The Sun.
London, England, 1826-03-10 00:00:00

e
. ' ' erect to '
strivillvaritievatett And . obsolete ones--suff maintain a should propose nothing which should endanger the power of
troncurrent existence, the infliction upon the former seemed to convictioosoi: e one hand, or the liberty of the subject on the
nimble the torment of Megentitts, who condemned the living Other; Ai
ilt,t, leal.3l.o.oiffsonndocrw .sotfoOttildaemdeanstdwibleyttitheer
,tAhecteofo ofg
to die in the arms of the dead. . The second objection was, that Wtli
Ityl-V:Cits entered against film in consequence of a verdiet, or tif
innovation's were dangerous. . To this the respondent answered,
that the same exception. might be taken against all trnprove- gstatlinding mute, or of insisting or challenging peremptorily Wore
meats tn medicine, and the rhysical as well as the constitutional than 24 jurors, or of outlawry, the law looked upon them all in
any felonious offenece. since 'ereitted
bodywould thus be debarred of all amelioration, the errors in the-eamo light ; but in m
byliifferent Acts of Parliament, the offender was . not always
both bang frefered to pass tine grepieti. The third ohjootion
n liable to the same punishment• , but it was a chief and Primary
wait MS the alteration of tbelaw .would t'rn itulges*iull.,l,aoi; object:to render him to all cares of sentence for felony, whether
yen to students; anti compel them to resort again to sent
the
they were created before that Act of William or since, liable to
opposing, morenver, a new charge for tort .gainsl. there the same consequences as if found guilty by a verdict. The
l'hafeeMe -a the lew• The Te*PPrltiell "Po:le.1 . text. next head of arrangement in the.l3ill ma that of uuceSsoties
might, indeed, be such new labou: if tnereweeeLtowncjo
net
after the facts , Aceeesoriekbeforeelte fact w,ert now triable in
Dt4"4"ewtext
w4°lltlCd4C.4 i' (17/41Ct' e°l*inPon disencumber her the county where. isle offenee'Strebaoultetitted, or in that where
the 'subject 'of , change—it was on., prOPOsed
sect eee.ee ought apprehended. The inconveniences of the la .v as related. to
theftth 'Wale e law of game 'obseletS , ,PliTts, • --f- 1, to follow accessories after the fact, was strongly exemplified in the case
low the. sciences, but the sciences oog It
books
a oho.
of the late, robbery at Lord Cowper's, for which two persons
'books,: The plan suggested was to clear tlitleltcis 1 Jews were executed; and the accessory after the fact was tried fuel
iete and' aleeping statutes,i ities ; and acquitted, first at Hertford, and then at the Old Bayley, but
such as chose
aft4iittngitue the
and Jatembards.. They might he preiserltetleaxec
t,bie 1,,
ws,
s end escaped because it Was not proved whether lie teas an acceseory
for NOTOt of them might be substituted T AI
Or the present before the fact in Hertfordshire or in Aliddl ewe e but its the
sueloae were agreeable to . the circurnetaoces _ _ e
ft'►
d 1 dben kn wn to have received part of the booty
ch advantage o en rr ta e o
Orate. Concurrent statutes might also with mo
proposal made to James subeequently, in the county of Surrey, he was tried and found
be reduced to a single one. To the prop
1.
fientlenutn would told a ater guilty on an indictment. su framed, but -nut until he cost the
the First the Right Honourable
t' the Howie, as contained public in the expends of his several prosecutions, the cup's
authotiu—the deliberate judgment o
general revision of the Statutes MOOS sum of 4201. It was now propoeedenremedy this defect,
it/ t4t' 1)(Tq c't. 1796' when s lundertaken under the by making the law reach the offender ..: either liteintliettnent in
at; eecommeetdeti by the Crown, tint
1... 7 ,
d berjeant the country where the roan became an al
or where he
suoction of Parliament by Air. Finch, 'Mr. Prynne, a 1
w troy d t 1 o taste received part of the plunder. The pleases
i ted le a Committee to consolidate the Statotes. AS 1 e . . . ,
',lc ter, eppo n . -formation of an to the competency. of jurisdiction, often too netounted to a
'lilts was the boo instance recorded otter the Re
lel the Statute Law, and the question had total denial of puttee. In the cases of inisdemeanouree the
Otterript. to new-mot fra eel' et
.ed for a hundred years since it was OrivionslY agitated ; law was defective in leaving the ex sates to be de ). ~
atombere
• rried into effect. The Right lion Gentleman the charge of individuals • who were often too poor to prosectite
it .watt never carried
11;)ST bTPO- The • Statute% in cases of the gravest
nature. He would only inteanen'the
ght on the same subject in 11126._ . . .
cases
of
.with., . , , .
