MAGISTRACY OF IRELAND. (Hansard, 15 December 1830)

HC Deb 15 December 1830 vol 1 cc1188-201 1188

O'Gorman Mahon
thought it was necessary to preface the Motion with which he meant to conclude, by some few explanatory remarks. He wished to have a return of the number and names of the Magistrates of Ireland, distinguishing those acting by a 1189 commission from the Lord Chancellor, from those acting under other authority. He must disclaim anything like a desire to make any invidious distinctions between those parties. At a moment such as this, however, when the country was looking forward to the benefits which had been promised her—he trusted with all sincerity, —and entertained hopes which he had no doubt would be realized, there was no subject to which it was more desirable to direct the attention of the House than the administration of justice in Ireland, particularly to that department of it by which the resident gentry came immediately into contact with the lower orders. He did not mean to make any general observation upon the great body of the Magistracy; but, unfortunately, the experience of Ireland shewed, that in former appointments there had not been a proper scrutiny into the rank, station, and acquirements, and into the character of those appointed to be Magistrates, so as to have none but those entitled to respect in the minds of the people. There were persons in the commission of the peace, who however incredible it might seem in an English Mouse of Commons, were scarcely above the very lowest of the community over which they had to preside, and whose past, as well as present character was such as to make it utterly impossible that any respect could be entertained for them. Further, he could point out individuals in the commission of the peace in Ireland accused of the worst acts, guilty of fraudulent practices, guilty of defrauding their creditors two or three different times, and who had taken the benefit of the Insolvent Act, and had had a Commission of Bankruptcy issued against them. Such were some of the men who occupied a Bench, on which ought only to be seated men of unsullied character. Were he to detail some circumstances connected with the conduct of a part of the Magistracy of Ireland, which were well known to gentlemen acquainted with that country, he should almost be charged with practising on the credulity of the House. There were among them men who had connived at mal-practices which it was their duty to repress, and who had actually participated in acts which were infringements of the law. If, in addition to that, he could point out individuals who made it a practice to receive pay and bribes from criminals, protecting those whom they were bound to 1190 punish, it could not be denied, that such a return as he wished to have must prove useful to the Administration. He was only actuated by a desire that the magisterial body should be pure and sound, as intended by the Legislature. The hon. Member concluded by moving—"That there be laid before this House, a Return of the number and names of these at present in the Commission of the Peace in each County, City, and Town, in Ireland; distinguishing in each the number and names of clergymen and laymen; also distinguishing the names of those Magistrates in each department who have qualified to preside on Road Sessions; and specifying the number and nature of offices (if any), civil or military, under the Crown, or otherwise, held by each or any of such Magistrates, and the probable amount of salary or pay derived there from; also specifying the known profession, public employment or trade, heretofore or at present pursued by each; also, the number and names of those Magistrates who, in each County, City, and Town, have suspended payment, or taken the benefit of the Insolvent Act, or had missions of Bankruptcy issued against them; and stating how often such Commission of Bankruptcy have issued against the same individual; such Return to distinguish also the number and names of those Magistrates appointed under City or Corporate authority from those deriving their Commissions of the Peace from the Lord Chancellor; also, a return of the number and names of those who have been appointed Magistrates in each County, City, and Town, in Ireland, since the year 1810, with the names and number of those who have been superseded in that period, up to the latest period."

Colonel O'Grady
was sure that the Magistrates were so conscious of the unfounded nature of the hon. Gentleman's charges, that they would, if they knew them be the first to move for those returns. When imputations were cast upon the Magistrates generally of Ireland, he felt bound to say, that those of the county which he had the honour to represent, had set an example in putting down the disturbances which, now that disturbances prevailed here, it would be well if the Magistrates of England followed. They risked life and fortune in support of the laws, and their courage and firmness had had their reward; and he, as well as 1191 every other Irishman, owed them thanks for their conduct. It was with pleasure that he availed himself of that opportunity to do them justice. He had been informed that the new Lord Chancellor of Ireland meant to examine into the condition of the Magistracy, and put out of the commission any improper persons, and it would be better that the matter should be left in his hands than that it should be brought before the House. By the general practice in Ireland, a Magistrate who became insolvent, lost his office; and if there existed any such cases as had been stated by the hon. mover, they must be unknown to the Lord Chancellor. There could be no doubt that it was the intention and wish of that Officer to remedy whatever evils might exist in his department, and to him he wished the matter might be left. In what he had said, he had no other object in view than to rescue the Magistrates of Ireland from the unfavourable impression which the speech of the hon. Member might possibly create.

