Star.
London, England, 1831-03-01 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The gallery was not opened till after tour o'clock owing to the call of
the Howe being fixed for to-day. %lr..lJaxwell howertr wijourned the
call.

314 O'CONNELL.

Mr. O'CONN ELL, in ireete;tinetaever.ll petitions, begged to ask
the Secretary for Ireland, in reference ;o a late prosecution, and with
reference to what that lion. Member hnd said windier any person had
applied to the liateerament on his (Mr. O'Connell's) account to com-
promise the protecution, if so what was the name of the party ? He
denied having authorized any person so to appear on his behalf, and he
therefore requind distinct answers.
Mr. STANLEY teplied that application hod been made to him by
the Earl of Glengall in writing, and Mr. Bennet, and a letter written
by Mr. O'Comielli's son purporting to be authorized by Mr. O'Connell.
(Cheers.)
Mr. O'CONNELL was glad of this explanation. The questions
hail been answered to his satisfaction. He had not the slightest con.
nection whatever with the Eail of o!engall ; and, therefore, if that no.
bleman made any proposal, it was without authority from him. (Hear.)
With respect to Mr. Bennett, that gentleman had certainly informed
him (Mr. O'Connell) that he (Mr. B.) had received three distinct pro.
posals from Govenunent of great advantage, and advised him to sub.
mit to a compromise of the prosecutions. Ile had written in answer to
this communication of Mr. Bennett's that he never would submit to
any compromise. His son had also written to the same effect, and
stated as a reason, that he had been deluded, step by step, by the pre-
' sent Administration. He would contend that the prosecutions bad been
generally, or he might say universally, withdrawn, on the past of the
Government. He had had propositions from a person sent over to Eng-
land respecting withdrawing the prosecutions. His answer was, let
him see what Ministers will do for Ireland, and then probably he
should not press for a repeal of the Union, nor would he ask anything
like a compromise in this. The hen. member then read his son's letter
to Mr. Bennett, which stated his belief that the proposition did not
arrive from the head of the government, therefore he would not believe
it. The indictment against him contained thirty-one counts, the

first fourteen of v:hicb were under a particular statute (Hear, halve)
The fist fourteen counts charged him with violating the proclamations
of the Lord Lieutenant. The other seventeen charged hen with
offences at common law. They charged him with sedition, moral ter.
pitude, and wishing to bring the Government of the country into con.
tempt. Now• he would say that these 31 amnia flamed two distinct
indictments; the fret part of which—he meant the first 14 coums of
the indictment—charging him with an offence against the Statute only.
The seem:, or remaining 17 counts, charged him with seditien. Now,
how did the ease stand ? why, he pleaded guilty to the first fourteen
counts, and the Government had withdrawn the others, and by eo
doing they admitted that he was not guilty of sedition. He hail
made no concession. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) It was true
the Government might cal him up for judgment on the first day
of next term, if they should think prudent so to do ; but if the y
did so they would have no right to go on, until he had obtained the
judgment of the twelve judges of !relent' on the writ of error which the
Attorney-General bad by a written acknowledgment allowed, and then
if that decision should be against him, he could appeal to the Home ref
Lords; and before their judgment could be obtained no sentence of the
law could be executed against hint. I. had also been said that lie Led
made stipulations respecting punishment. He could boldly as err,
without the least fear of contradiction, that no such thing ever toile
place. If, however, he had acted wrongly, he alone otiget to he put
lashed, for the other seven gentlemen included with hint in the indict-
ment, being no lawyers, had left their cases entirely in his hands. There.
fore, he alone ought to be punished. (Hear, hear.) That hart of the
indictment which charged him with sedithei had been give,' up, but in
doing so. he would contend Government had given up nothing. Tit y
never could have substantiated the charge. If he had gone to neat iii
the first fourteen counts and been cenvieted, he still should have It td
the appeal to the Jury. But he had preferred pleading guilty ; I:e
would tell the house his honest reasons for so doing. Ttie excitement w!a.. Is
would have been created by the trial would have been such that the stree
of Dublin would have been thronged ; the trades would have he, n out
with their banners ; the shops would have been closed; thousands would
have come to his house anti accompanied him in procession to and tru..i
the Court, and the population of all the adjoining counties of Wickha..
