The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-04-26 00:00:00

Mr. HUME twain objected to it as It mate to attain
its proposed object of uniformity. He Own moved an
amendment in the title, which on consideration be with-
drew.—The Bill then passed.
Sir H. PARNELL presented a petition from the town
of Drogheda, praying for a repeal of the Union Duties.: .
After a few words from Mr. Colmar, Mr. WALLACC,
Mr. C. HUTCHINSON. and Mr. O. PIIILLII% the petition
was ordered to lie upon the, table and be printed.
Mr. BYNO presented a petition from the inhabitants
of Old Brendan], praying a repeal of the Coal Duties.
Mr. BYNG presented a similar, petition from the inhal
bitants of Clerkenwell.—Botb laid upon the table.
Mr. HUSKISSON presented a petition from the oper-
ative Cotton Weavers of Manchester, complaining of dis-
trees, which they attributed to the recast great increase
in machinery. Right Hon. Member stated that be
Lad felt it his duty, at the request of the petitioners, to
present this petition to the House; but be wished to say
lie did not concur in the views of the petitioners. They
prayed an imposition of a as on " Power Looms," and
that the House woold take some measures to prevent the
wages of journeymen being affected by the increased ma-
chinery. He (Mr. H.) was obliged to say be dissented
entirely from the petitioners, though he sympathised
with them in their distress.
Lord STANLEY thought any interference by this
House in the relations between master and journeyman
could be attended with no good consequences.
M r.' G. PH I LLI PS opposed the petition, and stated
that the condition of the lower classes of manufacturers
bad been rather better since the introduction of this ma-
chinery.
Mr. Secretary PEEL said he had written to several
parts of the manufacturing counties, to inquire into the
sweet' the lower working classes, and the aoswiers be re-
ceived were most
oftsatifactory. The Report of the Cham-
ber of Commerce Manchester in particular did them
great credit.
Mr. MAXWELL thought it would be impolitic to ley
a tax upon machinery. The poor would be better served
if some of the taxes on the necessaries of life were taken

these Justices to swear an assault against your Petitioner,
and your Petitioner was actually bound over aecordingly ;
that your Petitioner remonstrated against this, and appealed
to the Act of Parliament, passed in the first year of the pre-
sent King's reign, and being the 56th chapter of that year;
that your Petitioner showed the said Justices, that. agree-
ably to the third section of that Act, he was fully authorized
to seize the said servant and to take him before a Justice;
that, notwithstanding this, the said Jestices compelled your
Petitioner to enter into recognizances as aforesaid, on pain
of being seat to gaol ; that your Petitioner demanded that
his complaint against the Duke's servant should be first
heard, seeing that he had been the first complainant, and
had been compelled to go so many miles backwards and
forwards, and to lose so much time on the business ; but
that the said Justices persisted in refusing to hear the com-
plaint of your Petitioner, until after they had heard the
servant of the Duke, and had compelled your Petitioner to
give bail.
That, when this had been done, the said Win. Neville
quitted the Bench, leaving the said Rev. Edmund Polities.,
and the said Rev. Robert Wright on the Bench ; that your
Petitioner then applied to these two Justices for redress
against the said servant of the Duke; that they heard his
complaint; but that they refused to decide at that time, and
put off your Petitioner again until the next Saturday ; that
your Petitioner, wearied with journeys on account of this
buiness,and seeing no hope of obtaining redress, resolved
to appear before these Justices no more, and to lay a state-
ment of his case before your Honourable House.
Your Honourable House need not be reminded, that the
Act, just mentioned, of the first year of the King, was pass-
ed expressly for theinsuring of •• a niore summary mode of
repressing and obtaining satisfaction for damages done to
land," dm. When, therefore. your Honourable House shall
have duly considered the conduct of the said Rev. Robes'
Wright and Edmund Poulter, the delays, the procrastina-
tions, the trouble and expense of your Petitioner, and espe-
cially the binding of your Petitioner over for the assault.
though the very oath on which that hail was demanded,
proved that your Petitioner had not bees guilty of as assault.
but had acted in strict conformity to the law; when your
Honourable House shall have duly considered these things.
your Petitioner will not doubt of your disposition to cause
justice to he done to him.
Your Petitioner, pledging himself to prove the above al-
leged facts at the bar of your Honourable House, if you
will be pleased to permit bias so to do, most humbly prays.
1. That you will be pleased to permit him to produce sects
proofs at your bar.
IL That you will so alter the Game Laws, as to enable all
eeeepiers of land to kill any wild animals on the lead
they occupy ; that you will take out of this code the
punishment of death and transportation; and that, at
any rate, you will cause the expense
ofth punishing
them.
