On this page
-
Text (2)
-
•Mabch 14, 1646. V "' - * • THE NORTHERN...
-
, . * , \. -CpJrjuhovflrj, ^l ' ir-cdonv...
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
House Oe Lords-Mosday, March 9. Irish Co...
11 Ido not deny to this house the competency or ee rise right of interference on such a question ; but 1 aay say say , that 1 think that interference ought at all antes mes to be tempered with discretion , that , vt ought ; ) bt tot to be lightly undertaken , and that upon the whole i is i is most desirable to maintain strictly the line ot . _semmmarcation between the functions of the legislative j aad eid executive government , ltmustalwsys be borne j n ma mind that the _brightest and noblest prerogative ; _npjotnjoved by the Sovereign is exercised uuder the j tUvMvice of the responsible Ministers of the Crown ;' nnd hd I shall not shrink from my responsibility , as one ' f f tbf the advisersof her Majesty with reference , to the j rrcstrcsent case . The hon . member for Finsbury had _; t . tatetated that the persons whose situation he has ;
_iiirouirousht under tlie notice of the house were mis- . _-i-uiduided and unfortunate . 1 must say , 1 dissent ! illtojltogethcr from the position of the hon . gen-: llenlenian that they were unfortunate , lor 1 con-, iidejder that with reference to the crime of vvhkhich they stand convicted , tliey were fortunate j in tn the highest degree . The hon . gentleman has i uUodso said that the feeling iu favour of these indivi- ' _ainndnais is strong aud _yerv general . 1 admit it . But tthethe hon . member went on to say that that feeling was ggniwiiversal . To such u proposition 1 most equivocall y _Ueirlemur . Those who believe that the sentence passed xm m these individuals ought to be commuted have uot iie-iie-itated to express so huniane a feeling ; but , on _iMieihe other hand , those who think the cause of justice
unduid order requires that the punishment to which uLkeLkey have been sentenced should be inflicted , have itustustaiued front the expression of that opinion , iu full _ra-lreliauce upon the disjiositiou of her Majesty to _excr-Geiseise the prerogative of mercy _consistently with _princcipcipfes of justice , ( llear , heir . ) The lion , member tfortor Finsbury has stated that , in his opiniou , the _eaneonviction of the pci *» on 3 to whom he has referred twawas not legal . He has stated very accurately the _ipo ' point of law which was reserved for the opinion of _iihiihe judges , and a nicer technicality could uot well _lhahave been brought under their consideration . Tlte _ifae _- _acts are these *—The statute , which justly affords -pepeeuliar advantages to parties _aeeuseu of _treassosou , provides Uiat ihey shall have certain
_privileges which are not extended to prisoners _accuseU ioi _' oi " _oiher offences . Among those advantages is thisiththat partksaccused of treason shall be furnished with ; a « copy of ihe indictment , and a list of witnesses , at tithe same time , and witinu a given period before the atrial . The prisoners iu this case were most anxious xcxo obtain , at ' . he earliest possible period , a copy of tl the indictment on which the grand jury had found a b bill against them : and tbe solicitor for tiie Crown , is with an eager and commendable desire to : iffurd them 'A'Aie full advantage of their pyivilfcge , ftmiisheil them \ s with a copy of the indictment at the earliest possible p period , lire days before the expiration of the period -5 within which he was required by law to do so . Ou X she dav within the limit prescribed by law he also
i mrnisheu them with a list of witnesses ; aud the i point taken was , that the delivery of the two—the k eopyot the indictment and the list of witnesses—\ was not simultaneous- That point was reserved by ; ihe learned judges who tried the prisoners lor the \ op inion of their brethren . The hon . member for ' Finsbury has said that I have admitted , under eer-¦ lain limitations , the necessity of an appeal in criminal cases ; aud because 1 had made that admission , he put a ease in which an appeal was made from the opinion of the judges to the decision of the House of Lords . 1 never held out the slightest expectation that I _ctm'd be a partv to tke establishment of such aa _appevil in cases of felony . As th * . law now stands the final appeal in criminal casts is to the opinion
of the fifteen judges , and the decision of the fifteen judges upon the question is held to be final . _Xow , what was the opinion of the Ulteen judge * , in the ease to which ihe honourable _gentleman referred ? It is true tbat uine out of the fifteen held that « he objection , if taken at the right time , would have been valid ; but it is also true that nine oat of the fifteen held , that in this case the objection was not taken at the right tune . So far the _hou . member for Finsbury and myself arc agreed . Hut _fkat was the unanimous opinion of the whole fifteen judges ? Jt was , that if the objection had been taken at the right time , the sole effect wouid have been a postponement ofthe trial , and the case would
have been decided at a _subsequent period . ( Hear , hear . ) I must repeat my observation that , considering the advantage which was _most humanely—and , _ss 1 think , rightly—extended to them by the advisers ofthe Crown , and considering also that the extreme sentence ofthe law was not carried into executim * on account of this difference of opinion among tbe judges , ihese pri- 'oners were most fortunate . Hut I next come to the point taken by the hou . member for _Fiusbury , that the offence of which these prisoners weregui'ty _wa-s only a moral demonstration in favour ofthe Charter . Ithink the hon- gentleman said it wis only to be regarded as a moral demonstration . ( _"No , nor froin Mr . Duucombe . ) Well , then , 1 withdraw the statement .