§ Lord Valentia, had never heard any well-founded attack on the Magistrates of Ireland. He had always found them, in all cases and at all times, willing to do their duty. Perhaps the resolution of his hon. friend, the member for Clare, might be viewed as rather invidious, and he thought it would be much better to leave the subject altogether in the hands of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, who had been so recently appointed to his situation, than to bring it before the House. If the papers were laid upon the Table they might bring into discussion circumstances which, perhaps, would not be altogether proper for the House to notice. If the hon. member for Clare thought that the Magistracy of Ireland had acted improperly, or that improper persons were selected, let him make a motion that would bring that opinion before the House, and allow it to be substantiated or refuted. He was satisfied that, taking them as a body, no charge could be brought against the Magistracy of Ireland. He certainly should not oppose granting the returns, but he did not believe that they would afford the hon. Member the information which he wished to gain. He hoped that the hon. Member would withdraw his Motion.

Mr. Maxwell
did not know a more honourable body of men —men more attached to the laws, or more humane in 1192 their conduct, than the Magistracy of Ireland. He was well acquainted with the situation of many Irish counties, and, therefore, could speak without hesitation on the subject. He doubted whether these returns could be procured, or whether any advantage would result from laying them on the Table. The hon. Member had better wait, and see the result of the revision which the Lord Chancellor was to undertake.

Mr. Jephson
did not see any great benefit that would result from having the returns, and if his hon. friend pressed his Motion to a division he should vote against it. The Clerk of the Peace was not obliged to know the profession or calling of persons in the commission of the peace; and, therefore might not be able to make the return required.

Sir Francis Burdett
said, for his part, he had no objection to the Motion, nor had he heard any argument against granting the returns. If persons had been placed among the Magistracy of Ireland, who ought not to have been there, this return would merely show whether that were the case or not. He did not know how the officer could be directed to make these returns, but there might be some means of getting at the information required. Neither did he know how the Lord Chancellor, before a man was appointed to the commission of the peace, should inquire into all the circumstances of his life, for this would be both invidious and painful. He thought the returns of importance, and hoped they would be granted without opposition.

§ Mr. Calcraft
said, that when returns were moved for, it was customary to state what parliamentary object the Member moving for them had in view. He saw no objection to granting these returns; but he wished to ask the hon. Member, what he intended to do with them. He felt, that if he were a Magistrate of Ireland, he should be entitled to know what the motive of the hon. Member was. He should be glad to know whether the hon. Member intended to attach blame to any quarter, or whether he thought that some benefit might be derived from having the names of the Irish Magistrates on the Table, to undergo the revision of the House. He was not aware, however, that the House would have any right to interfere, except in a case of gross impropriety of conduct in the discharge of the magiste- 1193 rial functions. He should not, however, give a decided opinion upon the subject, until he heard from the hon. Member what object he had in view.

