The Sun.
London, England, 1840-01-31 00:00:00

1 EN LNG EDITION.

with which he was himself connected, from the
general charge brought against it, and to show that it
had a claim for having effected legal improvements
in the country. He wished' for a few moments to detain
them while he stated what had been done in the way
of amendment of the criminal law of this country. This
was -no mean subject, nor one of little moment or influ-
duce to the people of the country. In 1808 the subject was
taken up by the Whig party, then in opposition, and it
fell into the powerful hands of a party as capable as any
that ever existcd to do justice to it, he aliteled to Sir
Samuel Romilly, who then first commenced his career
as an amender of the Criminal Law, and for ten years
struggled against the whole force of the minority of that
day, but who ended that career with almost as little
effcct as when he began it.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
In 1819, he (Samuel Romilly) being no more, Sir James
Mackintosh stepped into his shoes, and moved for a Com-
nattee on the Criminal Law, which was resisted by Lord
Castlereagh, but carried ; and in 1820 he brought in six
Bills, the principles of whch were rejected. So in 1821 a
Bill to amend the Criminal Law (so averse were the
Tories) was thrown out. In 1823 Sir James proposed
resolutions abolishing capital punishments in certain cases.
Sir Robert Peel opposed them. On the understanding that
the subject should be taken up by the Government, Sir
James then gave up his efforts in the cause, and then
Sir Robert Peel brought in Bills for abolish-
ing capital punishments, in fifteen cases, which,
however, had tco much of the shadow and too
little of the substance; and thus Sir Robert "kept
the word of promise to the ear, and broke it to the hope."
In 1826, the Right Hon. Baronet brought in some mea-
sures, for which he bad been too highly praised. For the
consolidation of certain obsolete laws, he (Mr. Maule)
gave him some credit. As to abolishing capital punish-
ments, he gave the Right Hon. Baronet none ; for all he
had done was to increase the sum which rendered stealing
in a dwelling-house capital, from 405. to 50/. Now, what
had the Liberal party done ?—( Hear, hear.) In 1832,
abolished capital punishments in horse-stealing, sheep-
stealing, and other cases ; in 1833, for return-
ing from transportation ; in 1835, for stealing in the
Post-office ; and, in 1837, the Noble Lo-d (J. Russell)
effected that change in the criminal law, which bad cast
so much honour on his friends, abolishing capital punish-
ments, save in some few cases. In the ten years to 1818,
the convictions were 1,954, executions 97 ; to 1828, convic-
victions 1,165, executions 59; to 1838, convictions 116,
executions only 6.—( Hear, hear.) It would be beneficial
to the country, that Hon. Gentlemen opposite had at last
(long " willing to wound, and yet afraid to strike") cone
forwardr to bring the question between party and party.
alike ro his
(M q
r.
Maule's) part, he was content to appeal
to the present and the past. It remained to be seen
whether to the past, the Conservation side would success-
fully appeal ; he believed that the people of this country
would much rather condemn them for the past than trust
them for the future..—(Hear, hear,)
Lord G. SOMERSET wished to know the date of the
communication from the Lord Lieutenant who, the Hon.
Member had stated, had agreed to the appointment of Mr.
Frost to the Magistracy.
Mr. FOX MAULE with some warmth replied, it
Was a confidential communication in answer to one
equally confidential. The date was February 13. Would
Noble Lord take this upon his (Mr. Maule's) word:?
Lord G. SOMERSET wished the Hon. Member to
understand that his only reason for asking was to ascertain
that it could not have been his father, the late Lord Lieu-
tenant of the county.—( Hear.)
Mr. F. MAULE was happy to understand that. The
Lord Lieutenant was Mr Hanbury Leigh.—(Hear.)
Mr. LIDDELL wished to take a part in this debate,
that he might, face to face, vindicate the reproaches
which he had felt it his duty to throw upon the Ministry in
the provinces. The arguments on the other side, of divi-
sion in the Conservative camp, from the differences about
Privilege, were the most absurd. He would just explain
the grounds of his vote on that question.—(A laugh and
cries of " No, no.") He contended that he was quite in
order. He had voted against the Right Hon. Baronet the
Member for Tamworth, because the Right Hon. Baronet's
reasoning, though unanswerable, led to injustice and oppres-
sion. Bat this slight difference would never interrupt the
general harmony and union of the party. Now the Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. F. Maule) had accused him (Mr. L.) of
making the Poor -law the pretext for inflammatoryharangues;
e had charged him with encouraging Chartism, and being
an incendiary.—(Mr. F. Maule—" Not in the least.")
