The Sun.
London, England, 1856-05-10 00:00:00

?HE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 10. 1856.

objection to lay the correspondence relating to it on the
table of the bongo.

PRESENTATION OF MEDALS TO THE SAR-

DINIAN ARMY.

In answer to a question from Mr. OTWAY,
Mr. F. FEEL said that her Majesty's Government
had decided that Crimean medals should be distributed
to the Sardinian army equal to that distributed to the
French and the Turkish armies. The medals had been
forwaried to the Crimea, but he believed had not yet
arrived.

of the decision of the Court of Directors, as the matter
had not yet comF, before him.

PROMOTION IN THE SCIENTIFIC CORPS.

Mr. EWART begged to ask the Clerk of the Ord-
nance whether it was now established as a rule of pro-
motion in the scientific corps of the army that no sub-
altern officer, however he might have distinguished him-
self as such officer, could be advanced to a brevet
majority until he should have again subsequently distin-
guished himself as a captain ?
Mr. MONSELL said there was no such rule as the
hon. gentleman referred to, but he was bound to say
there were very few instances of promotion to brevet
majorities for cervices performed as subalterns.

THE BANK CHARTER ACT.
Mr. MALINS reminded the house that when the
Bank Charter was under discussion in February the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had admitted the importance
of the question, and stated that he would not object to
appoint a select committee, but the time was inopportune.
Since then the stock of bullion and the reserve of notes
had considerably diminished, and it was the duty of the
Government to guard against the recurrence of the crisis
of 1847. He begged to ask the Chancellor of the Ex•
chequer whether, seeing that the bullion in the Bank of
England continued to diminish, it:was the intention of
the Government to allow the present session of Parlia-
ment to expire without taking any measure to relax the
strictness of the provisions of the act of 1844 which re-
gulated the issue of Bank notes ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, with the
permission of the house, would answer the question in re-
ference to the present state of things only; the amount of
hellion in the Bank on the sth January last was
10,537,0001. ; on the 26th March it was 9,723,0001. ; and
on Saturday last, the 3d May, 9,807,00/. ; showing a
decrease since the beginning of the year of 730,0001. This
drain of bullion was owing, in a great degree, to remit-
tances on ft.'!count of the Turkish loan. The residue of
that now in the Bank was about 650,0001. Against a
portion of that bills would be drawn, so that only the
sum of 200,0001. would be remitted in specie, and the
drain on account of the commissariat chest would be con-
siderably lessened.
.Under these circumstances it was
likely the stock of bullion would increase ; and in answer
to the question he could only say it was not the inten-
tion of the Government to propose any such measure as
the hon. gentleman referred to.