Cavan, &c. would have been pouring into the capital, and as the tti..l.
no doubt, would have lasted five or six days, he felt anxiotte to avo
such a cam of excitement.—(Hear, and a laugh.) These a ere hie
honest reasons. And notwithstanding all that he felt for the ameliora-
tion of Ireland; notwithstanding all the trouble he had taken fir the
amelioration of that country, he would sacrifice all, rather titan purchase
it by the shedding of one single drop of human blood.
A stranger in the gallery, here called out in a loud, deliberate, but
determined voice, " It's a lie." He was immediately taken two cut.
Cody by two of the officers of the House. During this pieceteling greet
excitement prevailed, in the midst of which Mr. O'Connell sat down.
The SPEAKER elided the &leant, and the Scrjeatit immediately
went to the gallery.
Mr. O'CONNELL (order being restored) proceeded. He would re.
peat that the reasons he bad stated were his only objects in pleading
guilty. He begged to repeat the language. He had not &tired the
shedding of one drop of human blood. He concluded with stating that
to avoid the consequences of such excitation lie had pleaded guilty ; but
with the written admission given, to promote the appeal. He said he
had petitions to present for the repeal of the Union.
Mr. STANLEY observed, that he thought that his statement on a
former occasion, respecting the non-compromise on the part of the go- •
vernment, had now been fully borne out by the statement of the hon.
member for Waterford. As to the indictments, he (Mr. S.) was n.
lawyer enough to enter into a discussion upon their technicalities,
but the hon. member opposite, conceiving that the government were
wrong in the first fourteen COtilltS, demurred to them on that ground ;
then, finding out his error, he thought proper to withdraw the de-
murrer, saying he should go upon the fact. Before, however, his plea
of not guilty under the demurrer in point of law could be discussed,
he withdrew his plea of not guilty as to the fact, and judgment was
obtained against him for a misdemeanour. Judgment having been
thus obtained against him, and the extent of that judgment being iu
the discretion of the Court, the Crown had gained all it wished—arid
felt that by not proceeding further the Government would avoid—what
they wished to avoid—the appearance of a political prosecution. The
hon. member had said that the reason for shrinking from his trial before
a Jury was his unwillingness to create agitation in Ireland. Was there
an individual to be found in Ireland, in London, or in the world, re ha
had ever beard or read a word of the thousand and one declamatory
speeches and letters that had been circulated by the honourable member
throughout Ireland who would give him an atom of credit tor
saying he did not wish to agitate Ireland ? (Loud cheering.)—
The honourable member, with all his extraordinary anxiety that the
public should not be the least excited, with the same breath then
told the House he was afraid of the conduct of the people—the very
people whom he himself had excited.—(Hear). He (Mr. S.) bad a
considerable number of the Hon. Member's inflammatory speeches
before him, parts of which be should take the liberty of troubling the
House with ; every one of which was only calculated to exdui and
exasperate the lowest and most illitetate persons to be found in Ire-
land. The Hon. Member bad said In one of those speeches, that its
Ireland alone was slavery still predominant ; but he hoped to see Ike
day when she would be free ; and though that time might be distant, it
would be the more secure, and the triumph would be aide greater err-
! tainty bloodless. Ile had alluded also to the people of Belgium, Swit-
' ratiand, France, and Poland ; but could any one believe that his allusion
to them was for any other purpose than that of holding their conduct
up to Ireland as an example for her?—(Loud cheers.) Was this the
mode in which the Legislative Union between the tevo countries was to
be dissolved ? He (Mr. Stanley) did not know what the Honourable
Member thought, but he certainly confessed that Ice did not by any
means envy him his feelings, when lie could stand up in that House
and declare he was afraid of the excitement in Ireland which his
own conduct had occasioned.--(Loud cheers.) He Should not enter
much further into details on the present occasion. Whenever the
Learned and Horaurable Member should think fit to catty into et.
feet the threats he had made of bringing his conduct mere formally
before the House, either before or after the time when he (Mr.
