The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-16 00:00:00

be as great now as at the time the cffene,e was eutrnittol,
He was no admirer of the Hon. Member for Prekon ; but

he would say that the conviction of that Hon. Member at
the time was a blot on the jurisprudence of the country,
and that the manner in which he bore his punishment de-
manded the ::•a`mest admiration.

Mr. StAiNiLi?,Y rose principally to protest against the
doctrine of the Hon. and Learned Membei for Ctare, that
that House ought to revive siihjects that had been decided
by legal tribunals ; and the .statement of the Honourable
Member for 'Gloucestershire, that Honourable Nlendrers
were seeking for an excuse for the vote which it was their
intention to give. On the transaction at Manchester he
should offer no opinioe. Ile was satisfied with the ver-
dicts of the Juries on the subject ; and he had too high
an opinion of the purity of our Courts of Justice to be-
lieve that, after the lapse of 13 years; the House of Com-
mons could he a better judge of the transaction th in the
Court of Justice before which the witnesses were exa-
mined and which possessed so many means of eliciting
the truth. It was unfortunately the case at the present
moment, that every individual Member might say, with
I reference to such a question, " I can't get justice now,
but I shall get it when we have a Reformed Parliament."
If he (Mr. Stanley) thought that a Reformed Parliament
would usurp the province of the legal tribunals of the
country, and enter into ouch investigations as that now
prop sed, he should he as strongly opposed to Reform as
he was at present friendly to it. But he bad an answer
even to that argument. What was the opinion of an
Hon. Member who was returned by a large county—by a
free population in the very neighbourhood of the place in
which the transaction in question occurred ? He alluded
to the Honourable Gentleman who now sat so much
to his honour for the county of Lancaster. He
was perfectly satisfied that that Honourable Gsntleman
spoke the sentiments of the great manufacturing county of
Lancaster ; and what was his opinion? That it was
better not to interfere with the decision of the judicial tri-
bunal ; that Parliament ought to confine itself to its proper
province; and that while it exhibited a due jealousy on
all Constitutional pints, it should respect the privileges
and authority of Courts of Justice. When so long a time
had elapsed since the occurrence—when the Hon. Member
for Preston did not, as he (Mr. Stanley) supposed, contem-
plate an impeachment—
Mr. HUNT observed that he did.
Mr. STANLEY said, that he could not concur in the
opinion of the Hon. Member. The affair in question
would have died away long ago, if it had not been kept
alive, front whatever motives, by parties who had been
constantly bringing it under public consideration. He
felt it his duty to oppose the motion.
Mr. JAMES could not bring himself to think that jus-
tice had been done in the case in question ; and should
certainly vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for
Preston. He much regretted, however, that the discus-
sion of the subject had not been deferred until the assem-
bling of a reformed Parliament. Whether the present
House of Commons did justice or not, he was well assured
that a reformed House would do justice.
Mr. EWART was of opinion that the question ought
not to be looked at as merely a legal one. It was per-
fectly competent to the House to inquire into the conduct
of public men, without being liab'e to the imputation of
interfering with the rights and authority of Courts of
Justice.
Mr. HUNT, in reply, regretted that many Hon. Mem-
bers then in the House were not present when he made
his original statement. Among others, the Hon. Member
for Tamwortb. There were other Hon. Members absent,
whom be should have wished to Fee in their places,.
Where, for instance, was the Secretary at War? Having
beard that lion. Baronet speak so frequently en this ques-
tion out of doors, he should like to have had an opportu-
nity of comparing those speeches with his speech that even-
ing. He concurred with an Hon. Gentleman, that the
time would arrive, that the time must arrive, when the
subject would he investigated. The Right lion. Chief
Secretary for Ireland had said that he was satisfied with
the verdicts of the Juries. There had been but one ver-
dict. That was in his case, at York. After five hours'
&lib, ration, the Jury brought in a verdict on half a count
of the indictment. They declared that he was guilty "of
attending a meeting at Manchester." The Judge sent
them back; and they then brought in a verdict, that he
ha'l been guilty of attending an " illegal" meeting at
Manchester. If, however, the meeting was illegal, why
did Lord Castlereagh, on the meeting of Parlament, pro-
pose an cx post facto law to make such meetings illegal ?
As to the trial at Lancaster, of " Redford against Burley,"
it had all the appearance of being a shim action. Adverting
to the spies which had been employed by his Majesty's Go-
vernment on the occasion in question, e observed that
Oliver was dead, hut that Castles and Edwar.is, under