S, orn poachers,eexolatinsdiZ keeyptihng
by those who
bowpivroeaseaenudtee
3. That you will be pleased to pass a law. to prevent Mi-
nisters of the Church of England from being Justices of
the Peace ; and for preventing any Justices from acting
as such under the Game Laws, where their own ser-
vants are the informers and witnesses.
And your Petitioner will ever pray. R. DELIA,.
Before we offer any remarks of our own upon this Peti-
tion, let us hear what was said about it in the House of
Commons, taking, as our informants, the reports is the
Morning Papers. These Papers present, in this case, es
mass of inaccuracies, such as we never recollect to have
seen before under the name of a speech of Mr. BawNrr.
Two of them calls the Farmer Richard Miller, in phew
of Richard Beller ; and a third calls him Richard Hellicr.
The Morning Chronicle lays the scene at Store in Buck-
inghamshire, instead of Avington in Hampshire. One
of the Papers makes the Farmer assault the Duke's ser-
vant, and another makes the Servant assault the Farmer,
and there is such a mass of confusion as to the Justices
and the cases and the conviction, that the whole matter.
as far as these papers go, is completely disfigured; in
short, it is not the story at all. The Petition speaks for
itself; stod, doubtless, the speech of Mr. BONNET was DO
more than a description of the contents of the. Petition;
but we will not insert any report of the speech of Mr.
BENNET ; because every report that we have sees mint
be incorrect. We will insert, however, what the report
says of the speeches of others.
Sir THOMAS BARING bore witness to the high character
of the two clerical gentlemen, of whom the petitioner com-
plaimed.
The Marquess of CHANDOS said, that the conviction had
been in all respects a J air one. The fact was, that the peti-
tioner was fond of coursing. No objection had ever bees ,
made to his coursing with those parties of qualified persons V
who went out in his neighqourhood ; but when he was
found coursing with his otrufricnds, persons not qualified,
it became necessary to proceed against him.
Mr. H. SUMNER said, that he thought the petition should
not be allowed to be brought up.—(Oh ! oh ! from the Op-
position). He repeated his assertion, and his reason for
ailing so was, that the law had provided sufficient means of
redress for the grievance complained of through the jurisdic-
tion of the Courts.
Mr. ELLICE said, Seethe could not agree with the hon-
ourable neemoer ; for the petition not only complained of a
grievance personal to the petitioner, but prayed for au al-
teration in the laws under which be had suffered. It was
couched, moreover, in language the most unexceptionable.
and the House would have no fair pretence for rejecting it.
Mr. C. WYNN said, that if the petition had been confined
to a complaint against the conduct of the magistrates, for
which there was a remedy given to the petitioner by appeal.
under the statute, to the quarter sessions, undoubtedly the
practice of the Heine would warrant opposition to its being
brought up As it also prayed for an alteration of the laws,
it was but right thatit should be received.
Mr. J. WILISIAMS said, that the state of the game laws
was most griiThus, and a gross violation of the laws of pro-
perty. Ile thought it essential that a complete revisal of
tbose laws should take place.
Mr.HUME said, that the Noble Duke, acting as Judge in
his own cause, had done that which scarcely another man is
the country would have done. Ile strongly objected to the
appointment of clergymen to the magistracy. The duties of
the bench, the squabbles of the neighbourhood, and the lia-
bility to be influenced by their rich neighbours, were alt
incompatible with the sacred duties of their calling. He
highly approved of those counties where the Lord Lieute-
nants had refused to appoint clergymen to the magistracy.
After a few words from Mr. C. Wrote, Mr. S. Woartsr,
Mr. E. WODEHOUSE, and the Marquess of CHANDOS, the pe-
tition was read, and laid upon the table.
To proceed is order ; it is curious enough that when
any Justice or Parson is complained of, there is always
somebody to cry up their character. If the reader looks
at the Petition, he will see, that Mr. DOLLAR says no.
thing at all about the character of these two Parson
Justices. if he had had to speak of their character, et
if we hail to speak of their character, we should know
very well what to say. As it was, be was only com-
plaining of their conduct towards him; and, unless Sir
Thomas Baring could have said something to justify
that conduct, or in denial of the allegations with re-
gard to that conduct, he might just as well have held
his tongue; though we by no means wish to abridge the
privilege of speech.—We, of course, cannot be aoswer-
able for the truth of the facts ; hat, we see that nobody
attempted to deny the truth of the facts ; and we think,
that if it could•have been denied, it is fair to believe that
Sir Thomas Baring would have denied it ; seeing that
he was so ready to bear testimony to the character of the
parties ; seeing that he is a Justice of the Peace for the
same district ; and seeing that he could scarcely have
failed to hear of the transaction long before it was mete
tioned in the Honse.—Vain, then, are all the rouchingq
for character in such a case. We may retort' to the