ter, that he felt himself bound, as an act of justice, to
express his opinion upon the subject. There could not be
the slightest doubt that he had properly exercised his dis-
cretion, and this opinion was strengthened by the judg-
ment of the Queen's Bench on a late occasion, in a case in
which an application was made fora mandamus to compel
him (the Attorney-General) to issue his fiat for a writ of
error. That was a case in which the prisoner wished to
bring error upon the ground that the place where the
offence was proved to have been committed was not
within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court,
where the prisoner was tried. The Court of Queen's
Bench held that, as that was an objection of which the
prisoner might have taken advantage at the trial, and as
he had had substantial justice done to him, the Attorney-
General was right in refusing his fiat, and that be had
exercised a wise discretion. The man was charged with
a foul murder, and had the right of challenge. A juror
was discharged, on the ground of illness ; another man
was added, and the jury were re-sworn. The prisoner's
counsel took their chance of a verdict ; and now they
came upon a purely technical point, and wanted to have
the objection argued in a court of error. He considered
that the right hon. gentleman the Attorney-General for
Ireland was to be admired for the moral courage of re-
fusing to sign the fiat ; and he hoped that after the full
discussion which had taken place on the subject, in this
and the other house of Parliament, no blame whatever
would attach to him for taking that course.
Mr. WHITESIDE observed that in the present case
the prisoner admitted that he bad no objection to the
12th juror sworn in the room of the juror who was dis-
charged, but he was not told that be had the privilege
of challenging the others. He (Mr. Whiteside) thought,
under all the circumstances, it would have been well if
the Clerk of the Crown had given the same intimation
to the prisoner with respect to the 11 jurors that he had
done with respect to the 12th: At the same time he
thought the right hon. gentleman was quite justified in
refusing the fiat.
Mr. NAPIER agreed with the hon. and learned gen-
tleman who spoke last as to the advisability of having
given the prisoner an intimation that he had a right
of challenge, but considered that the Attorney-General
for Ireland was justified in withholding the fiat.
Mr. M'MAHON thought, if the tight efchallenge was
not an idle privilege, it ought to la, complied with as a
matter of course, and expressed a wish that in this
case the right hon. gentleman the Attorney-General
for Ireland would yield to its application, and allow the
point to be reserved. Every subject of this country had
a right, whenever a wrong judgment was pronounced
against him, to have it brought under the review of a
superior and competent authority, He would be the
last man in the house to shield an assassin, and in all
probability this man was one, but he would be glad to
see him have atrial which would give public satisfaction
on the ground that no privilege which the law gave was
withheld. (Hear.)
Mr. I. BUNT hoped that this refusal to allow a writ
of error would not be construed into a precedent. A
writ of error did not mean that the sentence should be
reversed, but that the mode of trial should be reviewed
by a higher authority. The question here was, whether
the prisoner had any right which the law withheld from
him. A barrister of the highest eminence in Ireland
had deliberately certified that there was an error in the
proceedings sufficient to reverse the judgment in a
writ of error, and no man who knew Mr. Fitzgibbon
could doubt that he was convinced of the validity
of the point, or he would not have certified at all. If
there was a mistake committed, it was the mistake of
the Attorney-Genera!, who was bound to give the pri-
soner every right the law allowed him. He did not
wish to see such a power as this placed in the hands of
the Attorney-General, for Le believed that it was giving
him an assertion of power and a prerogative which might
be mischievous and dangerous in its exercise.
Mr. BAINES sail, upon the very best construction
of this case, he considered that the manner in which the
authority vested in the Attorney-General for Ireland had
been exercised on this occasion was perfectly sound and
judicious, and it must be satisfactory to his right hon.
friend that those most qualified to express an opinion,
he meant the high judicial authorities iu another place,
one after another pronounced their approbation of the
manner in which his discretion had been used.

Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE said he entirely concurred
in the opinion of fhe right hon. gentleman who spoke
last, and that he should regret if anything were to deter
the Attorney-General from conscientiously exercising his
prerogative for the purpose of justice. He admitted
that the power vested in him was anomalous, but as it
was so vested, he thought a proper use of it had been
made on this occasion.

Mr. WATSON also concurred in the opiaion of the
two hon. members who had last addressed the house.
He could not conceive the right hon. and learned gen-
tleman performing his duty in any other way than he
had. He was supported by ad the cases in the course
which he had taken, and if it was in the option of the
prisoner to bring a writ of error, the right would be
abused to defeat the ends of justice. If fault there was,
it lay in the counsel for the prisoner, who did not avail
himself of the error at the time. He deprecated that
hon. and learned members should send it out to the

world that a merely technical objection touched the
substance of the trial, and affected the justice of the
sentence.
Sergeant SHEE said the question before the house
rested much upon the facts of the case. The prisoner
challenged 20 jurors peremptorily, and one more he
challenged for pause, but he failed to produce his wit-
nesses to prove the cause, and the Attorney• General in-
sisted upon that juror being sworn. The subsequent ill-
ness of one of the jurors gave the prisoner a right to
challenge peremptorily all the 11 jurors, and among
them the man whom he had not been able to exclude on
account of the absence of the witnesses. The Attorney-
General would have done well to have given the prisoner
the opportunity of challenging that particular juryman
peremptorily, when e►ents had given him the right, and
the better course for the right hon. gentleman now to
pursue would be to advise the Crown to put the case i❑
a course for being heard before the judges in Dublin.
EMBARKATION OF THE TROOPS FROM THE
CRIMEA.

