Star.
London, England, 1818-02-26 00:00:00

INDEMNITY BILL.

The Duke of MONTROSE (in pursuance of the
notice given on a former evening), presented a Bill,
the title of which, being read is a low tone of voice
by his Grace, appeared to be for indemnifying all
persons who acted under the authority of the two
Acts passed in the last Session of Parliament, (for
enabling his Majesty to secure and detain persons
whom he shall suspect, &c.) in the arresting and hold-
ing such persons in custody, &c. The Noble Duke
obsel ved, that he should now merely move that the
Bill be read the first time, and then to have it printed;
and, if the prints should be ready by that time, he
wcallti move the second read* of the Bill on Fri-
day, when he should offer some observations upon
the nature and effect of the measure.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE, though he dis-
claimed any wish to enter into aught of discussion
upon the very important subject of which the Bill
formed a part, felt it his duty thus early to observe,
that a very considerable constitutional dnculty pre-
sented itself to their Lordships, under the circum-
stances, entertaining a Bill of this description. The
Bill, from what he uaderstood from the Noble Duke,
was what was called an Indemnity Bill, and the ef-
fect of which, coupling it with the general circum-
'stances of the case, wculd go to indemnify his Ma-
jesty's Ministers and persons acting under their au-
thority, for every act that had been done by them
during the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act ;
and perhaps it would be attended with a farther ef-
fect. Under what circumstances was the Bill brought
forward ? Their Lordships knew that the Commons
House of Parliament had appointed a Committee,
and it could not yet be known what the nature and
effect of their. Report may be. This they were not
to presume to know ; nor to presume that such Re-
port might not contain matter which might render it
tit, in the opinion of the Commons, to ground" an
linipeaconicnt against Ministers. He had mac than