Mr . 'I . Dcxcombe said , what he had stated was , ihat he believed that Frost had come down from the hills in order to make a moral demonstration in favour of Viueciit , who was then in confinement in Monmouth . Sir J . Guaham- —I understand the hon . gentleman to say that the purpose of Frost iu going on the night in question to Newport , was to make amoral dcniouiTratiofl . 1 must observe , in justice to the hon . _member , that he frankly admitted that those persons were convicted of a heinous offence , and one which , « n his opinion , was wholly unjustifiable . This _circuni-^ _utcuvk-xa n ic to statute the house—ur rather to recall to their recollection—what were the facts <>/ thc case . It is not for me to defend the opinions ofthe right hon . member for Edinburgb { Mr . . Macauley ) , who is far mors competent tbau 1 am to vindicate the - < entiment 3 he has recorded on the subject
but I may say , deliberately and dispassionately , alter _vietrjnjr tac circumstances of this case , with respect to the offence itself , that I have arrived at the same conclusion with the right hon . gentleman . I must say , tbat a more heinous offence lias seldom been committed . . Now , what were the facts if In the year 1 _* 39 there was great distress in the mining districts i : x this country . The price of provisions was kigh ; the rate of wages was low ; and a very general spirit of _dUatiecthm and insubordination was manifested . In the moment ofthat distress , amidstapopu' ation so excited and discontented , in a di-trsct where frequent meetings of ihe people had been held , Frost , who exercised great influence in the _neighbourhood , decided , in concert with Williams and Jones , that , anon a particular evenin ; , a _descent should 1 « made ; -. £ midnight upon the town of Newport , by three different columns—one headed by Frost , the second by William * and the third bv JVoes . Their avowed
_purpiee was to overpower the _miliuu-y quartered in _V-rattown ; to take possession « . f the place ; to break up the bridge over the Usk ; and to stop the mail . The stopping cf the mail was a preconcerted skua ] , by which the population of Birmingham and the Eortliern districts were to know that Newport was in their possosioa . ami there was then to bave been a general nsiw : for the purpose of establishing ihe Charter . Now , that 1 may not misrepresent the matter , I win tail the attention of the house to what _tvSs proved oa the trial of these men . The hon . member ier Fiusbary ha > truly said that the Crown was _represented on tLat occasion by two of the bri ghtest ornaments of tiie profession of the law—Lord Campbell , who was the . i the Attorney-General and
, whose mind was _deepU and hoirourablv imbued with sound consiitutioiul principles ; and * lhe hon . and learned member for Worcester ( sir T- Wilde ' , who , _at . the time to which 1 refer , filled the office of Solicitor-General . Now , what Slid the Lord Chief Justice Tiudal—than whom a more eminent and dispassi -natc judge is not to be found—( tear , hear)—ia summing up the case on the triai of these parties ? The Lord Chief Justice said , " The charge agaiust the prisoner at the bar is , that having broken the faith and true allegiance which he owed to Irislaw . ul Sovereign , lie has levied war against her within her realm—that i _^ in one -word-, _acharge of high treason . 1 oiKcrvcduiattbelearusd Attorney-General stated the case on the part of the
Crown against the prisoners to be ibis , —that ihe prisoner at the bar had brought down to the town of Newport a very large multitude of persons , armed aud arrayed in a wavlike maimer , and that the plan was to get possession of the town of Newport , to break down the bridge , stop the mail , and thati he mail not having arrived at Birmingham for some time , it wouid be a signal for a general rising in Birmingham and Lancashire , and tiie Charter law would become the law of the land . The learned . _Solicitor-Ceneral , who has summed up the evidence , had stated the outline of tin * case , which has been proved pretty nearly in tlie same form , omitting with great propriety that part of it upon which no evidence has wen offered—namely , tint wliich related to the
genual establishment uf Charier law . The Solicitor-Geueral - « t- _it < _-d tbat the plan ot the _t-rwmcr was to get together bands of armed men , with intent , by surprise and tenor , or by force , to take Newport , to _exercise power there , to supersede the magistracy , and thereby raise a genera ! rebellion within the kin . imm . Now , there can be no doubt whatever , that if either of the propositions which have been so stated by the law officers of the Crown is made out to yousatisfaction , there is full proof of the commission h y the _prisoner of the _c-riuic of _hiih _tri-as-on . " Now , upon that summing uji , and after hearing ihe defence —a defence , 1 believe , almost unrivalled in pi . int of talent and force , which wJL s conducted by the hon . and learned _Suncitor-UcncraL and ihe « sent Lord
pr Chief Laron of the Court of _Excht- _^ _o _.-r Sir F J ' _olltttk—alter everything that h _* . _* _, „ , . . luj U . " powerful eloquence , and an earnest d _^ ire to " obum the acquittd of the prisoners had lieen exhausted thejury , weighing the evidence uuder the direction of Lord Chief Justice Tiudal . and with reference io the statement of the law officers of the Crown , deliberatel y adopted a verdict of " guiltv . " Now , listen to _wiat fell from Lord Chief Justice _Th-dal , m passing sentence upon these prisoners . He said : — "It has bceu proved , in vour case , that you combined _togviuer to lead from the hill * , at ihe dead hour o night , into ihe town of Newport , many tiiousand _^ i of men armed iu many instances _wiili wesp' _-ns ( .-1 a daugtrjus dc-. _ciipiioii , in oider that they mi-Jit
House Oe Lords-Mosday, March 9. Irish Co...
lake possession ofthe town , and superseue the lawful _iiuthority of the Queen , as a preliminary step to a more general insurrection throughout the kingdom . It is owing to the interposition of l _' _rovideni-C alone that your wicked designs were frustrated . Your followers arrive by daylight , aud , after _lit-iug upon the civil power , and upon the Queen ' s troops _, are by the firmness of the magistrates , and the cool and determined bravery of a small body oi soldiers , defeated aud dispersed . What would have been the fate of the peaceful and unoffending inhabitauts of that _iown , if success had attended your rebellions designs , it is impossible to say . The invasion of a foreign foe would , in all probability , Ir . ivc been less destructive to property and life . It is for
the crime of hi gh treason , committed under these circumstances , that you are now called upon your selves tu answer ; an . l by the ponulty whicli you are about to _sutler , you hold out a warning to all your _feliow-sul-jects , that the law of your country is strong enough to _repress and to punish all attempts to alter the established order of things by insurrection siud armed force ; aud that those who are fouuil guiity of such treasonable attempts must expiate their crime bv aa ignominious death . " I have already observed that on account of a poiut of legal difficulty , whicli was not ruled iu favour of the prisoners , but upon which there was a material difference ot opinion among the judges , the prisoners were spared that ignominious death , and their punishment was comto
muted to transportation for life ; and we are now eoirader whether thatsentciice should be earned into execution . 1 do not wish _foi aggravate this case , but 1 should betray my duty if , in weighing this matter , 1 did not take into consideration one important fact . 1 have said that Frost possessed _jjreat influence in ilie neig hbourhood in which he resided . On that ' . ¦ round he had been intrusted with her -Majesty ' s commission for : he preservation of tlie peace . ( Hear , hear . ) lie was intrusted with that commission in the confident expectation tlat all his influence and power would be exerted among his neighbours for the purpose of maintaining order , tranquillity , and peace . He _sbuwl that trust —( hear)—he gross ) v abused it ; he almsi-d it to the extent 1 have already stated . ( Hear . ) Ar . d , certainly , if justice is to be administered—as I hope it ever will be in this country—with merer , but still with a due regard to the
example to lie afforded to a great community , I cannot overlook this circumstance of so gross au abuse of a trust _iso important . ( Hear , hear . ) I must be allowed to make another observation . The night on which this movement took place was unusual l y dark and tempestuous . Frost did not consider the fatal and di _^ _isti-ous result which his conduct would produce ; he had no misg ivings as to the _consequences of his crime ; but , by an interposition of Providence , the dark and tempestuous night prevented the insurgents from arriving at Newport till daybreak . ' Frost headed the first column and brought it into the centre ofthe town , to a building in wliich a small portion of her Majesty ' s troops had been posted . He ordered the column to fall out in front ; he pointed out the post as an object of attack , and told the men to so forward . ButFrost _wasnotfound in their front , he was discovered some hours afterwards iu a
_hidingplace in which he had taken refuge . Now , with respect to the punishment of these parties , wc must consider how much of that punishment has alre . idy been inflicted . The sentence , as 1 have before s ; iid , was commuted to transportation lor life , aud what time has elapsed since the infliction of that punishment commenced ? A period not exceeding five years . ( Hear , hear . ) Why , sir , a person transported for seven years for a minor offence would not , in the ordinary _foursc of the administration of justice in this country , have his sentence commuted at so early a period . According to the ordinary mode of proceeding _, a sentence of transportation for life , even under the most favourable circumstances , would m t be commuted until the expiration of ten years .
