The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-06 00:00:00

IRISH COERCION BILL.

Lord STOURTON said he hoped that his Noble
Friend opposite, who had introduced a Bill for the sup-
presiion of crime in Ireland, would also introduce a
measure, pari passu with it, for the preservation of the
lives and liberties of the tenant-farmers in that country.
The Duke of RICHMOND said he understood the
Noble Lord to refer to the corn-laws, and not to the
)utrages which bad been committed in Ireland.
Lord STOURTON disclaimed any reference to the
corn-laws in his address. his observations simply re-
ferred to Ireland.
The Duke of RICHMOND was about to address their
Lordships respecting the Bill, but he gave way to
The LORD CHANCELLOR, who said the Noble
Lord was not in order, as there was no notice before the
House. If he were allowed to discuss the Bill under
these circumstances, it would be competent for any other
Noble Lord to do so.

SIR J. M. DOYLE AND THE GOVERNMENT

OF SPAIN.

The Duke of RICHMOND rose to present a petition
from Sir John Milley Doyle, praying their Lordships to
refer the consideration of his case to the law officers of
the Crown. He stated that he had served under the
Spanish Government as one of the general officers of the
Legion, who he complained had not done justice to him,
but particulary that the Commission which had been ap-
pointed had not tr...ated his claim in a proper manner. He
further stated that the representatives of this country in
Spain acknowledged his claim. There was a clause in the
Act under which the Commission was appointed, that if
any difference arose with respect to the claims of the
officers who had been in the service of Spain,
that it should be referred to the law officers
of the Crown. He was an experienced officer, and
had served this country in Egypt and in the wane
s.f the Peninsular. His Noble and Learned
Friend (Lord Brougham) was of opinion that his case
should be so referred. He (the Duke of Rich-
mond), therefore, trusted that their Lordships would
resort to that course in this case. He was ad-
vised by his friends to take as much as he
could get, and to memorialise the Government for the
rest. He (the Duke of Richmond) did not think he
was asking too much if he o❑ly asked that this matter
should be referred to the law officers of the Crown, and
that they should decide whether he was entitled to this
claim on the Spanish Government or not.

Lord BROUGHAM supported the prayer of the
petition.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said that he was not
disposed to deny the valuable services of the
officers who were engaged in the army in Por-
tugal, but at the same time he imagined that claims
were made on the Spsnish Government which
were not at all in proportion to the services ren-
dered. Various commissions had been appointed,
but they had failed to give satisfaction. The
parties could not agree as to the amount, and the conse•
quence was that the officers and men interested were
continually applying to the English Government to see
justice done. Their Lordships would recollect that
the British Government were no parties to the
contracts made, but at the same time they were bound to
endeavour to obtain justice for any or every party
having claim on the Spanish Government. These
claims were entirely of a private nature, and this
Government was no party in the contracts. In the year
1840 his predecessor in office, Lord Palmerston,
agreed to form a mixed' commission, which should
take cognisance of these claims, and decide upon them in
such a manner as that there should be no appeal to the
Government of either country, and if the Commissioners
differed in their opinions it was to be decided by an
arbitrator, the Minister of the King of the Belgians,
who has in that capacity given several decisions.
He felt therefore precluded from opening the
question. He believed the Commissioners had
taken a full and a fair view of all the cases laid
before them, and had given their decision accordingly.
Re felt thsttle had, no power to interfere in regard to
these claims. He had enamined into the claims of Sir
John Milley Doyle, and he eonsidered that the Commis-
sioners had come to a right decision respecting it. Even
had he (the Earl of Aberdeen) tho power, he did not
feel at all disposed to re-open the question. That officer
had volunteered his service to the Spanish Government
in 1832, and it was accepted by Don Pedro with a great
laudation of his noble cond mt. Sir J. M. Doyle after-
wards admitted( that he entered the service without a
contract, therefore he could make no claim on the Portu-
guese Government for services performed under a contract.
It appeared, from the returns he now held in his
hand, that Sir J. M. Doyle had received sums of
2,000/, and 50/. from the Spanish Government, and
passed a receipt in full of them. Then the report of the
Spanish Commission was to the effect that they did
not consider that Sir John Doyle had any claim upon
the British Government, not having entered the Portu-
guese service under any contract, and, therefore. he (Lord
Aberdeen) did not consider that the claim could be enter-
tained. Under these circumstances he was of opinion
that no advantage would be gained by re-opening the
case. Besides he had no reason to complain of the
Spanish Government, as he had been treated ex-
tremely well by them. His Noble Friend (the Duke of
Wellington) would perhaps recollect that some years
ago he received 5,000/. or 6,000/. from that Government
for an injury he stated he had received.
Lord BROUGHAM complained that a surgeon had
been appointed one of the commissioners, whereas some
of the law officers of the Crown ought to have
sat upon it. On the same principle he supposed
that the Noble Earl (Earl of Aberdeen) would
refer a medical point to a lawyer. The Noble
Lord then referred to documents which set forth that the
Spanish Government admitted the claim, and consi-
dered that it ought to be paid out of the money devoted
to the British Government fur the liquidation of similar
claims.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said it occurred to
his recollection that such a transaction as the one re-
ferred to by the Noble Earl, took place whilst he was
serving his King in Spain, but he did not recollect
enough of the circumstances under which it took
place to be able to speak with any certainty on the
subject. He, however, recollected the name of Sir
John Milky Doyle, but he could nut call to mind why
he was employed—at any rate he was in the service of
this country during the Peninsular war ; and he had
the reputation of being a brave man.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY thought that Sir
J. M. Doyle had no claim against the Spanish
Government, having given a receipt in full for all de-
mands. He (Lord Londonderry) knew that that gallant
officer had been paid very handsomely for his service?,
more handsomely than either he or the Noble Duke
opposite.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that Sir J. M. Doyle had
given a receipt in full, because the Commissioners told
him that unless he did so he would not receive a farthing.
The question is, was the petitioner entitled by his agree•
meat and order to receive the amount he claimed.
He believed that he had not received a sufficient
remuneration for his services, and it was therefore inflict- '
ijeg great hardship on the lion. Baronet. He hoped
that he would have, with every other British subject, the
protection of the law.

