Star.
London, England, 1825-06-22 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Counsel were beard on Moore's Divorce Bill.
The Holyhead Road Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Foundlings of Ireland Bill went through a Committee on
the motion of Mr. S. Rms.—Report to be received to-morrow.
The LORD ADVOCATE brought up the Report on the
Partnerships in Scotland Bill.—The Bill was ordered to be read a
third time to morrow.
Mr. %V. DUNDAS brought up the Report on the Edinburgh
Bonds Bill.
After a few words from Mr. ABIUMODUT, the Report was
agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time to-morrow.
On the motion of Mr. Heating, the Bank Tokens of Ireland
Bill was read a third time and passed.
Dr. PHILLIMORE brought up the Report of the Writs of
Error 8111, which was read, agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be
read a third time to-morrow.
On the motion of Mr. Secretary PEEL, the University Pollee
Bill was read a third time and passed.
MR. KINRICK'S CASE

Mr. DENMAN gave notice of a motion, requiring
the attendance of four or five persons to be examined
with regard to a letter written by Mr. Kenrick (the
Welsh Judge), relating to the case of John Franks,
which letter was published in the Stamford Paper, and
a copy of which had been laid upon the table. That
letter was grossly libelous on the character of John
Franks. Mr. Kenrick had been guilty of peat malver-
sation in his office, and of great cruelty towards Mr.
Franks. He had equally misconducted himself towards
Camfor, from whom he (Mr. Denman) had already presented a
Petition. It was certainly necessary to take away front Mr. Ken-
rick the power and dignity of a Magistrate of Surrey. For the
bresent, he should merely move that the following persons attend
on Friday next, at the bar of the House—John Franks and Esther
his wife. Edward Arnold, Martin Money Camfor, and Peters.
Mr.,Sectetary PEEL thought there would. be much
siiffictety attending the motion. The ultimate object
of the Learned Gentleman was to remove Mr. Kenrick
from his office, and this preparatory motion bound the
House to an inquiry. Would the House act so preci-
pitately? It would be better to wait until the letter was laid on the
table. Let the Learned Gentleman embody on paper the grounds
of his proceeding, and then the person accused might have an op-
portunity of replying to the charge. In the meantime he had
better wait until all the papers were laid on the table.
Mr. S. BOURNE thought the motion a great deal too precipi-
tate. Mr. Kenrick was entitled at least to as much favour as the
meatiest person lo the kingdom.
Mr. ABERCRO3I BY said, that the charge had already been
made in such away as to enable Mr. Kenrick to give an answer.
A Petition had been presented sgainst him, and an Hon. Member,
la his behalf, had requested that the House would proceed to an
:Luirinto the facts. No one could expect his Learned Friend to
cef
his argument m writing, for that would be most injurious to
Mr. Kenrick.
Mr. Secretary Pan and Mr. S. Booms explained.-
Mr. C. WYNN thought that the House slight to adhere to pre-
cedents, and to require that any charge against a Judge should
be defined.
Mr. TIERNEY said, that the charge was against Mr. Kenrick
as a Magistrate and not as a Judge, and therefore less definiteness
was necessary. inasmuch as all the facts were contained in
Abe Petition.—Mr. C. WYNN explained.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that the House rarely
ever addressed the Crown for the removal of a Judge ' • but when-
ever it did so. the charge was always specifically stated. The pre-
sent was a gross subversion of all the modes of criminal proceed-
ings. The House ought to be cautious in establishing a dan-
gerous precedent.
Mr. ABEItCItOMBY explained and said, that the sole object
of his Learned Friend was to substantiate by facts the allegations
of the Petitioner.
Mr. TIERNEY said, that the best way would be to call no wit-
nesses. except such as were connected with the Petition. If the
enquiry were to be confined to Mr.Camfor's Petition, and no notice
were taken of the affidavits and other papers on the table, the ob-
jection would be obviated.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, that Hon. Members seemed
to think that every inquiry into the conduct of a-Ma-
gistrate must end in an impeachment. This was not
the case, and no charge in writing was necessary, except
in cases of impeachment. There had been already too
such motions made this Session ; one against the
Duke of Manchester, and the other was fixed for tow
morrow against Lord Charles Somerset, and yet tie
one bad objected that they were not in writing. It was peeslbb
that impeachments might be necessary, after the inquiries were over.
Perhaps it would be more fair to confine the inquiry to the case
of Camfor. From a long knowledge of Mr. Kenrick be could not
bet express his hopes that that individual might Tree himself from
all imputation. Still the House was bound to inquire, and ought
not to be hampered.
Mr. C. WYNN read extracts from the Journals, to prove
that charges were required to be in writing when directed against
Judges—Mr. BROUGHAM explained.
Mr. Secretary PEEL said that his objection was to the insti-
tution of any inquiry in the case of Franks, before all the
were laid on the table. After the papers were before the
the would be able to decide as to the netessity of inquiry.
r. DENMAN observed, that it was by mere acci-
' dent that the letter of Mr. Kenrick had not been printed
with the other papers. He was ready to admit that
it would be premature to call any evidence respecting
the case of Franks, and that part of the motion he
begged leave to withdraw. The Petition of Camfor,
however, contained specific matter of charge. He
should therefore :novel that Mark Money Camfor at-

