The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-11 00:00:00

17,11 E SUN; LON 24, VVEbN'ESI) AV VVENINO MARCH 11, 1843.

et midnight. On their arrival in the tewn they were to
lave taken posseselen of it and the bridge, and by a precon
certed signal it had been agreed upon that the mail shoed be
stopped, and its non- arrival was to have been the regnel at
• Birmingham and the northern districts that they bed neeses-
sion of the town, and a General rising of the Teeple was to
follow.—( Hear.) Now, ghat were the facts proved ? At the
trial, the Crown was represented by the present Lord Campbell,
who was then Attornev-General, and by the Solicitor-General,
the present Member 'for Worcester. Chief Justice Tindal, a
most able, distinguished, and humane Judge, charged the jury
upon that cccasien, and in that charge he charatteristed the
offence as one of high treason. During the triel the teeleonees
had a'l the advantages of having for their iteelenee most able
and learned counsel ; that defence stood unrivalled for legal
ingenuity, end ev, ry source e,f, legal eloquence and law was
exhausted in their fsvotar. Tee jury weighed well all the
evidence with the neeatest care and eeliberatime, and the result
of that deliberate care was a verdict, of guilty. Here the
Right Hon. Gentleman read an extract from the sentence of
the Learned Judge, which was to the effect that the offence of
high treason had been clearly proved against the prisoners, and
sentence of death was passed upon them. He (Sir James
Graham) then continued to say, that a difference of opinion
having, however, arisen with regard to the strict Irgality of
the sentence, in consequence of the point raised, her Majesty
was recommended to commute the sentence to transportation.
Now, let him ask the Haase to consider whether that sentence
was one which ought to he remitted. He did not wish to aggra-
vate the case, but let him remind the House, that in conse-
quence of Frost having been considered a person possessed of
great infitmiec in that part of the country, he had confided to
him her Majesty's commission for the preservation of the peace,
and that confi leneehe had abused in the manner already known
to the House, and therefore, in considering the justice of his
sentence, he coeld not overlook this gross breach of confidence.
—( Hear, near.) Nor could he stop here, for he should call
the attention of the Henget to the providential circum -
stance that the nigh' upon which this descent was to have
been made tiheee
I\w
and this. -*Teport was dark and tempestuous,
thought, showe d tire special intervention of Divine
P'",;tdenea, for it prevented those people from entering the
town before day-Treat..--(Hear. ) \Veen the columns of men
arrived in the town, one of those, columns was ftrdered up to a
certain point by Frost, wlio, let him ( Sir J. Graham) remark,
was not to be found at the head of that column, but he was
found in a hiding-place. How much of the sentence of those
prisoners had already been enforced ? Only five years. Now,
according to all the ordinary rules of such cases, it was not
usual to commute such a sentence until after the expiration of
at least ten years ; but in the present case, considering the
circurnstences under which the punishment had been inflicted,
he certainly could not recommend to her Majesty that it should
be commuted. He was far from not sympathising with per
sans condemned to punishment, hut in this case he should say,
that all his sympathies were enlisted on the side of the widows
aryl orphans that had been made by the conduct of Frost
(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Ile did think that this sentence
should be allowed to take its full course, in order to show to
others, who, though bold in counsel, were not so in action, or
foremost in the ranks they urged on, that when the
law reached them they weuld he sure to receive punishment.
(Heae, hear.) Far be it from him to say that mercy ought
not, in certain cases, to be exercised, but under the present cir-
cumstances he could not recommend her Majesty to remit the
sentence.--( Hear, hear.)
Mr. MACAULAY, whose opening observations were not
audible in the gallery, was understood to say that there existed
no connexion whatever between the letters produced, as some
Hon. Members were disposed to think, as the letters had been
written at different periods ; and though published, he doubted
if they could in any way inluence or prejudice the case then
before the House. With respect to the first of these
letters, of 1842, he thought it would be very much out of place
were he then to go over the grounds which he did on the for-
mer occasion ; but he could not refrain from saying that these
letters contained not a single observation or word by which
he was not then fully prepared to abide. —(Hear, hear.)
However, he would not suffer himself to be turned away from
the line of discussion, but would merely ask Hon. Gentlemen,
and simply request each of them who entertained a doubt on
the statement, to fully enter with him on the consideration of
the matter.—( Hear, hear.) Now, setting aside the
question of the lett rs by which, he repeated, he was pre-
pared to stand, he should declare that he had a preliminary
objection to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, Mr. Dun-
combe. He had a strong objection to any interference by
that House with the exclusive prerogative of the Crown. No
doubt the House had a right to advise her Majesty, through
her Ministers, as regarded the exercise of that prerogative ;
but certainly discretion should impose a restraint in such
cases that they should not overlook or disregard. He ad-
mitted that there were some prerogatives vested in the Crown,
in the exercise of which Ministers would be much to blame
if they did not seek the advice of that House—such as
matters connected with the command of the army, and Mlles.
important branches, in regard to which the House sineald be
most chary. It was through no superstitious fttitiing for the
birth of a Prince of Wales that the royal prerogative was
prayed to be exercised ; but the reason was obvious, for it
never was exercised save at the advice and by the recommenda-
tion of these with whom the responsibility of the safety of the
community rested.—(Hear, hear.) It was a solt.mn and
awful duty to be charged with the trust of the public peace;
to preserve peace and order to society and property, and at
the same time to do so with the smallest infliction of suffering
compatible with the attainment of the great end and object.—
(Hear, hear.) Now, his view of the question was this—he
conceived that the prerogative of mercy was less likely to be
abused when exerted in conformity with the advice of those
whose high and important duty it was to watch over the public
security and the public peace, than if it depended upon the
birth of a Prince or Princess Royal.—( Hear, hear, and a
laugh") But if once the precedent of an abuse of that privi-
lege were set, by that House entertaining every prayer that
might be presented by Honourable Gentlemen on behalf
of their constituents, they need have no apprehension
of its not being largely followed up.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
Were there no scenes occurring in the country that might serve
to act as warnings against the exercise of such a sympathy ?,
There were such scenes in abundance. They had the case of
the hypocrite who, about twelve months since, had been con-
victed on a charge of poisoning an unfortunate woman, who was
bound to him by many ties, and in whose favour was pleaded
religious character, standing, society and position, yet they had
petitions crowding the table, praying the exercise of the royal
prerogative. Again, had they not learned and pious dignitaries
interfering for an unhappy woman, and representing her as an
excellent woman, one who would be most invaluable in the
colonies, as a teacher of morality, a woman, in fact, perfect in
all the cardinal virtues, save that she mixed a quantity of arsenic
in her father's breakfast one morning?—( Hear, hear, and
laughter.) Now if the House interfered in these matters, every
lion. Gentleman would be constrained and required to present
petitions, praying the clemency of the Crown on behalf of ``re
'e
most serious offenders ; so that it was absolutely ecessary to
make a stand on the present occasion. As regarded the
clemency of the Crown, he would much rather entrust
it in the hands of the Worst Ministry, than to
the best House of Co:emces, There was a plain
course before them ; an is while they had a Minister in whoa),
they could confide, an.;; in whom they did not ticeleec their
want of confidene,e, it was their plain duty anti eiident wisdom
to leave the OP_-estion in his hands; ana as far as he was totieserhed
he could eaoCcontemplate why the 'present treasure gleteld Meet
with support. If he should "ise at all intltreked to interfere in
..