Sir J. WALSH said he was desirous of calling the at-
tention of the house, as they were the guardians of the
public purse, to the continuance of our troops in the
Crimea. which entailed a heavy burden on the country,
and deprived us to that extent of the blessings of peace.
Moreover, the highly satisfactory condition of the army
at present would soon be exposed to the heats of summer
and the malaria of autumn, frequent and dangerous in
those countries, and therefore it, would give him great
satisfaction to know what measures were in progress to
bring home the troops without delay. He would ask the
First Lord of the Admiralty, first, at what period he ex-
pected the first embarkation of the troops from the
Crimea ? and, secondly, whether be could at all fix a
limit to the period within which the whole would be
withdrawn ?
Sir C. WOOD said, in answer to the first question,
that the first embarkation of troops took place a fort-
night ago, and that 5,000 troops had already arrived in
Italy. The stations in the Mediterranean would first of
ad be occupied by the Crimean army, so as to relieve
the militia which were there at present. The troops would
be removed from the Crimea nearly in the order in which
they were sent out. It was impossible to fix the precise
period within which they could be removed, but his ex-
pectation was that the great mass of them would have
returned early in the month of September.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. WILKINSON drew the attention of the house
to the questions on which four hours a half had been
wasted in conversation. He appealed to the house
whether that was a satisfactory mode of dealing with
the business of the country. While such was the prac-
tice, no leader of the house could lay down any business
in the hope that it could be carried through with advan•
tags and success. He hoped some arrangement might
be contrived for checking that kind of desultory conver-
sation, and appealed to the house for their support if he
should hereafter bring the subject more formally before
it. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CRAUFURD suggested that greater opportu-
nities should be afforded to private members to bring
forward business in which they were interested.
The adjournment of the house to Monday, the 19th,
was then agreed to.
LAWS OF IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. _

Mr. A. PELLATT said that he would, on an early
day, ask leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws of
imprisonment for debt.
The house then proceeded to the orders of the day.
GENERAL WILLIAMS.

The Clerk at the table having read her Majesty's
gracious message, whereby she recommended that a pen-
sion of 1,0001. a-year be conferred on General Sir Wil-
liam Fenwick Williams, K.C.B.
Lord PALMERSTON said—Sir, the brilliant ser-
vices of Sir W. Williams are so fresh in the recollection
of every one I have the honour of addressing, that I
should feel that really I was almost doing an injustice to
him if I were to enter into any detail of the gallant ser-
vices in which he has been so recently engaged. It has
seldom fallen to the lot of any man to perform services
calculated to produce more important results than those
which have depended upon the exertions of the gallant
officer in question. Sir, I have only this one remark to make
—I believe Sir W. Williams is a native ofNova Scotia ; and
it must, therefore, be a matter of satisfaction to the house
that our fellow couatrync-in in North Ara erica have been
partakers, in the person of Gin. Williams, in the satis-
faction of sharing in the honour of the distinguished ser-
vices that have marked the progress of the war. Sir, the
paper I now hold in my band states that her Majesty
has been graciously pleased to confer upon Sir William
Williams the rank of a baronetcy, and, in order to mark
more distinctly those services, she had been pleased to
grant that the dignity be held under the style and title
of Sir William Williams, of Kars. (Cheers.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON said that, in point of strict form,
it was not necessary that a motion made in committee
should be seconded, but he hoped the house would bear
with him for a few brief sentences, in which he desired
to express how cordially be concurred in the motion of
the noble lord. He considered that not only would the
motion of the noble lord be carried by acclamation within
the walls of the house, but be believed and hoped that,
out of doors, the proposal would receive the sanction and
support with no less unanimity of every subject of her
Majesty. No member of the house concurred more
heartily than he did in the tribute of gratitude to tha
gallantry of the army and of the navy which was yester-
day so eloquently proposed by the noble lord and so
unanimously adopted by the house. Next, after those
signal mercies, for which during this war the nation had
had reason to be thankful to Divine Providence, the
early and successful termination of the war must be at-
tributed to the devotion and gallantry of the army and
navy. Never had those high qualities been so distin-