The Sun.
London, England, 1861-05-15 00:00:00

4

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(Tins DAY.)

The SPEAKER did not take the chair until some time
after 12 o'clock, in consequence of there not being a suffi-
cient number of members present.to constitute " a house."
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were read a third iii;e and passed :
The Alton, Alresford, and Winchester Railway Bill, and
Rhyl Bridge Bill.
The_ following bills were considered, and ordered to be
read a third time :—Cockermouth, Keswick, and Penrith
Railway; Henley in Arden Railway; Southampton and
Netley Railway; and 'We'd Cheshire Railways.
NEW TRIAL IN CRIMINAL CASES.
Mr. BUTT rose to move the second reading of this
bill, the object of which was to enable a review being taken
of erroneous verdicts in criminal cases. In 1844, Sir F.
Kelly, following the footsteps of an eminent legal autho-
rity, introduced a bill for the above purpose,
but the con-
sideration of the bill was delayed until the year 1858,
when he introduced the bill again, and its principles were
affirmed by a considerable majority. It had been objected
to by many to allow appeals from decisions of the Court
of. Queen's Bench in criminal trials, but in certain
cases it had Leon found of great service. In cases of
misdemeanour an appeal was allowed, but in felony there
was no such right, and the reason why the distinction
was allowed was, that felony incurred, in the event of a
conviction, forfeiture of goods, se that a man charged with
the more serious offence did not possess the privilege en-
joyed by him who was convicted of a lesser offence. By
his bill he proposed to sweep away the distinction between
felony and misdemeanour, and giving the man tried
in the Court of Queen's Bench for felony the
same right as that possessed by a man con-
victed of the lesser offence ; and he further proposed -to
extend the.power of that court to bring criminal cases be-
fore them from other courts by a writ of certiorari. In
several instances the opinion of the judge went with the
verdict of the jury, yet in many cases it had been proved
that both judge and jury were wrong, and an innocent man
had been in many instances convicted of an offence he had
never committed. He did not think a more glaring
want of the bill he at present had the honour
of moving the second reading existed than in
a.. ease or xi?. Barb.v, the attorxi..Y) ilrk""'^ case was
familiar to the house, from the fact that they had granted
him compensation. Then, again, he would instance the
ase of the Earl of Dundonald. The noble earl exerted him-
self to obtain a new trial, but was perfectly unable to do so.
If he had succeeded, he would not have gone down to the
grave with the sting of his trial rankling in his breast. It
was true the ultimate result was the triumph of the noble
and gallant earl over the aspersions of his enemies;
but if the bill now before them had been law
at the time, much of the suffering of so gallant
a man would have been prevented. Dr. Smethurst's
case proved the necessity of the bill, and referring to
trials still mare recent—that of Mr. Kirwan, in Ireland,
and Mr. Hatch, in Westminster Hall—showed the great.
necessity there was for the passing of the bill. The hon.
gentlemen then proceeded to point out several cases which
had occurred in Ireland showing the necessity of his measure,
and instanced a case of a man convicted of murder. Before
sentence was passed he was asked in the usual form why he
should not suffer the penalty of the law. If ihe had said the
witnesses had sworn falsely against him, he was told that
was no answer in point of law. If he said to the judge you
have ruled a point of law wrong; that was no answer in
point of law ; but if he said the clerk had
committed an error in drawing up the indictment,
and it turned out be one of the most trivial nature, then
he had sufficient to arrest the passing of the sentence. He
knew he shoull be asked if he proposed to give appeals in
acquittals as well as convictions, but as he did. not do so
in this bill, he felt there would be some objection, and he
trusted the House would read the bill a second time.

Sir. G. C. LEWIS said this was another instance of
Wednesday inflictions. Last session the House had in a
very marked way rejected is bill, which was precisely
similar in its enactments. He did not think that anything
had occurred since that time to show that the bill was re-
quired. Did the hon. gentleman think it was a common
occurrence, for the innocent man to be found guilty in this
country ? (Hear, hear, from Mr. Butt.) If the hon. gen-
tleman meant by his cheer to infer that it was so, he' (Sir
G. Lewis) felt a strong conviction, in which he was sup-
ported by the learned judges of the land, that such a cir-
cumstance was of very rare occurrence. He thought the
bill would be a mockery to a man in prison in
saying to him you can appeal against . your
sentence, because it would be entirely useless to ghte the
privilege without you made some provision for the pay-
ment of the costs. He did not think the case of Dr. Smethurst
afforded the slightest argument in favour of this bill, which
sought to enact that appeals be given to certain criminal
cases. The real ground of uncertainty in Dr. Smethurst's
case was the fallibilit) of the scientific evidence. Then,
again, Mr. Hatch's case did not afford the hon. gentleman
any stronger argument in his favour. (Hear, hear.)
He thought Mr. Hatch had a much better chance
of making out his case by 'proceeding by way of an
indictment for perjury than by having a new trial,
_ . .
Hatch would be ells-
which they could not have done had it been a new
trial. He was totally at a loss to see the necessity of this
bill. Did the hon. gentleman believe that courts of appeal
would never make any mistake. (Hear, hear.) As the
measure created quite a revolution in criminal law, he
should move that the bill be read a second time that day
six months. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. M‘MALLON spoke in favour of the bill.
Altar a few werds from Mr. BUTT, the motion for the
second reading of the bill was negatived without a divi-
sion.

