The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-23 00:00:00

TAHITI-FRANCE.

Sir GEORGE GREY said he had a question to put
to the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), which was of
considerable importance. It had been reported for a day
or two past that the French Admiral, off the island of
Tahiti, had taken possession of it in the name of France.
He had already alluded to the question ; and since he
had done so, the subject had assumed a very painful
aspect, and had no doubt attracted the notice of her
Majesty's Government. Full and apparently most
authentic accounts had now appeared in the public
papers, stating that the French protectoratefiad termi-
nated, that the island had been taken possession of by
the French stationed off there, and that the native.
Queen had been forcibly deposed. He wished to ask
the Right Hon. Baronet, if the Government had received
any information on this subject, and if so, whether he
could, consistently with his sense of duty, put the House
in possession of that information ?-I(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL felt obliged for the private intimation
grven to him by the Right Hon. Baronet, of his inten-
tion to put this question. When the question was put to
him the other night, accounts appeared the next day,
stating the facts now adduced by the Right Hon. Baro-
net. Since that period, a vessel bad arrived—probably
tke same vessel which brought the early in-
formation alluded to—bringing full dispatches from
the British authorities in the island of Ta-
hiti to the Government at home. He believed
the accounts were received. He believed that the
French Admiral in those seas had taken possession
of the island of Tahiti, and that the native Queen had
been deposed.—(Hear, hear.) All he could at present
say upon the subject was, that he greatly lamented what
had taken place.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," from
every part of the House.) He had no reason at pre-
sent to believe that what had taken place was with the
previous sanction or under instructions sent out by the
French Government.—(Hear.) But the Government
had put itself into communication with France upon the
subject, and, under all the circumstances of the case, he
thought it better to say no more at that moment, and
he doubted not the House would approve this course.
He would take the first opportunity, when he could
speak with propriety, to give to the House every
information upon the subject which he might be able
to do.—(Hear, hear.)
GAMING AND SPORTS COMMITTEE:

At the request of Mr. More O'Ferrall, and with the
sanction of Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Martin Blake was
placed upon this Committee in the room of Mr. Hume,
who voluntarily seceded from it, in order that an Irish
Member might be attached to it.
MASTER AND SERVANT.
Mr. MILES brought up a Bill for the amendment of
the laws relative to master and servants, which was read
a first time.
Lord CLEMENTS and Mr. POWELL severally postponed
motions till another day, in order to give precedence
to the adjourned debate on Ireland.
On the motion that the Order of the Day for re-
suming the adjourned debate be read,
Sir R. PEEL said it was advisable that some arrange.
ment should be made respecting the termination of the
debate. They were now approaching the close of a
fortnight since its commencement, and it was impossible
to foresee from the aspect it at present presented
when it would be brought to a conclusion. He was
unfortunately in the position of being one of the speak-
ers, and he was perfectly ready to make any arrange-
ment on the subject. He wished to learn whether it
was intended that the debate should end to night.
Several Hon Members on the Opposition side of the
House rose and exclaimed—" To-morrow night." The
Right Hon. Bart. then sat down.

On the Speaker putting the question, Sir Valentine
Blake rose several times to address the House, but, the
order not having been read, he was compelled to sit down
amid much laughter.
STATE OF IRELAND—ADJOURNED DEBATE.

