The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-07 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, PRIDAY, AUGITST 7, 1835.

Mr. Mackintosh purchased the property only a few years since.
The effect of the 13i11 would be to bring H ~ avering-tate
Bower within the limits cf the proposed borough of Rumford.
Mr. Mackintosh made his purchase of the Crown. The rentti.l
of the property was about 1,800/., and the
was 72,0001. The injury to the property be very con-
siderable.

—I stand 'pen the same ground I did befor. I sbo•_+lci
ire ex-
tremely sorry to appear to defy the Hon. House, but I must
Contend that I stand as a ~lefndattt in the whole ease.
tutl'4n tq gay, that it the qiiestiqn doel iltlt refer to
Yoh, ycu will refuse to give any answer to it—say yes or
no ?—After some hesitation, and referring to some paper, the
witness said, " I mu't decline to answer any question put to
me by the Groat Yarmouth Committee."
Mr. O'CONNELL—I am answered.
Mr. li. C. FERGUSSON—Was there any question put
to you at ail ?—Yes.

What was it?--I really can't recollect.
M
Mr, PE A SlS—Was it note " Are you a voter of the bo-
rough of Great Yarmouth ? "—That was the tiiittition,
Mr. R. C. FERGUSSON—Why refuse to answer that
question ?—Because I think I should not be called upon_ to
answer any question in a case in which I am defendant.—
( Loud cries of " Withdraw.")
The witness was taken from the bar, when
Mr. O'CONNELL rose and said he felt himself bound to
move that the witness who had just been removed from the
bar be committed to Ncwgate.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said he very much re-
gretted the absence of his Learned Friend the Attorney-Ge-
neral upon that occasion, because that question was one of
.the very utmost importance. At a time like this, when
party excitement ran so high, it was extremely desirable
that the House should come to a calm decision upon the
subject like that before it. .According to his view of the
law, the witness was perfectly justified in the course he had
taken ; because he did not think that this was a
case at all analagous to that of Prentice, he hav-
ing answered a variety of questions. One was put •to him
which did not in any way affect him, which he refused
to answer, after having answered every previous one.
It did appear to him to be a hard case to compel a witness to
answer questions which might criminate him. Here was a
witness called before a Committee to inquire into the
propriety of prosecuting that very individual.—( Cries of
" No, no," and " hear, hear.") Such, however, might be the
probable result.—( Hear.) He did then think it a hard
case to tell a witness, we are going to get evidence from you which
may be used against you, because it may implicate you in acts of
bribery, but you must not refuse to answer. It appeared that such
a witness a fortiori was not bound to answer.—( Hear.) He,
for himself, would not answer any such question. He believed
he had the perfect concurrence of the Attorney General in
this opinion. He should decidedly vote against the motion.
Mr. HUME said there might be in some Courts of Law
technicalities with which he might be unacquainted, .but if such
was the law of the case, all enquiry would be needless,
all enquiry would be defeated ; for an agent would only have
to tell a witness that he need not make any answers that
affected himself. This opinion appeared most strange to
him, and if it were correct, there was an end to the authority
of this House.--( Hear, hear.)
Mr. O'CONNELL never heard anything with half so
much astonishment in his life.—(Hear, hear.) Was a man
to be protected from giving evidence without giving any
legal reason for it? Would that course protect the innocent?
The witness was called upon by the notice served upon
him to be cautious not to criminate himself in any manner
whatever. That was the broad ground upon which
he stood, but not that he should not give evidence which
might criminate others. He had been taunted with attri-
buting bribery to one side of the House, but ho did
not do any such thing after this. He heard the opinion just
given with the utmost astonishment, he might say horror.—
. ( Hear, hear.)
Mr. TANC RED defended the conduct of the Committee.