hictehad reference to the crime of theft, he conceived to he
of paremoont importance. Other crime* no doubt were or equally heinous offence on a child, when if the parties parcels
deeper'. melignity ; but the number of those committed for were poor, the oflender nine tunes in ten escionti through the
theft, made that crime of the utmost importance in legiela. unwillingness of the parties to rote the risk or a conviction at
00114" If he succeeded in coneolidating the statutes of lar- an expellee so formidable, in addition to the lacuna reluctance
ewer; :iv. would be the first part of a regular code. Accord- of the parties to submit themselves and their misfortunes, to
ing to returns in the year 11125, there had been 14,437 criminal become subjects of public notice by a trial in a crowded Conn.
committale. Of these 12,530, that was to may, 6.7ths of the In cases of null-adminhoration by an officer, the prosecutor must
entlientlitrnber, catne within the provisions of the Consolidation pay the whole expence, as .had lately neen brought under his
Bill, comprehending charges of burglary, horse-stealing, hire notice in titc case of .11r. Sydney Smith, an active Alagittrate of
cent', itheep;stealing, and robbery, under the value of 40 Ail- Yorkshire, who, in consequence of prosecuting an Weer who
IsingeOnomraitted in is douse. The proportion of committals had very shamefully miscotititicted himself, had beet) put to an
for other crimes was quite trivial rte compared with those for unavoidable expellee of 801.—(11 ear himself,
was intended tube
theft. Only '22 persons were committed for arson, 94 for mur. remedied. Indeed it would be of great advantage to the pub.
tier, and 122 for manslaughter. To take the relative proportions he, that the prosecution of crime should not rest or remain with
of Committals for the last seven year's, 2.11. were for forgery, 11l individuals, but with a public and autitorixed prosecutor,
tat murder, 50 for anon, 43 for perjury; and how astonished through whom public justice would with dignity be vindicated,
would the House be to learn, that no lens a number than rather than private revenge gratified. It was intended to
43,000 had been committed for theft. Title statement was reserve to the prosecutor a power, in vane of these cases,
enough 'to thew the importance anti necessity of commencing to modify the lotlictinent so, that, though the offence with
their legislative measures with the crime of theft. It would which the person was chargeable wto. it capital felony, the
perhaps be objected that however important the required change? offender should only be liable, if convicted, to transportation.
in the law. it was yet impossible, as it 'timed at tile consolida. nor did lie anticipate that in thus moderating the severity of
tion of no fe'wer than 92 statutes. Such an increase, of course, our penal code, he either should be exposed to the imputation
defied all attempts at concentration. Now he would say that of lessening the security of property, or attecked by writers
dais Bill' embraced every material enactment within 32 pages. who in other instances hail resisted' proposed alterations of the
The two first pages were empluyed for the repeal of unneces. existing laws, as 'savouring of innovation. A great difficithy
Nary Ant, and 30 pages comprehended all that was to be the was often opposed to a conviction when there could beno doubt
law. Pe
-account for the extension of the statutes to so large A as to guilt, merely through technical informalitice, as for in-
nutnber as ninety-two. Since the reign of Henry the Eighth, :stance, when a man who had live or six Christian and surnames,'
he would observe that they were severally enacted, not uoo; was not accurately described, or when the depth in inches; of
genr•ral principles, but upon the occurrence of particular cases, the wound, or the sort of instrument with which the wound was
Bnch Member of Parliernant proposed a Bill according to the Inflicted were not shewn in the indictment with legal and snit-
czlitincy which had conic 'within his own knowledge, and each lotions exactness, the offender, though a murderer, wit% acquit.
having a peculiar predilection for the Bill proposed by himself, tett upon the mere i I einwsnality, mid even a judgment itself
he was remitided of a story told by Mr. Burke, who meeting a I was often vitiated, because there had been an omission of
Member in the lobby, Inquired what husinc-s Wes before the the terms " Vi et ormit," or IA ifrofert per raeortiam," in
:liouse,. and Was answered that it was only a Bill relating to the that legal document. lie confessed he would be happy if
general canedtution. The Right Honourable Gentleman pro- the House should be of opinion with Ilion that, as the title must
posed to extract the matter of antecedent statutes, and as he have a preamble, and that it was desirable a preamble should
,could better explain himself by *adducing particular cures, explain clearly the object of the Bill, the House should adopt
than by general reasoning, lie would thus illustrate his pion as a preamble the beautiful passage of Lord lisle, in speaking
The stealing of madder roots was prohibited by sum Act which of this subject, which states that Whereas from the great an.
prohibited frauds in the City of London, and which regulated willingness of prosecutors in cases of capital indictments and the
the conveyance of sugar in the %rest Indies.—(A laugh.)— exceptions made in favour of the life of a person capitally in.