once heard a Noble and Learned Lord then present,
with great force, learning, and ability, protest against
their Lordship? deciding previously upon a matter
vasicls may subsequently come before them in their
judicial capacity. in the present case, it was clearly
possible, that the Report of the Commons may pro-
duce that which May come before their Lordships in
their judicial capacity. Upon these grounds, were
there no other, the proceeding now before the House
was one unfit to be adopted, as involving points upcm
which it was fully possible they might have to decide
upon in their judicial capacity. The case was one,
therefore, in a constitutional point of view, of the
highest importance ; they should at least wait until
the Report of the Committee of the other House of
Parliament was made. He felt it his duty to offer
this powerful constitutional objection to the measure
now proposed, for the serious consideration of their
Lordships.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL could not acroid feel-
in some degree of surprise at such an objection, and
oifellb pointedly urged by the Noble Berl. If chili
Noble Lord's objection; he said, was good for any
thing, it would be good against the appointment of,
a Committee by their Lordships. The papers coin•
municated to the House by the command of the
Prince Regent were referred to a Comniittee, un-
doubtedly for the purpose of bringing under their
Lordships view the conduct of the Executive Go-
vernment, as to the manner in which the powers
vested therein, under the Acts of the last Session,
were exercised. If it were an objection that their
Lordships could not proceed legislatively in such a
case, because it was possible the other House of Par-
liament may have to proceed by impeachment, nume-
rous other operations upon which they so frequently
proceeded and acted upon, could not be entertained.
The Committee had reported their opinion after a
deliberate examination as to what the conduct of Go-
vernment had been, and there appeared enough upon
the face.of that Report to warrant the introduction
of a Bill upon the subject. Whether the Bill now
proposed for the consideration of the House was such
a Bill as was fully warranted by the Report, was
another question, and fit matter for discussion, not
now, certainly, but when the Bill should come un-
der their Lordship? consideration, on the usual stage
of the second reading. No solid reason whatever
could be urged against the Rosie proceeding in the
way proposed, and, in 'his opinion, no one instance
could be adduced of the House haring. acted in the
way suggested by the Noble Earl. N%ith respect to
the objection founded on the possibility that the Com-
mons being of opinion that the Executive Govern-
ment should be impeached, or at least censured, for
their conduct, under the Acts of last Session, it mar
'be a reason, eventually, for their throwing out a Nil
of Indemnity so sent down to them, but it could
,novrer operate as a reason against a Bill of the kind
originsitlfilwith their Lordships, if deemed advisable.
If the Noble Earl referred back to the 'records, he
would find, not very long since, that a Bill of the
triad applicable to Ireland was introduced into this
House. But he must set his face against the doc-
trine that their Lordship? House ought to hesitate
with respect to a measure of Legislation, or that it
was bound, because the other branch of the Legis-
lature had appointed a Committee of Inquiry to stay
its proceedings until it should be known what the
other House were doing, which, by the bye, they
could not know, eacept by its votes, which were far
from being regularly in their power to call for with
certain effect. There could be no pessible ground
for that Hou-se suspending its legislative power,
wherever it had sufficient ground to proceed, on the
mere consideration of what may be done by the other
House of Parliament. The Bill presented by -his
Noble Friend may therefore be now read the first
time ;. and on Friday the second reading may very
well take place. And he must again repeat, that he
saw no reason why the House should not exercise its
undoubted functions in the way proposed, according
to the long established practice of this brush of the
Legislature.
Lord HOLLAND strenuously supported the ob-
jections urged by his Noble Friend against their
Lordships proceeding, as now proposed, which he
censured as inconsistent, until they should know whe-
ther there may to: be impeachable matters against
his Majesty's Ministers, laid before their Lordships
for consideration, The Noble Earl's idea of the Com-
mons having the power to reject such a Bill, it sent
down to them, was not a sufficient ground for their
proceeding in a case with respect to which they pos-
sibly might be called upon to decide in their judicial
capacities, with all the formalities belonging to an
impeachment. In the event of such an alternative,
and the new proposed line pursued by them, could
they think it possible that the people of England
should deem their acquittal of persons so charged,
to be impartial and just ; especially when their Lord-
ships had Lreviously decided, as legislators, that
those persons ought to be indemnified ? On these
grounds, he certainly concurred in the opinion of his
Noble Friend, and farther, he thought that a mea-
sure of the kind should be suffered to originate with
the other 110u..e cf Parliament.
The Duke of 'IONTROSE shortly expressed his
conviction, that the House should not hesitate to pro-
ceed in the way proposed, because something of a
different nature may be done by the Commons, tend-
ing to affect the persons who were the objects of the
measure. Under all the circumstances, and with a
visor to what had already occurred in that House in
reference to the subject, he deemed it preferable that
the Biil should originate with their Lordships, and
therefore he felt it his duty to move that the Bill be
now read the first time.
Lord HOLLAND shortli expressed his dissent
from the conclusions of the Noble Duke, and said he
should, for form sake, move as an amendment, that
instead of " now," the Bill should be read the second
time in ten days.
This eropositica gave rise to a somewhat irregular

