The Sun.
London, England, 1821-02-16 00:00:00

have been 'curled on by Miss Glenn and her
maid-servant, and it appeared that the fatir indi-
viduals belonging to this family had suffered im-
properly. A professional Gentleman had pre-
sented a petition to the Borne Department, stat-
ing these circumstances, in October last, ;in -con-
sequence of which Mrs. Mulraine, the 'mother,
aged nearly BQ, Was.released from prison., Three
others had Peen esentented, one. of whom had
suffered his termiof imprisonment, and was at
large at that pertod_of_thne;_but_the.. other two
Bowditches were allowed to remain out their
term of imprisonment, without any interference on
the 'part of the'Government. It was this which
he thought -demanded some explanation. 'The
peculiar hardship of the mother suffering this
sentence at her advanced age, and her son having
been ruined entirely by the expences of. the pro-
secution, as well as of another application to the
Court of King's Bench for a new trial, which was
refused, rendered it a case which he thought
called for -the extension of. mercy from the
Crown. He was aware of the extreme inconve-
nience attending the interference of that House
with Courts ofJustice ; but he was sure it would
feel that this was a case in which a Jury had
been sounfortunately misled by perjury, that any
compensation that could be made to the parties
by the interposition of that House, would not be
misplaced; He moved that there be laid before
the House a copyof the Petition presented to the
Home Department in October last in behalf of
the Bowditches.
Mr. CLIVE highly applauded the motives of
the Ilon. Gentleman iu bringing forward this
matter, .He was willing to afford him every in-
formation on the subject in his power, froth
which he believed he would find that the Peti-
tion had not been neglected by his Majesty's
Government. In the subsequent trial alluded to
by the llOti;Gentleinan, the - case of perjury
against the prosecutors of the Bowditches was
o clearly made out, that the Lord Chief Justice,.
who presided at the trial, drew up a Memorial
to the Horne Department on the subject. This
Memorial was presented in October last, the ori-

ginal trial and sentence of the 13owditAes, hay-
ing taken place itt 1819. In consequence of the
representation'of the Lord Chief Justice, Mrs.
Mulraine was released from prison, upon the
Royal pardon being extended to her. One of
the Bowditches had already suffered his term,
and the sentence of the other two then in jail did

not appeac to be at all affected by what trans-
pired at the subsequent trial in question. It did
not therefore appear necessary or proper to inter-
fere with their punishment. The evidence was

still strong against them as having forcibly carried
away Miss Glenn. He had, he believed, given
every satisfactory information on the subject ;
and he did not see that there would be any ne-
cessity for laying the Petition before the House.
Mr. WARRE 'maintained that the public re-
garded the matter in a very different light from
the lion. Gentleman who hadjust spoke.- For
his own part, he could not see how any dis-tinc-
tion could be drawn between' the different Mem-,
bers of the family. He certainly could not ex-
pect to meet opposition to his motion under that
point of view.
Lord CAiTLEREAGIi said, the question at' issue
Eppeared to be with-respect to the three remain-
ing prisoners. One woman had been released at
the instance or the Lord Chief Justice ; but he
did not see, that because the Lord Chief Justice
had• made application in behalf of that one, that
it at all affected the other prisoners. He trusted
the Hon. Member would see the propriety of,
withdrawing his motion, upon the understanding
that the application he alluded to, addressed to
the Home Department in October last, did not
tend to exculpate the other two Bowditches then
in jail.
Mr.- BENNETT said, that the two Bowditches in
question had been branded as conspirators, and
convicted as such by the most gross systematic
perjury ever exposed in a Court of Justice. The
fact was, that the whole of the Bowditches
were innocent of the whole of the crimes charged
upon them, and did not deserve any of the
punishment they had suffered, and he thought it
necessary the House should know why they had
not been discharged, when a representation of
this was made to the home Department.
After a few words from Mr. BANtrs, tho no-
tion was withdrawn.
On the motion of Mr. CURTEIS, an Account:
was ordered to be laid before the House of the
Quantity of Grain, Flour, &c. warehoused under
the 55th of George if 1., remaining in the Ware-
houses ou the sth of January, 1821.
ORDER IN COUNCIL FOR ERAsING HER MAJESTY'S

; the other the 32d Geo. 111. With the help
of others, he believed, and he could only believe,
from the imperfect manner in' which those Acts
were recited in the Order in Council, he was
enabled to discover the chapters in those Acts
supposed to bear on the case. After reading.
those Acts of Parliirment, he 'really 'thought that
the Church of Scotland would be right in 'sup-
posing that the Order hi Council was issued un-
der errors, and though sent to Scotland it never
bave._ been. intended to be .enforced; The
Order was_ impotent with respect to Scotland, or
if attempted to be enkirced, it was Illegal ; it
was nugatory in the one instance, or illegal in the
other. If the. Order intended any thing, it was
illegal ;
.if it did not intend any, thing, it was- nu-
gatory, and it subjected the Council, from which
it issued, to general derision. He could not help
saying, that that Order was more likely to prove
a disgrace to the Books of the Privy Council,
than the notice of the present .motion to the
Papers, of .the House—(Hear, hear be-
came his duty to state two knstariees, in which
it was attempted. to enforce that Order:-7-the
first was, in the case of the Sheriff of the
Stewartry of Kirkcudbright, who, on receiv-
ing that order,' called a Kirk Session, con-
sisting of himself, his son, who was a Colonel
of the County Yeomanry, and the Clergy-
, man, when it was carried, that the Queen
should not be prayed for ; but the Clergyman,
greatly to his credit, dissented from the other
two. The result was, that the Order in Council
was subsequently taken into consideration by the
Presbytery.; they approved of the dissent of the
Clergyman, and they disapproved of the Order
in Council ; they ordered that it should be erased
from the books, and that the order for its erasure
should be read in the churches. He (Lord
Archibald) could scarcely conceive how any
body of men could throw more obloquy, or, in-
deed, contempt, upon the Order of his Majesty in
Council—(Hear, hear!)--The son of the Sheriff
of the County, Colonel Gordon, was Colonel of
the Yeomanry Corps ; it appeared that he took
occasion
,to ask the Clergyman what were the in-

