The Sun.
London, England, 1834-02-22 00:00:00

take If tilt Inquiry were granted. Let the House consider
if, since the irresponsibility of Judges were first established,
any precedent had been given for such a proceeding ? To
one cast he would refer. When the House attempted to
call Lwd Holt before them to answer for his conduct upon a
particular occasion, to explain the grounds upon which he had
given n particular decision, he replied—" I hold an authority
independent of this House. I gave the reason for my judgment
in the place in which my commission required me to do so. I
requ'ae to be protected and not arraigned by this House, and I
wilt not give the reason of my judgment." He (Sir R. Peel)
wr,uld be glad to know in what respect a judgment differed from
ar judicial charge. If that charge were dictated by a conscien-
tious conviction that it was called for,must not the Baron demur
to the jurisdiction of the House to institute the proposed inquiry

He ;Sir R. Peel) doubted the policy of the justice of that House
instituting an investigation into any judicial act, unless it were
one of partiality.—( Hear.) The House admitted that in certain
cases political matter might be introduced into Judges' charges.

What tribunal then was to define the limits within which it was
to be circumscribed ? Was that House to establish a censor.
ship—to license Judges•charges ?—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
Were they to point out for what faults Judges were to be held
amenable, or would they not rather leave it to themselves

as a matter of taste and of discretion ? (Hear, hear.) In
this case the charges of the other Judges had been passed by
unnoticed, but the charge of this Learned Judge had teen
circulated through the country; it was placarded over the
country, because it contained a warning to the people to keep
the peace. Upon what pretence could that House institute an
accusation against this Judge? Was it because that they
found that in another political charge which had been made
there was no personal invective ? The duty of a Committee,
if such a Committee should be appointed, would indeed be a
most unpleasant one. They would have to examine over every
sentence of the charge to make some discovery, and to select
those parts which they might consider subjects for censure, and
those for admission. And when the report of such a Commit-
tee was made, how would the House proceed ? If the charges
which had been made were proved, would there be ground for
the removal of this Judge? He would ask the House, if
there were no ground for these charges, whether they should
attach a label around the neck of this minister of justice?
If the Learned Judge remained in the administration of jus-
tice, was it not right that he should remain in his office un-
suspected and unimpeached ? Because, though the House
could not remove him from the Bench, yet, if they employed
any secret censure against him, his own sense of honour would
dictate to him the necessity of throwing up his office ? Then,
he would ask, was it wise on the part of that House, to use the
fearful instrument of impeachment in this case, if they even
felt they were warranted in removing him ? Why, in their
own reports they had referred to his public charges. These re-
ports had been printed at their expense, and they would not
And any instance which did not correspond with that which the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman complained of. If they disliked
irrelevant charges, they would find them in the case of Judge
Day. He would ask what great benefit could arise, if the
Committee proved that Baron Smith had been the author of
the second report ? The Right Hon. Gentleman had said that
he was waiting for same expression of feeling on the part of
Mr. Baron Smith ; but he (Sir R.Peel) had that confidence in the
credit and station of that Learned Judge, that he hoped whilst
the consciousness of integrity remained to him he would not
demean himself by any expression which might be considered
as tantamount to an apology. He was, however, far advanced
in years, and the infirmity of age might have affected the
spirit which had once animated him; and yet, with the fire of
youth abated, he hoped would be found in the person of
this Learned Judge one who would fight the battle of the in-
dependence of the Judges. If he were conscious that the
charge was frivolous—if he were conscious that no public in.
convenience arose from the practice of late hours—and if he
came to deliver his political charge, partly because he be-
lieved it calculated to support the cause of order and further-
ing the purposes of good government, partly because the charge
was sanctioned and encouraged by their approbation, and
partly because he was proud of seeing the appendixes of the re-
ports of that House graced by his charges, whatever the fate
of the Learned Judge might be, he trusted he would descend
to no voluntary humiliation. If, indeed, this motion had oc-
curred in other times—in an unreformed Parliament—if it had
occurred under a Tory administration when Judge Fletcher
delivered a sentence—if he (Sir R. Peel) had then been Secre-
tary for Ireland, and the report of 24 pages had been recurred
to—if he (Sir R. Peel) had brought forward a charge against
a Judge—if he had said, "Don't let him go the circuit, here is
a charge, a political charge made by him"—if this had occurred
when he (Sir R. Peel) was in office in 1814, what would the
present Lord Chancellor have said ? And when he should
have proposed a Select Committee for the purpose ofestablishing
the formula or the mode of censorship under which these
charges should be made—what would have been said by my
Lord Brougham of the independence of the Judges, and of
arrogance and contemptible folly of a Member, who, because
a personal attack had been made upon him, should endea-
vour to subject a Learned Judge to the discipline of a Select
Committee of that Houie ?—(Hear, hear.) There was a feel-
ing abroad that in the case of those declaimed, most of
liberty, and who spoke in the loudest terms of their preten-
sions, made this the ladder by which they attained their object,
and, having done this, threw it down! There was a feeling
abroad that these persons had no such inspiring love of liberty,
