Star.
London, England, 1828-07-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 15.
VMS -v. LORD yA RIK/ROUGH.

Lord Chief Justice Bass attended to-day to give the opinion
of the twelve Jtirlgisfin this questioNwhich,wpi. argued -before
theii Lordships some days Since: it related to a piece of ground
from which the sea had gradually and imperceptibly withdrawn;
and the point was, whether soihfurmed by allusion belonged to the
Crown or to the owner of the lands adjoining The Coon of
Kipg's Bench, in which the case was tried, decided that soil thus
projected by allusion did not belong to the Crown, but to 'the ad-
joining proprietor. 'rite opinion of the twelve Judges concurred
with that of the Court of King's Bench, it being held that he who
bestows labour on land so recovered, bestows it on that which is
his own. and acquires a'titk to it by improving it.
The LOILD CHANCRLLOR and Lord ELDON expressed their'entire
assent in the opinion of the Learned Judges, and the decision of
the Court of King's Bench was accordingly confirmed.

OWNER V.

LOAD LORTON.

This was an appeal from the Court of Chancery in Ireland; and
one of great importance to the parties interested ; it was a suit in-
stituted in that Court to compel the performance of a marriage set-
tlement, but which deed of settlement had been destroyed during
the rebellion of 1798. The Court below thought there had been
sufficient evidence adduced to prove the existence of such an in-
strument, and that a copy produced was an authentic copy, and
decreed accordingly : this decision was appealed against.
The LORD CHANCELLOR addressed the House.—His
Lordship was of opinion that the judgment of the Court below
was a proper one, and therefore moved that it be affirmed; but, as
it was a proper case to be brought under their Lordships consider.
ation, it uught to be without costs.—The appeal was then dismissed
without cons.
The Royal Assent was given, by Commission; to forty-seven
public and private Bills, among which were—The Promissory
Notes ,(Scotland) Bill; the Stamp Duties Regulation Bill; the
Packet Vessels Regulation Bill ; the Corn. Laws Amendment
Bill; the Church Briefs Repeal Bill; the County Lunatics Asy
lulu Bill; the Malicious Injuries (Ireland) Bill; the Constabulary
Acta (Ireland) Amendment • Bill; the Manchester Improvement
Bill • the Registry Office (Ireland) Bill ; the Alehouse Licensing
.(Scotland) 13111; the Cities and Boroughs Poll Bill; the Prize
Money (India) Appropriation Bill; the Administration of Justice
(India) Bill • the Larceny Laws Amendment (Ireland) Bill ; the
Liverpool Charity Bill; and the Storey and Sussex Road Bill.
The Lords Commissioners were, the Lotto Clisircituata, the.
Earl BATHURST. and the Earl of SI;ArITISBULY.
The Earl of SHA FTESBURY presented a Petition from New-
castle-under-Lyne for the Abolition of Negro Slavery.
The Duke of GORDON presented a Petition from Inverness
against the Importation of Foreign Wool.
• uessmse TAWS THS COXISORS.
Sir A. Gaawr and other Members brought up the Pilotage Bill
and fie Savings Banks Bill, which were severally read a first time.
Mr. Snirosn presented an Account of the Receipts and Expen-
diture of Dover Harbour, front the 10th of October, 1826, to the
10th of October. 1827.
'The Market Towns in Ireland Watehiog and Lighting 13ill, and
the Holyhead Roads Bill, were severally read a second time. •
The Marquis WELLESLEY presented a Petition from the
Chamber of Commerce in Dublin against the Promissory Notes
(Ireland) Dill.
•The Disembodied Militia Bill and the Insolvent Debtors (India)
, Bill passed through Committees.
. The Charing Cross Improvement Dill was read a third time
mid' passed.
' ' The Duke of WELLINGTON begged to postpone the third
vending of the lrbils Promissory Note Bill Until Thursday.