Stanley) should, as the Hon. Member for Waterford had been land
enough to tell the population of Dublin, stand like anuthet Polignac.
with up-lifted hands at the bar of that house, and when there should
be a Reform in Parliament, which he most sincerely hoped would be in
one little week, or a very short time more there would be, he (Mr. S.)
should be perfectly prepared to meet him. (Cheers.) Before lie sat
• down, he begged to say a word respecting the hurlers of Kilkenny.
The hon. member had invited them, if they had a vote, not wily
• to vote for the return of his friend, but urged them to use 411 tl:etr
it.fitunce in returning that friend—if they I:ad any is flueige,-
1 (Laughter.) Who were the individuals called hurlers? They were a ,
act of persons ahem the Hon. Member opposite himself had declined to
meet, persons acting illegally, and contrary in every respect to the law
of the country ; and yet, the Hon. 31enther was the very man who had
solicited and invecd them to come leeward and assist in the return of
his friend. He was sorry to have detained the House so lung, but lie
felt called upon to state thus much, in consequence of the Hun. Mena
bee having mutle a flourish of his anxiety for the ptescrvatien of the
peace in Ireland.
The SPEAKER said, that before the Howie preceeded lui titer, it
was his duty to inform the House that he who had committed the
outrage was now in the custody of the Sergeant at Anne.
Mr. O'CONNELL, in moving that the petition which he hat I:re-
sented be read, felt bound to notice some parts of the speech of the Hen.
Member opposite, a great part of which was utterly destitute of feat du.
lion. He said the Honourable Secretary was triumphant in his it an.
net., but deficient in argument. He had promoted agitation, eta a
crisis, such as the papers had called fur; he wanted no crisis, ti d if
his countrymen obeyed his advice. these would be repeal in Ittlard and
reform in England. If there were a reformed Parliament, he would
take the Secretary at his word, and call him to account for his despotic
and illegal corAict. lie wanted no crisis—no; and to shwa what
had been achieved, had any person, had one man been hurt et inter.
mired ?, What had the present Administration dam ? Lord Ang'a ley's
proclamation
had prevented him from receiving sonic honours en his
ding—it was founded on the recent Act, end who would not despise
such an Act, and the party acting under it ? If they would not have
despised such conduct, how unlike their sires of old were they ? This
was cl.e course of the the liberal administration. Agitation had
been in reality excited by the Honourable Secretary, and the proclama-
tions egainst breakfasts and dinners. He would bring the Hen. Si ere-
lary's illegal letter before a Reformed Heuer, a House that it wcteti be
an honour to have ama in. He then spoke of his desire to rotas
the peace, as instanced in his suppression of the "hurlers of Kil-
kenny " The proclamations were the cause of the agitation. The Irish
were slaves, but not willing slaves, such as not to be etireged
at the proclamations. They were meat hostile. They were despotic.
The law was nothing. One man's a i:1 one man's prcelamatiou was
law, was every thing. Was not that ciespotism, and was it not slat
very ? There was ito union bete ern England and Ireland. There was
net equal laws, not equal jury haws between the tan countries. Ho
Lad ulluded to the provocations given—they came from Whigs—be it
rent( mbered—and what had occasioned them ? There was net any vi-
de: cc. He was etrugglieg fig free and open discussion; for constitue
tional liberty. The hon. Secretary had tat contreelicted any cne part
of his (Mr. O'Conuell'e) etatenient respecting the evils that might
have resulted from the vraceeelings in Ireland. He had not said he did
not wish to have excitement wed agitation in led .nd. He had said
the reverse. Agitation was the puce necessarily paid for liberty, end
he desired to have agitation in Ireland for the purpose of obtaining the
repeal of the Union. If these lied not been agitation in England, the
Reform question would have slept at this moment. It was owing to
the salutary agitation which had taken place here that the subject now
about to be brought forward had been occasioned. It was a similar agi.
tation he trttsted that would convince the House of the ere.,
priety of bringing forward a measure for the tepee' of the union,
and for making Ireland have and maintain its own government. Had
the Hon. member opposite never heard of agitation in Ireland before ?
Why, when he (Mr. O'Connell) under the former Government.
had in Ireland advocated the rights of the Irish people, and of
means, to
was looked fors erd
agitation there, he had been cheered by the very
to
suienadinividthuesils:
now got into power, and who now, since they had got into power, had
Reform
most dinespoporticire who
eh .1 d
re"fShoutledd thteremebaenlittbße

t

i*
Li,.