§ Mr. Ruthven
thought, the hon. gentleman had put a most extraordinary question to his hon. friend. He had asked him what he intended to do with these returns, supposing them to be granted? and what object he had in view? How could his hon. friend answer that question until the papers were granted? It had been stated, that improper persons were among the Magistracy of Ireland. His hon. friend wished to find whether that was the case or not. There was nothing of more importance to Ireland than its Magistracy, and he was sure that this motion was not brought forward with a view of throwing on that class the least obloquy. Nobody supposed that the late or the present Chancellor had appointed improper persons to the commission of the peace. He was satisfied that Sir Anthony Hart, who was an excellent Lord Chancellor, would never have sanctioned an improper appointment; for the late Chancellor, fortunately for Ireland, was not a political character. No man could entertain a higher opinion of Lord Plunkett than he did, and he hoped that the noble Lord would not suffer the politics of Ireland to enter into his conduct with regard to the Magistracy of Ireland. He had a most important and difficult duty imposed upon him, though there was no doubt that he would perform it to the satisfaction of the country. He was a man of pre-eminent abilities, and of unimpeachable integrity; but there was some degree of alarm, that he might not be able entirely to get rid of feelings which influenced, in a slight degree, the conduct of the most honest men, but which would be attended with most mischievous consequences to Ireland, if they were suffered to give a colour to the conduct of Lord Chancellor Plunkett. For himself he must say, that he had no personal feeling to gratify; he knew the Magistracy of Ireland well; he was acquainted with them, having been long a Magistrate himself, and no man could speak more highly of a body of men than he was ready to speak of the Irish Magistracy. In his part of the country they had acted with the greatest advantage, both to themselves and the neighbourhood, and he did not hesitate to say, that the country owed a debt to the Magistracy of Ireland for 1194 preserving the peace of that country. He would even say, that they had set an example to the Magistrates of England. They never shrunk from doing their duty in seasons of difficulty; but when dangers appeared, they laid aside differences of political opinions, and thought only of preserving peace, and of supporting the law and the Constitution. He would further observe, that the country had derived the greatest benefits from the introduction of Petty Sessions; the beneficial effects of which were exemplified every day in the improved condition of the country; while the people were made aware of the benefits they derived from the Magistracy of Ireland. In the part of the country with which he was connected, the people entertained the greatest respect for the Magistracy, and the most perfect reliance on the administrators of the laws; and no evil could arise from these returns being made. He saw no objection to the Motion. It was somewhat invidious to insinuate that the hon. Member who moved for the returns must have some ulterior object in view. If, however, there were improper persons in the commission of the peace let them be removed. It had been stated that some had been bankrupts, and confined in gaol; but how could the Chancellor know this? or, how could he get at any information on the subject? No man ever held a public situation who discharged his duties more satisfactorily to the people than the late Chancellor of Ireland, and he trusted that the present Chancellor would also merit the approbation of the country. He admitted that much injury had been done by giving encouragement to carry whisperings to the Castle at Dublin; but he hoped the day of those practices had now passed away. He considered the subject one of vast importance to Ireland; he hoped the returns would be granted, and if any necessity were found for it, that the Magistracy would be revised and purified.

§ Mr. Calcraft
did not mean to say, that a Member was bound to state, on every occasion, the object which he had in view when he moved for returns? Although this was what was called an Irish question, he did not make any apology to the hon. Member for taking part in it, because he considered every question connected with Ireland of the same importance as a matter purely English. He knew no distinction or at least none ought to exist, 1195 As an English Magistrate, if a return had been moved for, relating to that body, he should have demanded an explanation. If there were grounds of complaint against any specific Magistrates, the returns moved for ought to be respecting those only, and not such as to throw an imputation on the whole body of Magistrates.

§ Mr. Hudson Gurney
thought, that the returns moved for would be almost useless, unless the hon. Member had some great object in view regarding the public convenience. It would be a cruel thing to drag gentlemen before the House without such an object. It could serve no useful purpose to have the record of any man's misfortunes laid on the Table. It would be infinitely better, therefore, for the hon. Member to limit his Motion.

§ Mr. John Campbell
had not the honour of being an Irishman, but he trusted that he might offer a few words on the present question. The Motion of the hon. Member was not only applicable to all Magistrates really in the commission of the peace, but would include all Municipal Magistrates, or those who had to discharge the duties of that office in any town or city of Ireland. The hon. Member must be aware that the Chancellor had no control over this latter class of Magistrates. The return, then, would be highly objectionable, as it would state, perhaps to the ruin of many of those city Magistrates, that at one time of their lives they had been bankrupts. [O'Gorman Mahon explained, that his return was confined to those actually in the commission of the peace.] In what a painful situation would the House place a Magistrate by putting such a question to him. He had no doubt that such a return might lead to the ruin of many mercantile firms which had now the highest character. He should therefore oppose the Motion.

§ Sir Charles Wetherell
said, that the hon. Member, in endeavouring to discover extraordinary grievances, had moved for extraordinary returns. It was impossible for him to discover what object the hon. Member could have in view in endeavouring to obtain these returns; but they would expose to the world the private affairs of the Magistracy, which would not even be creditable to the Inquisition in Spain, still less to a British House of Commons. He certainly should oppose the Motion, as it was highly improper. What a situation would the House place 1196 many respectable persons in by ordering these returns! A man at some time might not have taken up a bill of exchange on its becoming due, or he might have been unable to pay his tailor immediately on demand, or any other trumpery debt: and, for this, was he to be dragged before the country? If a man had refused to pay a bill, was he to be pointed out in this paper as an insolvent? If there were a single man in the House who would divide on this question, he would be with him; but if he went out of the door alone, he would certainly oppose the Motion. In that House, and in most of the good society of England, there was an absence of this prying into the personal or private affairs of individuals, and a contempt for an inquiry whether any misfortune had befallen a man in his previous career in life. It was the duty of the House to abstain from such proceedings, and to discountenance such inquiries. Every rule of law or moral conduct was against adopting such a course; and every man must see the evils which would arise from such a proceeding. For that House to institute such an inquisition would be most dangerous; and he meant strenuously to resist the hon. Gentleman's Motion.