other names, were receiving pensions, for an account
of which be would one day move. They bad tried
their spies o;i him, but he did not like them. If any
one of those gentlemen had contrived to catch him
,(Mr. Hunt) in his trap, he should not wonder if he
had become a Peer by this time, as his reward.—(A laugh.)
He maintained, that if it could he proved that Lord Sid-
mouth had hired spies, and sent them to instisate
the people to disturbance, the subject was a fit one for
the consideration of that House, and for impeachment.
He did not aim at the yeomanry—Le flew at higher
gsme. He should be ashamed to inflict punishment on
one of those little humble instruments of authority. He
regretted that the Noble Lord who was the Foreman of
the Grand Jury on the occasion of the trials which bad
been alluded to was not in his place in the House. A hill
which had been sent in to the Grand Jury against one of
the yeomanry, supported by the evidence of two men and
three women, had been postponed until the next day;
and when that day came, the Grand Jury first applied
themselves to the bill which had been sent in against
him. It had been said that the Courts of Law were
open to all ; hut, as Horne Tooke observed, so was
the London Tavern—to those who could afford to
enter it. All the Counsel who had been employed
against him on his trial, had since been made Judges, with
the exception of the lion. and Learned Member for Cocker-
mouth. lie hoped that that Hun. arid Learned Member
had not been neglected, because he (Mr. Hunt) had been
rather too much for him on the trial.—(A laugh.) The
Judge on the trial had shown fair play. Inde, d, there
could not be a more honourable man than Judge Bayley.
He would tell the House an anecdote which had been
communicated to him by one of the Judge's clerks.-7(
A
!nigh.) When the four Judges of the Court of King s
Bench were considering what judgment to pass upon him
(Mr. Hunt), Judge Bayley declared that he would not
consent to a sentence of imprisonment for a single hour.
The other Judges differed from him. The usage in such
cases was for every Judge to write down the sentence
which be thought ought to be passed, and then for the
him average to be adopted. Judge Best was for imprisoning
fiveyears,Judge Holroyd for ins prisoning him three years, and
Chief Justice Abbott for imprisoning him two years. The
whole amount of ten years was then divided by four, and
he was sentenced to be imprisoned for two years and a half.
The Hon. Gentleman proceeded to re-state the facts of the
transaction at Manchester; and expressed his conviciun
that but a few years would pass over their heads without
an inquiry into the subject. He hoped the Right Hon.
Member for Tamworth would never again be in a situation
to employ Spies, or if he were, that he would change his
opinion with respect to the expediency of employing them,
es he had changed it, much to his honour, on other points.
Sir R. PEEL, in explanation, disclaimed having vin-
dicated an improper Ilse of spies. Nothing was more to
be reprobated than employing spies to instigate the people
to acts of insubordination ; but he could not, as an honest
man, say, with his experience, that the use of spies ought,
under any circumstances, to he dispensed with. He gave the
most unqualified contradiction to the assertion of the Hon.
Mem. for Preston, that the action of Redford against Burley
was a mock action. The character of those who were con-
cerned in it was too honourable to admit of such a suppo-
sition ; and the evidence which had been adduced was of
such a nature that it would not have been brought forward
had not the proceeding been bona fide.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed that the per-
sons who conducted the case to which the Hen. Member
for Preston had adverted were utterly incapable of the
conduct imputed to them. On the contrary, they took all
possible pains to enforce the justice of the case. He be-
lieved, also, that the lion. Gentleman was entirely mis-
taken as to the practice of the Learned Judges in awarding
their' sentencesgenerally, and in his case in particular...—
And, besides, if the evidence of spies were to be rejected
on all other occasions, was it to be admitted on one in
which it must have been accompanied by a betrayal of
trust.—(llear.)
An Hos. MEMBER, whose name we could not learn,
defended the conduct of Lord Sidmouth with reference to
the transaction at Manchester.
Sir J. SCARLETT did not question the Hon. Mem-
ber's having triumphed over him at the trial to which he
had adverted, although he was not conscious of in But
the Hon Member was entirely mistaken with respect to
the judgment of the Judges. It would be very astonishing
indeed if any Judge let his clerk know what his judicial
intentions were ; and he was sure that Judge Bayley was
the last man who would commit such an indiscretion. He
heartily joined in the Hon. Member's panegyric on that
excellent Judge. With respect to himself, he certainly
would never (recopy the time of the House with any ex-
planation of his conduct as a counsel.
Mr- HUNT admitted, that, if he had employed any one

