The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-28 00:00:00

ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.

The Duke of WELLINGTON gave notice that on
Tuesday next he would move that the House, at its
rising do adjourn to the 16th instant.

IRELAND -THE STATE TRIALS.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that in pre-
senting the petition, of which he had given notice for
to-morrow, he would not offer any other observations,
or raise any discussion on the state of Ireland. He was
induced to take this course for two reasons. The first
was, that he was anxious to know what was the Govern-
ment plan relating to the municipal and electoral franchise,
a measure on which subject they expressed their inten-
tion to bring in. He thought that this plan would be
submitted that evening in the other House of Parliament;
but in consequence of the state of public business there,
it was not likely it would be brought forward that night.
Lord BROUGHAM—The state of public business
there is, that there is no House.—(Laughter.)
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE —That was one
reason, but another and much more serious reason for
his coming to the decision which he had was, that the pe-
tition alluded to the administration of justice in Ireland
upon which he certainly would feel himself Called on to
make some observations. It would be quite impossible
for him to do so without adverting to the recent trials
which had taken place in Dublin. There was
every reason to suppose that some proceedings
connected with those trials would come before the
House in its judicial capacity. Therefore, to dis-
cuss the question at the present time would be
highly improper, because his Noble and Learned
Friends on either side of the House would be quite
disabled from offering any opinion on the subject. He
would therefore present the petition to-morrow, without
offering any observations on it, but would give notice
that he would call the attention of the House to the pe-
tition immediately after Easter, and would probably
move that it be referred to a Select Committee.

Lord BROUGHAM could not help expressing his
concurrence with his Noble Friend, as to what he consi•
dered his duty upon that important subject, and he
(Lord Brougham) could not but consider that the
same principle would apply to the motion of which
notice had been given by the Noble Marquis near him
(Lansdowne). There was tne of two courses open
to his Noble Friend. He could adopt the course taken
by the Noble Marquis (Clanricarde), and • pos'pone
his motion, which he (Lord Brougham) thought would
be the better way ; or he could take the other course of
having it most distinctly understood, that there was not
one word to be introduced into the discussion to-morrow
which could in any way affect the pending law proceed-
ings, or relative to the present aspect of affairs in Ire-
land.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE entirely concurred
in the propriety of not entering into a general discus-
sion on the state of Ireland ; but he could not agree
as to the expediency of putting off his motion with
respect to the challenging of jurors. In answer
to a question which had been put to him (the Mar-
quis of Lansdowne) in that House when he had
given this notice of motion, he had stated his inten-
tion was not at all to interfere with any proceedings
that had taken place in the late State trials, but to have a
prospective inquiry as to the course to be taken by the
Government for the future in Ireland with respect to the
challenging the jurors. His motion was grounded
solely upon the expediency of making known the in-
structions given by the Government to the officers of the
Crown in Ireland for their future guidance. He should,
therefore, allow his motion to remain, on the under-
standing that there should be no reference to the
conduct of the Government in the late trials.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the result of
the motion of the Noble Marquis would be, that their
Lordships would be informed that the course which had
been adopted by the present Attorney-General had been
precisely the same which had been adopted by his pre-
decessors, and he had no doubt but that such a statement
would be satisfactory to the Noble Marquis.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was confirmed in his
resolution of bringing forward his motion to-morrow by
what had just fallen from the Noble and Learned Lord
on the Woolsack. Nothing could be more beneficial to
the Government, or give greater satisfaction to the
country than the announcement that such was the inten-
tion of the Government as to the challenging of jurors.
Lord BROUGHAM would only add, that if his Noble
Friend thought that he (Lord Brougham) was to be
precluded from giving his opinion on the whole sub-
ject, if it should be submitted to their Lordships,
he would find he was msstaken. If any Noble
Lord, in the course .of the discussion, should
allude at all to the conduct of the Government in the
late prosecution, or to the conduct of the Court before
which the cause was tried, he should feel it to be his
dut7 to give his clear opinion upon the subject. If that
subject were once gone into it would be impossible for
any one to say where the debate would end.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE was understood to say that
there would be no ohjection to the production of the
papers.
The Marquis LANSDOWN said that his motion
would not go to the inculpation of the Court before
which the late trials had taken place.
Lord CAMPBELL understood that it was agreed
that during the discussion there should be no allusion to
the late trials, because that subject would be brought
judicially before their Lordships by writ of error. His
own opinion was that the discussion could not be en-
tered on with advantage. There would be great difficulty
in separating the legal from the constitutional question.
It was much more expedient, in his opinion, that even
now they should no further refer to the more difficult
and delicate question which must, from what he had
heard, sooner or later come before them. Let it
not, however, be imagined that because he (Lord
Campbell) and others abstained from giving any opinions
upon the subject now or to-morrow--that they admitted
' the recent proceedings to be constitutional, or that they
in any way sanctioned the conduct of her Majesty's Go-
vernment.

ECCLESIASTICAL_ COURTS BILL.
On the motion that the Report on this Bill be
brought up,
The Marquis of NORMANBY said he must take that
opportunity of strongly expressing his dissent from the
principle of this Bill, and also from the grounds on
which it had been proposed. He did not know why the
discussion of such a Bill should be- left solely to the
Noble and Learned Lords in that House ; and having
attentively listened to every word which had been uttered