Well, if the Hon. Gentleman had not gone so far, he had
at least imputed to him improper violence on the subject.
Now in the northern counties the Poor-law had never been
required, and had been unjustly forced upon the people.
He had never used a word in addressing public meetings
which he was not ready to justify in that House. He had
never promised to vote for the repeal of the whole Bill, but
Only of its more stringent provisions, by which he could
assure the House that the poor had been ridden with a hard
hand.—( Hear.) He could tell them that the Poor-laws
would be unpopular, as long as they permitted the laws of
the nation to be violated in the case of illegitimate chile
dren, where the fathers that had begotten them were re-
lieved from the burden of their support. He would say
that the particular observations that were attributed to him,
and repeated in public, were made use of for the purpose
of distorting the truth of what he said, and rendering him
unpopular in that House. He never made use of the
words which were imputed to him ; and for the truth of
what he said, he begged to refer them to the reports which
appeared in the Parliamentary Papers. He did not deny
the expressions of dissatisfaction which he had made use of
with regard to the causes which be thought had increased
Chartism, and which he conceived was engendered by
the hostility which was naturally felt against the Poor-
laws. He well recollected the course of proceedings which
took place during the pi ogress of the Reform Bill—when
Lard Grey retired from the helm of affairs—the well-
known cry of " the pressure from without" was then
made use of. Was it then to be wondered at, when the
minds of the people were so much excited, they would not
confidently rely upon the virtue of that sentiment which
was uttered from such high authority, and continue
increasing that pressure from without, with a full and
cutifident reliance that their wishes would be granted ulti-
mately, by their continued agitation. He ascribed the rapid increase of Chartism to this cause
which of itself originated in the Birmingham
Political Union. He looked over that celebrated petition
presented to the House last year, which was signed by
12,000 individuals, and he could not find in the five points
which they urged on the attention of that House that one
word was uttered on the subject of the Poor-laws.—
( Hear, hear.) It was not alluded to either directly or
indirectly. The feelings which were expressed in that
petition, which the Government, by their conduct, had
Created by permitting that unnatural state of excitement
to prevail, were doomed to be disappointed. And Govern-
ment may well deplore the events which, in consequence,
had taken place. The House must deplore the course of
Proceedings which could cause such unfortunate results.
He did not charge the Government with a want
of energy in instituting proceedings to repress the Chartist
outbreaks, but he did charge the Government of her
Majesty with having encouraged a long course of political
agitation, which ultimately ended in disappointment to the parties themselves, and which disappointment found refuge
in Chartism.—( Hear, hear.) If the Government was not prepared to concede these points which had been urged at 1
those public meetings, why did they not take every means
to discountenance them at once ? Here they find that one
AHon. Gentleman, a member of the Government, the Judge
dvocate-General, was of opinion that the Ballot ought
be conceded. Again they find that the Secretary at
War was an advocate for the Ballot and the Extension of
the Suffrage. When they saw those changes exist in the
opinions of the Ministers, what could they or the country
expect but false and delusive hopes ? What confidence
then could be placed in a Government who depend for
their existence upon the chance and minute majorities
Which they might obtain upon the general question, are:
took for their support to many individuals who are well
known to have strong opinions upon subjects that must
lead to the overthrow of the monarchy in this country ?
The Government called for the confidence of this House—
he would tell the present Government that they never had
the confidence of the Representatives of Great Britain,
and if they deducted from their supporters the Members
which were returned from the sister kingdom they would
find themselves in a great minority.—( Loud cries of
" Hear, hear," from the Irish Members.) But what was
the result of such a state of things? That the Govern-
ment of her Majesty were actually controlled by an Irish
majority.—(Hear, hear.) What would be the prac-
tical result of all this ? Was it to be supposed that the
public would be satisfied at being governed in this
manner—or how could that House refrain under such
circumstances from bringing forward a motion of want of
confidence in the Ministers? And bow was that Irish ma-
jority constructed ? Was it not headed by an Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite, the Member for Dublin, who, up to this
noment, if the Tories should come into power, dares to
threaten that Government with summoning, he could not
say how many thousand men, to rise up at his beck, and
by such power to carry the Repeal of the Union ? If her
Majesty should have the courage to change her Govern-
ment, such would appear to be the happy result of the
present unfortunate condition of things. He would say
that that Government was distasteful to the people, and he
would ask whether it would be more agreeable to have
England governed by an Irish majority, or to have Ireland
governed by an English majority ? He begged to ask the
Roman Catholic Members from Ireland, was it not by
reason of
the votes of an English majority they owed their
seats in that House ? Was it not an English majority that
t:arried the Catholic Relief Bill ?—( Hear, and laughter.)
