The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-05 00:00:00

of that system in Ireland. He must also be aware that an
office of high importance had been offered to Lord Roden,
which he did not think fit to accept. The very appointment
of such persons in Ireland was quite calculated to inspire
the people of that country with the notion that they were
again to be handed over to Orangemen, and to be again
oppressed by them, as they had been for the last quarter of
a century.--(Loud cheers from the Opposition.) The Hon.
Member for the county of Longford (Mr. A. Lefroy) seemed
to think that the Orangemen had been hardly dealt with, and
declared that they could not be deemed a faction. He would
ask him this question, as he seemed to be perfectly initiated in
their secrets—Was it allowable to make any man an Orange-
man who happened to be a Roman Catholic ?—( Cheers)—or
to make the son of a Roman Catholic an Orangeman?—
(" Yes !" from several Hon. Members.) Or could a man
who married a Roman Catholic become an Orangeman ?
(" Yes I" was again repeated by several Hon. Members, and
the exclamation was followed by much laughter.) Well, be
that as it might, notwithstanding the indignation of the Hon.
Gentleman, he would tell him what the people of Ireland
thought the Orange faction to be. They believed that they
were a class that professed a monopoly of loyalty, and that so
long as they were permitted to trample on the Catholics with
impunity, they would be the obsequious servants of the Crown,
but that when the King should send a person to govern that
country with impartiality and justice to all, they would be quite
ready to assail him with bludgeons, brickbats, and bottles ; that
they were
" A class of reptiles, raised in troubled times,
Nursed in blood, and cherished in their crimes ;"
and that so long as the Government of Ireland held out pro-
tection exclusively to Orangemen, it was impossible to expect
peace and tranquillity in that country.
Sir ROBERT PEEL really thought himself justified in
suggesting, that considering the nature of the subject under
discussion, and the mode in which it had been brought before
the House, the conversation had been sufficiently prolonged.
—( Hear.) Could he have given a better pledge of his enter-
taining an earnest wish and desire that the Government of Ire-
land should be conducted with the strictest impartiality, than
selecting for the offices of Lord-Lieutenant and Chief- Secre-
tary two such individuals as his Noble Friend (the Earl of
Hadtl:eigton) and the Right Hon. Gentleman near him (Sir
Hardinge)?—two individuals not more distinguished for
:,heir ability and judgment, than for the consistency which they
bad eminently displayed throughout the whole of their political
lives, in their constant and persevering advocacy of every
claim of the Roman Catholics.—(" Hear," from the Minis-
terial benches.)
Mr. HUME considered it to be a notorious fact that the
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary of State for the Home
Department, had laid before his Majesty addresses from bodies
which, even if they were not, strictly speaking, illegal, were so
considered by the public at large, and whose objects could not
be misunderstood. It used to be a general custom to publish
in The Gazette a list of all the Addresses presented to his
Majesty. That practice had been discontinued—he supposed
because the addresses for the removal of the present Mi-
nistry were in the proportion of about four to one, com-
pared with those in their support. He had had: the
honour to be in company with the Duke of Wellington on
business during the period of his holding the seals of several
offices, and he then inquired why the practice had been dis-
continued. The Duke said that it had been considered pro-
per to desist from publishing the addresses generally, and that
the fairest course appeared to be to print none, either on the
one side or the other. He was decidedly of opinion that the
view taken by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin was
correct ; that these were illegal societies, and that the Home
Secretary in presenting addresses from them, and returning
answers thereto, was the abettor of what was illegal and im-

