The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-19 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNING, JULY 19, 1842.

seduld rot have left the matter to the operation of chance, but
_would have taken -earo-ahst the parties should- have had a fair
trial. The language of the Chief Justice in addressing the
Jury, was not such as Chief Justices in this country
were itt the, habit of using. 1-16 Old not think
that an English itillste would use the words
.i Infamous libel " in summing up the case ta a jury,
That. was, however, the language of the Irish Judge—language
which would Create a Suspieibri that he might have been ac=
te...4te,d by the paisiOnsnf the Partisan insiedd of the impartiality
which became his station. The coin se taken aptinst the pro-
prietor of the Newry Examiner had been unpaialleled in this
country since the Duke of Wellington's Administration ; and
such a course was only calculated to bring the administration
of justice into discredit. He bad no hesitation in saying that
014 Min Who had heed found guilty of the libel was a public
benefactor, inasmuch as he had called the attefitiOn of the em-
pire to the mariner in which justice was occasionally adminiss
tered in Ireland. He believed that the Irish Government had
Gob itself no ho our by the prosecution in question, and that
the mine it had :alien lit these matters could only tend to
perpetuate the suspicion which unhappily rte./ailed in Ireland,
that equal justice was not administered to all parties.
Sir J. GRAHAM would venture to address a few words to
the House on the present subject. He was perfectly assured
that his Noble Friend at the head Yf the Irish Government was
convinced that his first duty was to see that the law should be
impartially administered in Ireland. He found that no charge
had beet' substantiated against any of the Law Officers of the
Crown in that country. The first, of those Law Officers was a
nian distinguished by his legal ability and undoubted honour.
With respect to Mr. Lefroy, his private character was equally
high. It was true that he had taken an active part in politics
some fourteen years ago ; hilt he should remind the House that
political partisanship had never been considered as a disquali-
fication for a seat on the Bench by either of the political
patsies in the House. The late Government hail raised to the
Bench such ardent politicians as Mr. Justice O'Loghlin,
Mr. Justice Perrin, and Baron Wolfe, all of whom
might be said to owe their elevation to . their
connexion with party politics.—(Hear, hear.) It. was
complained that members of the Lord Lieutenant's house-
hold had taken part in canvassing at the public elections,
but he would remind the House that appointments in the
Royal household here had never been considered as disquali-
fying their holders from interfering in election proceedings
in this country; and it would be affectation to attempt. to
deny that such had been the case. It was stated that the
Crown had stretched its powers in challenging jurors ; but the
same right was exercised by prisoners; and while that was the
case, unless the Crown exercised a corresponding right, they
would merely be leaving an impunity for crime under the pre-
tence of fairly administering justice. He contended that
the right to challenge had been discreetly exercised
by the present Crown lawyers in Ireland. He said
it on the authority of the present Lord Chancellor
of Ireland—a man *hose character no one could impeach,
and Whose word every man would implicitly believe—he
said it on the authority of that Right Hon. personage that
all the Roman Catholics set aside, had been set aside in
conformity with the established rules in such cases. The
Lord Chancellor had had some doubts with respect to the
ca4eof Macdonald; but he had satisfied himself, in a minute
investigation, that that juror had also been properly set aside.
So satisfied was the Lord Chancellor of the fairness of the
trial, that though an English lawyer, and one of the highest
ernin, nee, he was convinced that justiee should be put in
execution, and that the law should take its course against
the prisoner who had been found guilty. He now turned
to the prosecution of Dowdall ; he pleaded guilty, and there
was no trial. With respect, to Duffy who was tried, it was for
disturbing exi-ting order in Ireland, and even for preventing
the course of justice. Every one .who read the article must
allow that the language was such as in a country like Ire-
land could not be tolerated. The Hon. Gentleman had allowed
that there were many expressions that could not be defended.
Mr. C. BULLER—I spoke of its temper, not its truth.
Sir J. GRAHAM—He would attempt to dispose of that
too. He concluded that the sting of the whole libel was its
falsehood. It was a Special Jury fairly selected, and it was
found that it was a malicious libel, and the Govern-
ment was bound to follow up that decision. He had
not read all the attacks on the Irish Government in the Irish
newspapers, but he believed they were not much more mode-
rate than in former days ; still it. wss neither the wish, the
desire, nor the intention of the Government, to resent those;
but the libel in this case was an attack on the Trial by Jury,
which the Government was bound to defend.