the .
Repcn
not be
would

It
F!
ure
How,

~ . A V•i .. .1.• •
• ‘ I
,-. • '
i .
r• ....„ .
..„‘,.„4...„..,,,
i ,- A C '.\ \' :a' ' 4 "
• • 4 • ) 4;
A i 1
..
(.4..., ,---- .„ i 0.:,-, ,
~L • _ - •,,e . A
,----2 '
<.•./.0,,_ , 1.,
.:,4 nu •?.s.fra
. ,
, •
SO oit-je .le///4e4-0
iii t'' '
......reeeeme,....,,,,......50,e,.......enee,...................eiA
PRICE SEVEN••PR/4Ctee,
eee5ee5ee:=,......,.......,....T001iw00re55e5t III.
norersation, chiefly across the table, in wich stave-
dof their Lordships joined. The discussion piaci- l' - •1
11
ally turned upon the question, which wouldon, be !ha s
.
Lost p or eligible days for the subsequent stages
I. the Bill i' Various rather distant days were sub , •
eased. Lordfiolland modtfied his amendment from I ' 41 I
Is days to that day se'nnight ; and the Earl of Li- •I. ,
1
erpool, in the course of whit passed, 'took occasion ,
• observe, that no long"delay in its progress ought
f : .• be adopted; because, it was material that if the ,
ill should pass at all, it certainly should pass previ- I ' • I . •t
adyy to the Recess. . - t
In the result, the amendment of Lord H lot LAND i
•
,
US negatived, and the Bill ordered to ba read the
rat time forthwith, and to be printed for the use of 3
reit Lordships. s i
The Lords were ordered to be summoned for 'sl-
ay, when the immediate understanding seemed to he, •
fiat the Bill would be proposed for the second finding.
The ReportOf the Committee of the commons, on
• '
• -.1. t'
di.ola alp Chimney-sweepers Regulation Bill was I
minded, end ulitdr had been corrontsniestretteiedisfsee,- ' ~ • - 1 1 I 4
.ordships, was, on the motion of Lord AtlcKtawn, t. 1 '
rdered to be printed, and the House adjourned till
riday.
1 t 1
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The second reading of the Steam Boat Bill was postponed till
,fondly. .
Sir S. ROMILLY presented a Petition from a person of the
ante of Edward Townshend, complaining of great abuses in the
xecution of the 1: inkrupt Laws.—Ordered to be referred to
ii he Committee on the Banks opt Laws.
Lord K I ILIC WA LL presented two Petitions from the Ter.- . .
crs in the county of Denbigh, praying for the repeal of the Il
..,rather Tax.-o,dered to lie on the table. ...
Ma r. iilairtse (from the East India Horse) presented cer-
1
,
ain Regulations made by the Government of India, according
u Act cf Parli unent.—Ordered so lie on the table.
lilt;. BA trot; e„, from the Royal College of Sureions, presented
accounts of the Eves paid by Surgeons takieg oat their certiti- .
ates.—Ordcred to he printed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that
he Houk on its rising should adjourn over to Friday.
. ,
Mr. CA LCRA FT wished to know if it were tins intention cf
lie Noble Lord to bring in the Army Estimates on Friday. The •
Report of the Fiaance Committee On the Army Ettintates woniel •
•
tot be out till tomorrow, and he therefore thought Gentlemen
would hardly have time to make themselves inaiters of it to en-
er upon the discussion of the Estimates on Friday. ,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the printed (
rt
Repo would be in th: herds of Member: earl/ to-morrcw.-
...
, I
Fe ens sure there WWI no •.v..;ti on the part of Mieiens. to force
to the discussion preniaterely. At the same time t::e fie!ise It •
could feel that it was in:voltam that the !,utiny ULU shwa/a be
wrought in soua, end he thought the Hoes: tould he,e no oh-
eetion to LAC hot() their consideration such parts of the Esti-
notes as ,ri'ht rot be comprehended in the Report of tie 14-
Luce Committee. I i
Nis. CA I,CRA E'l' had only wished to know whothcr or not
I
.t was likely the Arn.y Estimates would be brot.plit foisv-rd on
Friday. Fur his own part he bad no objection ledivi.ll.:_lly :o
urge against their coming on Cla that day, but be had wished thi i
1
House to know what was 'mended. •
The 1110d02 for 9C13 adjmirtunset to Friday was carried. - - !.
