The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-05-09 00:00:00

1 / i

I to answer the question by a juror, whether arising from
scruples of tendernrss of conscience or f!ous ocher causes
should not be visited with the extreme di.pleasitre of the
!louse, or the party be cominitted from that bar. Coder
these eirenmstances, lie could not s,.e what advantage
there mull he i goinz further into the cohbideratiln
the steoject, or in patting the question, when the House
declared, beforehand, that it did not in'cril to proceed,
against the witness to the last extreini!y. The scruples*
of the witnesses might not confine etch of them to the
same light, and the probable effect of going low the iii—
rptiry on the condtrt of the Grand Jury would be, that
a great deal of evidence tending. one way would he giver,.
and the flame be, perhaps, lei to come to a co.npletely
false view of the case. That consideration WWI so string
pith him that lie would vote against thequestions king
put ti the Grand Jurors. He reserved altogether the.
great point of the authority of the lin .:e. Ile reznitteit
to find that any thing like iiiiiente should he direet,i
against the solemn obligation of an oath. To compare
the oath of a Juryman to those obsolete and ridiculous
tests eljuded to by an Ibin, an I f.eirool Itlemkr, w...
not to raise the Onirersity oath to the character of Vie .
oath of a Jury, but to lower the obligation of a Jury It,
the nominal bond of the other. • •

Mr. WETHERELL au CANNING mutually
esti aimed.
Mr. PLUNKETT sail rge had been male
against the Sheriff of the city • in fey improper con-
duct in inspanelling a Jury, am as evidence' had been
snit-emit in support of that charge with regard to tbe.con-
duct of the Jury themselves, it mould he a gross injosties .
to the Sheriff to suspend the couroe of any examination
by which an answer to those charges might he given.
—lf the House canoe to the determine ion not t • per-
sue the examination of those witnesses, it would he,
is his opinion, but fair that all the prelimin ory
dente touching the conduct of the Grand Jury should
be expunged.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, that having expressed some •
doubts oil the pr ceding evening, and having since pall
some a:tention to the subjert, and having heard the
speeches of Hon. Gentlemen, he was anxinns to say a f w
*lords. The object of the inqiiiry could be attained in
his opinion without a diatiosure cif what paoiril the Grand
Jury. The question was, in fact,could the inquiry goon
oith safety and to the completion of its oloject, without .
inquiring into the transactions before the Grand Jere.—
If any 111AlltliOlIght it could out, that man must be further
of opinion that the inquiry must be gone into in the fol. •
lest extent, and that the 1 rase mug act reti ospectire!vmol
alts••lve trots, an obligation already made. The point which
the lloitse hail to try in re hits was, whether the She. ;e
packed the Grand Jure or not, and though licalltnitted the .
value of evidence on time sub.eif tent cohduct of the Jure,
yet it was riot absolutely material to a decision on the lost
issue. The Sherilrs comlact was by siii means to slant
or fall by the conduct of the Jury, for if los were a wan
determined to procure an improper verdict, be would
take care to impanel men who would preserve the semi.
blance of decorum and regnlarity. regard to the
*pinion he had given on :Ire stili of the King, hr arts
not on cousideration dispo;eil to in iintain it, as it would
be to declare, that there was one en sctuteat far Ireland
and an-other for England, with respts t tea Grand Juries.
tae couhd not agree with the reasoning of an Han. Mesa- ,
her, that a Juror could not be dispensed from his oath
to prosecute a witness for perjury before him. Timer
was a casein point which he reran:tn.!. •A
mars was
givireg evidence against another for a capital otiono.
and during the progress of his examination, a note tro is
cue of the Grand Jury was sent dawn to his Cann;-t
stating that the witness hail given evidence of a ditto-rot
nature to the Grand Jury on the day before. rime con. -
tlMSnett was the JUryinan was ittlinittad au evidence, the
min under trial was acquitted, nod toe other Was tried
and convio•teol of perjury on the same testimony. After
some farther o'iservations the lion. Member concluded
by expressing his concurrence in the propriety of 11 it
forcing the extreme authority of the liouse.
Colonel BARRY said, that the inquiry should be pnr-
,tueil in justice to the Sheriff ; from what he understood
the Grand Jurymen were not desirous of pressing their
scruphes. •
The ATTORNEYGENERA obsnrvetl, that when,
two nights, ago, the first question was put to a tritti..ss
with respect to the conduct of the Grand Jury, lie bad en-
tered his protest against such a line of evidence, be-
cause lie foresaw that if it were persevered in, the com-
mittee would be placed in ti, dilemma in which their
now stood. He regretted that thellouss had not listened
to his advice upon that occasion. tic Lite:: that in the
rase of Sir John Fenwick the house Ii convene:l.a
Grand Juror to state proceedings tvli;cii had passed in
the jury room ; but hedoubted whether it would be ex-
pedient to ffillow that p-ecedent upon the present occa-
sion. He had not yet ma le up his mind upon that poito,
and he therefore hoped that the committee would not
come to a hasty decision of the question In fore it. (tf
this lie was satisfied, at all events, that if the committee
should refuse to receive the evidence of the Gram] Jury,
they ought in justice to those gentlemen to expunge
from the minutes of the evidence eyery word which le-
herd to their conduct. (Hear.)
Dr. LUSHINGTON entertained no ilonbt of the pow-
er of Parliament to absolve Grand Jurymen from their
oaths. He agreed with his Hon. and Darned Friend- in•
the opinion that every thing relating to :he conduct of
the Grand Jury ought to be struck motor the evidence if
the testimony of the Jury were not mint:al-it.
Sir 3. NEWPORT suggested that a motion shoal.' he
made to expunge from the minutes all that related to
the conduct of the Grand Jury. (Cries of " Move.")
He would first wish to know the opinion of the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite.
Colonel HARM was of opinion 'that the proceeding
suggested by the Right lion. Bart. would he an act of
gross injustice towards the Grand Jury. Could the
committee, after having allowed all the calumny (he did
not use the wort in an offensive sense) which hail been
uttered against the Grand Jury to be published, now re-
fuse to hear and record their vindication ?
Sir J. NEWPORT said lie would not in he the mar
lion in opposition to the opinion of the It. glut Him 6 ri-
fleman.
Mr. DAWSON contended, that the nature of the case
required the fullest itsvestigition—inpatation bad been
frequently thrown out on the administration of justice in
Ireland—it was right to see whether these imput ohms
were well founded.' He, for one, would vote fur no-
thing short.
Mr. GOULBURN adhered to the opinion he had al-
ready given, namely, that no individual ought to be-
compelled to giveevidence, which to his conviction might
appear a contradiction to iris oath.
Sir N. COIITHURST said, that five of the witnesse%
contained in the list, given by the Attorney-General for
Ireland, had thrown blame on the Jury. The Jury
would not receive fair play, if an opportunity were not
allowed them to defend themselves agaiust charges
already made.
Mr. CANNING said, that the Grand Jury had ptated
in a Petition to that House, that acclsations bad been
made against them by the Attorney-General for Iceland,
of an unwarrantable sort—that bound as they were to
secresy, they were not at liberty to disclose the evidtnce
that had been brought before them—or the reasons oo
which they had founded the decision they hatdconie to—
that paragraphs in the Petition sheaved thistStlie Jury
that thirty were not at liberty to disclose What had Owl
place before them.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, that he did not think that the
evidence of the Grand Jury was necessary to the defence
of the Sheriff, though the Gentlemen who conducted the
case on the other side witle so much ability were of a diG
fern!fent opinion. felt,