The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-07 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, May 6.
Their Lordships met at Five o'clock.
The Bishop of LONDON presented petitions against
the Dissenters' Chapels Bill from Belfast.
The Earl of YAREOROUGFI presented a number of
petitions from places in Lincolnshire against any altera-
tion in the.corn-laws.
The Earl of STRADBROKE presented similar
petitions.
The Earl of WINCRILSEA presented 120 petitions
to the same effect from Suffolk and Kent.
IMPORT DUTIES.

Lord MONTEAGLE gave notice that, on Thursday
next, he should move that a Select Committee be ap-
pointed to inquire into the effect of protecting duties on
the commerce of the country.
Lord CAMPBELL presented a number of petitions,
praying their Lordships to legalise Presbyterian mar-
riages in Ireland.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from a per-
son named Dennis, and M.A., complaining of his having
been committed to prison in Winchester, as a vagrant,
for having sold tracts in the street.—(Laughter.)
The NOBLE and LEARNED LORD also laid on the table
a Bill for regulating the law of debtor and creditor,
which was read a first time.
Lord BEAUMONT laid on the table a Bill to place
Roman Catholics on thb same footing as Dissenters,
with respect to the law relating to charitable bequests.
The English Debtors on the Continent Bill passed
through Committee, and was ordered to be read a third
time on Monday next.
Lord CAMPBELL then moved the second reading of
the Irish Debtors' Bill.
The Earl of WICKLOW inquired why one Bill would
not do for the two countries ?
Lord CAMPBELL said the form of proceeding in
Ireland was different to what it was in England, and
therefore two Bills were necessary.
After a few words from the LORD CHANCELLOR,
the Bill was read a second time.
The Marquis of NORMANBY presented several peti-
tions in favour of the Dissenters' Chapels Bill. The
Noble Marquis wished to know when the Committee
which was appointed last session to inquire into the sub-
ject of Presbyterian Marriages in Ireland, would meet
again.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he could not at
present answer the question.
The Marquis of NORTHAMPTON presented a peti-
dohfrom the Art-Union of London, praying the House
to pass a Bill to legalise the Art-Unions of England.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE laid on the table of the
House the report of the Committee which had been ap-
pointed to watch the progress of the building of the
Houses of Parliament. He stated, that upon the Com-
mittee going over the Houses of Parliament, they dis-
covered that Mr. Barry, the architect, had
departed very much from the regulations
which were originally laid down by the Committee. The
Noble Lord gave notice that ho should call the atten-
tion of the House to the subject on Thursday.
THE APPOINTMENT OF MR. O'BRIEN.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE then rose to call
the attention of the House to the appointment of Mr.
O'Brien as a stipendiary magistrate in Ireland. Al-
though this gentleman had very recently expressed very
strong opinions in favour of the repeal of the Legislative
union between England and Ireland, although this
appointment might be considered as a trilling matter,
yet he could assure the House that in Ireland such ap •
pointments were matters of the utmost importance. The
first consideration of a Government in making such
appointments ought to be as to the character and stand-
ing of the person to be appointed ; for the peaceable
state of certain parts of Ireland depended, in a very large
degree, upon the person who filled the office of stipendiary
magistrate. The case to which he was then calling
the attention of the House was one which he did not
think could for a moment be defended by the Govern-
ment. Mr. O'Brien was 28 years of age, and was
originally intended by his parents for the
profession of the law. He did not, however, remain
very long at his legal studies, but for two or three years
he gave himself up to the charms of private life. This
private life, however, began to cloy up'in him, and he
then suddenly conceived a passion for public life, and
became a violent Repealer, at a time, in justice to him it
should be stated, when repeal was not so fashionable as
it had since become. During this time, at various pe-
riods and places, Mr. O'Brien applied the most
offensive epithets to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland ;
he became so strong in his language that, at one
meeting at the Corn Exchange, in Dublin, Mr.
O'Connell would not allow him to proceed in his
speech, and Mr. O'Bricn left the hall in high displeasure.
Soon after this a change came over the spirit of Mr.
O'Brien's dream. This was at the time that Mr. O'Con-
nell was the Lord Mayor of Dublin, and it so
happened that Mr. O'Brien was summoned before
that Learned Gentleman for payment of his ser-
vants' wages. And what did their Lordships
think was the defence set up by this gentleman? Why
that his servant's services were performed out of the ju-
risdiction of the Lord Mayor. Mr. O'Connell would not
admit this plea, and decided against Mr. O'Brien, and
from that time Mr. O'Brien became one of the bitterest
enemies of Mr. O'Connell. In one of his letters he de-
scribed that Learned Gentleman as a beggar, exposing his
sores, a monster,
,and a being only fit for a gibbet, or to
feritlise a foreign soil.—(Laughter.) This then was the