Mr. B A RCL A Y would ask any Hon. Members if indi-
viduals were brought before them under these circumstances,
whether they would not give them the same warning not to
criminate themselves. They might feel conscious that they
had committed bribery.—( Hear, hear, from Mr. O'Connell.)
Be assured that they did so, for the sake of argument, and then
they knew,that upon conviction they would be sentenced to
two years imprisonment in Newgate. He had always been
ready to promote enquiry, but this was a most unfair mode of
proceeding.
Mr. Nib HO LL could assure the House that the resolu-
tions upon which the Committee had acted were verbatim et
literatini; a copy of the resolutions moved by the Noble
Lord (Russell) last Session, and carried in that House without
a dissentient voice. If the agents for the petition had fol-
lowed those Resolutions there would have been no difficulty.

Mr. PEASE said that his only view in agreeing to these
resolutions was to give to every party likely to be eriminated
an opportunity of being present.
Mr. C. FERGttSSON was compelled to dissent, though
with the utmost diffidence, from the opinion given by his Hon.
and Learned Friend the olicitor-General.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. HARDY had been so fortunate as to meet with a case
directly in point. On the trial of a gentleman who had shot
his antagonist in a duel, for murder, Captain Denifort was
called on the part of the prosecution, but he refused to be exa-
mined, on the ground that a report had gone forth to the effect
that he had been second to one of the parties in the duel. Ser-
geant Adair said he might give his evidence with perfect se-
curity, for if any proceedings were instituted the Attorney-
General would moat assuredly be directed to enter a writ
staying them. Mr. Justice Lawrence and Mr. Justice Rooke
took time to consider the point, and then gave their deliberate
judgment, that Captain Denifort might if he choose state
the whole truth, but if he did, they could not protect him
from subsequent proceedings, and it was, therefore, for him to
decide whether he would give his evidence, as most undoubt-
edly be could not be compelled to give it. The Captain did
not give his evidence, and the prisoner was acquitted.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
preliminary objection taken by the witness was quite unheard
of. In Courts of Law no witness was allowed to refuse the
answering of questions before he had been examined at all, or
before it had been considered whether the questions put were
such as were likely to criminate himself. When such impor-
tant inquiries were instituted it was proper that they should be
conducted with strict impartiality and efficiency, but that could
not be the case if these objections were allowed.
Mr. SHAW had no doubt upon the matter, and he could
not but express his admiration of the fair and candid manner
in which the Solicitor-General had given his opinion.
• Sir R. INGLIS followed on the same side.

5Mr. Sergeant WILDE said his opinion was, that the wit-
ness had been premature in his objection. The Committee
were engaged not in considering an individual case, but seve-
ral, and therefore the witness might give, respecting other
parties, much important evidence, which would not criminate
himself. With regard to Captain Denifort, in the case men-
tioned, it bad been previously proved that Captain Denifort
was on the ground at the duel, and that there was every rea-
son to believe he was the second. If such had not been the
case, it would follow that by the same rule every witness on
being called upon to give evidence might say, " My Lord, I
have heard of report being circulated that I was the second,"
and, therefore, every witness might be excused giving evidence.
Mr. FRESHFIELD said that the doctrine laid down by
the Solicitor-General had been always held to be law, and
read from " Starkie on Evidence" the following extract :
" The witness might refuse to answer at all, on the ground
that his answers might subject him to an indictment • but if
he answered any questions then he was bound to disclose the
whole truth."—( Cheers. )
Sir R. PEEL considered the question of such importance
that he hoped the House would nut come to a precipitate de-
cisioa. Was the House of Commons bound by the rules of
the Courts of law 2—( Hear, hear.) Now, to decide that
question required some time, and consideration. In the East
Retford case he remembered that it was decided that the
House of Commons, in its inquisitorial capacity, was not
bound to act in strict conformity with these rules. With re-
gard to this individual his opinion was that no person, without
being expressly made a defendant, could refuse to answer on
the mere ground of his apprehensions.
Lord J. RUSSELL did not think the House bound by the
practice of the Courts of Law, and he considered the proposi-
tion of the Hon. Member for Newark reasonable, and he did
not object to such a course of proceeding as that Hon. Mem-
ber suggested.
Lord F. EGERTON was of opinion that it was necessary
that the resolutions should be before the House before they
took any further steps in the matter.
After a few observations from Mr. Wason, Mr. O'Connell,
Sir R. Inglis, Lord John Russell, Mr. Lefroy, Mr. Pease,
Mr. Harvey, and Sir T. Fremantle,
Mr. MACLE AN said that if it were left to the discretion
of the witness as to When he was to stop and decline answer-
ing questions, the proceedings would be wholly useless, for
he (witness) would stop whenever he came to any fact that
might seem to him to implicate his own party.
After an observation from Lord SANDON the House di-
vided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it 65
11.1.aj9rity.

