The Sun.
London, England, 1833-03-21 00:00:00

AUTHENTICATING PETITIONS.

Mr. HUME stated that the Committee now sitting up-stairs
for the reception of petitions had experienced considerable
difficulty in consequence of the irregularity in many of
the petitions, some of which were lithographed, and
others were so irregular, that the Committee thought
it would be much better if Members would endorse their
names on the petitions which they presented, so that the Com-
mittee might know, when any petition was irregular, to whom
to return it. He would mention one instance, which wa.
that of a petition commenting upon a speech made in that
House, which it was well known was wholly irregular. He
therefore would move that each Member should affix his name
to every petition presented.
Mr. WILKS opposed the motion, as it would be exercising
a censorial power over the right of petitioning.
The SPEAKER thought that the Hon. Member did not
understand the intention of the motion. Every Member wa,
responsible for the petition he presented—(Hear)—and if any
one should be presented that was irregular, it was but fair that
it should be returned to the Member who presented it. It was
not, in his opinion, exercising a censorial power as to the right
of petitioning.

After a few observations from Mr. HUME and Mr. O'CoN-
NELL, the motion was agreed to.
A discussion took place between Lord Althorp and Sir It.
Peel,we believe, respecting bringing on certain motions pending
the Irish Disturbances Suppression Bill, but from the very in.
audible tone in which it was carried on, it could not be heard
in the gallery. We regret that such low-toned conversations,
many of them, we believe, interesting to the public, are of but
too frequent occurrence.

Mr. O'CONNELL was perfectly willing that the Bill for
suppressing disturbances in Ireland should be discussed as
quickly as possible, but he complained of the House sitting so
late as it had. He appealed to the Noble Lord, whether after
one o'clock this morning, there was not a discussion which
had lasted for a considerable period—(Hear, hear)—but
which ought to have been decided at an earlier period.
Many Gentlemen who voted for the general principle of the
Bill wished to introduce amendments, but had not the op-
portunity of doing so, For his own part, he should not
think he was trespassing, if in future he moved an adjourn-
ment at one o'clock.

Sir M. W. RIDLEY stated that at the time the adjournment
was proposed this morning, the House was as full as it could
well have been expected to be at that hour. Undoubtedly it was
in the power of any Member to move an adjournment, but that pri-
vilege ought not to be exercised except on any particular occasion,
when any thing of interest was under discussion. The rules of the
House were made for the convenience of the House, and the
benefit of the public; but when those rules were misapplied,
it was in the power of the House to modify them, so that any
Member might avail himself of them when it was not decidedly-
against the feeling of the House to do so.

Mr. O'CONNELL, in explanation, said he did not, of
course, mean to say that he could ever be desirous of moving
an adjournment in the middle of a clause, for instance, but
he really did not see why he should be liable to any im-
putation in objecting to the House going into a
fresh clause at one o'clock in the morning.—(Hear.) He
thought that, considering the opposition he was bound to give
this measure, he could not justly be accused of having offered
any unnecessary delay or obstacle to the progress of the Bill.
Lord EBRINGTON hoped his Noble Friend would enter
into no compromise on this occasion with respect to breaking
up the discussion at any particular hour whatever.
An HON. MEMBER rose to protest against the long speeches
which the Hon. Member had been in the habit of making.
Speech es—

--" Immeasurably spread,
Seem lengthening as they go;"
and it was his intention to propose that some limits should be
laid down by the House, within which speeches ought to be
confined.—(Cries of " Question, question.")

The SPEAKER said that the Hon. Member was out of or_
der in speaking upon a subject respecting which no question
was before the House.
IRISH DISTURBANCES BILL

Upon the motion of Lord ALTHORP the whole House re-
solved itself into a Committee upon the Irish Disturbances Bill.
The CHAIRMAN then read part of the 12th clause, when