style of writing which the Government had determined to
uphold—this was the style of writing which had obtained
Mr. O'Brien his appointment. Lord Eliot had stated
that Mr. O'Brien was of an old family, and was an inde-
pendent gentleman. This latter fact he (the Marquis of
Clanricarde) was ready to disprove. It was true that Mr.
O'Brien had two estates, one in Galway, and one in
Roscommon, but both these estates were
overwhelmed with judgment debts recorded in
Court, and a list of which he (the Marquis of Clanricarde)
held in his hand. This, then, was the gentleman who
had found favour with the Government, and who had
been appointed to a situation in which he would have to
communicate officially and confidentially with them.
He (the Marquis of Clanricarde) thought, therefore,
that he had shown to their Lordships that this appoint-
ment of Mr. O'Brien was a most unfortunate one; espe-
cially when they came to consider that Mr. Blake was
been a magistrate for
set aside for the appointment of Mr. O'Brien, Mr.
ten years,
be itharviemngemnbeevreer bd,heeanving
known to utter one ob-
jectionable sentence, and who had always been respected
by all who knew hiss. Having said so much, he would
not trouble their Lordships further, except just to ad-
vert to an argument—tu quoque argument—which was
used by the Noble and Learned Lord near him (Lord
Brougham) with respect to this subject. His Noble and
Learned Friend said that the late Government of-
fered the Mastership of the Rolls to Mr. O'Con-
nell, and gave .the Vice-Presidency of the Board of
Trade to Mr. Shell, and the Noble and Learned Lord
said that these were parallel cases to that of Mr. O'Brien.
This parallel he (the Marquis of Clanricarde) could not
discover. Mr. Shed never made violent speeches in
favour of repeal, nor did he ever write inflammatory and
violent letters on the subject. 'With respect to the case
of Mr. O'Connell, he thought there was not the slightest
similitude to be found to that of the case of Mr. O'Brien.
The Noble Marquis concluded by moving that the ap-
pointment to the office of a stipendiary magistrate in
Ireland of a person who had published intemperate and
extreme opinions upon political questions which had
agitated the public mind, was not calculated to maintain
confidence in the impartial administration of justice
which such an appointment was intended to establish.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE apprehended that this mo-
tion was neither more nor less than an attempt to cen-
sure the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland and the Govern-
ment at home. Now he (Lord Wharncliffe) would meet
this attempt boldly. The Noble Marquis had stated that
certain gentlemen had been passed over. Why, who
was the person to judge as to who should ba passed over
and who should not, if it was not the Lord-Lieutenant?
'When the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland appointed Mr.
O'Brien he knew nothing of the letter to which so much
reference had been made as having been written by Mr.
O'Brien—a letter, be it remembered, silly and foolish in
itself. So far, then, the implied charge against Lord
De Grey fell entirely to the ground. With respect to
the change of Mr. O'Brien's opinion upon the subject of
repeal, he (Lord Wharncliffe) would eall to the recol-
lection of their Lordships the time at which that
change took place. It occurred at the time when the
Repeal Association was dabbling with the French, and
with the Americans, and soliciting sympathy from those
countries. Mr. O'Brien saw this, and he (Lord
Wharncliffe) could very well understand that such a
gentleman as Mr. O'Brien would feel disgust at the
attempt which Mr. O'Connell was making, and
endeavour to free himself entirely from any
connexion with, or participation in it. Before
Lord De Grey appointed Mr. O'Brien lie had
a personal interview with that gentleman, and
in that way satisfied himself that Mr. O'Brien was fitted
for the appointment which was about to be given to him.
He (Lord Wharncliffe) would ask whether there was
anything in the letters to which reference had been
made which could show that Mr. O'Brien was not
qualified for the situation to which he had been ap-
pointed? He apprehended that it would be difficult to
show this. He did not think that the Noble Marquis
was justified in going into the private affairs of Mr.
O'Brien, or in going into an inquiry as to what was the
amount of his debts. Why, if the Government were re-
quired to look into these private matters whenever they
made an appointment similar to that of Mr. O'Brien,
they would have onough to do.—(Hear, hear.) With
chile) would just remark that their Lordships aught
respect to the affair about the servant, he (Lord Wharn-
not to form any opinion upon such a matter without
first being in full possession of the facts of the case.
Was not Mr. O'Brien entitled to make the objection he
did? He might have considered that Mr. O'Connell
would be prejudiced against him, and, if he
did think so, he was
.justified in making
the objection which he had offered. He (Lord
Wharncliffe) could not but feel surprise that
whenever there was a word said publicly against Mr.
O'Connell there was immediately a clamour amongst a
certain number of Noble Lords in that House. These
Noble Lords cherished that Learned Gentleman's as-
sistance, but when he got to the verge of difficulty they
left him. Mr. O'Connell had certainly been offered the
office of Chief Baron.

