The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-07 00:00:00

-tt he people were now determined to exact their rights,
and the best thing Ministers could do would be to ro
commend a pardon to be granted in the case of the per-
sons he referred to. He had gee at respect fie
the personal character of the Right Honourable Baron( t
oPposite, but sometimes the Government in it-
oollective capacity, committed acts whis'a the find
vidual members of it shrank from ; and if the motion
was refused, he should not attribute that result to the
personal feeling of the Right Hon. Baronet. He re-
gretted not to see the Noble Lord (J. Russell) in hi'
place, because he wished to call his attention to the
particular case of Frost, whose punishment was attri
buted to a threat held out by the latter that he would
°Ppose the Noble Lord at the then ensuing election.—
(A laugh.) He regretted to hear a laugh on so painful
a subject as that of the banishment of these poor men
from their wives and families. No favour which tin
Government could grant would be more gratefully re-
ceived than that of the pardon of Frost, Williams, anti
Jones, and he trusted the House would be actuated not
So much by justice as clemency in making an appeal to
the Crown for the exercise of its prerogative. He,
therefore, begged to move that an humble address Ix
presented to her Majesty, praying that the royal cle-
mency may be extended to Messrs. Frost, Williams, and
Jones, and to all other political offenders.
Mr. WAKLEY seconded the motion.
Sir G. GREY said that the lion. Member opposite had
taken the trouble to disclaim a proceeding of which he
had never heard him accused--namely, of having been
cognisant beforehand of the treasonable designs of
2tlesars. Frost, Williams, and Jones, and of having ab-
sconded when they were discovered. He had never
seen or heard anything of the Hon. Member which
would lead him to suppose that he would incite others
to crimes against the laws of the country. The Hon.
Member had truly stated that the present was not the
first occasion when the case of Frost and his companions
had been brought under the notice of the House. The
motion of the Hon. Member, somewhat modified, was
brought forward in 1846, when it was rejected by 196
against 31. For his own part he must disclaim the com
Vitnent paid to him in his individual capacity by the
on. Member, more particularly in so far as it was
offered him at the expense of his colleagues and of his
predecessor in office. He could state of his owe
knowledge that the most careful investigation of
the facts had been instituted as well by himself
as by the Right Honourable Baronet opposite (Sir J.
Graham), and the result had been, as it was now his
painful task to inform the Hon. Member, that nothing
but a severe sense of duty could have induced former
Governments, as it now did him, to resist such a motion
as that before the House. It was always a painful office
Fto recal to mind the guilt of individuals, who, like
rost, Williams, and Jones, were expiating their crimes
a penal settlement; but the duty devolved upon him
of showing that the offences committed by those persons
were not of that mild and innocent nature which the Hon.
Member had described, but were, in point of fact, of a
nature to prove fatal to the peace, the welfare, and even
the lives of those very classes whose interests the Hon.
Member opposite professed to have most nearly at heart
(Hear.) He recollected, at the time, that a plea for the
treasonable and seditious manifestations that were made.
was offered in the circumstance that the lower classes
were goaded into acts of violence by want and destitution.
But was such an excuse to be offered for Frost or his corn
panions? 'Were they in want of the necessaries or even
the luxuries of life? No. They availed themselves of
the poverty and the consequent discontent excited in the
minds of the labouring tclasses, and they did so for the
amere purpose of personal ;advancement and self-agg,ran•
sstiement. If any doubt were entertained by the House
the grave character of the crime of which they were
convicted let him refer to the address of the judge who
tried them, Sir N. Tindal, than whom a more enlight-
enedi and humane judge never sat on the bench. But
the lion. Member had rested his motion, not so much
°n his denial of the gravity of the crime as on what he
termed the illegal nature of the trial, which ought, in
his opinion, to have at once been quashed. He r avowal
would hear the Hon. Member admit so much, for his avowal
would go forth to those classes who regarded him as a
leader that he considered the crime attributed to Frost,
Williams, and Jones as indisputable. With regard to
he legality of the proceedings, none of the judges
ad been of opinion that the conviction was not good
14w• On the contrary, their opinion was, that the
conviction was legal, and the Secretary of State
then had only to perform his duty, which he
did with the utmost lenity, the capital punishment
having been remitted for the milder one of transportas
tion for life to a penal colony. There were other crimi-
nals tried at the same time with the three chief offendrers,
but of these 1.0 were allowed to withdraw their plea and
to plead guilty, and these were sentenced to short terms
of imprisonment which had long since expired. Taking
all the circumstances into consideration, he was of opi-
nion that there was no ground for inducing the House to
make a special application to the Crown for mercy to
these individuals. If, notwithstanding the blood that
had been shed by the misguided and criminal men who
were now suffering for their offences, the House were to
step in and plead for their pardon, there would be no
line of conduct by which hereafter to be guided in
similar cases. It was most especially the duty of the
Government to repress such wicked and dangerous
attempts as those of Frost, Williams, and Jones. It
was the leaders that the law ought more particularly
to lay hold of. It was to the leaders that the atten-
tion of the authorities ought most strongly to be
attracted, and he was quite sure that the Hon. Member
Would not deny that to liberate the leaders of an insur-
gent mob would be an act of the greatest cruelty to
those whom they had misled. No person placed in the
situation which he had the honour to hold could give his
sanction to the motion before the House, without in-
curring great danger. It had even been admitted by the
Ron. Member that no undue severity had been practised
towards the three persons named by him. He only re-
gretted having been in a manner compelled to revive the
recollection of their crimes, but he felt that he had only
done his duty in speaking to the motion before the
Rouse. With respect to the Hon. Member's observation
that the case of Frost was not a proper subject for
laughter he must state that the laughter appeared to
him to have bean solely directed to the absurd imputation
of jealousy on the part of his Noble Friend (Lord J.