tie was one of those, he did not hesitate to say, who had
voted for that measure, but he could not then help admitting
he Lad been bitterly disappointed in its results. He
thought the conduct pursued by the Noble Duke and the
Hung Baronet the Member for Tamworth, who at that
time held the reins of Government, was a full guarantee
that equal justice would be done to the country.—( Hear,
defined by raising Roman Catholics to an ascendancy With reference to what the Hon. Gentleman the Secre-
tary at War said, who he was sorry to see was not then
his place, but nevertheless there was one portion of the
'P ooch which he delivered yesterday evening, and which
he had that day seen reported in the public papers with
surprise and astonishment. It pleased that gentleman to
talk of the fierce and intolerant bigotry of the followers of
e Right Hon. Baronet who sat at this side of the House,
and that the doctrines inculcated from the pulpit were
thenand
of such a description as would stain with disgrace
proceedings upon the hus!ings. Such was the lan-
guage which a Minister of the Crown thought proper to
make use of against the Clergy of the Established
Church.__( Hear, hear.) He thotieht that such
narn
anguage justified him in calling upon that' Government to
e that clergyman or that pulpit, from whence Rica
expressions came. They indeed asked for the con
d
of the country, and complained of not receiving
the support of the Gentlemen on this side, and at the
same time in public they dared to make use of such lan-
Veag° as this. Ho hoped, however, that the Hon. Mettl-
r would be able to adduce instances to justify such tan-.
guage. Among the many points which had been brought
forward to support their cause—it was not his pleasure to
dwell at length on them—but there was one point which
bet
wholeought of ydver great importance, and upon which
empire epended. He could not help stating
"""w ee5e5ee5ee.,..........._

that the Government had brought them into the most
satisfactory situation regarding it. He alluded to the
question of Finance; the Prime Minister in his place al-
lowed all the inferences that could be drawn from its un-
satisfactory state—in fact, that the finances were in a very
bad condition, and he could hold out no hopes towards
their improvement but such as were vague and unsatisfactory.
It was perfectly true that it was a popular measure to give
cheap letters to all. He alluded to the great reduction
that was made in the postage—but the question was this,
who were responsible for the National Debt ? and it would
then be a consideration whether the Queen could afford to
make such a sacrifice as the present low rate of postage
must cause. He could not therefore help thinking that her
Majesty's Ministers had a great deal to answer for for the
present low state of the finances. If he wanted an addi-
tional reason for refusing them his vote on this occasion he
would find it in such an act. He could not but lament the
unfortunate condition in which her Majesty's Government
had fallen into. He was well accustomed to bear them
give expression to high-flown sentiments of liberty. They
have often toasted the memories of those—the illustrious
ancestors of the Noble Lord, who stained the scaffold with
their blood. However the loyalty of the Gentlemen at
his side of the House might be questioned, the Crown
would never want friends when it had the aristocracy of
England and the Conservatives of that House, who were
ready to defend its rights, net only with their arms, but
with the best blood that filled their veins. Some errors
might indeed have been imputed to the Duke of Wel'ing-
ton and the Right Hon. Bart., who was the recognized
leader of that side of the House ; but he would appeal
is the growing confidence of the entire country in their
vindication; but eve* if they had errors be would still sup-
port them, and would never withdraw his allegiance from
them. He would conclude by making a quotation from
one of the greatest philosophers that ever lived—
" Menem mehercule cum Platoni
Errare quam cum his agere."