The Marquis of NORMANBY said Mr. O'Connell
had never been offered the Chief Baronship, but he wag
offered the Mastership of the Rolls.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE—Then Mr. O'Connell had
stated that which was not true.—(Hear, hear.) But
passing by this subject, he (Lord Wharneliffe) did not
think that the Noble Marquis opposite had made out a
case against the appointment of Mr. O'Brien, and there
he should leave it.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said the Noble Lord
who had just sat down commenced by stating that he
would meet this case boldly.' Although that Noble Lord
had met it boldly, ho had done so but weakly. The
Noble Marquis then entered into a defence of the course

pursued by the late Government with respect to the
offer made to Mr. O'Connell. With respect to the ease
before the House, the Noble Lord had stated that the
Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland was the person to judge of
the appointment of stipendiary magistrates in Ireland.
It was so, but was that an answer to the Noble Mar-
quis (Clanricarde) behind him? Was it to be said that
Parliament was not to have the power to interfere?
Such a proposition was absurd. This was a subject
which Parliament ought:to inquire into; and, entertaining
that opinion, he should certainly support his Noble
Friend behind him.
Lord BROUGHAM did not think, with the Noble
Marquis behind him (the Marquis of Clanricarde), that
they ought to enter into the comparative merits of two
candidates for the office of stipendiary magistrates. His
Noble Friend was there to show, not that Mr. Blake was
more fitted for the office than Mr. O'Brien, but that Mr.
O'Brien was unfit for the office to which he had been
appointed; and unless he had done this, of course their
Lordships would not go along with him in his vote of
censure, for censure it was upon Her Majesty's Govern-
ment. After all, what was the charge against Mr.
O'Brien? It was that he first raised an idol, and after-
wards changed his opinion, and became an Iconoclast.—
(Laughter.) When they came to consider of the letters of
which complaint had been made, they must also consider
what was the early life of Mr. O'Brien? He had rolled
at the feet of an idol, and at the feet of that idol he had
gathered the flowers of his rhetoric—(Laughter)—and
when he became an Iconoclast he preserved a portion of
the idol, and that was its vocabulary.—(Great laughter.)
Under these circumstances, he (Lord Brougham) did
not think there was so much blame to be attached to
Mr. O'Brien on account of these letters, silly, and un-
becoming as he believed them to be. He did not think
this was an improper appointment, and, therefore, he
could not vote with his Noble Friend behind him.
After a few words from the Earl of HADDINGTON,
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE replied.
The motion was then put and negatived without a
division.

