The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-07 00:00:00

ments because the Lord Chief Justice had objected to confine
the measure to Ireland and to misdemeanours. He consented,
however, to postpone the consideration of his amendment till
a future time, wl en he proposed to bring them forward as part
of a more general measure. He did not think that the best
way to deal with the amendments was to take them all into
consideration together. The accused person had in this case
to make out his own statement—he had to tell his own story.
And, if he satisfied the sessions, or the magistrate, as the case
might be, he was to be discharge 1. If he did not satisfy them,
he was to he committed for trial at the discretion of the magis
Crates. That was in his opinion a great improvement, but
whether it amounted to so great an improvement or safeguard
as to render transportation unnecessary, was quite another
qaestion. While he was on his legs, he would say one word
upon transportation, as that punishment had great weight in
Ireland. He had heard fram pe. sons from all parts of the
United Kingdom, that the fear of that infliction had
a great effect in deterring the people from the
commission of crime. He also wished to suggest another
matter, which did not require to be brought forward in the
shape of a.Bill. He held it to be of the utmost importance
that any person who for any offence should have been sen-
tenced in Ireland to transportation, should not have any inter-
val between the sentence and its execution. The person or
csnviet should be sent at once from the dock to the vessel, and
that would have more the effect of overawing the criminals
and deter:ing them from the commission of like afences for
the time to come, than double the punishment not accom-
panied with that celerity of execution. God forbid that the
convict should be hurried away to New South Wales or Van
Diemen's Land before the Crown had time to exercise its pre-
rogative of mercy ; but he still thought that such a course
would have a prodigious effect in increasing the fears of crimi-
nals. They all knew what had happened in Yorkshire some
twenty years age. There was a conspiracy between a father
and his daughter to charge a person with rape. That was
carried into effect. in the morning. Between nine and ten
o'clock they gave their evidence on the trial. By ten o'clock
both judge and jury saw the necessity of a verdict of acquittal,
as there was perjury in the case. The judge who presided
asked if the grand jury had been d:scharged, and, on being
told that they were not, he desired them to consider
the case of the father and daughter. The grand jury sent in
their bill at eleven o'clock, the prisoners were tried at twelve,
and by three they were on their way from the gaol in a cart, in
the beginning of the execution of their sentence. Every one
who knee( the northern circuit would admit, that for the next
three circuits the effects of the promptitude of this punish-
ment had a salutary effect in diminishing the amount of crime.
He mentioned that fact as he only wished to show the great
and salutary effects produced by promptitude in the inflection of
punishment. He wished also that the Executive Government
would take care that when a murder had been committed,
the old practice of executing the sentence as near as possible to
the scene of crime should be revived. He knew the bad effect
of the present principle in Lancashire where the executions
took place at the end of the county, probably distant from the
scene of the crime, and the Westmoreland peasant had the
sight, bat not an example. He would only say, in conclusion,
that if these suggestions were followed the effect would be a di-
minished amount of crime.
Their Lordships then went into Committee on the Bill.
On the first clause being read,
Lord BROUGHAM referrad to the amendments in this
clause which the Lord Chief Justice (who was absent) had in-
tended to propose. He Lord Brougham could not agree to
the proposition that the testimony of three magistrates should
be required before a district was declared. if they waited till
three magistrates sent up evidence of a district being in a state
of disturbance they might fail in very mans instances.
Lord CLANRICARDE entirely agreed in the opinion that
the declaring of a district should be left to the Lord Lieu-
tenant.
Lord BROUGHAM thought that the interference of three
magistrates would in many cases operate injuriously.
The Lord CHANCELLOR made a reference to the Act. 3 and
4, Wm. the Ii ~ in respect to this point, the applicatien of
which we did not understand from the low tune in which his
Lordship spoke.
Tice Earl of WICKLOW remarked, that as the Lord Chief
Justice would not be present till next week, and as the feeling
of the House appeared to be against the adoption of his amend-
ment, he thought it would not be fair to wait for him.

