The Sun.
London, England, 1827-03-23 00:00:00

FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 23, 1827.

THE ARMY.

A large Detachment of Irish Recruits arrived in town on Wed-
nesday morning, from Bristol, and received orders to embark, yes-
terday morning, on board a steam-vessel in the River, for Grave-
send, on route to join their respective. Corps and Depots, at
Chatham, Canterbury, and Dover.
A detachment belonging to the 82d Regiment of Infautry is
ordered to march from Westminster, for Harwich.

Another Detachment of Irish Recruits arrived in town on
Wednesday morning from Liverpool, and received orders to em-
bark yesterday morning on board a steam-vessel in the River, for
Gravesend, on route to Chatham and Canterbury.
A detachment belonging to the 56th Regiment of Foot was
ordered to embark yesterday morning on board a canal-boat, at
Paddington, on route toManchester.

A detachment belonging to the Stith Regiment of Infantry
was ordered to embark, yesterday, on board a canal boat, at Pad-
dington, on route to Bolton-le-Moor.

The 2d (the Queen's) Regiment of Dragoon Guards 'has re-
ceived orders to hold itself in readiness to proceed to Ireland in
the course of the ensuing month.
The 7th (the Prince Royal's) Regiment of Dragoon Guards
has received orders, on being relieved by the 2d Regiment of
Dragoon Guards, in Ireland, to return to England, and occupy
Birmingham.
The Depot of the 16th Regiment of Infantry has received orders•
to march, this day, from Weedon, for Halifax.
The Depot of the 40th Regiment of Foot is ordered to march,
to morrow, from Weedon, for Hull.

indistinct comparison instituted between that romantic
drama and Quentin Durward, ingenious, if not faithful.
In fact, the Quarterly Review seems lately to have taken
up two idols, on the altar of whose fame it offers up its,
periodical tribute of praise—we allude to Shakspeare and
Sir W. Scott. Novvi,ve are far from objecting to this adula-
tion ; it is warranted in both cases, as also is the criticism on
those trashy twins, Brambletye House and the Tor-hill,
but we do not like the doctrine of exclusiveness, whether
of praise or censure. The following criticism—or rather
hyper-criticism—on Fielding and Smollett, which occurs
cursorily in the article to which we have just alluded, seems
to us, to savor of what in vulgar, but expressive language,
would be called, sheer humbug.--." The actions and man-
ners of his (Fielding's) characters, proceed rather out of
their peculiar dispositions than from accidental impulses,
and the characters themselves are in a similar manner pro-
_ _

duced voluntarily and freely from the mere fertility of his
fancy. Smollett, on the contrary, individualizes his
characters by the peculiarities of their situation, their per-
sonal appearance, or their habitual eccentricities." Now,
this is really exquisite ; Fielding, it seems, produces
characters from the fertility of his fancy; which same fer-
tility, the Quarterly in its last number (coincidieg with
an opinion of Sir Walter Scott's), peremptorily denied
him. Again, fielding produces characters out of their
peculiar dispositions : Smollett, out of their habitual ec-
centricities. Pray, 'let us ask, is not a miser a man of a
"peculiar disposition," and by the same reason, of habitual
eccentricity.' Where then is the difference ? We have
hazarded these remarks as, we trust, they will be taken,
in the sincerest spirit of candour; the Quarterly Review
possesses too much excellence in every department of
literature, to dread the voice .of reproof, and when we
prove that it is not without its defects, we only prove, what
the whole world knows, that it is not absolute perfection.
With this observation we conclude.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, MAncx 22.

The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a peti-
tion from the Thread Lace Manufacturers of Buckingham, pray-
ing for the abolition of the duties on the manufacture of that
article.
Lord ROLLE presented petitions from Chard,
Somerset, and from several Parishes in Devon, praying their Lord-
ships not to grant further concessions to the Catholics.
The Marquis of CLAYRICARDE presented pe,
titions from Dundalk, Roscommon, and Athlone, complaining of
abuses in the Corporations of those places.
CORN AND WOOL.