proper.
Lord HO WICK said, that his purpose in rising simply was
to express the satisfaction with which he had heard the Right
Hon. Baronet disavow, in the manner he had done, all desire
to countenance or encourage the maintenance of those unhappy
party divisions which had so long prevailed in Ireland. Ile
confessed that many of the appointments made by the present
Government, taken in conjunction with some of the circum-
stances which bad been adverted to on that side of the House
--particularly that mentioned by the Learned Sergeant
( O'Loughlen)—did create in his mind an exceedingly unplea-
sant impression.--( Hear, hear.) Anxious as he had been--
anxious as he always should be—that agitation, from whatever
quarter it might proceed, should be resisted, and as far as pos-
sible put down, he confessed he was extremely sorry to wit-
ness proceedings on the part of Government which, by throw-
ing some degree of suspicion on their impartiality and fair-
ness, might tend to impede the effect of their efforts to re-
strain the agitation pursued by some gentlemen in that House,
whose course they were much in the habit of reprobating....-.
( Hear, hear, hear.) He hoped that the discussion which had
taken place that evening, would not be without important ad-
vantages in marking, as distinctly as he thought it had done,
the sense of that House, that these Orange associations which
were the means of perpetuating party divisions in Ireland,
ought not to be encouraged.
Sir. ROBERT BATE SON entirely concurred with the
Noble Lord who had just sat down, in wishing that all party
differences in Ireland were at an end. He wished to appeal
particularly to English Members, when he requested the
House not to be led away by the exaggerated statements they
had heard. He was not, and never had been, an Orangeman.
He was not a party man.—( Oh. ) The Hon. and Learned
Member for Dublin ( Mr. O'Connell) had said that the
Orangemen of Ireland were not Christians ; and yet, on some
occasions, that Hon. and Learned Gentleman had praised and
commended them most highly, when he thought be could gain
them over to his own purposes, and induce them to join in the
outcry for the Repeal of the Union.—( No, and cheers.) When
he and his party found, however, that they could not attain
their end, then he turned round, and flung upon them every
species of calumny and foul abuse his fertile imagination could
dole out. He believed that if the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man and his party, were to cease that baneful agitation which
the Noble Lord, the Member for Northumberland, had de-
fended, Orangemen would drop away of themselves. Ho be-
lieved their only object was self-defence, and self-preservation.
A laugh.) It was not true that these Orange bodies were
treasonable societies ; it was not true that any oaths were
taken by their members ; he placed explicit reliance on the
declaration made by his Hon. Friend in this respect.
Colonel CONOLLY was much obliged to the Noble Lord
the Member for Northumberlarle.for the very dispassionate
manner in which he had treated the subject. He had thrown
oil upon the troubled waters, and calmed the irritation which it
was sought to produce in that House. He could not patiently
hear these calumnies uttered against a set of men combined
only in their own defence. Unless they had combined, the
events of the last four years would have left them neither pro-
perty nor protection, nor life.—( Oh, oh.) He said so
distinctly ; he said so of his own knowledge ; he said so
as a magistrate and a landlord.—( Oh, and hear, hear.)
These charges ought not to be allowed to remain here ; it
was a much more manly and open way of proceeding to carry
the war into the enemy's camp instead of recognising, and al-
lowing, he would say, the gross, indecent, almost treasonable
course pursued by the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin
and his party.--( Cheers, and a cry of "Oh !") Oh ! Had
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman ever proposed the King's
health at a public dinner, as the first servant of the Crown—
( A laugh)--he meant of the people ? Call ye that loyalty ?
endeavouring to disparage both the Crown and the Monarch
in the eyes of his people ?—( Cheers, and " No, no !") Had
anything that could be done to lower and disparage the Go-
vernment, or assail all the authorities of the land in every pos-
sible way been left undone by the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man in the two last parliaments ? There was not one of the
constituted authorities who had escaped his strong and marked
vituperation.—( Cheers.) "We are accused," continued Col.
Conolly, " I say we, for I will proudly identify myself with
the honourable and loyal body of Orangemen, with a monopoly
of loyalty. Why, what gives us that monopoly? To whom are
we indebted for it ? To those who take up the trade of agita-
tion—to those who disparage all the constituted authorities—
to those who speak disrespectfully of the Monarch, and out.
rage the laws by every possible method in their power—who
delude the ignorant and drive them to actual violence—who
misconstrue the law, and hold out prospects of impunity to
those who are ignorant enough to be misled by them—who
wean the people of Ireland from their legitimate allegiance,
and induce them to form notions that the Government of Eng-
land is hostile to them, that they can get no justice from this
Parliament, and that they must effect the separation of the
two countries before they can obtain it." He was delighted
to hear the manly declaration of the Lord-Lieutenant that
certain persons should meet with no tenderness at his hands.
--("Oh !" and cheers.) But that those who consulted their
own personal interest and advantage in promoting agitation,
and driving the pauper and deluded population to acts of vio-
lence and outrage should be treated as they deserved. No
wonder that language like this, tending to promote the peace
and welfare of society, should meet with the vituperation of
some persons in that House.—( Hear, hear.)
Colonel VERN ER was not unacquainted with the great
Orange Association in Ireland, and he would venture to assert,
from a knowledge of the pure and honourable principles on
which it was founded, that its object had always been to main-
tain the laws, to preserve the connection between the two
countries, and to afford protection to property and life. They
had been told that some of the toasts given at the Mansion-
house dinner were objectionable. No doubt they were to Hon.
Gentlemen opposite ; the King's health had been drank, and
the Established Church, and the health of the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet and his colleagues.—( Question.)
The question was again put and carried. The Speaker left
the Chair accordingly, and the House resolved itself into a
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.