ai a spy, he should have been quite as guilty as those

whom he bad denounced.
The House then divid'd—

Fes the original motion .
For the previous question
majority - :•
SILK TRAUE,
On out• readmission to the Gallery, we found Mr. G.
BANKES addressing the House. Ile said that, as a
ccanterpoise to the great influence which the practical
knowledge of the Hon. Member for Ipswich must of ne-
cessity give him in the Select Committee on the silk trade,
he would move that the name of Mr. W. Ellice be' added
to the Committee. Ile also intended •o move th•lt the

name; of Mr. Robinson awl Mr. E. Stanley be aVell to
the Committee. He v.-ag aware that it might ue alleged

that same stagnation had already taken place in this ttadt
in consequence of the appointment of the Committee, but
he contended that any degree of stagnation which had
taken place was to he attributed, not to the Committee,
but to the speech of the Right Hon. the Vice-President
of the Board of Trade, with which the concession of that
Committee wa,. accompanied. Ile considered that speech
was calculated to do much mischief, and prevent, in no
small degree, the benefit which might otherwise have been
expected from the Commit tee ; and be entreated the Right
Hon. Gentleman, if the Government had come to a de-
termination on the subject, and only appointed the Com-
mittee to register that determination—hr entreated him at
once to state the fact, and explain the measures he had in
contemplation. In conclusion he observed, that if the
very reasonable proposition he was about to submit was
refused, he should consider it quite clear that the Silk
Trade had nothing of good to expect from the C ,mmittee.
The Hon. Member then moved that Mr. W.Ellice's name
be added to the Committee.

Lord ALTHORP was not prepared to effer any oppo
sition to this motion. He would, however, object to the
addition of the other two names, not from any personal
feelings, but upon principle. It was very inconvenient to
have names added to a Committee which had once been
regularly and properly appointed.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. G. BANKES then moved that Mr. Robinson's
name be added to the Committee.

Negatived without a division.
INCLOSURES.

Mr. WEYLAND rose to make the motion of which he
had given notice. We understood him to say he did not
wish to increase the number of inclosures, but to make
such a modification of the laws whereby they were regu-
ltted as might really benefit the poor. The Hon. Member
move:l for leave to bring in a Bill to authorise, in parishes
enclosed under any Act of Parliament, the letting of poor
allotments, in small portions, to industrious cottagers, and
to extend the provisions of the Act 1 end 2 Wm. IV., c.
42 and 59.

Lord ALTHORP said he did not object to the B:11, but
he should not pledge himself now in any way to the ques-
tion tilt it was fairly brought before the Hoare.
The motion was granted.
WEST INDIES.