Lord BROUGHAM said his Noble and Learned Friend
did not stipulate for three magistrates being required to depose
as to the state of a district before it was declared. All that he
wanted was, some better foundation for proceedings than those
in the present
Lord COTTENHA NI was of opinion that the matter
would be hest left in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant.
The cause was agreed to, as were also clauses 3,4, and 5.
On clause 6 being read,
Lord CLANCARTY observed, that the Noble Lord who
had introduced the measure had complained of the very great
(I,lficulty in getting witnesses to come forward when any crime
had been committed. There was no doubt that individuals
who came forward to give their evidence were exposed
at times to very great danger. It was not, however, so
much the dread of personal harm that prevented witnesses
coming forward, as it was the fear of having attached to them
ha stigma of being considered as informers. It was a very dir-
ferent thing to give evidence in Ireland from what it was in
England. He would earnestly propose to her Mejesty's Go-
vernment that powers should be given to the local magistrates
to compel vi et amnia persons to come forward whom they be-
lieved were competent as witnesses.
Lord CAMPBELL was of opinion that the law had already
provided for the difficulty which the Noble Lord had com-
plained of. A witness might be compelled to come forward,
and even be detained in custody until the trial should come on
at the assizes. He was also liable to be punished with fine and
imprisonment if he neglected to appear when called on. He
believed that all the law could do had already been done to
provide for the case.
After a few words from Lord WICKLOW, the clause was
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
On clause 7 being read, a long conversation, inaudible in
the gallery, ensued between Lord Cottenham, the Lord Chan-
cellor, and Lord Campbell, after which the clause was made
part of the Bill.
Clause 8 was next proposed, when
The Marquis of WESTMEATH considered that the remu-
neration to persons who might be injured should not be paid
until the amount had been levied on the county which was li-
able to pay, and that it should not be paid out of the consoli-
dated fund. He hoped the clause would be altered to the effect
he proposed before it was made part of the Bill.
Lord MONTE AG LE ebjected altogether to any such alter-
ation being made. The consolidated fund was contributed to
equally as much by Ireland as by England.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH withdrew his amendment,
and the clause was ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Earl GREY believed that it would be neither fair, proper,
nor just, that the landlords of Ireland should be exonerated from
paying their share of the expenses incurred in prosecutions.
He thought also that the present dreadful state of the Irish
people would never have existed if the landlords of Ireland had
done their duty to the people under them. He should alto-
gether object to clauses 13 and 14.
The Earl of RODEN, with some warmth, said that if the
Noble Earl intended to state that the evils with which Ireland
was afflicted arose from the neglect of the landlords, or from
any impropriety on their part, he (Lord Roden) should feel it
his duty, by as direct a contradiction as was consistent with the
rules of the House, to deny the veracity of any such assertion.
The Earl of FARNHAM would also deny the Noble Earl's
assertion. All the harm he wished the Noble Earl for the re-
mark was that he might be an Irish landlord, and be obliged to
undergo the painful task of residing on his estate.
Earl GREY explained, that possibly he had spoken with
too much warmth. A great change had taken place in the
treatment by the landlords of their tenants. The present evils
with which Ireland was afflicted were perhaps mainly attri-
butable to the past history of that country. The state of things
now existing there was the direct consequence of the dereliction
of the former landlords in their duties to the people. —( Cries of
" No, no.") It was an historical fact, with which not only
England, but all the world, was acquainted, and all that the
Noble Lords opposite might say or do would not make the fact
less true.
The Earl of WICKLOW was of opinion that the present
condition of Ireland wan owing to the gross mismanagement
of this country. He admitted that a great charge had taken
place, but he would protest against the histcrical facts which
the Noble Earl had employed.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was opposed to the intro-
duction of the clauses to which his Noble Friend had objected.