The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a peti-
tion frOm the Landowners of Dunbar, against the Resolutions
before the House of Commons, particularly the import price of
oats, which, the petitioners stated, would be too low.
. .

The Duke of RICHMOND presented petitions
from several parishes in different parts of the County of Sussex,
complaining in strong language, of the principles of free_ trade,
and imputing to them the 'distress they were suffering. They
were new experiments which the petitioners thought were in-
jurious. The petitioners also prayed that no :iteration might be
made in the Corn Laws, and that some restriction might be laid
on the importation of Foreign Wool.

Lord KING presented a petition of a contrary ten-
dency. It was a petition signed by certain inhabitants of Man-
chester. It had been got up since the Resolutions proposed in
another place had been known, and which had not given any
satisfaction to the landowners; and no satisfaction at all to the
consumers of corn. It was indeed supposed that they had given
satisfaction to the landowners, but that class thought it right to
cry out loudly against them, in order to make the consumers sup-
pose that they had not received a great bargain from the Minis-
ters. If they had not been got up by the landowners themselves,
they hid at least been prepared by those. who had the fear of the
landowners before their eyes. The petitioners called their Lord-
ships' attention to the hope they had entertained of the Corn Laws
being repealed, which they said would have relieved their distress,
by lowering the price of food, and creating a demand for our ma-
nufactures abroad,
_which would have kept down the rising manu-
factures of foreign countries.

The Earl of MALMESBURY rose to move for
the Returns relative to Wool, of which he had given notice. Two
of the Returns for which he meant to move, would be amended
Returns, already moved for by another Noble Lord ; the two
others were new ones, and not comprehended within the Returns
already laid on their Lordships' table. The Return he meant to
move for related to the trade in wool. Within three years the
price of this article had fallen from 16d. to Bd. per pound ; and
one cause of this depreciation was, he had no doubt, the variation
which had taken place in the duties. Those duties were, he be-
lieved, never meant to be protecting, but were adopted as a finan-
cial measure. From October, 1811, to September, 1827, the
average importation of wool had risen from five to twenty-one
million pounds. The duty was then 6d. In 1824 the duty was
lowered from 6d. to one halfpenny ; and in that year the impor-
tation had augmented from seven to eight million pounds. The
consequence of this was, that the wool growers had been seriously
injured. Their Lordships must not regard this as an isolated
question—it was one of itself, of great interest, and it was closely
connected with the question concerning the Corn Laws. Every
person, at all acquainted with the agriculture of the country, '
knew that the production and price of corn and wool depended
very much on one another. There were many districts of great
fertility, which could not be cultivated to any advantage without
flocks. When their Lordships took into their consideration the
important measure relative to corn, he hoped they would extend
their consideration to the subject of wool. They might see, also,
by the consequences which had already ensued to the Wool trade,
what would be the consequences to the agriculturists if the trade
in corn were also made free. As long as the duty on wool was
sixpence, the wool grower had found in this country a good mar-
ket for his produce; but, after the duty had been reduced to a
halfpenny, a great deal of foreign wool had been imported, and
they felt the deepest distress. The glut had been such, that many
of the farmers had two and three years' growth of wool on their

