The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-19 00:00:00

NOTICES OF MOTION.

Mr. HUME gave notice that he would, to-morrow,
move for returns of the number of appeals brought before
the House of Lords in the last two years.
The HON. MEMBER also gave notice that he would
move for a return of the number of Custom-house agents
discharged in consequence of fraud, and the amount of
penalties recovered from the sureties.
Mr. H. BERKELEY gave notice, that on the motion
for the third reading of the Small Debts Bill, he would
move as an amendment that the Bill be read a third
time that day six months.
Mr. WALLACE postponed to the 29th instant the
several motions of which he had given notice for this
evening, respecting the Post-office and the Customs.
The HoN. MEMBER also gave notice of a motion for
a return of the amount of receipts from the sale of
papers published by order of the House, and also of the
expense incurred in defending prosecutions in the Courts
of Law, arising out of these publications, in order that
the balance should be ascertained.
THE GAMBLING ACTIONS.

Mr. CHRISTIE gave notice, that in Committee upon
the Horse-racing Penalties Suspension Bill, be would
move that the power of proceeding for penalties under
any Act of Parliament should be taken from common
informers.—(Hear, hear.)

BRAZIL.
Mr. LABOITCHERE gave notice that on Thursday
next he would bring under the consideration of the
House the existing treaties with Brazil.
THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON.
Mr. HAWES moved fora return of papers connected
with the treaty of Washington.—Ordered.
REGISTRATION OF VOTERS (IRELAND).
Sir R. FERGUSON gave notice of a motion for
returns relating to the registration of electors in Ireland.
THE QUEEN OF OTAHEITE.
Mr. HINDLEY begged to ask the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman, the First Lord of the Treasury, whether there
was any truth in a paragraph which appeared in one of
the morning papers of this day, to the effect that Queen
Pomare, of Otaheite, had been deposed by the agents of
the French Government ?
Sir ROBERT PEEL had not so much leisure as the j
Hon. Gentleman to read the morning papers.—(Laugh. 1

ter.) He had therefore not seen the paragraph referred
to, and was unable to answer the questibn.
LIVERPOOL DOCKS.

On the motion of Sir H. DOUGLAS leave was given
to bring in a-Bill for the improvement of the Liverpool
docks. .x
_ .

RAILWAYS. , •
Leave Was also 'given to bring in Bilrg for' the forma-
tion of branch lines connected with the :Manchester and
Leeds, the Hartlepool, and other railways,
SUPPLY. _ _

The Order of the Day for going into Committee :of
Supply was read, and postponed till Wednesday next.
POLITICAL ASSOCIATIONS AND THE PRESS.

On the motion for reading .the Order of the Day for
the second reading of the Poor-law Amendment Bill,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he had a question to put to
the Attorney-General. It appeared that the proprietors
of several newspapers in Ireland had withdrawn them-
selves from the Repeal Association, the reason stated by
them for so withdrawing being that Chief Justice Penne-
father had laid it down as the law that the whole of an
association were responsible for any article that might
appear in any paper of which the proprietors
might happen to be members. Mr. Barrett, of the
Pilot, and Mr. Gavan Duffy, of the Nation, had both
stated this as their reason for withdrawing from the
Association. Now the question he had to put to the
Attorney-General was this—whether, if the matter pub-
lished in any newspaper, the proprietor of which might
happen to be a member of any association, the whole of
the members could be made responsible, if that matter
was put in as evidence against that association?—(Hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the Hon. Gentle-
man had been kind enough to apprise him, a few
minutes previously, that he intended to put the question
to him. In answer to it, he would say that he had no
doubt the proprietors of the newspapers in question
were well advised, and had exercised a sound
discretion in retiring from the Repeal Association.—
(Cheers and laughter from the Ministerial benches.)
But whatever they might do, under that good advice, it
was impossible for him (the Attorney-General) to form
any judgment in reference to the general question whe-
ther the contents of a paper, of which the edito-r might be
a member of an association could be used as evidence
against the whole of the members, unless he knew the
objects of the association, to what extent the editors
were mixed up with it, what the articles were in refe-
rence to those objects, and what use was made of those
articles.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial side.)
Mr. ELPHINSTONE said he was a member of the
Anti-Corn-law League—(Ministerial cheers)—which
was an association for doing away with monopoly.—
(Ministerial cheers and laughter.) Now there was a
journal which was called the League, in connection with:
that Association, and he wanted to know whether he
(Mr. Elphinstone) and every other member of that league
was liable for every article that might be published in
that paper ? He wished to have an answer to that ques-
tion from the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the Hon. Gen-
tleman had addressed his question to him, but he did
not know that he was entitled to the honour of such
a distinction—(Ministerial cheers, and laughter)—but
in answer he would strongly recommend the Hon. Gen-
tleman to take the advice of his ordinary professional
legal adviser.—(Renewed cheers and laughter from the
Ministerial benches.)
Lord EBRINCTON and Mr. HINDLEY here rose about
the same time, amidst the derisive cheers of the Mem-
bers on the Ministerial side of the House, and the
latter Hon. Gentleman commenced speaking amidst
cries of " Order, order." The Hon. Gentleman having