Mr. BURGE wished to know whether, anion' the pa-
pers that were now on the table of the House, there were
any relating to one of the islands of the West India Colo-
nies which bad suffered more than any of the rest? Upon
the allover he received to that question would depend the
course which he should pursue. He asked, therefore,
whether, among the papers that were laid on the table,
there was contained all information of which the Govern-
ment were in possession with respect to Jamaica ?
Lord HOWICK said, to the question now put to him
by the Hoc. Member opposite, he bad not the least hesita-
tion to give an answer. The papers laid on the table con-
tained all the information of which the Government were
in possession on the subject of what had passed on the Or-
ders in Council being ti emulated to the West India Colonies
The Ile n sad Learned Gent'eman must be aware, if be would
take the trouble of recollecting dates, that it was quite
impossible for the Government to have received informa-
tion of what had passed in Jamaica upon the receipt of
the orders in Council there, because the date of Lord Go-
derich's dispatch was on the 10th of D,cember ; the
packet had not sailed till a few days afterwards, and con-
sequently could not have had time to bring hack any an-
swer to that communication. The papers now on the
table contained all the communications that the Govern-
ment heed received on the subject of the Orders in Council.
There were other papers relating to the previous state of
the colonies, which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman bad
moved for, and which would be laid upon the table as
speedily as possible ; but which he had not brought down
to-night, because he did not think that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman would wish to mix them up with this
discussion.
Mr. BURGE was sAtisticil with this answer of the
Noble Lord, and therefore should at present confine his
motion to copies of any dispatch, or any other communi-
ceti: n from other of the West India Islanos besides Jamaice,
or any of the Orders in Council which had been trans-
mitted to them.
Mr. BARING did not mean to enter into any disens-
sion of the West India colonies, which would now he im-
proper ; but merely to state to the Government his fixed
opinion of the necessity of fixing an early period for a full
discussion of this most important question—moat impor-
tant as it realty wee, with respect not only to the interests
of the colonies, but of the country at large. These colonies
could not be left in their present uncertain state, without
danger of the most fatal consequences—of cons« quencea,
the contemplation of which, whether their moral effect or
their connection with property was considered, must be
sufficient to make men shudder. In his opinion, there-
foie, whatever plan the Noble Lord might have in view, it
was his b .iinden duty to state it to Parliament.
Mr. F. BUXTON also thought that the House ought
to enter upon an etttly discussion of the question of the
West India colonies. He thought, too, that they ought to
enter on the consideration of the state of slave, y in the coin-
nies--always, of course, in combination with that of the
compensation to be granted to the planters. He should
himself, at a very early period, submit a motion to the
House on the question. The first object of that motion
would be, the state of slavery itself; and the other, the
means of getting rid of it altogether.
Mr. K DOUGLAS was lieewiee of opinion that the
House ought early to enter on the discussion of the ques-
tion. He wished to know whether the Noble Lord would
allow them the opportunity of doing so on the further con-
sideration of the Sugar Duties Bill ?
Lord A LTHORP feared that it would be inconvenient
to do so in any state of that Bill. He intended himself to
introduce the discussion of the question in the course of
the present Session, hut he should not now state the plan
he intended to propose.
Mr. HUME said, that in the present state of the West
India colonies they were affected by a want of credit.
Now he thought that the threats which had been held out
to them by the Government were likely to destroy all the
credit they did possess. Whatever plan the Ministers had
in view—whatever punishment they intended to inflict,
he thought no time should be lost in bringing it forward.
Lord HOWICK agreed that this question ought to have
the earliest possible discussion. He was anxious for the
discussion, if it were only for the purp ise of answering
the unfounded assertions which had lately been made. He
complained of those assertions ; he complained, too, of the
the Hon. Member for Middlesex talking of a threat.
No threat had been used—nothing in the nature of a threat.
There had been a promise of advantage to those colonies
who might adopt certain measures which the Governtnent
had recommended, but there bad been no threat. The
Government had laid down a principle. They wanted to
relieve both the planter and the slave ; but they had used
no threat, The Hon. Member might have talked of threats,
in allusion to the language which Mr. Canning bad some-
times held towards the colonies; but the present Government
had used no threats. The Government had offered a boon
to those colonies who adopted their recommendation.
Mr. GOULBURN said, he should not object to the se-
cond reading of the Sugar Bill this night, provided that, at
the next stage, an opportunity was given for the discussion
on the next stage of it.
Mr. BURGE insisted that notwithstanding the positive
denial of the Noble. Lord, threats had been held out by the
Government towards the Colonies. He thought that a
promise of advantage to some was a threat to others. He
strongly urged on the Government the necessity of a speedy
discussion of this most important question.
Mr. BARING also recommended an early discussion
of it. . .

- Lord SANDON entertained a strong opinion that in
the present state of the Colonies, his Majesty's Government
ought not to lose a moment in making a distinct and ex-
plicit declaration of the course of policy which they in-
tended'to pursue in reference to our West Indian posssesions.
If the Coloni-s were in a flourishing condition, Hon. Mem-
het s opposite might talk of granting them a boon ; but, in
their present state, anything that might be done must lose
altogether the character of a boon; it was now with the
Colonists a question of life or death.
The motion was then put and agreed to.
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES.

Mr. WILKS moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend
the law relating to Friendly Societies, and to extend the
time granted them for complying with the provisions of the
10th of George l's.
. Mr. lIUME seen❑ded the motion.
Sir R. PEEL hoped that if any Ilim. Member hail
any further ameniment or alteration to propose in the law
relating to Friendly Societies, be would take the oppor-