•
FO R RIG N WOOL.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said, the House would re•

collect that when the Noble Duke at the head of his
Majesty's Government contented to a motion made by
~Noble Friend of his for the appointment of a Com-
mlttee .to inquire into the state of the Wool Trade, be
expressly stated that he did so with a view merely to
convince the nutiterous Petitioners who bad approached
the House that an addition to the duty upon foreign
wool would uot be beneficial, but injuriout
.to the Bii-
tish grower, and that his Majesty's Government would
not consent to the imposition of any additional duty.
The Committee had bet', appointed, 'and had entered
upon a moat laborious and complete inveitigation of
the. subject, and the evidence collected by that Com-
mittee was now be.frre their Lordships. In these cir-
cumstances, he begged to ask the Noble D..ke if his
aeatiments upon this subject had undergone any change,
or if-he still adhered to the opinion he expressed on the
motion for the'Committee? The most intense anxiety
prevailed among the woollen manufacturers upon this
•subjecr, and he trusted the Noble Duke would be en-
abled to give such an answer to his inquiries as would
hive the effect of removing it.
; The Duke of *WELLINGTON must say, that the
evidence produced before the Committee had not had
the effect of causing him to change his opinion in any
way whatever. His former opinion had rather been
cott6nned by what had occuitred before the Committee.

At the same time he must say chat a great mass of in-
• forMation had been villected, and had been promul-
gated so recently, that it would be improper for him to
pledge-his Majesty's Government to any course what-
_ eseri A great fall had taken place in the price of wool,
• but this was in some degree accounted for by 'the tide-
.44ioration of the quality. The improvements in agricul-
ture had been `attended with a great increase in the
- quantity r f sheep, and by the systL m of br4ding to in-
crease the size of the animal. Er,m these curses thew
was a considerable iticiease of the qu intity of wool, and
a-considerable deterioration of its quality. Both these
Circumstances weir deserving of consideration in any
attempt to account fur the fall in price. At the same
time a great change had taken place in vie habits of
the peopleol-this ciuntry, and cloth of the finer de-
seri' tions was inote,g.enerally worn. :Ilesedesciiptions
of cloths could not be rulculactured without a consider-
able intermiattne of foreign wool. In this, which he
believed to be the corioct-view of the subject, to lay
any additional duty upon foreign wool was not calcu-
lated ,to promote the intete‘t of the English grower,
and was not, in fact, calculated to produce any other
Effect than to transfer the woollen manutactoie to other
Countries, and to give encouragement to smuggling.
These Here his ideas upon the subject, and the ideas of
his Majesty. Government, and without pledging him-
self absolutely upon the present occasion, he thought
that the'manufact•itess need nut entertain any appre-
hension of change..
• Earl STANHOPE said, that if no method could be
found of relieving the distress of the British wool-
growers, the sooner they were apprised of this the bet-
ter, Ps they might then form their arrangements with
lespect to breeding,' and to the rents they would con-
-tract to pay. He held in his hand a petition which
forcibly descrilti4;the situation to which this class of
the. cotcmunityliatere seduced. _
Lord 1V DALE expressed ad opinion, that the
Noble Duke had formed a hasty opinion upon the sub-'
was as much a corn question as a wool question.
,juri STA NHOPF. presented a Petition from the Ownrrs and-
Occupiers of Land in tile neighbourhood of Mahon, praying fur
protection to Agricukure.
pr. Pourassuas and 'other Members, brought up the Cinque
Vent Nu.
Mr. &UUCP' presented the Fourth Report of the Commissienesi.
fur Buildingt.'hurches in the Highlands.
The DeiseofitlCHMOND, in rising to present dPeti.
tion from the. West Riding of Yorkshire, praying prom.
tioa for the won' grower, said. he had been absent when
the question was put by his Noble Friend to the Noble
Duke, He regretted that the question should so hastily
have been put in his absence. fle had heard what the
answer was,. and he thcasglit the Noble Duke could,'
hardly be aware of the gloom and-despondency which
that answer wootd occasion throughout the agricultural
districts'of England.. denied that ktritistr wool was
deteriorated. The Chairman of the Woollen Manulae-,

Ituras had.published a pant phlet.on'the subject, in which.]
he anode no mentiOn of tltis deteriorktion. o.hers of
the witnesses had been examined befOre, and then they
said nothing about deterioration. There could be no
doubt that this assertion of deterioration was the forlorn
hope of their case. He ertreatect the House to compare
the straight•forward and candid evidence of the British
farmers examined before the Committee, with thethpo
retical and speculitive, and he might saypreieriCating,'
testimony of the Leeds Delegates. The Noble Duke
had heard only one side ofthe question. it was now too
late in the Session for him topropose any measure, but
he felt he shotild not discharge his duty as tt Peer of that
Howe, if he did not heat Session bring fbrward area.
sure upon the subject.
LOT d WHA RNCLIFFE bad .through *Mere inadver. -
tence asked the question in the absence of the Noble
Duke. He contended that the evidence .4 the manu-
facturets was lull, entitled to credit. Bohr as regarded ,
an increase of duty, the wool gro%ierahad.nocase at
It would be more for neir own advantage to take or
the duty now in force.

