The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-06-21 00:00:00

THE STATES) AN

to by the Judges. He did not think it necessary farther
to detain the house in stating his objections to ibis mea-
sure. He rested his opposition principally no the ab-
sence of any alleged evils in practice, and the wishes
of the people of Scotland being against any such
change. Thus no evil could he eleewn in favour of
the measure, and general opinion was against it.—
(Cheers.)
Sir J. MACKINTOSH said the arguments of the,
Hon. and Learned Lord were twofold; general and see.
cifie ; lint, that this reformation was founded in
theory : but this was the argument under whirl' every
enemy of reformation disguised his hostility to common
sense, and confirmed what had been observed by an emi-
nent writer, that no man became an enemy to reason till
reason became an enemy to him. The second argument
of the lion, and Learned Meusher was, that no distinct
grievance was alleged or proved ; the third, that the
people of Scotland, so far from sanctioning the mea-
sure, opposed it. Before he proeeeded to notice these
objections particularly, he would first observe, that they
had been all made before by the Jacobite enemies 'gibe
Heritable Jurisdiction in 1747 ; yet that very theory,
which the Learned Lord stated as the ground of his ols-
tetion now, was the precise argument on which Lord
ardwick founded his support of the Bill to abolish
that jurisdiction. (The Learned Gentleman here re-
ferred to a Parliamentary Report of the speech of Lord
Hardwick) The Jacobite topics of opposition in 1747.
which Lord Hardwick passed over in contemptuous si-
lence as anworthy of reply, were those which were now
used by the Learned Lord against the present measure.
As well m:ght the ',earned Lord object to Juries in civil
cases, which formed the greatest improvement *bat had
taken place in the Judicature of Scotland, einept the
abolition of heritable jurisdictions; as well might he
do so, as oppose this Bill, for the principle was the
same. The Hon. and Learned Gent. then contended
tnat peremptory challenge in Juries was an essential
principle of the Law of England, as laid down by Mr.
Justice Blackstone and other authorities. It was a prin-
ciple founded on 'he laws of human nature itself; for
what could be more repugnant to natural as well as to
moral law, than that a inan should sit to decide upon
the life or forums of another man to whom he was
inimical. As to the argument of the Learned Lord,
that peremptory challenge would cause delay In the
administration of justice; it was one which could not by
any means be sustained. lf the principle was found to
answer every purpose in England, where there was a
great number of prisoners, what was to prevent it from
answering equally well in Scotland, where there was a
comparatively small number of prisoners. Bat be would
ask, did not the circumstance of a list of the Jury being
furnished to prisoners, imply the necessary inference of
peremptory challenge? If it did not, such list was no-
thing but a mere mockery. The Hon. and Learned
Gent. then adverted to the late duel in Scotland, ob-
serving that one of the Scotch Judges bad given his
consent that his brother should act as second to one of
the parties. If this case had been tried in Perth, where
that Judge presided, in what a situation would he have
been placed when called upon to select a Jury? He next
enumerated the various mural and political advantages
which England derived from respectable persons in the
middle walks of life being admitted to n Juries ;
and he maintained that the principle ought, with equal
right and justice, to be extended to Scotland.
Lord BINNING raid, that notwithstanding the dif-
ficulties which he naturally felt in rising to reply to
the observations which were made by the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman on the other side, yet he should
not from any consideration personal to himself,
shrink from doing his duty. limas made a charge
on Scotch Gentlemen that they did not intredece be-
fore that time a measure like the present. He;would
reply to that observation, that it was quite natural that
Scotch Centlemen should not introduce a measure
which the Scotch people never desired. Ile was of
op'nion that the Scotch ()millennia were as intelligent
and respectable as any other, and be protested against
the defence set up for them by the Hun. and Learned
Gentleman.—(Hear, bear.)—lle heard a cheer from
an Hon. Gentleman who was not connected with Scut-
laad.—(liear, hear.)—That Gentleman knew nothing
ofScotlaad, to which he was en utter stranger. He
believed that the power vested in the Judges of Scot-
land was exercised hitherto without the least cause of
complaint. To deprive them of any part of that power
would make the worst impression on the people, parti-
cularly at a time when it was so mach the custom to
calumniate the Judges. With respect to the allusion
of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Sir James Macio-
tosb) to the appiication of Sir A. Boswell to the letter
fns directed not to the Judge, but to his brother; and
Sir Alexander Boswell, as were very natural on so so-
lemn an occasion, was anxious to consult Lord Ilea-
dowbank aboet his family and property, It was quite
natural that a father of a family should coma for ad-
vice respecting the final settlement of his affairs, sod
to whomovould he be so likely to come as to a friend ?
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman could not cite a
less applicable case. lie thought the- Judges could
not be influenced in the appointment of a Jury by any
improper motive, and he would prefer the jury select-
ed by them to a jury formed by ballot. If the Judges
were not deemed worthy of that, trust, he did not know
what trust should be reposed in them. It would be
found, that in Scotland the jury went against the opi-
nion of the Judge more freqnently than in Mislead,
which was oo small proof of the fairness of the selec-
tion. The people of Scotland desired no change. The
Judge, who knew nothing of the cause to come before
the jury, could Dottie supposed to /me any desire in
packing them. The question was fiery tntereating,
and he was sorry when he came down to the Muse, to
find the benches so badly filled. If that bill was con-
sidered a boon to Scotland, be was surprised that the
Scotch Ileatlemeo did not give it their full attention.
He thought the administration of the Criminal Laos in
• Scotland mere favourable to prisoners than in Eng-
. land. In Scotland the prisoner had a list of witaesses
fourteen days before his trial. In England the pri-
soner came into Court and stood in the dock entirely
ignorant of the names or number of the wit . In
Scutiaad the pri was allowed Counsel. The pri-
soner was placed at the bar of the Old Bailey without
any such assistance; but the prisoner did not suffer
thereby, because the Judge became his Counsel. With
these advantages, he did not see any reason fur
making any change in the manner of appointing a
jury iu Scotland.