which they professed before they attained power. Threedays
only had now elapsed since a proposition was made to a willing
audience for the purpose of establishing the liberty of the
press. It was proposed in that measure to place the law of
libel on the same ground with that of scandal—that no ex-
officio informations should be resorted to; and it was consi.
tiered a grievous evil that truth constituted a libel. Censure
was libel, because it wounded the feelings, therefore was liable
to persecution. Apply this principle then. Was there to be
no liberty of speech ? Was a Judge to have no option, but to
flatter the Government of the day ? Should they who were
to permit this Bill to pass, to put this Judge on his trial without
documentary evidence, and without proof of the allegations
made ? How could they profess to respect the liberty of speech,
if they instituted a proceeding arising out of it which was
more vexatious than any persecution ? If they or the Govern-
ment were offhnded at the terms of the charge complained of,
could they arraign the Judge for the purpose of his answer in
person before a Committee of the House to the charge made ?
If this were done, what security was there for any one if
that course were to be pursued ? Here, then, upon the
allegation of a single individual—those allegations nothing
proved—an inquiry was called for. Now, he would ask not
only what Judge, but what man could be safe, or what was the
liberty of speech of which they boasted? Upon that, indeed,
this attack would be worse than ten thousand e.r officio informa-
tions. Let the House look to the charge of Judge Fletcher,
which he had heard so much lauded. The charge against Mr.
Baron Smith might have been, that he introduced political
topics ; but there was, at the time, before him no case of trea-
son or violence. But it was said that, therefore, he was not
warranted in giving a political charge, seeing that it was not a
special commission. The Right Hon Baronet, after some fur-
ther remarks, observed that Judge Fletcher (we believe) went
to Wexford, and that he gave a charge of twenty-four pages,
illustrative of the state of the country, in which he commented
on every topic connected with domestic policy, he not being
gent on a special commission, and he left the House to judge
whether toe state of the country justified this proceeding. The
Right Hon. Baronet then proceeded to read a part of the charge,
expressive of the Judge's pleasure at the appearance of the
country, that the calendar was light, there being but three
or fbur eases, ono of which was for homicide, not connected
with those disturbances of which he had heard so much.
Why it was because of the absence of these crimes that
Judge Fletcher during his charge felt himself warranted
so aeldeessing a political charge to the Jury. But let the
ouse take into account the moral taint which this pro-
posed inquiry must leave, if the Judge felt it his duty to
adhere to the advice of Lord Bacon to warn the people
against the consequences of agitation.—(Hear, hear.) He
would now ask the House to consider whether they had
any ground to go upon to warrant them in asking the Lords to
join in the proceeding ? As Mr. Baron Smith's judicial
career was drawing to an end he would leave it to be deter-
mined whether they could remove him from the Bench,—and
if they could not, why was it necessary to heap upon him a
Mass of injustice by subjecting him to inquiry ? The Hon.
and Learned Member had compared the Learned Judge to a
stiernond, and he should ha to remembered that the purer the
diainond, tee, more visible were the specks in it; and if, in
pursuing this charge, he would place in the scale the high
honour of the judicial career of the Learned Judge, he would
see that there was no reason why they should ask him to sub-
iii to this inquiry. The Right Hon. Baronet warned the
House not to, ensheathe the powerful instrument of impeach-
ment, and observed, that involved as they had been the other
night in the discussion, he would ask whether one man ill ten
had read with attention the charge made? Admit the principle
of the present motion, and they would at once open the door to
gvery solicitor to prefer complaints. Let the House, then, re-
trg.e los elapse It was said, indeed, that they must proceed,
but if they found that they had good reason to retrace their
steps, they acted the part of better men who recalled their
track. Ilecallse the Hop. and Learned Member for Dublin
bad warm feelings, he might think himself the object of vitg-
Peration. But, without a specific charge, and without any
notice being given to the Judge immediately interested, he
was opposed to subjecting hint to any inquiry.
Lord ALTHORP would not say that the House should not
retrace its steps. If they had substantial reason for doing so,
there could be no difficulty in retracing their steps; but he
must say. that when a question was decided by the House of
;:ommons that the conduct of a Judge should be inquired into,
ihat decision should not have been taken without due deliherae
tion—(Hear, hear)—and the decision having been so taken, 'he
held it would be inconsistent hastily to retract it. The Right
en. Gentleman heving adverted to the charges, he" would
observe, with regard to the first, it was that of neglect of duty.
It appeared that the Judge went into Court late and sat till late
at night. In the case of Armagh, he admitted'that the ex-
planation of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, the Member
for Dublin University, tended in a great degree, if not entirely,
to take away the charge made so far ; but it appeared from
statements which had been made, that not only at Armagh, but
at other places, Baron Smith had been in the habit of going
late into Court ; and in the case of Castle Pollard particularly
the Judge had not acted as he ought to have done. He had
heard that at Castle Pollard the Counsel protested against this
mode of proceeding. The Right Hon. Gentleman seemed to
think it was impossible for a Judge to make an apology. Now
he thought it would have become the Learned Judge to have
stated that the House of Commons having voted for an inquiry,
and that the House having thought the course pursued not
correct, to have authorised some one to state his regret to the
House. The Right Hon. Gentleman had not drawn the