Now , I must remark , that if punishment be not ofa vindictive character—as in this country I hope it never will be ; but if it be inflicted for the suppression of crime , and in order to afford an example to a great community , I cannot think that 1 should be justified in advising her Majesty to accede to the prayer ofthe petitioners who have supported the motion of the hon . member for Finsbury . My . sympathy , I am bound to say , is not with Frost and Williams . My sympathy is with the widows and orphans of those men whom Frost , Williams , aud Jones uwled , and who lost their lives on the _occasion to which 1 nave refrrred . ( Hear . ) I most say that I think it is useful that tliose men should remain—at present at loast _^ -exampks that such advice as they
gave io the people generally proceeds from men bold in counsel , but timid in execution ; and who , when matters come to an issue , are eager to screen themselves from tke consequences of their miscouduet , instead of being found in the foremost rank of those whom they have iucited to crime aud outrage . ( llear , hear . ) Their cxemple , I think , may afford a salutary and useful lesson . I am bound to say that I cannot think , under piesent circumstances , it would be consistent with my duty to advise the remission of the punishment- io which these parties have been . sentenced . Far be it from me to say * that the gate « f mercy should for ever be closed against them . Far be it from me to hold any such doctrine . I say that it is a question of time and circumstances . At the
present time , and under present circumstances , I do not , think that it would be consistent with my duty io recommend her Majesty to extend her clemency io these unfortunate prisoners . 1 do not consider it advisable that any interference should take * place . No _luau respects morn than 1 do the feelings ami wishes of so large a portion of the community as have _t-xprtssed their opinions in favour of the motion of the hon . member for Finsbury ; but _juntice is admiuisleivd for the benefit of the entire community , and my belief is , that it would not lie for their advantage , ri htly understood , that I should accede to the _proposition of the hon . gentleman . ( Hear , hear . ) Mr . Macaulet said he would not have uttered a _sin-zle word on this ocr . _*«* ision , but for tiie introduction
oi his name by the hou . member who brought forward the motion . The hou . member must permit him io begin by setting rig ht some mistake iuto which he had fallen . There existed no such counexion between the letters which he had introduced to the notice ol the house as he seemed to suppose . Those two letters were written at different times , and to different persons . One of tliera was written to a constituent of fiis ( Mr . Macauley ' s ) iu answer to some scruples which that constituent entertained about cuiitri billing to the support of the militia , and the other was in answer to the secretary of a committee , who requested him to _suppott the motion of the lion , gentleman in favour of the pardon of Frost , Williams , ant ! Jones , lie ( Mr . _Macaulex ) had had no notion
that either of those _lettem w .. uld be published . One of tbem was written iu the strictest privacy ; though , with respect to the other , which was addressed to the secretary of % committee , perhaj she had not so much right to complain of the publication . They were , however , published together without his ( Mr . Macauley ' s ) authority , but , whatever influence they might be thought to have on the tenure of his seat for the place he had now the honour to _represent , tliey were not published , he presumed , with any view t .. injure the case now under discussion . With respect lothe first of those letters , and with respect to the _quotiun ofthe elective franchise , it would be very much out of place now to goover again all the grounds which he had already urged iii opposition to tlie petition presented by the hon . member for Finsbury ju
1 S _12 . There was not oue word in the letter m reference to that subject which he was not prepared to _abidis by . ( Hear , hear . ) But he would not be turned away fronune discussion of the question before the house ; he would uot on the present , occasion be led into a discussion of the principles of Chartism , but he requested any hon . gentleman who might , have a doutit as to what the ( injects of Chartism were , to read for himself that national petition presented by tlie hon . member for Finsbury , and to judge whether lie ( Mr . Macauley ) had described them rightly or not . He begged to say that tlie letter which he had written in reference to the ease of Frost , Williams , and _Joitts , _nas written without any expectation on his part that it would ever be published ; but there was uot one word in it which he was
not prepared to reassert . ( Hear , hear . ) In the first place , he had a preliminary objectiou to the moticu of the hon . member for Finsbury , which would be decisive , even if the case brought forward by that hon . member were stronger than it was . He had a . strong and insurmountable oljecth _.-n to any interference ou the part of this house with this particular prerogative of the Crown . No doubt they hud a right to advise the Queen with respect to the exercise of any of her prerogatives . There was no law which said that they might advise the Queen with respect to one prerogative , but that with respect to another Uie House of Commons should not
interfere _, liiy _. the discretion of former Houses ol Commons had always imposed on them , and the discretion of the present ought to impose upon it , certain rules not to be lightly pa .-scd by . ( Hear , hear . ) It was from no superstitious feeling , from no blind reverence for tise Queen ' s prerogatives , that he spoke ; for he wished that noue should exist except for tiie general _uoud ; but was it not obvious that tlie persons by oy whom the Queen should be advised with respect to the exercise of the prerogative of mercy should be the same persons as were responsible for ihe peace and order of society ? ( Iltar , hear . ) lie could not but _u-ar , from what had fallen from
the lion , member for Finsbury , that he looked on the exercise ol the prerogative of mercy iu au erroneous light . The hon . gentleman seemed to think that its exercise _shou'd be ii matter _ofiiiere amuseincut and pleasure . ( Hear , hear . ) " What a monstrous thing , " exclaimed _thelum . gentlemau , " that when a I ' nnccof Wales aud a _IVmcess Hoval were born , prisoners were not pardoned . " { Cheers and laughter . ) . Such w ; is not his ( Mr . _MarauieyV ) view . He did nut think that tue iioyai merey was , like a firework , to be let off to celebrate a festival or joyous occasion . ( Citeeia . ) The Jt © yal mercv wits a ( listiiict part of justice ; it was a _sofcmii a , m awful _at-! _, ? " ? _' _1 ° " tius r _-riMiiiie _, that the _governuem was bound to preserve the peace of society , and to protect fife and property , and they were bound to uo _luis w . ih the smallest , mJl _' _ct _' _w , of _differing ( even on the guilty ) winch waa _compatible wuh the
House Oe Lords-Mosday, March 9. Irish Co...
accomp lishment of the object iu view . ( Hear , hear . ) In such cases as the present nothing was easier than for lmn . gentlemen to come dowu to _thathom-c and gratify the good humour of their constituents bv . ukiug for pardons for all sorts of parti , s . He looked upon the origin ot this proceeding to be the natural reaction against that barbarous penal code which had been in force in _"England duriug the past century , and the result was that there was now Sll ( _.- i a sorc „ cllemiiiiite feeling m the country , that there was hardly a case of atrocity with respect to which they would not have thousands ol persons petitioning for mercy , if the house gavei any encouragement to the practice . It was , therefore , necessary to make a stand in the first instance . ( Hear , hear . ) lie had
no _he-diation in saying that this prerogative of mercy was a power which he would rather entrust to the worst Minister than to the best llouscof Commons . ( llear , hear . ) If a Minister was bad , they could address the Crown to dismiss him ; but while thev had a Miuistcr with respect to whom they did not declare a want of confidence , it was their duty to leave this matier elsewhere ; and he could _notcouteruplatc the case in reference to which he would Interfere with the exercise of this prerogative . But if he could contemplate any such case , it must be one of the most overwhelming , most flagitious , and most monstrous iniquity , making one ' s blood boil , something like the iniquitous cruelty which was -perpetrated in the rcigu of James IL , with _re-peet to those who
look up arms tinder Monmouth . W hat was the case of Fr «> st , Williams , and Joues ? They raised 1000 oroUUO persons , who , armed with fire-arms , _scithes , and deadly weapons , marched at midnight for the purpose of _atiackuig a toira , " aud iked on the Ciueeu ' s troops . _Sucfi were the words of his letter . Ihey wounded a magistrate iu the discharge of his duty . Mr . _Doxcomue . —He was not wounded by their fire . Mr . Macauley . —He had read the trial , and , unless his memory deceived him , two wounds were received by Sir T . Phillips , who , on that occasion , exhibited a gallantry and fortitude which would have done honour to a . veteran ; lor he informed only
Cantaiu Gray of the wounds he had reeeived , without Jetting tlie soldiers know of them , ( llear , hear . ) This movement was intended to lead to a general rising in the north of England . ( Hear . ) Let them consider the language of Chief Justice Tindal . Was that language too strong for the occasion ? Imagine the effect of a great civil war between glasses in England . That was what these men meant , ( llear , hear . ) No war that they had ever seen or heard of could give the smallest notion ofthe horrors of such aeontest . ( llear , hear . ) Tho great wealth , the great civilisation , and all the other advantages of this country , _mtbt make a civil war between classes a visitation very different from , and far more horrible , than the wars of the Roses or of the Cavaliers and Roundheads .