Their Lordships then adjourned at a Quarter to Nine
o'Clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 6.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour.
On the motion of Sir T. FREMANTLE, a new
writ was ordered for the borough of Abingdon, in the
room of Thomas Duffield, Esq., who since his election
had accepted the office of steward of her Majesty's
Chiltern Hundreds.

Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition in favour of
protection to agriculture.
Mr. F. MA.IILE and Mr. Ross presented petitions
praying the House to legalise Presbyterian marriages.
The Liverpool Fire Prevention Bill was, reported.
Mr. TRELAWNY presented a petition from Corn-
wall, praying for a reduction of the duty on foreign sugar.
LANCASTER AND CARLISLE RAILWAY.

Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET moved that the
amendments made by the Lords to the Lancaster and
Carlisle Railway Bill be referred to the following Mem-
bers, for their consideration and report, viz. :—Mr Est-
court, Mr. Miles, Mr. Strutt, Sir William Ileathcote, Mr.
Aglionby, Sir John Yarde Buller, Mr. Wilson Patten,
Mr. Pendarves, Mr. Ord, Sir Robert Ferguson, and Mr.
Cumming Bruce ; with, power to send for persons, pa-
pers, and records.— Agreed to.
Mr. DENNISTOUN presented a petition from the
master cotton-spinners and power-loom cloth manufac-
turers of Glasgow, against any further interference with
the hours of labour in factories; and a petition from the
operative coopers of Glasgow, for the repeal of the duty
on foreign staves.
Mr. P. HOWARD presented a petition from the
operatives of Carlisle against any interference with the
hours of labour in factories.

Sir G. STRICKLAND presented petitions from
Yorkshire against the Masters and Servants' Bill.
Mr. HUME presented petitions from Montrose against
the Inclosure Bill.

Colonel RUSHBROOKE presented ten petitions
against any alteration in the corn-laws.

PRIVILE(E.

Mr. B. COCHRANE rose to complain of a petition
that bad been presented by the Hon. Member for RoA-
dele (Mr. Sharman Crawford) some time since. He had
been told by several persons that one half the signatures
were forgeries, and he had been requested by several of
his principal supporters to inquire by whom that petition
was forwarded for presentation ?
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said the Hon. Member had been
kind enough to intimate to him that he intended to put
the question, and he had searched all his papers to en-
deavour to find anything that would indicate the
source from whence the petition came. That
search had been wholly unsuccessful, and his memory
did not serve him to say from whom the petition came.
If the Honourable Member for Bridport had sooner
mentioned the case, he might have been able to give him
some information on the subject which he was at pre.
sent utterly unable to do. At the same time, if the
Hon Member could point out any mode of discovering
the parties, he should be happy to assist him in doing so.
Mr. 13. COCHRANE made some observations in re.
ply, but was called to order.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said the case presented prima facie
evidence of a breach of privilege.
The SPEAKER reminded the Hon. Gentleman that
there was no question before the House.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said it was for the purpose of rail
ing a question that he addressed the House.
The Honourable Member had been assured by some
of his constituents that there were forged signatures
attached to the petition. This was calculated to deprive
petitions presented to that House of all their value. He
did not know whether either of the Hon. Members in-
tended to make a motion, but the case was not unde-
serving the attention of the House.
Mr. CRIPI'S stated that ten petitions, which were
presented on the Ten Hours' Bill, had the appearance of
being all written and signed by the same person.
Mr. HUME said that he believed there was a resolu-
tion that each petition should be examined by the clerk
at the table, to see if it was right.
The SPEAKER said that the resolution required that
a Member of the House should sign his name to the
petition, but that was not done.
Mr. HUME thought the House ought to come to a
resolution that no petition should be received till it, was
signed by the Member who presented it, who would
therefore be responsible for it. He thought her Ma-
jesty's Government should take the matter up ; but if
they did not, he should have no objection to move a re-
solution of the kind.—(Hear, hear.)

Mr. DARBY thought it would occasion a great loss
of time if the clerk was obliged to examine every pe-
tition.

Dr. BOWRING thought it would be sufficient if the
Member was to give a character to the petition he pre
sented by signing his name.
After a few words from Mr. CRIPPS, the subjec
dropped.