Russell) excited by his fear of having Mr. Frost for a
Political opponent. For the reasons he had stated he should
feel it to be his duty to oppose the motion.
Mr. C. MORGAN said that he had a very vivid re-
collection of the facts of the case as they came out on the
trial of Frost, Williams, and Jones, and he must, in the
performance of his duty, vote against the motion of the
Hon. Member.
Mr. HUME said that the decision of the judges was
nine to six on the point that the legal forms had not
been complied with on the trial, and on that ground he
should vote for the motion of the Hon. Member, as he
considered the whole proceedings were illegal, and that
Frost, Williams, and Jones were illegally conveyed out
of the country. With respect to the general grounds on
which the motion was based, he must say that he thought
the Government of England ought to stand on higher
grounds than those which called for the banishment of
political offenders. Russia and England were now the
only two countries where political offences were not con-
sidered to be worthy of pardon.
Mr. AGI4ONBY said that the term " all political
offenders" was too wide a one for him to assent to, and
he recommended the Hon. Member to alter it. He bad
voted formerly in favour of a similar motion, and he
should again repeat his vote now.
Mr. WAKLEY said that every part of the case was
so fully and minutely known to the House and the coun-
try. that it would be a waste of time to enter into the
details or to discuss them. Neither would he discuss
the question of treason; it was enough that Frost and
his companions were found guilty of that crime. But
he would observe that Frost and Williams might have
been successful in their enterprise, as others had been in
foreign countries, and then they would have been lauded
ets patriots instead of being branded as traitors. What
he wanted to impress on the House was the feelings
eatertained by the working classes towards those men,
feelings which he saw had created an uneasy sensation
on the Treasury bench.—(Laughter.) There were
!pillions of the working classes who believed that
'frost, Williams, and Jones had been illegally convicted,
Thand that opinion it was impossible to shake.
e very counsel on the trial said that this was the
Case; and two of the most eminent men at the
bar, the Lord Chief Baron, and Sir. F. Kelly also stated
that if the objection had been taken earlier, the
prisoners must have been acquitted. The motion was
only an appeal to the humanity of the House; but it was
hopeless to expect the House to make any concession to
the pebple. When he reflected on the past he only'
wondered that the working classes would ever consent
to appeal to the House again. It was not always the
people who committed treason. There were kings who
had been traitors to their country—royal miscreants—
aY, miscreants—who came to England after having
'airily attempted to take away the liberties of their
countrymen. Such persons had experienced the kindest
reception from the nobility, and even royalty did not
scruple to receive them into its palaces. He regretted
the contrast thus offered by the manner in which the
.petition of the working classes for mercy to Frost, Wil•
I an's, and Jones had been received by the House and
Government. lie should be betraying his duty if he did
not cordially support the motion.
bnColonel THOMPSON said that the present was an
neopnportune moment for the motion, which would have
extesmor.e properly made a week ago or a week hence.
nd CRAWFORI) hoped the Government would
ex
nlercy to Frost and his companions, who had now
tiar.teud
cot hvve itiaciences.by eight years' sufferings.
munityexpressei ii•oa the part of a very large com-
tion. He had lon• is determination to vote for the mu-
gerresisted any interference with the
Frost
of the
Frost and his compan'iown by an address in favour of
tys.t but at present he would ask
whether it was not likel o raise the Government in the
estimation of the House h
theye9nsenting to the motion for
an address in favour ot
if this course was adopted. criminals? He should rejoice
Sir D. DUNDAS thought it sv argument on the part of the Hon. ohs an extraordinary
not explained
that the people of England (and
timber for Finsbury,
who he meant by the people of En
had
t) being dissa•
urned, action,
with a verdict which had becgtnand
ins to law, therefore, because of such dissatisction,
the House of Commons, lawyers, and
men of sense,
were to surrender all the securities which the I
for Property, life, and liberty. These men knew aZila thve
Penalties they incurred in the case of failure when
thee
entered upon their treasonable course, and they ha nYo
light to complain that they were now suffering those
Penalties.w But what was the offence of these men, and
Peat was the penalty they were suffering? The Hon.
_4ll,..nscher for Bolton had asked, had they not suffered
18..u;rintly? Surely that Hon. Member must know that
It„fistng to the individual was not the only object of
arnent, " Pena ad paucas metus ad omnes veneat."
Was not merely what the individual suffered, but what
blvt:l,th,e effect. of
fthe punishment on society at large. Far
from him to interpose against the exercise of the

4U I