The Sun.
London, England, 1840-03-11 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, iR4O,

ore it was that he considered that if a Committee be
I appointed, it ought to have the power not only of inquir-
-1 ing into the circulation, but the whole
s% stem of banking
I s in the country. He, therefore, would suggest to the
~ Chancellor of the Exchequer the propriety of making his
notice more general, stating that the Committee ware to
inquire into the systsm of banking generally in the United
Kingdom. He thought it' the Right Hen. Gentleman
adopted that suggestion, the Committee would do much
more good than it would under the motion of the Right
Hon. Gentleman. He trusted that the Right Hon. Gen-
j• tleman would take care to put Hun. Members on the
i Committee who were well acquainted with the subject.
Mr. E LL ICE did not rise to oppose the motion, but
merely to allude to the statement that had been made by
the Right Hon. Gentleman with respect to the Bank of
1 Ireland. If he understood him rightly, lie stated that he
i would hare been willing to introduce a Bill with respect to
1 that establishment, placing it on the same footing as the
Bank of England; but before he did so, he was anxious
i to have the opinion of the Committee, that he now moved
for. Now he, for one, must protest against the adoption
of such a course.
Mr. HUM E would not oppose the motion, as he consi-
dered the object of the inquiry to be to put an end to that
ever_varying state in which the currency was placed,
owing to the particalar conduct of the establishments
which had now the power of issuing paper. That object
was certainly a very laudable one ; but there was another
consideration of greater importance, which was, whether
the currency of the country was placed on a correct basis;
and he would venture to say, that if the Com-
mittee were not permitted to go into that inquiry,
the whole of their labours would be lost. ( Hear.)
One question which would be raised before the Committee
would be, how the great variations in the currency were to
be put an end to ? and he (Mr. Hume) doubted very much
whether that question could be gone into, if the labours of
the Committee were limited to the inquiry as to the issue
of paper-money. Now, what was the case in France :
there the currency had been placed upon a proper basis,
and so completely had the public mind in that country
been satisfied on tl;at subject; that since the year 1791, up
to the present moment, there had not been five pamphlets
published in that country ; while here, Mr. Richardson, of
Cornhill, had sold no less than two thousand pamphlets on
the subject of the currency within the short space of two
years and a half, and at the present moment there was
scarcely a morning passed without some pamphlet on the
subject issuing from the press. Thus the public mind was
unsettled on the subject, and he wished, therefore, to
know from the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he
contemplated any inquiry on the part of the Committee
fs7dt: the subject of the currency. For his own part, con-
1. 'jog the great crisis that had taken place in the years
'239 1826, 1836 and 1537, he was almost a
cornett for g metallic currency. At the present
moment no less than fifty or sixty millions had been sacri-
ficed by circumstances over which the parties had no con-
trol. In this state of things ought it not fairly to be made
a question for the consideration of the Committee, how far
it would be advisable or not to have an entire metallic
currency ? These were questions on which he wished the
Chancelior of the Exchequer to state his views. He
thought the Committee's power ought to extend in the
manner he had suggested, as he was sure that unless the
fullest examination was made on the subject the labours
of the Committee would be as useless as that which had
been sitting for the last three years.
Mr. G ROTE agreed with the Right Hon. Gentlemen
who had brought forward the present motion, that the pre-
sent time was peculiarly appropriate fur considering this
subject, as there was, at the present moment, circumstances
of a peculiar nature existing, which made it the duty of
that House to investigate the subject with more than
ordinary care. They had escaped a great crisis with
respect to the manufac:uring system, and that considera-
tion, above all others, should induce them to adopt every
means in them power to place the currency of the country
on the surest footing, His Hon. Friend had compared the
currencies of France and England, and had stated that
there had been a great number of pamphlets published in
this country on the subject. With reference to the various
opinions pronounced in those pamphlets, it was not his in-
tention to go at any length into them, nor was it his in-
tention to go into an elaborate discussion on the currency,
but this he would say, that if there was any benefit more
than another that was to be derived fi om going into the
question of the currency by a Committee, it would be the
clear understanding which would be obtained of the effect
which the Bank of England had on the currency.
There were scarcely ten gentlemen agreed upon that
point, and he had no doubt that that establish-
ment had been censured for the existence of evils
which had arisen from no mismanagement of theirs.
He was far from thinking the Bank of England had con-
ducted itself in a way that could have been desired ; but he
was satisfied that the result of the inquiry would be to
rescue the Bank from a great deal of rash and undeserved
censure, Though many of the difficulties of the mone-
tary system had wrongly been attributed to the Bank, yet
he thought that by prudence and precaution those difficul-
ties might have been lightened. There were other im-
portant questions connected with the inquiry iwhich had
received but little attention, and among these questions
was the magnitude of the Bank reserve of isullion. An-
other question was as to the extent to which the Bank
was justified in administering the currency, with a view to
what was called the support and.protection of trade. On
that point he would nut pronounce any opinion at the pre-
sent moment, but it was one of those topics which ought
to be brought before the consideration of such a Com-
mittee as was about to be appointed.—( Hear, hear.)
His Hon. Friend had said that nothing had been done by
the Committee that had been sitting on Joint-stock Banks
for the last three years, but he ought to have looked to the