Was , then , that house to treat this as a light case ? ( Hear , hear . ) What were the motives which impelled these men to such conduct ? Were they of a light kind ? Were the objects in view small and _insignineant , which ordinary minds- were likely to l _' ejeet as of no Weight , anil were not likely to lead to imitators ? ( Hour . ) Murder and spoliation of every kind were always contemplated by the men committing ti . ese crimes , and tlte causes whicli induced them to such a course were made up of all the motives wliich impelled the human mind . He was speaking cf the ieaders ; for with respect to the unhappy multitude that followed them , no one could entertain any other feeling but concern . But iu order to be merciful to the multitude , they must
show severity to the guilty leaders . ( Hear , hear . ) Cuusider what were the motives which impelled men to lake the lead iu such proceedings . Every man who committed such crimes wished to succeed , and what was the price if he did succeed ? From a fiiieudraper iu a country town h « would be raised to be the President ofa Republic , to be oue of a committee of publie safety , to be like a Robespierre exercising the power of the State , aud placed on the same footing with the potentates of Em ope . This was a prospect oi power and distinction flattering to the vanity of every man , and these were the motives and these the visiotis which appeared to men when meditating on the subversion ol the established government . ( Hear , hear . ) And
what was the punishment thut it was now proposed to place against such a crime ? Less than that for a misdemeanour or petty _hu-cc-ncy . ( Hear , hear . ) Was it possible , then , to . doubt that these men would hud imitators i f it were to go forth that those who committed high u _' eason who shed blood aud raised a great civil war of class against class , and who attempted to subvert the whole order of the Slate , were to be less punished than the apprentice who stole live shillings from his master ' s till , or the girl ivh might make tree with , hev mistress ' s ribbons to deck « ut her . Sunday bonnet ? ( Oiieers . ) lie contended that these great criminals would have imitators , unless their punishment bore some proportion to their crime . ( Cheers . ) The koii ; gentleman quoted
as a parallel case that ot the Canadian rebels . Were none of them hanged ? [ Mr . Buncombe . —Not on that occasion . ] He was certain of the fact that a considerable number were hanged . But what was the resemblance between that case and the present ? In the case ofthe Canadian rebels , they hanged the most guilty and the worst ringleaders , and granted au amnesty to the rest . In the case of Frost the same course was taken , except that nobody was hanged . But they transported ihe worst , and pardoned the rest . It wa . for the hon .-gentleman to show how hanging in one case some ofthe leaders , and sparing the multitude was a case of lenity ; and how in the other case only transporting the leaders and pardoning the rest was a case of severity . ( Cheers . )
He approved of the guarded language which the right lion , gentleman opposite bed employed . He did not mean to say that no circumstances might . -. rise to justify the exercise of the prerogative of the Crown iu this _ca-e . Were he to do so he should be committing the same fault as the hou . gentleman near him , and interfering in a more uuamiablc way with the prerogative by restricting the exerciscof the mercy of the Crown . No one who voted against tiie motion to-night meaut to say that Frost , Williams , and Junes might uot at some time be objects for the mercy of the Crown , but only that it was not proved that her Majesty ' s Ministers were not to be trusted with the ordinary exercise ot her Majesty ' s _prerogative , and that that house would not _uujireceueutcdly and inconveniently interfere . ( Cheers . )
Mr . _D'Israei . 1 was delighted that Mr . Macauley had vindicated his recent letters , and would be still more so , if some right lion , gentleman on the Ministerial benches would come forward raid vindirnte the letters to which they had receutiy signed their names . With respect to the qutstum before the house lie recollected that he was , five or six years ago , in the small minority of four iu favour of this identical motion . He thought it impossible io aggravate the crime which theseindividualshad commuted ; and he felt bound to say that their sentence was as lenient as any sentence could he under the circumstances . But iu _considering this case lmn . members ought to look to all the other circumstances which occurred . it the itme . He could not forg _. t that the year 183 ! )
was a year of great political excitement , and that a system called " _agnation" had obtained in this kingdom for a number of years , and that by that agitation , carried a _> he thought fo the nearest _ctiifiues of sedition , men became ministers , parties were destroyed aud _constructed , and an administration rose to power formed of individuals who at that time had sat ou both sides of the house . Whether they were Secretaries of Slate or not he need not inquire . (** Hear , livav . " anvl a laugh . ) When , therefore , these iguomut ami uninformed individuals , seduccd'by these great examples , by seeing that from this . system of agitation men became Ministers , and by seeing others in another part of the United Kingdom become more powerful than
Ministers—when to seduced they broi-e out into a course of proceeding which had been discussed tonight , he thought it ri _^ ht to consider their conduct in connexion with all the other circumstances of the time . He ( Mr . D'Israeli ) knew very well the correspondence that had been held by eminent leaders in this country with organised masses ofthe people , and he knew thut their _transactions had been more successful than those of these poor Chartists ; and animated by these convictions , although he thought their crime enormous , the greatest of all crimes , and the judgment lenient , he felt it his duty to v <* te in their favour . Now , had any circumstance occurred since to change his opinion , and therefore his vote ? Tke right lion , and learned member ( Mr . Macauley )
had instanced the case of one of * our colonies ; biii it was the case of that colony that very much influenced him ( Ah * . D ' Israeli ) , lie saw a great insurrection there , and found the traitors not only not punished , but rewarded ( hear , hear ); and although not the _m- _iii to palliate t ! ic enormity of the crime in question , he did not want the people of England to leel that there was a difference between colonial and native crime ; an advocate of native industry , lie did uot wish for this exception . ( Hear , hear , and a laugh . ) If the colonial system could only by carried out by making Mr . Frost a slave , and Mr . Papiueau a speaker of a House of Assembly , then that svatcm OUg _l-ttobe putiineiullo . ( Cheers . ) But the right hon . and learned gentleman , never ri « : _lii-r in his reuiitiiscenccs that _vvfoju he appealed to history , weut back to the reign of ' James II ., and said it was rep lete with instances which might , be paralleled with
the present case , but which were innoxious compared with it ' here was a , magistrate u-ouu- ( cd , and her Majesty ' s troops were fired upon . 11 might be asked iu parenthesis whether her Majesty ' s troops were not fired oil in Canada ( hear , hear ); and it might , UC well to sec a return ofthe magistrates wounded iu Canada _, ( llear , hoar ) But when the right hon . and learned gentleman appealed to the rei gn ol James 11 . as the model reign for sedkion and treason that should he pai-doued , he must be' asked , was not the blood oi Sedgmoor as costly as the blood of the little town of Newport . ' ( Hear , hear . ) Were we to be told to show no mercy in the case of this insurrection , because in the reign of . lames II . there was a rebellion in wliich there was suffering infinitely more severe ? The observations of the right hon . and learned _geutlcniansupplicdnovaHdargumeutagaiiistthis motion , The _hott . member then turned to the arguments of Sir James Graham , and admitted that he had , as a
House Oe Lords-Mosday, March 9. Irish Co...