hands. He hoped, when their Lordships had these facts before
them, that they would hesitate to give their consent to a law,
which might have the same ruinous effects as to corn as the alte-
ratisn of the duty to which he alluded had had as to wool. He
considered the grower of wool to be a manufacturer, like the
clothier, he required a large capital to carry on his business,
and must be treated in the same manner. He held in his hand
the last Act for consolidating the customs, and he found that
duty on the importation of foreign wool, which was to operate
as a protection to the wool grower, was about four per cent. on
the value of the article. But, on turning to the same law to find
what protection the clothier enjoyed, he found that all manu-
factured woollens paid an ad valorem duty of 15 per cent. or '
the protection to the clothier was four times as great, nearly,
as the protection to the wool grower. He supposed that the
clothier was, for some reason or other,_ entitled to this greater
degree of protection ; but he had been unable to find opt for
what reason. He had consulted the Returns on their Lordships'
table, and he found that the average of the sums paid from
the land as poor-rates, &c. for the years 1825 and 1826, was
4,892,0001., while the amount of the sum levied on fact-hies and
other manufacturing property was only 259,0001. Neglecting
fractions, therefore, it appeared that the landed interest paid 24
parts out of the 25 of all the money collected for the support of
the poor. If there were any difference, therefore, in the protec-
tion given to the two classes, it ought to be in favour of the agri-
culturists. If such a disproportion as that he had described were
suffered, it ought to be in an inverse ratio, and the greater degree
of protection should be on the side of the wool grower. As the
law now stood it was in principle most unjust to the wool grower.
In the return already laid on their Lordships' table relative to the
importation of wool, he found that, in 1824, the amount of wool
imported was 19,378,0001b5. ; in 1825, it was 22,558,0001b5. ;
and in 1826, it was 43,795,0001b5. Since that period the wool
trade had been ruined ; and if a similar system were adopted with
regard to corn, the same ruin would ensue. Their Lordships
might learn also, from what Mr. Jacob stated in his Report,

what would be the effect on the Continent. That Gentleman had
described the great exertions made on the Continent to increase
the quantity of wool for this marlet, and their Lordships world
find, were they to allow -corn to be imported, that the end of it
would be to put a stop to the growth of corn, in the same manner
as to the growth of wool. When the duty had been lowered from
sixpence to a halfpenny, the exportation of long wool had been
allowed, and it was said to have been allowed as a boon to

the agriculturiSts. Ile believed that the whole quantity exported
since the exportation was allowed, did not exceed 90 tods—and
this was the boon given to the agriculturists. He did not want
to injure, the manufacturer—he did not wish to stop the importa-
tion of foreign wool, for he knew that there was some species of
foreign wool which the manufacturer could not dispense with ;
but he wished that the protection given to the manufacturer
should be extended to the • agriculturists. ' He thought that the
protection ought at least to be equal for both parties. It was
curious that the export of woollens had not increased with the im-
portation :of foreign wool. - If the consumption of woollens had
increased, therefore, it must have been at home, and of the home
consumers the landed interest were the most numerous. It could
never be the interest, therefore, of the manufacturers, to injure or
ruin the agriculturists. The Noble Earl concluded by moving
for, first, an Account of all Foreign Sheep and Lambs' Wool Jul,
ported into this country from 1800 to 1826 inclusive, distinguish-
, ingthe quantity imported in each year, and the countries whence
lit was imported; second, an Account of the Rate of Duty levied
in each year, from 1800 to 1826 ; third, an Account of the
'official and declared value of all Foreign Woollens imported into
this country between 1810 and 1826, distinguishing the countries.
IThe Noble Earl eiplainedi that his object in moving for this Re-
turn, was to shew to what extent the manufactnrers and the con-
sumers had been benefitted by.the alteration of the laws. The
fourth return moved for by the Noble Earl, was for an AcCount
of all the Long Wool exported from this country from 1821, when
the duty-nris 'reduced from 12d: to ld., to 1826.
Lord -BEXLEY made several observations in answer
'to the Noble Earl ;- but his Lordship spoke in such a low tone
that he was nearly inaudible below the bar. We understood him
to say that the Noble Earl was under a mistake in supposing that
he had made a discovery when he stated that woollens were
more highly protected than wool. It had long
.been the policy
of this country to give very great protection to _every 'species of
its manufacture, and the difference which the Noble Lord seemed
now to think so great had formerly been much greater. The al-
teration had made at the solicitation of both parties ; the agrictil-
turists wishing' to have the export' of long wool allowed, whiCh
had before been almost prohibited.' It had then been stated, that
as long as England was the best market for wool, she would be
assured of obtaining a supply—a prediction which bad been veri-
fied by the small quantity of long wool exported, and the great
quantity: imported. The present system of policy which the
Noble-Earl had deprecated, was not so novel as be seemed to sup-
pose; for under a similar system this country had flourished for
many years.
The Duke of RICHMOND rose to confirm, the.
Noble Earl's statement, that the farmers had yet on their hands.
the wool of two or three years' growth.' They could not find a
market for their produce, and this was the- result of the experi.
ments of the ffee trade gentlemen. But the experiments had
completely failed ; and they directed attention tO. other subjects
in order to gloss over their failure. He hoped the Noble. Earl
whci baknioved for the returns would call their Lordships' atten-
tion to this 'subject' by some specific motion, and 'that they
would shield the flockimasters from the ruin with which they
were threatened. .