Nix, he asserted that these murders were committed by
strangers frequenting the country, and who were concealed,
partly from a general feeling of hcepitality prevailing through-
nut the country, and partly he was afraid from a secret con-
nivance.—( Hear, hear. )
Lord CLANCARTY observed that the Noble Marquis had
rightly stated the source of these lawless assassinations, and it

principle. He wanted to know if any Noble Lord in that
House would give the Lord Lieutenant power to transport a
man supposed to be of a dangerous character. He was sore
that no Nolie Lord would grant such a power. They were
too much imbued by English feelings to do so. If they were
really to transport a man for his bad character, better for them
to do so avowedly on that ground ; and there ought to be a
searching inquiry into his character. Let him suppose the case of
a lover, or that of a man going to see his priest, and that either
of them were suspected to be going to joist a party of White-
boys, who were to meet that night; and were accordingly ar •
rested. The coincidence of rucli a rneeting (in case there was
one) would be certain to condemn them before a jury.
These were the suspicious circumstances which the
Noble Lord thought justified the passing of
such a clause. He did not distrust the
judges of the land, who were to try the parties, but ha would
a,ls how could the, judges pronounce upon character? How
could they proceed. Was there to be a public investigation ?
It seemed to him quite impossible that such a mode of pro-
ceeding could be justified. A man perfectly innocent came as
much within the reach of the Bill as the most guilty, and such
a man might be condemned to the severest punishment, and
not only himself, but all depending on hint. Ile thought it
monstrous that their Lord hips would sante ion such a clause.
Let him suppose a man evicted from his land under the clear-
ance
system, and that he expressed those feelings which hid
been.ntertained by such a man 13 long as human nature was
what it was—if, under such circumstances, although innocent
and ueoffending, the actual victim of oppres ion was trans-
ported fur his expression of strong feeling, would it
not be most monstrous?—(Hear, hear.) The system would
also have the effect of lowering the character of the police in
Ireland, inasmuch as it would create a system of espionage de-
grading to that body, and calculated to impair thi it efficiency. '
If the law was to give this power to the police, it would utterly
destroy the liberty of the subject. Neither did he think this
power should be given to the local magistracy, though he had a
great respect fur them, without its being greatly abused.
They were to have communication with the Lord Lieutenant,
but he had no more means of knowing the character of the
man than the Judge. 'The accused party, if convicted,
was to be sent from the dock to the ship, and
therefore what power or means of appeal to the
Lord Lieutenant had he ? These were the reasons
that influenced him in making objection to this clause.
If it was the object of the Bill to enforce obedience to the pro-
clamation, surely twelve menths' imprisonment, with hard
labour, would be ample punishment for being out at night. If
a more stringent clause were required, let it be inserted, but
let it be so worded as not to endanger the liberty of an inno-
cent man, and perhaps the lives of his family. No man was
more opposed to agrarian outrage than he was; but there
were ample means of framing clauses to meet such cases as
men being found wandering about at night with arms con-
cealed about their persons, or other suspicious circumstances.
What was the real cause of this system of agrarian outrage ?
What was the bottom of it all? They all knew it was the
rooted hatred of the poor to the law, the result of long ages of
gross misgovernment ;'and they had been told by high autho-
rity that in Ireland there was one law for the rich and an-
other for the poor, and long ages of misrule had con-
vinced him of the fact ; and in order to eradicate that
feeling would they pass such a measure as this ? Would these
cases of oppressiou which he had pictured, and which it would
be impossible to avoid under this Bill tend to eradicate this
feeling? ‘Vould it not rather tend to increase the evil, and
exasperate the feelings of the people? Would it not rather be
better to rely on the ordinary law of the lend ? He knew he
would be met by the argum •nt" that this was no new measure.
But that was an additional reason why he would oppose it,
because such measures never had any other effect in Ireland
than to create a worse feeling amongst the people of that
country against the Government by which they were ruled.
He begged to apologise for having trespassed upon the House
so long, but he would now conclude by proposing that the
sentence should be twelve mouths' imprisonment instead of
transportation.
Earl WICK LOW said he conceived that there was no class
of the community in Ireland who would more rejoice at the
passing of this clause than the peasantry of Ireland, the very
elms for whom the Noble Earl had made so pathetic a speech.