The Clergy officiating in Jails' Bills was rm.. a t`alid time, ye i •
and passed.
si : i ,
The Waters Tilde/inky Rill went tifrongh a Cemtrittee, ei*
4 -,.:
Report of which was ordered to be received on Friday. ,, „, : ,.
Lord FOLKESTONE press teal a Petition from the Inhable
tarts of a parish in the northern part of Glasgow,in favour of Far..i 4i •
liarn.nn.ry Reform ; which was read and ordered to be printed,
The house went into a Committee on the Scotch Asinavitn .4
LiLi
licensing Act, in which certain Resolutions were agreed to.— I
The Report was ordered to be received on Friday. i.!A ,
CRIMINAL LAWS.
Sir S. ROTILLY rose to move for leave to bring i
in a bill to repeal so much of an Act passed in the i 44
10th and 11th of King William 111. as went to take 1 f
r
away benefit of Clergy from persons convicted of
stealing-in houses shops, stables, &c. to the amount
of five shillings. It was not necessary that he should
say much on the present occasion, as a very strong . •••• •
a. ?-
opinion had been manifested on the subject, to which .
'• it i
he wished to direct their attention, both in the pre- •I- I) ,
sent and in the last Parliament. The bill he wished •11 lit
to bring in had already paised through that House •
four times, twice in this, and twice in the last Par-
liament.
On the last occasion of its being brought
in, it passed through its several stages without meet-
ing
with a word of opposition, though it had subse- , •
quently been lost in the Lords. Under these circum- '•
stances be had little to say on again bringing for- , •
ward a measure which had been so repeatedly before ,
1
them, but he thought it right briefly to shew them
• '• •
what was the state of the administrations of justice to
at present with respect to those crimes, which should a.
be punished capitally as the law now stood. The -,"4
offences which this Bill would affect, were at present
punishable with death ; but the law, so far hack as 'I .4.
• -i(
the Returns extended, namely, to 1805, had never • 1;
• •
been carried into effect. In the space of twelve years,, i '
from 1905, there had been (.5 persons indicted, and
of this number •113 had been capitally convicted, I .
and out of these 113 criminals not one had Leen 4
executed. In :165 cases the Jury had brought in the
parties guilty of a simple larceny. The severity, of
the punishment attached lay law to the oilence had ' ,
the effect of inclining Juries to lean in favour of the
prisoner, notwithstanding the oath they had taken, and It ' ,
this he conceived to have a inn ;t immoral tendency. 1.
although Blackstone had said it was pet fcctly proper
fora Jury to reduce the value of an article from its
nominal price to that which it bore at the time the
Act was passed. As he had rne.:tioned how the law , 11
had been executed under the Act of the 10th and 4,
11'.h of King William, he wculd now state what the i
administration of justice had Lien under the law ter , '•
punishing stealing in a dwelling-house to tic arnt,...nt 1
of 40A. From 1806 to 11516 there had been ICI 7
persons tried—nut of this :lumber 21;3 had,been up i:, • I
tally convicted, but hot (awl) Id been executed. In tte
v.a r ltilfi, 131 persons had been tried, forty-nine ,11,
had been capitaliy convicted, and one criminal had -
been executed—(hear, hca.--, hear.) That out cf
1,••••:4 pea-"as indicted for stealing in a dwelling. i
''
hot:::.• to the amount cf 41.1 a:. but one inilividual had 1 '
suffer.A. In all other cases, with :Ile exception cf t/I 1
::,-12, the Jury had brought in the party guilty tt
,stea;i4lg, but not to the amount of -19 s. The pr;:-.... t
' chile .actin upon by th",•:: to whom .....:le adniimstra,
Zion of justice sv..ts oontitied, in cases cf frauditle .t
lia nkitt:stcy and for ere, was preciscle opposite to ?"
I,
• , th.tt adoptcd toll: tc•i,c,..l. 1.,.• I:.at.: C.46...1Cca of v. 4,02
1 q 't
la.