Mr. TWISS said he would beg the attention of the
House, while he briefly elated the reasons which induced
him to vote for the second reading of the Bill. He
approved of the clause for giving peremptory obal.
lenges, and he was in favour of the Bill. hot Incense
it was calculated to lead to other changes, but because
it bad so clause, no corollary. which could contem-
plate or lead to any other, change.—(Hear, hear.)--
The list of witnesses and the aid of amass! which
were stated by the Noble Lord to be granted to pH-
tonere is Scotland, would be more usdal if the pri-

soner bad, by means of challenge, such a Jury as would
be capable of receiving an impression from them.—
(Hear, bear.) In England prosecution were gene-
rally carried °nit', private although in the
name of the King : bat in Scotland they were always
conducted sot only in the King's vain., but also by
the King's officers. The whole weight of the prose-
cution so carried on by the Crown was apt to discos-1
rage aad intimidate a person, and it was most material
for the ends of justice, as the Hoe. Mover of the Bill
cited from Mr. Justice Blackstone, that a prisoner
should not be discos-aged from making his defence.—
(Hear, hear.) It was nature: to suppose the Judges
would appoint Juries as conformable as possible to
their own will, and is that COO the trial was solely by
the Judge, without any cheek by the Jury.—(Bear,
hear.) What would be the opinion in England of a
trial by the Jury free from any contioal by the Judge
In Scotland the trial was by the Jadge, witlaont any
check by the Jury. That was apt to influence the
public opinion in Scotland as to the fairness
of the trials in many cases. The public
opinion ought to bs consulted. After ems. farther
arguments, in answer to those urged against the
principles of the Bill, he concluded by stating his in-
tention to vote for the Bill.
Mr. PEEL, said that, upon one of the objects of the
Bill, namely, a change io the mode of selecting the Ju-
ries, he entertaimed a doubt and thinking that benefit
might be derived from the second object, be should not
oppose the second reading of the Bili.—(Hear.)—l n the
Committee, it would be in his power to propose seine al-
terations in the details of the Bill.
Mr. DRUMMOND sopported the second reading of
the Bill.
The Bill was then read the second time,
_and ordered
to be committed on Monday neat.

BUTTER TRADE.

The order of the day for the house to resolve itself
into a Committee on the Butter Trade Acts being read,