Lord TEYN HAM cont-ndrd that the general interest
of agriculture required further protection toßiltish wool.
Earl STANHOPE that the manufacturing wit-
nesses before the Committee appeared not like men of
business, but like so many political economists. They
contended that the more foreign wool was imported,
the better for the British grower. This opinion the
Noble Baron opposite appeared to share ; but it was one
which appeared to him the most extraordinary and in
credible he had ever heard. It this were so, wool must
be entirely different from every other, commodity.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH had no wish to prolong
a discussion which had already been protracted to au
incnnvenient length; but, having attended the Com-
mittee, lie hoped as an impartial Member, he felt it his
duty to say, that the evidence of the manufacturers ar-
peared to him to be as good and as worthy of credit as
thet of the agriculturists. The Noble Earl had scarcely
done justice to the former description of witnesses. If
they had offered opinions which appeared to be drawn
from the doctrines of political economy, it was fair to
state that those opinions had been drawn frbm them by
the questions of the Noble Earl, who, in. conducting
the examination, appeared be himself a political eco-
nomist, but a political economist, as he had endeavoured
to convince him in the Committee, of a bad school.. It
was certain, however, that whin the manufacturing
witnesses spoke of the deterior:.t.on of British wool, they
spoke as practical' men. It was plain from therevidihce,
'that British wool" had deteriorated, betweesi 1817 And

1824., to such a degree, that its employhtikt in the Ma-
outactUre of fine cloths had been diminished holm Sixty-
bix to six parts.
Me Duke of RICHMOND would :repeat:hii,exfifes-
sion that tie manufacturing wimesies had beep.guilty
of prevarication. aresof them, fist lustoce, had broadly
stated that the farmers in Sussex would --noutiike the,
market price lor their wool, and on being pressed to
name a single farina who had -ierused, Shad no other
answer to give: than non mi ricer& They 'often
ap-
plied to change their answers to questions froth- no to
ye,, and from yes to no. They also applied; and-were
permitted to expunge large pasts of the evidence,, both
questions and answers. He had a right to state these
things to vindicate himself in having Made the charge
of prevarication. They took the liberty he had men-
tioned with questions put by him, but not with those
put by the Noble Baron opposite (Lord Wharnclitfe).
The Marquis of LANSDOWN• admitted the pro,
priety of allowing witnesses to alter clerical awl's, but
condemned the practice of allowing them to alter any'
'thing else, which it was very natural they should. wish
to do if they had the opportunity, and if they had said
any thing unfavourable to their own case.
Earl STANHOPE contended that their evidence did
not bear oqt the assertion ..that British wool had been
deteriorated.

The Eail of ROSSLYN agreed in opinion with' the
Marquis of Lansdown, that their Lordships could not
pay too much attention that the evidence given before
Committees was not perverted. •
The Marquis of SALISBURY referred to the evi.
dence to show that the fill of price was occavioned by
the introduction of foreign wool.
The Petition was then read and laid on the table.

Lord CALTHOII PE presented a Petition from Birmingham,
complaining of the Act of 1826 relative to the Currency.
Lord HOLLAND presented a Petition from Tewkesbury, in
Gloucestershire, against Slavery In, the colonies.. . .
The Marquis of LANSDOWN presented a Petition from the
Builders of Dublin, against the Doty on Glass.

