The Statesman.
London, England, 1824-02-11 00:00:00

THE STATESMAN

whereas the former Act gave 10s.—(Heir.) In that re-
spect, therefore, it was less objectionable than its prede-
cessor. At one time it seemed to he an understanding
with the inferior persons at the police-offices that they
could claim this reward as a matter of right. It had been
his care to undo this impression as much as possible. Hie
first busineis, after the passing of the Act, was to address
himself to the principal Magistrates, and impress upon
them the propriety of exercising a discretion as to giving
the rewards; and that as the money was to he paid by the
parish, they would not certify in any case unless they
were persuaded that the psrty prosecuting had the ends
of public justice more in view than any private gains.—
Of the Vagrant Act itself, be did not stand up to be the
advocate, at the same'time that he felt the greatest respect for
the pure motives which induced his Hon. Friend, the Member
for Staffordshire, to bring it forward. But it could not be
denied that if this man wss really guilty of the offence imputed
to him, it was one of a serious character, and called for a se-
rious punishment. It was incredible to what an extent this
conduct had been pursued, and how much exposed females were
to insults, particularly in the Parks. The Act, however, made
no distinction between involuntary and accidental occurrences
of this sort, s.tld in that respect it was defective. The nature
of the offence ought to be more definitely described, and more
discretion should be given the Magistrate. as to the length of
imprisonment to which he sentenced the party, for at present he
was obliged in every esse to commit for a month. So fares
related to these points, he conceded to the Hon. Member that
amendments might be made in the present law. But in the
observations which he used respecting stipendiary Magistrates,
he could not agree with him. The office of a paid Magistrate
was either beneficial or mischievous from the selection that
was made of the person to fill it. Now he took some credit to
himself and his predecessor for the care with which they had
paid to this subject. Formerly persons were indiscriminately
chosen to be Magistrates, but Lord Sidmouth had laid down a
rule, and he (Mr. P.) had continued to act upon it, of not ap-
pointing any gentleman to the situation who was not of at least
three years standing at the Bar. It was not made a matter of
interest; and he could say for himself, that he never made an
engagement beforehand respecting the appointment of a Ma-
gistrate, but always made choice of the person who seemed
best calculated for the office. The Hon. Member had also al-
luded to particular acts of Magisterial conduct done by Mr.
Dyer and Mr. Swabey. If he had displayed the same cour-
tesy in apprizing him (Mr. P.) beforehand, that lie meant to
bring forward charges against these gentlemen, which he had
of the motion, sonic answer might be given to them. But with
out affording an opportunity of making a defence, it was a
little unfair to make these charges. It was imputed to Mr.
Dyer that he suffered one person charged with au offence to go
at large upon small bail, whereas he refused to take any bail
whatever from another. But the Hon. Member had not in-
quired what the nature of the charges were, and whether they
were felony or misdemeanour. He should not forget that in
one case the Magistrate had no discretion, and that however
much these offences might differ in a moral point of view,
their legal import was very different. He had also alluded to
the difference in the number of committals and convictions, in
order to prove an abuse against the Magistrates. This was not
unimportant, but it should be stated whether some of the com-
mittals were not after summary convictions under penal Acts
of Parliament. These were sovie of the leading topics of the
Hon. Member's speech, to which he (Mr. P.) could give a more
full answer, but as he had given notice of a distinct motion on
the subject at no very distant day, it would be a pity to spoil
the Hon. Gentleman's speech, and he should therefore reserve
himself till he had heard that statement. He alluded to the
subject generally, to show the Honourable Member that he
bad no indisposition to meet him upon it, and he assured him
and the house that he had no interest iu keeping back any do-
cument.
The petition was then read.
Mr. HUME, in moving that it be laid upon the table, said
his object was to bring this matter before the house, and if
the Right lion. Gentleman had saved him the trouble of making
a speech, he would have taken it a favour. In re,.ly to the
Right lion. Gentleman's taunts upon the petitioner, for as-
suming that the watchman had sworn falsely, he could only say
that the Right Hon. Gentlemen sod the Magistrate had taken
up the affair on the watchman's showing, although, if it were
more inquired into, it would be seen, that It was impossible lie
could have spoken truth. As to the number of indi*idea s
committed by the Magistrates, it would be found that they
were all committed for trial, and not upon summary process.
Rut at all events, it appeared from the Right lion. Gentleman's
own admission, that this maa was hardly treated. It was ad-
mitted that upon those who were accidentally guilty of an
offence against the Act, this law was very hard, and from the
frequented state of the streets, any man might have been taken
in the same situation.—(Laughing.) But it was most Import-
ant to obtain an admission of the severity of the law from
Its Majesty't Ministers. The Right Honourable Gentle.
man had admitted that the petitioner's offence was accidental,
and that therefore the law in that respect ought to be mid-
pled.
Mr. Secretary PEEL protested against his hosing supposed
to admit that the petitioner's offence was accidental.--(
laugh.) On the contrary, he meant to say, that assuming him
to be as guilty as he was charged, he was a fit object for
punishment. He )y no means considered the offence accident
tal t• bat he stated this less with a view of making the case
stronger against the petitioner, than of excusing his own
answer.
The petition was then laid upon the table.
Mr. lIUME moved that it be printed.
This motion was opposed, and the gallery was cleared fora
division, but no division took place.
COMBINATION LAWS.