;

1

!

to, the honourable gentleman might rest assured that he (Mr. O'Con-
nell) would bring before the house his unconstitutional letter, that the
honourable member might have the opportunity of making his defence.
He had not said that he did not wish for agitation in Ireland,he wished
for agitation ; but, he repeated, he desired to avoid that crisis which
the Government had expressed a wish to have. And be had not alto-
gether failed. He felt that even now he was in attitude to see some.
thing done for his country. He had done something for Ireland, and
his heart told hint that he had acted honestly.
Lord ALTHORP said he was astonished at the learned member's
language, that the agitations were the results of the proclamations.—
ad no agitatious existed before ? Had not the learned gentleman glo-
ried in having produced agitation ? He considered that the Government
had only done what it was entitled to do to prevent the consequences of
the agitations that were in progress. The ease of both sides was now
before the country, and let the country determine who were right.—
(Hear. hear.)
Mr. O'OOR3IAN hIAHON said, it was manifest that there had
been negotiation, but who originated it was still a mystery. Mr.
O'Connell, it was clear, did not originate it, and the Government did
not take part in it. A dictatorship had been established—there was no
union—lreland had all the bad laws of England, or bad laws made for
her. As to the censure of the language used respecting Belgium,
Poland, &c. it came with bad taste. when they recollected Lora
Altitorp's eulogium on the tri-coloured flag. The repeal of the Union
was called for by the people of Ireland. The Union had not been
c.lled for by the people of ireiand. As to agitation he would support
it whenever the opportunity presented itself. He hoped to see the
Union repealed, and the people of this country benefitting from such
repeal.
Mr. S. RICE said, if the friends of the repeal were so confident of
its advantages, why did they not rely on calm discussion, instead of
evading it ?—(Cheers.)--They teemed to dread nothing so much as
discussion. Why have these incidental discussions? Why not name
a day for the general discussion? It was not snowing confidereeln the
cause, thus to evade it. Let some day be named for it ; that House
was likely to decide the question quite as calmly and rationally as the
hurlers of Kilkenny.—(C beers, and a laugh.) He thought it would be
shewn that the repeal would be most injurious to Ireland.—(Cheers.)
The petition fro Lucklard-bridge, Carlow, for repeal of the Union,
it as then preset) dby Mr. O'Connell.
The Colo Trade Bill was postponed till Thursday.
azroaar. _ _

Jr.S LITTLETON reminded tit; House that there were many Par-
liamentary Reform petitions still to present ; and as there were three
ballots for to morrow, would it not be better to receive them first. or
to postpone the motion till they could be presented—(No, no—no
postponement.)
Lord ALTHORP, in reply to the hon. member for Staffordshire,
said he would not object to the proposition, and he thought it ought to
be submitted to the house. His lordship made some allusion relating
to the motion regarding the borough of Evesham, but he spoke in so
low a tone that we could not catch his expression.
Col. DAVIES was opposed to any delay in the important business
of the country before the house, and would insist that the orders of the
slay should be gone through regularly.
Mr. BENN ET said, that there could be no business more important
for the country than to receive those petitions for reform.
M. WOOD said, that he knew many honourable members had been
at the house as early as nine o'clock that morning, to have their names
placed on the list, for the purpose of getting an opportunity to present
petitions. That morning's post had brought a vast accession of peti.
tions for reform to hon. members from their constituents. He (Mr. W.)
had come to the house as early as ten o'clock, and he then found that
upwards of 40 hon. members bad been there before for the same pur.
pose, to enrol their names.
Mr. C. CALVERT thought that it was known that the petitions
were all for parliamentary reform, and none against it, and as the mo-
tion was only to be introduced on the following evening, that there
might be sufficient opportunities for hon. members to present petitions
before the bill went into committee.
An Hon. MEMBER remereetl, that it would be more desirable to
have the petirious plead on the minutes of the house before that the
bill was gone into. and as the fate of the %potion could not be known,
and perhaps it tinght be lost on its first proposition. (Cries of no, no.)