There were 20 statutes against steeling various timbers, such f dieted, more venoms escaped than through any conviction in the
as maples, thorns, quicker's, &c. Another Act was for the I mincle of their judges of their innocence, whereby many mar.
better ensuring of fees on customs, anti regulating the fees of : derv, robberies 'and other unseemly offences escaped punish.
eMetes in Senegambia, in Africa —(A laugh.)—lle hoped it i mane to the great stiaoue of good Governments anti dishonour
. woeld, not be deemed improper to transplant those trees in a of God."--(Hear, hear toe-If the House should be of this
rutere congenial soil. lit the Pith of George the Thirst there • opinion he thotight lie would be able to present them with
nose g
ot matinee—one c. :10, making a certain crime a felony, ;a la which should be little liable to objection. Whilst on
and the her c. 411, making the same crime a inistlemeattoor, l• titres übject he must say, that he had never been of opinion
will; e penalty of 20t. The latter statute he considered it vir..l that it could be fairly said that the facility which our laws af-
fil tip tat of the former, tool the Gentleman who proposed the forded to the escape of criminals ought to be us ground of pane.
Bill, tanild not have been aware of the previous enticement. lie gyric. Yet he must confess he should be very sorry that the
now came to his :second proproltime Otte, clause of his Bill practice were introduced here, 'sow prevalent in Prance, where
consolidated twelve MAILIIOI AgllitOtt die receivers of stolen goods', the accused was compelled to a confession ; and the President or
And, here too the Statute's were numerous, because of their Judge himself was accustomed to draw out, by ingenious quest.
enactment upon particular instances. There was one statute tions, proofs of criminality--and, by adopting the character of
to, prohibit the stealing of lead, - another against the stealing often eager advocate, disqualify himself for discharging impar-
pewter e third to prevent the turtling of jewels, antha.fourth , tially his subsequent duty, when he came to pronounce sentence
to punt ft the theft of bank-notes. By the )fill now before the ,in the character of a judge. In cases of misdemeanours, which
House, it was provided dint lf any person was found guilty of often were liable to highly penal consequences, he intended to
receiving lead, pewter, , jewels, or any other thing, knowing introduce a clause to give ,it power to the Court to grant the
.ettern to he stolen,. the stealing of which was by ON ,or any prosecutor's expo:ices. These crows, he intended, should be of
other 'donne of felony, the receiver should upon such convic. course specified particularly; and 14 that specification he had
thee I;ii deemed guilty of felony. Witeriver the stealing of an no doubt the liOnee would think hint perfectly warranted in
srticls watt a fetorty, it was but fair that the receiving of it, inserting the two cues of assault, with intent to commit rape
with it knowledge that it was stolen, should be felony also The or to abuse a child. The Bill would also clearly define the
Bill next went .to remedy the law.as it now stood, and to sup. power of Magistrates to adroit to bail which hattonginnlly been
ply Its oniissions. By the law It %NANA great offence tweinumit regulated and limited by the Statute of' Edward the rim, arid
a robbery in reetty.furineltedleelging—butottrionte tosay, it was now required to be eimeolidateti, as there was a variety of enact.
no offenco„at ali to commit (mein a reedy-furnieled house. Ina mons on this subject scattered through a wide field of legiela- '
late care the Chit! Juliette or the Court of King's' Bench ex. don. Ile felt it was now high time be should apologize for
pressed hi* regret that the state of the law did-not permit him to having so long intruded on their patience—(Cheeno—and some
pant sentence on a criminal who appeared beforo irint, because Might think very-probably that it was presumptuous, in IMP.
the offence with which he was charged was committed not in fists who was no lawyer to intrude himself into a reform-in our
[tatted lodgings, hullo ifurniehed house.' Again it was a serious laws which required ell the aids of experience and mores.
offence to steal nab from a river, which ran through or in the Nina attaininent.—(Cheent.)—Prom the circumstance of his
grotied.of 'mothers but no offence to steal from a river bounding being called byhis Majesty to fill the high officer he now held,
land. ! Anti yet in very many instances rivers bounded the lends he had been qualifjed to approach the , subject in some degree
of prottrletors ; and if despoiling rivers of fish were a punish- by his experience, end by daily, be, might mid homely. obser.
able uffenctS 411 'the two former tinges, It ought to be one In the Mimi of the urgent' necessity of some revision of this part
Inst. The House wits perhaps weary of these details.:--(11eliT, of our law. It' he 1..1td been left to himself and Ids own.oppor.
lose I)—As to embezzlement by servants of their masters' pro. tunities of observation, perhaps the task had been unattempted.