Mr. BOTCH rose to address the Committee. He stated,
that at the late hour at which the House rose last night,
he had proposed an amendment to the preceding clause.
That Z.^endment had been offered by him to prevent
a crying injury, namely, that of having a prisoner turned out
of Court at the time any argument was raised against any argu-
ment which he had himself urged. On that occasion he wits
not a little surprised to have found two or three experienced
British Officers rise up to defend the practice, although
in their long experience such a practice had never
existed. After that, it was hardly likely that a civilian
like himself could be listened to, but with a degree of
impatience, under the supposition, no doubt, that he was mis-
taken in his premises. He now held in his hand the pro.
ceedings of a courtmartial, under the Mutiny Act, attested
by the Deputy Judge Advocate himself, and signed by him, to
be delivered to the prisoner. By this document it appeared that
the Deputy Judge Advocate acted with the greatest virulence
as Counsel against the prisoner in speech after speech in the
absence of the prisoner, and on no less than three several occa-
sions had the Court been cleared, and the prisoner turned out.
His friend, an Advocate, who had been allowed to speak to him
du•ing the trial had been turned out also, and elaborateargn-
ments, quotations from the judges, quotations from the Terms'
Reports and decisions of the courts of law, and long
argumentative speeches took place, during the time
that the prisoner and his friend were out of court
The prisoner having been turned out of Court with his friend,
the Court then decided that the prosecutor should be allowed
to prove the firing of a ball.—(Hear.) He mentioned
this to show the House how important it was to the prisoner
that he should hear the argument. Surely it could not be inteil.
cd that the courtsmartial to be established by this Bill should be
allowed to hear the Judge Advocate as counsel against the
prisoner, at the same time turning the prisoner out. The
prisoner, in the case he had here stated, tirged the hardaip
of the Judge Advocate being heard against him in his absence,
hut the courtmartial decided that it was all in regular cour,e.
He should not, therefore, be doing justice to an independent
constituency and to his own opinion, if he did not propose
to amend this clause. After the words " to allow a sergeant-A.
law or a counsel learned in the law to attend the courtmartial
as
.ledge Advocate," he proposed to insert these words—" Provid,l

Mr. WYNN said there was a very great difference
between the Chairman of a Quarter Sessions and the Judge
Advocate; the former knew nothing of a case before
it came before him, while the latter was the actual
adviser of the case being brought before the court at all ;
therefore, the evidence must have been laid before him
before he came into court and took his station. There
was also another part of the duty of Judge Advocate
that entirely differed from that of the Chairman of the
Quarter Session, which was, that he made an opening
speech, stating the whole case to the Court. The
Right Honourable Gentleman cited several cases of courts..
martial upon which he had sat, where the Judge Advocate
had acted in the capacity of prosecutor. He made an opening
speech, conducted the case from day to day, and replied. It
was impossible that the Judge Advocate could be like the rest
of the Court, for he must know every thing of the case be-
fore it came before that tribunal.—(Hear, hear.) In fact,
it was impossible for a person to examine witnesses who had
not previously made himself acquainted with the case.
Mr. STANLEY said his Right Hon. Friend forgot that the
clause took the power entirely from the courtsmartial, which
was the ordinary system, and 'gave it entirely to the Lord
1 Lieutenant.

Mr. COIIBETT said that the Right Hon. Gentleman
seemed to think that the slight alteration which had been made in
the clause would be sufficient to reconcile the public mind to
courtsmartial-----a thing in itself altogether unbearable. After
all, what did it amount to ?—(Hear, hear, hear.) It
! amounted to this, that five or seven men, he forgot which, who
depended upon the Government for their rank, their promotion,
their degradation, and in short, for their daily bread, were to
decide, let who would plead for those under trial.
Sir ROBERT PEEL thought that it would be
extremely indecorous for any barrister or King's Coun-
sel who had had any hand in getting up the prose-
cution, to be allowed to act as Judge.—(Hear, hear.) Ile
had no objection to the principle of the clause, but he regretted
that as trial by jury had been considered insulticient,Government
had not taken courtsmartial as they found them under the Mu-
tiny Act. They had introduced into that Act provisions
altogether at variance with its whole construction. They, for
example, had required unanimity in cases where the Court
consisted of five, and that five should agree when it consisted of
seven. He begged to say, that these courts were not courts_
martial, such as were created by the Mutiny Act. He was
sorry they had been so named in the Bill, because the name of
courtmartial in civil cases was obnoxious to the people, and in
fact they were not so. It was right to employ military officers
on these trials ; but the moment any changes, such as those of
appointing Counsel, or changing the numbers of the majorities
necessary to convict were made, there was an end to the court-
martial as appointed under the Mutiny Act. He thought the
name was offensive, and that it ought to be abandoned, for
there was no reason why some other appellation should not be
given to these courts.