The SPEAKER put the question from the Chair, whether or not the
petitions should be receired?
Lord ALTHORP repeated. that he was willing that the house
should depart from the precedent, and suffer the petitions to be received.
Mr. CA LCRAFT holed that the house would agree to receive the
petitions that evening.
The Marquis of CH ANDOS complained of his motion relating to
the borough of Evesham being defeteed, on account of the arrangement
of the Noble Chancellor of she Exchequer, and said, that he would
take the opportunity of saying, that there might be some who did not
consider it a motion of any importance, but he thoo3ht far otherwise,
and be was determined to bring it forward on Mond. .y next.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, Mat it was his desire to be enabled to com-
mence his measure on the Reform question on the following evening
(this evening) at six o'clock.
General GASCOYNE objected to delaying the business of the house
for the purpose of receiving petitions. He would call to the recollection
of the house that when the Catholic question was being discussed the
petitions were dropping in every day against the measure, and no
interruption of the business or the house was allowed and
he did not see why the precedents of the house should be departed from
in this case. Whet he was on his legs he felt bound to notice the in-
difference with which the noble Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to
treat the intimation that had been made to him of a person being in
custody for having insulted an hon. member in the house. The hon.
member for Waterford had been most grossly insulted; it was tht
greatest insult that he (Gen. Gascoyne) had ever heard offered to any
one in that house, and it was impossible that it could be overlooked.—
The noble Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to notice it, or other-
wise the hon. member for Waterford might suppose, arid very justly,
that he had not been properly protected in his place.
The SPEAKER said, that properly he was called upon to answer
the hon. member who had spoken last, as the notice of the person in
custody had been deferred at his suggestion. The noble Chancellor of
the Exchequer had by him (the Speaker) been told, that be considered
it would be better not to interrupt the business of the house by going
into the matter then, seeing that the person was in custody, and could
not be liberated until he was discharged by the house.
General GASCOYNE expressed himself satisfied with the ex-
planation.
Sir ROBERT PEEL was prepared to give his vote that the pea.
tions should be received. He said that he was a very disinterested per-
son on the subject, as lie bad one petition for reform, and one against it,
to present. (A laugh.)
Considerable confusion arose in the house, which was very full, so
that a number of honourable members who spoke could not be beard,
on account of the number of honourable members who hurried from
their seats.
Mr. HUNT said, that he had not been aware that the house
would have come to a resolution to receive petitions that night, anti
several which he got by post he had in consequence not brought
with him; but if they were likely to be received, he would go home
for them. The hon. member accordingly left his seat immediately for
that purpose.
The motion was agreed to, that the petitions be received.
Sir ROBERT PEEL hoped that it would be distinctly understood
by the house, that the secession had been allowed for reform peti-
tions only.
Mr. LITTLETON then presented five petitions from Staffordshire
for Reform, four of which he stated prayed that the suffrage be extended
to the petitioners, who hitherto, although numerous, had not been al-
lowed a voice in the election of a representative. The petitions were
from Bilston signed by 16,000 persons, Dudley, Waled, Staffordshire
Potteries, and Button-on. Trent. The hon. member supported the prayers
of the petitions, and remarked that there were few places where so large
a population was unrepresented as the conjoint districts front whence the
petitions came.
A number of other petitions were presented by several other members,
but the noise in the house made it impossible to hear them.
Mr. DEN M A N presented five petitions for Reform.
Sir 111. RIDLEY presented one from Barnard Castle.
Mr. BELL presented one from the County of Northumberland, and
one front the town of Hexham.
Sir R. BATES presented one from Londonderry.
Mr. RU st BOLD presented one from Great Yarmouth.
Mr. HODGES presented one from a parish in the eastern district
of Kent.
Mr. BURKE )iresented one from Exeter.
Lord G. BEN r INCK presented one, but the name of the place did
nor reach the gallery.
Mr. IV ILKES presented one from Long Sutton.
Lord EBR IDGE presented one from Newton Abbot, and another
from the parish of Shibear.
Mr. STRUTT presented one from Derby.
Mr. MI LDBIAY presented one from Winchester.
Mr. EGERTON presented one from Macclesfield.