The first vote was the sum of 28,384,7001. to pay off and
discharge Exchequer Bills.
In reply to a question from Mr. HUME,
Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE explained that the vote
was for the purpose of discharging Exchequer Bills issued for
the supplies of 1834 and 1835. The different periods for
which they were issued would shortly expire, and the usual
course was, before they expired, to enable the Government to
issue fresh ones. It was in strict accordance with the regular
practice pursued every year.
The vote was then agreed to, as was another vote of
621,500/. for the discharge of Exchequer Bills issued for car-
rying on public works.
The House resumed, the resolutions were reported, and the
report was ordered to be received on Friday.
CHESTER CRIMINALS EXECUTION BILL.
Mr. JERVIS moved that the House do now resolve itself

ihto *Committee of the whole House on this Bill. The Hon.
and Leaped Member entered into a brief explanation of its
/ '.. principtilprovisions,which was wholly inaudible in the gallery.
(,-, The House
-then ent into Committee, Mr. RICHARDS (who
/ tooklthe chair amidst the laughter of the Opposition) in the
, chair. , .
~... On the-first elaniii being read,
..,. The iTTORNEY-GENERAL considered it his duty to

move an Amendment to the first clause of this Bill. It was
quite true, as had been stated by the Hon. and Learned Mem-
'ber for the City of Chester, that he (the Attorney-General)
had given it as his opinion that under the Act of Parliament
for the abolition of the jurisdiction of the Courts of the
County Palatine of Chester, the duty of executing prisoners
devolved upon the Sheriff of the County ; but although he
thought that he was legally bound to do so, he did not think
that that was the meaning of those who framed the Act
(Hear, hear.) Indeed, so little were the Sheriffs of the City
themselves aware that they were relieved of that duty under
the late Act, that they continued for two years after the passing
of it, to do execution on criminals as formerly. The Bill
brought in by the Hon. Member for Chester stated, " That
whereas doubts had arisen whether the Sheriff of the county of
the city of Chester, or the constable of the Castle of Chester
should execute criminals, &c." Now, the fact was, that there
had never been a question as to the constable of the Castle of
Chester executing that duty, for the question was merely be-
tween the Sheriffs of the County and the City ; and the ques-
tion now was, whether it would not be better that what was
the avowed intention of the Legislature, and what, in fact,
had been practised for three years, namely, that the Sheriff of
the county of the city of Chester should see execution on cri-
minals done, should not be confirmed. He objected to plac-
ing that duty in the hands of the constable of the Castle. The
office of constable was an inferior office ; the person holding it
had a small salary, and he had not the authority to give that
solemnity to that awful ceremony which the occasion required.
An execution was an occasion which ought to be so conducted
as to make a solemn impression upon the people ; and unless
the solemnity were such as to show that the criminal lost his
life as a sacrifice to justice, the taking Lway life by public exe-
cution was scarcely to be justified. It might be as well to
leave the power to the gaoler of Newgate to execute criminals,
as to the constable or the Castle of Chester. He was not for
extending the punishment of death, but, on the contrary, he was
in favour of its abolition in every case where it could be abolished
with safety to the community, but he could not agree to a proposi-
tion which would diminish the effect of executions in cases where
executions were thought necessary. He doubted also the pro-
priety of the same person having the custody and the execu-
tion of a criminal.—( Hear, hear.) He proposed to move an
amendment on the first clause of the lion. and Learned Mem-
ber's Bill to the following effect : " That whereas the sheriff
of the county of the city of Chester was by law liable, and
used to execute all criminals ordered for execution, as, well in
the city as in the county ; and whereas, since the passing of
the said Act, the sheriff of the county of the city of Chester
has continued to do execution upon criminals ; be it enacted,
that he shall continue to obey the rules and orders of the Court
of Assize in the same manner as before the passing of the
aforesaid Act, he obeyed the Court of Grand Sessions ; and
in case the Judges of Assize should order that execution
should be done on a criminal in any particular part of the
county, that then the sheriff of the county should be bound to
execute the criminal in any part of the county so ordered."
Sir JOHN CAMPBELL thought it would be better to
abstain from legislating on the subject, and let the matter be
settled by the proper judicial tribunal. The former trial went
off on a technical point. He was opposed to the Amendment
as well as to the original Bill, and should, therefore, move
that the Chairman leave the chair.

