The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-07 00:00:00

denied. In doing so he believed the Governor was acting on
the authority of the statute law of Austria. There was one
statute law which declared that all deserters should be
brought in dead or alive, and another law, declaring that
all rebels should be treated as deserters. Still he hoped, for
the sake of the character of Austria, that the Government never,
sanctioned so barbarous a proclamation. He was also glad
that the matter had been brought under consideration, as it
would be shown that the feeling of this country abhorred such
barbarous proceedings.

Lord BEAUMONT thought that the reason assigned by the
Noble Lord was anything but sufficient to account for or to
justify the outrage that had been committed ; for it was his
firm belief that the Noble Lord would have preferred remain:a
big in captivity to being subject to such violence as they
endured. If such were the state of the law, he trusted that 04i
would soon be assimilated with the law of Turkey.
INTERFERBNCE WITH PRIVATE PROPERTY.
Lord DENMAN presented a petition from a gentleman 0s
the name of Smith, which purported that on the 19th ""
DeeemLer last his private house had been invaded by three
persons of the Excise department, who stated that they cm!"
in search of a private still. The offence was aggravated by the
i
fact that the gentleman whose premises had been intrude
upon was a special pleader. There was nothing to justify tbl°
°fret. e, for it had been committed under the authority of
anonymous letter. Now, this gentleman was aware that hell'
no redress by an action at law, for the authorities seemed t°
think that it was not contrary to the law, and he was there•
ctre aware that he could obtain no damages. Such being the
case he thought that his only remedy was to petition that House,
and he trusted their Lordships would entertain its prayer aid'
a view to an amendment of the grievance of which this gentle
man complain, d. If the law were permitted to be enforced
its present shape, no man's proprrty would be safe. H. would
on a insure day bring forward a Bill to amend this law a 5 1t
stood at present.
_

The Earl of DALHOUSIE said, that if this petition bad
been received netrel on the statement that hail been made that
night, nothing would have been further from his thnuents than
to make any reply to it, further than to answer the questili
put by the Noble and Learned Lord; but the petition whit
had been read by the C!ei kat the table was, in
point of fae"
a direct attack on one of the public departments of the CO'it
try, which, it any of the departments were so, was well and e,le
ciently execiu ed-- he meant the Excise ; and when the noble
and Learned Lord the other night very kindly informed le
that he intended to ~resent this tition, and draw the attend°,
of the House to the statements contained in it, he (Lord Pt,
housie) took care to inform himself as to the whole of the 01,11,
ject. He found that the person whose name was affixed to tuef •
petition had had another presented to the Commons House
Parliament, very similar in substance. He found, bowee',!
that the petition that night, presented to their Lordships 01'
as compared wisis the other. greatly modified in its latignetti,
and statement,' With respect to the facts on which the Pe 0
tion iteelf was fon itied, namely, that the petitioner's house ,
"et,
entered by an E wise officer, armed with a search wawa0
that fact was nods ibtedly true. lie was quite ready to say
much with respect to that ; and with respect, also, to the Co.
duct of the officer in olitainining the warrant, he did not p'3"
to advance one word of defence. The conduct of the °it'd
was blameable in the eyes of his superiors, and they punish.