Ile ( Lord Wicklo AO admitted this clause was a severe one;
but, though similar acts had been enforced before, he never

heard of icase of such hardship and tyranny as the Noble Earl
had been so pathetically describing. In answer to the Noble
Earl's pathetic speech, he (Lord Wicklow) begged to refer the
House to the speech of a great statesman, Lord Grey, who
in 1833 introduced a similar measure, the severity of which he
lamented, but he said that its very severity was its best
security. This present Bill made a misdemeanour a transport-
able offence, and the Bill of Lord Grey contained a clause pre-
cisely similar.
The Lord CHANCELLOR and Lord CAMPLELL said that
Lord Grey's Bill contained no such clause.
Earl WIC.KLOW continued to say that he considered this
Bill would be useless without this clause, and therefore he
would oppose the amendment.
Lord CAMPBELL said that the Bill of 1833 made the in-
timidation of witnesses a transportable offence. ; but the b?ing
out at night was made simply a misdemeanour, without de-
' fining any punishment beyond fine and imprisonment. The
Noble Lord then read the clauses he alleded to, the words of
which bore oat his statements. He then continued to say that
in the pres,nt 13111 no distinction whatever was made between
the offences, and therefore he should say that so far this Bill
had been most unhappily framed. The offences of intimidating
a juryman or a witness, or being out armed were transportable
offences ; but no distinction was made between those offences.
and that of simply being out at:night, perhaps upon his lawful
business. So that a man being out at night, unarmed, or
banded, but " under suspicious circumstances," as the Bill had
it, was to be transported for fifteen years. The Noble Lord
then read a supposed case, upon which a form of indictment had
been framed, and contended that a document so loosely worded
should not be permitted to exist. A man might be out upon
an affair of gallantry or some other matter which was
not upon a " lawful cccasion", but yet it might be
found difficult to prove that it was unlawful.
He (the Noble Lord) did not believe that the present measure
was the proper cure for the malady that prevailed in Ireland;
for they could not make the law more respected by leaking it
more cruel and unjust. He trusted that, on consideration,
they would come to the conviction that their object would be
better attained by acceding to the amendment of the Noble
Earl. Agrarian outrages were condemned by every man in
the country, and by no man more strongly than Mr. O'Connell,
who had ever set his face against such.—( Hear, hear.) And
he should then say if the Bill passed in its present form it
would have the effect of aggravating, rather than correcting,
the evils complained of.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord BROUHAM said he had attended to the arguments of
Noble Lords on both sides, and he should confess that, in hi:
opinion, the subject had been approached with an absence
of all party feeling.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
But after having given the fullest consideration which
he could to the arguments, he was forced to admit that he was
entirely in favour of the Bill without the amendment. In his
opinion some of his Noble Friends had been led away by their
feelings on the occasion, and had not sufficiently attended to
what the nature of the power intended to be bestowed on the
Government really was. His Noble Friend who had moved
the amendment, all along affirmed that the very venial offence
of being out an hour after sunset was a misdemeanour,
and punishable by transportation. But it was not for so
venial an offence that he was liable to transporta-
tion, but for an offence which he (Lord Brougham)
considered by no means venial—being out under sus-
picious circumstances, and not on lawful, and there-
fore on unlawful, occasions—the law having declared that public
security required that he should not be out on such unlawful
occasions.—(Hear, hear.) Now there had been a distinction
sought to be drawn between what was a moral and
what was a legal offence. Now, he (Lord Brougham)
could not at all conceive the difference, as a well-
disposed subject should ever consider that what was opposed to
law was opposed to right, and, consequently, to morality.
Again, a man was not to be transported fur fifteen years for so
venial an offence as Noble Lords imagined; for the Court was
armed with a power to examine whether he was out on lawful
business or under suspicious circumstances,— (Hear, hear.)