Lord ALTHORP said there was some importance attached
to the suggestion of the Right Honourable Baronet, but it
was impossible to be attended to, as the clause had passed.
Mr. O'CONNELL would nut prolong the discussion, but
he would merely take a name that was familiar to the House,
and call the tribunals revolutionary tribunals

Mr. WARBURTON' was of opinion that it was necessary
that no misunderstanding shou d take place upon the subject,
but that whatever was intended should be explicitly in the Bill.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that an amend-
ment was quite unnecessary, as it '-ad never been intended
by the Government that the Judge-Advocate should be
both Judge and prosecutor. It was int nded that a
separate prosecutor should always be appointed by the
Lord Lieutenant. It would be considered even a breach
of trust in the Judge-Advocate if he were to take part in
the trial as Counsel ngsinst the prts,,ner.
Mr. WARBURTON then suggested that, as there were
several kinds of courtsmartial, and as it might be difficult
to ascertain, by a general reference to the Mutiny Act,
how far the provisions of that Act referred to the present
tribunals, it might be proper that the special provisions of
the Mutiny Act which had reference to the present Act
should he especially mentioned.
After a few words from Mr. STANLEY, Mr. R. GRANT,
and the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, who thought the suggestion
unnecessary, it was withdrawn.

Mr. O'CONNELL took that opportunity of moving
the insertion of two provisions, which he thought highly
important. The first was one to compel those tribunals
to be open courts, which at present they were ❑ot
obliged to be; the second, that the counsel or agent of the
prisoner should be allowed to take notes of the evidence.
This he thought important, because by the present prac-
tice all persons were prevented from taking notes excepting
the Judge-Advocate. He therefore moved that words to
that effect be add.-d to clause 12.

The SOLICITOR GENERAL had no objciction to the
amendments moved by the. Hun. and Learned Member,
with this limitation, that the Judges eh, ul.l be allowed to
retire for the purpose of deliberating on their judgment,
as was the practice of the Judges in Courts of Con mon
Law, and of juries, when deliberating on their etrdict.
With regard to the taking of notes ut the evidence, he
thought such a cl.use unnecessary ; but he would nut ob-
ject to it. He hoped, however, that the Hon. and Learned
Member would postpone his amendments tor the present,
with the understanding that they should be inserted at the
proper place.

some remarks from Mr. O'CONNELL, Mr. R.
GRANT, and Mr. WARBURTON,

Mr. O'CONNELL was perfectly ready to withdraw
his arbendment, on the understanding that his suggestion
should be adopted at the proper part of the Bill.

The clause; as amended, was then agreed to.
The 13th clause was then read ; upon which
Mr. O'CONNELL objected to that part of the oath
which compelle•t Alemhers of the courtsmartial " not to
disclose or discover any vote or opinion of any particular
member of the courtinartial, uolcss repaired to give evi-
dence thereof as a witness, by a court of justice, or a
courtmartial, in due course of law." lie said that this
was introducing a principle in those Courts which was
not recognised in the ordinary Courts •t Justice; and be
saw no reason for the difference.

Air. STANLEY said that the suggestion of the lion.
and Learned Member was quit- inadmissible. It was
desirable that as little personal odium should be attached
to the members of the courtsmartial as possible ; and he
h ught it much better that the sentence skoubi gn birth
—n .t as the sentence of individuals—but of the tribunal.
He would divide the House opts the question, if the Hon.
and Learned Memlier should insist up.ot his amendment.
Mr.O'CONNELL would not divide the House upon that
question. He had no wish to put Memtiers to that trou-
ble, excepting in such questions as he considerd of vital
importance.

The 13th and 14th clauses were then agreed to.
The 15th clause was then read.
Mr. O'CONNELL moved that the words "or by
some other person duly authorized by hire or them fir that
purpose" be added. His object was, that the orders should
be issued on the sole responsibility of the Lord-Lieutenant.
Lord AL THORP said these o-ders came direct from
the Lord-Lieutenant in the first instance. Tie Noirle
Lord suggested to the Hurl, and Learned Member the
great delay which must be oceisinned by waiting for the
Lord-Lieutenant's persJnal order in every particular
instance.
withdrew his mot on. GERAI,
s
Mr. O'CONNELL said the May would not be more
than a day or two. The Lord.Livut.liant's order could
317 r. explanation from the SoucyrFN
ire transmitted to the roost remote parts of Leland in
thirrA.eefoted:y :
,C E