BLTHAII PALACE.
The Marquis of LANSDOWN•would.make no-apo-
logy to rfiefflouse for the motion of which he bad given
notice. He thought nothing could jostify the destruc-
tion of remnants of antiquity, and of architnittral
beauty and 'grandeur, but the necessity of removing
them, in order to make way for great improvements;
such, for instance, as the St. Katherine Docks, and the
other improvements which had taken place io the me.
tropolis. Bat if they were occasionally called upon to
sacrifice such venerable relics, they ought so much the
more to protect them when no important public object
forbid their preservation. Now Eltham Palace was one
of those monuments of antiquity which recommended
themielves to their Lordships' protection, by the most
interesting historical recollections. It was a specimen
of British architecture of the reign of Edwird the.Pirst.
In this Hall Edward the Third had held a Parliament,
and it had been the scene of important transactions in
the reign of Richard the Second. It was a specinien of
architecture which modern architects had conaicended
to study, and in so condescending they bad dope well.
It was upon these grounds that he recommended his
Majesty's Government, IF they did not think proper to
restore it on account of the expense—and' ha did not
know what the expense would be—at least to Preserve
it as a venerable ruin. He should not be told of the
mischief which might bosoccasioned by its fall, for all
the mischief, if it should fall, would be, that it might
knock down a few pigsties. He hoped no objection
w,,uld be felt to lay the lease, and the other documents
fur which he should move, upon the table. 'However
the architecture of the presint day Might be admired,
he must be a. bold man who would say that modern
architects did not requit4 the severity of ancient models
to check their aberrations. The Noble Lord concluded
by moving, that there be laid before the House a copy
of any lease which had been granted of the lands be-
longing to the Crown, in the parish of Eltham, in
Kent ; and also 'copies of arty Report, titieh had been
made to the Commissioners of his Majesty's' Woods,
Forests, and Land Revenues, respecting the slim of
Eltham Palace.
The Duke of WELLINGTON had no objection to
the produCtion of the documents in question. The Go-
vernment had no alternative but to expend the public
money to the amount ut about 6,0001. in the repair of
this edifice, or to suffer it to be taken down. Certainly
in these times he apprehended Parliament-would be re-
luctant to sanction suck an expenditure.
Lord Viscount GODERICH said, that the Palace sit
Malaria was in-a most dilapidated.. condition, and bad
~been for many years used as a barn. Ithad been late

did tititt%lcuoitt when, and on the repretlntitiolitif the
tenant ithaielpen repaired from time to time to, keep
it standing. Last year ititaoeprqitinted that a slight
repair would be of no ult.. It is 44)t pig-sties only, as
the Noble Marquis had state47thatwouid be endan-
gered, by its fall ; thert.woulcfalso be some danger to
human life. Mr. Smitke had. been sent to examine it,.
and he reported that •it was impossible it could stand,
and that tO.repair it'would cost six thowsind pounds.l
It was afterwards thought that the roof, which was..
esteemed one of peculiar beauty, might he applied to,
.ome part or Windsor Castle, and Mr. Nash was sent
down to examine it. His report was unfavourable, on
account of the expense of removing it.
.He thought
there would be an indisposition on the part of Parlia—
ment to incur the expense, although, as an individual,
he would have wished to preserve a monument so ve.
alterable and beautiful.

Earl DARNLEY thought that the question was,
whether so valuable a monument should be preserved?
—it was penny wise and pound foolish.to stick at an
'expense of. 6,0001.
The motion was then agreed to.
SALE. OF GAME.BI'LL..
Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved the second reading of the Sale
of Game Bill.

The Earl of WESTMORLAND orposed the Bill, and moved
it be read a second time this day three months.

Lord FALMOUTH WAS satisfied that this Bill would
n' t prevent poaching. He drew that conclusion from
the evidence of Mr. Hunt and Mr. Drummond.` It Was.
proved I hat, notwithstanding guile in Scotland was sot
in the market, poaching had itscreased.to a great extent.
The witnesses generally,examined before the Com'osittee,
had proved that the Bill would not prevent poaching.
The Marquis of SALISBURY Supported the Bill.—
The measure originated in this House, and after con-
siderable discuAsion, was sent to the Commons, where
it was thrown out. It was again brought forward in
the Commons' with mete verbal 'alterations, and surely
the Houle would riot siiiiiiss it after they had consented
to the principle on 'which It was founded.
The Eatl of CA lINARVON said, he should support
,the Bill, because he thought it would destroy the mo-
nopoly and check the commission of crime. He had
some objection to the Bill, but that might be removed
in the Corn mime. He objected to tbe mode of:enforcing
penalties. He should move an alteration of the clause
respecting penalties, arihe Bill should go into a Com-
mittee, and would.theiffote say. no more upon the Bill
itritipmenz Stage. .
• Lord VtriIItNCLIFFE replied. This Bill would
Wank. us, as near the Scotch Law as possible. It was
in evidenfenthat game, was publicly sold, and therefore
it was clear, th,st,. in spite or their legislation, the higher
and the lower Sank; of society were engaged, the one
in buying, and she of in selling game. Wbuld they
then sittliere.and: 4tase to legalize lice, sale of that
which was 'publicty.scold.in spite of theicenactments?
It the Bill cosigner/ itself to the sale of game, continued
'obj•CiiOns would be made. to it ; and indeed it would be
very hard ,that Notblemen and -Gentlemen of furtane
should be enabled to realize large sums for their game)
whi:egssvners of a few acres should be deptived of that
advantage—(Hear. hear).
Lord FA LMOUTif explained.