•+~ ;r .

be bed just spoke& • In ewes of 644 .and frau-
dulent bankruptcy is was judged improper ever to
pardon unless some particular circtunstancet,
ip the prisoner, should transpire. In the
orwthibb he 'had first spoken the sentence was
never executed, unless circumstances of peculiar a
cevation• were proved against the prisoner. Id g-
caset, he contended, the severity of the law
operated against the administration of justice,
—Within the last eighty-five years there:had been
. but font convictions for fraudulent bankruptcies.—
Yet it was known that numerous persons were an-
nually defrauded by bankrulits, who calmly pesolved
to let the offenders escape with impunity, 'because
there was no alternative between this and
.thedding
their blood. Forgeries had formerlyeseen uniformit
. punished with death, but there had been such a great
increase of forgeries of late years, in consequence of
the great addition made to our paper circulating
medium, that it had been found impossible to carry
the sentence of the law into effect in every case. In
most cases, it was true, the law had been executed,
but still, from the uncertainty of punishment which
had thus been introduced, all the benefit of the se-
verity of the law was lost. The feeling of the pub-
lic was against the severity of the punishment, yet
many painful examples had been thought necessary.
That very day two lads, the one 17 end the other
18 years of age, were to have been executed, but
owing to the exertions of a worthy Magistrate of the
City, who was also a Member of that • House, •and
an Honourable Friend of his, they had been respited
for a week. If sanguinary laws did not prevent
crime they produced the most injurious effects. Not
only were the lives of the victims wasted,. but the
impression which such scenes made on the specta-
tors was not that which it was desirable to produce.
This had been stated in stronger language than any
he could use by Mr. Burke, who, speaking of the
policy of punishing political crimes on a, great num-
ber of persons, had said, " Such exhibitions only in-
crease the ferocity of men, and teach them to re.
gard their own lives, and the lives of others, as of
very little value ; whereas, it should be the great
policy of a Government to make them feel that both
are of importance in the eye of GoD, and that they
should never sacrifice, or even hazird them, but in
c snformity with those rules prescribed by morality,
Old under the direction of the law." He considered
tie exhibition which had been made of the wretched
man who had committed suicide in Newgate, from
the accounts he had read in the Paper of the day,
to be highly objectionable—(hear, hear, hear.)—His
bloody and mangled corpse, it appeared, had been
exposed to public view, with the instrument of
death suspended over him--(hear, hear, hear.)—
Such an exhibition before a crowd, partly made up
of women and children, could net but produce the
most unfavoura'sle impression on them. Besides, he
had to remark, the Sheriff, or whoever had done
this, had no authority for taking such a course. All
the law directed where a verdict of felo de se was
given; was that the body should be buried in the
highway, and those who made the exhibition to
which he had just alluded, had no right to take upon
themselves to pronounce a man who had not been
tried, to be a murderer, and to dispose of him by
the hands of the executioner. There was little or no
doubt that this man had been guilty of the murder
for v-hich he was to have been tried, but still those
who had him in custbdy hid no right to make an
exhibition of his wretched remains, that should be
at once disgraceful to the country, and injurious to
• the ch.uacter of the people. Such conduct had been
justly reprobated in stronger and in better taints than
any he could use, by a Right Honourable Gentle
man now no more (Mr. Sheridan) when the body of
Williams, the supposed perpetrator of the murders
committed in Ratcliffe igtway, some years ago,
was exposed in the same manner. He then moved
to bring in a Bill, to repeal so -much of an Act
passed in the 10th and 11th of King William HI. as
went to take away the Benefit of Clergy from per-
sons convicted of stealing in shops, &c. to the amount
of. ss. or more.
Mr. JOHN SMITH corroborated the statements
which had been made by the Learned Gentleman
with respect to the numerous fraudulent bankrupt-
cies which occurred in every year, and the increased
number of forgeries which had occurred of late years.
He further remarked, the House were not aware of
the many cases in which .forgeries were committed
where the business was given up on account of the
severity of the law. To guard against the effects
which pity for the individual produced in such cases,
he had belonged to an association formed for the
purpose of bringing such offenders to justice. Pity,
however, prevailed over all their arrangements, and
their union had been of no avail. He supported
the Motion.
Sir J. NEWPORT supported the Motion, and
hoped the Bill would pass into a law.
Leave was given to bring in the Bill.
10•11 AN ISLANDS.