Colonel WILLIAMS maid, it ought not to b, al !owed

to the Lord-Lieutenant to delegate his power in case

where the tit wence was so high as transportation.
The CHAIRMAN read the clause which referred to
this part.
Mt. O'CONNELL 'would take the sense of the House
when the report was brought up.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clause 16 was then read.
Mr. STANLEY proposed, as an amendment, to strike
out of the second part of this clause the words " or any
member thereof." The intention of this amendment was,
that every proceeding should be enforced by the whole
Court, and nos by any one Member of it.
Mr. O'CONNELL hoped this clause would not be
allowed to remain so ambiguously worded as it was at pre-
sent. The Solicitor-General might understand the clause,
but there were other Generals ho could not. According
to tbis c wise. a person, though not living in a proclaimed
district, might be summoned into one by a courtmartial,
and be thus forced into a district where the Habeas Corpus
was suspended; then if he refused to give evidence, he
might he detained by the Court.
Mr. STANLEY said that the operation of the susuen-
sion of the Habeas Cor ills was equally against any man
who had committed any offence which rendered him liable
to it, whether he were in the proclaimed district or not.
It was ti•en moved a. an amendment, that after the words
and it shall he lewfill," these words be inserted, " and
they are hereby requited to swim.% any person whose
evidence is t.qii red, as well on the part of the defence as
of the prosecu ore."
The anonitieent wag then agreed to.
Mr. AGLI()NRY wished to knew whether the Judge-
A vocate was to be c naideri d in the light of a part of the
Court, or rnly a leg I adviser?
Mr. STANLEY said, that ut der the Act, the Judge-
Atik °cat, Wlllll4 lotite no power to is ue warrante.
Mr. AGLIONHY thought it wool I be very advisab'e
that he should take a part in the committals.
The 16'h clause. with vet hal amendments. particularly
one to exempt any person from twing examined tinder the
Art who could not be lawfully .xamined tie ore other
courts, ayes then ordered to stand pact of the Bill.
The 17th clause, which enacts that any person liable
to bii prosecuted within any proclaimed district for any
offence against 27th George 111., 50th George 111 ,
Ist and 2tl William IV., and 2d and Sd William IV., or
for any offence against the Act, may be tried by such
conrtamartial as the Bill appoints; and which courts-
martial may sentence to transportation for life or for a
term of not less than seven years ; but nut to impose the
penalty of whipping. &c.
Mr. O'CONNELL suggested that some provision
should be introduced so as to make it quite clear that of.
fences committed before the Bill was passed should not be
prosecuted under it.
Mr. STANLEY thought such a case already amply
provided for by the Bill, but he had no objection to intro-
duce words agreeable to the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man's suggestion. Finally words were introduced, ex-
etnptine all offences from being prosecuted under this Bill
committed subsequent to its passing, and before any dis-
trict was nroelaiwed.

Mr. RUTHVEN proposed an amendment, to prevent
these courts from irflicticg any other corporeal punishment
than whipping.
Mr. WARBURTON thought that words like those
suggested were proper, to make the Bill accord with the
provisions of the Mutiny Act.
Mr. STANLEY bad no other objection to the words,
but that they implied the possibility of such tortures being
now used as had formerly been employed.
Mr. O'DWYER thought that some limitation was ne-
cessary. He recollected that four years ago a case of horrid
cruelty occurred at a gaol in Dublin. Thumb-screws
were applied ; bolts were put in the mouth. The evidence
of what he stated was on the table of the House ; and the
gaoler, who had for these cruelties been found unfit for his
office, had teen made a stipendiary Magistrate of in a dis-
tant county. That showed the baneful ascendancy of
faction in Ireland. . .