Mr. C. GREVILLE presented one from Warwick.
Mr. WILBRA HA M presented one from Nantwich.
Mr. LEFEVRE presented one from Basingstoke.
Mr. JUN RS presented one from Carmarthen.
Sir F. BLAKE presented one from Berwick-upon-Tweed.
Sir It. PEEL presented one from Banff, for Reform ; and another
against universal suffrage and annual Parliaments, from the Vicar and
others from a parish in Nottingham.
Lord ALTHORP presented petitions from Pembroke and Upton,
for Reform.
Mr. LAMBE presented one from Melbourn.
Mr. WOOD presented one from the inhabitants of the city of York,
who were not allowed to vote at elections, praying for Reform, and an
extension of the elective franchise. The honourable member stated that
unless the franchise wasextended, that no description of Reform would
be availing ; and he stated, that if the measure to be brought forward
on the lst of March did not embrace that alteration, he would bring for.
ward specific motions for that purpose, front all the large towns in Eng-
land. He also presented a Reform petition from Birmingham, from
the Wesleyan Society.

Mr. L. WELLESLEY presented a Reform petition from the'
county of Rases.
Mr. WESTERN said, he should support a fair and temperate
Reform.
Mr. MABERLY preaented a reform petition from Croydon.
After a few words Roma Member, whose name was not known, Mr.
Warburton, Mr. &ism; and Mr. Waithman, the petition was read,
and ordered to be printed.
Mr. M ABERLY presented a similar petition from Abingdon.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a reform petition from Mr. Yates, a
Magistrate in Gloucestershire.
Sir T. ACKLAND presented a reform petition from Plymouth.
Lord EBRINGTON concurred with the petitioners.
Reform patitiona were presented by Alderman Wood, from the Ward
of Crippl te ;by Alderman Waithman, from St. Dunstan, Stepney ;
by Sir J. Graham, from the county of Lanark, from Monmouth, and
from two other places; by Mr. Hunt, from Preston, Arington, Yeovil,
airy St. Edmund's, Ashford.in.thesWater, from Charley, and from
two other places.
Several paktum. were presented flow the following places by the fol-
lowing member*:
Mr. BAINBRIDGE, from Taunton, praying for the vote by ballot.
Mr. LABOUCHEItE said, be was not able to support the prayer of
the vole by ballot, as he had never heard any arguments in its favour
aufficient to cto.vince ititu. (Hear.)
Mr. HUNT said. be was desired to support the petition. He was
confident that if toe people of Taunton were to vote by ballot, 18 out
of 20 would support the prayer of the petition. Certainly, if the hon.
ge..tleman opposed the vote by ballot he would lose his popularity
in Taunum. It was like giving a man with a wooden leg the privilege
of runnin,r a hare, to give a man a vote and not give him the means of
exercising it.
Mr. HUME raid, unless his honourable friend (Mr. Labouchere)
could point out some remedy for such practices as took place at
Newark and Liverpool, he would be hound in honour to vote for the
ballot. (Hear.)
Lord SA NDON said if the electors were to vote by ballot, he thought
the menaben. should vote by ballot too.
Mr. O'CONNELL oaid the cases were wholly different. The mem-
bers acre deleg.tes, and it was proper those who sent .been should know
how th.ty performed their duty. The constituent was only accountable
to his own cooseience.
Mr. CAL' RAFT thought voting by ballot would only make men
deceiver-. (limr, bear, hear.) While canvass was continued, men
would certainly promise; and if they broke their words they would
be deceivers.
Mr. CAMPBELL hoped never to see the day when Englishmen
would Tom in secret.
Lord NUGENT thought if the ballot would tend to do away with
canvass, that would be a o.rong argument In his favour. He would be
ashamed to ask one of his conseitttents how he ohould tote. He was
satisfied to hear it at 111 c, hu.tinAs.
Mr. LA BOUI OURS said he looked for the repression of such
radices as had taken place at Newark from the honest intliguaticio of
the public.
Lord NUGENT presented a petiti..n from Aylesbury, and two from
patislies in Bucks.
Mr. C. GRANT, from Inverness and from Peehles.