Committee that was appointed in 1832 by Lord Althorp.
—( Hear.) Much good had resulted from that Committee,
and appended to the Report of that Committee was a
great mass of documentary evidence connected with the
circulation : and he anticipated from the documents that
would be laid before the Committee about to be appointed,
great assistance in refuting the current errors, and esta-
blishing a prudent course as to their future policy. Another
qnestion that had been mooted in recent times, ana which
had received countenance from very powerful and influen.
tial quarters, was the combining of the functions of deposit
and issue in the Bank of England, That was a subject
that would require very serious and attentive consideration.
He was glad to hear from the Right Hon. Chancellor of
the Exchequer, that the inquiry was to be divested of every
thing like hostility against either private Banks or Joint-
Stock Banks, and he hoped the inquiry would be con.
ducted in that candid, fair, and impartial spirit which the
Right lion. Gentleman had prescribed.—( Hear.)
Mr. 4WI. T WOOD next addressed the House, but in
such a very low tone crf voice that he was scarcely heard
in the gallery. We understood him to say that the Chan-
cel.or of the Exchequer had eot given a decided opinion
upon any one of the numerous topics to which he had ad-
verted, but had said the Committee was to inquire into the
subject. The monetary system was radically bad, and
what the peoile warn; a was not a Committee, but the
Government to come forward with distinct and decisive
measures, which could be carried into operation, so as to
prevent those numerous fluctuations which had existed of
late years in this country.
Mr. CL AY thought the question before the House was,
whether the monetary system was a fit subject to be re-
ferred to the consideration of a Committee. The appoint-
ment of a Committee was strictly in conformity with pre-
cedent. All the great alterations that had been made on
this subject were preceded by inqu:ri s. A Committee
was appointed in 1810, another in 1819, another in 1826.
and another in 1832, which preceded the renewal of the
Bank of England Charter. He thought the Legislature
was right in the course they adopted on those occasions,
because if there was one subject more than another on
which it was desirable they should carry public
opinion with them, in their legislation, it was the mone-
tary system. Although public opinion had for the last few
years taken a refit direction upon this question, yet he
did not think there was such a concurrence of opinion,
that the public were prepared to concur in the propriety of
some legislative measure without some previous inquiry.
The lion. Gentleman who had last spoken, had said that
the monetary system was radically bad. That was owing
to the difficulty of solving the problem of regulating the
paper, and metallic currency. That problem had been
experimented upon by two of the most enlightened nations
in Europe, but they had not been able to arrive at any
satisfectory conclusion. lie for one, humble as be was,
would not withhold his approbation from the measure in-
traduced by the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for
Tarnworth, upon the currency.—( Hear.) He had never
heard anything like an argument against the principle of
that measure. But it was supposed that after the passing of
that Bill, the same fluctuations to which the country had
been exposed would not be experienced again. In 1525
however, a crisis occurred more violent than the monetary
system had ever before experienced. It was attempted to
meet that in 1826 by a final suppression of the small note
circulation, and the establishment of Joint Stock Banks ;
but in 1827 there was another crisis in our monetary sys.
tern, and they all knew there was a crisis in 1839. It was
clear, therefore, that after some twenty or thirty years of
experiment—it was acknowledgedby universal consent, that
the great problem to which he had alluded had not been
solved. The Hon. Member for Carlow had said that non-
issuing banks ought to have been included in the terms of
the motion for the Committee. He (Mr. Clay) thought
that for all the useful purposes which his Hon, Friend had
in view, that subject would fall within the scope of the in-
quiry. It was intended to refer the Reports of the Com-
mittee on Joint Stock Banks to the Committee about to be
appointed, and his Right Honourable Friend, the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer, had stated that it was his intention
to direct inquiries to be made into the transactions of the
Bank of England with the non-issuing banks, so that
would involve an inquiry into the subject to which his
Right Hon. Friend the Member for Carlow had alluded.
His Hon. Friend the Member for London (Mr. Grote)
bad alluded to the inquiry, and complained that it had led
to no result ; but the labours of that Committee had not
been thrown away—it had made a collection of, and put
upon record, some most important facts. Inquiry was
absolutely necessary, for by a decision given about two
months ago in a Court of Law, the public had absolutely
no protection against Joint stock Banks. The Judges
bad there l .id it does, that a judgment obtain, 4 against
the person who was to sue and be sued, would not be
effective s'ain't the proprietors of a Joint-stock Bents of
which he 'errs the slicer; but that a party complaining
must core menc • his action aeiti est all the parties in the
Batik. This now anieunt, dnto a denial of justice. The
motion of his Bleb! Hun. Frisnd he thought was quite
corn jsrehererave enough, and would elo great good.
Sir R PEEL—The utility of the Cerenio toe must en-
tirely sod exclusively depend upon V.e mariner in which
the inquiry was conducted.—(Cheere.) It was easy to
say that the inquiry should be full and searching, but in
his opinion it might be so full, so searching, as to be alto-
gether useless In his eesinioe it was wise to appoint a
Committee: all depended upon the manner it which it was
coeducted. they were to consider in all its bearings
wh t eGurse Parliearent ought to adopt at the period when
the Bank Ctemter expired—if they were to take up that
question and pursue it sts eddy, their labours would lead to
it good practical result If the inquiry were to be a vague,
anti o general, and desultery one,
iimee they would have a very
d 7 tr,ltl no. upon the COITIMitti,P, aed airy would .
, e: ee re, -, e eir end confusion in the moms of the

