The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-03 00:00:00

had had some previous information, which would enable
lhim to answer the questions put by the Hon. Baronet.
He was also prepared to allow that gr. at excitement did
prevail in Leicester on this subject. He had had copies
of the petitions sent to him at the Home-office, and on
_ _

receipt of these, he had thought it his duty to make in-
quiry into the circumstances of the case. He had re
ceived a retdrn on the day before yesterday in explana-
tion, and he (Sir J. Graham) was bound to say that
that explanation was not satisfactory.—(Hear, hear.)
Ie tliought the committing magistrates were wrong in
no.: allowing the parties to appear at the sessions. They
testa been sun moned to appear before the judges but the)
7:vere not allowed to enter the room. They were asked
if they brought the money and when they answered in
the negative they were sent to prison. He conceived this
a gross violation of the liberty of the subject. On the
non-payment of the rate it NI as competent to issue a
warrant, for not only the amount of the poor-rate but
the amount of costs also. In this case a warrant had
been issued and a return made of nulla bona. It was
then competent to issue a warrant to attach the person,
!but the parties outht to have been admitted into the
presence of the magistrates before they were committed
to prison. He had felt it his duty in this case to advise
her Majesty to order the immediate liberation of these
IPemons from prison, arid he only regrctt( d that he had
riot 'been enabled to recommend this course at an earlier
1: eriod.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. T. DUNCOM BE thanked the Right Hon. Baronet
in the names of those persons. The parties who repre-
sented the petitioners had called upon him last week,
and he had recommended them to adopt the course of

briningthesul.rect before the House. 'The Right Hon.
Baronet (Sir J. Easthope) was out of town, but he (Mr.
Duncombe) assured those persons that the Hon. Baronet.
would be very happy to present the petition. He (Mr.
Ituneombe) believed that every circumstance stated in
that petition was perfectly true. The parties were now
asitTering imprisonment with hard labour, and that, too,
after they had been liberated on payment of the original
debt. They were not allowed by the police to enter the
magistrates court ; and their committal, under these
circumstances, he contended was a gross act of illegality
and oppression. Unfortunately for those parties, the
rtmission promised by the Right Hon. Baronet had
tome too late, for the terms of their sentences

expired the day after to- morrow.—(Le ughter.)
Were these persons then to have no redress ? Was this
ranfortunate widow, fifty-eight years of age, who had
lost her husband by an accident in a coal-mine, who was
only a lodger with her daughter, and „ho had been sen.
tented to imprisonment with hard labour—was she, he
asked, to have no redress? He tru-ted that the Right
lion. Baronet would go further, and advise her Majesty
to strike these magistrates off the commission of the

peace, thus preventing in future their power to commit

those gross acts of tyranny and injustice.—(Cheers.) -
Mr. BUCK, as chairman of the Leicester court of
quarter sessions, could not allow the remarks which had

just been made upon the conduct of two of his col-
leagues to pass unnoticed. They had, to his own know-
ledge, been in the commission of the peace for a con-
siderable time, and it would be extremely harsh to dis-
'miss them for this single act of indiscretion. They were
highly respected in Leicester, and he was sure their dis-
missal would result in serious inconvenience to that town.
He could assure the House that it was quite impossible
those Gentlemen could have been actuated by any cor-
rupt or unworthy motives in dealing with the case then
under discussion.

Mr. HUME was sorry to stly anything againrt the
character of two individuals of whom he knew nothing,
,exceptin; of course this single act ; but he should be ex-
ceedingly glad to know if the Right lion. Baronet agreed
with the recommendation of his Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for Finsbury. Was there no means by which these
poor persons could obtain redress ? If there was not, he
'hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would mark his sense of
This Act,
.by making an example of the magistrates.
Sir J. GRAHAM said it would be unbecoming in a
Minister of the Crown to make any declaration upon
the conduct of these magistrates, until they had had
some opportunity of vindicating their character, or
making some recompence to the aggrieved parties. He
should take the earliest opportunity of releasing those
parties, and for the present it would be most unwise for
him to do more.