petty, the law was extremely defective, for it was necessary for But he had the hnportent advantage of beingnitled by the tech-
it master to prove the specific nature of the coin embezzled be. nical knowledge of several men of high professional attainment
fore he could convict hits meant of the fact. If a servant re. and experience. The Billy which he was about to Introduce
cldred 10e. to deliver to his imetter'e debtor in change for a 11. had been drawn up by the eseistance of the sane Gentlemen who
note, he could not be prosecuted for the embezzlement of the assisted in &awhile up the Jury Bill, Mr: (hewn, a Barrister,
note. A charge of embeeeling 1014. would not lie against him, who had the advantage of great experience in this departnunn
ter he had not embezzled lbs. Neither could his master sue. and Mr. lloblunise, with whom he had the good fortune to be
Web a charge against hint for embezzling the note, because the aeitocinted in his office. The Bills also hail been revised by most
OW was never the property of the toaster. All these inane. of the Judges, and he was particularly gratified to acknowledge
veciencies and defects were removed by the Bill; which also the cordial support and kind obligations conferred on him by
snittgeted tbe crime of embrzzlement. By the existing minutes, both Justictet tiolroyd• and Bayley, hut more particularly by
it . wee a felony i by the 'Olll, only a misdemeanour. The the Chief Austice of the Court of King's Bench, who had gone
clime was made upon this consideration I dust is cases of .over the Bills, line for line almost,. and suggested many im-
. felony no more than one act could be proved to a Jury; and in portant alterations and considerations. booed he must say,
general, Juries entertaining a doubt whether a sinle instance that from ell Alie Legal Profession he had experienced the
Intel riot be the result of mistake, were rattier er
inclined
to ac. utmost encouragement, which might in itself be, sufficient to
squit the prisoner. The crimee however, being made a mlstle. refute the vulgar impression on ill-informed mind,* that there
weapons* it was by, thepreseut Bill, any number of acts might was any disposition on the part of the Profession to coontee
be priced tioa Jury. hiconsititently enough, our law made it fiance or perpetuate the errors or negligence of our exist.,
a i'neric to titettl property . which was vested in our own funds, ing laws.—Wear, hear I) -He should Leave these 11111* to the
*bile it tookno.notice of theft Committed' in foreign funds.— House for the purpose of 'being examined, satisfied with the
Th,i:, cvji,also.,w4g cOred 4 the Bill. It also rendered criminal gratifying relb.setion, that 411 bringing them forward, he Ina
this .stettling of title dee.4, and what were termed ins 'legul sought only the honourable distinction of having been desirous,
Orme thaw in action, thongit absurdly DO crime by our law. whilst lie tilled hi* lama situation, to mature and improve_
;Potts of the nets newly made felony by the Bill were sithjected this part of our voluminous legal enactments, which in his mind
sueephal pun(ishmen)t, nee were treated with ultdOitieventy.— would prove a solid ground sat gratification toltimself if eccorn.
Quidteuties were considered as part ore dwellingehouse, if any plished, as being one of thine valuable and real memo's of
1446710 a faUrtilittication existed between than. The Act of high official station, of which us just and honourable mind might
hat 4ON$Ioo tiOalog to the robbery of gardens was repealed.— be bleineleettly ambitious.—(Loud cheers.)—fle intuit corifeas.
(llestr t)-.lt Was C(:Ttz,litlly hArd that A mchoolboy, for a thought. be was ambitious of associating his name, m the future history
CO Art-, ititould be rustle liable to seven years tratisnortetion, of the efforts of this enlightened :gee, with the reformation
In featlist Act by its sent ity, diminished the security of pro- and permanent improvement of the law. The Right lion.. se=
petty, for 411001 persons were unwilling so prosecute under so cretary then moved—" That leave be given to bring in a Bill
penal a statute. The hill allowed Alegistrotes to exercise a for consolidating and atuending the laws relating to larceny,' and
d;scretion in 'discharging au offender in the first 'instance, upon the offences of steeling or einuezzlin property, set well ii% con-
ps.yintist of the damage committed, with a small gee, He cealing the same.--{The height lion. I:emitAnon silt down
hoped the Right Honourable Secretary for Ireland would move amidst heed cheering.>
the Mouse to extend the provisions of the Bill to that couetrye Sir Al. W. RIDLEY was happy to 'tail the present neition
Attic/wig to the progressive increase of crime in this cOuntry, as an earnest of future iinprovernents on a more extensive scale.
which- be thought it would he .100114 pride to conceal, lie lie hail been particularly dextrous. that, for the sake of 't (wk.
saidf that in the seven' years preceding 1816, there were shire, which had so great an interest In the growth and breeding
in England and Wales 47,620 commits a. -For the seven of hotees, and that these Llillishould have embraced the subject
years preceding 1023, there were 10,200 .cominittale. Igor
the of purloireng and traneporting.horses to foreign countries.
seven, years precediug 1816, 4,100 persons had been tried for Mr. N. CALVERT was desirous that a distinction should be
capital admen i and 8,`200, for the like period preceding drawn in the tun of misdemeanours, which often-were the
1423. • Notwithstanding the great Increase of population in means of confining persons in a gaol fur a length of time, end
jAaadon, its committals bore no proportion to those of the pialtiug them familiar kith the detail of crime and the persons)
1•. of the (Amery. The cummittills in bondon for the seven of criminals.
