The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-06-28 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS—TnunsnAy.

ONERS' COUNSEL BILL.
Lord LYNDHURSTPRIS, in inoving the second reading of this bill
Ilvrelt with great force and eloquence upon the inhumanity and
ineonsistency of refusing to a man, who was allowed to employ
counsel to assist him in establishing any right of property, that
assistance on a question affecting his character, his personal
liberty, or his life. The noble lord said, if he might use so
!trong an expression, he should say that this appeared to him to
be perfectly absurd. (Hear.) In cases of the deepest dye,
viz., charges of high treason, the prisoner was allowed the bene-
fit of counsel. Another class of cases, of the lowest description as
to tiehninal matters, viz., misdemeanours, the party charged
was likewise allowed the benefit of counsel. So that in the two
extreme cases, in the gravest and in the lightest charges, a pH-
. r was permitted to hpre counsel to address the jury, whilst
1 e intermediate cases, viz., in cases of felony, he was not
eFIII
wed that privilege. This was an inconsistency th'at amount-
to something bordering on absurdity. There were other
thinßs nearly as absurd to which he would now direct their lord-
hips' attention. In charges for coining, for instance, a man
Indicted for that offence was allowed the full benefit of counsel;
hut, if he were acquitted, and indicted for a second offence, with
the same witnesses—the same evidence, in that second indict-
bleat, the counsel had not a right, as the law stood, to address a
single word to the jury. (Hear.) Now there was another
class of cases to which he would direct the notice of the house.
A party was indicted for excessive violence upon a female, and
.!,t counsel had no right to address a single word to the jury.
BUt suppose that the prisoner was acquitted, and another bill
Was framed against him for an assault, and although the wit-
Slesses were the same, the counsel might address the jury.
Their lordships, he thought, could not fail to observe how in-
consistent and absurd such a state of things was. He might
state another description of case, that of an appeal of felony.
10 cases of that nature the prisoner was allowed the benefit of
~ounsel, but in the charge of felony he was not. He (Lord
Lyndhurst) might, if be thought fit, multiply these inconsis-
tencies and absurdities; but he thought he had stated enough
to induce their lordships to agree to the principle of this bill.
t,The Lord Chief Justice Denman Lord Abineer, Lord Chief
slarob, the Lord Chancellor, and Lord Wynfor% fully concur-
red in Lord Lyudhurst's views.
The bill was read a second time.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY.
The lords' amendments to the North of England, and the
Sheffield railway bills were read and agreed to.

ELECTION BY BALLOT.
Mr• GROTE moved for leave to bring in a bill to provide that
ther votes at elections for members of parliament should be
Bken by ballot. Mr. Leader seconded the motion. Lord
almeny opposed the motion on the ground that by secret
Ttting fraudulent use of the franchise would be encouraged.
1 ue prop
majority of 51-88osition of Mr. Grote at the close of the debate, was
aBt by' voting for, and 139 against the
ulption,
Some bills were furthered a stage.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—FRIDAY.
PRISON DISCIPLINE.
The Duke of RICHMOND, after calling their lordships' at-
tention to the recent report of the inspectors of prisons, more
rNeeially with regard to Newgate, that prison being in a most
graceful condition, wished to know from his noble friend op-
-I:9altei whether it was the intention of his Majesty's ministers
remove the prisoners in Newgate, thty being empowered by
Itri act of last session to do so, to the Penitentiary; and if they
'tad not done so, whether it was their intention to take any
steps for that purpose.
. Viscount MELBOURNE assured his noble friend that the sub-
ject had not escaped the attention of his Majesty's government.
411(1 that the Secretary of State for the Home Department had
4,0 t been inactive; for he had prepared a measure to remedy
tila defects which existed; and a bill had accordingly been
made, but
in order to carry into effect the recommendations
""ade, but from the advanced state of the session and the
pressure of business, it might be doubtful whether it could be
1,1,0‘v brought forward. With respect to the state of Newgate
Lhe entertained precisely the sentiments which his noble friend
td etiOn that subject, And he had only to add that a proposition
'l4tt, been made by the government to- the corporation of the
City of London, which would have the effect of removing the
abuses so properly pointed out by the inspectors of prisons, as
tegarded the gaol of Newgate. No answer had at present
teen returned to the proposition Made, but there was every
reason for believing that the corporation of London would ac-
cede to it. He did not know whether anv intention existed of
removing the prisoners in Newgate to the 'Penitentiary, but he
apprehended that the proposition made by
.government would
effectually remedy the evils so properly complained of.
Several petitions were and ang them
The Earl of SHREWSBpURY sentprd amo petition from the
4ornan Catholics of Liverpool, in favour of the removal of the
, Nobilities under which persons professing the Jewish religion
labour.
The bills before the house were respectively forwarded a.
z'age.--Adjourned.