§ Mr. Wakley moved for "Copies of the Evidence and Verdicts of the Juries at the Inquests lately held at Woolwich on the bodies of two Marines, who had been subjected to the punishment of Flogging." He deeply regretted that this motion was to be opposed by the Ministers of the Crown. It appeared to him to be a matter of great im- 439 portance that the evidence of an initiatory court, like that of a Coroner's inquest, should always be laid before this House, in order that an opportunity might be afforded of knowing the circumstances of any case or subject with reference to which the House might be called upon to legislate. The House ought not to be left without the means of knowing whether the proceedings and the verdicts in these cases were consistent with the proper administration of justice. He did not mean to go into these cases, because it would be invidious in him to make any observations on the conduct of any person in the absence of the evidence. This he would say, that there were several hon. Members in that House who required the information which he sought. There was a Bill before the House to regulate the remuneration of medical witnesses for attendance at coroners' inquests, and there might be circumstances in the cases alluded to which would assist the House in coming to a decision on that measure.
§ Lord John Russellcertainly could imagine peculiar circumstances in which that House would feel it to be their duty, in an extreme case, to call upon the Coroner to produce his notes of the proceedings; but he submitted that, without some very grievous case of this kind, it was inexpedient for the House to call a Coroner before them to give up his notes of evidence, in order that the House might read such evidence taken before a legal tribunal. He presumed that the evidence which had been given on the occasions to which this motion had reference had been fairly given, for the hon. Gentleman had said nothing to the contrary; and perhaps he was the only Member in the House who could, from a knowledge of the subject, say that the evidence, as it affected the medical practitioners, was unsatisfactory. He thought it would be very imprudent if the House were to interfere with the administration of ordinary justice so far as to call for evidence. Now, supposing that the evidence of the medical men (although the hon. Member had certainly not said so) had not been given with a sufficient knowledge of the principles of surgery, still the Coroner's Jury's verdict was not conclusive; and supposing the case of a Coroner's verdict of wilful murder, or no murder, or accidental death, it was always competent for persons to bring it before the tribunals of this country. He trusted that the House would refuse to accede to the motion.
§ Mr. Wakleyhad no personal motive in 440 asking for this evidence; he thought it a very proper motion; but after what had fallen from the noble Lord he should not press the question.—Motion withdrawn.