feel preceding fillfe die not exceed 1,018 o end in the like Sir R. WILSON wished childottenllng
hod been inclined,
oad oefere 1623 were iset' more than 13314 Crimea* via.. 14. DICKINSON objected that all the expenses in wises cif
, teed highway. rottbnre went on the tlecreese. In 1793 prosecution tier Injuries to personal property tell rts a charge on
~6,1r0
Were eye Nino eaminittals.' hum 1826 wily 165; In the ' the land, through the medium of the County hates. ,
1 144; 1786 r.it (I 1701-there Weee ,1311 executions to London, rind Air, C. Wit..SON hoped that the Hight. lion. pendent:in
-011
bia die last three years only 30,- being Inure than 101) low would include the, power to grant costs in ell cases of eeieults
wis ', ,aot vtalT4 Ottigv, mentioned., lie believe,! the , with intent to commit felony.
theft iPs,,,P4 '-- - " f bltf that f the . ' Al' I OCK ' .O power o else constrt e VI) I 0 L :local . T. ~
HART agreed with' the Right non. Geutletnan,
mere trtuin4ll Ab `the , sil ',a this nia be made thattall.
frAtti‘ wouw,, r over on 1 ~ tore proceedings In caeca of; indiconeots aught -to 45
rnagio to.ithei obisicis is, had Itseteee, uotwithshoahlg the simplified, awl he hoped that the suggestion or the Right Hon.
r.„lll„„,,,,Pgatt; popaaion .and: dun 'increase of clinic.. How. , lientleman would be acted on in securing. us a more effective.
,``"""-"--2 Our
o,ieht be 'on We hiereaset it was net be "'erred Pre, "Pkive Polite. This might be done bye:following up the old.
are ;crone --rt -7 ..., the railurov- twevioni experiment& .pleneelne of ,thc lew with re )e iunite ' ' ` '
el et to the ot swot./ t,IA ' who
, .
the in conacquetice Lic
se ustiate, the design 14); reduce the :mintier of lopnFriy Pe enjoyett something of magitteriul authori y *lint
Of Oh b 141- -- - capital mitliOup4ot should, Or might to be ' tairlPi?vde• ' ' There there . Witt no , corporation tile` • only way of
our laws indicting cap I
- ',i,' . °deli 'to Mete these changer., meemig the increase Of crime Wars by enlarging, the powers of
wkaodontvi. lie should now pr
wiroduced as astir and judicious 'this officer, as far us referred co the prevention of aline.
elbeek he thought enitgbt 1 -/ .ti raw be found that be - Mr, AIiERCUOMBY perfectly concurred in the opinions
' doe. laws, *lnt .Lto bel ties o
.01 -

..
so generally given in favour of the proposed alterations in this
department of the criminal law. - It had been said that in the
kat 7' years not less than 8,000 persons had been capitally con-
victed, of which, doubtless, but a small proportion had been
executed. A large proportion of oirentes'agaiust the peace and
also against private property arose out of the Game bows, and,
as far as respected this branch of crilne,-'he hoped. the Right
Hon. Gentleman' would not fail to include a revision of the ex-
haing la*. . . - - - • - ' • '- -. : -
... ' . '
• Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT was perfectly convinced that most
critninali in the country Might date the commence ent of their
criminal conduct to being in the first instance engag lka pOtel*,
fif,„
ing, which he therefore thought was a.erime *hie ugli tVW '
most sedulously repressed by the vigilance of the Legislature
anti the Magistracy.
31r. SYKES thought-that Costs ',lima be riven also in cases
of misdemeanours to poor pro ,!tutors, in the same way as in
cases of felony.
31r. CH ET 11' Y N I) agroed in. the propriety of granting costa I
in cases of misdemeanours. He begged to set the lion. Aim-
ber for Southwark right as to the offence of child stealing,
wkigh was punishable already in the same way as other eases of
grand larceny.
31r. ESTCOURT denied that the origin of our increased
calendar of crime.; was attributable to the frequency ofoflences
against the Game I uws, so much as to the peculiar condition
of the poor in tiro present state of society. The cluirge of pro-
secuting in cases of serious offence% fell on the county rates,
which he coul/t not help representing to his 3litiesty's Govern-
ment and the House as an actof very serious injustice. •• - -
.11r. Alderman 'BUY PG ES believed the increase of crime
was to be attribuiedin a great degree to the abject condition
anti immorality, Of .11te lower orders who paid no attention to the
care or instrOctia 'of their offi(pring ; and it would be desirable
if the 'Right thin: Gentleman could devise alone means of pre-
venting.improper associations in the large towns of England
amongst the younger classes, by dovising some means, for em-
ploying them in the houses of their parents.—(A laugh.)
3lr. Secretary PEEL, in reply, observed, that it was his in-
tention to introduce a pro Vision, in the course of next week, for
a material alteration in the law relative to the entreat of recog-
nizances, in cases where persons are bound to give evidence—
which he thotight a case of very peculiar hardship, in many in-
stances.

