The Sun.
London, England, 1842-06-29 00:00:00

the prodnution of the letters, but 'he knew that they'
were obtained with a vivw to this Report, upon whVii
a Commission was to be founded, with Mr. Phelan at it:
'heat?.

Lord WIIARNCLIFFE said the-Report could not
have been founded upon the letters, because the letter's
were not written till after the Report was made.—(Bear,
hear.) He must say that it did not appear to him that,
the least blame rested upon the Commissioners.
Earl WICKLOW said the question was whether the
Commissioners deserved those censures which the Noble
Earl had passed upon them for either of the acts which
the Noble Earl had imputed to them, viz.:—first, break •
ing the Act, of Parliament ; and second, insulting the
House. He (the Earl of Wicklow) did not think that
the Noble Lord had made out his case. He (the Earl
of Wicklow) said he could not think of any thing more
inconsistent with good faith and justice than the publica-
tion of letters written under such circumstances. The
Commissioners did not refuse to comply with the order
of the House. On the other hand, they wrote
to the
writersof those letters to ask their consent to the pub"
lication, and they sent returns to the house of all those,
of which the pubiication had been agreed to. They did
more, for they informed the House that they would
return the other letters without the consent of t'e
writers, if their Lordships thought it necessary
to insist on it. He (the Earl of Wicklow) regretted the
dismissal of Mr. Stanley from the office of Secretary t°
the Commissioners, and as the office was still vacant, be
trusted he would be restored to it.
Lord COLCHESTER, was of opinion that the order
of the House had not been complied- with ; and that no
public officer, w thing letters on a public subject, had
right to mark his letters private, or having done so, t°°
select, for return to their Lordships' order, what answers
be pleased to select to suit purposes of his own.--(ll,eaf:.
hear.). That individual had no right to disobey We--
Lordships' order in whole or in part, or to make lull
selection as to how much of it he would obey.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that there cola-
be no doubt that, if their Lordships chose to insist aeon
the production of those letters, they must be produced'
But the effect would-be to prevent any person from corn'
implicating confidentially with any public officer. There
could be no exercise of their Lordships' privilege nicirc
calculated to put amend to all confidence between man
and man, and 'between public men and private inch:
victuals, than would have been the full enforcemen,'
of the order, in the sense in which it was interprete°
by the Noble Earl (Mountcashel) ; and he therefor.°
hoped that the motion would be persevered in, that thoe
Lordships might meet it with a direct negative. It
hoped by giving a negative to this motion they won.
el
show that they were not inclined to draw aside the v
between a public officer end a private individual.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said the Noble Lora
certainly could never have thought that letters strictli
private could hare been laid before that House. It v 51,51
stated that these letters were private, but that they it
been quoted in the Report which had been laid bef,°:'
the House.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord wished
know to whom all these letters had been addressed, an
he wished to have all the answers to them.—(lleo
He (the Duke of Wellington) thought it was a motion ti
which the House should not agree ; and if the Sub:r
Lord had given notice of his motion, he (the Duke
Wellington) should have recommended him not to word
for private letters. He thought his Noble Friend sh°llb,
withdraw his motion, and it might be a very proper s;lt,
ject for discussion hereafter, to inquire how far the 'et,
tees were written with a view to influence a Rell°,l.
Those private letters might perhaps come out in that
discussion.
The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL replied. To all the.
letters which Mr. Phelan wrote, he signed himself as "1;
Phelan, Assistant Peor-law Commissioner." Now, if 313:i
L Phelan had signed his name just "D. Phelan," it wt.
then appear as if they came from the individual D. rff,.."
lan ; but " Assistant Poorzlaw Commissioner" being' "".
nexed made them official documents, and public (we:,
ments, notwithstanding the word " private" wss
fixed. He did say, then, that the Poor-law Conul,ll-t
, sioners were bound to furnish these letters. Suffie'le
time had elapsed, to have enabled them to have obtain°.
