The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-07-16 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FRIDAY, JULY 12.

The gallery was opened at twenty minutes past twelve.
The bill for raising a sum of money for repairing Blackfriars,
bridge was read a second time.

EAST INDIA COMPANY'S CHARTER

Mr. GRANT moved that the house resolve itself into a com.
mittee on the East India Company's Chatter Bill.
The house then went into committee.

It was agreed to postpone the preamble of the bill.
On the reading of the first clause, it was proposed to fill up the
second blank, relative to the duration of the period of the re-
newed charter, with the words " 22d of April, 1854."
Mr. HOME was of opinion that twenty years was too long a
period to consign the government of India to the company un-
der, the proposed system. No human being could foresee what
might happen in that country during the next ten years, and he
thought it very possible that circumstances might arise during
that period in India which would authorise a violation of such
an engagement. It would be much better therefore, in his
opinion, to leave the matter open at the end of ten years, in the
manner proposed with regard to the charter of the Bank of
England, that it might be subject to the opinion of Parliament.
The system would then have a fair trial, and the country wculd
have ample opportunity of seeing how it worked. Ile should
feel it to be his duty to take the sense of the committee on the
subject.

After some conversation the gallery was cleared for a divi-
sion; but as the clock had struck three, the division would have
been rendered null. The chairman then reported progress and
asked leave to sit again.

CALL OF THE HOUSE.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY gave notice that in consequence of what
occurred in another place last night, he would on Monday next
move that the house be called over.
Col. EVANS brought in a bill for the amendment of the Ves-
tries Act, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a
second time on Tuesday.

THE MIDDLESEX MAGISTRATES AND THE GRAND JURY.
Col. EVANS said, that in consequence of statements which
had recently come before the public, an apprehension was gene-
rally entertained that some late criminal proceedings were
irregular, and that, consequently, several persons who had been
convicted of crimes would be again let loose upon society.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL admitted that there was great rea-
son to apprehend that several persons had been illegally con-
victed at the Old Bailey. The circumstances of the case, as
far as he had been able to learn them, were these :—Towards
the conclusion of the late Old Bailey sessions the presiding
judges were informed that the bills of indictment had not been
properly preferred. They instituted an inquiry, the result of
which induced them immediately to stop the trials which were

proceeding. A meeting of the judges was subsequently held at
the chambers of the Chief Justice, and, as he was informed,
those learned persons came 'to an unanimous opinion that the
trials which had taken place were illegal. '1 his opinion was
communicated to the Middlesex magistrates, accompanied with
instructions that the Grand Jury should be again summoned,
the witnesses resworn, the indictments again preferred, and the
prisoners retried; but these magistrates, thinking that they
knew the law better than the judges, had declared the proceed-
ings which had taken place legal, and prevented the Grand
Jury from being summoned, and consequently the possibility of
the prisoners being retried. He would shortly state the circum-
stances out of which the illegality of the proceedings grew.
The bills against the prisoners were usually returned at the
Middlesex sessions, held a few days before the Old Bailey
sessions. On the Monday the Court met and and sat at the
Middlesex sessions, and adjourned to Thursday; but on the
Tuesday and Wednesday there were no magistrates present,
the crier alone presided in the court, and swore the' witnesses,
who went before the grand jury and gave evidence, upon which
true bills were found. The judges were unanimously of opinion
that the crier had no authority to administer the oath, that
therefore the witnesses who were examined before the grand
jury were unsworn, and that consequently the bills found upon
their testimony were illegal. The Middlesex magistrates, how-
ever, on what grounds he could not imagine, took a different
view of the subject, for they said that the judges were wrong,
and had prevented the grand jury from being summoned. What,
under these circumstances, was to be done was more than he
could tell.