After a tesr words Atom the Earl of ROULTN, the Bar was
cleared for a divistwi„wben.shere appeared for the second reading;
Present. Proxies. Total.
Content . .•• • 37 27 . 64
Non.coafenbs • ' 36 • 58 94
'lllljority —3O

The Bill was consequently lost. .
Their Lordships then asljourned,Att HAL, sin Salim sler.ocr.
'nOt)SE OF COMMONS.

. .
'The tti nose was sutitniinted, in the usual manner. to the,llmise
of Peers, to liar the Royal Assent given, by Commission, to
several Bills. ..
. . .
The SP.EAVt4; on IA return, informed the House Ow the
Royal Assent had fascia given, by Commission, to several,
*inch he enumeiated.—(S;e report of Lords). . • ...
Mr. SUGDEN brought 1n a Bill for Confolidating the Laid
respecting the Propertif of Infants and Liitiatics:=Reid sl first
time, and ordered to sise.printed and read it second. tune this (fat
three months.
• .
Sir J. 31 ACi wrostr; in consequence at the delay °rimier%
postponed Isle: moons' respecting the case of 7Mr. O'Reilly; till next
Session.—The Hon. Member prestnted'a Petition frotn Aberdeen-
shire against Slavery. •
Mr. F. BUXTON presented similar Petitions from Alton,
Dublin, Rodborough, Bandon, and Market Boswell. The Hon.
Gentleman stated, that Mr. Brougham was prevented making the
motion of which he )sad;given notice, on the subject of slavery, by
the state or Isis stealth,. but would bring the question before the
House early neat Session.
Mr. C. GRANT presented 4 Petition from the wool growers of
Inverness, for, protection against foreign wool. . . .
Mr. F. BUICTO/s1 'moved that an Address be presented to his
littijesty,''statitig that the natives of South Africa had always been
recogniied by the British Government as a free people, and praying
that his Majesty would give directions that they should be's° treated.
'He felt great satisfaction that the Secretary for the Colonies had
promised Isis support to the motion.
Sir GEORGE MURR NY said, it waibis antious desire that
the saute freedom should be extended to thosiatives of Africa that
was enjoyed by his Majesty's other 'objects. He cordially sup-
ported the minim).
Sir R. WILSON hoped that the condition of the Intlentoti
would engage the attention of the Government, as it required to
be placed itin•a very different footing.
The motion for the Address was then agreed to.
PREROGATIVI COURT OF CA NTRIORIRY.