§ Lord Althorp
said, that the hon. Member had asked him, before he proposed his Motion for the returns, whether there would be any objection to it; and he answered, that he was not aware of any; but he must add, that tins Motion differed from what he (Lord Althorp) expected it would be. It would not be desirable to drag the name of every Magistrate before the House who had been a bankrupt; and the hon. Member, he was sure, would not desire to attach a reproach to a man because he had been in pecuniary difficulties. Any information with respect to the Magistrates of Ireland, he should be happy to afford, but he did not think that these returns would be desirable. There was a great objection to making inquiries into the pecuniary circumstances of the Magistracy. The feeling of the House was decidedly hostile to the Motion of the hon. Gentleman, and he therefore suggested to him the propriety of withdrawing it.

O'Gorman Mahon
would acquiesce, readily in the recommendation of the noble Lord; but he could not see any objection to making the returns. He was surprised at the language which had been used, and 1197 he could not allow the opportunity to pass without replying to the observations of some hon. and learned Gentlemen, who had been pleased to insinuate that he moved for these returns from some uncommon motive. He never thought there could be the least objection to giving returns respecting the conduct and character of public officers,—for such the Magistracy certainly were. As soon as a person was appointed to the commission of the peace, he became a public man, and must expect to have his views and conduct in public life strictly scrutinised. He had reason to believe that there were improper persons in the commission of the peace, and he wished to know whether it were the case or no. He did not understand exactly the language of the hon. member for Boroughbridge, (Sir C. Wetherell) nor the tone of lecturing which he adopted. Although the age of that hon. and learned Member might be a sufficient reason for his respecting him, it was not sufficient to make him put up with the strange language he had used. He utterly disclaimed the idea of making any attack on the Magistracy of Ireland; and the hon. and learned Member put language into his mouth which he never uttered. He had made no attack on the Magistracy of Ireland; and he appealed to the House, whether he did not say, that he had no intention of attacking that body. It was with a view of excluding from that respectable body the weeds which had crept in amongst it, that he proposed his Motion. His hon. friend, the member for Limerick, was completely mistaken in imagining that he wanted a thorough investigation into the affairs of all the Magistracy of Ireland. He stated, that they were respectable men—which was admitted; but he must complain of the language of the hon. Member; for though he did not know the character of the Magistracy in the county of Limerick, he did not think it stood quite so high as his hon. friend wished to place it. He certainly did know instances of not altogether proper conduct of Magistrates in his own neighbourhood, but he had not many opportunities of viewing their conduct, because he was no longer a Magistrate, having been superseded. Did his hon. friend forget the conduct of some late Magistrates in his own country? They determined to resist the popular prejudices on some points, feeling they might lead to disturbances of the public peace. 1198 But how did they proceed? Not in a common way, as other men would have done. Did his hon. friend recollect a round-robin which these gallant men signed, expressive of a determination to maintain the peace, which they were afraid to sign in the common mode? Did he forget, also, that, but a very few days ago, some of those very Magistrates were fined for improper conduct in a Court of Justice in Dublin? Did he forget that those Magistrates were brought before the tribunals of their country, and that the Court inflicted a heavy fine on them? His hon. friend, the member for the county of Limerick, could not have forgotten this. The strictest investigation should be made before a man was appointed to the commission of the peace; but he had no wish to drag the private transactions of private men before the House. He did not wish to exhibit a man to the country because he had been a bankrupt. But men had been appointed Magistrates in Ireland, who had been fraudulent bankrupts, more than once or twice. He repeated, he knew men in that situation who had been guilty of fraud; and it certainly did not appear to him that these were proper persons to be intrusted with the administration of justice. What would be the feelings of the peasant, carried before such a Magistrate, for being unable to pay 5s. The Magistrate, no doubt, would order him to pay, but what must the peasant think of seeing the Magistrate in the enjoyment of great wealth, after committing gross frauds, while he was sent to gaol if he could not pay the 5s.? Such persons ought not, he repeated, to be in the commission of the peace, if tranquillity was to be preserved. His hon. friend, the member for Wexford (Lord Valentia) said, that if the House assented to this Motion, it might be considered as a reflection on the conduct of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland. He could not conceive how this could be the case, as he was not, perhaps, so likely to get at information of this sort as the House, of Commons, unless