On being re-admitted into the Gallery we found the witness
at the bar.
The SPEAKER--I am commanded by the House to ad-
monish you that you are bound to submit to be examined by
the Committee, without any prejudice to yourself, and without
answering- any questions that may tend to criminate you.
The witness then withdrew.
Lord J. RUSSELL thought that the two other witnesses,
(Messrs. Green and Lalor) ought to be called in, and simi-
larly admonished by the Speaker.
After a few words from Mr.. Shaw, Sir R. Inglis, and Lord
F. Egerton, the witnesses were called in.
Mr. Lalor (being examined by the SPEAKER) said
that be was summoned as a witness before the Committee—
that questions were put to him, which he refused to answer;
that the reasons, for his refusal were that in the notice
served upon him he was charged with certain acts of bribery,
and that he was backed by the laws of his country from being
compelled to be a witness in his own case. These were his
only reasons, and no action that he was aware of had been
brought against him.
In anwer to a question from an Hon. MEMBER the wit-
ness said that he had told the Committee the course he
meant to pursue.
In answer to.
Mr. SHAW—When refused to answer the
questions his mind was under the impression that he was likely
to be prosecuted in the case.
Here the witness was ordered to withdraw, dnd a long dis-
cussion took place between Mr. Shaw, Mr. Roebuck, Lord F.
Egerton Mr. C. Fergusson, Sir Robert Inglis, Mr. Tancred,
Dr. Nicholls, and Mr. Wason, as to whether he was bound
to answer any question, which, if he declined to answer
might lead to an inference that his silence was the result of
guilt.
Lord J. RUSSELL, however, put an end to the conversa-
tion by saying that prolonging it could lead to no result what.
ever. ; and the witness was again called in.
In answer to an HoN. MEMBER the witness stated that he
was not aware of having been advised by any person not to
answer the questions that might be put to him; but he threw
hiniselftpon the candour of the House to say whether he was

bound to give up family conversations, or, rather, private con-
verEations.—( Cries of " Certainly.") Then he must beg, most
respectfully to inform the. House that he would not.
Mr. MACLEAN—Were you not in the Committee-room
Olen the resolutions were read? Witness—l was.
Mr. AIACLE All—Did you not attend particularly to that
part of them in which it was stated that certain parties had
been guilty of bribery in aiding and abetting acts of bribery
and corruption Witness—No,
consider that these words
presumed
not particularly. •
Mr. MACLEAN— bid you•
might render you liable to prosecution ?-
so because of the notice I had received, and I i1ec01..551Y
claimed my right to be exempted from appearing as a witness
from the Chairman of the Committee on that ground, coax
ttittt tll6 agents of the petitioners must know something
on which they iticatit to fOtuid a etizirgd against me.
Mr. RONA YNE—Was it by the advice of tiro friends
whom you consulted with that you refused to answer all ques-
tions that should be put to you? Witness—l consulted only
professional persons. I received no advice not to answer the
questions that should be put to me. I was merely told what
the consequences would lie if I refused to answer.
Mr. PEASE—Are you aware that the complaint embodied
in the petition is divided into two parts, namely, that bribery,
has long existed in the botough of Yarmouth, and that some
acts of bribery were committed during the last election ?
Witness—l really cannot say. I have not read the petition.
Mr. PEASE—WeII, but if such were the case, is it in your
power to give evidence of any facts tending to establish the
charge of bribery prior to the last election ? Witness—l should
say decidedly not.
Here the witness was ordered to withdraw.
Lord J. RUSSELL suggested whether it would be neces-
sary to pursue the same line of examination in the case of the
next witness?
Mr. Green was next introduced and placed at the bar.
The SPEAKER, after asking the witness his name, said—
Have you received a summons to attend the Committee of this
House to whom the Yarmouth election petition has been re-
ferred? Witness—Yes, I have.
The SPEAKER—Have you been examined? Witness—
No.

