The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-02-15 00:00:00

P

'1 ATE:s

111111M=IIM—
of still mere importance. It would be, in unsay cases.
Impracticable correctly to ascertain the settee of a• pub-
lit meeting, tinless the negative as well •as the affirms-
' Ow of a question were put. He Could not trouble the
. Ntiuse with the different cases in which Sheriffs had'
_eted improperly—they woold be for the ionsideratiodi
tt the Committee. With respect to the case of Nor-
diumberland, the Requisition hod been signed by a
Treat number of persons possessing property to a great
extent : the object of the Requisitionnts was perfectly
legal. The Sheriff objected to call the Meeting, not t
oo
the ground of illegality—he assigned no such gromaLl
be acted merely on his own discretion. The object of
• the meeting which he refused to call was perfectly. le-
' 'AI; 41)•11 considering the rank of the persons who sign-
ed the Requisition, and the general respectability of the
Comity, not the slightest danger or inconvenience was
!tittle to occur. The Honourable Member next alluded
to a late dot of Parliament, the Act against tumukuous
Meetings. which took away the rights of the people to
hold public meetings, and gave to the Sheriffs an exten-
sive and dangerous power. It was not the intention of
the Legislature to give so great a discretion to the She-
riffs; for he remembered a declaration made by Minis-
ters in that House, when the Act in question was under
eon:adoration. The Ministers declared, that the mean-
ing of the Act was to give the sanction of law to that
which existed before only by sufferance. He contended
ew,
that the Important right of Petition was, by the n
power given by the Act in question, great!), endangered.
Htrusted that the House would take some measures to
limit that power witbio certain bounds, either by amend-
ing or repealing the Act altogether. He would wil-
lingly vote for its repeal, because he was convinced that
the inconvenience and danger complained of was occa-
sioued by that law. He hoped that he brought forward
this subject in a manner not likely to increase the agita-
tions of the country; far different, indeed, was his ob-
ject. His object simply was, to correct what appeared
to him to be an abuse of power, and to prevent the re-
currence of acts so irritating as those of which he coin-
laioed.-7 he Honourable Member concluded by
umitering, " That the Petition presented, on the 9th in-
stant, to that House, from the Inhabitants of Chester,
complaining of the conduct of the High Sheriff in re-
fusing to cSI a County Meeting, should be referred to a
Select Committee, to examine into the matters therein
sated, and to report to the House thereon."
Mr. DAVENPORT, in a low tone, requested to know
what was the difference between the present motion and
a u..otion of wl.ich notice was given by au Honourable
tiontlemen (Mr. Creerev)?
Mr. BEAUMONT said, that the object of the two
motions was very distinct. His (Mr. B.'s) object went
na-iely to prevent the recurrence of an evil. The oh-
pet of his Honinitable Friend went further—it went
diately to the consideration of the Sheriff's con-
duct, with a view to have him ceusured or removed from
Mr. CREEVF.Y said, he thought that the motion of
LI:, Honourable Friend would have been for a general
i•upiiry into the conduct of Sheriffs as to the exercise of
ti.tir discretion in refusing to call County Meetings.
• Such, he thought, would have been the object of the
tuition suggested by the refusal of Sheriffs in various
coauties—iu Oloucester, Berkshire, Kent, and other
.places. The motion of which he (Mr. Creevey) gave
I.4tice last night, stood on different ground—that mo-
tion was suggested by facts stated by different members,
trove which it appeared that the Sheriff declined putting
an Amendment, or proposing a negative to the Address.
his object, in glviug the notice of last night, was to