Lord KING thought there was an opportunity of
making out a strong case, and as he saw two Cabinet Ministers
present, he had hoped they would have stated this case. They
were the guardians of the general prosperity, and bound to take
care of all interests. He was surprised, therefore, that the Mi-
nister had not observed, that although the agriculturists were in
distress, the manufacturers were in still deeper distress. But
would that distress not have been greater if the wool had not been
imported ? He had no doubt, that the importation of foreign
wool had diminished the distress of the manufacturers. If it
were so great with this advantage, he might ask, what would it
have been but for that ? This, he thought was a strong case ;
and if the general guardians of the public prosperity did not de-
fend the manufacturing interests in that House, it was not likely
to be defended. _ _ _ _

The Earl DARNLEY, though he agreed with the
Noble Mover, as to the state of the wool grower, did not there-
fore agree with him in thinking there ought not to be any altera-
tion in the Corn Laws. He thought, however, that some addi-
tional protection should be given to the article of wool, and he was
surprised, as he knew that many of the farmers had still their
stock of wool on hand for two years, that a greater number of pe-
titions had not been sent to their Lordships on this subject. He
thought it more deserving the farmer's attention than the proposed
alteration of the Corn Laws.
The Marquis of SALISBURY confirmed the
statement of their being two years' stock of wool on hand which
was quite unsaleable, except at ruinous prices. Foreigners sent
their wool to this country, and would take back nothing in ex-
change but money. If this were a beneficial trade, they no doubt
would be ready enough to continue it.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM rose to address
their Lordships, but was interrupted by
The LORD CHANCELLOR, who informed
the Noble Duke that the Commons were in waiting,
Sir Alexander Grant, Mr. N. Calvert, and other Members of
the Commons, were then introduced, and brought up two public,
and several private Bills.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM then addressed
their Lordships, and expressed his regret that the discussion of
the Corn Question had not been brought before them. The con-
sideration of that question had been postponed Session after Ses
sion, and Session after Session their Lordships had heard that the
question should be put at rest without loss of time. Resolutions
have at length been moved in another place, and their Lordships
had been told that similar Resolutions should also be moved in
that House, or that the question should be brought before them.
When that catastrophe occurred, which he lamented as much as
any man, and which had fallen on the Noble Earl who was to
hnOatv ebrsoubm d
ughitt tfeorltvhaersde
becauseßesolutions
the to
Ministers their
Lordships,wered e pr4t.ebde y were
ftlle
only one amongst them who could discuss the- subject properly.
If the Bill were to pass in another place, their Lordships might
agree in the principle, but they might differ as to the amount of
the duty, and their Lordships were aware that on this point they
were precluded from making any alteration in the Bill. They
dare not make any alteration in the duties, or it would endanger
the fate of the Bill.—(Lord Holland said their Lordships did not
admit that.)---This was, however, the practical effect—if they
altered the duties, there could be no doubt the Bill would be
thrown out. The question, however interesting it might be to
the other House, was also of great importance and interest to
their Lordships. He hoped, therefore, that before the Easter
Recess, some Noble Lord would give them an opportunity, by
submitting some motion on the subject of discussing this im-
portant question. As to the question to which the motion more
immediately related, it was an indisputable fact, that two years'
growth of wool was yet on hand; and although the Noble Lord
might see some consolation in this, he could not. He could not
call that a good market where nothing was sold for two years.
The Earl of WESTMORLAND admitted that it