Lord R. GR 0 SVE NOR supported the motion that the
Chairman leave the chair.

Mr. HARDY thought that the duty which devolved on the
sheriffs of other counties should also fall on the sheriff of the
county of Cheshire. He did not see any reason why the she-
riff of Cheshire was not to be called upon to execute criminals
as well as the sheriff of Yorkshire.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL agreed with the Hon.
and Learned Member for Chester, that there should be a de-
claratory Act on the subject. The Judges would take care,
when they again went to Chester, to order that the Sheriffs,
both of the county and the city, should attend the execution of
criminals, and that a repetition of what had recently hap.
pened should not again occur.
Mr. O'CONNELL supported the view of the subject taken
by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bradford.
After a few observations from Mr. WILBRAHAM and Mr. C.
W. WYNN.

Mr. AGLIONBY thought that it was the bounden duty of
the Legislature by a short declaratory Act to take care that
such a lamentable occurrence as had led to the present measure
did not happen again.
Sir J. CAMPBELL withdrew his amendment, and would
support the amendment of the Attorney-General.
Mr. ENVART thought it highly desirable that the law in
this case should be assimilated with the common law ; there
might still remain some anomalies, but the inconsistencies
would be much greater were the other course which had been
proposed followed.
Mr. G OULBURN supported the views of the Attorney-
General.

The Committee then divided on the Attorney-General's
amendment, when there appeared—
Ayes
Noes ...
Majority for the amendment
The several remaining clauses of the Bill were then dis-
cussed, and the report was brought up.
The House then resumed.
ABOLITION OF INIPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