What better security, he wished to ask, could there be, than
that the Judge before whom the man would be tried would go
into the particulars of the case, and direct the jury as to the
nature of the offence ? And then, even though he should be
found guilty of being out under suspicious circumstances, the
same judge would mete out such punishment as, under all the
circumstances of the case as proved before him, should appear
to him to be just. —( Hear, hear.) If the man hap-
pened to be out under circumstances of a very
mischievous nature always taking into account the
tate of the neighbourhood or locality and that
he was proved to be a man of good character, would not that
go into the jury-box in his favour ?—( Hear, hear.) And was
it not certain that the sentence of the Court would be perhaps
_ _

would be their duty to avail themselves of the machinery which a day, or two days imprisonment, or perhaps a fine of five shit
that Bill would afford them to relieve the poor people from the lings ?—( Hear, hear.) It had been asked, " ashy were not the
support of that class of vagrants. He would wish the Noble suspicious circumstances defined?"—(" Hear, hear," from Earl
Earl were a little oftener present at the inquiry then going on Grey.) Now his answer to that was because it would be im-
with reference to the Irish poor. law, as he anticipated much possible to define them : for instance, one man being seen with
good would be t ffeeted• from his knowledge of Irish affairs. a bludgeon, might be no great crime, but when 60 or 60 men
He had been instrumental in putting the Noble Earl's name armed with bludgeons were seen together, would not such be
upcn the Committee, but as yet they hal gained but little an aggravation of circumstances ?--(Hear, hear.) In reference
from his intcligence. to the mixing up of agrarian outrage with landlord tyranny, he
Earl GREY said that he told the Noble Lord distinctly that (lewd Brougham) should say they were questions that should
it would not be in his power to attend, and yet, in spite of that not be mixed together, for every such consideration weakened
communication, he persevered in placing his name upon the the efficacy of the measure for the suppression of crime. Let
Committee. He had attended the first few days, as it was in the people be ever so iniseoverned, that gave them ne right to go
his power, but since that time it was utterly impossible that out in mobs and make life insecure and property valueless in that
he could attend. ill-fated and unhappy part of the empire.—( Hear, hear.)
The consideration of clause 15 was then postponed. When the time came for considering the grievances under which
Earl GREY felt it his duty to move an amendment on the agricultural population laboured, he would be as ready as
the 16th clause. That clause made it an offence, transportable any Noble Lord to enter into the question, but he felt disinclined
for, fifteen years, for a person to be out of his house to mix the questions at present—( Hear, hear)—and he there-
an hour after sunset. Now they must Ncollect fore felt it his duty to support the measure, in doing which he
that this was a trifling police offence, and by no means involving could not avoid saying that he was giving his support to a
the breach of any moral principle ; he, therefore, would move measure infinitely less stringent than the one which he (Lord
that the punishment should be limited to imprisonment for one Brougham) had the honour to present to their Lordships fur
year. It seemed to him that the power which was proposed acceptance. It was true, there was this severity in the present
to be conferred, and not now for the first time, upon the measure that did not exist in his Bill, namely, the making mis-
executive Government of Ireland, was one which should not demeanour a transportable offenoe ; yet he could not help say-
be conferred unless under the most extraordinary circum- hag,* that in his opinion, the court-martial clauses in his Bill
stances. He might be told that the care for which such a were decided the most important clauses in the measure, and
clause wee intended was one which called for so severe a pun- fully justified his anticipation, as not a single man was tried
ishment. Ile did not, however, consider that the circum- under them, so great was the terror which they inspired.--
stances of Ireland presented any such case as that. He was of (Hear, hear. )
opinion that the personal liberties of the inhabitants ofwa pro- The Marquis of CLANRICARDE considered that if the
claimed district should not be so fettered as that they would amendment proposed by the Noble Earl (Earl Grey)
be obliged lo stay within their cabins from about four or five in were carried, that the Government would be armed with no
the afternoon of a December day till half past eight the follow- more than the ordinary power. As to teaching people to
ing morning; and that they would not set their foot out of respect the law, such could not be done by letting them see,
their miserable cottages during a period of sixteen hours year after year, that by a combined effort they could defeat it,
without subjecting themselves to these severe penalties. A and overreach the constituted authorities.—( Hear, hear.)
peasant may notvisit his friend—rosy not go to his work, without They argued on this matter as if the law were to be universally
running the risk of being arrested by a policeman, and afterwards applied all over Ireland, but their Lordships should recollect.