tend the House on Friday ; and that the House resolve
itself into a Corneal*e on that day. With regard to
the ultimate effects of this inquiry, he could not say
what measures he should adopt. An Address to the Crown erns
the utmost limit of his proceedings there Crown
w}}
courses which might be adopted. He ought not,therefore, to be
regarded as standing in the situation of an impeacher.
Mr. tieennary PEEL thought it would be more consistent with
justice to send a copy of Casnfor's Petition to Mr. Kenrick ; and
on Friday move fur Cmfor's attendance, as in the meantime the
accused might furnish a satisfactory explanation.
Mr. DENMAN said, that no statement from an accused per-
son could be satisfactory. It was statement against statement.—
' Let the inquiry be made, and then let Mr. Kenrick be heard in
his defence.
Mr. Secretary Pm and Mr. Durmast mutually explained. r
It was then moved and ordered, that the Petition of Mr. Camfor
be communicated to Mr. Keuck that Camila. be ordered to
attend the House on Friday; and also that Mr. Kenrick have
I leave to attend at the same time in person, or by his Counsel.
Mr. BROUGHAM thought the House ought to meet earlier
than usual, in order to get sooner through the inquiry.
Mr. Secretary PEEL concurred.
Mr. DENMAN objected, on the ground of the probable short-
ness of the inquiry.
Mr. MAXWELL presented a Petition, signed by 10,003 Ope
ratite Weavers of Glasgow, respecting the Combination Laws.
The Honourable Member supported the prayer of the Petition.
Mr. Secretary PEEL said that the Committee had paid an
equal attention to the statements of both masters and workmen.
Mr. MAXWELL explained.
The Petition was ordered to be laid on the table.
UNITARIAN MARRIAUXII.
Mr. W. SMITH presented a Petition from the Uni-
tarian Dissenters, paying for some relief. The Hon.
Gentleman stated, that in consequence of a Bill which
he had carried through the House having been thrown
out in another place, the Unitatians had been placed in
a worse condition than before. He thought it his duty
to introduce the subject once more before the Legisla-
ture. He denied that at the time the Bill for relieving
those persons who impugned the doctrine of the Trinity
passed, that he admitted that those persons were only
relieved from the statutary penalties, and were still left
under the penalties of the common law. He never had
admitted any such thing, and it so happened that he
had a record of what he did say on that occasion. In
his opinion, the whole of the penalties, both smtutable
and under the common law, were done awry. Of that
he had never heard any doubt expressed till lately by a
Noble Person in the other House; if any doubts there
really we, e remaining, it was very desirable they should
be cleared up, and that was the object these Petitioners
had in view.
After a few words from Mr. Roses:sox, the Petition was read'
and laid on the table.
On the motion of the Cnancsatoa of the Engem:ea, the House
went into a Committee on the Newspapers' Bill. The several
clauses were agreed to, and the Report was ordered to be received

tomorrow.
The West India Clergy 13ill was read a third time, and a Clause
added b) way of rider, for paying the salaries out of the Four and
a Half per Cent. dutiei, after which the Bill was passed.
The House went into a Committee on the Public Works in Ire-
land Bill.—Report to-morrow.
The Glass Duties Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Report on the Plate Duties Transfer Bill was received,
and the Bill ordered to be read a third time to.morrnw.
The Customs Temporary Duties Bill was ordered to be read a
third time on Friday.
The Dublin Wide qtreets Bill went through the Committek.—
Report to-morrow.
The Customs Consolidation Bill was read a second doe, and
committed for Thursday.
The isle of Man Trade Bill was ordered to be read a third time
on Thursday.
The Piiiitige Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be read
a second time to-morrow.