Minister , placed the quastion on a constitutional _ground in the early part ol hissneeek The minuter was ot course bound to dilate on " the enormity of the crime , and the delicate nature ol the exercise of the prerogative ot the Crown , and no one would question eitlicr ; hut it created quite an extraordinary sensation to nntl that the government had a set of opinions they were determined to adhere to . ( A l . \ iigk . ) But the right lion , baronet paused in that career , and when he had put himself in a dear and intelligible arid strong position , both in point of constitutional doctrine , and ( it w _.-is to be hoped that was not a past sentiment ) ol * loyal feeling , he virtuall y added , looking to the lion , member .- , for Finsbury , who were the lirst to discover that he was of SO " _squetKillJc" a
nature , — Lring forward the question' on another occasion , in another session , perhaps in another Parliament , and 1 shall be ready to meet you in the most liberal spirit ; at present I disapprove of tlie motion , and I wish the prerogative delicately and discreetly u _< ed . Do not for a moment suppose that I wish to stop you in your constitutional course ; press the Crown , though the exercise of mercy is that _pi-oro-iai've for which I am peculiarly responsible , and with which this house is the very last authority which should interfere ; but do not persevere just now , although under present _eireumstances-we could not be in a minority . " ( A faugh . ) Now thatwas not the way m which the government ought to meet the question . He ( Mr . _D'lsraeli ) voted for these
men years ago , m the hour of their adversity , and wouid not desert them now ; but according to the right opinion of society , and the decision of the law , they had committed a ( jveat crime , and the law had awarded them a great , though a lenient punishment , and the government ( to use their own _ofliclai language ) had onl y two courses , —the men wore either to be punished as an example to society , or pardoned as ar . encouragement to _others to feel that there was in the Crown a divine faculty of mercy ' ; but no government was authorised in standing forward aud saying , " These are criminals , whose punishment we vindicate , but bring on your motion again , and we do not say wc will resist tho _appcfa . " Tuat was a _concession of the most demoralising character . ( Hear , hear . ) If in such circumstances
these " men were ever pardoned through the exercise of the highest quality of tlie Crown , the attribute of mercy which all adored , what would they arid the multitude they represented say ? Would they feel gratitude to tlte Crown ? No ; they would only recognise the timidity and weakness of thegovernment . ( Hear hear . ) For these and other reasons , if the hou . mover divided the house , he should support him its ( _jefore ; but perhaps he would do well to be satisfied with having now placed the case in a light which would call attention to it , and enlist on its side what might be called the wholesome sympathy of the public , so that ultimately , perhaps , the Crown might be induced by its natural impulse and > disposition , conscious of that sympathy of its subjects , to view with mercy the conduct of these misguided men . ( Hear , hear . )
Sir < J . GitAHAM complained of the misrepresentation of which the last speaker had been guilty . What he had said was that he could not be responsible , at the present time , for the remission of this punishment , but he had thought it proper co add , that it was not right for any man to presume that there was any limit to the mercy of the Crown . Mr . J . A . S . Wortlki * complained ofthe influence which personal pique and personal prejudice always exercised over the mind of Mr . BIsiueli . They had induced him formerly to vote for the motion , and tliey induced him to vote in the same manner kow . Leaving Mr . B'Israeu with these passing '
observations ; he proceeded to remark that the petitions on this subject d : d not embody publie opinion , and to express his belief that nothing would give a greater shock to public opinion than the remission of this sentence . He then entered into a review Of the Circumstances which had led to the trial and condemnation of these men , and showed that so heinous was the crime of which tliey had been found guilty , that it was only after great pressure that Lord J . Russell and Lord Melbourne commuted the sentence of death into that ol " transportation for life . And yet this was the case in which Mr . Duncombe called upon the house to address her Majesty for pardon' If ever there was a ease in wliich the house was hound not to interfere , tlie present was such il case .
Mr . Aouoxiiy wished that Mr . Buncombe could have been persuaded to withdraw liis motion after the speech of Sir J . Graham . Sir lt . Isglis defended Mr . D'lsraeli from the censure of Mr . S . Wortley , and observed that it was perfectly legitimate in Mr . D'lsraeli to remark that if these men had been led astray , it had been by lights tkatcamc from high quartets . But while he ( Sir ft . Liglis ) vindicated the tone ofthe speech of his hon . friend the member for Shrewsbury , he must say that he dissented entirely from the conclusion to which he had consistently arrived . ( Hear , hear . ) Had it not been , however , for tlie closing _sentence of tlie speech of the right hon . baronet tlte Secretary of State for the Home Department , lie should have been _content
to _> it in silence ; He had been very much pleased with the greater part of tiiat speech , hut it did , especially towards the close , give him the impression that , while he maintained the right of die Crown tu remain unfettered by the discussions in that _housewbiJe , indeed , he deprecated the discussions in that house—he had not made up his own mind in favour of the permanent execution ofthe sentence , and that he did give encouragement to a repetition of this motion next year , or some other year . ( " No ! " from Sir J . Graham . ) Then he withdrew that conclusion . Before concluding , he could not help expressing a wish that the hon . member for Finsbury would withdraw his motion . If he did not , he hoped the house would reject it by a huge majority , it was not
merely that the prerogatives ot the Crown would be best preserved by that house not interfering ill this particular case , but that in no instance had public sympathy been less generally excited than in respect of those three individuals . ( Hear , hear . ) People talked of political offences as if they were no crimes at all . Why , the offence for which these men had been transported was the concentration and essence of nil crimes . ( Hear , hear . ) If they had realised the objects tliey iiad in view human imagination could hardly couccive a scene of greater horror arid atrocity than would have been witnessed at Newport on the morning , of that day when these men were apprehended . The lion , baronet concluded by . repeating the expression of his hope that the motion of
the hou . _meiHtier lor rmsbury would be defeated by a large majority . Mr . Waklet expressed his surprise and astonishment to find i-he hon . member for the "University of Uxford stating that the only portion of the speech of the right hon . baronet the Secretary of State with wliich he fouuil fault was that which contained an indication of merciful and humane feeling . Was that the position which the representative of the Church of England had taken ? ( Hear , hear . ) He reall y should have supposed that the hon . baronet would have been the first man in tiie country who would have advocated the merciful motion of his ( Mr . Wakley ' s ) hon . coin-ague ( Mr . T . Buncombe ) . But how had he been mistaken ! He should be rejoiced if
he could carry back the feeling of the house , and the impression arising from the discussion , to what tliey were at the conclusion of the right hon . baronet ' " : speech , ( llear , hear . ) He ( Mr . VYaklcy ) was sitting by the side of his hon . colleague at the time , aud he made the remark to him , that he feared the subsequent discussion ; that lie was alarmed at wkatmiVht transpire during the debate , because his lion , colleague judiciously made an appeal to the _rljht hon . baronet , and asked him if he con Id holdout any hope of mercy being extended to Frost , Williams , and Jones ; and the right hon . baronet , in reply , intimated to his hon . colleague a desire that he should go on with his statement . He ( Mr . Wakloy ) could ee clearlv that the rijiht hon . baronet wanted a vote of