The SPEAKER—Have any questions been put to you?
Witness—Yes.

The SPEAKER—Did you answer them ? Witness—No.
The SPEAKER—Why did you not? Witness—On the
ground that I could not tell myself whether or not I was a
defendant. The witness went on to say that he had heard his
name frequently called in question, and therefore believed he
was a party implicated. He had received a notice, and that
gave him to understand that some parties had false things to
say against him.
In answer to a question from Mr. Sergeant WILDE, the
witness said that it was so long ago he hardly recollected what
did occur during the last election, and that the reason he did
not answer the questions put to him was because he feared to
criminate himself.

The witness was then ordered to withdraw.
Mr. HARVEY suggested that the witness Lalor should
be recalled, in order that he might be asked whether he was
willing to answer all questions not directly tending to impli-
cate himself. _ _

Lord STORMONT—Directly or indirectly.
Mr. Lalor was accordingly again placed at the bar.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE—Are you willing to answer all
questions that may be put to you before the Committee which
do not directly or indirectly tend to criminate yourself ?
Witness (as we understood)—Yes.
The witness having withdrawn, and the motion for his and
Green's admonition, and that they be told that they were
bound to answer all questions not tending to criminate them-
selves, having been put,
Sir T. FREMANTLE said that his objection to the mo-
tion was stronger in this case than in the last. He contended
that they had no right whatever, in point of justice, to make
this party a witness.
Mr. HARDY also considered that as those parties were in
fact told that charges of bribery would be preferred against
them—that House was not justified in obliging them to give
evidence.
Mr. AGLIONBY contended that they were bound, in point
of law, to give evidence in all cases, except where they were
themselves actually defendants.
The motion was agreed to, and the witnesses, Lalor and
Green, were again placed at the bar.
The SPEAKER had been commanded by the House to
admonish them, and to tell them that they were bound to sub-
mit to be examined by the Committee, without prejudice to
their right to object to any question, the answering of which
might tend to criminate themselves.
The witnesses having withdrawn,
Lord F. EGERTON rose and said that acting under the
instruction of the Committee, it was now his duty to move that
William Prentice be committed to the custody of his Ma-
jesty's gaoler of Newgate.
Mr. HARDY proposed as an amendment that Mr. Pren-
tice be called to the bar, and admonished in the same way as
the other witnesses.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opposed the amendment.
Mr. HUME asked whether, night after night, they were to
proceed in this manner ? The close approach of the termina-
tion of the session seemed to confirm these witnesses, and
encourage tkem in their obstinacy.
Mr. HARDY would not divide the House on the question.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE thought there was enough of evi-
dence furnished to lead to the discovery of the truth. The
House ought not to send the prisoner to Newgate, as he was
not guilty of contempt, having refused to answer upon legal
grounds.
After a few words from Mr. Pease, Mr. Ronayne, Mr.
Freshfield, and Lord F. Egerton, the House divided, when
there appeared—
For the original motion
For the amendment
Majority
On our return, we found Lord JOHN RUSSELL giving
notice that he would to-morrow move that for the remainder
of the session the orders should take precedence of the mo-
tions. He also moved that the dropped orders of yesterday
should be read for the purpose of being re-appointed.
Mr. HUME requested to know from the Noble Lord when
the Election Expenses Bill would be proceeded with ?
Lord J. RUSSELL could not name any day during the
remainder of the session.
Mr. HUME said that such being the case, he would ap-
point Thursday next.
To a question from Mr. BORTH WICK,
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was his intention ro bring
up the Report on the Irish Church Bill to-morrow, as the first
of the Orders of the Day.
CAPTAIN ACHESON.
Mr. PLUMPTRE then proceeded with his motion for the
minutes of evidence at the trial by Court Martial of. Captain
Acheson, of the Royal Artillery, at Malta, in 1824. It was,
he said, a case of great hardship, and although it had been
previously before the House, it was one upon which they had
never come to a vote.
Sir J. BECKETT admitted that the question was one of
the greatest importance, in determining whether the orders of
a Commanding Officer were to be implicitly obeyed by the
Officer in subordinate 'command. The case was this :—Cap-
tain Acheson had been ordered to cause salutes to be fired, in
honour of certain religious processions, on the 94i of De-
cember, 1824; but, on some private religious scruples, he rc.
fused, and neglected to do so. The order for these salutes
was by no means an unusual one, such having been the prac-
tice on the part of the English garrison ever since the con-
quest of Malta.
Mr. HARDY supported the motion.
Mr. C. FERGUSSON opposed the motion. It was
alleged on the other side that lie did not disobey orders ; but
surely the non-execution of orders given him by the Governor
himself could not but be looked on as disobedience ; and, of
course, punishable so long as military discipline was to be
maintained in the British army.—( Cheers.)