The Order of the Day for the commencement of the
adjourned debate having been read,
Mr. MAURICE O'CONNELL said he should not
detain the House long, and he should confine himself
as much as possible to certain statements made by the
Attorney-General for Ireland. At the commencement
of his speech the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman
thought proper to attack the traversers with respect to
their conduct towards the Government reporter, Mr.
Bond Hughes. Now, the case with respect to Mr. Bond
Hughes stood thus :—He lodged an information that
at a certain dinner at Mullaghmast, he saw Mr.
Barrett, and he stated that Mr. Barrett spoke there.
He further swore that he afterwards saw Mr. Barrett at
a meeting held in Abbey-street, and that the day after
the proclamation against the meeting at Clon-
tarf, he saw Mr. Barrett on the evening of
that day at a dinner at the Rotunda, and
that Mr. Barrett spoke at that dinner. n the
15th or 16th of October the traversers attended
at the chambers of Mr. Justice Burton, to
put in bail. Among those traversers was Mr.
Barrett, and among the parties attending was the
Crown witness, Mr. Bond Hughes. Mr. Hughes went
there for the express purpose of correcting an error as
to the name of the traversers, the Rev. Mr. Tierney
and the Rev. Mr. Tyrrell. He then saw Mr.
Barrett, and in the course of his evidence, stated
that he neither saw Mr. Barrett at the Rotunda nor at
the meeting at Mullaghmast. Subsequently a summons
was served on Mr. Bond Hughes to appear at the police-
office, to answer a complaint of wilful and corrupt per-
jury, but Mr. Kemmis never alluded to the statement
made by Mr. Hughes, at the Judge's chambers ; but
suffered him to remain under the imputa
tion of perjury. On the 3d or 4th day of term
a writ of mandamus was applied for. No men-
tion was made, on the part of the Crown soli-
citor, of the fact that Mr. Bond Hughes had committed
a mistake. Now he (Mr. M. O'Connell) thought they
could not entirely acquit Mr. Bond Hughes for allowing
so grave a charge as perjury to hang over him, when it
was obviously his duty to take the first oppor •
tunity of meeting it. But he was a Crown witness,
and it must be supposed that he was in the
hands of the officers of the Crown. Those Crown
officers contented themselves with resisting the applica-
tion for the mandamus moved for on the part of the
traversers, and they allowed the charge to hang over
Mr. Bond Hughes from the 16th of October until he
was examined as a witness on the trial, when, in
the course of cross-examination, it was elicited
from him that he bad committed a mistake.
He thought the only blame that could be attached to
Mr. Bond Hughes was, that he allowed the, matter to
rest in the hands of the Crown solicitor instead of taking
it up himself and placing it in its proper light before the
public. The moment it was placed in its proper light
before the public, that moment the obloquy which had
been cast upon Mr. Hughes ceased. The Right Hon.
and Learned Gentleman (the Attorney-General for
Ireland) had alluded much in his speech to the caption
of the indictment, and tried to explain his motives
for refusal. He (Mr. M. O'Connell) was sure that
it was as unusual to refuse an application of this
nature in Ireland as. it was in England. When
the matter was brought before Mr. Justice Perrin, he at
once concurred in the propriety of allowing the tra-
versers to have a caption of the indictment. Again,
the traversers being allowed to traverse, a four days'
rule was moved, but the Right Hon. and Learned
Gentleman demurred, and eventually, after much dif-
ficulty, the traversers succeeded in getting the rule.
When the Chief Justice asked the Attorney-General
whether it was customary to grant such a rule, he replied,
that the ordinary practice might be so, but he, as chief
officer of the Crown, felt privileged to oppose it. The
Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman had spoken in terms
most laudatory of the, rish Bar, and he (Mr. M. O'Con-
nell) thought it equal to that of any other country, but
still he could not help reiterating the question put by
the Hon. Member for Worcester, as to whether the
Attorney-General for England would have acted under
similar circumstances as the Irish Attorney-General had
done. He (Mr. M. O'Connell) would ask the Right
Hon. and Learned Gentleman, the Attorney-General for
England, how he would have asserted such a prerogative?
The Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman (the Attorney-
General for Ireland) had complained that the traversers,
through their agents, had resorted to every means—even
the most frivolous—to procure delay, and frustrate
the objects and ends of the prosecution, but he (Mr.
M. O'Connell) contended that the interests of the tra-
verses imperatively demanded that course to be pursued,
and every step which had been taken had been taken
according to the strict letter of the law. In Eng-
land the practice had invariably been to afford
every facility to the traversers for preparing their defence
by supplying a caption of the indictment, and every
other document they might require. He should
next allude to another point in those trials: when the
bills were before the grand jury it was proposed to
alter a misnomer, and upon Mr. M'Donough resisting
the application, the Attorney-General called upon
WDonough, who was a Queen's Counsel, to pro-
duce his license to act as counsel for the traversers.
He thought such a demand did not, at least,
tend to raise the Right Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman in the estimation of the Irish bar.
The Act of Parliament provided that no person who was
not on the list should be placed thereon, unless
he himself gave notice of his name not appearing on the.
list. And the Act of Parliament further provided that
no person's name which was already on the list should
be taken off without notice being given to that
person. The course pursued by the traversers
was therefore strictly legal. The Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman, the Attorney-General for Ireland,
last night, when he stated that the attorneys for the
traversers were admitted to examine the notices of
objection to the jurors, ithtoyd
wthoomstatreetaitnheadt
other attorneys andcounsel,
the traversers knew not, were in attendance to object
to any names the traversers might propose to be placed
on the lists. They managed their affairs very well, for
the traversers never could ascertain by whom they had
been retained. When the Attorney-General lest night
denounced the conduct of Mr. Mahoney, he omit.
• led to state this iftwt, that counsel attended ou