that house—if he was determined to limit the expatriation of these men—to justify him in that position * , because it was absurd to talk of tiie prerogative ofthe Crown in such cases . It was an act of the Secretary of State for the Home Department ., and of him alone . Now , the right hon . baronet , he considered , had made a fair speech , and he did not think that , asa whole , there was any reason whatever to _complain of it . lt was all that could be expected from a Secretary of State for the Home Department , Such a Minister was placed in a position of great responsibility ; he had in a great measure the conservation ofthe country under liisespocial control , and every person who considered this fact for a moment , must allow ihat it required agrcatexcrcke of
discretion on the part of the Home Secretary to recommend that pusuiis who had been found guiltv of such offences should be liberated and restored " to their country , ( llear . hear . ) But in this case his hon . colleague had taken especial care nottogointo the merits of the question . " He deprecated the offences uf which these men were found guilty , and spoke of them as offences of the highest character ; he did more , he reminded the house of the millions of petitioners who addressed tlie home on this subject . None of them attempted to justify the conduct of these men . l ' ut these petitioners were of opinion that if those men lmn been in a higher station of life , and had had move-money stt _Uw-iv d _'«* _ws--A , _and covAd have carried their case before another house , they would not have been transported . ( Cries of , "Oh , oh ! " ) He was . only speaking of what was the
upiitton of the petitioners ; and he assured the _liou-e that this impression universally prevailed , lt would be in the recollection of the house that the question to have been considered iu another place would have been one of a legal and technical character ; and it was generally believed , that if carried there the result would have been altogether different . The house would remember the decision which was given on technical grounds , in another case within tlie ' _" astyear ( hear , hear ) , and the opinion nf the petitioners was , that _PVost , Williams , and Jones , would have been equally fortunate if tiie same appeal had been made . Now what were tlie circumstances under whieh the petitioners addirsvcd the house ? Was there commotion—was tlicie _seiiilioii abroad ? Nothing of the sort . This was the very period for the Secretary of State exercisimr Iii . * discretion . Uut thcspeecJi " - hivhich had been delivered 111 . u' it
House Oe Lords-Mosday, March 9. Irish Co...
had thrown new difficulties in the way ; tor he found In that house the bitterest enemies ot treat , Williams , and Jones—the bitterest enemies ot mercy . Did hon . gentlemen remember that the workingclasses had no representatives in that house ? Were they aware that millions were addressing that house asking for the liberty of men whom they _conscientiously believed were unlawfully transported . ( Cries of " Oil , oh ! " ) That was their impression , was there never to be any concessions to popular opinion in that house ? Were they resolved , because the working-people were excluded from being represented in that house , to treat their petitions withindifference , contempt , and scorn ? ( Hear , hear . ) In his opinion they would endanger the existence ofjthe constitution id this country by such a course of proceeding , for what must the people think when they find that the bitterest enemies of Frost , Williams , and Jones were
_discoverable in that house ? He considered that the Home Secretary was in a great measure relieved from liis responsibility by the speeches of the hon . inemhei'sfor Oxford , Bute ,. aad Edinburgh ; and lie really , hoped that it " his letters were always to be followed by such postscripts as they had been that night , the hon . gentleman would never write again . ( Laughter . ) He begged the right hon . gentleman again to cunsider the case , with reference to the legal objection which was taken by the'jud ges , and to bear in mind that the law of this country always maintained the principle , that wherever a doubt arose in the case ofa prisoner , that individual was entitled by law to tlie full benefit of that doubt . ( 11 ear , hear . ) Mr . Hoi'K , referring to an observation of Mr . D'lsraeli , denied that any of thosu who had been convicted of hi gh treason iu Canada had been since rewarded with offices and honours .
Lord J . Manners and Sir T . Wilde ro 3 e together , but , in obedience to the general calls for the former , Sir T . Wilde gave way , and Lord J . Masnkhs proceeded to address the house . The noble lord commenced by observing , that , in spite of the speech just delivered " by the hon . member for Fin » bury ( Mr . Wakicy ) , in which the hon . member had stated that the continuance of the discussion could come to no good , and as it had been stated that the petitions of tlie people who had no representatives in that house were treated with scorn and indifference , he wished to interpose a very few observations before the house came to a division on the question now before it . He ( Lord J . Manners ) thought that the whole tone of the present debate must serve to convince , not only persons in the house but also out of doors , that there existed no indisposition on the part of the present House of Commons to listen calmly , fairly , and dispassionately to the cases submitted by
those classes , who it was said had no direct representatives in the house . The noble lord , after defending Sir II . Inglisfrom the charge of cruelty , said the object for whicli he had risen was to express his regret at a considerable portion of the eloquent speech of the- hon . gentleman the member for the city of Edinburgh . ( Hear , hear . ) He ( Lord John Manners ) knew net whether there was anything peculiar in the construction of his mind , but he must say that he never heard historical Whigism brought to the attack of modern Chartism , but his judgment was shaken by the feeling of great inconsistency . ( Hear , hear . ) In the very speech in whieh the right lion , gentleman-had so eloquently denounced the crime of whieh . those men , l- _' rost , Williams , and Jones had been convicted , the right hon . gentleman had attempted to find something in the shape of an excusu aud sympathy for the Duke of Monmouth ' s rebellion . ( Loud cries of '' Hear . " )
Mr . Macauley . —The noble lord will excuse me . What I said was this , that if thu severity of the punishment in this case had resembled the severity of the punishment by which Monmouth ' s rebellion htul . buen put down , that then I thought there might be some ground for Parliament to interfere . Lord J . Mann bus thought there was but a very little difference between them . In the case of the Duke of Monmouth ' s rebellion the sentence was that the rebels should be hanged , drawn , and quartered , the sentence on Frost , Williams , aud Jones was , that they should be hanged , drawn , aud quartered , white the particular punishment carried out was , that the rebels in the former case wore transported to the plantations , while Frost , Williams , and Jones
had been transported to the colonies . ile ( Lord J . Manners ) thought the _riglrt _,. hon . gentleman had not by his explanation made any material difference m respect to his case . . The rigkt hon . gentleman had _if-kctl the house to look at the motive which had induced Frost to set himself up and to levy war against her Majesty . What was Frost , it was asked ? A linendruper who wished to become a dictator , had been the reply . Now , he ( Lord John Manners ) could not forget that the house , by its vote on a former occasion , bad determined _t- > make celebrated the name of Hampden . And who was he but a private gentleman , who also levied war against the constituted authorities of the kingdom _? But it was said that the cause in which Hampden had been engaged
was genuine , while that of Frost was not . This was a mere question of opinion . There were . many who thought the cause in which Frost had engaged was a legitimate cause , but still did that impression change the state of things ? He ( Lord John Manners ) had no doubt that many hon . members would not hesitate to vote in favour of the erection in the new Houses of Parliament of a statue of Oliver Cromwell . ( Hear , hear . ) It was quite competent for them to do so , but what he ( Lord J . Maimers ) deprecated was these attempts to palliate rebellion ill one ilgc —( Ileal' ) -. these efforts to honour the conduct of" a regicide in another , and then to deal haish / y with those who havo excited rebellion iu modern times . This , he thought to be a dangerous and fatal course of policya course of policy to which ho could never lend himself ; and therefore , as he was prepared to oppose