mercantile community.—( Hear, hear.) If they were to
turn their attention to this theories cf Mr. H. Palmer and
others, and inquire into the advantages of having the capi-
tal of the Bank divided into one-third bullion' and two-
thirds securities—it they took up those subjects and steadily
pursued them to the end, their labours would lead to good
pr,cticsl results. Let them inquire into the advantages
which limited responsibility had over unlimited responsi-
bility ; that also would lead to a practical resuit.—( Pear,
hear.) He thought the terms of the motion opened the
question wide enough —he thought it answered the
views of the Hon. Member for Carlow, for, of coulee,
it would he competent fur the Committee, in inquiring into
the issues of the Bank of England, to inquire into the
manner in which they circulate their notes by means of
Joint-stuck Banks. He strongly deprecated any inquiry
so extensive as was called fur by the Hon. Member for
Kilkenny. He could never consent to any inquiry into
the basis of the currency.—( Hear, hear.) It could not be
done without creating great alarm, without leading men
to suppose that the mied of Parliament was not made up
on the subject. Parliament had repeatedly declared that
it would adhere to a metallic currency, and Parliament
could not now enter into any inquiry respecting it without
unsettling every transaction which had taken place since
1819. He hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman would
take especial care that that was not one of the subjects
of inquiry in the Committee. The Hon. Member for
Kilkenny declared himself desirous of abolishing the paper
circulation entirely. It could not be done—they had abo-
lished the one and two pound notes, and, for any thing he
knew, it was possible they might have the power of abo-
lishing the five-pound notes, but it was absolutelyimpossi-
ble to abolish a paper circulation without putting an entire
stop to the whole system of credit existing in the country.
What was a promissory note but a paper circulation, and
how would it be possible to abolish a circulation of that
kind unless they were to go back to the days of barbarism,
and substitute the system of barter ? One question to be
carefully considered would be the great distinction be-
tween a Bank of Deposit and a Bank of Issue ? That
would be one of the subjects which the Committee must
undertake, and in his opinion that should be the first ne,t-
ter to which its attention should be drawn. He really
trusted that the Committee would not suffer itself to be
diverted from that great subject. He trusted that the
Right Hon. Gentleman, as Chancellor of the Exchequer,
would feel it his duty to direct theattention of the Commit-
tee to those important matters, and by his influence confine
the attention of the Committee to them until they were
exhausted.—( Hear, hear.) If he pursued that course,
then he ( Sir R. Peel) anticipated useful results from
their labours ; but if, on the other hand, they pursued the
inquiry in the same manner as they did that relating to
the Joint-stock Banks, then he anticipated no good re-
sults, and he would infinitely rather that the Government,
upon its own responsibility, would make use •f those
means of information at its command, and offer a legisla-
tive measure at once.