him. But the allegations in this petition did not merely atl:e
bute blame to the officer.-they inculpated his super'
stated
officer also. The petitioner, in the first place, 'tiled that the man, in executing what he called his duty, had etret 0
a forcible entrance into his house, and when his warrant Peg
demanded, he refused to produce it ; that these proeeedititp
alarmed and dismayed the persons in the house, and tlsat.oo,
health of the inmates was then, and was still, placed in lie)
pardy. To each and all these statements, he (Lord Dalhoos
gave an unqualified contradiction. How stood the facts ? 0
anonymous letter was received by the Commissionenters
Excise ; but no measures were taken, no instructions /jos
issued on that letter. On the contrary, it was remitted to
ad
officer of the district, with instructions to carefully inquire
cie
report upon it. The officer did not report but from theao
cumstances connected with the letter itself, he fancied
there existed sufficient grounds for suspicion. He, there'gee
proceeded to the nearest magistrate, to make, as the 1001
quired, a deposition. That magistrate was from home, °AO
then proceeded to the next, and procured a warrant. 'ibif
making the oaths required by law. He proceeded with
to,
warrant to the petitioner's door, which was not forcibly antet
The officer knocked, as he would in any other case, when
was opened. He inquired for the master, who did not her,,lol
that day to be at his chambers, and when he came, no war's,o
was asked for, because it was at once shown. They after fled
proceeded to look over the house. The Noble and LI 0
Lord said that any inquiry on the officer's Par 0
the district would at once have proved that
otof
suspicion could attach to this gentleman's '
but he (Lord Dalhousie) could inform the Noble Lora.°
this would be, in every ease, very insufficient ground It .11
upon. He could tell the Noble and Learned Lord t°a,pi
another house—a house of better appearance than tin!' feJ
more like a gentleman's seat—a small still was found I°_,liss
operation in the drawing-room. The officer, after proeee, est
through several of the rooms, did perceive that there wa
cuse for suspicion, and he left. The family did not one: y
him. The gentleman happened to be at dinner, and whe ;a
offered to open the door of the dining-room, the officer 0%00
was unnecessary. he apologised for the trouble that had
sei
giver:, and then depsrted. This happened on a ThursdaY'oo
on tie Friday Mr. Smith, the petitioner, addressed a lett tf
the Commissioners of Excise, complaining that ObseS
dress had been given him—that no apology had
tendered, although the Commissioners must have been in, ;ell
session of the report of their affair. No such report haedsl,
made by the officer. The gentleman added that he desir io •
investigation into the proceeding. He said that if 11:1,0
receive from them a specific assurance before three o'e:';
the next day that their officer %multi be reprimantlec7l)!
should take no proceedings, but otherwise he would PlB, P,
matter in the hands of his attorney, anti have public opera',
the subject. Now although it was perfectly neeessalloje
proper that this subject should be brought before the C°
sinners, still it was equally necessary that the conduct ebesS
officer charged should be inquired into, lest he might ha/eeeo
improperly impugned. To the petitioner's demand thevief
rniseioners mede an twer on the 'a me day. They stated that 170,0
pronouncing judgment en the conduct of the officer, they ''eaer
call on him tor an explanation, atter which they wouldooo
municate with Mr. Smith without delay. The Comilla° b,
of Excise, he considered, were right in their p oroceedialr'ol!
cause they did not wish to sanction proceedings of a° s 0
and arbitrary character. Nothing, surely, could be Wiere to
sonable than that statement. Until they had ascertaine4
facts of the case they could not wit h propriety tent; 10
apology. Why no person would flog his hound until lilt el
reason to believe that his hound had committed a 13°1'0
surely they could not be expected to render less justice ye
fellow man than they would to a dog. On the same (°*b
Commissioners received a reply from the gentleman wh°
tioned the House that night. He said that the reply the 00'
missioners had sent to his letter could not be received bYies!
The outrage perpetrated by their officer on aisofe
gentleman had been one for which, as gentlemen, tueeleelee'
hound to make ever, satisfaction. He required, most di'`e„4ol?
an ample apology from them ; and further, he would
_et
1W before two o'clock to-morrovv, to cover the °We
counsel, and other contingent expenses. Now be we:. j
what these expense* had been ? This was written on the
and on thejBth, the day before, the very transact ion *TT 0,5
given rise to the correspondence had taken place. Now bete
again, what expenses had been incurred? The letters,eetlie,
Commissioners of Excise had been written from the °eess
man's, own chambers. He had not even to pay sixPentisell
messenger, because, in his former letter, he said that h? 7
would wait. the reply. Where, then, were the experts° etortei
(Lord Dalhousie) understood that lawyers had even seorieet
charitable regard for one another, and that they Pr dalsf
for other's ailments in the same way that medical men ber
charge those of their craft for attendance on their
ailments.