bring the conduct of the Sheriff before the House, with
a view, in case it should appear that lie had acted km
roperle, of having hip) censured by the House. lt ap-
ileared *to him that the motion of his Hon. Friend was
exactly the same as that of which be had given notice.
Lord CASTLEREAOH said, the object of the motion,
it appeared to him, was to inquire tido the conduct of
tt.e Sheriff, with a view to ground some further proceed-
Lg. lle begged to observe, that it was by no means a
n..itter of course to put an individual, charged with pos.
bib e misconduct, to the trouble and expense of bringing
witni Ws from the country. He apprehended that
it wonld be better if the honourable member for Nor-
. ti.omberland and the honourable gentleman behind him,
%%wild postpone the question until they hail the whole
iJeriis of the case before them. Then the house would
be able atone view to see the nature of the delinquency
cliurpil against the Sheriff. It was a subject well de-
scrying of attention, and before they came to the discus-
sion of it, they certainly should have the facts and me-
rits of the case before them. He threw out the sugges-
lion, not by any means for throwing any embarrassment
in the way of inquiry. He wished to have the matter
put in the most distinct and intelligent manner, and
ith that view he suggested that the motion should be
allowed to stand over until the whole of the facts should
Le collected.
Mr. DENMAN said that a Petition had been pot
i%to his hands, which he would have presented early
in the evening if be were aware that the motion was
to hare been brought ou. A requisition had been
rime time since presented to the Sheriffs of Middlesex
• , for A County Meeting, which they declined calling.
Mr. Sheriff Waithman, in case his conduct should be
objected to in declining to call that Mettitig, had
cer-
fain papers to produce to the House which would joss
- -tify his conduct. The question before the House was
certainly very important, and he was glad to hear the
• • Adoration made by the Noble Lord ; but he thought
that declaration was a little incooststeat with the con-
. • tkuct of-Ministers, particularly at the Hampshire Meet-
•.- ilig..ilbsisainulid tug attend that Meeting and openly
oppoer the object fir which it was loft but aes ben
at'
iliem'signed a counter requisition.
Mr. BEAUMONT assented to the suggestion at
torilCairlereagh, and the motion was withdrawn ihr
- • tie }resent.
SCOTCH JURIES.
•
Mr. CENNEDY, in bringing forward his mods.,
said that it was of the utmost importance to remove
ape'bitit th.it might casually appear on the admisis•
trition Of jdetice ; he did not mean to cast the slight-
impsitatio\ on the conduct of the Learned Judges
. lo Scotlaod, sad he felt be was only attempting to re-
here them wben endeavoured to remove defects in the
administration of justice. In the year 1701, an Let'
was passed in Scotland which might be properly called
- •the Habeas Corpus Act of that country; it was an Act
• to ware the liberty of the subject, by virtue of whieb,
any individual charged with an offence, might com-
pel the prosecutor to bring him to trial within a limit-
ed time. Unfortunately many persons were denied
Cie benefit of that Statute, because the expense .of
seeking for redress under It o•ss too bear; for those
individeals to meet. Again, persons were only
entitled to the. benefit of the Act of 1701, who pow
► ipusly quali,fied *Actuation by going to gaols persons
. _
•
out eibailtould not obtain the benefit of the provisions
of thot Act. • Another defect to which be felt it neces-
sary to allude, was the arbitrary pidgin:ins proastancei
in-Scotland, no matter what the punishment, froisilek
matlltet :fine, up to transportation for five years, ash,
for life; Sledges pronousced arbitrary judgments--,
political offences also came under the cognisance of
those Courts. By a late Act, which naturally excited
alarm la this country, a man convicted of She second