Mr. C. WOOD entirely agreed with what had fallen
from the Right Hon. Baronet. He could not agree with
his Hon. Friend near him ( Mr. Hume), that it would be
either wise or practicable to introduce into this country so
large a proportion of the metallic currency as was in use
in France ; it was impossible that such large transactions
as were carried on in this country could be carried on with-
out a large paper circulation. He was perfectly astonished
to hear the call made upon the Government by the Hon.
Member for Whitehaven, to legislate upon this matter
without inquiry. The lion. Member (Mr. Atwood)
seemed to have quite made up his mind upon the whole
subject, end t• consider that oo inquiry was required, or
could inform his mind upon it; if so, he was the only one
either out or in the House who thought so. Even his
Hon. Friend near him ( Mr. Grote), who was not ignorant
upon such matters, said he had much to learn upon it ; and
there were great differences of opinion existing amongst t 1 e
highest authorities in the country upon such a question. That
difference of opinion termed in his mind the strongest
ground for inquiry, and he perfectly agreed ith the Right
Hon. Baronet that the inquiries of the Committee ought to
be confined to practical subjects, and those alone. In his
opinion it would be better to limit the inquiry to what had
taken place since the renewal of the Bank Charter in
1832. The experience of eventful years, of years of diffi-
culty, must lead to the best practical results. Therefore
the experience of the last four or five years was of the very
highest importance, and could never be so well obtained as
at the present moment. It was of the utmost possible im-
portance that in some points they should enter into a
minute investigation—for instance, much information
was yet necessary with respect to the average returns,
which did not yet lead the mind to proper results.
It was absolutely necesssary that they should know much
more correctly than they were able to ascertain by these
returns, the dates and times when the increase took place.
An inquiry like the present would be attended with very
great advantage, not only to the Bank of England, but to
the private and Joint-stock Banks throughout the country.
He agreed with the Hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets,
that all the great improvements which had taken place in
the management of this establishment had emanated from
the inquiries and reports of Committees of that House.
He could not, therefore, but anticipate the most beneficial
results from this inquiry.
After a few words from Mr, W. ATTWOOD in ex-
planation,
Mr. H A WES said, the Right Hon. Baronet the Mem-
ber for Tamworth bad anticipated almost everything he
had to say on the subject. He hoped that the inquiry
which was about to be instituted would be of a practical
character. It appeared to him, however, the tendency of
the Right Hon. Baronet's speech was to narrow the in-
quiry too much. He did not think the subject could be
properly discussed without taking into consideration the
law of partnerships in that country. He regretted the
delay that must take place before any sound legislation
could be come to; but the good which would be attained
by investigation, carefully conducted, would more than
counterbalance any inconvenience that might result.
Mr. TURNER anticipated the best results from the
important inquiry about to be instituted, although he ap-
prehended that the Bank of England would feel some de-
gree of jealousy on the subject.
Sir JOHN RAE REID could assure the Hon. Mem-
ber that the Bank of England had no jealousy on the sub-
ject whatever.—(Hear, hear,) So far as the Bank of
England was concerned, it would go into the most minute
inquiry, and be was convinced that the public would feel
much more satisfied than it at present appeared to be with
the conduct of the Bank of England, when that investi-
gation had terminated. He felt it his duty to say so
much in reply to the observations of the Hon. Member.
Mr. SLANEY said at the present moment they had
the notes of the Bank of England, the notes of Joint.
Stock Banks, arid of private Backs, all circulating to-
gether, atid it was impossible for persons who were in the
habit of receiving them to say what their value was. He
thought that such a sta e of things should not prevail, and
he trusted that the Right Hon. Gentleman, would provide
that whatever company had the privilege of coining notes
which were to circulate throughout the country, that they
ought to give some security or guarantee that the notes
were good.