principle in Iveislation. If the original motives to an Ac: Of
Parliament end ceased to exist, that was no reason, if the
Act was now found to be practically beneficial, why it should
be repealed. The whole question was, whether non-resident
voters after the law had permitted the exercise of their rights,
for eightylearsethould now be disfranchised. This was a ques-
tion not confined to Ireland ; it extended also to this country.
If the House wr,s prepared to say that this principle should be
adopted in Ireland, they must be prepared Also to ailopt it
i england. He did not agree teeth the reasoning n' Right
Kerr Barone which would estalelleit a' d,\ b , Kettle
.
Iv of the o heel Wieners and thßsof tii di he st it to
reps 1. ' leit tit tißeehl gran ti age Omelet (Oa eta, swoon. f
respectability and character usually resided in the t was, as the
most secure- places of refuge; but as civilization advanced,.
persons of this description no longer con tined themselves within
such narrow limits. The Act a ow. 11. had been rendered
necessary, because a great number of persons, qualified to exer-
cise the rights of burgesses had ceased to reside within the pre-
cincts of the boroughs. -nut there was still a stronger reason
evhy he must oppose the motion of the Right lion. Baronet. In
Many boroughs, the majority of the present electors might, for
any thing they knew, be non-residents, in sonic, perhaps all the
electors. If they were now to deprive theneof their franchise,
who Were to succeed them its voters? Even if not objectioaable
in principle, nothing could be more inconvenient than to make
such a change now on the eve of a general election. The
question was one which would at any time require mature con-
federation, but certainly at present he was nut prepared to ac-
quiesce in the expediency Of agitating it.
Mr. S. It tet supported the motion.
Mr. PLUNKETT opposed the motion. His Right Hon.
Friend had fallen into a mistake either in law or in tact. The
question was not between the existing charters, which required
residence, and the Act of Geo. If. which dispensed with it ; but
between an Act of 10th Henry VII. and that of Geo. 11., and
he presumed that the Legislature at that time considered the
restrictions unconstitutional, as they tended to abridge, and not
to extend, the elective franchise. Many of the charters of
James 11. were unconstitutional, and were afterwards modified
by tOrce of the constitution. They made residence a necessary
qualification of the elected, us well as electors. The Act of
Geo. 11. had beers in existence 70 years, and many persons
were in possession of rights under it. The repeal of that Act
would operate retrospectively; and powers now enjoyed, and
unimpeachable would be rendered liable to question. It was
quite trite dint those who had enjoyed their ftanchises for
six years, would, by virtue of the provisions of another Act, still
retain unquestionable possession of them ; but what lie would
ask, what was to become of those who had not enjoyed the elec-
tive franchise for so long a period ? Ile trusted the House
would pause before it adopted a principle to affect an existing
body of electors without any means of measuring its extent.—
In sonic Corporations they might perhaps disfranchise the whole
body. The Act of Geo. 11. had passed forty years previous to
the Union. And at the period of the Union, the selection of
boroughs which were to send Members to the Imperial Parlia.
ment, was made with reference to the number of voters gene.
rally without distinction of resident or non-resident. lie ob-
jected to the proposed Bill, therefore, not only on an account
of its peculiar_ inexpediency at the present moment; not only
upon principles of general policy, as it went to abridge the elec-
tive ftunehise ; but also, because it invaded individual rights,
and opened again an arrangement made at the period of the
1./pion. The Bill having already been twice before the House,
was, be thought, a strong argument against it now.
_Mr.MARTI'N (of Galway) chnracterized the Act of Geo.ll.
as, the most disgraceful incident in die Parliamentary history
of Ireland. Perhaps the House generally was not aware of
the eircometances connected with the passing of this Act. An
Honourable Gentleman, whose name he would not mention,
and who, possessed great influence in the Irish Parliament,
had made a swap of one borough far that of Newtown, and then
finding that it would be convenient for his purpose to intro.
duce bis-butler and other dependants as voters for his newly
acquire&borough, he prevailed upon the Irish Parliament to
pass this Act, to proclaim all the monstrous falsehoods of the
preamble. It. would be competent for the House when the
Bill was introduced by his Right lion. Friend to add a pro-
viso, to save existing rights. And, as to the approach of
a General Election, the operation •of the Bill might be post.
poned till after that event hail takes) place. Ile thought it
would be treatment less respectful than his Right lion. k riend
was entitled to expect, if the House refused him permission to
bring in, the Bill. It had been much the fashion to impute
interested motives to Gentlemen meting front Ireland. He
would appeal to the Attorney-General, whether every Judge
in the Court of Error, or the erroneous Court, he did not know
what they called it, had not In the great Galway cause declared
that the Newtown Act had nothing to do with tialwxy. It was
akar therefore that he could have no interest in the propose I
hill. He reprobated the practice ,of refusing leave to bring in
bills. He was perhaps a little sore, as lie had been refused the
Other night, on the ground, too, that he was pursuing a systetn
pr petty ilegiabstion. It was not thought petty legislation to
punish men for stealing a pocket handkerchief. It was at least
equally deserving of punishment to steal the tongue of a living
animal. The Honourable Member then proceeded to give a
artandiebfipale concludedteriejr.repress
such
bu withr ba4 a
ut 11 0e rt
delinquencyi thatot,
waethneota
minute anatomical description of the latter instance of theft,
main
pettyw li who
bus a
elhattutio.