z.s:t

.• "

.

~ •

1, •

rt.

C

~.

•

S}~ .

a •

offence in the case of libel, .was made subject to tlip
punishnient of banishment; hut in Scotland it is the
law to transport a man for the first offence.—(Hear.
hear !) —I n the course of the last year, an individual
in that country. convicted of a seditious libel, was
transported for five ears—{Hear, hear.)--Tbat indi-
vidual was now undergoing that punishument—a punish-
ment which he understood was considered rather lenient.
Another point, to which he would allude, was the power
assumed and exercised by the Lord Ailvocate,
of filling ex-ejsrio informations, by which .emans he
took away from the accused the benefit of a jIITV. in the
first instance. Another grievance on the accused party,
was, that he was denied the benefit of any informality
that might appear. Where such informality appears,
the prosecutor " deserts the diet," pro loco ct tempore,
and the party is sent back to prison, and brought up for
trial a second time for the sante offence. Another crying
evil was, the mode of selecting Jurors for criminal trials.
The practice was, that fortv-five persons were presented
by the Sheriff, out of which-fifteen persons were selected
as a -buy to try the case. In Srotlanel there were four
Counties within the Circuit ; the Sheriff returns at Edin-
burgh 45 persona for each of those Counties, waking
190 persons in the whole. Those names are delivered
to time Judge, and out of them be selects 45 persons at
his wiil and pleasure. Ile was far from sempoosing that
the Judges acted improperly or partially,, but be sule
spitted that those were preliminary arraogemeots which
might not to exist. It should he recollected, that in all
oases—in cases of murder or of robbery—eight Jurors
oat of fifteen were sufficient to convict the accused. In
,si country, where one man might lose his life by the de-
cision of another, the greatest caution ought to he ob-
served in the selection of Jurors.—( ear,
hear.)—The
I bon. gentleman next observed, that though Sir lieorge
M'Kenaie stated that the right of peremptory chal-
lenge existed in Scotland, such right did not exist,
and was not sanctioned by authority. The remedy
he proposed was, that the jury, instead of bring
Reinitiated as they are, should be selected by ballot.
.He would also give to each party the right, to
a small amount of peremptorily challenge. He would
give the prosecutor the right to challenge three Jurors,
and the right to the accused of challenging these
also. Ile did not wish to go farther ; in.a country
where the life and fame of an individual might depend
on the voice of a single man, no party teling should
be allowed to exist. In England, the right of pe-
remptory challenge., in cases of capital felony, was
always exercised, and was generally permitted in other
cases, as long as Jurors conkd be fraud. He under-
stood that the Learned Lord (the Lord Adeocate) in-
tended to introduce some measure of amelioration with
respect to the Law of Scotland; he would be glad to
find that the qnesti,in concerning the selection of
Juries was intended to be embraced in that measure,
bat he was not aware that such was the intention of
the Learned Lord. The Honourable Gentleman con-
cluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to re-
gulate the appointment of Jurors in cm insinal cases in
Scotland.
Lord EINNIY6 Fait!, that lie regretted the absence
of the Learned Lord (the Lord Advocate.) It was not
to be supposed, that he (Lord IL) could 'be able to
reply to the statements that had been made; indeed,
it was not necessary, for his lion. Friend had gone
into matters which were quite extraneous to the object
of his Bill—(Hear, hear.)—His Hon. Friend 11104.14-1
luded to what lie called arbitrary punishments
be
would state the nature of those arbitrary punishments.
Where an individual stood accused of offence