Lorn SA NDON thought that since the extinction of
one pound notes, the poorer classes had suff,:red much less
than formerly.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER re-
plied. A discus,,ion like the present must necessarily be
limited in its character ; hut so far as it had gone. it was
gra, ifying to find that it had been received by the House in
a proper spirit, and that all parties were impressed with the
advisability of entering into the inquiry if a fair and just
manner. With respect to the qu.stiou of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Kilkenny, he begged to say that it was not his in-
tention to recommend to the Committee any proposition
for the abolition of notes, and the establishment of a purely
metallic currency. With respect to extending the inquiry
further, he begged to suggest that it would be better to
adapt the wording of his motion for the appointment of the
Committee, leaving it to the Committee, if they thought
proper, to extend their inquiry further.
The motion was then agreed to.

POOR LAWS (IRELAND.)
Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN rose to move for certain re-
turns of which he had given notice, but as the Noble Lord
the Secretary fur Ireland, stated that the information
would be submitted in the annual report of the Poor-law
Commissioners, he would content himself tsitli moving
for one return which would not be included—a return of
any applications made by Poor-law-Commissioners for the
purpose of ascertaining the opinion of the respective
Boards of Guardians in regard to the propriety of enacting
a law for the suppression of mendicancy and vagrancy; and
what has in each case been the result of such application.
—Agreed to.

CASE OF FROST, WILLIAMS, AND JONES.
Mr. LEADER presented petitions from St. Pancras,
from Newington, from Newport, Monmouthshire, from the
seven principal townships of Stoke-upon-Trent, signed by
four or five thousand persons, from Bath, agreed to at a
a public meeting ; from the inhabitant householders of
Brighton ; from Glasgow, Cardiff, St. Leonard's Shore.
ditch, St. John's Westminster; from Finsbury, signed by
2,000 inhabitants ; from certain inhabitants of London ;
from Tredegar ; from Frost himself, and from the Dor.
chester labourers, who consider transportation for life
worse than death itself, all praying for a tree pardon for
Frost, Jones, and Williams.

Mr. FIE LD EN presented petitions from Oldham and
other places in Lancashire to the same effect.

Mr. 'LE ADE R then proceeded to say that in the present
state of the House he should make his statement as short
as possible. He was induced to trespass on the• House on
the present occasion, not on account of the prisoners, not
on account of any sympathy he felt for the act of which
they were convicted, not from the merits of the case or
that he thought they did not deserve punishment, but be-
cause he thought the law had been strained against the pri-
soners. There had been a doubt, and it was the opinion
of nine-tenths of the people of this country, that wherever
there was a doubt it should be interpreted in favour of the
prisoner. There was a very strong feeling in the
country on the subject, and he need not inform the
House there had been more petitions presented on
this subject than any others.—( Hear.) He had
procured from the Journal Office the number of petitions
and signatures on this subject, and he found the number of
petitions up to the present time exceeded 100, and the
signatures 120,000, and the House must bear in mind
nearly halt the petitions were signed by Chairmen on be-
half of great public meetings, and there was therefore a
very strong feeling throughout the country on this subject ;
not, lie was aware, among the upper or perhaps the middle
classes, but among the working classes there was as strong
feeling on this subject as upon any question that bad agi-
tated them for sonic tine. It was not that they sympa-
thi,ed with Frost or wished that he had succeeded in his
attempt, but because, as was invariably stated in the peti-
tions, they believed the law had been strained against
the prisoners, and that they had not had justice
done to them.—( Hear.) He would not argue this
case se a lawyer, nor set up his opinion against theirs, but
he said it was a case that might be argued by any man of
common sense ; and that any Member of the House was
just as capable of fornyng an opinion on the subject, as
any lawyer in the land. He did not address the House merely
with reference to the prisoners concerned, but on the
broad conwitutional ground of having the law strictly,
fairly, and equitably administered in all cases as written
and .=own. not as merely stated by Judges. call. d on
to give an opinion, and not in this parti-adar case to try