suet,. cases, it would be in the eettht of such severities being
I).".actised, as were exercised in the reign of James 11. Some such
case as that would make the blood boil ; but was the present
that description of thence?—( Hear.) What were the circum-
stances? Three fellows assemble together four thottsand or
five thousand men, a-med—some of them with gutty; scythes,
pikes, end other deadly weapons. They Mitch at midnight,
attack a house, fire on the Queen'ri troops, and wound one of
her Majesty's justices of the peate while in the discharge of his
duty—and wound him badly also.--(" Not badly," from an
Hon, Member.) Unless his (the Right Hon. Gentleman's)
recollection served him badly, Sir Thomas Williams was badly
wounded on the occasion.--(1-lear, hear ) Nose Whit *at the
object of the movement? Was it not ihtenSled to have been
general ?—( Hear.) It had been proved in evidence that the
object was to excite to a 'general rising; and he should assert
that the language cf Chief-Justice Tindal on the occasion was
by no meats too strong or too severe. Let them imagine
the feartlil struggle that might have ensued between the two
parties which the outbreak would of neteesity call up ; no man
that they had ever read or heard of could convey to them an
adequate notion of its ferocity. The wars of the White and
Red Roses, rue of tire Cavaliers and Roundheads, would bear no
comparison with the scenes that might end would result from
that awful outbreak were it not so speedily crusheds(ilear,
hear.) All that the imagination eotilci Conceive could not
come up to the reality ; and a, shock would have been pro-
duced, certain to be teen hot alone throughout England, but
throughout the erifeerssl world, the consequences of which
would in eget to come be deplored by their children and their
children.—( Hear, hear. ) Btteh We're the objects
which the unfortunate men had it Vie* on whose behalf the
House was then selietted to interfere; but would
the House tryst tat 'ease leniently ? Before it did so it should
first lust:Sire, 'that the motives were that impelled the unfortu-
nate glen to act as they had done. Was their motive a trifling
one ? Quite tire reverse.—e Hear, hear.) The crime was one
that included all other ceitftee against society. Ile spoke not
then of the unhappy multitude engaged in the outrage, but of
the ringleaders, to whom severity should be practised. The
Motive of Frost no doubt was success, and the hope of changing
his position from a linendraper to the protectorship
of the kingdom—the leading Member of the Committee of
public safety, a second Robespierre, possessing boundless means
of gratifying his love of distinction and flattery of the highest
degree-....that was the motive which he believed impelled him.
—( Hear and a laugh). Now, was it possible that that House
could think of awarding less punishment to the men convicted
of high treason,-and of the intention to subvert society, than
would be awarded a mere clerk for the robbery of his em-
ployer's till , or a shopman for the abstraction of a few yards of
ribbons ?—( Hear, hear.) It was impossible that there could
be an end of crime, under the existence of such temptation,
unless the punishment bore some proportion to the crime com-
mitted. The Canadian rebels had been instanced ; but there
was no analogy between the cases, for as regarded them, the
ringleaders were hanged, and then an amnesty granted ;
whereas, in the present case the ringleaders
had not been hanged, whilst an amnesty had
also been granted. (Hear hear.) He was not
about to trouble the House further, as he conceived he had said
sufficient in vindication of what he had set out with. He ap-
proved of the part taken by Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite,
and he trusted the House would not interfere to wrest from
the Crown the exercise of a great and high prerogative.—
( Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI said he was very glad that the Hon.
Gentlettian, who had just sat down, had vindicated his letters.
it was always to him (Mr D.), as also, he felt, to the House
agreeable to listen toj the Hottoerable Gentleman vindicate
these celebrated letters, which plch!imi atl effe,4
the time het yet tithe foreneAteri. He wished -otheiet,
t
Honotiraliee tNntlnrrelen, fling as eminent a position
as the Meet lion. Member for Eciinburghs.WOuld rib and
vindicate other letters which had toety Winch influence on
public opinion. He belieVed it they followed that example
-the present debate tVotlld be able to stand comparison With e.oy
that on previous oueasiens had occupied th'etr ellitt'stinn. tie
begged to assure the Instate ttiat Lir trespassed on it with great
relectante ; but he Could not refrain from stating that many
years ago he (Mr. Disraeli) was in one of the smallest
minorities that ever came off in that House upon the present
subject; a minority, in fact, of four, on which occasion he voted
in favour of the present identical question. He had not the
moral courage to refrain from coming forward tot
press an opinion which he then vindicated by his vote; vs
however, thought it was impossible to put s•-• - -se,
crime of which the prisoners had h- .at of view the
crime that included all rot— eeen convicted—it was a
also to say, the' t ..ere.—( Hear, hear.) He was bound
they b- oe had ever considered the sentence to which
• -tan es —( Hear, hear.) It might be well
bee:. euielected was as lenient as any sentence could be
said that, in a case where the crime was so awful and the sen-
tence":he circumstances.—( unrli::
so lenient, it was not the duty of that House to come
forward on the present as on previous occasions. It would be
very difficult to meet an objection which found sympathy in
every breast e but they should consider the circumstances under
which all human transactions occurred. On the previous oc-
casion, being the only Tory Member that voted in the minority,
he could not forget that they lived in a period of great political
excitement, and that a system called "agitation" existed
for several years, by which men became Ministers,
parties had been transferred, and Administrations raised to
power, the members of which previously held seats at opposite
sides of the Houie, • whether Secretaries of State or not he
was not going to say.—(Laughter.) That that report had
been very prevalent, and that there existed a loose and de-
baughed state of public feeling in the miude of ignorant and

inexperienced persona, induced by the great example set them,
Which had made some erten. Ministers; and other. men in the
sifter cohntry, mere powerful than Ministers, could not be de-
hied ; and, douotless, it was influenced by such example that
led these men to play the part they did. Therefore, he
thought they should not decide on the conduct of these men
witleeut reference to the circumstances. He would not think
it right to tell them they had warred war against the Queen's
troops, for such was most inexcusable conduct. Neither would
he tell them- thee
,had excited, passions, ettil held. •ogt Or pee-
tations shltiar were illegitimate ; but which, had
illey eiteceerle I, would cease o be so.—(lleare hear.)
Although their crime was great, and the judgment on them
lei ien.t, still, when it was brought before the Hope beforealle
had felt it his duty to record his vein in their favour. lied
any circum.stanhes edurred since to change his oannion ?
'll'4 lion. and Learned Member was certainly very happy in
all his flights of eloquence, but never more happy than when
he ilustrated his arguments. He said, "Look at this case—
look at the morbid and effeminate sympathy it stirs up in the
public mind; it was this zympathy that said that a mhrdertiss
must be sent to the colonies Of this country." It was this
aending to the colonies that influenced him in the course he
had tak.n. It had been said that there had been a great insur-
rection, and that the parties raising it were traitors ; but they
were not only not punished, but were rewarded for their crimes.
He did not wish the people of England to feel (altliostgli he
did not want to do otherwise than palliate the punishment of
the sufferers)—he did not want them to feel the difference
between colonial and native punishment. Ile was so far an
advocate of native industry that he did not wish the people to
feel any exception in this instance. - (Loud laughter.)
It was this system that made Frost a slave, and
Papineau a Member of the Hnuse of Assembly. The
Hon. Member appealed to the House to turn to the reign
of James 11., which they would find replete with instances
parallel to the present case. That would be an hiterference
with crreurnste.nces on which they were not called upon to de-
cite. Here her Majesty's trove were fired upon; he might
ask were not her Majesty's troops fired upon in Canada? He
should like to have from the Right lion. Baronet the return of
li
the meeistretes that had been wounded in Canada. When the
Hon. Member appealed to the reign of James 11. as the medel
reign for treesen and sedition, was not the blood of Sedgemore
as costly as the blood spilt in the town of Newport ?--and was
the House to be appealed to to show no mercy because there
was in the reign of James 11. a rebellion in which they suffered
greater evils than in the late disturbances ? He could not deny
that the observatione of the Hon. itismber were always inte-
resting to listen to, but they had no valid arguments against the
motion of the Hon. Member fur Finsbury. One of the most
remarkable arguments of the Hon. Gentleman was, when he
told them that they were bound to support the Crown in the
exercise of the prerogatives at present in question, because it
was necessary, under all the circumstances, that they should not
question the conduct of her Majesty's advisers, but look at the
position of the Government. The Crown must not be questioned
because it receives advice from an individual who has told us
that in the present case he takes a peculiar responsibility. He
(Mr. Disraeli) would ask if the Government possessed the
confidence of that House, although it was supported by 112
gentlemen—the regenerators of this country by their
change of opinion. The Crown in the exercise of its perogative
was advised by a Minister, and to support these perogatives
the House must also support the Minister who advised the
Crown. The House was bound to consider whether that
Minister possessed the confidence of Parliament, and whether
in a week hence he might not consider it necessary that the
exercise of prerogative should he of a far different nature from
the one then in question, and that it should be exercised in that
House, because another Minister might be ready to accept the
responsibility of office. The Right Honourable Baronet, the
Home Secretary, bad commenced his speech in what he (rsir.