Sir C. bIONCE said, by a Treaty concluded be-
tween the four Great Powers of Europe wfio were in
Alliance at the close of the late war, the lonian
Islands were placed under the protection of Great
Britain, and it was in that Treaty stated, that a
Constitution should be framed for them. The nature
of the Constitution framed for them, it appeared to
him, could not but be highly interesting to the coun-
try, and to the English Parliament. Ile wished to
know, as he understood the Constitution had been
framed and ratified, if it were intended to submit it
to the House.
Lord CASTLEREAGH stated that which had
been done, to have been done in conformity with
the prayers of the inhabitants of the lonian Isles.—
The Constitution was framed, ratified, and in ope-
ration, but he had not received the commands of the
Prince Regent to lay it before the House.
Sir C. MONCK gave notice, that on Tuesday he
would move for an Address to the Prince Regent,
praying that the Constitution framed for the lonian
Isles might be laid before the House.
STATE PRISONERS.

Sir WILLIAM BURROUGHS moved for an Ad-
dress to the Prince Regent for a return of all the
persons arrested, committed, or detained on treaso-
nable charges, distinguishing those detained for high
treason from those confined on " suspicion of trea-
son: or for " treasonable practices," and also distin-
guishing the warrants by which they had been cons-

mitred. He also Moved for a return of the prisons
to which they had best► first committed, as also those
to which they bad been subsegnently removed, ald
the manner in which they had boss liberated.—The
motions were agreed to.

Maw warm •
Mr. MACDONALD wished' to know why a new
writ had not been issued for a burgess to serve in the
rooin of Mr. G. H. Rose, who, since his election, had
accepted the office of Clerk of the Parliament?
Lord CASTLEREAGH said he was not prepared
to answer the question, but would inquire into the
circuthgance which had prevented the writ from
being rPozed•for. As yet he believed the individual
mennoned lied done no act which, in point of form,
proved that he had accepted the office which had
b-ri mentioned.

Sir M. W. RIDLEY begged to state, that he un-
derstood the person who had been mentioned had
I named an individual to act as his deputy. This
prove 4 that he had accepted the situation of Clerk
of the Parliament ; and he (Sir M. W. Ridley) would
therefore move, that a new writ should be issued for
Southampton.
Lord CASTLEREAGH had no knowledge of the
appointment of a deputy.
The Motion for a new writ having been put from
the Chair,
Lord CASTLEREAGH moved that the debate on,
this question should be adjourned to Friday, that
time for inquiry might be afforded.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT argued, that as no docu-
ments or proofs, or inquiry were called for when a
Member accepted the Chiltern Hundreds, and a new
writ was moved for, so none could be necessary now,
and therefore it was not necessary to adjourn the
question over to Friday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had
as yet not heard any Member say that he knew of
his own knowledge that the Honourable Gentleman
who had been mentioned iiad, since his election, done
any act to prove that he bad accepted the Office in
question. At present they had no facts before them,
and what had been stated came in the shape of a
mere surmise.

Sir M. W. RIDLEY said he had had the informa-
tion on authority which he could not doubt, that
Mr. Rose had appointed his deputy. Nothing but a
mere form was wanting to induce the Chancellor of
the Exchequer himself to move the new writ. The,
Honourable Gentleman, however, as he had had the
office in reversion, must be considered as having ac-
cepted it, as nothing to the contrary had appeared. '
Lord MILTON reminded the House, that for-
merly, when Gener4l 13eitie was supposed to have
become Earl of Lindsey, a new writ was issued ; but
some doubt having arisen whether he would actu-
ally succeed to that title, the writ was superseded,
and the House sustained no inconvenience. In the
present instance, the House had long been deprived
of one of the Representatives of the People. As the
office was held in reversion, he thought it ought to
be reganifed as having been accepted.
Mr. ABERCROMBY thought, as the office was
held in reversion, the House ought to have been in-
formed before this by the Honourable Gentleman, or
some one for him, that he had accepted it. To omit
this was, in his opinion, censurable. His Honourable
Friend, however, would lose nothing by letting the
subject stand over to Friday, when, if the office
should not have been accepted, the whole question
could come before the House.