the parties. In the first place, it was part of the law of
l 1 treason, which had been neglected in this instance, that a
list of the jurors and witnesses should be delivered atthe
same time, at a certain period before the trial. This law
had not been complied with, and it was asked what did
it sigeift, ? They were told it was merely a frivolous ob-
I I jection, and ought not to be entertained for a moment ;
and he believed if the Attorney-General bad treated the
subject with perfect contempt, and said that he tvouldsoon
get rid of it, Now, in the case of treason, the law-was
made chiefly for the protection of the subject against-the
ects of an arbitrary or despotic Government, and thellaw
of treason ought in all points to be literally and strictly
interpreted; and if all those regulations which were en-
acted for their defence, were not strictly- adhered to, the
whole law might be frittered away, and they would be at
the mercy of the Government. He would ask any Mem-
ber of the Government what be wauld say, if, in a case
effecting the Revenue Laws, where it was often argued a
man had not complied with some very minute regulation,
that such an excuse was never allowed, for if it were, the
law would become useless, and it would be impossible to
get any convictions; and just so in this case, unless they
gave the prisoner every benefit of the law of treason—
unless they obliged the Law Officers to comply with all
its enactments, they would soon have a Judge-made law,
by which any man against whom the Government might
have a dislike, might be found guilty by the law of treason.
It was not denied that the copy of the indictment, and the
list of witnesses, was not delivered simultaneously, and
nine out of the fifteen Judges allowed that the objection wits
valid, but said that it was not taken in time. Oh, but it was
said, what did it signify? the effect would only have been to
have postponed the trial for ten days, and this argument was
allowed in a case where men's lives and property were at
stake. Was he to be told it was no difference to a man
to be tried ten days before he ought for high treason in
cases of excitement? The country might be under much
less excitement on the 20th than on the 10th of the month.
Men's minds might in that time have become calm. Many
might have been frightened, and they knew nothing so
cruel and revengeful as a frightened coward. Besides, a ma-
terial witness for the prosecution or the prisoner might die.
There were many other ways in which a prisoner might be
injured, by being tried ten days before he ought to be
tried ; and if the law were to be strictly administered, ac-
cording to the letter, then undoubtedly Frost and his fel-
low-prisoners were tried sooner than by law they ought to
have been tried, and were therefore illegally convicted.
Then there were only three Judges before whom the case
ought to have been tried, buti n this case it hap"ened that
it was referred to the fifteen Judges, six of whom were
for the objection, and nine who thought it valid, but not
taken in time; and out of these six, were two of the three
who tried the men at Newport. Now, he had been
told by good lawyers the prisoners might have insisted
upon having the objection decided at the time, and be should
say as a matter of reason and common justice, they might
so have insisted, because that was the only Court to try
them, and the three Judges were not bound to take the
opinion of the other Judges. There was no law to that
effect, and it was a great defect that there was no Court of
Appeal upon this subject, and in the case of high treason it
was the greatest posa;ble grievance, for though the Crown
might pardon, it was necessary to get an Act of Parlia-
ment to get rid of the attaint. Then it was positively
stated—he heard that it was denied elsewhere, but he was
told so by the Counsel for the prisoners, that it was clearly
understood by them at the trial—that the prisoners should
be in no worse position on account of the objection being
referred to the Judges, than if it had been decided on the
trial. The prisoners all set forth in their petitions that
such was their understanding, and such was the opinion
of many persons who were in Court, and heard what
passed. The House, he hoped, would bear in mind,
that, in order that the laws should be respected
in the country, it was absolutely necessary there
should be an opinion among the people that they
were strictly and impartially administered. Now he must
say in this case there was a strong feeling among hun-
dreds and thousands of our countrymen, that the law had
been strained against these men on account of an offence
of which they had been guilty, and that they were punished
more on account of the natuee of the offence and the mis-
chief that might have arisen from it than from a strict
interpretation of the law. What could be more mischievous
than that such an opinion should go forth to the world ?
The people would no longer have confidence in the law un-
less it were literally and strictly administered to them ; it
had been said that pardoning these men would cause great
mischief in the country, and add to the violence which
had already been perpetrated by some misguided men.
So far from that being the case he believed in his con-
science that pardoning them would have the effect of put-
ting down all violence. He believed that so great would
be its moral effect among the working-classes, that
it would more than anything else put down all attempts
at violence.—( Hear, hear.) It was said that many
of the middle classes were so incensed at the Chartists,
that Government could not prevent these men from being
transported, and he had heard that the Cabinet had deter-
mined these men should be banged even before the point
of law was decided, and it was only on a re-consideration
of the point of law that they consented to commute the
sentence. If the argument on the point of law was good
for any thing, it was as good for a free pardon as commu-
tation ; and, after all, what was transportation for life ?
For hi; part, he saw little to choose between it and hang-
ing ; and having sat upon the Committee on the trans-
poi tation system, he confessed that the statements he lied
heard of the orders inflicted on human nature by trans-
portation made him pause, whether or not to say that trans-
portation was not a worse punishment than death, for in
ease of execution a man's life ceased at once, but in case
of transportation a main had nothing to look to but death,
after years of torture—torture not so great to the physical
man as that of the Spanish Inquisition, but as horrible as
any that could be inflicted on human nature ; and to this
these men were condemned, after allowing there was a
point of law in their favour so strong as to induce a com-
mutation of the sentence. He should be told, perhaps,
the House of Commons was net a fit place for discussing
this question ; that it had no power in this matter,
and ought not to be appealed to against the decision
of a judicial triburesl, but the House of Commons,
was the only place in which a matter of this sort could be
discussed—the only place to which the people, when they
considered themselves aggrieved, could come for redress,
and the only place co which the prisoners could apply for
justice, and it was as competent for the House to address
the Queen on any subject—the House had just as good
a right to address the Queen to grant a free pardon to
these men as on any other subject. The Government
might have taken another course, which would have satis-
fied all classes; why should they not have entered into an
agteement with the prisoners and waived their power of
execution or transportation on condition of their leaving
the country. This would have satisfied all, because the
only feeling throughout the upper and middle classes was
to get rid of these people ; sonic, indeed, there were who
were more sanguinary. and were sorry the men were not
executed, but he trusted they were a very small number—
he would now make only one other observation respecting
the lateness at which ties motion was brought forward,
and which it was necessary to make in justice to hireself
and others. He wished much to bring the matter
before the House earlier in the Session, and before
these unfortunate men had sailed for Van Die-
men's Land, and he had come down to the
blouse, night after night, prepared to do so,
end he believed that, on several occasions,
the House, and the Government, would allowed him to
love done so, for he must say the Hon. Gentleman, the
Under-Secretary- of State, had given, him every facility,
and that he had not to complain of him for anything that
had occurred upon the subject ; but upon the advice of the
legal advisers of the prisoner not to bring the matter for-4
ward, as some negotiation was pending between them and
the Government which might be interfered with by the
motion, and having the interests of the prisoners at heart,
and believing that the legal advisers of the prisoners had
so, he had put it off on two or three occasions, though he
told them he believed their negotiation would have no
better fate that he apprehended for his motion. He be-
lieved great misrepresentation had prevailed upon this
subject, and that those Gentlemen were accused of not
being so urgent as they should have been ; and also for
not arguing the question before the House. But his an-
swer was that he and they had done what they be-
lieved, and had been advised, was best. He was
sorry to have troubled the House so long upon the sub-
ject, and would now move that an Address be presented to
her Majesty, praying that her Majesty will be graciously
pleased, under the special circumstances of the case, to
grant a free pardon to Frost, Williams, and Jones.
Mr. HUME said, that in rising to second the motion of
his Right Hon. Friend, he did so not on the merits of the
prisoners, because he could not but think that the offence
of those parties had been most detrimental in every point
of view. It had been detrimental to the cause of public
liberty.—(Hear, hear.) He should say that no occur-
rence in his time had given him more concern than the
lamentable results of that rash and foolish undertaking.
He did not rise, therefore, for the purpose of palliating- the
offence of the parties in question, but he believed
that a very general impression existed among
large masses in the country that those parties
had nut been treated in the way in which other individuals
under similar circumstances might have expected. He
hoped that he would hoar something stated by the Right
lion. Member, the Under Secretary of State, which
might remove that impression, because it was one of the
most injurious ones he could conceive. He thought that
the prisoners in this case had not had all the advantages
which the Act of Parliament had provided for them, and
that the lists, as had been often stated, bad not been duly
delivered. He had been informed that in criminal cases
it was not usual to refer questions of the kind to such a
tribunal as the 18 Judges, and he had been told that it eras
usual for Judges to give their decisions immediately.
When Sir F. Pollock had asked on the trial if the pasties
would be in no worse condition than if the case had been
decided on at once, the answer of the Judges was that
they should not. The sitting of the fifteen Judges was
extra-judicial, and it would be hard to decide the
degree of authority to which it should be entitled.
He had been told that that was the first case of hinds
treason in which reference had been made to such a tri-
bunal. The case appeared to him but of the ordinary
forms of law, and that was the opinion of the various peti-
tioners who had addressed the House. So far as he could
judge, the public feeling was to a great extent in favour
of that view ; and he could not but express his regret that
there should ever have been any necessity for the motion
of his Hon. Friend. _ _ _