had been the intention of his Noble Friend to open his views on
the subject to their Lordships, when he hoped to have made such
an explanation as would have satisfied their Lordships and the
country at large of the propriety of the measures he meant to pro-
pose. But he had reason to believe that his Noble Friend had not
exactly made up his mind as to the course he would adopt, or in
what manner he would bring the subject before their Lordships.
It was a subject which, often as it had been discussed, had never
originated in that House. He saw nothing different in the state
of the question now, which would make their Lordships expect
that a different course would he pursued. When the misfortune
overtook his Noble Friend, there was no reason why another per-
son should not bring forward the motion, and make the explana
tion which he was deprived of the power of making- If any
disrespecto
r it
ghi ne iart eLordshipswas meant
lie trusted their Lordsdheii
;where,
uodtarildci
ahs.
thtvo, chose
siy.t
sotulbel
erhi
nge
eata
sshueur
re:
shu,
aevst
nii
aogtn
bals)nee
ynf ore their Lordsh ps
would, t
was open for him to do so, but
ntNaosoottlbivtll
aelel
sii LrnukoLsr,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said

. , •
.c--- •
had been obliged to acquiefii4tbe poatponetnentOf iheAti.iitiost;
because tbere.waa no other. Nob -upp9sitci who could gire
that explanation which had been, promised by,e IVoble Mari who
thr the 'House •

was not.,en in
Lord REDESDALE .said, the Corn Law Ques-
tion was a very wide one: Their Lordships had heard how
much the the import of foreign wool had injured the farmer,
and if the farmer could not get a good price for his wool, he
'Must have a higher price for his corn. He had also been in-
jured by the importation of hides and tallow, which had lowered
the price of these parts of his produce. The importation of
cheese had also injured him. In some places
dairies bad been
put down, because it was no longer profitable to make cheese.—
The Corn Law involved a consideration of all these subjects,
and he thought the whole matter ought to be discussed by their
In
Lordships before the Bill. came up from the other House.
his opinion, the Resolution's placed on the Votes of the other
House of Parliament went the length of fixing a maximum on the
price of corn, and there was not one writer of any eminence, not
one political economist who had mentioned the subject, who had
not condemned the practice of fixing a maximum price for anY-
tl4ng. All experience proved the injurious nature of the law of
this description. It must, and it always had, checked the pro-
duction of the commodity on which the maximum wax fixed. II
the Reign of Edward 'III. a maximum had been fixed, but it
lasted only a year, and was then repealed, on account of the disor-
ders it created. According to the Rest/idioms proposed in ano-
ther place, corn was never to rise above 60s. Such a measure
would be, in his opinion, most impolitic; and of commodities,
corn, on account of its being affected by variations-in the seasons,
was the last which ought to be subjected to any -such restriction
lie was prepared to spew that, in.auch a case, Ititi high-priCsit of
the year, when there might be a short crop, would not compensate
for the low prices of the year when the crop. was abundant, and
the farmers would lose on both. If no Other Noble Lord should
submit a motion to their Lordships, he should feel it his duty to
submit some Resolutions to them, not with a view of obtaining
a decision, but with a view of inducing them to devote their minds
to examine the propositions, and ascertain distinctly their probable
effects. They would then see, it it were right, by ,the establish-
ment of a maximum, to discourage one species of industry and
benefit another. It was plain, from what had ensued, from the
importation of foreign wool, what would be the consequence of
introducing foreign corn. That must have raised the price of
corn, and, on the same principle, the importation of hides and
tallow had raised the price of meat. The value of horns and
hoofs had been reduced, and therefore the butcher was obLiged.to
sell his meat dearer. It was an old saying, the meaning of which
was well understood, that the fifth quarter was the butcher's
profit. The four quarters enabled him to pay for the beast to the
farmer, and the fifth quarter paid him for his labour. It WAS no
longer so, the fifth, quarter was of lees value, and the hutch& wits •
obliged to charge higher for meat. All these were 'subjects their
Lordships ought to take into consideration. Government had
already destroyed the credit of the farmers. He knew from good
authority that farmers could not at present borrow money, unless
they had landed property. Their capital was gone, and they
could not borrow any more. In Charles the Second's reign, there
was a true system of political economy established, which he
thought well worthy their Lordship's attention. He contended
that Ministers had never given the measure that consideration it
deserved. They had answered a few objections, hut had never
taken a. profound and extensive, political view of the question.
Under the present circumstances of the country, it was surprising
that corn was sold so cheap; and this could only be accounted for
.by the fact that the farmers were contented with much smaller
profits than other people. Adam Smith had long ago said, that
the high 'profits acquired by our merchants were ruinous, and were
the principal causes of high prices. But since his time merchants
had required still higher profits. The merchants of our time
lived in Portman-square, or Portland-place, or in the Regent's
Park, and merely had a counting-house in the city. They had
departed from the velvet caps and square toes of their ancestors,
and only went into the city to sign their names to letters. They
knew little or nothing about business, and ‘Vert obliged 'to have
one or two confidential clerks, 'who managed everything for them.
He contended, that the great profit required by master-manufac-
turers and dealers to keep up their establishment'', was the great
cause why we were undersold by foreigners, 'arid why their Lord-
ships were to be called on to adopt a measure which would injure
the farmers. _ _ _