CRUEL TRIATMCNT 01 ANIMALS.

Mr. MARTIN moved the second reading of the Cruel Treat-
ment of Cattle Bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that the offence
was already a felony, and the Bill of the Hon. Gentle-
man made it a misdemeanour ; so that the offence
would at the same time be a felony and a misdemeanour.
The Bill, in its present form, could not pass, and he must oppose it.
Mr. R. MARTIN said, that the Bill he held in his
hand was the Bill of Mr. Attorney-General. The At-
torney-General had no objections then to the Bill, pro-
vided the words cutting, maiming, or wounding, were
inserted. The objection of the Right Hon. the Mem-
ber for Oxford, arose from his (Mr.M.) having adopted
the suggestion of the Attorney-General, who promised
to we his influence with the Lord Chancellor, to have
the Bill passed. The Bill to which the Attorney-Ge-
neral assented was an absurd Bill-441 laugh). 0, so
it was termed in the House of Lords. The present Bill
went to cure that absurdity. The Attorney-General
did assent and consent to the Bill that went up to the
Lords : and he called on him either to admit the absur-
dity, or to consent to the Bill before the House. The
Attorney-General had, in the course of the last 24 or
36 hours, told him (Mr. M.) that if one clause were
left out, he had no objection to the passing of the Bill.
If such objections were made, the public would be apt
up think that the House of Commons was a very bad place far tie
education of Gentlemen.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL repeated the objections whirl
he had previously urged.
Mr. It. MARTIN contended that the Bill of the Hon. Masi.
ber for Knaresborough only applied to cattle which had owners.
Mr. S. WORTLEY referred to the former Act, and said chalk
applied to all cattle.
Mr. C. WILSON thought the 'meet Bill might be. renderpd
free from the objections of the Attorney-General by stating that it
should not have the effect of repealing the former law, while it left
the power of punishing minor offences as nsiadesseansniti. • !
Mr. GOULBURN opposed the Bill. • 4
After a few words from Mr. Menem and Mr. Swum Race, the
house divided—
For the motion •
Against it

It
27
-9

Majority against the Dill
On the return of strangers to the gallery, •
•
Mr. GREEN was moving an Amendment to the Church Lands
Baelianp Bill for leaving out that part wb.loh limited the quantfty
of land to be exchanged to forty acres.
Lord PALMERSTON objected to the Amendment.
After a few words from Mr. Locusutair Mr. hlexcx, Mr. C.
Wasson, and Mr. J. Raster, the Boum divided
For the Amendment
Against it
Majority .
The Report of the all was then received.
SPRING GUN&
On the question of the second reading of the Spring Gans 111,
Mr. TENNISON opposed the Bill, on the ground
that the offence might be punished by a civil action,
and the injury was much greater than the law, if ap-
pealed to, could inflict, and often terminated in the
death of the party. The Honourable Gentleman then
stated several instances of melancholy accidents
happening from spring guns, and sometimes to the
parties themselves, in v►hose grounds they were set.
The object of the Bill was to render it unlawful to set
spring guns, and where death ensued within a year and
a day after being wounded by such an instrument, the
party setting seek gun should be deemed guilty of Manslaughter.
The Honourable Gentleman concluded' by moving that the IRE be
read a seeoad time.
Mr. p. WORTLEY thought, that a great deal of
properly in the kingdom could only be protected by
'the use of those instruments, which lie acknowledged,
he had himself for years made u•e of. lie &mid bp.
pose the second reading of the Bill, bec.iiise, liy every
jaw of right, as well as by die law of the laud, he ha:

.

s 4. '

