Mr. O'Connellwished to make a few remarks on something which had last night fallen from the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department, in vindicating the conduct of the rev. Mr. Bagshawe. A demand had been made by a Catholic prisoner for a priest, and the question as to what he wished to have his attendance for was discussed between the gaoler and the chaplain, who came to the resolution that the prisoner wished for the priest to assist him in conducting his defence; the request for his attendance was therefore rejected. On looking over the act of Parliament, he found no such discretionary power, as had been here exercised, entrusted to either chaplain or gaoler. The 661 act stipulated that if a request should be made by a Catholic prisoner for the attendance of a priest, it should be granted. It would, however, appear that the right hon. Baronet had vindicated the conduct of the clergyman alluded to.
§ Sir James Grahamsaid, that, admitting the statute to run as the hon. Member had construed it, yet that the case alluded to did not come within the limits of those provisions which it was alleged had been violated. He understood that the prisoner had refused to comply with the general rules and regulations of the gaol.
§ Subject at an end.