GREAT COUNTY DOWN RAILWAY.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented a peti-
tion, which he hoped would receive the support of the
Noble Duke who had just sat down. It was a petition
signed by Lord Arthur Hill, and other noblemen and
gentlemen of the county of Down, in the north of Ireland,
praying this House to suspend the standing orders
in the ease of the Great County Down Railway.
They had suspended the standing orders the other even-
ing in a case similar to the present, and hoped they
would do so now, as the measure would be a great boon
to the whole of Ireland, and give employment to a con-
siderable number of people.
Lord REDESDALE objected to granting the
prayer of the petition. He said that the Committee
found the plans, which were lithographed, as many
other plans were, very incorrect. The lithographing
was altered in the levels, the height, and the arching,
so that it was hardly possible to make out what they
meant. The excuse made for this incorrectness was
the want of time, but the answer to this would be
if the projectors had not time to get up efficient plans
by the 30th of November, why not wait for an-
other year ? There was no hardship in this.
On every occasion when a decision was given against a
Bill interested parties came forward in order to get the
decision reversed in their favour. There was no use

in hearing standing orders at all if this practice
was to be carried out. Ho had resisted the
motion the other evening respecting the Wexford,
Carlow, and Dublin Junction Railway, and he would
resist the present, he hoped with greater success,
as not a word could be said in defence
of .the plans which had been got up. The
merits of the Bill was a totally different question, and if
the project was a good *no it would stand so much the
better chance next session.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that as they
had done the same in respect to other lines of minor im-
portance, he trusted that they would aot hesitate to do so
in one of such great magnitude, and which would prove
of such great benefit to that part of the country by
giving employment to the poor in this season of distress.
In the case of the Wexford, Carlow, end Dublin Junc-
tion Railway, there was no practical irregularity, be-
cause the parties who received the notices came with
them in their hands ; therefore, admitting their service.
There was no analogy between the cases.

Earl of WICKLUW could not conceive the use of
standing orders at all if they were not to be adhered to.
The errors were entirely owing to the neglect of the
solicitors.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY did not wish to
press tee matter further, after what had fallen
from Noble Lords. They had consented to the
perpetration of a little sin, but were determined to re-
sist a great one.—(Cheers.)
Lord REDESDALE slid it was competent for the
Standing Orders' Committee to report on the schemes
suinnitted to them, and to suggest if they thought
proper that the standing orders should be dispensed with.
He would resist any application of this kind in the same
way that he had resisted the application made by
the Ntible Earl the other evening, because if it were ac-
ceded to, it would give rise to very great carelessness
on the part of solicitors and agents in Ireland.
After a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY withdrew his
motion.

The Duke of RICHMOND moved for the County
Treasurers' returns for the counties of England and
Wales, from Michaelmas, 1844, to Michaelmas, 1845.
The House then adjourned at a Quarter past Six
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 5.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at a few minutes before
Four.

SECOND READINGS.

The following Railway Bills were severally read a
second time, and ordered to be committed, viz.,
Kent Atmospheric Railway
Cockermouth and Workington Extension Railway
East Lothian Central and 'Fyne Valley Railway
Yorkshire and Glasgcw Union Railway
Manchester, Huddersfield, and Great Grimsby Direct
Railway
GREAT NORTH AND SOUTH WALES