Mr. HUMS rose and said, that he had intended to
present that evening the Petition (of which he had given
notice) complaining of the Right Honourable Member
opposite (Sir Jshn Nicholl), as Judge of. the Prerogative
Court of Canterbury. In consequence of not having
teceived certain affidavits necessary to substantiate the
case, he had been advised not to present the Petition that
evening, but to postpone it until to-morrow or Thursday.
Sir J. NICHOLL said, with some warmth, that he
was perfectly ready to meet the charge which the Hon.
Member for Aberdeen had thought proper to bring
forward against him. The Honourable Member,
after having circu.!ated a charge injurious ti his
character, ought not to keep the public mind in
doubt or suspense, or vs expose him to inconvenience,
by postponing it upon any such ground. He (Sir John
Nicholl) bad offered him to admit chit affidavits of the
alleged facts had been made ; and with this admission
he was ready to satisfy the House that his conduct as
Judge of the Prerogative Cotirt "had in every 'respect
been correct. The Hon. Member ought to have satis-
fied himself-of the correctness of the facts, before he
published his, intentions of bringing forward the charge.'
He (Sir John) had disposed of all the ibusiness of the
Court, and had intended to leave town to-marrow with
his family. -Heshonld take the sense of the House,
whether the Hon. MeMber should be allowed to post-
pone his motibn.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL argued that the
Hon. Member for Aberdeen had not stated sufficient
groundrfor postponing his motion.
Mr. HUME said, that if he had presented the Peti-
tion in question without giving notite,lhe:Right Hon.
Gentleman oPposite would have 'Ka& much: better
grotinds of complaint. " He was fully persuaded'of the
groUnds of the Petition, but he had thought it necessary
afterwards to call for the documents to establish the
case. He should have wished to iftratpone the case co
Thursday or Finlay,. if it had been; cativ,inient.to the
Right Hon. Penileman.. .The caie:he had to bang:foe -
ward was that of Voter Watts, ' shoemaker, of Dorhams,
who had been in gaol many years on the process of the

Prefogatiee Court, for not paying a petty Easterefer-
ing. He maintained that the Petition was just; and
that whatever claim was made for offerings, it aught
,to be fixed. In 1822, the petitioner had been cited be..
fore the Court, on the demand of what was called an
Easter Hen, or, in fact, a payment of three-halfpence
a pieg for,; c 4 drakiwtyriggavaily=l:ll.4**Onar
appeared before the CottrtA "parson for seven mcces-
sive days, when the Courtlierteimined. Ant.„rhit he
• •
Is a that .he was to pay, e give iIL3 afilnillran.
swer to the citationa•Tltislisiwei was to. be on stamped
paper, the stamp alone-costing five shillings, and the
whole suit being for teopence hal4peany—.(Hear, bear).
The Petitioner was sent back to prison for;contempt,
and, was confined 72 days.• and then discharged. - lie
brought his action in the Court of King') Bench, bat did
not succeed. He then appealed to the Clunter-Soiione
at Dutham, composed for themott pact 'f Clergymen,
who confirmed the decision against him, and he was
committed for the amount and expenses. amounting td
upwards 0f.25/.'Proceedings had since gone on, raisint
the expenses to upwards of I.IBW. The .Honourable
Member thought that these offensive exactions oughtmo
be abolished.
The Petition was brought up and read. The Fetid
tioner prayed ihat the Bishop ought to place in time
conspicuous part of the palish, the fixed and ,regular
Fees to be paid to the Clergy.
The Hon. Malaita said, the Petitioner had nowbeen
imprisoned four years; his wife died a few worths tsct,
and his family were ruined by these severe proceedings
against him.
Mr. Secretary PEEL knew nothing of the partionlar
case, and would suspend his judgment ur/ I he made
inquiry respecting it. But he would observe that the
refusal to pay this 101.1. might have inyolyedthe whole
property of the Clergyman in question. He should ob.
ject to the Bishop fiting .the rate of fees to be paid ty.y
the parishioners. He wouldinquire into the case, and 4-
he found it to be a case of hardship, the prerogative of
the Crown to administer justice in mercy woulti.ao doubt
be exerci•ed.

Sir 30 HYNICHOLL—Sir, the caie before the Howe
is one which has arisen out of a legal demand /made by
the Clergyman, and wilfully resisted by the Petitioner,
whose sufferings, if he has suffered, have been brought
upon himself. While upon my legs, i canrut avoid
making a few observations upon my o*n case. The
HOO. Member has given notice of a Petition, complain-
ing of my conduct as a •Judge, and heft I am in my
place ready to meet the charge. I am sure the /I,,n„e
will see the hardship of detaining me and my tafttly in
town, merely becausethe Hon. Member 1t4,1 been out
of town, and•has not had 'time to read the papersa!sm.
netted with'this chaige. Sir, the Hon. Member 00.ght
to take cate.and satisfy his mind that a charge was V. a
foutided. .