sat down,
Lord EBRINGTON, who had first caught the
Speaker's eye, proceeded to ask, pursuant to notice, the
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary of State for the
Home Department, whether it was the intention of her
Majesty's Government to introduce any measure—or the
same measure which had been already proposed, with
respect to the Administration of turnpike-trusts in
England. _ _

Sir J. GRAHAM said that he had intended to intro-
duce a measure on the subject, but that a commission
had been appointed to inquire into, and report upon the
subject. The Commissioners had fully investigated the
matter, and he expected that their Report would be
ready in a very short time, and before introducing any
measure of the kind, he wished to have the advantage
of receiving their Report.
Mr. HINDLEY said he must confess that he was
not satisfied with the answer which had been given by
the Attorney-General to the question of the Honourable
Gentleman behind him (Mr. Elphiustone). He (Mr.
Hindley) had consulted his professional law adviser on
the subject, and that gentleman told him that the Asso-
ciation called the Anti-Corn-law League was a perfectly
legal one. But that would not decide the question if the
Attorney-General was directed, as in the case of Mr.
O'Connell, after 11 orl 2 months, or a long time had elapsed,
to proceed against its members.—(Cries of " Order,
order.") He repeated it would not decide the question
which his legal adviser had decided in his favour.—(Re-
newed cries of " Order, order.") He now asked the
Attorney-General whether the Anti-Corn-law League
was a legal Association or not?—(Jeers and cheers from
the Ministerial benches.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL appealed to Hon.
Gentlemen on both sides of the House, whether he had
ever declined answering any question put to him in that
House ? If the Hon. Member had really any question
which he wished to ask him (the Attorney-General),
relative to himself (Mr. Hindley) he would be very happy
to answer it, and without a fee.—(Cheers and laughter.)
But if he answered the question now he would be oc-
cupying the public time in a way in which he did not
think he should be justified in doing.
IRELAND—ADJOURNED DEBATE.