Disraeli) considered to he his right position. Whatever
might be his (Mr. Disraeli's) opinion on the main question, he
could have no doubt that the Minister of the Crown was to
come forward and dilate on the enormity of crime, and also re-
mark that the prerogatives of the Crown should be delicately
exercised. Nothing could be more just and politic
than the position the Right Honourable Baronet as-
sumed and then dwelt upon. He (Mr. Disraeli) knew
that a grave feeling prevailed amongst those around him with-
out conversing with them. It was difficult to answer the ques.
thin put by the Right Hon. Baronet. It was a matter of
surprise that her Majesty's Government had a fixed tet of
opinions. The Right Hon. Baronet placed himself in a clear
position, both in point of constitutional feeling, and he hoped
he might say, in loyal sentiment of feeling, and yet at the last
he says—" Preys me," (looking at the Hon. Member for Fins-
bury as if he (Mr. Duncombe) had discovered that he was of
a squeezable nature ), " to bring forward this question
on another occasion in another session perhaps
in another Parliament, and I will treat you in a
liberal manner ; at present, I wish that the exercise of
mercy should be delicately arid discreetly used. Press the
Crown and Ministry then. But although crime is enormous,
the exercise of mercy may be necessary, and this House will
be the last to interfere with it. Bring forward the motion,
then ; and although we cannot be'ln a majority now, we shall
know what to say to them." He (Mr. Disraeli) had voted for
these men years ago, and, whatever might be the opinion now,
he would not desert them. They had committed a
great crime and had received a lenient punishment. The
Government had only two courses—these men should
be pardoned, or they should be punished as an example
to society. If they were pardoned, it would be an encourage-
ment to others to feel that though they might be criminal the
dsvine faculty of mercy was still exercised in this country.
Sir J. Graham had said " Bring forward the motion again and
I do not say that we will resist your appeal." What would be
the result of that? It would be that, if these men were par-
doned by the remission of their punishment, one of the
dearest qualities of the Crown, a quality attributed only to
Majesty, would be exercised at a late period ; but would the
people feel gratitude to the Crown ? No, they would
only comment on the timidity of Government. For
these reasons he would support the Honourable Member.
if he persisted in coming to a division. He however proposed
that he should be satisfied with bringing the question forward
to pulaic attention and sympathy. The Crown might be in-
duced to view with mercy the conduct of these misguided men.
If, however, the Hon. Member pressed to a division, he (Mr.
Disraeli) should rote with him.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that he was sorry that he had been
misunderstood. The House would remember, that he had
deprecated any interference with the execution of the sentence,
and said, that the exercise of the prerogative of the Crown
ought, in his opinion, to be dispensed with ; but at the same
time, he would not be responsible for any advice to her Ma-
jesty, nor would he presume to attempt to place any limit to
the prerogative of mercy.
Mr. S. WORTLEY sal:l,, that the Hon. Member had told
them, that !tine years ago he had voted on this Ofteetion in
f'.7our of these men, He (Mr, Si Wtith,ll.,,y) was hat Surprised
at the course now takenby the Hen; Member, in kiyingtbe
same vote. He doubted) hotleeithe ithliittheit the flusie would
be swayed by the rciaehari 'Which seemed to influence the Hon.
Member's Otillii. He could not think the House would feel it
wAI just to the parties whose case was under eofleid4ratiofi, fit
introduce into title, disclisSion the pirtY feelings of common
debate and retteatks Of a per:sweat tehderi§y. Ills botiltl4fiot
help thinkirst that it ?iiiS iinhaOiete ita.ieti iti.'y .06.
Member; eh lit4f,t grounds, thought it r.ecessary to bring for-
Ward a motion to interfere with the prerogatives of many. The
Hon. Member would find that the niotion had tiaii Onsidereil
with the greatest reseeh:t by th`ditt't tlsieh; siee opposed to it, tint
it would vent little, advance his case if there was a feeling on the
part of the people—( Heate hear)—for thb rgifiaSion of
this sentences He could not Hneesik-e it core unfortunate in-
terrtiption to shh Course of that feeling than the course
no* pressed, because by removing the atrocity of the crimes
persons had committed, it intertlirpOith the plerbgetilre
of mercy, and otetederrid it atilt shore difficult to be exercised
in this t' ad. With regand to the representations made by the
Hon. Member as to the state of public feelifig, tin this siibjeot,
he (Mr. S. Wortley) begged leaVe to ditch from him. He
believed that at (hit Mement, if the Crown were to exercise
the, pteaogative of mercy towards these persons, it could hardly
take a step more calculated to shriek public opinion, He wbtild fur-
ther say, that to remit the sentente of thee(' pe,rsofis *Mild be an
act of gross injustice to neatly other minor eritnittalswhiese Mittel
had beQn teminitted under eirthinstatieoh far Mitre deserving of
rriercys bat who had not received it. What was the nature of
the crime that had been committed? The Hon. Member
spoke of it as a tumult, but it was prepared for a week before.
Would they take the case of Frost, Whose position had enabled
him to exercise a great influence over the people ? The House
had heard from the Hon. Member for Coventry what was the
state of that part of. Walt's where Frost resided ? The Hon.
Member had spoken of the act as the exercise of a
particular right.—( Hear, hear.) Were they convinced that
these personswere under the belief that they exercised a particular
right--that they were under the impression that their right
was inteefered with by law? Thistlewood had some such
motive, and he struck at once at the highest apparent cause of
the evil ; but the persons in his case were aware of the pur-
pose for which they were led. It was proved that Frost led
his men to invest the town, and attack the military regardless
of the misery he inflicted on the townspeople. What was the
charge given to the jury by the Lord Chief Justice ? He
asked the jury, did they believe that the prisoner had
ill innocent intention, or a guilty intention? did be
intend to resist the Queen's troops, and sacrifice the lives of
his fellow subjects ? What was the answer of the jury ? He
recollected the suggestion of his Learned Friend, and the ob-
servation of the Lord Chief Justice in passing sentence. The
Secretary for the Home Department had referred to that trial,
and he (Mr. S. Wortley) would also revert to it. The point
left to the jury for their consideration was whether
the intention was innocent, and whether they believed
that only a harmless demonstration was intended,
or that the intention was guilty from the first.
The Lord Chief Justice declared that the verdict met with his
entire concurrence ; that his learned brethren, along with him-
self, were all of the same opinion.—( Hear, hear.) It was
clearly proved that Mr. Frost came into Newport at the head
of many thousands with dangerous weapons, in order to take
possession of the town, preliminary to a general insurrection
throughout the country. (The Hon. Member here read an •
extract from the evidence of one of the principal witnesses
examined on the trial, to the effect that the object was to ex-
tend the insurrection all over England.) He (Mr. Wortley)
believed that the disturbances in the north of Etteland were
intimately connected with this motrement of Mr. Frost. He
doubted if the outbreak in Yorkshire, especially that' ifi
Sheffield, would have takers place, had it riot been for the
proceedings at Newport. So strong was the °pillion, of not
only the Noble Lord then at the head of the Home Depart-
ment, as well as Lord Melbourne, of the eltrerne attroliity of
the sett of the leaders in this insurrection, that they were most
unwilling to remit the sentence of deths whichwas the usual
course in extreme eritnes, when the Judges Were difidee iii
opinion, as they were in the present case, on the point raised
on behalf of the prisoners after the trial at Monmouth. It Wall
only when strongly pressed that they yielded; . Thla,.*al the
rise in which the 1:190'd t`;e:,::4lteu tipOn to so- iicii toe Z.7.;:0;„.n ;cif
the exercise of
.clemency and mercy.-(Hear, hear.) This
case, hi his qpiniori was not one calling fOr any especial isle
terferehee; whit+ teas only to be eitereised in extreme .kias&s.