which was death by the law, the Lord Advocate had
the right of restricting the libel, which was, pro
taato, restricting the power of the Judges in favour
of the accused.—lle was not prepared to assume or
deny the propriety of the change propoied ; but in
the absence of the Lord Advocate, and in the utter
ignorance of the House, with the exception of two or
three Members, lie hoped his liou. Friend would con-
tent himself with having the Bill read a first time,
and letting it lie over.
Mr. M. A. TAYLOR said, it was rather unparliamen•
tart' that his Hon. Friend should be assailed becalm. he
brought forward the motion in the absence of the Noble
Lord, whose duly it was to he present. He did not see
why, if time lard Advocate was absent, their tongues
were to he tied ; the Noble Lord should rather have
apologised for the Learned Lord than have inculpated
his Honourable Friend. His Honourable Friend had
brought to view the arbitrary power exercised by the
Court of Justic iary, to instances of which he (Mr. T.)
had happened he witness in a ease, the details ot
which were printed, and which was also to be found in
the debates of that House ; he meant time ease of Mr.
Muir and Mr. Palmer.—(bear, hear. !) —lie (Mr. T.) had
been in the House in time time of the debate, as well as
in Edinburgh at the time of the trial, anal certainly, its
common with many others, he did not think the verdict
was that which would have been given by an English
Jury.--(lsear !)—He bad on this point the testimony of
a man ot no mean authority, who was present the whole
time, he 1111•411 t the late Sir S. Romilly. Mr. Emeimmiue, a
lawyer of the first eminence, declared, that on that oc-
casion the Court of Jesticiary had misunderstood the
law, When they sentenced the prisoners to transporta-
tion. The law said, that persons convicted of sedition
should be" banished from their pleasant fields and na-
tive homes." But this never bad been nnderstooel, or
could. be .neally interpreted. as giving a power to
transport time prisoner to a particular place, as they did
those prisoners to Botany Bay.—The case was brought
before the House of Commons by the present Commis-
sioner of the Jury Court (Mr. Adam); the Judges ea-
coped censure with very great difficulty, and no one who
heard that debate, could suppose that the law gave the
power assumed of banishing beyond the seas fur sedi-
tion and libel. But, forsooth, they were nut to speak
of Scots law, unless the Lord Advocate was present.
In the House of Lords, the Chancellor decided on
Scots law, though no Scots lawyer, and in that House,
even if the Lord Advocate had been presets.. be should
take .on himself to decide according to Isis own jails-,
meet.
Mr. J. P. Grant said, the principle of the Bill bad
bees laid by his Hon. Friends on grounds which rm
quired no amplifiea.ion, but he should rectify a mistake
of the Noble Lord (Lord Binning), who supposed that
it was only when a libel was restricted by.the Lord Ad-
vocate that an arbitrary power was exelicised by die
Court of Justiciary. Within net a great many years. la.
those cases in which by the law of Scotland they were
enabled to inflict a punishment, of which the tautest ex-
1111st was banishment from Scotland, the Judges bad as-
AMA the power to transport the prisoner to a particular
Wised. ac under the Transportation Acts in England, and
a recent case, for one of these °Kentaro in which Its-
liebnient was the utmost legal punisheseit, the prisoner
Was emmoromended by an unanimous Jury to the Why of
the Court, and that Court, in its lenity, transported kilo
ler five years.
. Lord liiNfNl I explained.
Leave was to -bring in the Bill. •
RRITIRH FLOUR.
11r. CU RTI ES. after ameationi tag dads ter law dais
a rootlet bad prevailed of supplying oar gareisifte
abroad with American is preference * Eagilsb Flare
matted for as aamaat of all the Cora and riser, the