The debate was then adjourned to Friday.
Mr. MACDONALD said, he would now move
for another writ, to which he thought no objection
could be made. He moved that a new writ should
be issued for Christchurch, for a Burgess to serve in
the room of the Right Hon. George Rose, deceased.
The motion was agreed to.
BLOOD MONEY.

Dr. PHILLIMORE begged to inform the Houie„
that he was a Member of the Committee which had
been appointed to examine into the State of the Pri-
sons in the City of London; and that, in visiting the
prison of Newgate on Monday last, he had received
information that three men, of the names of Brock,
Pelham, and Power, who had been tried at the Old
Bailey, and convicted of the crime of having seduced
three unfortunate Irishmen into the commission of a
capital offence, in counterfeiting the coin, in order to
get the rewards for the discovery and conviction of
such persons, had received a free pardon, and been
dismissed from that prison--(hear, hear.) He now
wished to know whether that statement was correct?
and whether any objection would be made to the
production of the
.judgment on which they were con-'
demned, and the free pardon by which they recovered
their liberty? He had heard, that on a previbus
trial, for a similar offence, a doubt had arisen in the
mind of the Judge who presided, respecting the ope-
ration of the law in such cases, and a point was re-
served for the decision of the twelve Judges, who
gave an opinion that the person in question could
not be executed ; and accordingly he received a free
pardon from the Crown. That opinion, it was stated,
had influenced the Officers of the Crown in the case
of Brock, Pelham, and Power, and they had been
discharged from custody. This was a matter which
required explanation; for he could not conceive any
thing more horrible in its consequences than that such
blood-hounds, who had been guilty of so enormous
an offence, should be let loose upon society, and have
the opportunity of seducing other persons into the
commission of crimes—{/fear, hear, hear.)
Mr. B. BATHURST said, that the information
which the Honourable Member had received, as to
the free pardon of those men, was perfectly correct.
The Law Officers of the Crown, how greatly soever
they might wish such criminals to suffer the execu-
tion of the law, had found that they could not be
brought to punishment. He was glad that this mat-
ter had now been agitated, as it was desirable that
the public should know the ground on which those
persons had been liberated. At the same time, he
begged to state, that the Law Officers had beer; de-
sired to take into consideration the necessity of intro-
ducing an Act for amending the law in that respect.
With respect to the opinion of the Judges, on which
these men had received their pardon, it did not exist
in such a shape as to be laid before re House. This
was all the explanation which he was enabled to give
to the statement of the Honourable Member.

Sir FRANCIS BURDETT could not refrain from
expressing his surprize that these villains had been
suffered to escape from the punishment die to their
crimes. He thought it impossible that there sitoulai

not be a law in our criminal jurisprudence to meet
Ruh cases of blood-money. ft was highly expedient
that the opinion of the Judgel on this subject should
be laid before the House; and he hoped that the Ho-
nourable Member would insist on its being produced.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that the case I
had been argued. in the Exchequer Chamber, and
the Learned Judges were of opimon that the offence
did not come within the ordinary laws of the land.,
He had since applied his mind to the subject, but he I
found some difficulty in framing an Act to reach such
cases. The prosecution against Brock, Pelham, and
Powet, had been carried on by the City of London
with great assiduity; and with respect to the Law
Officers of the Crown, he could assure the House,
that there never existed a more serious and anxious
desire of bringing persons to justice—(hear, hear, hear,
hear.)—But when the law came to be discussed, and
most ably and gravely it was discussed, some very
nice points arose, and the Learned Judges were of
opinion that judgment could not be executed. The
offence was enormous, and could not fail of being
held in the greatest abhorrence. The persons, he
admitted, deserved to suffer the most condign pa-
nishment ; but the law was defective ; and, under
such circumstances, they were pardoned.
Lord STANLEY was proceeding to offer some
observations, when
Lord CASTLEREAGH rose to order. There was
no motion, he said, before the House ; and no bene-
fit could arise from prolonging the conversation.