It was not justifiable in the present instance, for the objection
raised on behalf of the prisoners, and on which the Judges were
diVided,no*brought forivard as an argument for the ekereiee of
inere'ee was ptirely of a teelsinie'til Cliareieiselh It Ares ei edit of tlial
too great indulgence of the Crown. Mr Maule, cn being strongly
• 4
tidare:fe.snSecodeb7i.cfu,e:thtazoenropy or the tnatettnenT, in ,-,;,-,..?r to enable the
t.hies('satlfs4rettuld beitdgb6yti4jawii. bilk hiegy took advantage
tfaague
Of the iiiirgled enaritier in Which, the ihdicttnent hid been got
ur, and raised the tecnnical oiektioh. tiiiteliiedi he had referred,
I et, on this point, the nrisoners had counsel of the rst letsal
ability, and the eage ;4a3 eroded before ti‘a.; fifteen Judges)
where every consideration and attention *Ws paid to it; yeA the
majority of the Judges decided against the object hen. If so;
on what grounds could they now remit the sentence ? These par-
ties had been guilty of an offence of the gravest nature, the punish-
ment for which was the loss of life, and but for the technical error
he had referred to would have been visited with the extreme
penalty of the law. If, on any future occasion, any cause
should be made out fur the exercise of mercy, God forbid that
the House should stand in the way ; but he must say that on
the present occasion, and in the case under consideration, there
were no grounds for any special interference now.—(Hear. )
Mr. AGLIONBY express d his sorrow at the speech which
had just been delivered by the Hon. and Learned Member.
He (Mr. Aglionby) had wished that the Hon. Member for
Finsbury, after the speech from the Right Hon. Baronet
( Sir J. Graham), had left the question in the hands of the
Government, as that speech indicated that the course might
yet be opened for the exercise of mercy ; but after hearing
the last speech, he (Mr. Aglionby) coefessed the Honourable
Member for Finsbury had a difficult course to pursue.
He considered the Honourable Member for Shrewsbury must
have misunderstood the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet. He
(Mr. Aglionby) did not. tuiderstend the Right lien, Gentle.

Plan aa.inviting violent discussion, but he understood him, than
in opposing tho motion now; it did not shut, the door, of mercy
or do away with hope as to hereafter.—( Hear, hear.) On this
ground I c (Mr. Aglionby) did net wish the motion pressed to
a division, but the question was placed on different grounds
now; the country would read with regret the speech of the
Hon. and Learned Member for Bute (Mr. Wortley), as the
question was now raised not on mioute points of evidence, or
the strict rule of justice, but on that of general policy. The
totintry wad perfect, dyiet. tow; !mat a strong feeling existed
among the population on this subject which ought not steabe
neglected. The parties for whom mercy was now solicited,
had suffered for the last six years punishment of the
severest character; and; if he was correctly informed, their
conduct in the colony had been suet], as to ead there] to a .re-
laxation in their favour. In fact, their conauct was stated to
be excellent. Their release, therefore, would not at all inter-
fere with the public peace. In conclusion, he must say the
Hon. Member for Finsbury was placed in a difficult position
now, after the speech of the Hon. and Learned Member who
last addressed the Hemas, thetth he (Mr. Agliontyy) confessed
that, in the first instance, •he should have taken the advice of
the Right Hon. Baronets and not press the matter further at
present.
Sir B. 11. INGLIS said that the lion. Member for Bute
had represented the speech of the Hon. Member for Shrews-
bury as foil of acrimony and bitter feelinet, deal with that
statement he dismissed it. But to that be (Sir R. H. highs)
would venture to say, there was no expression in it of party
feeling.--(lerinieal cries of " Hear, hear.") He repeated the
expression that such wee the fact. The, lion. Member for
Shrewsbury went no further than this, that the light which led
astray was light from some other piece, if not from Heaven ; and
that, after what had been dune in the North American colo-
nies, some consideration might be paid to the parties on
whose I.ehalf was now sot eht the exercise of mercy.—(Cries
of " Hear.") Would arse os e deny that the traitors of Canada
were demi-Vilma of more censidetatiitil tNati !hoe mihmina men?
The man who had saved Canaria—Sir Fiancie Ilead—sticeee-
sive G everts silents had neglected, while the awe who had sup-
ported Papineau had been hononred. N. inn W2S more
deep'y persuaded than he (Sir R. feats) was of the guilt of
the three persons, whose case was then under e.-,nettieration,
He had never voted for them before and be should not vote
for them now. He had beers pleased with the speech of the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for tiee Home Depart.
merit, until the last part of it; *bitch deftlifily did not satisfy
him. It seemed to Ishii to hold Met an ettecitragetritet for the
repetition of this motion. lie (Sir .11. Inglis) hoped the
Hon. Gentleman would withdraw the motion, but if he did
not, he trusted that it would be rejseted by a large majority.
Mr. WA KLEY could not see bow the Hon. Baronet was
to be satisfied. He had commenced his Spaeth fey Complaining
of the tone of the Hon. Member for Bute (Alm S. Wortley)
and he (Mr. Wakley) therefore thought that the Hon. Ba-
ronet, overflowing with the milk of human kindness, was
about to support the motion. But the Hon. Baronet went on
in his criticism, and came to a review of two speeches, one
that of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary, and
the other, the speech of the Right. Hon. Member for Edin-
burgh. Beth speeches pleased him, with the'exception of one
portion ; and what portion was that? Why the one indica-
tion of a merciful and humane feeling on the part of the Right
Hon. Baronet. Was that the position which the represent-
ative of the Church of England ought to assume in that
House? He (Mr. Wakley) was most astonished and oh-
founded at the spectacle he had witnessed. He had supposed
that the Hon. Baronet would be the first to advocate the
merciful motion which had beers made, but he was mistaken.
Now he would rejoice if he could bring back the feeling of the
House to the impression which was created by the conclusion of
the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet the Home Secretary. He
( Mr. Wakley) was at the time sitting by the side of his Hon.
Colleague, and he then remarked to him that he
feared subsequent discussion. He literally feared
what would transpire during this debate. The Right Hon.
Gentleman Wanted a rote of that House to justify him in
keeping Frost and his cempanions expatriated. It was
absurd to talk of the perogative of the Crown—it was, in
fact, an appeal to the discretion of the Minister. It was the act
of the Minister—and the Horne Minister; He considered that
the Right lion. Gentleman had made a fair speech. There
was nothing to complain of either in its tone or
temper. It was what they might expect from
a Seeretaty for the Home Department. The Right Hon.
Baronet was placed in a situatisn of great reTonsibil:ty. lie
had in a great measure the conservation of the country under
his especial control. It Would be a eery great exercise of
discretion on the part of the Home Secretary to teem-intend
that persons charged with such offences and found guilty should
be liberated and restored to their country.. His Hon. Friend
had taken special care not to go into the merits of the question.