Captain PECHELL rose and said the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Pembroke, who, he was sorry to
see, was not then in his place, seemed to him (Capt. P.)
totally insensible to the associations which had existed
between him and his former colleagues in office, when he
did not scruple to attach to them the monstrous abuses of
bringing their political prejudices into the Naval Depart-
ments. He (Captain P.) was prepared to show that the
statements which the Right Hon. Baronet so coolly and
so solemnly brought forward were not borne out by the
facts. He could not but feel very poignantly on this oc-
casion, as it affected the service to which he had the
honour of belonging. He was sorry to say that the Right
Hon. Baronet had endeavoured to give that service a
severe wound. But be (Capt. P.) thought that the Right
Hon. Baronet had been guilty of the most unfair and un-
just attack upon the Ministry.—( Hear, hear.) He (the
Right Honourable Baronet) said boldly, that " ser-
vices upon the quarter-deck were but secondary
to services on the hustings, and he enumerated a list of
gallant Officers, who, he stated were placed from half
pay to command since the year 1837. The Right
Hon. Baronet was not correct in such a statement.
The first officer he alluded to, viz. Admiral Ommanney, no
sooner took the command at Lisbon than he was assailed
in the most unmeasured terms by those who advocated
the same cause as the Right Hon. Bart. They asserted
that he abused the power which had been given to him,
by insulting the Queen Dowager. In consequence of
such attacks he immediately instituted proceedings
against those parties, and he (Captain Pechell) hoped
that the power of the law would show that such
insinuations were undeserved, and that no such feeling
cf. uld exist in the breast of a British officer. The next
officer alluded to was Lord Clarence Paget who stood a
candidate for Southampton. When he stood he was em-
ployed in the service in the West Indies, and so far
from being appointed only on that occasion he had some-
time previously the command of a ship of war on the West
India station. Another officer who was alluded to com-
manded a ship in Falmouth, and had long before received
his appointment. At that period there could be no motive
for giving Captain Plumridge hissappointment, for at that
time he had nothing at all to do with the representation
of Falmouth. It was also alleged that Sir James Gordon
was forced away from his position to make room for an-
other gallant officer—that was an assertion that should be
contradicted, as it would reflect great disgrace upon the
Admiralty if it were true. Sir James Gordon was
an officer of high and honourable character, who was always
ready to act when a gallant deed was to be performed.
He was appointed to the Dock-yard at Chatham, but he
was at the same time told that such appointment would be
of a limited nature, and that a contingency might arise
which would cause his removal. Capt. Clavell was pro-
moted to the place, and Sir James Gordon was removed,
on being promoted to his flag. Now those were very
grave assertions which had been made, and it would
be unfair to allow them to go abroad without a direct con-
tradiction. Sir James Gordon was now in the Admiralty,
in its civil employ on the south-eastern coast of this
country. He (Capt. Pechell) could not but think that
those attacks were quite unworthy of the Right Hon.
Baronet who asked why the same rule should not have
been applied to the Navy as well as to the Army ;
but he (Captain Pechell) called upon them to produce
a case where an officer on half-pay ever suffered himself
to remain in a .company where speeches insulting to the
Sovereign were made ?—( Cheers.) He called upon
them to prodnce a Naval Officer on full or half-pay who
ever was reproved for being in the company of those
who uttered such disgraceful and insulting lan-
guage as had been lately reported ?—( Hear, hear.)
What did the Right Hon. Baronet mean by applying the
same rule to the Navy as to the Army? Captain Plum-
ridge certainly contested the borough of Falmouth, but
he believed that an officer in that House, whose vote
would most probably be recorded in favour of this motion,
had, at the head of his regiment, con ested the borough
of Kinsale, and yet had received no rebuff :from the Right
Hon. Baronet. He believed that there was not an in-
stance on record—an instance of a naval officer receiving
a reproof for keeping improper company, and he would
venture to say that no naval officer would so commit himself
by quietly suffering slanderous language towaralp his So-
vereign to be employed in his presence.—(Cheering.)
He would now allude to what had fallen from the Hon.
Member for Droitwich last night, and from the Hon.
Member for Northumberland this evening, who had eels
tainly gone rather near the wind in regard to language
used from the pulpit, in what he had stated. He would
state a transaction which had taken place in a town not
more than 50 miles from the metropolis, which was the
site of a Royal Palace. At a meeting at which the Hon.
Ba.onet, his colleague, had attended, at which the Hon.
Members for Lymington, for Aylesbury, and the Hon.
and Gallant Officer, the Member for Honiton, were pre
sent, a Rev. Gentleman had stated in answer to the toast
of Church and State—
Mr. LIDDELL—Not from the pulpit.—( A laugh.)