...---- -
Mr. FOX MA ULE said that he was extremely sorry
to have to address himself to the House on a motion of
that nature ; and he deeply regretted that the Hon. _Mem-
ber for Westminster should have thought it right to have
made that House a Court of Appeal from that tribunal
which the seconder of the motion had admitted could
alone have decided the case. The Honourable Gen-
tleman who brought forward the motion had en-
tirely laid aside all reference to the prerogative of
mercy as exercised by the Government, xvhile he
aked for an address to the
.Crown as an act of right and
justice in favour of the individuals convicted on the occa-
sion. The Hon. Gentleman had stated that those three
individuals had been tried for a political offence, but in his
(Mr. F. Maule's) mind the crimes with which these indi-
viduals were charged was of a stronger nature than rt mere
olitical offence.—( Hear, hear.) The obj 'ct those itid:-

viduals had in view was to overturn the whole system of
I
society in this country, and by an act of violence to strike
at the very roots of the constitution under which we lived.
A preliminary objection had been taken et the trial that
the forms required by the law of treason had not been
complied with, inasmuch as the delivery of the list of wit-
nesses, and of the indictment, had not been simultaneously
made. The point had been referred to the fifteen Judges,
but it had been stated that two of the three Judges who
presided at the trial were of opinion that the objection was
a valid one.—( Hear, hear.) It had been also contended
that if they had been of that opinion at first the case
would have been decided in favour of the prisoners. Now
it appeared that the fact of these two Judges having re-
fused to decide on the matter, showed that a great doubt
existed in their minds as to the point brought before them
—such a doubt that they reserve the point for the
consideration of their brethren, the fifteen Judges. It had
been said to his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny
that that was not the common practice. He believed, how-
ever, that his Hon. Friend would hear from persons more
conversant with the law than he (Mr. Maule) was, that in
that assertion he was mistaken. From the nature of the
trial he thought it was clear that the Judges had given the
unhappy men all the advantages they could possibly enjoy
under the circumstances of the cases. Sir F. Pollock, in
allusion to the reservation of the point, said that " he pre-
sumed the effect of it would be to place his client, Frost, in
precisely the same situation as if the case had been de-
cided at once." The Chief Justice states that "it was a
very common course taken at Assizes, that when a point
arose which suggested any difficulty to the Judge, he
should refer it to the fifteen Judges." Sir F. Pollock
went on to say that " in the event of their Lordships being
of opinion that the objection ought to be raised at the trial,
nis client, Frost, would be placed in the same situation as
if it had been so raised." The Chief Justice replied,
" No doubt he will be in the same situation if, on consult-
ing with the Judges, we think that the objection ought to
have prevailed ; the case will be as if it actually had pre-
vailed." " And the verdict," said Sir F. Pollock. "will
be given accordingly." " No," said the Chief Justice,
" because that would be perfectly regular." When the
case had been referred to the fifteen Judges, it followed, in
his opinion, as a matter of course, that the Judges
could do nothing but follow their decision. The
first intimation of that decision was given by
the fifteen Judges in a letter addressed to the
Secretary of State for the Home Department. He would
read that letter to the House, as it detailed the facts of
the case more clearly and explicitly than he (Mr. Maule)
could have done. The Hon. Gentleman here proceeded
to read the letter in question, which was to this effect--
that they bad the honour to inform his Lordship that the
arguments in the three cases of Frost, Williams, and
Jones, against the Queen, have been closed, and that the
Judges, after considering the question, had come to the
following determination on the two questions—namely,
first, a majority of the Judges, in the proportion of 9 to 6,
were of opinion that the delivery of the lists of witnesses
had not been a good delivery in point of law; and,
secondly, a majority of the Judges, in a proportion of
9 to 6, were of opinion that the objection had not been 1
taken in due time. All the Judges, however,
admitted, that if the objection had been made
in due time, the effect would be a postpone-
ment of the trial, in order to give time to arrange
the list. With regard to the remark of the Hon. Member
for Westminster, that all the Judges had agreed that if the
objection had beer, made in time the effect would have
been a postponement of the trial, he ( Mr. Mauls) could
only say that all that the Hon. Member had stated with
regard to whether the prisoners should have been tried a
day sooner or a day later, did not in his k Mr. Mettle's) mind
carry any great weight with it. On the trial of the pri-
soners there had been no objection raised to the ef-
fect that they had not had sufficient time to prepare their
defence. That was not all—for a memorial had been sub-
mitted to the Government by the Hon and Learned
Gentlemen who had acted as Counsel for the prisoners in
the case, in which it had been stated that the prisoners
had not had the full benefit of the law. To that memorial
the Judges bad sent an answer, which fully entered into
the case, and which he wished to reed to the House.
The answer, which was read at length by the
Rig tit Honourable Gentleman, stated that the Judges had
perused and considered the memorial of Sir F. Pollock,
who had been Counsel for Frost. The Judges proceeded
to state that the memorial had been founded on an entire
misconstruction of the law, and on a misrepresentation of
it, as far es they were concerned. The uniform practice
they said had been, as far back as they had been able to
trace it, that if a Judge at the trial had felt any serious
doubt as to an objection that had been raised on a point of
law, he should decide the point against the prisoner and
allow the trial to proceed, reserving his decision on the
point of law, in order to take the advice and opinions of
all the other Judges thereon. The letter then went on to
state, that after consulting those other Judges, and hearing
the case argued, the opinion of those Judges should be
taken and the decision of the majority of the Judges bound
the Judge' who had tried the question—( Hear, hear)—
arid their opinion should be considered law. If the opinion
of the Judges was in favour of the prisoners the course
was that the Judge who had presided at the trial should
make a communication to that effect to the Secretary of
State. The letter concluded by stating that the fact of two
of the Judges who tried the case having been favourable to
the objection made no difference in the case whatever.
The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to say that such
was the opinion of the three Judges themselves who had \
presided at the trial, and consequently no opinion they
could afterwards come to could affect the trial. The
Judges were of opinion that under the circumstances I
there was no ground whatever to entitle the pri-
soners to a free pardon. The Government bad
therefore nothing to do but to adhere to the first deci-
sionof the Judges, and with regard to the motives
assigned for the Royal clemency, he could assure the
House that that clemency was to be attributed to
nothing but a desire to vindicate, as far as might by found
necessary, the laws of the land, and those who assigned
it to any other motive were completely mistaken —( Hear,
bear.) The more he considered the circumstances of the
case, the more be felt that those who were favourably
disposed towards the prisoners, ought to be persuaded that
commutation of their punishment was as much as they had
a right to expect. With regard to a statement of the
Hen. Member for Westminster, that transportation for
life was a punishment as severe as death, he would only
say that he had never known an instance in which
any man seemed to prefer being executed to trans-
portation for life, and he had never hoard of an in-
stance in the which the family
of that individual had
not expressed their gratitude at a sentence having been
so commuted. For the various reasons he had assigned,
he felt it his duty to oppose the motion of the Hon.
Member. —( Hear, hear. )