His Hon. Friend deprecated such offences as those of which the
parties had been found guilty. He spoke of them as cases of
the worst character, and he realinded the House that out of a
million of the petitioners who had addressed the House on the
subject, none of them attempted to justify the conduct of
Frost and his companions, but the millions of petitioners were
of opinion that if the prisoners had been in a higher station
of life, and had had money at theif diepdsal4 and had
carried their case to another House, they would never have
been transported.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.) He was only speak-
ing of what was the opinion of the petitioners, and what was
the impression Which universally prevailed. They all knew
what was the decision upon technical grotinde, Which was come
to about four years ago in another place. What was the state
of the country now P Was there Sedition abroad ? Were
there any signs of rebellion—was there discontent to any great
extent? No nothing of the sort; but if there were public
commotion, and public agitation and discontent, all of them
would immediately say, "Why you. are absolutely encouraging
rebellion ay calling back these men." This then in his opinion
was ths period for the Crotty to exercise—er rather
for the Right Hon. • Gentleman to exercise— his
discretion. The Speeches however he had heard this night had
thrown new difficulties in the way; and he.found in that House
the bitterest enemies of Priest! Jont= e d William 4. Did Hon.
Gentlemen recollect that the Worthing people had no repre-
sentatives in that House ? That was a feet they never would
remember. Millions were flaking for the liberation of three
men whom they beliered had hebn tirilatvfiully transported.
Well then, he asked, was there never to be any concession to
popular feeling in that House? Were they elways resolved to
treat the petitions; of the people With indifference contempt,
and scorn? In his opinion they were absolutelyl en-
dangering the existence . of the constitution and the
country by stieli a course of Protieeding. The Heme
Secretary was now relieved trom his reSpensibili'y by
the speeches of the Hon: Ildronet the Member. for
Werth the Mid. and Leeatied• Merlsber for Bute, and the
Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh. He (Jr. Wakley)
felt that it Would be no advantage to prolong this discussion,
and he therefoae retoinied his Seat by imploring the Right Hon,
Baronet the Secretary for the Horne Deportment, not to care
oae straw for ]shat lion. Gentlemen had said, Wild Were de-
W‘oiiS of esteiticlini fioni the Cotint4 tfacie tiefortiniate men.
He called them unfortunate, for he considered all unfortu-
nate. He begged him again to consider the case, with re-
ferentie to
.the legal objection that was taken on the trial, and
maintain the principle, that 4.4tieheaea a def..bt ertisted, the
benefit of tts,rt doubt should be given to the accused.
.11/1•• G.W. HOVE said the lion. Baronet, the Member
for Oxford, had stated that al., persona t'onvieted of rebellion
in Canada had beers permitted to ierive honours by the Govern-
meht or the bourittl. Nova t e assured his Hon. Friend
that such was not toe Cited. nd ptiesoile convicted of being
engaged in that yehellion had beenemployed at alt. The lead-
neesdess ,botineeted sii4th. that. rebellion had.. undoubtedly
been alloWed to return to ineir tei4niiin They returned
under no special pardon of the Crown, they returned under a
flaw in the Mode of pfaceeding, by which' the conviction war
held hot to be availitilt: agalitit thorn. There visa no pardon,
therefore, asked for, and of course no pardon was granted.
Lord JOHN MANNERS thought there was an erroneous
ittpreaSion abroad, that the opinjons of the unfranchised were
tKeted with contempt by ttigt iiettsui bait he warts sure that
various arguments which had been tiled, and the speeches
wnich had been spoken on that occasion, would convince people
out of doors that there *as no indisposition on the part of
Parliament to listen personally to the representatiens of those
eletssest His chief object in rising, however, was to express
his regtet at a considetathe porticin of the able and eloquent
spetereeh of the Hon. Member for Edinburgh. isle (Lord J.
Matrigers) did not know whether it arose from a peculiar
orga . isation of his own mind ; but he had an impression that
a re °mime to historical facts tended to promote the principles
of Chartism rather than to militate against them. But the
Hon. Member for the city of Edinburgh, after eloquently
denouncing the crime of which these unfortunate men
had been found guilty, proceeded to say, that it fell
very little short of the crimes committed against
the State in past ages. The comparison, however, in
his opinion was decidedly too severe, and certainly the crime
which these unfortunate men had committed would by no
means justify such a punishment as being hanged, drawn, and
quartered, which was the punishment inflicted upon offenders
against the state in times gone by.
Mr. MACAULAY explained that he never thought of con-
veying to the House the impression that he was favourable to
such a mode of punishment.

Lord J. MANNERS continued—At all events, the /light
Hon. Gentleman drew no distinction betwsen the offence of
Mr. Frost and that of state criminals, of a former age. That
House, last year, voted a sum of money as a tribute to
the memory of Hampden. Now, what did Hamp-
den do ? Why, that gentleman, like Mr. Frost,
levied war agair:st the constituted authorities of the country.
Many people said Hampden's cause was a perfectly legitimate
one, but that was a question of opinion. There were many
who thought Mr. Frost's case a perfe''ly legitimate one. He
would go further than even many Gentlemen in that House,
who were prepared to vote money towards erecting a statute to
Oliver Cromwell—(Cheers)—for the purpose of encouraging
the efforts of future generations.—(Cheers.) Now, he pro-
tested against this system of palliating the conduct of regicides
in one age, and dealing harshly with' the conduct of those
wl'o excited rebellion in another—it was a dangerous and fatal
of the Honourable
policy, a policy to which he Could never lend himself. He
was prepared to oppose any such proposition as that
to which he had alluded, and in all consistency he was
of the policy shown in
House,
Crown. The Hon
that there was a strong justified r ifnorn ovtin sb votingury.
_for( thelle a
rp,r 1 ipeoasri;
.1 0 n
Sir 11. PEEL said that nothing more than the speech of his
Hon. Friend behind him had tended to confirm his impression
u t illegal,th e
legality
l iht
ya had that
the
ep
sen-
tence, r t 3.
of the fatal consequences which must result from a discussion,
thesin, e popularamexbeori
eti
es exercise
l,_(.)ilfassemblystbhuer y prerogativesilii
akdedtehcal atreHd oouf
im-
pression among ellions of their fellow-subjects that the sen-
been possessed of wealth, it would have enabled him to appeal
to the House of Lords, who would have overruled it. But
tsetniiebleypiafsitehdetuip:nefAefar.
that Irene Was not the proper tribunal to decide it,
But the C,;-2wn had take, every opportunity of obtaining the.
- Ad cert . , ainly there was
ti , lethal a9l e urn this pen. ' •
_es, . , c 0
informality -4.2 proceedings to
nothing on toe ghtlnd ,of , in _
Austify a remission of the pe.nirlirrient. But, said' :,,,2 Hon;
clentleman, is there to be no concesslnn to popular feeling : ~
qFuersotsitonwaasho
Most eel tiinlj, /lON in a ease of this kind, where the popular 1
opinion was altogathei dr iiiiiee43. If that impression Was an
improper one, or was decidedly utljtitt; that House ought to
resist iti whatever might be the number of persons who pre-
kt!!!,tt OtitiOntrin its favour. The question then fit them to
conshier was iri!, introelp was this popular impression a
ewree One or not? tot bie part he was decidedly
6: opinion that it Was intorrett, He was net
founding than eilinion upon any impression of his, own
but upon the decision LI 414 highest legal authority. -The
Whole of the 15 Judges had coni:dered this question, and had
dethied ciiiain4 it. The judgment had been delivered by a
wan witocil at t;ilivv3, was the most forbearing and the most
•t..„
disposed to give a prisoner ..... benefit of any doubt or advan-
iaoc in his favoui—he meant Lord Chief Justice Tindal—and,
in fact, the whole of the 15 judges were:mfluenced by a sine,.'re
desire to give the pilzatters every advantage. The Judges de-
cided against the allegation relating to the informality of the
delivery. But they not only decided upon this point they went
further, and considered what the effect would have been had
delivery been taken at the proper time.
the informality of the
Now; what would have been ,he effect, in point of law, of the
e proper h ' time?
objection, urged had it been taken at .....
would iWouldt have
it have been the remission of the sentence, -_ • ,
been the delivery of the prisoners from all p,,,.-Ltsnmectrit ?