Mr.
_HUP4E-49 have satisfied my mind upon it:"

Sir JOHN NICHOLL continued—ft 1 say the lich
nourable Mernber t ulht to. satisfy his mind that there
was some, foundation `for the charge before be impugned
the ihatacter • cif a Getitle!nan who has tied a high
judicial situation for now twenty yearc, within a few
months, Without the slightest spot or imputition Upon
his character. He ought to pause and consider beim
he dragged. forward such an inaividu,l; and by doing
st.gave pain not only. to that individual himself, inn*
all those connected with him. Sir, every :Honourable
Member who bears me must feel that it is painful to
have such a charge publicly give n notice of openly
handed round the country, and now postponed: Itns
painful, I say, however triumphant the answer to. *
charge May be, becatise there are Assays to befoui.ul
Persons who will readily believe that there existedsoare
foundation for it.. kis grievous that there should'etist
a lion's mouth 'in this country, from • which charges
may be. brought -without-the slightest foe OM jolt. if
!the llots..Memlierdoes hot think proper to ptesent his
Petition;end bring 'inward his charge this eveningvlE
shall not remain any longer in tlw n to elect. it, but will
leave it altogether in the hands cf my friends.'
Mr. HUMEbegged the Right Hon. and Learned
Gentleman tti understand that thousgh the delay tybick
had occurred ;Wight be personal inconvenience to
himsef, yet that the cause of truth was paramount.*
all other considerations. He fully believed the slate.
ments contained in the Petition; but wished to substan-
tiate them before presenting it. :He supposed hell*
have a family as well as the Right Hon. and Leaned
Gentleman—e(a laugh)—and might suffer equal.ineaa-
venience in his attendance in the House. He considered
his time as important as that of the Right Ho_ nourable
and Learned Gentleman. He should state The facts,
end the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman ci.uld de-
fend himself. • This he was determined upon—to state
nothing but what he believed. •S, far from concuttrng
in the sentiment of the Right 'Hots: Ind Learnict Gen-
tleman as to the "lion's mouth," he believed that oneof
the principal uses of thit Wine in its .lioe's
mouth," nhich afforded the best check or. the condom
of public men. tt Let," continued the Hon. Aleniter—'
" let the Rigl t Hut. and Leiwned Member defend bines
self it possible. from the charge which I shall midget
‘sgain,thim. All I shall. now say i , that on reading
the Petition I ,All
not think he could, and I still.rlo net
thirli tie can; but 'if to refute the charge aim
will be better .pleated than' I Shall be." •
• Dr. LUSfillilGTON—ir; 'the Hon; Member far
Montrose has*Conclncled'hy stating, thafne think; magi
of it e allegatbms in the Petition to which. he alludes
will be established against the Right Hon. Gentler*.
over the way. Now, if he makes it ss'essertitinupon the
statements contained' in the Petition itself—and he col
no other: inforMation on the subject—l beg is tea
him that I was present during the whole inquiry, and
am perfectly acquainted with all the facts of t ie case;
and-I will undertake tOpledge my' character, that thtte
neier was any charge introiuced into this House Mtge
utterly destitute of foundation. I, who have pravid
in 'that Right Honourahe and. Learned Jujge s Cola
daily, for I may say the last twenty years, feel tha
should not do justice to him, it I did not herr testi.
ninny to the ability, the zeal, and tne impartiality *a
which the RightH, nourable Judge has uniformly
charged his judicial functions. I will only add, that
this is not the Petition of the person whOse name a
affixed to it, but that.of a petty fogging attorney,..*
has been guilty of perjury and attempted extortion.
‘.
Mr. fiecretary.PEEL'objected.to the Petition 1)64
printed. It was Ihe Petition cf a person who had fatiel
in litigation, auld. it ts.euld be prostituting the,privilego
of .thelfouse to pkimit the printing 'of a .petition cute
taming allegations 'that might be totally :untrue.--
Nothing could be more unjust than the course %loci'
the Hon. Gentleinan had pursued witfi respect to the
Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Sir J.
That Vii another abate of the of the douse'
(Heir). notice of a charge against tie
Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman, was it fair in the
Hon. Member to say" he had been out of town, and Rai
unable to make himself Master -of the accusation'—:
(Cheers): The •chatacteruf the it igbt &(on; and Learned,
Member was a sufficient protection against vague and
groundless accusations—(Chcers). But such might o°'
be the case in every instance, and in his Or. Secretarf