After a short conversation, words were introduced at
the suggestion of Mr. O'Connell, which would have the
effect of Mr. Ruthven's amendment, exempting all persons
convicted before these Courts from any punishment to
which they would not be liable for the offences specified
before this Act was passed.
Mr. STANLEY brought forward the proviso of which
be had given notice a few nights back. The addition was
to this effect—" Provided also that nothing contained in
this Act shall be deemed or taken to give to such courts-
martial any power or jurisdiction to try any person or per-
sons to be charged with printing, publishing, or circulating
any libel, or with any combination or contederacy contrary
to the provisions of the Act of the 27th Geo. 111., or
with the prevention or obstruction of any person or persons
in the act of enforcing aoy right or claim tinder the pro-
visions of the last-mentioned statute, unless such combina-
tion, confederacy, prevention, or obstruction shall be ac-
companied by force or threats; and all such offences as
shall be unaccompanied by force or threats, shall remain
triable according to the course of common law."
Mr. RUTHVEN withdrew his amendment, and the
proviso was agreed to.
On the question that the clause, as amended, should
stand part of the Bill,
Mr. ROEBUCK proposed the addition of a proviso,
requiring that the reasons for the judgments of the
courtsmartial, whether on matters of fact or of law, should
be entered on the minutes of the courts at the time of
giving the judgment.
Mr. STANLEY said, the proviso was liable to consi-
derable ohj ctions.
Mr. ROEBUCK consented to withdraw it for the

present.
The clause was then agreed to.

On the 18th elaume being read,

Mr. O'CONNELL moved an amendment, limiting the
power of arrest. His oti•ct was to prevent the exercise
of this power by private soldiers or non- commissioned
officers, except in the presence of magistrates, peace offi-
cers, or their own sup, rior officers.
A desultory diseu-sion lollowed, in which the Solicitor
General, Mr. O'Connell, Lord Althorp, Mr. Shell, Mr.
C. Feigus,on, Mr. Stanley, Mr. Rutliven, Mr O'Dwy-r,
Mr. O'Connor, &c. participated. Eventually, two amend-
ments, suggested by Mr. O'Connell and Mr. Fereusson,
were propose by Mr. Stanley ; the one, after the words
taus- to he apprehended and committed, any person
who, within any such procb.itned district as aforesaid,

shall he in the fields, rreet4, hiehways, or elsewhere out
of bis or her dwe ling or place of abode, at any time from
one hour after sunset until .unris.," to insert the words,
"under suspicious cireutnstances ;" the other, after the
words " nidy i.e tried," to insert the words, " unless dis-
charg-d, or held to hail by person+ an authorized." These
aimndments, toeether with some others of a verbal nature,
were aereed to; and the clause, so amended, was ordered

t i stand p in nt the Bill.
Tile SOLICITOR GENERAL observed, that the
Committer 1141 i now c. me to rt. e of the most important
clauses of toe B.ll—that which rtl trot to &foie:Jim),
visi s by the maostrates, or in vii tue or the r warrants,
between sunset and sunrise, for the purpose of a-err .in-
ing the pres.nce or the absence of the inhabitants. It was
allowed on all hands to be of the greatest imt.ortance that
the inhabitants of any house in a proclaimed district,
should be compelled to furnish the means of ascertaining
whether they were at home or abroad ; and for that pur-
pose it had been supposed necessary to give the I%lagis-
Crates, or the persons au horized by the Magistrates,
the power of breaking and forcing an entrance into
any house, under the circumstances in question.—
(Hear, hear.) His Majesty's Government, however, were
very anxious to mitive the severity of this enact-
ment, and to lessen the inconveniences which it might oc-
casion.—(Hear, hear.) They had, therefore, prepared
an amendment, which he should have the honour to pro-
pose, and which they hoped would meet the approbation
of all parties, and at the same time secure the object which
the clause had in view, without rendering it necessary to
break or force an entrance into any of the houses.—(Hear,
hear.) It was proposed that, in the fiist instance, the
Justice, or any person with warrant of justice, accom-
panied by a commissioned officer or chief constable, should
go to the House, and require the male inhabitants to come
forth, and thus enable the authorities to ascertain that
they were not absent ; and that if, on the ground of illness,
or on any other ground, the male inhabitants, above the
age of fourteen, should refuse to come forth, the persons
authorized should then have power to demand admission
into the house, but should not have power to enter with-
out the leave of the inhabitants ; and that if they were
not allowed to enter with such leave, then the male inha-
bitant or inhabitants should be deemed and takers to be
absent, and should be subject to the operation of the Act.
(Hear, hear.) Such was the substance of the proposed
amendment; it would have the eff,ct of preserving every
man's house as his castle; and none of the inconveniences
or abuses anticipated by the Hon. and Learned Member
for Dublin, and other Hon. Members, could possibly arise.
Mr. BERNAL then proceeded to read the clause, as
amended. When he arrived at the word " inmates,"
Mr. O'CONNELL moved that they :should he called
" by name."
Lord ALTHORP objected to it, as through a mere
mistake the object of the Bill might be defeated.
5-Ir. O'CONNELL—Yet you would make a mart liable
to the punishment of a misdemeanor without knowing
his name.
A long and desultory conversation here took place be-

tween Moira. Spring Rice, Sheil, Perceval, Perrin, Lam-
bert, and C. Ferguson, on a suggestion of Mr. O'Con-
nell's, that the names of the inmates should be marked on
the doers.