Not at all. It would merely have had the e..,et
of postponing the trial, in order that the Crown might I
have an opportunity of correcting the informality, and 1
serving the notices according to law. But the Judges
decided that the conviction was, upon the whole, a perfectly
good one, and therefore the Crown had a perfect right to carry
it into effect. Tow, he apprehended he was correctly stating
the legal decision of the Judges upon this case. This poptilar
impression, then, of the millions was erroneous, and it was
the province of the Howe, notwithotanding the pyti*s vilacit
---

had been presented, to resist it. Nothing could be mord eels;
versive of the first principles of the administration of the law,
than that the House should bend to copular opinion in a
nutter of theh kind—that
.popular opinion being at the same
time founded upon wroiig and erretteons gr ounds. The Hon.
Member for Finsbury did not wish to throw :eel impediment
in the way of the Crown; and he went so far as to admit
that it would have been left mere-free and open in the exercise
of its prerogative had that dtscuesion not takcn place. Why,
that would be the natural result of the di-cession, for it was
aitteulS to erclude party considerations from discus-
siens of this nature ; and the debate would
rather prejudice than prove of adVantage to these
unfortunate men. Some allusion had been made to
the insurrectionists of Canada. Now what had they to do in
this disciissien with Canada? In that case there were no im-
pediments to the exercise of the free pardon of the Crown, and
it only showed that the Crown had not been Indisposed to exer-,
cise its prerogative when it could do so without subverting the
ends of justice. Now he could not invite t` .e lien. Gentleman
to withdraw this motion, nor hold out any hopes of a comero-
mite. He thought the Crown ought not to retire from aidis-
cussien of that kited with any sort of understanding, ex-
pressed or implied, as to the course it would hereafter take.
He thought it ought to be left unfettered ie its discretion
When his Right lion. Friend would not undertake to say that
under no circumstances and at no time the mercy of the Crown
should not he extended to those unfortunate men, he did not
itoend to influence the Hon. Gentleman in the course he might
think proper to adopt. The debate upon this subject ought to
close in its being distinctly understood that the Crown was
under no obligation whatever to take any other course than
that which the ends of strict justice might dictate.
If the House persisted in carrying this question to a diri-
thin, he maintained that the relationship of the Crown to
the House would he inverted.—(Hear, bear.) It would be
most difficult for the Crown to exercise its prerogative if the
House of Commons sh mld arrogate to itself the power by
the Motion before the House. And what would be their con-
dition? In this case Frost was a man of property—a man
of intelligence —Greer, hear)—a man who stood in a special
relation to the' Crown, having been intrusted with a Corn- •
missien for the preservation of the public peace ; and if the
House acre to act in compliance with the petitions that were
presented to it in such eases, they would be placing themselves
in a very awkward position with regard to the Crown—they
would, in fact, be attempting to deprive the Sove-
reign of the prerogative of mercy. And he could
hardly dAteire a case in which the House of Commons
might tiet tie Wartanted in a similar interference, if they
agreed to the motion of the Honourable Member for Finsbury.
He had no wish to bring the facts relating to Frost before the
. House, because the very bringing of those facts by the Minister
of the goeernment appeared to bring an impediment in the
exercising of the prerogatives of mercy by the Crown, but in
this case it was hut right that the facts should be brought
under the consideration of the Honourable Members'; and what
were those facts? That a magistrate made an attack upon a
peaceable -town with a number of armed men, which attack
was the signal for ail innovation by the multitude. The pub-
alinedbtrhidegestwopapsatgoeboefthati-oewmnado urnsosen id
, the mail
imf was to be stopped,
dicated by the burn-
ing of the town of Newport, which was in hhe possession of
rebels, against the authority of the Crown, end that
after six years' imprisonment, the House of Common; was to
come forward and petition the Crown to exercise its prerog:h-
tives. He should deprecate the establishment of a precedent
t, that.—(Hear, hear.) If the Hon. Gentleman the 'Mem-
ber for Finsbury thought fit, in his good sense, after what had
been said, not to press his motion to a division, he must not
suppose that the Government had now entered into any obliga-
tion whatever, passive or implied, with respect to the future
exercise of the prerogative of mercy by the Crown. He
agreed with his Right Hon. Friend, that that must be left to
the Crown ; and he thought that it would not be wise, either
in the discussion or in the division, to hold out any expectation
of mercy.—(Hear, hear. )
Mr. M. PH [LIPS said he had not intended to say a word
in common with the subject, but as several numerously signed
petitions in favour of the present motion had been forwarded
to him from the town which he had the honour to represent,
he thought that after what had fallen from the Hon. Member
for Finsbury (not then in his place), he should not be justified
if he did not make a few remarks. He denied, that in taking
the course he was bound to take in reference to the motion of
the Hon. Member for Finsbury—that was to say, that in voting
against his proposal, that he was treating with scorn the peti-
tions of the people. He had no such intention. His (Mr.
Philips's) belief was, that in his judgment he was right in the
position which he was about to take with respect to this case.
He might be wrong, and so might they, and he denied that
in voting contrary to their petition, that he was, treating them
with scorn, contempt, and derision. He denied every one of
those imputatlods in Coto. He had merely risen in order to
justify himself in those expressions, because he conceived that
they were made without any proper foundation. With regard to
the justice of the sentences, he considered the security of the
public peace required that they should be carried into execu-
tion and not be altered. In conclusion. he would say, he
believed that there were several Hon. Members in that House,
who, whilst they intended voting against the motion, had not
the slightest hitentiott to treat the petitioners with scorn.—
(Cries of " Divide, divide.;')
Mr. P. HOWARD hoped that the Hoe. Member for
Finsbury Wottici riot insist upon a devision.—( Hear, hear.)
He trusted that lie would be satisfied with having brought the
case, with his tistial ability, before the House, and he (Mr.
Howard) thoiiiht that the House would tee of opinion that
that Hon. Member would not be stdeancing his caie by forcing
the House to what would appear an adverts dieition,---( Hear,
hear.) He (Mr. Howard) had been entrusted with a peti-
tion which had been numerously signed, and prayed for the
release of did individuals rained by the Hon. Member. He
yr illinglY hire tribete to the becoming and decorous man-
ner in which the working' cleeses had advocated their
case ; they had entered into no coniiiinetions ; they had
in the most decorous manner demanded (tom the
rnayei' di' Cetlisle the use of the town-hall for the purpose of
holding a meeting to alit 't it netition, praying her Majesty to
order the release of Frost, Williams, &it', greses, Their peaceable
conduct in Otte advocacy of their case was worthy of the greatest
praise. Fie thought, that from the very fact of their not hey-
ing a direct . repreeehtation in that House, their petitions
should, in the words of his Noble Friend, be treated with at-
tention atici respect. But deeming that it was not proper
for that House to Mt-effete between the Crown and the ex-
ercise of its prerogatives, exettit PI very extraordinary casts,
he could not give his support to the metien of the Honourable
Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley). He flits anxious
to say so much to the House for the purpose of showing
that he did not treat the opinions and wishes of petitioners to
that House tali disrespect, and for the purpose of bearing at
the same time- a tribute to the otderly conduct which now dis-
tinguished the working classes of this ceuntty. He wished
also to say that of all the petitions which he had seen bearing
upon this question, there was not one in which the petitioners did
not express their abhorrence of those crimes of which Frost,
Williams, led Jones had been convicted, and it was only
because they conceived that those persons had undergone con-
siderable punishment, that they supplicated for the mercy of
the Crown. He quite agreed with hle d'idble Friend,
that it cyanid be extraordinary for that House, at
the same time that they condemned modern conspirators,
to erect anything lik e a memorial to Oliver Crom-
well, who had assisted in bringing his Sovereign to the block.
—( Hear, hear.) He had risen for the purpose of chewing
that he entertained sincere respect for the opinions and feelings
of the working classes of this country ; but, as he had before
said, as this motion went so far as to Interfere with the Crown's
prerogative, he should be obliged to vote against the Hon.