Lord KING thought it could not be denied, as the
Noble and Learned Lord had spoken of the horns and the hoofs,
that his arguments had been drawn from the extremities.
The Earl of MALMESBURY was glad to learn
from the Noble Lord that he meant to bring the subject of the
Corn Laws before their Lordships. It would enable their Lord-
ships to state their opinion, and it would be desirable that they
should do so before the Bill came up from the other House. _

Lord ELLENBOROUGH was glad to hear of the
Noble Lord's intention ; but he thought the subject ought to have
been brought under their Lordships' consideration before.
Lord BEXLEY explained ; and the returns were
then ordered. . .

-.---- -------
The Marquess of EXETER, presented a petition
from some place in Rutland, praying their Lordships not to grant
any further Concessions to the Catholics.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMON'S.—Menem 22.
TREGONY ELECTION.
The following are the Members appointed to try the merits of
the petition complaining of an undue Election for the Borough of
Tregony :—J. Denison, Viscount Barnard, J. Grattan, Lord Pal-
merston, R. F. Wilson, Sir J. Beckett, Sir A. Grant, J. Far-
quhar, R. Downie, J. Calcraft, T. F. Buxton, Sir N. C. Tindal,
James Blair, Win. Holmes, Hon. J. H. Paulett.
The names of Members who had not attended the Ballot were
then called over, and those who did not answer to their names
were ordered to attend on Tuesday next.
DENBIGH ELECTION.
The following are the Members appointed to hr the merits of
the petition complaining of an undue Election for the Borough of
Denbigh :—Mr. William Leader Moberly, Hon. Mr. T. Knox,
Mr. Williams, Mr. Tomes, Honourable G. Vernon, Mr. E. Lock-
hart, Mr. C. Burrell, Marquis of Blandford, Sir G. Rose, Mr.
Alexander, Mr. Rumbold, Lord Wm. Paget, Lord Wm. Russell,
Mr. G. Dawson.