!• ' 1

. •
a right to let spring pus for the protection of his property. If the
Bill restricted the use of spring guns to the night time, be should
net object to it. •
Sir F. BURDETT said, poacher!, who were the per.
sons against whom these guns were directed,were never
hurt by them, while acccidents were continually hap'.
penins to innocent peisonp. , Setting. spring-guns was
effecting that Indirectly, which was not permitted to be
done directly. The practice he thought inhuman ; for
children, or persons taking t walk into the country for
amusement, were liable to the loss of life by those
instrunsenis.• He thought the greatest evil resulting
from the use of spring guns, was allowing the u,e of
ahem for the protection of game. If their use could
keep the prisons clear of poachers, it might be a ques-
tion of choice between two evils ; but es it produced no such bene-
ficial result, be shou,ld support the second reading of the Bill.
. Mr. COLBORNE was opposed to the. Bill, which
would lead to a greater evil than that which it professed
to remedy, as the number of gamekeepers must be en-
larged, atid continual conibats must take place between
then and the ,posehers, which would lead to greater loss of life than
that which could result from the use of spring pls.
Mr. H. GURNEY supported the Bill.
Lord BINNING was opposed to the second reading
of the Bill, which was directed to the abolition of the use
of spring guns for the protection of gardens as well as of
game. He thought the Bill was a very bungling spe-
cimen of legislation, and he was surprised at such a Bill
coming from a place which took such pains usually in
criticising whatever was sent up from that House.
Mr. SCARLETT supported the TENNISON re.
pliedond the House divided, when there appeared—

For the second reading, an I Against V, 27 I Majority,l2.
The Gardena' Protection Bill was read a second be
,ommitted to-morrow.
It was moved that the House should rvsolve itself into a Com-
mittee on the Assessors' Election Bill.
Mr. HOBHOUSE opposed the motion, en the ground of the
lateness of the Session.
Mr. HORACE TWISS said, be had taken the earliest opporti-
thy for bringing the measure forward, but was prevented by the
Feat prest of business from doing it sooner. He should, however,
withdraw the Bill for the present Session, on the understanding that
its should be permitted to bring It forward early in the next Session
at Parliament.—Tbe motion was accordingly dropped.
Every other Order tin the paperhating been previously disposed
If, the House adjourami at lame o'Cuanc.

'1111±; EVENING STAR

LONDON.

THURSDAY. JUNE 22, 1825.
STOCK EXCHANGE, TWELVE O'CLOCK.
Consols opened this morning at 911 1, and got up to lite 1 for
the Account, with not much doing. They are now 91/.
A good deal of business has been done this morning-in the New
French Owens, which are payable at Messrs. Rownsczataa'.
In the Foreign Market there is but little doing.
Current Prices: New Spanish 191 20, Old Spanish 24* 1, Ras-
sian 951, Mexican 76k, Brazilian Scrip I 1 disc. liezkao Scrip
21 1 disc. Danish Scrips disc. Greek Scrip 91 9 disc.
Pit ICE OF STOCKS AT ONE O'CLOCK.
Bank Stock 233
3 per Cent. lied. 301/2 1/2
S per Cent. Cons. Shut. •
3 per Cent. 9944
Si per Cent. Red. 981/2 98
4 per Cent. New Shut.
Long Ann. 22 1-16 21 15-16
India Stock Shut.
India Bonds 53
£l,OOO Ezcheq. Bills 32 34
£509 ditto 32 34
£lOO and £2OO ditto 32 34
Cons. for Acct. 91% % 54.
FOREIGN FUNDS, TWO O'CLOCK.
Austrian Bds S p Ct. Mt:. Scrip Ms,
Brazilian Bonds Ditto Acct. 21 1 1 dig.
Ditto Aect. Neapolitan Bonds, 1824,
DistoScrip, Spa. 1825, Peru+. Bonds, ft per Ct. 741
Ditto Acct. f db. Ditto Acct.
Buenos Ayres Bonds Ditto Scrip, 4 di.
Ditto Acct. Ditto Actt. 51 dig
Chaim Bonds, 6 p Ct. Portuguese Bonds 88*
Colombia. Bds,6 p C. Ditto Acct.
Dktoßonds, 1824, ST/ 1 Prussian Bonds S p C.
Ditto Acc. 871 1 Do.' Bonds, 18112, 1011
Danish Bonds, S per Ct. Russ. 80nd5,1822, S pCt. 9SI
Do. Scrip,s Ott. 1112 S 51 His Ditto for Acc. 9511
Ditto Met. 11 die p. Ct. C. 241 1 *
Greek Bonds atagolikAcct. 24/ *
Ditto Acct. SO Span. Sip. Ct C. 1613, 19.1 1
Do. Scrip 1925, Ditto Acct.
Ditto Acc.9/ * 1 dis. French Rents., S p Ct.
Men. Bonds, ap Ct. 761 Bachange
BRITISH AND FOREIGN SHARES, IWO O'CLOCK.