Member for Finsbury.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," and" Divide,
divide.") The Hon. Member proceeded, amid loud cries of
"Divide, divide," to state that he considered the Commons
of England, if they refuted to grant the request of the peti-
tioners, would at lest have treated them with respect.
Lord J. RUSSELL would say a few words with reference
to the speech of his Hon. Friend who had set down, and other
Members who had taken a similar line of argument, and
had found fault with his Honourable and Learned Friend the
Member for. Bute, for stating circumstances which seemed, in
his opinion, and in the opinion of other Hon. Members of this
House, adverse to a favourable consideration of the subject by
that House. He considered that it was quite impossible to dis-
cese SIT Motion of this kind without considering what was the
nature of the, tiffenee he was committing. It was quite impos-
sible that Hon. Member;
sort and not stata upon the one hard those circumstances
which they thought tended to extenuate t.:::!
should enter into a debate of thil
crime ; and upon
the other hand those circumstances which, in tne !minion of
other Hon. Members, would make it inconsistent with the :I.ll'
ties of the prerogative of the Crown to chow any extension of
mercy. Was that a desirable cottrse 7 It was impossible on
the one hand to avoid a discussion which must bring out the
unfavourable circumstances of the case ; end, upon the other
hand, was it desirable that Parliament should he considered as
adverse to the extension of mercy by the introduction in
the debate of circumstances tending to aggravate the
crime. The Hon. and Learned Member for Bute had
stated circumstances, as far as he remembered, most fatally.
He felt himself obliged to state (and this was one of the in-
conveniences of this sort of debate), that except for the differ-
ence of opinion of the Judges upon d technical point, the Home
' Secretary of that time (Lord 'Norraanby) had seen no reason
why the panithment of death should not be inflicted on the
prisoners ; he thought it necessary, however, it being a great
question of State, and not a mere ordinary case of criminal law,
totconsult the opinions of his colleagues, and lay the ease before
the judges. He (Lord John Russell) did not recollect, ex-
cept in one point,. that there was any difference of opinion
among the Judges as to the justice of the punishment. He
felt obliged to say this much, because his Hon. and Learned
o the
t Y 0
eu4xgc i
:Ir:et
sw.
forward
7 bua
ly
thatri
dd
te
hh,:sea,i, .
via
perfectly
atiifico ;
he
Friend the Member for Bute, had been censured for expressing
that opinion. His Hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh
(Mr. Macaulay) had also been censured for making a similar
statement of his opinion ; he must say that some extraordinary
misunderstanding seems to have been made with reference to
his Hon. Friend, by his lion. and Noble Friends the Members
for Shrewsbury and Ikleivark ( Mr. Disraeli and Lord J. Manners),
What his Hon. Friend', said was, that there might be a ease
where the punishment was excessive, and in that case Parlia-
ment might interfere, and he gave for example the Monmouth
rebellion. It was well known that in that case three' or four
hundred persons were executed, and among the rest a lady ad-
vanced in years, not because she had been instrument:A in fo-
menting the rebellion, hut because she had harboured and
given refuge to one of the parties. In cases of such extreme
cruelty and injustice he (Lord John Russell) could c.?nceive
Parliament were bound to interfere. When Hon. Gentlemen
would interfere in a case of this description, he begged them to
recollect that the laws of this country were executed with
mercy ; they were living under a constitution to
onlywhisk
question,tyranny
then,wes to
ot
consider least a s stranger.—( aans
,et
whethere T. — (
Secretary of State—the adviser of the Crown. For ihis part,
theykind
wouldcould be
il G
t b disposede
better of inle af t t
to
t popularhe amssilaetmeugabruriey:,hp.tie:oi!i:o;w:ohfo,ityrthhthiealeert
hej wished to .oppose no obstacle to the considerat ion he
thought it was the duty of the Secretary of State to A ive it.
But all these circtunstances might be more impartially consi-
dered in that manotor than if discussed in a popular r wanner
ii: a debate in Farhat sent, where some Members won Id take
lenient, anpdrt.ioptohieitrisona moforetbaeggfiraovnat.edmvoimewbo-rf the
r
case.vote
1 ot e mote
against'
7t e e those rest, en, and those only, he would g ive his
'5( 3ERTON perfectly concurred .in the
,
opinion expressed by the Noble Lord, who had just sath town.
agreed with' the opinion expressed ley the
FHienzoablrusdroy.pe r
Right Host. Baronet, at Cle head of the Government , that
such'subjects as the present. were not fit matters for disk ussion.
Mr. 'l'. DUNCONIBE c telsidered that he had been hardly
dealt with in the course of this t debate. It had been s aid by
fe FRANCIS
Hon. Members, that the present ethetior . would be an it rterfer-
ence with the prerogative of the Crown. ; Why was that
Fort Ni
: n' hdY, was
h e
it principleoot exhexibhiitbeidte dwfboorothhei
s firstli toiom. e lidi s
L evening?
Il ed
motion three years ago, moving ex.
it to extend a full and free pardon's o all the
jeleitober ..for Bath (Mr. Roebuc itt
hborrortglehtadfdores.:rdto
the
Crown, prayinet
as then. said ale:Celt inter-
Canadian rebets ? Not one word
fav,,t• o
- -`"---ve fire -work to be discharged or beought
a pleyehinr— or
.a -
Minister ? Hon. Members 'heard
for war at the Avill of the
fering2 withf ththeopererroowgoalve ofls tihte ',oCrbosve nk.e•ptWahsatainbttsa
was netb'ng
nothing'
said then_ about the improper conduct
hisbTer—e-
of this prerogative they t.—(Hear, hoerar..e)ctioTeh_erteo
of the Onister, either
_t, word or
- rse.t ey
rebels? It wat, .?
express or
Hon. 'Ld earnee
h would pursue advising the Crown. Why
the determination
inof ae.. advisers of the Crown
rood Ili reference
up on th ta ot
occasionthe
what
-I Friend knew A that would be the result, and
Ministers of that day. His
, he said 0 the
as to the cc:till:ll'l'Y
wtoallsrinoot
wouldthis be
er.

!Mr! they would be released, and he would not therefore trouble
the tiouse with any further remarks. And, continued the'
Hon. Al embet, eltrybody in the country knew there would be
a release, and they were released. All he. asked was that the
same weight and measure si,C9ltl be dealt out to the inhs
of Wales as to the French Canadians'. He considered habitants
Ife had been unfairly treated by the Hon. .7`nd Learned Member
for Bute, vilia had dwelt upon the aggravation 6! the case. The
Learned Solicitor-General, he thought, might a:.slrex, him well
upon this point. But did he (Mr. Dancombe) press interfe-
renee of Parliament upon the merits of the case. He saLl at
the outset that neither he nor the petitioners believed the con-
duct of the parties to be right. He said they were guilty of a
grsat crime—he said, and the millions who had signed the pe-
titions had said, t hat these parties had already received sufficient
punishment. Their conduct has been most exemplary in the
colony to which they have been sent. The Hon. and Learned
Member for Bute had left him (Mr. Duncombe) no option in
consequence of his sanguinary and blood-thirsty speech. He
said that they could not commit a greater outrage on public
opinion than to release those parties. He denied that state-
ment. Had the Hon. Member seen the petition from Leeds
which he bad presented to the House that evening, signed by
34,000 persons, headed by the Vicar of Leeds (Dr. Cook)
by twelve members of the Town Council, and by the Board
of Guardians ? He considered that the petition emanating
from Leeds expressed the general feeling of the whole country.
He begged to state that Sir Thomas Philips received no severe
wounds whatever ; he had cut his finger in the room of an inn,
but he ventured to state that he received no gun-shot or sabre
wound, which would entitle him to receive a pension from the
country. In conclusion he must say, in justice to the peti-
tioners who had entrusted. him with the care of their wishes,
and believing chat the general feeling of the humane wts in
favour of mercy, he would feel it his duty to take the sense of
the House upon his motion.