Mr. HUME remarked, that under those circumstances
the Right Hon. Baronet had done everything he could,
with an alacrity that did him credit.—(Hear.)
After a few words from Mr. F. FRENCH, which were
not audible in the gallery,
Sir JOHN EASTHOPE rose simply to express his
acknowledgments to his Right Hon. Friend for the hand-
some manner in which he had met the case, and to im-
plore; him not to allow even the first post to-morrow to
pas& without giving an order for the release of these
Prir persons.
Sir J. GRAHAM had not power to accede to the
'request,.
Mr. ESCOTT wished, if any further investigs.tion
took place, the Government would ascertain whether,
under the existing law, these magistrates had the power
of mulcting these poor defendants to the amount in
which they had fined them. The Act of Parliament
certainly gave them costs, but it did not specify the
amount, and he very much doubted whether the law
sanctioned so heavy a fine as 11.
Mr. GISBORNE wished to know if he rightly un-
derstood the Right Hon. Baronet to say that he had
tmade a personal application to these magistrates to know
the grounds upon which they acted ?
Sir JAMES GRAHAM replied, that he had made
an application to the Clerk of the Peace, who had for-
warded a very full explanation.
The matter then dropped.
ARMY ESTIMATES.
Mr. HUMS had come down to the House that even-
folly expecting that the Hon. Gentleman the Se-
'cretary-at-War intended to make some statement
011 the subject of the Army estimates. lie understood
11(m, however, that it would be more convenient to
the Right Hon. Gentleman to take the vote for the pre-
sent, without discussion, but if he consented to this
course he hoped the House would consider them as not
being prejudged.—(Rear, hear.)
Mr. B WIA,LIAMS reminded the House that, pre-
viously to the Easter recess, they quietly voted up-
wards of 2.,800,000/., without any account being given of
its interacted disposal. True, they were then told that an
oppo':cunity would be afforded them for entering :at
length into the question, but no discussion afterwards
took place. lie remembered, too, that about three years
ago, his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose assented
to a similar course to the one which had been proposed
that night, but when, on a subsequent occasion, his Hon.
friend proposed to reduce the arrajnby 20,000 men, he
was met by roars of laughter. Now, if they voted these
79,000 men they, in point of fact, voted away the whole
of the army estimates, for, after voting the number of
men, they could hardly refuse the money to pay for
there. But a vote of this nature had never, to his know-
ledge, been taken on a Wednesday, and he could see no
reason why they should, on the present occasion, depart
from their former custom. If, therefore, the
Might lion. Gentleman the Secretary-at-War was de-
termined to proceed at once with the vote, he should feel
it to be his duty to propose a reduction ; but before pro
needing to state the nature of it, he should be glad to
know if the Right Hon. Gentleman had any objection
to postpone the vote till another time.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER in-
formed the Honourable Member that the precise number
of men required for her Majesty's service could seldom
or never be ascertained, and therefore it was that a larger
number was k.,lways specified in the vote. But it did not
follow from this that the whole of them would be re-
quired, indeed it was quite evident they would not, and then
the Hon. Member had an ample check on the number to
be implied in voting the money to pay them ; for upon
'the amount voted of course depended the number to be
raised for the service. The Hon. Gentleman, however,
did not appear to be aware of the inconvenience he
would cause by throwing obstacles in the way of
taking the votes that night. The Hon. Member perhaps
was not aware that it was absolutely necessary that the
Mutiny Act should be read a first time and printed be-
fore the 25th instant, but this could not, be done until the
rate of men had been agreed to.
Mr. WILLIAMS said it was impossible for any ac-
countant in England to calculate the expense precisely
of 10,000 or 20,000 men, and he therefore had no means
of ascertaining how much a vote ought to be reduced to
effect a saving of so many men to the country. In fact,
the whole question rested with the number of men, and
not the money.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would,
for the Hon. Member's satisfaction, undertake to furnish
him with the exact cost of any given number of men.
Mr. 'WILLIAMS would state then the number of men
he wished to reduce from the army. Ever since he had
beard any arguments in favour of the vast extent of our
standing army, he had always understood that it was
kept up tor the purpose of relieving the regiments sta-
tioned in the colonies. Now he could show them that
they could just as well accomplish that object if they
9asented to reduce the present army by 11,000 men.
There were for instance three regiments of Life Guards
which performed no duty in the colonies, and there were
also three regiments of Foot Guards which never per-
z.,,;(7lled any duty whatever in the colonies. None of the
Horse Guards had performed any duty whatsoever in the
colonies since the termination of the war, with the ex-
e_eption of one battalion in Canada. These six regi-
"'" nts, consisted of 6,561 men, and cost the country
up-
Wards_, of 110,0001. per annum. It was not his desire
neprive her Majesty of any display which might be
Pleasang to her. But he was convinced that all the pur-
poses of royal display could be answered, and a reduc-
tion effected equal to the cost of 10,000 men.
Mr. S. HERBERT understood the Hon. Member for
Coventry to suggest only a reduction of cost, and not a
reduction of men.
Mr. WILLIAMS —Precissly so.
The House then went into Committee, and a vote for
1,111 men, exclusive of those employed in her Majesty's
territorial possessions abroad, was agreed to.
The House resumed, the CHAIRDIAN reported pro-
gress, and obtained leave to sit again.
PUBLIC MUSEUMS—DESTRUCTION OF
TREASURES OF ART.
On the reading of the order of the day for the Com.
%wee of the whole House upon this Bill,
Sir
GRAHAM• the moved that it be an instruction to
k,otninittee to introduce a clause extending its provi-
sions to the protection of works of art in the possession
of private individuals.
BOUVERIE thought that the provisions of the
light to be extended to the protection of private
Property of every kind.
he Bill then passed through Committee pro forma.
POOR. LAWS (SCOTLAND).
a Bill for
The LORD ADVOCATE moved for leave to bring in
the amendment and better administration
Olaf the laws relating to the relief of the poor in Scot-
there
nd. It hado often and long been complained of that
was •n adequate provision for the relief of the
Poor in Scotland. He did not speak of the poor in cases
dl,soc_fasei_onal distress, which m'ust be met by extraor-
Zy efforts—but of the poor in their permanent con-
vu. In 1838, the General Astiembly of the Church