Star.
London, England, 1819-12-17 00:00:00

I 1

I

c'

I

•
"et,

. •

,' ,

I

II
i ~

r

~Yeomanry, and trampled under foot by the crowd ;.
and, when attempting to escape, he was pursued by
a soldier of the SStli, whose name he did not know,
from whom he received a bayonet wound in the
thigh. At the same time he was attacked by another,
whose blow he avoided only
_by throwing himself on
the ground. In consequence of the injuries he sus-
tained, he was since prevented from attending his
business, and, therefore, prayed relief.—The Petition
was ordered to be printed.
.. Mr. LAMUTON here took an opportunity of cor-
rectin' a mistatement of the Noble Lord (Castle-
reagh), on a preceding night. The Noble Lord, in
making out the case of disaffection in the County of
Durham, had then stated, that his (Mr. Lambton's)
Agent had dismissed several of his men from the col-
lieries for Oteir radical opinions. He had then told
the Noble Lord that he would inquire into the fact,
and having done so, he had that morning received a
letter in answer, from the County of Durham, which
he begged leave to read. The letter stated, that no
Radicals had been dismissed from his (Mr. Lamb-
ton's) employment, and treated the • report as a vile
fabrication. It also stated, that the men were never-
more peaceable, or more inclined to work; and, be-
sides, that as their yearly hiring did not terminate
until. the .sth of April, the Agent could not disthiss
them, even if he were so inclined.
Sir ROBERT WILSON rose to present a Petition
of a similar character to the two last. It was from
a person of the name of Thomas Barlow, who ap-
peared to have served in the army. The Petitioner
stated, that he was, without provocation, and with-
out notice, attacked, while peaceably attending the
Manchester Meeting, by a corps of Yeomanry, one
of whom advancing before the rest, he called out to
him for that forbearance which he himself had often
shown the enemy in the day of battle; but the Yeo-
man cut at him, and inflicted a severe wound on his
head: another blow, aimed also at his head, he par-
ried with his arm, and was wounded on the hand.
He stated, that he could not recognize the offender,
because he was disguised in a military uniform ; and
he hoped the House would consider a case of such
unmerited suffering and wanton outrage:
The Petition was lald on the Table.

Sir FRANCIS BURDETT presented a Petition
from Robert Lees, the father of John Lees, the un-
fortunate young man, on whose remains the Oldham
Inquest had been impannelled. The Petitioner de-
tailed the facts relative to the manner in which John'
Lees had come by his death; the proceedings of the
Inquest summoned at Oldham ; with the decision of
the Court.of King's Bench against its legality ; all
which particulars have been already before the Pub-
lic. The Petitioner stated, that no redress could be
obtained by applicationio the Courts of Law, and
prayed the House to administer that justice which was
not to be obtained elsewhere.

Mr. V. BLAKE opposed the Petition, and said
that it and similar Petitions contained most unfounded
assertions. It was not true the Petitioners had been
excluded from the proper mode of legal redress, it
was in their power to move for a criminal informa-
tion against the Magistrates in the Court of King's
Bench, but they had not done so ; that was the ob-
vious course, and as that had not been adopted, it
could be alleged with truth,: that the Courts of Law
were open to those who could prove themselves
aggrieved ; and as to the application to the- Court of
king's Bench for a Rule to shew cause why a Man-
damus should not issue, against the Coroner, it had
fallen to the ground, because the Jury was illegaL
Mr. BROUGHAM said, that the. Court of King's
Bench • always refused an extraordinary application
for a mandamus when tLe case was not clearly =del
out by the parties. The Coroner had asied illegally
—he would not charge him with having wilfully
done so—and, therefore, no criminal information
would lie. But the Coroner had the benefit of his
own wrong--.-the taking the view and other proceed-
ings had been irregular. That idea was first thrown
out by the Court of King's Bench, and the Coroner
jumped at it—(Hear, hear). " 0," said he, "I. have
acted illegally—l can't proceed with
,the Jury—l
must put a stop to any further inquiry ;" and then
(said Mr. Brougham) the People were told that they
were unreasonable and clamorous, because they were
not satisfied with such a mockery of justice—(Hear,
hear). He did not wish to say any thing disrespect-
ful of the Courts of Law, no one had more respect
for them when they did acts of justice; but when
there was collusion, he would not say intentional or
criminal, but that which had the erect of the gross-
est and most wilful collusion, by allowing the Coro-
ner to profit by his own illegality, in such a case, it
would be a shame if the People of England were
satisfied—(Hear, hear). The more the facts were
known, the more reason the People had to be any
thing but pleased. Inquiry appeared to be stifled by
the votes of that House, but it could not be stifled
unless better arguments could be advanced than any
yet offered., It was, to say the least of it, a most un-
fortunate fatality, that the Grand Jury at Lancaster
had not permitted the question concerning the Man-
chester affair to go to a Jury of the Country. Their
verdict, however it went, whether for or against the-
Manchester Authorities, would have certainly had
the effect of giving more satisfaction to the Public
than they could have received from the decision of a
Manchester Judge, from the proceedings on the Co-
roner's Inquest at Oldham, or the subsequent con-
duct which was adopted atWarrington—(Hear, hear).
To crown the whole, there was their the adjournment
of the Inquest, and then the singular reason set forth
for not resuming the Inquest, after the previous pro-
ceedings had been decided to be illegal. He would
not entrust himself with depicting the consequences
likely to arise from all these transactions ; but thus
much he would say, that they tended to make the
breach between the People and the constituted Au-
thorities at Manchester, if not remediless, certainly
wider than otherwise it would have been. Then fol-
lowed those numerous exaggerations which went to
create so much unfounded alarm. One Noble Lprd
had asserted he could vouch for the fact, that out of
150,0:)0 persons in a certain district, 100,000 were in
arms. it was never for as moment thought of, whe-
ther this wa. physically impossible or not, though'
ril-on the face of it its absurdity was glaring. An-
other person said, that no fewer than sisteemheu-
sand Colliers had arms in the North, and indeed it
would seem that these Alarmists were-
- " Arcadia ambo
" Et lantare parer, et reapondere parati"—
all prepared, as if in chorus, to answer one another,

i • s
!!7