any propositions such as those to whicli he had alluded , so he thought he was justified in not voting for thu motion now submitted to the house by the hon . member for Finsbury . ( Hear , hear . ) Before he sat down , he must say that he was tint disposed to look at the crime ot Fiust as one altogether without foundation , for he believed there had never yet been a _popularinsuiTt'CWon whicli had not some great evil l ying at the bottom —( hear , hear)—and he thought that if the house would attend more to the social aud moral condition of the people , and less to the philosophical and politico-economical notions which at present were so much discussed , the legislature would be laying for the future a better and more , enduring foundation for those great institutions of tho cuuutry whicli that wicked and criminal attempt went to subvert . ( _Cheei-s . )
Sir R . Pkbi . —There has been no speech delivered in this house to-night wliich has more coullmied my previous impressions as to the evil consequences of discussing , in a popular assembly like that iu which wc are met , tho exercise of the prerogatives of _tlk-Crown , than the speech which hits recently been addressed to the house by tlie hon . colleague of the hou . gentleman who has brought forward the present _niotiou . ( Hear , hear . ) The hon . gentleman has said that a very strong . impression pervades the minds of millions of our fellow subjects that the sentence in tlie case before us is illegal , and that if the [ _lartici had been wealthy , and had been able to carry the case to the House of * Lords , they would have been treated with a very different degree of mercy . Now , it
the question was merely as tc the legauty of the sentence , ueither house of Parliament could interfere , even on the petition of millions of the subjects of the realm , it was for men high and eminent as legal authorities to state the case to the Crown—tlie _Cl'On _' then to take the best legal advice within its power , and to see whether there was any Haw—tiny informality , or want of technicality iii the conviction , entitling the party to a remission of sentence . ( Hear , hear . ) The hon . member asked , is there to be no concession to popular feeling ? Certainly not , if that popular feeling be altogether erroneous , ( Hear , hear . ) it the expression of the opinions of millions be unjust aud erroneous , this house ought to resist Lt by whatsoever number that opinion might be expressed .
Tiie question then is , in the first place—is the popular expression on this question correct , or not ? 1 say it is decidedly incorrect . ( Hear , hear . ) 1 do not found that opinion on auy judgment of my own , but upon the recorded sentence of the highest legal authorities . What was the decision of the fifteen judges as delivered by a _nt _.-tn of all others—no , 1 will not _stiy , of" all others—but a man mure cautious , more forbearing , or more disposed to give a prisoner every advantage , never sat on a bench . 1 allude to Chief Justice Tindal . ( Hear , hear , ) The opinion of tht fifteen judges was , _ii-at the delivery of the lists to the prisoners , _however well intended , with a view to giving them every advantage , was , in point of law , not _sood . It was , on the other hand , urged that tinobjection to the informality of delivery was not taken at the right time . Suppose it had been , would the effect have been a remission of the sentence—the delivery ofthe prisoners from all piinisjimcnt ? Not
at all . The establishment of that objection would only have postponed tho trial , in order that the Crown miiiht correct the informality . Tlie result of the judges' decision whs , that the conviction was , on the whole , quite good , and thattliu Crown had a riglu under it to carry iuto effect tlte capital sentence o ! the law . If I aui correctly stating the decision oi the jud ges , the impression ofthe millions alluded to by the hon . member is entirely erroneous ; and , if so , nothing could be moro subversive ol the lirst princi les of law and order than that this house should defer to a popular opinion , founded on _enoiieougrounds . After arguing at soum length on the point of prerogative , and the impolicy of such discussions on a popular assembl y , Sir Kobe : t took up the _fact-.-ot the case . Why , what was the case of Frost ? He was a man of property—a man of intelligencea man who stood in a peculiar relation to the Crown , having been entrusted with the commission fov the
preservation ot tho peace , il is the inconvenience attending such discussions as this , that involves the bringing of the circumstances of the case before the house , though the very la-1 of doing so on the part of the Ministers of the Crown appears to show an inclination nut to advise the Crown to a lenient exercise of its power . Uut what were the facts of this case ? A magistrate makes an _attack on a peiiciiblc town , at the head of a body of armed men . whieh attack was to be the signal for a general insurrection throughout the north ; the bridge was to
House Oe Lords-Mosday, March 9. Irish Co...
be blown up ; the mail wns to be stopped , the stoppage of thu mail being intended as an indication t » Birmingham that Newport was in possession ol rebels against the authority of the Crown . That is the case in which , after the parties have undergone six years' imprisonment , the House of Commons is asked to come forward with a petition to the Crown for the exercise of its prerogative of mercy . I should deprecate the establishment of a precedent of this kind . I am convinced this is not the place in whichto discuss the case of prisoners suffering the sentence
of the law . It ' the hon . gentleman , acting upon the dictates of his own good sense , thinks fit not to provoke it division on this subject , well and good ; but I hope he will excuse me if I distinctly stale that I cannot invite him to spare us the pain of a division by entering into any engagement whatever , either expressed or implied , with respect to the future exercise of the prerogative of the Crown . I agree with my rig ht lion , friend that this must be left to the deeision ' of the Crown itself , and I do not think it wise to deprecate either discussion or division by holding out any expectations whatever on that subject .
Mr . M . Phillips should vote against this motion , if it were pressed to a division . At the same time he wished it to be distinctly understood , that in sa doing he was not treating with scorn the petitions ot the people . After a short speech from Mr . P . _Howauii against the motion , Lord J . _Hl'sskll rose for the purpose of pointing ; out the impolicy of entering into discussions on the exercise of the prerogative of mercy by the Crown _, in the House of Commons . It was impossible t © discuss a motion for the remission of punishment without entering into a history of the crime for which it was inflicted . One side would state all the
circumstances calculated to extenuate , aud the other all the details which were likely to aggravate , the crime-He assured the house that , except for a difft-renoe ot opinion among the judges , the Secretary of State for tlie Home Department , at the time ' of these trials , saw no reason wh y the sentence of death should not be carried into execution . In consequence of that difference of opinion among tlie judges , the Home Secretary had deemed it necessary to consult his colleagues , and the result was notorious to tho world . He should vote against this motion , because he was convinced that all the circumstances of this case would lie more impartially considered by the Ministers of the Crown than by any other tribunal .
Lord F . _EoEiriox took the same view of the ques tion . Mr . _Doxcombe replied . He felt that , great responsibility having been thrown upon him , he was entitled , in justification of himself , to make a few observations . One would suppose from what had been said in the course of this debate that no question of this sort had ever been submitted to the house before . The hon . member for Manchester had expressed his virtuous indignation against the parties whose cause iic ( Mr . Duncombe ) was endeavouring to promote ; but why did not the hon . gentleman exhibit this indignation when the lion , and learned member for Bath brought forward his motion for tho pardon of the Canadian rebels ? "Nothing was then said about
usurping the prerogative of the Crown . Tiie right hon . baronet had stud that nothing * . _ysis so wrong as to discuss such a question as this ; but why , he would again ask , was any such discussion allowed in reference to Canada ? There was a distinct understanding between the lion , and learned member for Bath and the government . ( Hear , hear . ) The hon . and learned gentleman said— "My clients will be released _, and I shall not be obliged to " trouble the house . " Everybody knew that the Canadian prisoners would be released , and they were released . All lie ( Mr . Dunc . _imbe ) asked was , that the same weight , and measure should be meted out to the individuals whose cause he now advocated _, lie considered himself to have been unfairly treated by the lion .
