The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-02 00:00:00

opportunity of giving notice of his intention on the
subject.
Mr. GUINNESS said no subject of greater im-
portance could possibly come under the consideration
of the House, and he trusted it would not be disposed
of in a hasty manner. For 25 years he had been a
receiver in the Irish Ccurt of Chancery, and no one
was more competent to advise the House upon the
abuses connected with the management of pro-
perty under the control of the Irish Court
of Chancery than himself, and he sincerely hoped this
matter would be postponed. To show the necessity
for not disposing of this question hurriedly, he would
just mention three cases of abuse which had come
under his own knowledge. For twenty-one years a
large and valuable property in the county of Cork had
been under his charge as Receiver, during which time
not one single shilling had been expended to improve the
condition of the tenantry living upon it. The second
case was a property yielding 4,500/. a year. It had
been nine years under his care, and during those nine
years the sum of 1681. was all that had been expened
in cultivating the condition of the property
or improving the property. The third case was
one of a property in the county of Meath,
yielding 1,6001. per annum. Upon that pro-
perty, during the ten years it had been in the
Court of Chancery there had only been 6001. ex-
pended for the benefit or improvement of the
tenantry.—(Hear, hear. He humbly submitted that
these three cases, which were only a few he had se-
lected from a large number of a similar character,
constituted good grounds for asking the interference
of the House, and now that they were so anxious to
ameliorate the condition of the sister kingdom, he
hoped they would not lose sight of the large amount
of landed property that was unfortunately placed under
controul of the Court of Chancery, but they would
teach that Court that property which came within its
jurisdiction had its duties as well as its rights.--
(Hear, hear.) The results of the expenditure upon
the property he had last mentioned were so remark-
able that he must beg the patience of the House
while he related them. The 6001. had been ex-
pended during the last three years at the rate
of 2001. per annum, and the result of the
expenditure of the first year, namely 1845, was that
he received 1,000/. over and above the annual rent, in
liquidation of arrears. In 1846 he also received
1,000/. sbvve the rent, and in 1847, during all the
distress that had pervaded the entire country, he had
received 6001. over and above the rent in payment of
arrears.— (Cheers.)
Sir GEORGE GREY could assure the House
that there was no objection to giving the information
asked for, and all that his Right Hon. Friend had
required was simply that the motion should be put
in such a form as was best fitted for obtaining the in-
formation.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. R. OSBORNE said, under these circum-
stances he would not press his motion in its present
shape.
The motion was then withdrawn.

GOLD AND SILVER COIN.
Dr. BO WRING was understood to postpone his
motion for returns relating to the gold and silver coin,
bullion, and bank notes in circulation, issued from the
Bank of England since January 1845, and other
returns connected with the bank.
RAILWAY BILLS.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER, Mr. Hayter and Sir Thomas Birch
were added to the Select Committee on Railway Bills.

ADJOURNING DEBATES.

Mr. BROTHERTON postponed the following
motion until Wednesday :—" That when any new
business is brought on after twelve o'clock at night, if
it be moved and seconded, that the debate on such
question be adjourned, Mr. Speaker shall immediately
declare the debate adjourned, without putting the
question to the vote.
COVICTION OF INNOCENT PERSONS.