Mr. HUN f, from a paish in Manchester. With respect to th,
hon. members who appeared to be OW anxious to protect the morals
the people from the bud eff, co, of voting by ballot, was it not wontle• •
fat tht.t they neva thought of protec.ing them from the bribery and cor-
ruption, sod lying and dtmtkennent that at present Wig place at Ali
popular elcctions.
Mr. ELLIS moved for a new writ for the county of Nairn, in the
room of Mr. Goo; ge Campbell, who has accepted the office of Groom
of the Bedenomkr.
Mr. WYNN brought ;n the Mutiny Bill. Read a first time, and
ordered to be rad a a. tond Bruce
OUTRAGE IX THR ROUSE.
Lord A LTHORP said the uZINUJI who bAll committed the drew
ag2invt the house wl.s 'tow in cus.ody. one) be would move that he
be called to the 11;1 -nit shots woilid be that he shorld be repoh.
matiticd diothatAed. a. te. thought die person who had eounnit.so
such au uutete,e eau d scarcely be in a state of mind to suffer severe
punishto.:nt. e..r.)
The prisoner vim :hen brought to the bar.
SPEAKER —What is your name ?
P. isotiar.—Alz rade,. Jacobs.
SPEAKER.—What doology have you to offer for the very great
(Sul you have commis against for house ?
The priscma was it.tl4titic..l, hearth in th• g..llety. He said be was
conecrmat in a trade whito he eavect:rl an •Id be discmsed that night.
and he t.,otiAht he nod a rigiu an an Ety,linte eon to be pieseot eluttug
the discussion... He Mti .sot .ii.k It as us 110.siblO that any .)...3111)1.r of
that house cou'd exi.:ct the, hz. as ail Ri,5ii.b.1.419. could be bika•
when bk., hand who: had oe-i; 7.41.t1 i.; 'hot house .hat •;ight.

The SPEAKEtt cellist the orisooes to order. • ml 64.0 he was hrooghs
there to melt: an apoloAl s'er .11 • ip.a. offe,tee 11:: had committed. H.
should lake care ussc to inflame shat uy proteedio3 in she mean t.
he was .hen
The piscoser said he d.d not think the gentleman to akin be spots
cotAd expect that any E4glisistrass should lee. p his tensile?.
The SPitAKER *gip called hi..• to order.
The prisoner then sad well, Mr. Speaker, and Gentlemen, if 1 hare
offended you I beg all your pardssus. He was then removed froth
the bar.
Lord ALTHOttP said what the person had said at the bar was not
such an apology as could satisfy the House. He thotsght the cone he
had intended to pursue would not be a snffieient vind.cation of the dig.
nity of the House. lie should therefore move, that Alexander Jacobs,
being guilty of a breach of the privileges of the House, be committed to
Newgate..—( Hear. hear.)
Mr. O'CONNELL said he did not mean to palliate the offence com-
mitted against the House, by the man who had been brought to the bar
but he hoped he might be permitted to say, for one individual, that h.
wished that pardon might, if possible, be !granted. The man appeared
to be under come influence, perhaps peculiar to the day—perhaps of a
more permanent character—and in either case he was an object of p ty
It did appear that:there must he some obliquity of intellect that could
lead to suet an uncommon offence ; which was not likely to her:Tema);
and, as the offender had begged pardon. he would take the liberty of
moving an ao•endment, that Alexander Jacobs be reprimanded by the
Speaker and discharged.
Sir R. PEEL said, he could understand the feelings of the hor. gen-
tleman, and if the offence was merely personal, could accede to his pm.
posal : but the offence was against the dignity of the house, and could
not be lightly passed over. When he considtred how easy It was to
repeat such an offence, and that last session papers had been thrown
from the gallery into the house, he must support the motion of the
noble lord. The prisoner said he was concerned in trod; that showed
he ass not deficien. in intellect ; and if he came to the house in a sots
of intoxication, he deserved punishment.
Mr. W. WYNN said, the prisoner should, he thought, be kept
in custody till to-morrow, to give time It inquire into his state of mine.
' Lord ALTHORP thought it was neeesmuy, p preserve the dignity
of the house, that such an offence should be punished.
The motion for the committal of the prisoner to Newgate was then
agreed to.
-