Sir N. COLTHURST rose. He entered into some
statements to chew that the home butter was not suffi-
ciently protected—that the importation of Dutch butter
had very much increased in the last year—and that the
importation of butter from Ireland bad diminished io
proportion. This was not an Irish question. He pro-
posed to add a duty of 10s. per cwt. on the importation
of foreign butter. It was said to be a bard thing that
for the benefit of Ireland, the citizens of London should
be compelled to eat salt butter. But the truth was, that
the duties on foreign butter did not affect the superior
sort of Dutch butter. He concluded by moving that
the House resolve itself into a Committee on the Batter
Trade Act.
Mr. GURNEY would concur in any measure for the
relief of the peasantry of Ireland; bat be would sub-
mit to ne Mx imposed for the purpose of allowing the
landlords of Ireland to keep up their exorbitant rents.
Mr. ROBINSON would oppose the motion of the
Hon. Baronet, but not on the ground implied by the
Hon. Gentleman who spoke last. He saw no reason for
increasing the protection duty. The lowness of price
VISSIDO ground for doing so. The importation duty on
foreign butter was already 50 per cent., and Ite saw no
reason for increasing it. The fact was that the importa-
tion of butter from Ireland was greatly increased within
the last two years. Upon general principles he would
oppose this resolution. Butter was one of the few arti-
cles which Holland had to return to as for our coinnio•
dities; and it would be as well to declare at once tbat
they should hold no intercourse with this country, as to
impose a duty amounting to a prohibition on the Im-
portation of their commodity.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT denied that Ireland bad cape-
rimed so much advantage as England in the remission
of taxes. He supported the motion.
Mr. RICARDO took an opportunity of re-arging the
expediency of approaching, as much arpossible, to the
principles of a free trade.
Mr. RICE said be was as willing as anytime to return
to the principles of a free trade, if the circumstances of
the country permitted it. The increase in the importm
don of butter from Ireland to this country was a falla-
cious argument in favour of the assertions, that there
was no reason for increasing the protecting duties on
butter, for the fact was, that the warehouses were over-
stocked with that article in this country, and a great
part of it ahsolutelt unsaleable.
Mr. T. WILSON supported the motion. He was op-
posed to the increase of protectiog duties, but he also
thought that such protection as was already afforded
should not be removed.
Mr. iYESTERN supported the motion, and ridiculed
the application of Adam Smith's doctrines to the present
times, which were in no way analogous to those in which
these doctrines were first promulgated. If the House
would open a free trade, they should begin by patting
the English grower upon the same footing with the
foreigner, aneenable him to bring his produce,to mar-
kecat the same price.—(llear.)—He regrettedit to say,
tbst the opposition shown to this measure was only
part of a system which seemed to countenance the trade
of foreign countries, even at the expense of the best in-
terests of a large portion alb. empire.
Mr. HUSKLSSON professed himself disposed to go
any length in protecting the trade of Avery part of the
empire, but be could not persuade himself that this mo-
tion would have the effects which were expected from it.
Butter had mot fallen in price in the same proportion as
other commodities, which proved that it slid not want
more protecting duties. Ireland ought to be able to sell
her butter cheaper than Holland, the taxes being lower,
the soil more fertile, and enjoying, as she did, an exist-
ing protecting duty of 20s. He was opposed to any new
restrictions, and he was afraid the principle bad been
already carried too far. We were the first to impose re-
strictions upon trade, and the effect which our example
had upon other countries was already felt sorely at home.
He therefore.deprecateil the proposal of carrying these
restrictions farther, being convinced that the re-action
which they would naturally produce, could not be other-
wise than fatally detrimental to the best interests of this
country.
Mr. HUTCH I NSON agreed with the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman in his notions of a free trade, hut he would sug-
gest that the principle, however plausible in the abstract,
would be harsh, ill-timed, and absolutely ruinous to Ire-
land, if applied at this time. It was a little hard, that
after this country bad been so long prospering under a
restricted system, the moment of her departure from it
should be that in which the beat interests of an impo-
verished and suffering people were deeply committed in
the change —(Hear.)
Mr. MONCK opposed the motion. The true way of
giving the agricuurists relief was not by imposing dit-
ties, but by remitting taxes. This was the only way of
putting the English grower on a footing with the fa,
feigner. lie thought the interests of the producer was
already too much considered at the expense of the con
saner.

-----
Mr. GRIFFITHS supported the motion, and denial
that Irish butter was inferior to Dutch. •

Sir T. ACKLAND SW Mr. DAVINPORT spoke os the
same side.

hlr. V. II MARA ID declared Monett a wars
friend to the Agriculturists of Ireland, whose interests,
he thought, this motion was calculated to promote. He
was afridd, however, that the present was an unpro•
pitioas moment for bringing it forward, and fearing
that the question might be prejudiced by a negati% e, his

advice to the Hon. Baronet would I e to witbOra
this time.

Sr. N. COLTIWILST said he was ready to t 11, ,
course which the feelings of the house poiete.i
Under these circutnstances he bad no hesitation in ui„..

drawing' the motion.
The motion was then negatived without a d*.v;sion.

LICILNSINU BILL.

The Licensing Bill was re-cum;itted, after some oh.
ions from Mr. BENNET, Mr. Sloxca. the CHAN-
CELLOR or rue EXCIAIQUEIt. Mr. BRIGHT, and 3fr.
PALMER ; the Report was agreed upon, end ordered to
be received to-morrow (this day).
SMALL NOTES. BILL.
The Small Notes Bill went tNronsh a Committee.
The CHANCELLOR of the EYCHEQUER, is a:.
swer to a question from blr. Ricardo, said that the
country Banks would he bound to pay their notes either
in-euin or in notes of the Bank of England.
Slr. RICARDO disapproved of the course pointed out
by the Bill. It would he considered oat of doors as a
repeal of the Bill of 1819.
rite CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQVF:ft, in ♦x.
planation, said that the Bank of England now issued
IL notes.

After a few words from Mr. Mimic, Mr. Poss.:, .
HIVISKIESON, Mr. H. GURNEY, and Mr. F. 13,1.1.31Ep, t 1.4
house resumed, and leave was given to briag in a BA
to continue the restraint upon the issue of 'mail nova.
Adjourned at Ilalf•past One.