
or fourteen hours continuously, :nd the work
was extremely severe. The Noble Lord then referred to of the resolutions was moved by Sir David Roche, a
the state of the children employed in the Brussels carpet- Liberal Member of Parliament. There was nothing
making, the frame-work knitting, and other trades, for like party feeling exhibited at that meeting. The state
the purpose of showing that they were much overworked, of lawless disturbance, and the impossibility of bringing
and had no opportunity of obtaining any education whatever. the offenders to justice was admitted by all those geti-
The opinion of the Government Inspector as to the labour thimen. This took place on the 2d of May, and not-
to which children were put in the coal mines, was, that i withstanding all their exertions, this state of disturb-
" the hardest labour in the worst factory was less cruel I ante still continued ; in consequence, a second meeting
and oppressive than the lab stir in the best coal I was held on the 15th of May at Ballaskenry, Lord
mines " He would not trouble the House with many more Cl.arina in the chair. A Magistrate at that ni.etimr.,
details, as the results were almost invariably the same. Mr. T
Langford, made a statement as to the state of
It was the custom, in many instances, for parents to bor-
row m )tey upon the labour of their children, and the
crime to the district. The truth of that statement was
ma-ter had a right to the labour of the child until the loan I eclat, ted bi Mr. Redmond, the stipendiary Mahistrate,
wa; r, paid ; so that here was a system of legalized sl,, and 1 y the officers of police. The night before he bad
very going on in this country. One of his correspondents I said :time of the policemen had arrested certain men in
h.,d stated to him, that the system was one which was de. arms. Mr. Redmond said that now was their time, Lucy

structive alike to the temporal and spiritual welfare of the
children. The next subject to which he would draw their
attention was calico printiog—children of six years of age
were employed in this trade, and some of them went to
w.e k at 12 at night—they worked 12 hours and took their
meals in the workshop, the atmosphere of which was
loaded with puiionous gases from the effluvia of the colours. '
His object in drawing the attention of the House to this
subject was to place these children within reach of what
Dr. Chalmers would call an aggressive movement of edu-
cation. Continental nations were following our example,
and it would not do for us now to fall behind them in the
work of humanity, and be last where we were first. From
Report of the French CommisFion it appeared that there
was no morality existing among the chitchen employedin
manufactur,s, and from the Report of the Recruiting De-
partment it appeared that the number of persons rejected
as incapable front the manufacturing districts doubled that
of those rejected from the agricultural districts; and he
had nn doubt that if a similar inquiry should be instituted
in this country, the res.. It would still be more deplorable.
(LEFT SPZAKING.)