produee of America and foreign countries contracted for a different practice prevailed in the Ordnance
by his Majesty's Victualling Office within the last three ment ? (-
years. mMr. WARD mead, that the practice in the Deana.,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained Departent was, after ascertaining
that during the war the colonial garrisons had been sup- of the articles about to be disposed of, to sell them k
plied as they best might be, but that in the commence- private contract, and this erten' was pursued a
ment of the peace, the Treasury had issued an order that cause it was felt to
be a guard against those et.
they should be supplied with British corn and flour. nation' which were so often semi to exist at pohite
During the two years that this system had prevailed, a auction,.
great part of the flour it as returned unserviceable, and the Mr. RICARDO, adverting to the extraordinary ion,.
strongest representations were made that American flour of Exchequer Bills at par from the Treasury emir tine,
only might be pent out. American dour lead fot two ago, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer declined to
years been supplied. Rut on the representations of agri- account for when called upon in that House, took ocp.
cultural gentlemen, and on its being proved that British lion to ask the Right Honourable Gentleman %Aeon.,
floor might be so prepared as to be equal to American the transaction referred to was now in a state to admitef
flour, the Lords of the Treasury bad changed their sys- explanation
tern. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER snit
Mr.
Mr. CURWEN said, that the only difference betweea that he should have no objection to explain the two.
American and English flour was, that the former was action when the account was finally wade up.
kiln-dried, which of course might be dour with the lat. Mr. WARRE expressed a desire that mute distinct
ter when it was sent to hot climates. explanation or estimate should lw laid before the Wait
Mr. HU3IE protested against a departure from the with tespect to what wasxalleml Regent•etreet.
principle that the Government should Rupp'', itself at the Mr. HUSKISSON said that the most eatieesetere n 4
cheapest market. accurate information was furnished upon that snaiert in
Atter a few words from the CHANCELLOR of the the Report of the Commissioners of lifoods mid Mein
EXCHEQUER, the motion was agreed to.
wilat. WhAadßltheEeninqialuidredbenflohreen litriegHenotu-ssetreet *as likviy
1 lONIAN ISLANDS,
Colonel DAVIES wished to know how long the In- to he completed.
specters of Militia were to he kept up in the lonian Mr. HUSKISSON stated, that from the
progress that
Isle', where militia (as appeared by the returns) was had been made in the buthlinas, be had reason to he.
; liens that the street would be completed in two yeere
embodied. Their salaries amounted to about 40001.
they weer nominally paid out of the revenue of the The Committee of Ways and Means and Supply wen
Wand, hut while those revenues were insufficient for deferred until Friday.
the insular expenses, they were iu reality paid by this
RI .t LT DUTY.
country.
Mr.GOULBURN said the Inspector* were officers on U n the Order of the Day for the second reading of
po
the Malt Duty Bill being read,
the Staff, and were appointed for no definite time. Mr. CREEVEY rose to oppose the motion. He bad,
Sir J. NEWPORT wished to know whether any more
he said, two or three short reasons for resisting say lop
Reports were to he made front the. Commissioners on
of SuPP, I under existing circumstances. The first ere.
the Fees of Enelish Courts of Justice, of which not One
n son was, that although the House 11,14 been sittieg fin
had been presented for two years? three weeks, no estimate of the public expense halist
No answer was given. been presented to the House from any departmestre
Mr. BROCUHA3I, in reference to the Inspectors in
the Administration ; and he would not consent to gnat
the lonian Isles, wished to know whether they were the
public money to any department, until a dear state.
continued when there were no militia ? meat of the ground of its application were previonalyesee
Mr. GOULIWR3I said, though there was no mi-
municated to the House. In this resolution, indeed, Ise
litia embodied at the time of the returns, that did nut
was the more confirmed by the language which Ire es.
pro..,e that the militia did not exist. deratood was unreservedly used about the Treasary,lee
Col. DAVIES said,lse could explain bow the fact wa.• which
was generally believed by its adherents—nut/le
In reality there was no militia. tinder the old Govern-
that the present would be a very short Session.--[Hest,
meet of tee island there were village officers who train-
hear, from the Treasury Bench He meant that it to
ed the militia, and who tailed thew out at certain times
andrratood about the 'treasury that all the public I'M.
to exercise. Since the British Government had com-
nem would be over before Easter ; that ia, that elio,.