hibited less acerbity in that House. than Mr. Lefroyisad done.
Lord Wellesley had offered him a seat upon the bench, and that
was the third judicial appointment that. Mr. Lefroy had refused.
But then he lad opposed Catholic Emancipation in 1829.
Could there be greater intolerance thati to make that the ground
of depriving hint of that reward for professional eminence to
which he was fairly ;entitled ; and for the Nob e Lord who had
beets a party to offering the Ck ief Baronship of the Exchequer
to the strenuous advocate of the repeal of the Union—to a
gentleman who had always taken the vehement part in politics
which Mr. O'Connell always had taken, forthe Noble Lord
to lavish his indignation on them for the appointment
of Mt. Lefroy to a puisne judgeship in the same Court, was
some such instance of assurance—he believed that was a
strictly Parliamentary phrase—(A laugh)—as that which had
enabled the Noble Lord, with a grave countenance, to congra-
tulate the present Government on the position which his policy
bed secured to them in Affghanistan.—(Cheers and laughter.)
It was curious to observe in what different lights the characters
of men were viewed on different occasions. When a rumour
was circulated that tbe Government was about so send over an
Englishman as Lord Chancellor of Ireland, the part oppo-
siie were loud in the praises of Mr. Lefroy.—(Cheers.) They
hod no objection to see him placed in an office which gave him
the appolutment of the whole of the Magistracy of Ireland then,
but now he was not to be appointed to any judicial office
because he voted against Catholic Emancipation in 1829, and
had supported the Government. He would leave the House to
sly what foundation there was for any chargeagainst the Govern-
ment as regarded the appointment, and he would ask the
House what would have been thought of the Government if it
had been so shabby as not to have appointed a gentleman so
well qualified as Mr. Lefroy to the vacant judgeship, on the
ground that twelve years since he had voted against the
Catholic claims, and had been a supporter of the Government.
(Cheers.) With respect to the appointment as Solicitor-
General of his Hon. and Learned Friend Mr. Sergeant Jack-
son, lie thought no rnan, looking to the high professional and
moral character of that gentleman, could with any justice object
to such an appointment. With regard to the appointment
to office generally, the principle he nad hid down for his own
guidance, and that of the Government, was to give no prefe-
rence on account of the religious profession of any man—to look
for the person fittest to fill office, of course giving preference to
men of his own party where they were found Assessed of the
requisite qualities. Of the justice of those principles he was
convinced, and according to them he would ever shape his
conduct.
Colonel VERNER defended the conduct of the law officers
of the Crown in the case of Hughes. The Hon. Gentleman
went into the circumstances connected with the case at consi-
derable length, but was perfectly inaudible in the gallery, in
consequence of the impatience and noise of the House.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against the motion

.. 146

Majority against the motion ...... —7l
sir R. PEEL then moved that the Speaker should leave
the Chair.
Mr. 11110THERTON would oppose the motion, unless the
Right lion. Baronet proposed that the House should resolve
opfroSceuepNly merely pro forma. He
to pass any votes at all at
that, late hour.
ith"oeulfghinttothaey (s:ho
on
umlditt
teioe t
Sir IL PEEL said that he only proposed to take the Militia
Estimate, in Committee of Supply.
Mr. HUME said, that at that late hour (a quarter to one),
he did not think they should proceed to the consideration of
any votes of supply. He should, therefore, move the adjourn-
ment of the House.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but no division
took place, the motion of adjournment having been withdrawn,
on the understanding that only one vote should be taken in the
Committee of Supply.
SUPPLY.

The House went into a Committee of Supply, and a vote
wai taken on the Militia Estimates. The Chairman reportEd
progress, and obtained leave to sit again this day.
SOUTH AUSTRALIAN BILL.