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.
Mr. SPRING RICE rose to call the attention of
the House to a breach of its privileges, and such a breach as re-
lated to a matter of the greatest importance, namely, the necessity
of securing witnesses summoned by the authority of that House
from being tampered with or obstructed. Before he proceeded,
however, he would move " That the Standing Resolutions of the
House on that subject be read."
The Clerk read the Resolutions in question, which stated that
if any person should tamper with or obstruct witnesses summoned
to give evidence before that House or before any Committee of
that House, he should be considered guilty of a high crime and
misdemeanour, and be subject to the severest punishment.
Mr. S. RICE then proceeded. The breach of
privilege was described in a petition which bad been put into his
hands by a gentleman complaining of the conduct of anothf_rug,es,
tleman, and the House were aware that an election
been presented complaining of the late return for e
tb
of
Galway, which petition had been referred to the consideration
who had
a Committee of that House. Among the individualsevidence ou
been summoned by order of the House to give thfeiLambert and
' the subject were two gentlemen of the name o
the substance
French. The Hon. Member then read the petits
Lambert, of the
of which was, " That the petitioner, Thou:teal_
d as a witness to
county of Galway, had been summoned to souse
H on the subject of
give evidence before a Committee of that ,
'that, while in the lobby
esrtalutidnFinch, who, he believed.
,iiith; tfnraotmptwhreoPehtiepete°elhetttini°hiolltneitoYn.hn,ztoaef
the late election for the county of GalbwonY
had long been in a very delicate state of
he immediately obeyed
buttlle jsuusmtmreocnosveorfe tdhe
provocation ,and "
last, he was insulted and
County of Galway ; '
assaulted by the Honourable_ort ,s
it, in the late Election and
of the House of Commons, on notwithstanding,
Cii‘T_t°lhaius3
was an active partner of Mr. 31
therefore
that the
ere,fore
wod afford him its
prayed that the House.
did not mean to say, that
the.wit spirite of the Resolution Spring Rice) n
He (Mr. • • came exactly within th conduct
described in the petition
Clerk
had just read e letter of the
Resolutions which the ; for, it did not
had been absolut 1
wpehtoitwionaseral shoada
gi,,en Magistrate
A ir. Frenchfor th the
no
appear that the n
on applied to it ; and
e y deterred or ob-
no Resolution on the ' •
if there had been
...... subject--(hear, hear,
even the
bear, from Mr. yn
structed ;
hoped, would n)exert it, House undoubtedly had the power,
and be hop., the of protecting any witnesses who
were summoned by authority of the Speaker. In presenting
but o
tho petition, however, it was not with the intention of moving
at that moment that the parties should attend. There could be
no doubt that the House had the power to protect its witnesses ;
and when the personal irritation which generally attended "elec-
tion cases, and especially (he was sorry to say) Irish election_
cases, was considered, it was evident, that if witnesses wer;ina
protected, the consequences, both private and public; '
follow up the presentation of the petition with any motion for. the
exceedingly mischievous. When he said that he did n?twnioueanto
parties to attend, his abstaining from taking such
a step did not
arise from any doubt that such a course was expedient, but beA

A -.....:77,,,,.....,,. ,
'--,--4\ ci.,-4,..1f--- ~
• ..-=
i 6 ''• . !tik. A ,v a l-7.N. ~ /A--°,l`-',"
~ ..:', '. , , 40s- ,A,',,,...„...iL,H,-;•-•1z,"-s., \c,.., .-, :fi.,,,-5.----",,,,,,c,),..,,,
~„,r, .:,i,,,. 4
5;,_ f '•':
..., , ~......, , • i ,„/,0-.....4,
..... • .
' ' `k"). -% tl
~',-"' '
.fiv, ~,_ 4,i,,,L.,- • ---,_, ',,,,
_,4:4
tft
_6-c- . , ~,,,..,,,,fr tiff/ sl- 37')'... •, 4 '4,41----, '-'\ 4.... w
40, ,
,movlittr