'unwed, they had been called out, and they bad una- tern were safe, that the Queen was sacrified, and tlet
ninsously refused, because there existed a system of mil- nobody cared about money—Dear, hear, and a laugh ea
rule and usisgovernmetit in those islands, which, the
the reposition Benches.]—The estimates ought to b
sooner it was put a stop to the better for our connexion
two or three weeks before the House, in order that sad
with those islands. 1 bat subject, however, would he
Members as were disposed to attend to their duty, mg' la
brought substantially before the House. But as to mi•
rare an opportunity of examining the do uments. Ups
litia, in point of fact, none existed, and the Inspectors
tots, and upon other ground, he felt it his duty to oppose
were Sinecuriets, the grant of any Supply, until the will and the wool
Mr. tiOULIit:IIN briefly observed, that the state- of the
public were attended to by Ministers. He la 4
emote respecting the lonian Isles, when they came to been told that a certain Lay -Lore of the. Admiralty
be examined, would he found inaccurate. (alluding, we understand, to Sir G. Warrender), as he
Mr. C. GRANT moved for leave to bring in a Bill to I was
called by
some,
but whom he would call a sine
regulate the Office of Clerk of Assize, and Nisi Pries
cure and sham Lord, had been beard to declare,in these
and Judges' Register in Ireland.—Leave given. circles of which this Lord was such a splendid ornament,
Mr. C. GRANT moved that to-morrow the Houser,-
that h.e. would i
ld comedown and indict signal chastisement
solve itself into a Committee un the Acts respecting the
upon him kam. (.) fhe pi. r . ed in his purpose to g
Judges' Registers Salaries. resist the Supplies ; but still he was determined tepee S
.
In answer to a question from Mr. Creevey, severe. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had emir.
Mr. C. GRANT said his object was, in pursuance of
voured in some degree to satisfy the public desire dew
the recommendation of the Commissioners on Irish
trenchment. It had not, however, been stated, is what
Courts of Justice, to take away the fees, and to pay the
departmo the th rent snch
ee( of reductithe Lon wouldd
of the Admiralty;
take place. Het te
officers by salaries to be made up by a stamp duty on
return tay Lor
IDs begged to express a hope, before the M m
Meads who
m 1
rutin parts of the proceedings.
On the motion that the Committee of Supply be post- this Lord had invited to attend his benefit, that bewed\
potted to Friday, be graciously pleased to carry his threat into exiteatim
SCOTS MALT DUTY. with some clemency, that he would condescend to Mi.
Lord A. HAMILTON asked whether the Chancellor gam his punishment for ohl-ecquaintance-sake, and fns
of the Exchequer intended to make any alteration in the
duty on malt, which, in the Northern Counties and in a recollection that he was once among those with 'Asa
he (Mr. C.) then co-operated, generally acting, too, is
Scotland, amounted to more than the price of the article?
the ultra side— 0 laugh, and hear.!
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said be The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed,
)
had obtained much information on this subject. and
that the number of men and shipping
should lay it before the House ; but he did not find sea - bad been already
voted by the Howse. and it was new proposed only tv
sun for making any alteration is the duty, beyond that
With
thensual lovelies for carryingthose votes into elect.
alleviation as to malt made from beer or big which was
respect to the Estimates to which the last spike
made last year.
hadreferred, care remold he taken to hare them laid bee ton
PRLVENTIVE SERVICE.—REVENU E.
the House, so as to afford time for their due mai-
Mr. W.SRRE said, the Chancellor of the Exchequer
nation.
had stated, that smuggling had of late decreased; but Sir ROBERT WILSON declared his
container
he was rattier inclined to fear, that the Chancellor of the
with the resolution to resist the grant of any seethes
Exchequer was not quite correct. He wished, however,
to know, whether during the whole peace, the Chancel-
until Ministers should slew a disposition to knee the
grievances of the people.
ler of the Exchequer intended to continue the present
system of high duties on Foreign Spirits and other ar- Sir T. LETHIHMIXIE said that he was an advocate
for the exercise of a reastioitinnal jealousy with respect
to the public expenditure,
i but as be must consider flu
tides, which made the temptation to smuggling so
great? In fact, the Revenue was now protected, if
t
was protected, at time point of the hayonet.—(Hear.)— opposition which Ministers experienced from the 'eke
sole of the House vexatious, be felt it his duty to swift
From Beach,/ Head to the Thames, the coast was lined the motion.
with armed omen; at every step they met a seaman. with Colonel DAVIES declared, that the House was ewe
pistols and cutlass. This system, which was projected
