Star.
London, England, 1824-05-27 00:00:00

---....

, ...,..........

•••••••••-•...,m.

-Th
'` A
Per Cerzt
--'__
A 011)(
,C"\TAIA 4,
-.rir-,•.3i
'AY 1
111L4111* fal 4 l•
* ' •;
. ‘?"-A6-4-‘)Ate--)

THURSDAY, MAY 27, 1824.

rPRICIK SRVENI-Itt,:srcr4

Bills, as refetrit,e to their Lord p: St aiding Orders,
in relation to Joan Stock C panics. should be .
be printed for O. consideration of their Lordships. If als i;.ot
were acceded to by the I louse, :via he understood that nu o .j.c-
tion would be made to it, he should postpone the motion in winch
he hat given notice for to-day to Monday next ; hut in.. i
the meantime, that it he an instruction to the Cli.ormaii of the..-
I.nrdski.oe Committee (the iLarl of Shaftc3l tail) not to proceed
with any such private Bids beyond the first reading of the 3 am,.

FlrnitsALS OF ATTAINDERS.
. The Earl of LIVERPOOL moved the 0...1er of the
Day on the Bills presented yesterday, to rev • •he re.
spective Attainders of the• Earl of Mar, s•w of
John Francis Eiskiiie, Esri: of the Earl, of Kr..:-:.ure,
cestor of John Gordon, rsq. of the Eat lof •ivallau
and Perth, ancestor of James Diatom:mid, E.q..an,l of
Lord Baton Nairne, ancestor of William Nairie,Ebq.
and also for the reversal of attainder of the Earl of
Stafford.—The motion for the h ccond reading being put.
The Earl of RADNOR objected to the title of the
Bill respecting the Eatl of Nairne, which in his o;.iniott
did not sufficiently set fo:th the objects cf the Buil.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL, in reply, said that any
such deficiency in the title *of the Bill famished no rea-
son why their Lordships should not go to a second read-
ing : when Ole measure had proceeded to that stage, he
shou!d propose it to be referred to a Committee, in
which tl,e titie could be amended.

The Eirl of LAUDERDALE said, that he wished
to see the respective claims established by evidence be-
fore their Lordships, as, for anything the House knew,
they were about to do that which might prove injurious
to other claims, the assentors of which might hereafter
be found Petitioners for redress at the bar.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL did not wish their Lord-
ships to do anything at the present time which could
not he proved to have been done on former occasions
in similar circumstances; but he must say iot such Oc-
casions precedent and custom were the bes guides. If
it had been customary in such cases to exit-. e the va-
lidity of claims in the tisst instance, their Lordships
ought to do so now. If it were otherwise, as he believed
was the case in the restorations of Captain Fitzgerald
and the Earl of Doncaster, then, certainly their Lord-
ships ought to take the present Bills in their regular
course. He could only add, amidst all variations of
opinion, that he was willing to consent to the appoint-
ment of a Select Committee empowered to search for
precedents, and, if necessary, to call for evidence. He
had not introduced the present Bills lightly ; they were
framed with the consent and under the sanction of his
Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack; and who he
doubted not had made up his mind as to the result.
Viscount MELVILLE, in defence of the Bills, re-
ferred to the Act passed for restoring Francis, Dake of
Buccleugh. This Act even went further than the re-
storation of the family claims, for it recited all their
former titles which had been attainted and disputed. In
the Buccleugh case formerly, as it the Fitzgerald case
latterly, no proofs were ever sought for the purpose of
substantiating the claims on eit'hcr side.
Lord HOLLAND was desirous tltat the proceedings
of their Lot dships should be regulated by no other Loh:
than that of right reason ; and, upon this in inciple, he
was inclined to think that the claimants ought in the
• first instance to establi,h their tight. Ile recollected,
most perfectly, one occasion (the Fitzgerald case) to
which the Noble Viscount had just referred ; it was a
case in which lie felt much and deeply interested, and
perhaps too much so to investigate with strictness; bin
a distinction was to he drawn between a restitution in
"mood and this species of restitution in title. -With re-
spect to the Bill which went to reverse the attainder on
Lord Stafford, it had his most cordial approb Lion.*
The Earl of II A BROW BY defended tote menial e.
Lord REDESDALE was struck with tiie circum-
stance that one of the Bills (the Strathallan ciaim)'nbt
only went to restore, but supposed the descendant of
that family the rightful heir, and theteby set aside all
other claims, which supposition titer-Lordships might
be called to revere at thin'. own Bar; but in the•Buc-
cleugh case the claimant was allowed to be the legiti-
mate heir, and therefore there was no t2itf.culty in ad-
mitting his claim. He wished that the present Bills
might he referred to a Speci.il Committee, in order to
examine the recitals they centatined; for though he be-
lieved there would be no great difficulty in proving
those recitals, it was better to examine into them.
The LORD CHANCELLOR at considerable length
aescribed'the manner in which his duty had called upon
him to act in the present instance. All claimants to
Peerages were in the habit of api-lying in the first in-
stance to the holder of the Great Seal, who was ern-
powesed to call for evidence in support of such claim
or claims, but who never did call for such evidence un-
less in a very difficult case. It then became the duty
of an individual in his situation to advise the Crown to
apply to the Ilouse of Lords. If, after this, a Bill for
the reversal of attainder came authenticated to their
Lordships by the King's Sign Manual, the person so
claiming having applied to the Crown, he (the Lord
criancenui) ti,cii actsA/Trbil-trlrti—re.r4Wl•vaDa;&r.
in the present instance the applications for restorations
to family honours were made on the ground of the loyal
services and good conduct, for a loog series of years,
' of the descendants of those who had unfortunately for-
' feited them. He could only say, that the evidence on
'the part of the claimants had been subinizted to the At-
4orney and Solicitor General, both of whom recom-
mended, in consequence, the exercise of the restorative
power of the Crown ; and he hoped that their Lord-
ships would not be induced, on partial grounds, to ob-
struct the exercise of this prerogative of the Crown.—
Having said this much, he was clearly of opinion that
their Lordships would.oot act wisely if they neglected
to look into precedents on this occasion, though not so
as directly to interfere with the rights of the Crown;
and upou the whole, it might he better to ws;milate the
present cases to the Fitvieraid c.!se, in ,shish, if recol-
lection still served him, their Lordships trust leinember
that certain proofs were not required.
Learned Lord coocluded by ex viesin,
to agree with the suggestion of his Noble willing
ens
Friend (the
ds
EaTrlhoeflL:ailvieor
fp
Efoßr tpnQe
mittee to search for precedents. of SeIeCLCOM•
(5.:::::04t he thought
obvyerd.i eh uniform
(in i t .ol
beenm op
br as
observed
ice,
ordslapt. Brit it was per.
on st:ch occasions by their I.
iwtivili,cottlil,dasbefalarrabseltietecrotuolabdi
ialsce