Star.
London, England, 1817-02-22 00:00:00

tLese flings should have gone on so. long ; that the
oil should ever have then to such a height. Ainong
tliter things that had lately come out, was the corn
of the Mufristrates of one part of the metropo-
I„ that they c.nild not check disorderly houses in
ittir vicinity, because such houses being tinder the
en iron! of tf•e Board of Green Chili, they catild
qt .heir lief-I:+es renewed, in spite of all oppoeition
Rom ii.em. This WAS SIIJ to be the case with the
houses comrlained of in Charinr).cross and other
H • telt exceedingly interested in knowing if
Govertinteltt had any ire Wires in C9lltealplatirl
jetu:JeJ on these facts, to endeavour to cot rect the
eril complained of i was anzious to know what hut
b;.,11 d ire. He wi,ited not to take up the time of the
but there were One or two points connected with
on st hich he h.td touched the state of the
to which he was anxious to'ilireet the attention
1!:e Thr. fi st w.c-, the enormous increase of
comtitNl by cluidren : this he considered to
yttit m itt %arum; attest:ion of Parliament.

I.ezt w is. die st storm); rewards giv. n to Police
'jet r, for the apprehensien of off; ndoffs; It wu
u that all the Magi, rates and Police Officers
faith one single ezception) were decidedly of nonine
officer of punka was ever ar all influenced id
o,:g his evidence by the lope of obtaining the re-
sod. Thee ohjlczed to rewards being given, because
4,1 tiecriently attached discredit to the evidence
giro) by the ellicer. but all were satisfied that they
yrzr n:aJe them come forward agasnst improper
hers of prosecution. One individual (the ltecerder)
was sn delighted with their conduct ost such occasions
tut he wished them to be I urther rewarded than they

vile at present. The report, however, was not print.
,J when it came out that some of the officers had
km tempted, by the • rewards, to seduce to crime,
lbst thi y might betray their victims to pun;slunro; for
sake of them; and in the case of the men tried
v coining. four persons, it was found, ere concern-
! in consptinge to obtain a reward of £l5. by &ten-
:jog the 4ives of two of their fellow-creatures. He
not, when he mentioned this circumstance, ntean to
sign the opinion of those who believed the rewards
operated on the m;nds of the officers when they
ere giving their evidence. Hu was only surprised
,hat the system of the conspirators could have been
icted noon s s long, without being more known. He
concluded by recomm•nding the prayers of the Peti-
Oars to the !avowable consideration of the Hause.
The petition was then read, and ordered to lie on
aYe.

Sir S. ROMILLY next presented a Petition from
t'c inlabitants of New' Haggerstnee, in the parish of
8!. Leonard, Shoreditch, complaining of partiality on
the part of Sir D. Williama, Mr. Met coots, and other
Magistrates, in the licensing of ?oldie houses. They
cued, that a licence had been refuskd to a -house,
buid for a public-house, Which was much wanted in
their neighbourhood, and complained of various pat.s
thir conduct in nearly the same terms as the tor-
ter petitiorers. and prayed relief.
Mr. bA.THuxsT contended, that the Petitioners
bad their remedy in the Court of King's Bench. He
agreed with the Honourable and Learned Gentle-
min (Sir Samuel Romilly) that the question that
:rose on the conduct of the Magistrates was iinpor-
unt, es! as it affected the persons whtisobscribed to
tee Petitions, but as it related to our .general sys-
tem of Police. The Report of the Committee of lett
session had certainly brought strong charges against
the Magistrates of the disttict which had been re-
ferred tot but the Committee not having brought
their labours to a satisfactory conclusion, Ole Magis-
trates complaining that they had not been heard, the
course which the Honourable-and Learned Gentle-
man had proposed to take with these Petitions was,
is his opinion the best to pursue. The Honourable
Gentledim had wished to know what had been thane
by Ministers on the subject of the Report ? The first
step had been to lay the proceedings before the .Lord
Gilancellor, that he might consider whether there
were grounds to remove any, and what Magistrates ?
The Lord Chancellor had not thought there were
grounds to remove the Magistrates, and the subject
was nest submitted to the Attorney-General, that he
might see if there were grounds for a prosecution.
lies Learned Friend (the Attriney-General) had not
wen that there were. Having ststed this, it would
be seen that his Noble Relation (Earl Bathurs• ) had
done all that it was in his power to do; but he was
IlUthnriggd to state, that he was anxious the subject
should receive every possible investigation. It had
been expected that the Committee would be revived
in the present Session, and this it was thought would
afford an opportunity of establishing the charges
which had been brought foes.att, or of clearing up
the conduct of the Magistrates, it they had not been
guilty of the mal-exercise of the powers entrusted to
them. It was of great importance that it should be
ascertained whether they had been properly or im-
properly exercised, and whether they had or not to
guard against the future abuse of them. On these
points it would be for the House to determine when
the whole of the case was before them.
Mr. BENNETT commented on several parts of ,
the Report, which he, as Chairman of the Committee,
laid before the 11-:use, and thought that sufficient
reasons appeared to justify proceedings against at',
least one of the. Magistrates, Mr. Merceron, who
had convicted himself by his own evidence. He
complained of the conduct of the Magistrates in con-
tinuing a licence to the Duke of York public-house.
The Magiitrates of that quarter assembled since the
Report, and having collected all the publicans of the
division, the Chairman, Sir Thomas Williams, read
them a kind of lecture, warning them to preserve a
better chatacter in future than they had previously
I,ossessed. But were they improved since ? Was
the holder of the public-house under the name of the
Duke of York more guarded in his conduct ? Within
the last two days thieves were taken us that house,
which had been their usual haunt. He contended,
that the Lord Chancellor had not done his duty in
continuing some of those Magistrates in the Com-
amitsi n.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL defended the
conduct of the Lord Chancellor and of the Law
Oflicars of the Crown from the imputation of a dere-
liction of duty, on the principle that the Police Report
had been concluded. It was competent for any per-
tnit injured by the Magistrates to apply for leave to
°le a criminal- information against them but tin
Law Officers could net proceed to of in tio un-
goislied state of the Report, pardeulasly ass iey muss
147 e looked foram(' to the time wino they would