Mr. T. Ii.)UN CONIBE said that there was much in
what had fallen from the Right Hon. Gentleman, from
which he entirely differed. There was nothing, how-
ever, in which he differed more from him than in the con-
cluding part of his speech, in which he had tried to mix up
the case of the prisoners in question with the point of law
that had been raised. If it were a mere question of crime,
and not of law, he should certainly say that there never
were in the annals of this country three men whose lives
could he more justly sacrificed than the lives of Frost,
Williams, and Jones. That was not, however, the ques-
tion. The real point to be determined was an interpreta-
tion of an Act of Parliamero ; and, ah ‘tever might be the
intricacies of the law, he should say that the case might
have been decided on by a simple reference to the dictionary
of Dr. Johnson. Such a reference he believed would clearly
show that the prisoners had not been dealt with according
to the provisions of the law for treason. He wished to oh
serve that he felt very much surprised at the absence from
the House of the Counsel for the prisoner on the present
occasion, and the more so, as some of those Honourable
Gentleman had advised his Hon. Friend, the Member for
Westminster, to postpone his motion in the hope that
something might in the meantime be done for the prison-
ers. There was one point in the case, which though him-
self unacquainted with the law, he wished to refer to. He
had received a letter from Mr. Thomas, the Counsel for
Williams on the trial, and in that letter Mr. Thomas
stated that he had taken the objection in time.—( Hear,
hear.) He had taken it, he said, before the
Jurymera were called. The Attorney- General
had asked him if he objected to the trial, and he said that
he objected to the service of the list, and it would be for
the Attorney-General to see if, under the circumstances, he
could go on with the case. The Attorney-General, how-
ever, impanelled the Jury, and lie (Mr. Thomas) had no
power to prevent him from doing so. He had again taken
the objection on the first witness been called, and after-
wards when Mr. Baron Parke was about to sum up. It
might be expedient to transport those people, but that was
not an excuse for sending them to a penal settlement. He
thought they were entitled to their discharge.
Sir S. L US HING TON thought that although the dis-
cussion of this question ought not to have taken place in
the House, yet it might serve an important and useful pur-
pose, by dissipating the opinion which prevailed amongst
some portions o the working classes, that the
conviction and sentence were not according to law. The
conviction and sentence wen:, in fact, consistent with law
and justice, and with every question of expediency. It
was important to have the admission of his Hon. Friend
the Member for Finsbury, that the crime of which those
persons had been convicted was of the most atrocious de-
scription. It was, in reality, a deliberate attempt to over-
throw the liberties of the country, and the institutions
upon which all civilized governments must stand ; and the
consequences would disabuse many of the, opinion that
mere political differences could be admitted as an excuse
for a violent opposition to the laws of the land. Ile could
not help observing that a case might occur in which an
appeal to that House, in the last extremity, ought to be
made; yet be deprecated the attempt to make the House a
Court of Appeal, in criminal cases, against the Courts of
Law, and the prerogative of the Crown. The moral
guilt of the parties was admitted.—(
• =ea r. ) The single
point to be considered, if the House were to judge of the
sentence at all, was whether, in the course of the trial, a
different decision ought to have been given as to a question of
firm, which would entitle the parties to an entire acquittal, '
—( Hear, hear.) Ho agreed that the question had been
argued by the Hon. Member for Finsbury as if he belonged
to the profession of the law.—( Hear, hear ) The non..
delivery of the list of witnesses did not occasion any in-
convenience to the prisoners, for it was admitted that they
had received all the documents within the time at which
they were entitled to receive them. The Judges at the
trial reserved the point of law for the decision of the whole
body of the Judges, and the majority decided in favour of
the course pursued in the progress of the trial, If the
minority of the Judges had beenoaugldaintshy thentethepr cisonaellrsupanodn
the majority in their favour, w
the House of Commons to address the Crown for a re-
versal of the decision of the majority? The usual course
was, that when a majority of the Court was against the
Point raised in favour of the prisoner, to decide the
point against him, and to reserve it for the decision of
the whole of the Judges. Not only was he of opinion
that the decision of the Judges was right, but that anything
that might be done to alter it would be productive of in-
finite mischief.—( Hear, hear.) He complimented Sir F.
Pollock for the zeal and talent which he had displayed, but
he was sure that if his Hon. and Learned Friend were ap-
pealed to on the present question, conscienti,,us opinion
would be opposed to the motion.—( Hear, bear.) There

was only the opinion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury
against the Judges. If the motion were agreed to this
would be the first time when this House set itself up as a
Court of Appeal in criminal cases. Hundreds had gone
to the scaffold upon decisions in which the Judges were of
diff.rent opinions.

Mr. DUNCOMBE said that ought not to havo been
the case.—( Hear. )

Sir S. LUSHINGTON differed from his Hon. Friend,
and thought that the opinion of the majority of the Judges
• ught in such cases to prevail. Nothing could be
moreinjurious than the interference of the House between
the sentence of the Judges and the prerogative of the Crown.
He believed sincerely that the mercy which had been ex-
tended to those persons had been wisely extended. It
was in accordance with the principles of justice, and in
conformity with the wishes of the nation, which had long
been opposed to capital punishments—( Hear, hear)—at
the same time that the public were convinced that the sen-
tence was according to law.
Mr. W AKLE Y denied that his Hon. Colleague bad
shown himself equal to a lawyer, as he had argued the
case solely upon the principles of common sense.—( Hear,
and a laugh.) He had adverted particularly to the former
practice, where a doubt was entertained by the Judges.
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Sir S. Lushin4ton)
said that hundreds had been executed, on whose cases
there had been a difference of opinion amongst the Judges;
and that this House was not competent in such cases to
decide. What I was the House competent to make
laws and not to comprehend them ?—( Hear, and a laugh.)
The Judges had apparently first decided, by 9 to 6, that
Monday was Saturday, and then, by 6 to 9, that Saturday
was Monday.--( Laughter.) And was it to be said that
their decisions were not to be questioned in that House?
When their decisions were calculated to attract respect, he
hoped they would obtain it; but it was impossible for any
person of sense to respect absurdity. It was exceedingly
unfortunate that the question came on in the absence of the
Learned Counsel for the prisoners, who had not been con-
tent with their able services at the trial, but had ever since
been indefatigable.—( Hear, hear.) It would be improper
there to discuss the merits of the case as to the prisoners'
guilt or innocence. But the country would feel that
no man ought to be convicted who had not
had the full bsneilt of every provision which
the law made for him.—( Hear, hear.) Feeling as he
did that the great constitutional question involved in the
case could not be done justice to in the absence of the
Learned Counsel he trusted that his Hon. Friend would
not damage the case by pressing now for a division, espe-
cially as the delay of a week or to could not possibly pre-
judice the case.
Mr. LEADER said he did not see what reason there
was for not dividing. He could not see how the priso-
ners' case could be damaged by a division now. As to
the Learned Counsel they could again bring it forward if
they thought proper at any future time.--( Hear, bear. )
And so far as the prospect of a small mino-
rity went, be had always expected it ; and bad
stated that if the prisoners should be led to hope that
any effect would be produced by his bringing the question
fo. ward, those who so deceived them would be acting ab-
surdly, cruelly, and wickedly, though he had consented to
bring the case before the House, feeling that strict justice
had not been done to the prisoners.
The House divided, and the numbers were—
For the motion
Against it
Majority —63
The Report of the Navy Estimates having been
brought up,
Mr. HUME objected to the votes being passed without
further discussion, and the gallery was cleared for a divi-
sion, but after some minutes re-opened, as none had taken
place, the resolutions having been agreed to.
The Report on the Army Estimates having been
brought up and agreed to, the House adjourned at a Quar-
ter to Eleven.