tention and feelings of the Corps as to praying for
the Queen ? The Clergyman replied,. that he
did• not know what • were the intentions of the
Corps, but that for himself he would follow the
dictates of his own conscience and the la'ws of/his
church. The Clergyman preached a sermon to
the Corps remarkable for its propriety ; the Cler-

gyrnan concluded by offering up a prayer for the
King, and at the close of .that prayer it appeared
that he was guilty of the great offence of saying,
" bless likewise the Queen ;" for that offence the

NAME FROM THE LITURGY.

Clergyman was that very evening placed under
arrest—(Loud cries of hear, hear !)—Hy arrest
.he wished to be understood to say, that the indi-
vidual was restrained from going out of the
county ; and that restraint was continued until
the Corps were disembodied. Could the Noble
Lord think that such a subject was not fit to bring
before the consideration of Parliatnent—(Hear,
hear!) ?—For his own part, whether sitting at
one side or the other of that House,, he could not
suffer an attack on the religion of Scotland to pass
unnoticed—(Cheers !)—ln spite of the language
of the Noble Lord opposite, he would wish to
treat the subject with temper and calmness, but
also with firmness; he would be anxious to hear
the answer of the Learned Lord—he would be
glad to know, whether an act of the kind he
stated was to be defended, or how it was to be
explained ? lie had heard of precedents—prece-
dents, which were invariably wrong, were enti-
tled to little consideration, and in the state of the
public mind, agitated as it was by the strongest
feelings, to have issued such an order on the faith
of bad precedents, hastily and without due con-
sideration, retkcted little credit on the parties
who signed it. Indeed those very parties seemed
not to understand on what authority they signed
that order. When an Ilonourable and Learned
Gentleman (the Member for Oxford) had moved
some nights since for some Papers in that House,
it appeared that Ministers were by no means cer-
tain upon what authority they issued their own
orders. • Both orders were ill-advised—the order
as respected England was unjust and impolitic—
the order with respect to Scotland was illegal as
well as unjust. The Order, which he had read in
a Scotch Newspaper, was accompanied by a let-
ter, signed James Buller, which stated, " You
have sent an Order of his 'Majesty in Council, for
an alteratiOn in the prayers for the Royal Family
so far as relates to Scotland." Now, it was worthy
of observation, that there were no prayers to make
an alteration in—(Dear, hear, hear :).—There
was no Book of Common Prayer—no Liturgy in
the Church of Scotland—(Bear, hear !).--Due

obedience was required to an alteration in pray-

Lord A. Hamm-roe., in rising to bring forward ers where no prayers existed. Obedience was
his promised motion, said that he understood the required,--from whom ?—from the general As-
Noble Lord opposite had said that the notice of seenbly of Scotland, over whom the King and
his motion was a disgrace to the papers of that Council had no more authority than they had in
House. He only noticed that assertion to give Constantinople—(Hear, hear !)—There was only
the Noble Lord an opportunity, if he codid, oft one variation betwesen the Order issued for Scot-
disclaiming it ; or, it' he could not, that the land and that for England, and that was, that in
Noble Lord might state the reason` why he made the Order for Scotland, Bishops were not directed
such an assertion. lie hoped that Members to put it into execution. If it were not for that
would guard themselves against an impression single variation, the, Order sent to the General
which a.declaration of that kind was so well cal- Assembly of Scotland would have been the most
culated to make. The object of his motion was complete piece of absurdity that was ever at-
for the production of a very extraordinary docu- tempted to be palmed on mankied.—(Hear
meat, the Order in Council directed to the Ge • With respect to the Acts of Parliament, the 10th of
neral Assembly of the Clerk of Scotland. He Anne ordered, that the Queen should be expressly
should observe in the first place, that the religion prayed for by name, and also the Princess Sophia.
established in Scotland was 'independent of the The reason for that strictness was, that the pre-
power of the Crown, independent of the Privy tender, under the general name of Majesty, was
Council, and of every other power save the Ge- prayed forby many persons publicly in the Church.
neral Assembly—(Hear, hear !)—The Order in The application of that Act had long since
Council to the General Assembly of Scotland was ceased, for if it were to be now enforced, the
signed by the same Privy Councillors, the Arch- people of the present day would be obliged to
bishop of Canterbury, the Lord Chancellor, and pray for Queen Anne and the Princess Sophia.
others, whe' signed the Order to the Clergy of The Act referred expressly and exclusively to
the Church of England. Due obedience was re- them, and no power of provision was made for
quire& to be paid to that order ; but without altering it. It was quite clear, that the Privy
meaning any sarcasm, he would say, that the best Council, of itself, had no power on the subject.
obedience that could be paid to it was by not If such a power-was vested in the Council, why
obeying it at all. lie would ask the Learned was the Act of Anne ever made ? Or why was
Lord opposite whether the General Assembly the same Act quoted in the recent Order in
could pay obedience to such an Order, without Council ? With respect to the 32d of Geo. 111.,
subjecting...themselves to public derision ? That he really could not see what application it had to
Order, it 'appeared, was issued on the supposed the point at issue. He did not think that it was
authority of two Acts of Parliament, the one the one bit more applicable than a chapter in the
10th of A.nne, the
.chapter and section not quot- Koran would have been, if gravely urged as an