Mr. OUTAVIUS MORGAN begged to correct a state-
ment of the Honourable Member—Sir Thomas Philips had
been wounded.

Mr. HOPE begged to c )nfirm the statement of the Hon.
Member for Monmouthshire—be had been wounded_by,a gun
shot wound.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.

The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion ... 31
Aglinst it .
Majority against the motion —l6s
CASE OF MR. KINDER.

Mr. MARK PHILIPS rose to bring forward his motion,
which was one, he respectfully said, demanded the attention of
the House, in order to prevent the merchants of this country
from having their commercial affairs improperly interfered
with. All he asked for was to produce the documents which
her Majesty's Government had received respecting the decision
which the Mexican Government had come to respecting the
claims of Mr. Kinder. If those papers were produced he
would not wish to say another word on the subject, but it was
certainly, in his opinion, a very unjust decision, and he thought
that the Government should interfere, as the justice of Mr.
Kinder's claims were very strong. He asked for the produc-
tion of those papers from no selfish motives or grounds, but his
constituents had an interest, whose property was involved,
and he thought a case had been made out for the production of
those papers, for the purpose of satisfying the country.
ge simply asked for the production of those papers without
wishing to enter into any extraneous matter. He wished for
tho;: euments in a national point of view as well as in a
commerem: Dint, and be would not say one word more, but
simply read his
1.,:,?ti0n, which was to the following effect :
r
-nesentations by Richard Pakenham,
Copies of ell reports or rj
Esq., her Majesty's 11finist: in Mexico, on which her
Majesty's Secretary of state fur For. Affairs has founded7l.
the decision Le has given on the applications of Mr. Thomas
Kinder. on the
,
Sir R. PEEL said that the Hon. Gentleman calie4
Government to interfere with a question of international ,
The facts were simply these :—Mr. Kinder called on the
Mexican Government to decide the point, and the decision
was against him ; and, according to every principle of inter-
national law, there was no ground on which the British
Government could interfere, which was laid down
by the highest authority in the land, His Noble
Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs consulted
the highest authority, and his decision on the evidence
was that there was no claim on the Mexican Government for
reparation. As he said before, his Noble Friend the Secretary
of State for Foreign Affairs came to the same decision that the
Court of Justice had come to, that the claims of Mr. Kinder
were inadmissible.

Mr. M. GIBSON said that, in his opinion, the Right Hon.
Baronet was not at all satisfactory. The Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs did not say that Mr. Kinder had no claim be-
cause the decision of the Mexican Government was against him.
If the Right Hon. Gentleman had founded his ease ripen the
sentence pronounced against Kinder in Mexico, he thought
that a case might be adduced exactly similar, when the Duke
of Wellington had interfered. The answer of the Secretary
of State was not, however, founded on a foreign tribunal, but
upon the representation of a Minister of State. It was not an
uncommon case, he contended, for the Government to interfere
where a private individual felt aggrieved in reference to
affairs of a like description. Mr. Pakenham may have
been misled, and if Kinder had the report
before him, he could be able at least to see the grounds on
which the decision given against him was founded. Mr.
Kinder was a man of integrity and intelligence, and he thought
his case was one where the Government of this country should
interfere with the Government of Mexico. He saw no reason
why Mr. Kinder should not be told the grounds upon which his
claim was resisted ; arid he, therefore, contended that the papers
moved for ought to be laid upon the table of the House.
After a few words from Mr. FORSTER, and Mr. SCOTT,
Sir ROBERT PEEL said the Hon. Gentleman had made a
long,peech on his view of this subject, and he did not think
it quite fair that such views of the case should be carried out.
He wished to make an objection to the decisions of the
Mexican tribunals, and he hoped the House would not sanction
such a thing. This was a question whether we should inter-
fere with the decision of the Mexican courts, and he was
firmly of opinion that no such interference should take place.
He should like to know what their courts of justice would say
if a Mexican subject were to ask the Government of his coun-
try to interfe with the legal decisions of this country? We had
enough trpen our bands sejtbout doing this; and he did again
hope that the House would not interfere with the decisions of
another country. Stsppose that a Mexican subject were to call
upon the Government of his country to interfere with our
Minister for Foreign Affairs—Lord Asserdeen—what would be
the feeling here? He trusted the Hous.
would not sanction
the proposed interference by the Hon. Member.
Mr. M. GIBSON wished to state that Lard Aberdeen had
founded his opinion upon Mr. Pakenham': report.
Mr. M. PHILIPS said that when they bad the assurance
they had just heard in reference to this affair, he could but feel
satisfied, bat he at the manse should say that this was no
matter of minor importance. It involved the purchase of an
estate to the amount of 40,0001., besides which the purchaser
had to pay other dues into other hands. If those were the facts,
he could not tell why the correspondence of Mr. Packenham
should not be laid ttprs the table.
Sir R. PEEL said that that was the very point he differed
from the Honourable Member upon. Interference was de-
manded, and the answer of the Queen's Advocate was, that
this country should not interfere. li:sder those circumstances,
the papers could not be laid upon the table.
The motion was then withdrawn.
FRAUDULENT VOTES AT ELECTIONS.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said he would not trespass upon the
House at this late hour of the night with this subject, but that
he bad attempted to de so several times before without effect.
His motion was to this effect—to appoint a " Select Coi;="
mittee to inquire into an alleged organized and extensive sys•
tern of fraudulent suid vexatious objections to the votes of a
great number of duly qualified electors for the Northern Di-
vision of Warwick-shire, the Northern Division of Staffordshire,
and certain divisions of other counties."
Mr. AGLIONBY hoped the Hon. Member would not press
his motion at this late hour of the night, far there ought to be
some consideration for Hon. Members who were obliged to at-
tend Committees all day and this House at night.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said that if Hon. Members thought
proper to adjourn the motion, they could do so.
Mr. C. BULLER assured the Hon. Gentleman Ofr.
Newdegate) that the object of his motion would not be attained
without a warm debate ; and he therefore felt it would be
more convenient for all parties that for the present the
question should not be brought on.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY gave notice of his intention to move an
amendment to the effect, that the full question be opened on
inquiry.
Sir ROBERT PEEL having also expressed himself in
favour .ef a postponement of the question at that late hour,
Mr. [itt;:s said that he thought it would be better in this
case not to name iny particular Committee, but to inquire into
the subject generally.
Sir W. JAMES entirely !Incurred in the suggestion of the
Hon. Member for Montrose.
' Sir R. PEEL said that thoue: lie thought the registration
laws required amendment, yet too nai,:eh burden should net be
laid on the improvement at first.
Mr. C. BULLER then agreed to withdratee his proposed
amendment.
After some further discussion,
The question that a Select dommittee be appointed to file
quire into the subject generally was put and carried.
Mr. SPOONER then moved the House should take into
consideration the petition of Joshua Toulmin Smith (presented
sth March).
Mr. HUME moved that an humble address be presented to
her Majesty for copy of an order in council, dated the 7th day
of September 1838, for regulating within the colonies of
British Guiana, Trinidad, St. Lucia, and Mauritius, re-
spectively, the relative rights and duties of masters and servants.
Copy of a circular dispatch addressed by Lord Glenclg to the
Governors of the Legislative Colonies in the West Indies,
dated the 15th day of September, 1838, transmitting copies of
the said order in counsel, dated the 7th day of September, 1838.
Copy of an order in council, dated Dec. 9th, 1841, abrogating
so much of the order in council, dated the 7th of September
1838, as relates to contracts of service
_inode unrunapr3;e.
th of
Copy of an order in council, dated the 4 day
1813, abrogating so much of the order in council,
of t.le'
s
7th day of September, 1839, a relates to contracts servtee
made in North America.—Agreed to.
COAL WHIPPERS' BILL.
This Bill was read a second time.
SUPPLY.
The report of the Committee of Supply was brought up and
received.