Lord CAMPBELL seemed to express dissent.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE said the Commissioner
Mr. Smitki again, that his demand of an apology anistlej
was inadmissible; and on the same day lie, in %elf
charged them with having committed and sanctione,!,,A,
vet of tyranny. He (Lord Dalhousie) thought that 1: fis:
have crossed the imagination of this Mr. Smith. of
be ro
court, Temple, (for he was anxious that he should 0.4
scribed thus in his petition), that plain-spoken Perstsege,
reading his letters, might have called his demands an
at extortion, but he could not press this opinion 015
their Lordships. A this happened upon the
etstlej
The Commissioners wrote again upon the Monday,
~egl
that this officer had been severely censured, and regret
annoyance to which the petitioner had been subjeeteost
might inform their Lordships that the officer was a Intbirqj
spectable man, who had served in the department fer,e to:4
forty years ; and he might further add, that Lf
" censure," carried in the Excise a much
.i je
meaning than their Lordships probably attached t°,l ett 1.00
meant suspension from promotion for three years, ele,ealnisl
wards fir any meritorious conduct. But this gent ,ga
the 12th of January, changed his tactics, and taking je
cause of the officer whom he had formerly been_eo
a passion with, he charged the Commissioners
offence against. him. He said that he dt cl 9
sish the officer censured, because he had trite e 0
that he had, under the circumstances, acted "'elle)
view of pleasing them ; and on the idea that It it 1,',"
would be altogether ascribed to zee. But would t"entleeie
ships believe, that immediately afterwards, this
.g_`, he oh
commenced attacking the excise-officer himself, that
mended from him that Le should sign an ample arontlitoi,
in addition pay him a sum of 251. On those 'vet*
only were the actions to be stopped. Now, this ° 01$9
been thirty-two years in the excise, he had then see
200 e, out of which he paid his travelling expeasifd
his salary at the utmost only amounted to 1501.,
„,
man demanded a sixth of his salary, and an abject apolttg
dated January 17th, yet an action was commenced p
onaeeeettres
Had this gentleman not gibbeted himself, he (Lord 1n hen
would not have drawn him further before the House andileor,
the country. The 251. were not paid, the money ml%Ol
tendered but not paid. The officer refused to sign the areie
and the gentleman wrote a letter saying that he had go tittlo
and endeavoured to defer the settlement from time iibelee
New he would read the apology required, and the q°'oo,o(
the petitioner termed it. and he would put it to the
say whether Peter Mann.the excise officer, with 15t:0"
was not the honester and the better man than Mr-
of 5 I
his house, Wendlane, Highgate. He had never Ilea' a
had.sk e d
charge against an officer of excise, and he questione isros
'lihfethaPssiruraLnocredshliira %et
6
would not act upon any anonymous information ; they
thatHe wthoeulddepgairvtme
department
te Noble ,
done so in times past , they had not done so the-i,OO
were the facts of the case, and he would leave their
ov
to draw their own conclusions from them.
the Lord DEN AI A N said that he had known nothing fes 10 art
jeer matter contained in the petition, further than, ieboe
been informed by some of the gentlemen connectetinold_
Excise, who had called upon him yesterday. He "-if he el'
however, have felt it necessary to present the petitiontieose
ltd
been asked to do PO. Hedid not believe that the gended
tended to place the amount of money he had denlMteoneleso
pocket ; he intended to give it to some charity. I°
the po
he earnestly hoped that the Noble Lord would limit
entru, ted to inferior officers.
c.l,ol)or#
GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY OF 111-- red/100
Lord REI)ESDALE presented a petition from c!eitig
ties connected with the ':rand Canal of Ireland, Priv
the Great Western Railway Bill be re-committed.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 6' of
bYraßceldLLthS..it
Viscount SANRIAINLWemA moat,'
op pOr..- .corebe,
asking the question, of which be had' nu°
give „ me,
lative to the manner of treating railway Bi"6slielPh".o
occasion which the lion. Member for for 4;10
presented was a fitting o ortunity
to do so. He would now therefore+, 'otb`,"ot
a petition from merchants, bankers, au
of Liverpool, praying that Parliament would el'
010110
for postponing the pa,sing of any considerab,lea, OA so
of railway Bills this seision ; and, in cl°lll„"rotre'fliO
would ask Sir Robert Peel, whether he wag. Pe-1,. C 6.0
advise any course which should have that ent,..-bers "ft
petitioners stated that they had heard that '•340060
great depression in all branches of commerce. 5101
Truman and Cooke, brokers, stated that thepd,
branches of commerce were severely deprett
*
only had there been a great fall in prices, "de, tit
demand for goods in the Indian and China trorplo
priWps.l nine of this, they Said, was al"'