' answers from all the persons who had been ritten t.f"
' He thought that such conduct should not be borne ;1,
t their Lordships, however, were content to bear it Pill
tiently, he was content to do so too. He begged lea
t to withdraw his motion. T blo
The Duke of RICHMOND objected to the I`o at
Lord's withdrawing his motion, and moved instead--""

it be rejected.
Or ted•
The question was then put, and the motion was rej—
The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL gave notice, that•on
The
Friday he would present a petition from the •Med4a
Association of Ireland, on the subject with which li?:1a
this evening troubled then,. In presenting that pel.'"th
he would have an opportunity of going more at lag
into the whole question.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
JURISDICTION OF JUSTICES.
The LORD CHANCELLOR informed the Hobe
The
the Bill which had passed for altering the jurisu.',
tion of Justices of the Peace, would come into operat7,
in the middle of the quarter sessions, and thereby 111
sion great inconvenience. He had prepared a short
to postpone the operation, which he now laid on the tawo
The Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be re
a secon:l time. to•morrow.
The House then adjourned.

"'OUSE OF COMMONS, June 28.
NOTTINGHAM COMPROMISE.
On our entrance to the gallery, Walter
Sir G. GREY was on his legs, and moved that Mr. os
be called to the bar of the House, that the resolution of
House might be communicated to him.
After a few words from Colonel SIBTHORP, sri
Lord J. RUSSELL conceived his Right Hon. Frio- ,ts
right in saying that the Committee had authority to alon7hst
persons before it, and that persons were bound to attend t°
i•
summons. That was the course adopted with regard t° they
Fleming, a Member of that House, and he supposed that
did not mean to adopt a different course in the present instance
He conceived, the motion having now been carried, it Was rte.
cient that Mr. Walter be informed of the resolution it av
House; but he did not think it was necessary to make suc
order in every case.
The motion having been put, fag
Sir R. PEEL said he did not think the power of rnaltee,
witnesses attend rested in the inherent right of the Conta'jf
but was derived from the delegated power of that Hense.;niff
the proposal originally made had been that the Speaker !lee bis
to John Walter, Esq., that he should attend, he would4l/
vote in favour of that resolution, because he did not see any just
ference between it and the one to which the House lia"(11)5
come. He thought the ends of justice would be anstreret see
the adoption of the course he had proposed, and he did ne the
a very material distinction between that and the (outset, be
House had adopted. When, however, he assented to W. the
did so on the ground that the Committee did not reeltur.:a to
assent of the House, but that they had already had the Pn'a-peri
summon witnesses conferred upon them, and to send for P
and records. ea of
Lord HOWICK thought the proceedings on both to
Per
the House had been extremely irregular; the more rete
course to have pursued would have been to have PO. teeas
feia
resolution proposed by his Right Hon. and Learned l'!st Is
He would have voted for negativing the original resolutle;st,
order that a better one might have been adopted; as the 1,14 the
however, had assented to the original resolution he thong'
better course would be to adopt the one proposed. tansltbe
Mr. O'CONNELL said that no person could unders
resolution now come to as casting any reflection ; but °lee
ness had any right to say he would not attend, on the %se a
that certain parties were not neutral enough to sit on' oote
Committee. lie would suggest that nothing could bred
mischievous than the idea that in a Committee aPP°Tisathif
the House it was to be a sort of bye battle whether a
was sufficiently neutral to sit in a Committee. —(Hear') °I);
Lord JOHN MANNERS said that Mr. Walter ' stood
jected to the Hon. Member for Bath ; that objectifn.n,.
tba
upon the record, and nobody had denied the validity in l'bs
Mr. O'CONNELL must have been misunderstoo"
rted
Noble Lord. He did not consider a mere unsupPo so
ment, such as that which had been alluded to by triceot 7
Lord, sufficient. He meant that the party should qlettlbej
petition to the House on the subject, and that the retree'"
presenting the petition should move that the partY be
from the Committee.