Captain PECHELL said that what he was about to
state was more in relation to what fell from the Hon.
Member for Droitwich last evening, who had denied that
such things had been agitated as the appointment of Ca-
tholic Privy Councillors. The Rev. Gentleman, who ap-
peared to be the grand star of the evening, stated that he
would refer to the manner in which Government patronage
had been distributed, and that not on the narrow principle
of pelf and party, but on the broad principle of Church and
State. The place of Mr. Wood, who was a firm adherent
of the Church of England, had become vacant at the Ad-
miralty, and had been filled up by Mr. More O'Ferrall,
Catholic.—( Cheers.) The Rev. Divine,:in another part,
had said that appointments made vacant by the removal of
members of the Church of England had been filled up by
Catholics. Mr. More O'Ferrall had vacated his office at
the Treasury, which had been filled up by the appoint-
ment of Mr. Wyse, a Roman Catholic. The Rev. Di-
vine had then gone on to state who M:. Wyse was ; but
that gentleman was well known in the House. The Rev.
Gentleman was the Rev. J. S. Anderson, Chaplain to
her Majesty, and he understood it had since been pub-
lished in a cheap form. He was clearly of opinion that
the attack would signally fail. The country was not pre-
pared to coincide with a speech said to be delivered at
Canterbury by a Member of this House—( Cheers)—and
he believed it was for the interests of Ireland and the be-
nefit of the country that this proposition should be carried.
He sincerely and cordially joined in opposing the motion,
and he was sure he would be in a very considerable make-
rity.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear, hear.")
Mr. LA SC ELLES admitted the importance of this
motion. He thought that, looking at the state of the
country, those who supported it incurred great responsi-
bility, and therefore he should state why he had withheld
his confidence from her Majesty's Government, and why
he entertained the most confident expectation that the
Right Hon. Baronet would be able to found a very firm
Government in their place. He made no charge against
them of promoting Chartism. The speech of the Noble
Lord might have been misunderstood, and he acquitted
him of any evil intention ; yet if his speech was open to
misconstruction, that was only a reason why other Members
of the Cabinet should abstain from the use of language
as dangerous, and as liable to misconstruction. He had
listened to the speech of the Hon. Member for Edin-
burgh, last night, with considerable pain. He thought it
cruel and unfair to the Chartists, whose minds were in-
flamed, that he should take that opportunity of coming
down to the House with a dissertation on the blessings
of agitation.-_( Loud cheers from the Opposition.)
When he said that the abolition of slavery, and various
other good measures had been obtained by agitation, what
would be the natural inference the Chartists would draw.
They would say that their objects were equally praise-
worthy, and that it only required time and agitation to
obtain them. But if that were not a sufficient ground for
giving his vote in favour of this motion, he would refer to
the speech of the Noble Lord, the Member for Northum.
berland, who stated that at the end of last Session, the
Cabinet felt they were so weak, by all their most respect-
able friends dropping from them—that they felt the
necessity of strengthening themselves by the introduc-
tion of new men ; and on the speeches of those who
had been introduced by that re-construction he
founded his reason for voting in favour of this
motion. He had looked at the dangers of the country
and at the means of averting them, and he did not find
those means to exist in the present Government. The
speech of the Hon. Member for Edinburgh had adverted
to the topic of religion, and had charged it upon that
party, for from that speech one would imagine that it was
his (Lord L.'s) side of the House that was put on its
defence.—(Cheers from the Opposition, answered by
counter cheers from the Ministerial side of the House.)
He felt, as affecting Ireland, that he would never be a party to any measure which should in any tray interfere
with the extension of religious freedom to all alike.—
( Loud cheers.) He would not allow for one moment
such a question to be brought forward—( Continued cheer-
ing)—but he would not make the principle of democracy
march through the land under the garb of religious tole-
ration ; and it was in support of those principles the Hon-
ourable and Learned Gentleman wielded the power
of the Catholic population. It was to attain such objects
as the extension of the Franchise and various others which
the Government were pledged to oppose. But he would
say that the Government only opposed a mock resistance
to those measures when they caressed one of those who
who supported them most. There was one other circum-
stance to which he would allude. He hoped that in all
their conflicts in that House they would keep out of sight
the person of the Sovereign. It was quite true that the