_mem-Iter for , Bute , who had entered into ' the merits of the case of these parties . lie ( Mr . Duncombe ) did not rest his appeal upon the merits of the case at alllie said at the outset , that neither he nor the petitioners whose petitions he had presented , attempted to justify the crime of the parties ; but he did gay that they had endured sufficient punishment for tbe offence they had committed , and that their conduct had been most exemplary in the colony to which they had been sent . It was said there was no public sympathy—no _c-11 from the people for any relaxation of punishment ; but those who svid so must be ignorant _, on the subject . He called their attention to a petition presented by him , praying for the pardon of Frost , Williams , and Jones , and signed by 31 , 000 inhabitants of Leeds , including Dr . Hook , the
vicar , the chainwan , vice-chairman , and tweiveof the guardians ol" the poor . The evidence on which the men were convicted , it was supposed by some _,, depended on the testimony of a government spy . Be that as it might , he , however , wished not to strip the laurel from the brow of the magistrate , whose wounds were made so much the subject of commiseration . Those wounds notwithstanding , he believed , were not of so frightlul an extent , and amounted only to a cut linger , from wliich tiie worthy m . gisirate might have escaped if not for his praiseworthy exertions to unbar a window , in doing whieh the glass broke and inflicted the wound complained of . Nothing he had heard during the debate changed his opinions , " and in respect to the feelings ofa generous people , he felt himself eaiJed on to take the sense oi the _hoiiie on the question .
Ail ' . C . 0 . _MOMU-V begged to correct that portion of the honourable member ' s statement wliich referred to the wound of Sir Thomas Phillips . He could assure the honourable member that instead of a cut finger from broken _glass , Sir Thomas reeeived a gun-shot wound in the hand wiien in the act of opening the wiuduw to call for military aid . The house then divided—For the motion 31 Against 19 b ' Majority against the motion 1 G 5 On the motion of Mr . _"Ni-wdkoatb , a select committee was appointed to inquire into the facilities afforded to vexatious objections and fraudulent claims under the present system of registration of county voters for the election of members of Parliament . The other orders of the day were then disposed of _,, and the house adjourned .
HOUSE OF COMMONS-Wedxesday , Mauch 11 The house met at twelve o' clock .
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL . The Friend ly Societies Bill went through Cor . in ittee pro forma , it having been arranged between Sir James Gl ' itfiatli , Air . Duncombe , and other hon . members , most immediately concerned iu its _progress , that with a view to the consolidation of certain clauses , the I ' uvther _consideration of the bill sheuld be postponed for ti fortnight .
ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL . Mr . B . Escmr moved the second reading of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill . A measure of * a similar nature had already been introduced into the Ilouse of Lords by the Lord Chancellor . The provisions of iiis lordship ' s bill , however , did not entirel y eurvespond with tlie provisions of the bill before the house ; but as the character of the two were identical , it might be preferable to consolidate them ,. and form out of them one measure . He detailed at some _lei . gth the grievances still suffered by persons _professing the Roman Catholic faith within the United Kingdom ; such , for instance , as _iuability to practice in the ecclesiastical courts , or to teach , unless upon taking an oath , which was repulsive to many eonscientious individuals . These inconveniences were acutely filthy numbers upou whom they pressed .
Sir _ltoniiKT Ixous was anxious to return to _tne ptactice ofthe Augustan age in Engiiiiidiii reference to religious matters . That practice was wholly _jrrecoiicik-abJe with the contents of the bill before the house , whieh appeared to be based upon the legislation of 18 _" 20 , and succeeding years—the ( lark ages , as they might be called in this country . No practical grievance had been _substantiated by Mr . _liscott ; for as for what he had > tat « l about the obstructions in the way ol " Roman Catholics teaching , they were notoriously unreal , as any person might have a license granted upon application to the Bishop ot his diocese . The present measure would in effect repeal the Act of Supremacy , as well as the law for the expulsion of the Jesuits . He moved that the bill be read that day six months .
Lord _Moiii'E-ni referred to various provisions m the existing law which the bill before the house would annul as practically inoperative , though not nu that account uude & evving legislative notice . The . "tnlutc against preaching , for instance , was notcriously iuett ' eeuve , the obnoxious doctrines being promulgated without let or hindrance in all pans ofthe bud . Still that enactment , while it remained upon the statute-book , might be applied to a malicious purpose , and so of others of a like kind . He urged upon the house to abolish all such restrictions a .-: those against which this bill was directed ; and as Kngland was the asylum of political refugees , so let it be also the haven for persons of every variety of _relii-imis belief . Mr . Finch opposed the bill .
Sir Jamus _Giuimm professed his readiness to support the second reading of the bill , though , he toii--sidered there were some parts of it _whii-lfshouid bo . altered in committee . It was but a measure for the completion of the act oflS 29 ~ anact which had his . _tAi-diii ! Miieurrence at the time , ami to the principle _, of whieh he still subscribed . Mr . Wysk repudiated , as a Roman Catholic , ihe tenet , wliich Mr . Finch had represented as a pan ofthe Catholic ereed , viz ., that tlie Pope has supremo dominion in temporal mutters . However such a doctrine might have obtained in the dark ages , it held no _gvouml now , either here or in professed ]* , ; . Roman Catholic States . " " After a speech , in opposition , _Urom Mr Mr . _O'CosxELi . explained that ample _aflbt-ded in this country to person . - who the conventual garb to abandon their tit any time thev chose . He then def ' meter of the Jesuits , _allirming that ages been conspicuous for their learning . mil had effected more for the mrc than had been performed by - of men .
•Mabch 14, 1646. V "' - * • The Northern...
• Mabch 14 , 1646 . _V " ' - * THE NORTHERN SfAR . * "• ' ¦ V
, . * , \. -Cpjrjuhovflrj, ^L ' Ir-Cdonv...
, _. * , \ . _-CpJrjuhovflrj _, _^ _l ' ir-cdonv _wasr ; ha'd ; ass » nfeai _-professfon , if ; _Jendeti'the cha-. tliey had . in . alland piety ? : interests o _^ litera-s any . other , _boug ¦ ,- _iVv'iil * A— - L I iT ! r _.-C . 6 _^ uhovtp 3 _H _^\ $ Zll _rfi _^ iiom . _w ~ _- _^ m 2 ft ? _ftS i-hitd , ; assumed !; « .., / , | - „ j . _^ _:-prolessiun , » r _!* i _££ 4 * *" * < r * ii mdelHlie cha- ' _v _"S _' -j ><>« liey hadin alk _, _< _-f Ji _^ ing and piety _^ Uj 79 7 iV rests _of'litetasfe \ H . % _8 _|^ ) _Z -sL 0 _s
-
-
Citation
-
Northern Star (1837-1852), March 14, 1846, page 7, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/ns3_14031846/page/7/
-