Legislator.o C. I l
whateverl ' C
111 Ili IgNh
might
.0b Ne
said would
aboutil algillhelweht aihi:yialitstielpsrtieehlnasiittrnere,kondd.
hhuroci
motives,wrn lei
introduced.
rr,
ti
oliolisi
;-
protecting the interests which sent him to that House. He did
iiin ofo
ott
ul iled entire!oli,tobtcee subject,coincide
strange ionnlitiheevalits:
ewiatms
ue
A leimtintett under the gallery, whose niaminneedw:fieto%(t.ialds
one
learn, replied, but was inaudible in the gallery.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT explained. lie was quite aware
that for whatever purpose the Act had been
that had never been the subject of serious deliberation.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House then
divided—

Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
The Right HMI. SECRtTAIIV then moved for leave to bring
in a Bill relative tothe punishment or accessories after the f►►ct,
a►ul the expenen of prosecuting for misde►ueanours, which was
also grunted.

STEAM VESSELS.
The LORD ADVOCATE Of SCOTLAND ruse to make
his promised motion for bringing in all to regulate Steam
Vessels itl Scotland. His object in this was to put it stop to the
frequency of accidents in tldsdepaiunent of the Packet Service.
It was intended to restrict the command of these vessels to ex-
perienced seamen, and also to regulate their relative legal po.
sitinns in passing each other when on the coast, and he had no
doubt that the House would concur in the propriety of his ap.
plication. Ile then moved for leave to bring in the Bill.
,H IJJI E opposed the motion for leave to ',ring in the
Bill, which lie feared would only tend to cripple and fetter in.
dividual exertion, and limit the permission to mavigate these
vessels to parties, whose eligibility to command, must, afar all,
be decided and determined by the public.
Sir HENRY. PARNELL was equally indisposed as his
Friend, to submit any Bill of regulations on the subject.
• Admiral HA It VL V suggested the propriety of enlOrcing on
board these vessels, the same regulations with respect to the
yielding on the larboard tack to the vessel which was meeting
her on the starboard tuck.

Mr. SYKES opposed the motion, on the ground that the law
of self-preservation constituted a sufficient motive to vigilance
and care.

The LORD ADVOCATE insisted that it was necessary to
the public interest, as well as to that of the owners of steam.
vessels, that public rules should be enacted. Jf such rules had
been promulgated previous to the melancholy accident to which
he had before alluded, that accident would not have occurred.
He said that owners and the public were both unanimous in their
wish for legal regulations.
Sir J. NE Wl'OlIT observed, that if the people of Scotland
could not manage their steant.boats us well as they,•were managed
in the other parts of the kingdom, the
,better remedy would be
to pass an Act prohibiting steam navigation in Scotland, leaving
the rest of the kingdom free.

Sir C. COLE supported the motion. The clinstrous occur.
rence of the Comet was to be escribcd to the want of such regu-
lations. •

The gallery wan being cleared for a 'division, when
Ale. CA N NINO ruse and :Maid that he must vote for the mo-
tion, it it woe only on account of the long catalogue of griev-,
once:4 of which Scotland it Seemed had already to complain.—
( Loud laughter.)—lf this 11111, intended for the protection of
the people of Suotlatid,- were to be rejected at the very thresh-
hold of the house, it would be one item to be added to her pre-
sent:long catalogue of grievances.—(l,aughter.)
Mr. UM and Mr.IJOJJHOLE severally recommended
the lion. anti Learned Gentleman to withdraw his motion.—
The Ilouse.then‘diiided—
For the Motion - - 70
Against it .ti
Majority —44
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS IN IRELAND. ,

Mr. S. RICE. after a few introductory observations, moved
for leave to bring in a Bill for " the more effectual exceution
of the law in cities and towns corporate, and other local juris-
dbqionS in Ireland."
'Mr, 00111,BURN, without intending to oppose the intro.
auction of the Bill, was yet apprehensive that many objections
might appear against it in the future stages. An indispensable
condition of any such measure would he that it did not interfere
*lOl Any existing corporate rights., lie would' reserve any fur-
ther observations till the Bill came before the House in a more
matured shape.
Mr. C. HUTCHINSON briefly supported the motion. '
(of Galway) stated that he knew of many ex-
,TN which he would not more particularly mention.
as they were such as would readily suggest themselves to all
persons acquainted with the. nature of local jurisdictions. De-
lays had also taken place in the registration of freeholds, arising
from the same causes. Many instances of this bad fallen under
his own observation. He begged leave to correct a misconcep-
tion of what had fallen fmm him on a former evening respect.
log the toils collected at Tuam. 11 e.had not spoken of the tolls
now collected, but of those collected formerly. These tolls had
been reduced from 700/. per annum to 120/.