•
Sir J. ELLE Y opposed the motion.
Mr. O'CONNELL protested in an Assembly of freemen
against the slavish doctrine that a soldier iod nothing to do
but to obey.—( Oh, oh.) If a soldier was ordcred to shoot
his Officer, or any of the Hon. Members preseut, he was
bound by that doctrine to obey it.—(Oh, oh.) Yet, if he did
an illegal act, he was punishable by law—the law was the
master over the soldier and the Officer. Captain Acheson
was an exemplary Officer, and should not be punished so
severely.—( Oh, oh, and laughter.)
The Earl of DARLINGTON deeply sympathised with
Captain Acheson, and he considered that in his case thcrb
were several extenuating circumstances.
After a few words from Mr. Finch, Mr. Wilks, Lord E.
Somerset, and Mr. P. Howard,
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the Motion
Against it 54
Majority
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at Half-past One o'Clock.

LAMARTINE'S PILGRIMAGE TO THE HOLY
LAND.—" It is the peculiar charm of De Lamartine's descrip-
tions," says the Quarterly Review, " that he is always in-
clined to see the brighter and more effective parts of the pic-
ture before him ; in scenery it is the soft, the luxuriant, the
splendid, the awful forms of nature. He discovers beauty, and
even magnificence, in sights which many others have beheld
without emotion. The traveller is to be envied who, like La-
martine, bears about with him, as it were, a perpetual sunshine
of the imagination which gilds up all that is intrinsically beau-
tiful to its highest tone of splendour, and brings out new beau-
ties, latent or unperceived by the common eye. Nor does
his imagination or creative faculty confine itself to the inani-
mate forms of nature. His Syrian Paradise is peopled with
Houris. He describes, in the most flowing language the ex-
traOrdinary.beauty of the Arab and Christian races of pea-
santry, particularly in the neighbourhood of Mount Lehanon."
CHURCH RATES.--A meeting was held on Mon-
day at Stoke Church. On a division it appeared that the
majority against the rate proposed was 220.—Devonport In.
dependent.
ABYSSINIAN WHEAT.—This description of wheat
was introduced to this neighbourhood (Dunbar) by Lord Lau-
derdale, and sown in his experimental park on the 13th of
November last, after a crop of clover of an Italian species.
Although the wheat was sown of the common thickness, not
above one half of it braided, but the.plants tillered out very
much, and it came into car with the other descriptions of
wheat generally sown in this country. The ear is bearded,
and consists of one principal and many smaller cars growing
out from its sides at irregular distances. Should the pickles
all come to maturity, the number must be very great, and the
crop most productive. The straw is large, and not tubular,
as in other wheat, but filled with pith, and is strong and solid.
From its thickness and
.inflexibility, it will not answer for bed-
din. —Kelso Mail.