Mr. S. WORTLEY presented a petition from the Artisans
Labourers, and others working for hire, residing et Barn.;ley.
in the West Riding of Yorkshire, praying a Repeal of the
Combination Laws. The lion. Member stated that he was not
opposed to some modification of these laws, although he la-
mented the error into which the petitioners and others had
fallen respecting them, that, after the repeal of these laws,
they would be more independent of their masters.
The petition was laid upon the table, and ordered :o be
printed.

STATE OF IRELAND..
Lord ALTHDRP, pursuant to notice, rose to move for cer-
tain Returns relative to the State of Ireland. Some apnlog y
was perhaps due from him in undertaking a subject of this de•
seriptiou ; bat he considered that the prosperity of that coun-
try was as much matter of interest to an Englishman in that
house as to a Member for the sister country. As it was his
Intention to make a motion upon the subject of Ireland later
In the Session, it would be well for him in the mean time to
prepare himself and the House, by moving for papers which
would throw light upon the matter. These were of that
nature which he apprehended would not call forth any oppo-
sition. They related to the state of the Revenue of Ire-
land, the Clitursh, and the residence of the Clergy, and alrri
the mode is which the laws relating to Roman Catholics bad'
hew executed. His motion for a Return of the Revenue
'mild be for the gross and net produce of the Custom and
Excise for the two years, ending isle of January 1824, dis-
tinguishing' the articles. Next he should move for the
amount of the Grand Jury Presentments. To this he
thought there would be no objection, as it was part of the
charge to which Ireland was subjected, and that neceLsari-
ly entered into a discussion upon the state of the country.
His next motion would be to ascertain the residence of the
Clergy. It was impossible that any man could look at
the state of Ireland. and not be satisfied, that if a resident
Clergy were good for England, which was universally ad-
mitted, it must be doxbly good for Ireland. (Hear, hear.)
If an instance were wanted, be might mention the case of a
Reverend person who had, with great credit to the Irish
Dorm:neat, been lately appointed to the See of Limerick
and whose more, dnriug his residence in it, presented none
of those outrages which unhappily marked the other parts
of Ireland. He was not acquainted with Dr. Jebbe, but
could not observe his late elevation, without expressing his
satisfaction at it. He should next propose to move for a
list of the Parishes in Ireland, with the names of the In-
cumbents, distinguishing those who were nun-residents.-4
Another Return he wanted was respecting the Clara
property. No man would suspect him of wishing to o
tarn the Chureb Establishment, either in Ireland or Env,-k
land; but be thought it of the greatest importance, coo-
sidering the state of that country, to know what lad was
the property of theeharcb. He also wished the hems to
know bow many Homan Catholics had been appointed to
those offices, to which, by the removal of disablilites, they