he listened to private whispers, which would be most pernicious. No man could entertain a higher opinion than he did of Sir Anthony Hart, and he believed that no man who ever presided in a Court of Justice was more divested of everything like political feeling. When he (O'Gorman Mahon) was an agitator, he removed him from the commission of the peace; it was by his orders that the 1199 supersedeas was issued; but he did not feel angry with him on that account, because he was satisfied that his conduct had been misrepresented to the Lord Chancellor. His countrymen thought, that he had suffered in consequence of his attachment to the public cause, and they wished to make a present to him to commemorate his humble public services, but he declined receiving this mark of esteem, out of respect to Sir Anthony Hart. He refused, because he did not wish his countrymen to believe that a political motive had influenced the conduct of that excellent Judge. He had not alluded to this before; but he could do so then fairly and openly, because Sir Anthony Hart was no longer in office. But to return to the subject of his Motion: he had no wish to drag all the Magistrates before the House, though he was desirous of finding out the improper persons amongst them. If, by pointing them out to the Lord Chancellor, so that they might not be re-appointed; if any Member would come forward manfully, and place his finger on the names of such persons, all the complaints against the Irish Magistracy would be removed. He certainly should have no objection to see the names of those gallant men who signed the round-robin to maintain the public peace, brought before the House; nor should he have any objection to see the names of those who were fined 500l. the other day in the highest Court of Justice in Ireland, published. He could assure the hon. member for Boroughbridge, that if he was desirous of dividing, he would oblige him; he would come to the point, and allow him, if he pleased, to walk into the lobby. He had no wish to disagree with him—but the contrary; still he could not put up with the tone he used. He would tell the House, that if it were desirous of having peace and tranquillity in Ireland, it must make the administration of justice pure. One bad Magistrate did more to shake the confidence of the people in the purity of the administration of the laws than any ten good men could to establish it. He had no objection to adopt the recommendation of his noble friend, the member for Wexford, and his gallant friend, the member for the county of Limerick, to leave the matter to the investigation of the Lord Chancellor, who, he had no doubt, would do ample justice between the parties. With respect to the observations of the hon. member for Wareham(Mr. Cal- 1200 craft) that hon. Member was not justified in asking him what course he intended to pursue if the papers were granted and laid on the Table. His object was perfectly fair and open. He had no wish to insult or injure any of the Magistrates of Ireland; but he conceived that he was entitled to move for the production of any papers which were calculated to promote the welfare of that country, without having it insinuated that his wishes were improper. He had been a Magistrate himself, and he knew that there were persons in the commission of the peace who ought never to have been appointed; that bankrupts, and persons convicted of fraud, ought not to be on the Bench. There were others also who had neither wealth, education, nor character, to justify their appointment. For instance, he knew a small town in the southern part of Ireland, where there was a post-office at a little shop, and when a person wanted a letter, he had to tap at a window, which was opened, and the letter given out, and he paid his sixpence and received his twopence change. And by whom was this done—who was the keeper of this little post-office—who was the receiver of the fourpence? A person who was in the commission of the peace for an Irish county. What would any hon. Member say, if such was the case in this country,—would he not indignantly exclaim against it? He did not mean to say that the person he alluded to was not a respectable man in his way, but he conceived that no human being would assert that he was in a situation to administer justice to the people of Ireland. He had no wish to injure the feelings of any man, and he was, therefore, sorry that the discussion had taken such a turn; but if any hon. Member would lend his assistance to promote an improvement of the Irish Magistracy, by pointing out to the Lord Chancellor persons who were unfit to be Magistrates, he would perform a great service to Ireland.

Colonel O'Grady
wished to say one or two words, in respect to what had fallen from the hon. Member. He could assure him that he never thought of charging him with having been actuated by an improper motive. He was, however, mistaken in one or two points, especially upon the subject of the Limerick Magistrates. He felt it his duty to state, that he knew no case—bearing out the assertions of the hon. Member; if he had, he should have 1201 felt it his duty not to have moved for the names of all the Magistrates, but to have mentioned those who had behaved improperly, and have founded ulterior proceedings upon the returns. The Magistrates of the county which he had the honour to represent had always conducted themselves in the fairest, most honourable, and most courageous manner.

§ Motion withdrawn.