Mr. EWART rose, he said, to ask a question of
the Right Hon. Baronet, which he conceived of the
greatest importance, as it affected the administration
of justice in this country. Several cases had recently
occurred of persons being found guilty whose innocence
had subsequently been proved. A girl, named Mary
Ann Turpin, was recently convicted at the Central
Criminal Court, and sentenced to six months' impri-
sonment, for stealing a watch. A person was after-
wards convicted of the same offence, and the girl re-
ceived a free pardon. The next case was that of
Thomas Whalley, who was sentenced at the Stafford
Assizes to 1.5 years' transportation. After lying in
prison eight months, his innocence was made manifest,
and he was liberated. The newspapers had recently
furnished another case—that of a person named
Charles Butler, who having been wrongfully
convicted, also received a free pardon. There
were, he believed, many other cases. Three
men, who had been for years in Van Dieman's Land,
are proved to be innocent, they were vardoned, and
received 101. each as compensation. 'lo him it ap-
peared a solecism in language to say that a man who
was innocent should receive a free pardon ; because he
was entitled to his liberty without its aid. Sir
Samuel Romilly introduced a Bill to give compensa-
tion to innocent parties who were convicted ; but he
did not live to see his benevolent purpose carried
out. lie (Mr. Ewart) considered that a Court
of Appeal should be established for criminal
as well as civil cases. It was true a writ of error
might be instituted in a criminal case in a point of
but such a court could not entertain any criminal
question which vested upon facts alone. Sir Fitzroy
Kelly, who was not now in Parliament, had intro-
duced a Bill to effect so desirable an object; but
it did not meet with the support of the House. He
wished now to know, looking at theses, to which he
had called the Right Hon. Baronet's attention,
whether the Government intended to establish such
a tribunal ?
Sir G. GREY said, in simply replying to the ques-
tion, it w mid be unnecessary for him to enter into
the whole question with reference to the necessity of
establishing a tribunal like the one suggested. He
considered, however, that if a tribunal of the kind
had been in existence it would have Worded no re-
medy in any one of the cases brought under review. So
unfavourable an opinion did Sir Fitzroy Kelly
entertain with respect to a court of criminal appeal,
that whilst he sat in Parliament from 1444 to 1846 he
did not re-introduce his Bill. With respect to the case
of the girl Turpin, if a court of appeal had been in ex-
istence she must have waited to the ensuing term before
an appeal could have been lodged; and if a new trial
were granted it could not have taken place until a
future session. The Recorder wrote to him on the
24th of October, stating that a person named
Walsh had been convicted of the same offence,
and that consequently the girl was innocent. On
that very day an order was sent from the Home-
office to the prison ordering her immediate liberation.
—(Hear, hear.) Her liberation could not have been
effected more speedily. Then with respect to the case
of Thos. W hal ley for which he had received much blame.
After a proctracted trial he was convicted ; for three
months that case never came under his (Sir G. Grey's)
attention, and he never heard of it until a memorial
was presented to him in June. The usual course was
then taken. On the 16th of June he referred that
document to Mr. Sergeant Gaslee, who heard the
case. Some considerable time elapsed before he (Sir
G. Grey) heard anything further of the matter; but in
the month of August, at his suggestion Mr. Sergeant
Gaslee was reminded that he ought to make his report;
on the receipt of the letter, Mr. Sergeont Gaslee
stated that he had delayed making his report
in conequence of the writ of the prisoner's
counsel.--(Hear, hear.) On the 22th of August
he (Sir George Grey) read Mr. Sergeant Gaslee's
report, but it was of such a nature as to require fur-
ther consideration. The first was upon the
evidence that had been adduced. Sergeant
Gaslee was satisfied of the correctness of
the verdict, but further facts coming to his (Sir
G. Grey's) knowledge, he referred the case to one
of the Barons of the Exchequer, who also con-
sulted with Mr. Sergeant Gaselee, and on the
9th of October he received their report, both of them
unanimously considering that the verdict was wrong,
and that the prisoner ought to be discharged ;
and immediately upon that report being re-
ceived the man was discharged.—(Hear, hear.)
With respect to the case of Charles Butler, he was
discharged upon a medical certificate that his further
confinement would endanger his life. With regard to
the three prisoners transported to Van Diemen's
Land improperly, it was true that they were brought
home, and had 101. each. With respect to the court
of appeal to which the Honourable Member had
referred, in
criminal cases, he for one should
be glad to get rid of the responsibility that
attached to the office he had the honour to hold, but as
to the establishing of such courts, he would not then
go into the policy of the adoption of such a course.
Mr. DEERING enquired of the Secretary of
State for the Home Department whether it be
his intention to enforce the discretionary power
vested in him by the Act 7 and 8 Victoria, c. 126,
where an asylum for pauper lunatics shall not have been
begun upon before August next in any county of
England, the funds for defraying the expense of
the same being forbidden by the same statute. as well
as by the Act 9 and 10 Victoria, c. 84, to be raised
at a higher rate of interest than five per cent.; or
whether be means to reserve such exercise of his in-
tention until moved to do so through the medium of
presentment by the local authorities.
Sir G. GREY said that if it appeared that the jus-
tices in any county failed in the execution of their
duty, he should not fail to exercise the discretion
vested in him.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
On the order of the day being read for the ad-
journed debate for the appointment of a Select Com-
mittee to inquire into the causes of the late monetary
pressure,
Mr. URQUAHART rose and said that the Par-
liament were met at this period for the pur-
pose of onsidering the cause of public dis-