Sir J. CAMPBELL was deeply impressed with the import-
ance of the subject of his motion, which was for leave to bring
in a bill " to abolish Imprisonment for Debt except in cases of
fraud, and to amend the law of debtor and creditor." As the
law was understood and administered in this country, power
was given to any individual member of the community over the
liberty of every other individual, who might, without the order
of a judge or otherwise, be deprived of his liberty, thrown
into a gaol, and subjected to the greatest, the most cruel extol,
tion. This was a power not belonging to the ancient common
law of the country, but which was introduced by statute long
after the common law had existed, and which did not (as we
understood the Learned Gentleman to say) exist in equal
severity in France, or any other country on the continent. He
would take the liberty of illustrating the severity and nature of
the present law, by stating to the House a remarkable case
which had recently come under his notice, and which was only
a few days ago tried before the Lord Chief Justice of the
King's Bench ( Denman). In the course of the summer of
last year, a foreigner of distinction, the Duke de Cadaval,
arrived in this c.,untry accompanied by his wife and family ;
after landing at Dover and proceeding to town, he took lodg-
ings there. Shortly afterwards he received a letter from a per-
son of the name of Collins, which recounted groat services
done to the Duke, and intimating that his claims were consider-
able for these services. The Duke shortly afterwards received
another letter, demanding payment of the money alleged
to be due, and threatening proceedings in case of noncom-
pliance. The Duke was much alarmed, but not complying
with the request, Collins swore an affidavit of the debt, stating
it at 10,0001., went down to Falmouth, and accompanied the
sheriff's officer who arrested the Duke, giving or promis-
ing to give the officer 501. for making the caption. The Duke
being much distressed at the prospect of a gaol and separation
from his family, and being a stranger in the country, he, under
the pressure of these fears, agreed to give the plaintiff 5001.
as present payment, which sum he obtained from the Portu-
guese Consul, and actually handed over that amount in sove-
reigns in a bag to Collins, to be permitted to go out of cus-
tody ; and the terms were drawn up in the shape of an agree-
ment, by which it was stated that the 5001. was part of a sum
of 16,2001. which the plaintiff claimed, and the action was to
proceed in its usual course as to the remainder. Subsequently
the Duke, finding the fraud that had been practised upon him,
brought an action against Collins, and, he was glad to say,
had the satisfaction of recovering the 5001. so fraudulently ex-
torted from him. Was not this a state of the law which de-
manded the serious consideration of the House, and some
change which would give better protection to the public ? He
could state to the House, from the returns which had been
made of the money spent in connection with the present law of
arrest, and proceedings consequent thereon, that there was the
enormous sum of 300,000/. annually expended by the respec-
tive parties, debtor and creditor. These funds, which ought
to be distributed among creditors, were idly spent among
sheriffs' officers and their followers. He would state an-
other consequence resulting from the present law : the cruel
creditor who disregarded the feeliags of his debtor had the
priority, and had thus an advantage over an indulgent cre-
ditor who had a reluctance to resort to harsh proceedings.
The harsh creditor swept away the whole of the debtor's
property, and those who exercised feelings of kindness and
indulgence had no remedy left them. The remedy he pro-
posed for this was to abolish imprisonment, but to compel
the debtor to abide by the verdict and justice of the court,
unless, indeed, it should appear that the debtor was dis-
posed to attempt an escape, when he should be compelled to
give security. This would deprive the creditor of an
opportunity of committing an injustice on his debtor with-
out diminishing his remedy. When he thus proposed to
deprive the creditors of their present remedy by imprison-
ment, he would on the other hand propose to give them
greater facilities against the property of their debtor. By
the present law there was this difficulty in the way of cre-
ditors. Suppose a creditor at Liverpool wished to proceed
against a debtor who was about to go abroad, he must send
up an affidavit of the debt to London, which must again
be sent down to the country, by which lost time the
debtor may have escaped by the sailing of the vessel.
He would propose as a remedy for this, that on an affi-
davit being made of the debt and circumstances, a magis-
trate on the spot should have power to grant a warrant
against the debtor, whom the creditor should keep in cus-
tody until he could give security. According to the pre-
sent law, be the debt ever so small, the debtor can be
immured in gaol, and so his liberty and exertions are
abridged, instead of being allowed to exert himself for its
payment. His person may be enclosed within the walls
of a gaol, but such imprisonment does not enable the creditor
to get at the property of his debtor. The miserable conse-
quence of this is, that our gaols are filled, the debtor becomes
acquainted with vice and misery, and his mind contaminated
with his new associates. He would give the creditor therefore
power to reach the property of the debtor, but not to inflict the
evil he had described. There was another evil in the present
law of arrest—it made no distinction between the honest and
the fraudulent debtor—none whatever. The unfortunate honest
man, who could not fulfil his engagements, was no better off
than he who would not pay. He should therefore propose that
unless there was fraud (as we understood the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman). or the debtor refused to obey the judgment or
absconded, his person should not be molested ; but if so, then
the creditor should have the power to take the body of his
debtor in custody. He was aware that creditors would not be
willing to give up the advantage of arrest ►without an equiva-
lent; by the present law a creditor only got indirectly at the pro-
perty, but he would propose as an equivalent, speedy judgment
—speedy execution ; and that all the property should be forth-
coming for the satisfaction of the creditor. His first objection to
the present law was, that in the case of bonds, bills, promissory
notes, and instruments to which any one may hare solemnly set his