being obliged to prove (what no man could prove) that his that its operation was limited to the disturbed districts; and no
intentions were free front criminality. It was said by the honest man, he would undertake to say, would in such a dis-
Noble Lord that the clause was necessary, and that it only trict be found out of his house after sunset. The really good
applied to perssns who were found under suspicious circum- effect of the measure would be, that while it inspired honest
stances. He could not, however, consent that it should ever men with confidence in the power of the Government, it at
come into operation in any of those disturbed districts, and no the same time struck terror into the hearts of the evil-disposed
arguments that he had heard could induce him to come to a by the severity of its' clauses. If the amendments of the Noble
different conclusion. Was it to be supposed that their Lord- Earl were, however, acceded to, the Bill would be so weak-
ships were to pass a law of such unexampled severity, because ened in its operation that it would be comparatively useless.
a
toPman, forgetful, perhaps, of the enac:rnent, should wish The very papers read by the Noble Lord who had introduced
relieve the tedium of a sixteen hours' confinement in his the measure were a satire upon the imbecility of the Executive
miserable cottage by going out to breathe the fresh air, tt.at, Government, and formed the very best indictment that could
f.,r such a venivaletfl.
; ransportcci to a enee, he should subject himself to be be drawn up against them. If Government had long ere that
utterly shocking to
evse-r-ttlement for fifteen years. It was so time assumed a Ligher tone, if they hail brought the power of
• should the Bill come befoyre .
for
ice,nir Lordsl• 1113'
principle of natural justice, that, the executive to bear upon the disturbed portions of Ireland,
inserted in it, be House with that the evils they were then considering, would have had ne exist-
clauseto it. He might be told thate'itwo'ld "Y' " Not content" once. He should oppose the amendments of the Noble Earl.
men, but to vicious and insubtirdinattelipdennt apply to peaceable Lord COTTEN HAM said that the Noble Earl, by his
only whe were found in what was called suspicious and that those i amendments, did not wish to rescind the clause to which the
u)licious circum- amendments applied; all he wanted was to limit in some degree
stances," would coma under its influence' What,t. he would the punishment of. offences. The first object cf society was of
ask, were suspicious circumstances ? He wishe know how course to secure life and property, and the only question was,
they could distinguish between two men who were found out, therefore, how they were best to do so. When this Coercion
one upon a re ally useful occa ion, and another who was in: Bill was first introduced it was proposed to make it a perma-
iluenced by improper motives? He would take two instances. vent law for Ireland, but it was now considered only as an ex-
go
Suppese one man, ing out for the purpose of visitinn, his traordinary ex;edient to remedy an extraordinary state of
sick friend, and another going to join a party of Whitetoys, things. With renard to the particular clause in question, el-
and suppose both arrested by a policeman, what differ. though he woul.l not deny for a moment that this was a res'ric-
ence, he would ask, could be found in the external circumstances tion on the liberty of the subj •et, still if the peace of Ire-
that one man was. influenced by
milann- landThls required it, the Government were right to persevere.
to justify them' in saying
precaution,appca,ed to adopted
was a measure
proper motives, and that the other was innocent ?' No
amendments could pronounce upon the human heart, and therefore it would i preventing offences, oflthim,.however, that the
Theyof a
nt the
deeh
tohualtd Noble Lord I
be impossible, with any
.regard to justice, to say under such 1 punishent, as provided by the original Bill wwarsheimulenemmoebnreecwrifmotuhulaaldynt
circumstances who was innocent or who as guilty. The mere i severe. and that the am
! that there were gradations in crime,
fact of a man being out at night was not a crime, and. could : meet the exigencies of the case.
not justify such a severe punishment. He had heard it stated
out of the House that there was a mode of detecting
a man— I might be out of his house after sunset for the worst of pur-
that his character would criminate him.
If that was really the poses, another manmight b e also out for purposes comparatively
innocent. The introduction of the words i. under suspicious
ground on which they proposed to go, it was a most dangerous