had subscribed their money, and let them reward the I
police well and they would be still more active. Was
it upon the reports of such officers as this, that the
character of such men as Mr. Langford was assailsd ? ►
Why did Mr. Sub-Inspector Jackson pass over all the
resident gentry, to send tor Mr. Redmond on this
occasion ? The Noble Marquis had said that there
were no instructions to Mr. Redmond on the case. Why
that paper had been produced by Mr. Redmond at
that meeting, on the threat of the Magistrates to ad-
journ the meeting. There was no excuse for refusing
it on the ground that it was a law-officer's opinion ; it
was no such thing. He believed that the law-officers
had been misled by Mr. Jackson. Mr. Langford had
acted on a warrant, which had been issued for a year,
and had been reprimanded in consequence. There was
nothing in the Act stating the term during which such
warrant had been in force, and it had always been the
custom to suffer these warrants to be in force until the
country was tranquillized. The conduct of the
Irish Government in reprimanding Mr. Langford
was most inexcusable. No warrant was wanting to
make any search for arms, when a Magistrate had re-
ceived sworn informations. He certainly, when lie re-
ceived information of the concealment of arms, did not
wait to receive the signature of another Magistrate ;
but this was not needed ; and be ought, instead of
having been reprimanded, to have received the thanks,
as he had already those of his brother Magistrates, and
of the High Sheriff of the county. In searching the
house of Michael Madgan, Mr. Langford was only ac-
tuated by the purest motives. Who was this Madgan ?
Mr. Langford found the arms in his house—he com-
mitted him—he was tried at the assizes, convicted, found
guilty, and had sentence of death recorded against him.
This person was consigned to everlasting slavery for the
term of his natural lite, and it was for having brought
him to justice that Mr. Langford was treated as be had
been by the Government. About this time Mr. Lang-
ford received other important information That in the
house of a man named Whelan he would find arms,
documents, and two of Whelan's sons, who, it was
said, had been participators in an attack upon a house
for arms. He searched the house, found the papers,
and arrested the sons. The Temperance Society of
Limerick felt aggrieved at the discovery of theca
papers, as likely to induce a belief that there existed
some connection between the Temperance and the
Ribbon Societies. A representation was made to the
Government, requesting an investigation, and stating
their belief that the documents were forged. The Go-
vernment desired Mr. Langford to institute an investi-
gation. Mr. Langford, in the exercise of a wise dis-
cretion, thinking that Wayland, who had always borne
an excellent character, had suffered sufficiently in having
his two sons committed, refused to drag him to trial or
investigation, as it would be impossible to bring the
knowledge of these papers home to him. He knew
some persons might make light of those papers,
but those who had attended to the Com-
mittee of last year would know that there was something
serious meant by those curious sounding words. Mr.
Langford showed the papers to Mr. Re,!mond, who
laughed at them, and wrote to the Government suggest-
ing that the inquiry should be extended into other mat-
ters, and to the finding of a blunderbuss by Mr. Leng.
ford the day before the meeting of the Magistrates,
thereby insinuating that the whole was a fabrication,
and making common cause with the Temperance socie-
ties ; and also that, in consequence otthe political cha-
racter the affair bad assumed, Counsel should he Bent
down to preside. What he meant by political character
he knew not. The fact was that Mr. Redmond finding
he was unable to perform his duty, wished to prevent
Mr. Langford from doicg his by obtaining the name of
Mr. Langford's secret informant. The investigation
was held and the Temperance Society made the most.
miserable failure. Mr. Redmond, however, said be
would make it all right in his report to the Govern-
ment, and he therein states his opinion that there were
no Riband offences in that country, and that the out-
rages were purely agrarian. This report seemed to
have produced an effect on the Irish Government, for
on the 22. d June Mr. M‘Donald writes to Mr. Lan.--
ford stating the regret of the Lord Lieutenant that he
(Mr. Langford) should have exceeded his powers, and
have been guilty of acting in an arbitrary manner in
searching for arms in 1840 on a warrant issued in 1839.
And this was the return he received for having done
his duty, and having received the good will of all the
loyal and well disposed persons for his efforts to strike
terror into evil doers. Another Magistrate had applied
for a warrant, and the Government had said they would
:ssue a warrant, but not to Mr. Langford. The answer
of that gentleman to the Government was, that Mr.
Langford was in possession of the information, and that
without his assistance he could not proceed. Had Mr.
Langford refused to act upon the warrant of
1839 Madigan would have escaped. The mis.
taken policy of the Irish Government had prevented
the detection or many crimes, and screened
many who had been guilty of even murder.
The state of things in that district was such as every
man must deplore. In such a state of things the Ma-
gistrates ought to have been supported. It he had
been in error he had erred but slightly. He had not,
at all events, acted with partiality. But if it was said
that the object of the Government was only to keep
the Magistrate within the strict line of his duty, let
him call their Lordships' attention to the conduct of
another Magistrate, who was a partisan—he meant Mr.
Barnes, of whom he did not wish to speak harshly.
That Gentleman arrested eleven persons upon mere sus-
picion ; and he kept one man in prison eighteen months
—passing over three Sessions. The Magistrate justi-
fied himself by referring to the difficulty of obtaining
evidence in that country ; which was an excuse that
he (Lord Charleville) was ready to admit. But when
that was passed over in a partisan, why was Mr. Lang-.
ford treated so severely for protecting the lives of
the unhappy persons who resided in that
unfortunate district ? He might have overstepped the
strict bounds of the law ; but he was actuated only by
a desire to discover the perpetrators of a most foul inure
der. He (Lord Charleville) did not censure Mr.
Barnes for the manner in which be had endeavoured to
discharge a most painful duty. But his case showed
how it might be necessary: for a man in a situation
of similar difficulty, to take a painful responsibility
upon himself. Such was the case of Mr. Langford,
who, although he went beyond the exact letter of the
taw, succeeded, however, in bringing the criminal to
justice—that criminal having subsequently received sen-
tence of death, and being now doomed to pass the re-
mainder of his life in a penal settlement, and in sla-
very. Was not that gentleman entitled to some repara-
tion? He (Lord C.) asked for that reparation—not
for the sake of Mr. Langford himself; but, for the sake
of those who depend on the Magistracy for protection.
One part of' the papers which he now had to move for
consisted of the correspondence between Sir A. de Vero
and the Irish Government. He thought that Mr. Lang-
ford had a right to know what was tho nature of the
communications made respecting him to the Govern:tape:4l.s;
He concluded by moving for a return of the
connected with the case of that gentleman,
The Marquis of NORMANBY had listened atten-
tively to the Noble Earl, and he had not been able to
discover what was the object of the motion. The minute
details which the Noble Earl wished the House to in-
vestigate were such as could only be brought forward
in some grave case upon which the peace of the country
depended. But surely the Noble Earl had shown
nothing which could call for the attention of Parliament
in the squabbles between one inspector and another. The
Noble Earl himself had shown that the peace of
the district had not been neglected ; but that, on the
contrary, eleven persons had been brought to justice,
independently of the exertions of Mr. Langford him-
self; and solely by the exertions of the police. When
the Noble EA brought tie case of Castle Connell be-
fore the House on a former occasion, he made use of
language, which upon reflection he must be sorry for.—
(Hear, hear.) On that occasion he said that the con-
stabulary depended for promotion, not upon the dis-
charge of their duty, but upon their neglect of it. Now
was that language which it was just—which it was
prudent to use towards men of such respectability, who
had beett ohoeen for the most part in consequence of
their former services to their country ?—( Hear, hear.)
The Noble Earl had gone so far as to call one of those
officers, Mr. Jackson, a gentleman of the highest cha-
raeter and nnirapeached integrity—a spy.---( Hear,
kNrs) Was that language which ought to be applied
to a gentleman whose zealous discharge of his duty had
been borne testimony to ny the resident Magistrates of
the 9040 y ?-,(tjear, hear.) The Noble Earl admitted
%Wit Mr. Langford had behaved illegally, • .

THE LONDON GAZETTE.

(THIS EVENING.)

:CROWN OFFICE, A va. 3, 1840.
MEMBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT
PARLIAMENT.

COUNTY or SURREY, WESTERN DIVISION—John Trotter,
of Horton-place, Epsom, in the said county. Esq., in the
room of the Honourable George John Perceval, new Lord
Arden. _

COUNTY OF LOUTH—Thomas Fortescue, of Ravensdale and
Cle. moot Parks, in the county of Louth, Esq., in the room
of Henry Chester, Esq., who has accepted the Chiltern
Hundreds.