The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-08-09 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS.-TUESDAY.

Lord DUNCANNON moved the second reading of the
soldiers' pensions bill.
The Duke of WELLINGTON expressed his approbation of
the bill ;he thought it of a beneficial character.

The bill was then read the second time.
The highway rates bill was read the second time:
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND.

Lord BROUGHAM brought forward his resolutions on the
administration of justice in Ireland, founded on the immense
mass of evidence, now forming four thick folio volumes, ad-
duced before the lords' committee "on the state of Ireland
in respect of crime ;" and of which committee his lordship
was an active member. In bringing forward his resolutions,
he earnestly disclaimed being actuated by any party or per-
sonal views ; he declared that he was stimulated not by the
intention of becoming a personal accuser, but by the desire
of vindicating the constitution,, maintaining the royal pre-
rogative of mercy in its judicious exercise, and sustaining the
ascendancy of the administration of the law ; he was not the
engine of party feelings, or the instrument of party attack.
His lordship then, in lengthened and forcible illustrations
from the evidence, urged that, in the main essentials of the
due administrations of justice, " in Ireland is is not as it is
in England." In the performance of this work, his lordship
occupied nearly three hours and a half.
The Marquis of NORM ANBY replied, speaking also at great
length. He strongly complained that the charges had not
been preferred in 1837, when his recollections of the transac-
tions would have been much fresher, instead of now. Also
of the evidence adduced before and taken by the committee
as partial and unfair. He urged that the committee ought to
have called and examined the " local inspectors," persons
whom he had always consulted, and who were best acquainted
with the merits of the several cases. He strongly denied that
he had ever treated the judges of Ireland with any disrespect ;
on the contrary, he had held many and fall communications
with them, and frequently had obtained their concurrence in
the course he took.

Lord MELBOURNE followed, and said that he had not had
the opportunity of fully perusing and considering the evi-
dence ; and that he considered such must have been the case
with most of their lordships ; that the resolution unneces-
sarily cast a stigma on the government; and that he, there-
fore, moved " the previous question."

Lord WHARNCLIFFE defended the conduct of the com-
mittee and the course of inquiry pursued. .
Lord PLUNKET spoke, and took an extended view of the
question, also urging that their lordships could not have fully
read and weighed the evidence, adding, as additional argu-
ment against deciding now, that it was not unlikely the in-
vestigation would be resumed.
The Earl of RODEN denied that there was any fair reason
for calling on their lordships to suspend their judgment on
the ground of there not having been time to pursue the
evidence. As to Lord Plunket, he was a member of the
committee, and received, or could have had the evidence day
by day to peruse. The resolutions were sustained by the
evidence—evidence that the complaints he had ever made re-
garding the government of Irelandwere true—and which more
strongly than ever convinced him that truth was great, and
must prevail.
Lord HATHERTON defended the government of the Mar-
quis of Normanby, and asked in what part of the bulky
volumes was there any evidence of mischief resulting from
the government and proceedings of the noble marquis?
Lord STUART DE DECIES defended the government of
Lord Normanby.
Lord BROUGHAM replied. He had not complained of the
law ; his complaint was that the law was not executed.
The house at nearly half-past three o'clock divided. The
numbers were—for the motion 86, for the amendment 52
majority in favour of the resolutions 34.