ANNOYANCE JURORS (WESTMINSTER) BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill, and several
new clauses having been added to it, it was reported with
amendments, and ordered to be reprinted.
PIERS AND HARBOURS BILL.

Mr. PAULL moved the second reading of this bill,
which he said he had now for four sessions brought under
the consideration of the house. On the last occasion the
bill was referred to a select committee for consideration,
and the present measure was founded upon the opinion
contained in the report, and also upon the evidence given
before the committee. He did not propose any new prin-
ciple or any new matter of detail, but as the powers had
been given in several bills that have received the sanction
of Parliament, viz , the Tramways Bill, the Fairs and
Markets (Ireland) Bill, he thought it could be safely given
to Piers and Harbours. The machinery for carrying out
the provisions of the bill could be amply discussed in com-
mittee, but he proposed that the act should, in the event of
its receiving their sanction, be carried out by the Board of
Trade. Its principal object was that in the event of parties
wishing to save the money expended in ott lining an Act
of Parliament to take land and levy tolls for the making of
piers and harbours they might, after they had deposited
the plans and compiled the whole of the standing orders
of Parliament proceed by provisional order of the Board of
Trade with the construction thereof. He had
provided for the proper consideration of any
objection that might arise to any proposed new
works by adopting the arrangements now insisted on by
their standing orders with respect to legislation of this de-
scription.
Mr. M. GIBSON said, although the bill from its name
might be supposed to effect the same object as that pro-
posed by the Government, it did not in the slightest degree
clash with it, and if the house should agree to read it a
second time, it might be made to act as an aid to the Go-
vernment measure. If the Legislature thought proper to

throw the duty of carrying out the provisions of the bill on
the Board of Trade, he should have no objection to give
all the assistance in his power to it. (Hear, hear.) On
the part of the Government he had to say there was no ob-
jection to the second reading of the bill ; but he must re
serve to himself 6he right to suggest any alterAtion
might be ~,,,nsidered necessary in committee. .

Mt. lIENLEY thought the bill Lutslit be greatly im-
proved when they came to consider it in detail in com-
mittee.
Sir L. PALL supported the bill. He said he was the
owner of a harbour which came within the provisions of
the bill, and if it received the assent of the Legislature he
should, without doubt, avail himself of its provisions.
The bill, after a few words from Mr. BUCHANAN, was
read a second time.
MINES TRESPASSES PREVENTION BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
REFORMATORY SCHOOLS (SCOTLAND) BILL,
This bill was read a second time.
The other orders of the day having been read and post-
poned,
Mr. MURE obtained leave to introduce a bill to make
further provision for the regulation of the British Whit°
Herring Fishery in Scotland,
btained
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ° _
TRANSFE it OF STOCKS AND ANNUITIES.
I the
leave to bring in a bill to increase at the Bank
transfer of stocks and annuities tran!Pr
respecting the
of Ireland, and to make further provision
public stocks or
mutual transfer of capital in certainEvgland and Ireland ;
funds transferable at the Banks of the
afbaiceilities or
and for other purposes.
BOARD OF WORKS.
METROPOLITA financial
of
f
politan Board of Works under the
transactions of the
14
6 tlrO°4 to the 25th d
Mr. PEEL moved foNr a return showing the
day of March, 1861,
Act 21 and 22 Vo• c.
Loans—The
each loan; the rate of
principal sums bor-
rowed,with the date and amount
interest; the annual sums repaid on account of the loans,
as follows :,-1. As to
with dates of repayment ; and principal sums outstanding.
2. As to Works—The several sums borrowed for the works
with dates of borrowing, and any other sums received
available for such works ; and the monthly pay-
ments for works executed and services performed, with de-
scription of the several works and services. 3. As to
Sinking Fund—The amount of the main drainage rate as-
sessed in each year ; the payments made to the Bank of
England on account of such assessments; the amounts
received for investments sold, and the interest received upon
. ilM4t4lelltS i tll9 0n191,14tP paicl for iATO§tII29I3.IS Inl'r,4"Cd;