1 by an active naval officer, the cores consisted of 13(10 liarly called neon at time present crisis to exercise its
old constitutional privilege of stopping the 'sr W
I seamen, who patroled the coast night and day. It be- ,
came a matter fur consideration wit Cher this would tend the
in consequence of the state of the country, and than
manner in which the overwhelming power, note(
to improve the naval service. The midshipmen and
young officers were subjected to the worst temptations, Crown, but of Ministers, was now used to Omuta* j
wishes and to insult the feelings of the people.
and wereunder no effectual enperintendance. An Act
After some remarks by Mr. Hums on the epithet ate
was passed lag Session.(hroneht in by the Secretary of
the Treasure), in which perhaps the House would he fion, and the observations of the Smuts', aid dr
paged to have been applied to the opponents oftbe ow
surprised to learn, that any one person landing a single tr
esersartaco. in reply,
pint of foreign spirits, was subjected to a fine of one Sir. J. NEWPORT declared that be could set er •
liundred pounds. This penalty was imposed, not only sistenly agree to the opposition which had beta wads,
when a cargo was landed, or where the offender was an to the motion before the House. fur as the supplies W
habitual smurglrr, but for the most collet centraveniion been voted, so he thought should the Ways and Maw
of the law. He could not illustrate it better than
by alio•
an example: a man, who had been out fishing, on Ills Mr. J. MARTIN was determined not to mot:
return Lowe, was apprehended by a Lieutenant of this any grant of money to the Government, until the
blockade system, with literally one pint of foreign spi- estimates were presented in a more dear sod iate,
rits in his pocket. The Lieutenant brought him before
a Magistrate, and demanded the infliction of this penalty. scarcely be withdrawn from this purpose by the wolf
The 31agistrate who knew that the man was not a smut shapes, too, than they had yet appeared ; and beams
2ler, was aware, that by the infliction of this penalty e truly an alteration took place in the modeofdrawing a?
should ruin him, declined to act (for no power was given these Accounts, they were not likely is their
declaration of time Chancellor of am Eschwiner, !het et
in time Act to mitigate the penalty.) The officer re-
onstrated. 'she Magistrate said, 1. I know the proyi- state to be at all intelligible to posterity—(
hear, bear! on the Opposition Benches.)
lions of the Act of Parliament as well as you do ; but 1
A division here took place, and the numbers wers-' )
will not be the instrument of raining this man for this
trilling offence, and if you insist, you must go to another For the motion ... • 71
.
Magistrate." Against it . • •
Sir ti. Ct)CKBURN said, an officer had been sent to
i was accordingly read a Melia
Majority . . . . ....tam.
inspect the Preventive Service, who reported that the The Bil . _ransferore;
Midshipmen who were employed behaved remarkably committed for to-morrow ;as was the T
well. Some dirtinrnislied actions had been performed Bill.
by these officers ; for it was to be observed, that the
snuggling was not carried on merely in boats. Hat the passed.
The Queen's Annuity Bill was read a third OEO4
tile Ralh OPt.
mogglers came in armaments of 100 each. There_ were In a Committee upon the Master of
pegelar returns of killed and wounded of these offi:ei e. tea St•tict
as in time of war. erne Bed s''—
lemad)Acte, a conversation took place haw
Sir J. Newport, Mr. Hume, Mr. D. Bee ~._.no
OLD swims.
Mr. GRENFELL rose to tall the attention of the implon's
abuses discovered by the Commissioners for
House to an article to which very little attention bad her whose name we could nut learn, upon taw
into the State of the Irish Courts ofJestioe. o
eart2rW.
been hitherto paid—he meant the Old Stores. He saw with 'regard to the exaction of fen. aftet widw`
in the estistrites of the last year 263,0001• set down in lowing .. . •
the Navy Department. without explaltation as to the mosointoans were agreed to. ---
alliCoaaah'i
manner in which they were disposed of and in she Ord -4310 t/. per annum to he paid
float
iof.auoilhe
to
to do
nines 213,0001. The old Ordnance Stored were. be oh titter rettea'S
areyed, sold by private contest% valid' WY Otrtice to Muter* in the Coen of Chancery. epee ...„ce
Fund to the Master of tee Rolls—s
he deetreeact as it prevented that emeriti
beet served to prMest the public saltiest jebblas. of illness. -
which from office after twenty years service. or ill °eel"—
Len a be
s°
Sir G. WARRENDER seated. that Slit Old Naval Mr. HUMS suggested that prevision a---I
rio,
Stores were always sold by Odic aistioll. to guard against any such gran . ei.e a• is do
Mr. ORIINPgLia was aware of this practice with perhaps a year's service, by twit** lalLe,
regard to the Naval Stores. bet he wished to know from health ast:l qualdicationscorsay WI"
fiat.tr_ri *a
the Secretary of the Ordains. Office, ipso what ground .ilaster in Claaacery, as was thaws, nar
t after a shod