Mr. F. LEWIS hoped that sonic means might be found' of
rendering the Bill so unobjectionable as to admit of its
cation, not to Ireland only, hut also to England. Ile had
had the misfortune to live within A localjnristliction in Wales,
anti had seen enough to convince him of the necessity of some
measure to remedy the defects anti abuses incident to such
jurisdictions. Perhaps additional Mugistrates could be ap.
pointed without giving them power in the chamber of the Cor-
poration.
Mr. WARRE highly approved Of the Bill. Ile hoped its
success would be such as to ensure the extension of the example
to England. The whole subject of local jurisdictions must, of
necessity, undergo revision. It Involved most important con.
siderations with respect to the sate of prisons. '[hose under
local jurisdictions were generally so &mulles nut to admit of the
necessary classification of prisoners. lie hoped the Bight Hon.
Gentleman (the Secretary for the Home Department) would
take the whole subject into his serious consideration.
Mr. S. RICE replied.—Leave granted.
NON-RESIDENT BURGESSES.

Sir JOHN NE WR POT.rose to move for leave to bring in
a Bill to repeal an Act by which it was provided that the rights
of Non-resident Burgesses in Ireland should not be questioned.
The Act was that of the 21st of Geo. 11. c. 10. sec. U. Irish
Statutes. The Right lion. Gentleman here read the preamble
of the Act, which recited that inconveniences had been expe-
rienced front the want of a sufficient numberof-Protestant inha-
bitants in many of the towns corporate of Ireland. Since the
.passing of that Act circumstances had in that respect entirely
changed. The repeal of the , Test Act, as affecting, Protestant
Dissenters by the Act of 1780, had alone made a material
change. Upon the subject of the Act of 1780, he knew that
great misconception prevailed. It was only two or three years
ago that a Cabinet Minister had told hint that his chief reason
for resisting Catholic Emancipation was, that it must lead tip
the repeal of the 'rest Act. It was only with great difficulty,
and utter a reference to the Act of 1780, that the Cabinet Mini-
ster could be convinced that the Text Act, so far as it applied to
Protestant Dissenters in Ireland, had been already repealed._
The repeal of the Test 4-Ict had removed, in a great degree, the
y
grounds for this act as stated in its preamble. The Acts for the
relief of th Bm e oan Catholics from disabilities under which
j the previously
labouret, had also operated to nullify the reit-
Inning upon which the Act of George 11. was founded. It
could not he,pretended, that in the towns of Belfast, Dumgold,
and Newry, in all of whiCh corporate offices were at the im-
am time filled by non-residents, there could not be found re-
.sident burgesses tu sufficient numbers. He could have no insurelyy teresst irneptrieiesensutecd a city,cestiof awl had established his seat in thatthi present motion, because be fm or.
n
Hom! by the exclusion of nonresident voters. The Act, for
the repeal of which lie was about to move, was a blot in Irish
Legislation.
Mr. GOULBURN said, that there could be no necessity, for
lony disclaimer of interested motives on the part of the Right
Hon. Baronet. Of any such motives he would fully acquit
But. nevertheless, he was not prepared to concur in his
'iptide. The effect' of the proposed Bill would be mischievous,
inasmuch as it would tend, to curtail the number of Magiatrates
which it was generally thought desirable to extend. The sole
argument of the Bight lion. Baronet was drawn from the pre.
amble of au Act passed 80 years ago. This h.a thought a bad

Foi the Motion
Aping it

• •
Majority —3l:
Sir J. NEWPORT moved for leave to bring in a Pill to pre-
vent Episcopal Union, and restrain the granting of dispensation.
The lion. Baronet explained that the nature of this Bill wax to
deprive the Bishops of the power of uniting one benefice to
another, and enjoy the emoluments arising front them. On a
former occasion last year the Hon. Member for Lowth. who was
well acrivainted with every thing relating to the subject upon
which he had grounded his Bill, informed the House of a tact,
and In his opinion one fact was a sufficient precedent to prove
the utility of this Bill. He stated that a Bishop had united
no less than five parishes, and had increased his emoluments
to'an amazing extent, by this union. This he (Sir John New-
port) contended was unfair, because many able and efficient
Clergymen were of a consequense deprived of benefices. His
Bill was to prevent any Bishop,
who possessing a her.efice of
the sum of 300/., took another oneohould be obliged to forfeit
his first benefice. It was unjust, that upon his being promot-
ed to another benefice, he should retain the former.
GOUT nuRN did not wish to retrain the Bon. Ba-
ronet from bringing in his Bill ; but at the same time he could
assure him that he had one in his hand upon exactly the same
principle.