Colonel YORKE thought all these verbal amendments
frittered away the Bill, so as to render it utterly inefficient.
It would therefore be no protection to the peaceable—no
terror to the criminal, and would only be an useless piece
of legislation, tending rather to increase than allay agita-
tion. He thought the hest way of disposing of it would
be to put it into the fire.—(Hear.)
Mr O'CONNELL—That is a proposition which I
sin u'd have the greatest pleasure in seconding.—(Much
laughter.)
Mr. WALKER, adverting to Mr. O'Connell's amend-
ment about the names, was astonished that the Hon. and
Learned Member should be the man to impose an addi-

tit nal du'y on the peasantry of Irel4nd, be who always
prof ssed to he their friend, when the non-performance of
that duty would subject them to punishment.
Mr. O'CONNELL denied that he did any such thing ;
he was the friend of the peasantry, but had never pre-
tended to be the friend of the disturber of the public peac..
--(Hear, hear.) His amendment went to protect the
ileac able peasantry, and to guard them from any treache-
rous practices to which they might be liable if what he
proposed was not agreed to.

. .
Mr. WILKS was altogether opposed to this amend•
went.

Mr. STANLEY should vote for the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman's amendment, upon the distinct understanding
th-tt a clause should afterwards be added, calling on the
people to furnish the names of their inmates to the police.
Mr. o.o,nnelt's amendment, to add the words " by
name." was then agreed to without a divi‘ion; as was

also the amendment proposed by the Solicitor-General, as
to the police caring on the inhabit ints of a house to show
themselves, instead of the police entering their houses.
The questi“n was then put on clause 20, which related
to the discos ery of arms in the houses of persons resident
in tlisturl•ed districts.

Mr O'CONNELL called the attention of the Committee
to the h in.ship that would be imposed upon individuals
who had enemies malicious enough to place arms in their
houses, or in the thatch of their cabins, or even in a pig.

stye, if they had one, for the purpose of afterwards giving
information to thi- police, if their accusers were not bound
to show that they had those arms knowingly in their
possession. He should propose, therefore, to insert the
wad " knowingly" in the present clause; and if the
Committee did not agree in that proposition, he should
afterwards propose to insert the words, " in a dwelling-
house."

The SoLICITOtt• GENERAL and Lord ALTHORP con-
tended that it was sufficient for arms to be found upon the
premises of a person in a disturbed district, to justify the
presumption of knowledge, as in the cases of larceny and
smugeling it was sufficient to show that the stolen or
smuggled goods were in a place under the control of a
party, to throw upon him the onus probandi of nut being
aware that they were stolen or contraband.
After some further conversation, the amendment with
respect to the word " knowingly.' was negatived without
a division.

Mr. O'CONNELL suggested another amendment,
hat " barns, outhouses, &e.," should be excluded ; as,

if they were not, the masters might be at the mercy of
every vagabond servant that chose to place arms in them.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought that houses
should be included of which servants were supposed
to have the key. . _

Mr. O'CONNELL said it would puzzle a courtmartial
to find out 01 what houses the Irish servants had the keys.
As to procuring false keys, that was out of the question.
They were too poor to be able to do so, unfortunately ;
and if they were not, so many causes of Whiteboyism
would not be recorded.

After a slight discussion, Mr. O'Connell's amendment
was agreed to.
Several other verbal alteratiAns were made in the
clause, after which it was agreed to.
The 21st clause was struck out of the Bill without any
discussion.