On the Order of the Day in resuming the adjourned
debate on Lord John Russell's motion for a Committee
to inquire into the state of Ireland being read,
Mr. HORSMAN rose and said, that he felt it his
duty, as an English representative, to enter his protest
against the policy which her Majesty's Government
had pursued with regard to Ireland. It had been ad-
mitted on all sides that we had arrived at a great crisis ;
and he should support the motion of the Noble Lord, be •
cause he thought it necessary to inquire how that crisis
bad arrived.—(Hear, hear.) There were certain facts
on which no difference of opinion existed. It was ad-
mitted that three years ago Ireland had been handed
over to Honourable Gentlemen opposite in a state
of peace and tranquillity.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
The habits of the people had improved—(Hear, hear)—
troops had been withdrawn—(Hear, hear)—the adminis-
tration of justice was respected—(Year, hear)—and the
repeal cry was comparatively speaking unheard.—(Hear,
hear.) Now, however, the repeal cry had become a
national cry.—(Cheers.) More troops had been sent to
Ireland, and the country was covered with garrisons ;
thus proving that the Government intended to
act upon the announcement which had been
made last year, that concilihtion had been
carried to its utmost extent.—(Cheeri.) The Hon. and
Learned Member for Cork bad been prosecuted to con-
viction, and that Hon. and Learned Gentleman was now
only awaiting the sentence of the Court which would
consign him to a gaol.—(Hear, hear.) By what means
had that conviction been obtained ?—(Cheers.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman had boasted the other night of
his moderation and fairness; but he (Mr. Horsman) must
confess that he had never known of any proceedings in
which moderation and fairness had been more com-
pletely dispensed with than in the recent prosecutions
in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) He would not dwell upon the
animus which had been exhibited throughout those pro-
ceedings by the Learned Gentleman who had repre-
sented the Government—(Hear, hear)—to the extraor-
dinary preliminary boasting by which the case had been
prejudged.—(Hear, hear.) He would not speak of
the calling upon one of the counsel for the
traversers to produce his license—(Cheers)—or. of
the insisting upon the presence of the traversers in
the Court during the whole of the proceedings.—(Hear,
hear.) These were all extraordinary and vexatious
proceedings—(Cheers)—but they were matters personal
•to the Attorney-General.—(Cheers.) But why a as the
list of witnesses on the back of the indictment
not furnished to the traversers ?—(Hear, hear.)
It was essential to the defence that they should
be furnished with the list, and he would ask
the Attorney-General for England, if in the
whole course of his professional experience he had ever
known an instance in which the list of witnesses had
been refused.(Hear hear.) He would ask the At-
torney-General if he would, under similar circum-
stances have refused the list ? Then the application for
a copy of the jury list, which was equally necessary to
the traversers, in order to prepare their challenges was
alsorefused.—(Hear, hear.) The sheriff had trans-
mitted that list to the Home-office, and
had offered to furnish a copy :to the de-
fendants if the lAttorney-General would consent, but
that consent had been withheld.—(Hear, hear.) What
reason could they have had for such refusal ? Was it
not to be presumed that they were acting under the in-
structions of the Government ? The production of those
documents were essential for the defence of the traversers
on their trial, and yet these documents had been refused.
Then, with regard to striking off the names from the
jury-list, how had they proceeded ? It was said that
eight of those who were struck off were repealers. He
took that statement as it was made, but there were
still four others who were to be accounted for—two
Roman Catholics- and two liberal Protestants. He should
like to know why it was they were struck off. The
Government, by the 'proceedings which they iy'opted,
succeeded in keeping twelve men on the jury who
combined the three-fold elements of being Protes-
tants, Anti-Repealers, and Conservatives. With
regard to the omission of the names from the
general list, though it might have happened through
accident that they were left out in the first in-
stance, the Government took care to avail them-
selves of the error, and they forced on a trial with an in-
complete jury list. It was a maxim of law, according to
Lord Bacon, that if a man found a door open and en-
tered, and having purloined something broke out
through a different way, he was guilty of burglary. It
was in a similar way Government acted in those trials.
They obtained a jury according to their own wish,
and obtained a conviction, but it was one not likely to be .
much respected.(Cheers.) It was a conviction which
he hesitated not to say, was a false conviction
(Cheers)—and would be followed by no moral results.
And if no moral results followed from it, what practical
results would follow from it. The Right
Honourable Gentleman told them of one practical
result which had already followed, namely, that

peace was restored to Ireland. But he. was not aware
that the peace of Ireland had ever been broken.—
(Cheers.) It was a peace like a sort of smothered rebel-
lion.—(Hear, hear.) As the Noble Lord said, they held
Ireland by military occupation. They held her in
peace as long as there was peace in Europe
--(Hear, hear)—as long as they were in a state
of quiescence,' but the moment a move was made,
the moment a shot was fired, they would fall in
pieces.—(Cheers.) If they continued their present
policy to Ireland, they must play the coward at hole,