conteD
Mr. WA KLEY said that although it had been ten s
that the resolution of the House did not convey_aniieworib't
upon Mr. Walter, yet the speech saf the Right Hol;;,
the Member for Devonport did convey a censure. „s s'•",j
Hun. Gentleman bad laid it down as a rule that all pa.;iy a",
moved as witnesses were bound to attend most pos.' i.vio (),,t ej
must submissively ; that whether summoned as a ni` nuts,' a
criminal he was bound to submit. He (,tsr. WakleY)!'n ce of
against such a doctrine. It constitutes! the very rttsorlc,
tyrannical disposition—( Hear, hear, from Colonel °I es to ' )
and in practice it was fraught with the greatest daltbteorf,:a
character of the House.—( Hear, hear, from Colonel 000,4
He agreed with the Hon. Member for the University•
in every sentiment he had uttered. He (Mr. WakleY,eec
the House had been startled into a most ridiculous t „
stitutional proceeding.—(Hear, hear, from Colonel forget."e'r,
followed by shouts of laughter.) He should never aatiloas
way in which Hon. Gentleman had got up, .one sfter
to answer in the most submissive manner questionsoati°l);se
been put to them in referenc ease a private traotiste the
(Cheers. ) He said it was private transot bold
cei
law took no cognizance of it—the law did
coollficri.
parties engaged in it criminal—and before they had up ari°es
legal proceedings they had required parties te g,tthe bett tlt,
inmate themselves. The sooner they get out of " tee. tOl
(Hear, hear, from Col. Sibthorp)—it would be be a ottoys
country. He was convinced, from what be had bernarittee
so
doors, that the general.opinion was that the el st
just an impartial one, and had not dealt out an eqnsahenethla
jice to all parties.—( Hear, hear.) He did noL
his Hon. and Learned Friend's Committee would t_e:dinVesliba°o3
new. Every one in the country knew that contriP_'..id elite
taken place, but the Report of that Committee,,,_°t"bougbit
unfair slur upon the character of individuals. rssainst •
practice a most dangerous one, and he protest d'o it°
together. the Color°
Mr. ESCOTT said he had two objections to Latit ese.ofs.
of the Hon. Member for Bath. The first was, t"c,a Alr:_niplo
proved that the Hon. Member had assumed two pri%ol
ter a hostile attitude, and he must dissent froenin,, trl°,oo
that an accused person could not call in questoio
00'0w:eared,
before which he was to appear and give
and el't tbcis
second objection was that the Honoures._ted t alo
Member for Bath had last night state of es 0,510.
Committee was determined to adopt the 9",sut teos°l,oc°
ing the parties accused ; and, in fact, all partluthe at_tednoo an
examination. He should give his vote ageln_ „s„tsea•
of °lilt',
of Mr. ‘% alter, because the proceedings were
unjust principle.
tee degree NS4'
Lord STANLEY thought there was a°. hat Alr' part.
c:.anseseupnitioninonoend tbheefosruebjtehcet .
committee,
mH eno
iuttnedee,r sntoeteadl.t.
caac,cetl: ,otoe 1°,,,
but as a witness, with regard to the facts of :fea uejbeet:to,ser.
the Committee for inquiry. The proper and t
the Committee was at the time it was formed'ctiuns D'for the
complained of delegated to it. No such oh? wee, t the"_
he collo' .0„ Os f tee
taken, and the House had appointed t l4ov
et 0 cif
purpose of trying certain offences. In the
."the objee
courseaa
took place, it was distinctly avowed tbal_. In tb aecn'od.
Committee was not to criminate individuati,
not ss coe to
, the investigation, Mr. Walter was summonnbarsetert,o objbea,
person, but as a witness ; and, in thate sight
~,ittee,ctsne"
not conceive that he had any uw.rhat C001"..„e
from any personal feeling, to atatneynder
thievalre,:s)
a witness summoned before
mittee, constituted in the ordinary
rat Air' reSta':
It was on that ground he thought es. e (LO ira,.
' no reason to remonstrate. •It was further fr'ea`,,,,eeotile
„iont
opinion that a Committee requiring n
authority Eros
tit* P°
did not stand in need of any specific a tr,istee
s, and
isnenasdminugchfoarsailthereHrox,dpealepegrated trheecoe;:i.,t they sees