The 22d clause having been put,
Mr. O'CONNELL remarked, with respect to the words
" by menaces or otherwise," that there was one mode of
menacing which was legitimate—that of threatening those
who gave evidence with an accusation of perjury in case of
swearing falsely. All that he wished was, that the only
menace that could be made was this species of legal one.
He thought the words " or otherwise," should be omitted.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL objected, as most im-
proper, to any threat of an accusation of perjury made
before trial.
Mr. O'CONNELL thought that every innocent man
had a right to warn his accuser that he would, in case of
false testimony, charge him with perjury. No such threat
could of course be made to jurors ; it concerned only
those who gave evidence.
Lord ALTHORP said, that the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman only alluded to part of the ca•e. A menace
of the sort be mentioned would have an influence over
evidence given, but not on the appearance of witnesses.
Now the object of the clause was, that there should be no
menace to prevent the appearance of witnesses.
Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSSON considered the words
objected to compl-tely necessary. The clause, if any
alteration were to be made in it, should be strengthened
instead of being weakened.
An Hort. MEMBER suggested the propriety of having
any punishment less than 14 years transportation left in
the hands of the Lord Lieutenant.
The clause was then agreed to.
The 23d clause was then put and agreed to without any
discussion.

Lord ALTEIORP then moved that the Chairman do
report progress, and ask leave to sit atain.
DISTRESS AMONG THE INDUSTRIOUS
CLASSES.

Mr. T. ATTWOOD said he had a motion on the paper
for to-morrow which he considered as important. The
Noble Lord was desirous that he should postpone it until
the Irish Coercive Bill had passed through the House, and
be (Mr. Artwnod) was willing to do so, provided he was
allowe•' to make his statement to-morrow night, leaving
the further disru,sion for any other period that might be
deemed reasonable. . .

Vv
. _
Lord ALTHORP did not think it would be desirable
that the Hon. Gentleman should mike his statement before
the matter could be regularly brought forward for discus-

SlOll.

Mr. T. ATT WOOD observed that there were so many

notic.a of motion on the parr for the next two months,
that he should fear having an opportunity to bring the
übject forward lor a considerable time, unless the Noble
Lord would appoint a day for the discussion.
Lord ALTHORP could not uniertake to appoint any
day.
Mr. T. ATTWOOD wished to know if Wednesday or
Fs iday in the next week would he convenient.
Lord EBRINGTON hoped the Noble Lord would
enter into no arrangement that would delay the Irish Bill.
Mr. T. ATTWOOD then declared that he should not
postpone his motion, but endeavour to bring it forward
to-morrow (this day).
DRAMATIC AUTHORS BILL

The Dramdtic Authors Bill was read a second time,
To be coroini,ted on Monday.
STAFFORD BRIBERY INDEMNITY BILL .

The Stafford Bribery Indemnity Bill wa., atter some
conversation, read a second time. To be committed to•
morrow (this day).
POLICE OFFICES.

On the motion of Mr. LAMB, the House went into
Committee en the salaries of police magistrates and the
expense of police ffices.
Mr. HUME wished to know if it were intended to do
away with any of the police offices now in the metropolis.
Mr. LAMB replied Chit Lambeth-street office was in-
tended to be done away with.
The resolutions were agreed to, and the House resumed.
OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH.
Sir A. AGNEW moved for leave to tiring in a Bill for
the purpose of enforcing the better regulation of the Sabbath.
After some observations from Mr. WARBURTON, Mr.
HOME, Mr. SHAW, and several other Hon. Members,
leave was given.
Tree Bill was then brought in and read a first time, and
ordered to be read a second time on the 30th of April.
The other orders of the day having been disposed of,
the House adjourned at half-p oit two o'clock.

,(Se

RECOLLECTIONS OF A CHAPERON.—
cond Edition, just published.)—" We cannot but express
our gr,aitude to Lady DacKe, for the very rich treat she
has set before tr.. We hardly know how to convey to our
readers the very high opinion we entertain of these volume's.
They appear to us most perfect pictures of the operations
of the human heart under various circumstances—generally
those of aristocratic life in Engl ord."—Spectator.
PRINCE TALLEYRAND.—Ever since the
commencement of the French revolution, even when this
distinguished personage was Bishop of AUTUN, it has been
his habit to put down every occurrence relating to public
events, and to the characters with whom he has mingled.
Ibis work extends to many volumes, some portion in his
own autography, others written by his Secretaries, and it
is customary with the Prince to read to his visiters oc-
casionally extracts from these MS. connected with the par-
ticular period that may happen to be under discussion at
the time.