Colonel Evansrose to present a Petition from Thomas and Caroline Deacle, of Marwell, Hants. The gallant Member said, that it would be in the recollection of the House, that he had, on a former occasion, brought the petitioners' case before the House, when he moved for copies of the proceedings in two trials, in one of which the petitioners were defendants, and in the other of which they were the plaintiffs, and Mr. Bingham Baring and others were defendants. On that occasion he stated distinctly, that he had no knowledge whatever of the case, except what he had gathered from statements in the public papers. He also declared, that he was totally unacquainted with any of the parties, and had studiously avoided having any intercourse with them, in order that his mind might not be biassed by ex parte statements. It was his opinion, that the circumstances of the case, as they were detailed in the public papers, were sufficiently grave to demand inquiry, not so much with respect to the interests of individuals, as because they involved a serious question respecting the liberty of the subject, and magisterial authority. It certainly appeared to him, that the interest of the individuals concerned, as well as of the magistracy throughout the country, required that the documents which he moved for should have been granted, and he was not prepared for the course which the debate took on that occasion. Though he had avoided ex parte statements, other members were not so abstinent, and ex parte statements were made from the documents which he moved for, and the greater part of the discussion was criminatory of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle. The petitioners now came forward to represent, that they had suffered serious injury from the statements which were made in the House on that occasion, and they had consequently requested him to bring before the House the petition 381 which he now held in his hand, for the purpose of affording them an opportunity of vindicating their characters. When he brought forward his motion, he was told that Mr. and Mrs. Deacle had made co-defendants with Mr. Bingham Baring all the persons who could have given evidence in his favour. But he found, upon inquiry, that there were five persons, including a gentleman named Jervis and, three constables, who witnessed the whole transaction, who were not included in the indictment, and who might, therefore, have been called as witnesses by Mr. Bingham Baring, if he had thought proper to call them. In the course of the debate, testimony was given in favour of Mr. Baring's character, but he thought, that such testimony, when opposed to facts which had been proved twice over in a Court of Justice, was not very satisfactory. If the papers which he moved for had been granted, and he had found that they made out a case against Mr. Baring, he had intended to have moved an Address to the Crown, to remove him from the Commission of the Peace. The House was fully in possession of all the circumstances connected with the arrest of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, and the subsequent trial of the former. He did not think it was candid on the part of the prosecutors, to stop the trial against Mrs. Deacle, when they found that they had no case against her. They ought to have allowed the trial to have proceeded, and thus have offered her and her husband an opportunity of vindicating their characters. The House was also aware, that Mr. and Mrs. Deacle brought their action for false imprisonment against Mr. Bingham Baring, and obtained a verdict. This action was tried by a Special Jury, composed of gentlemen of some station in the county in which Mr. Baring's family possessed great influence on account of their high character and wealth. Such a Jury would not be unwilling to look with favour upon any circumstances in extenuation of Mr. Bingham Baring's conduct; nevertheless, they returned a verdict against him, with damages, though they were small. The Judge who presided on the occasion, told the Jury, that nothing had appeared which could implicate the character of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle. He (Colonel Evans) did not impute to Mr. Bingham Baring more than that he had exhibited great want of temper. When he moved for the papers, the discussion 382 took a course which left the characters of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle under imputation, and he had been the means, unintentionally, of doing them an injury. The hon. and learned member for Newark appeared attribute conduct of the most opprobrious nature to Mr. Deacle, and coupled his name with that of a man named Boyce, who had been convicted of felony. The hon. and learned Member had since told him, that he had been quite misunderstood; that he had no intention of throwing any aspersion on the character of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, and that he had only put a hypothetical case. He (Colonel Evans) and others, who were not accustomed to the refinements which were familiar to the gentlemen of the law, had supposed that the hon. Member meant the House to believe, that Mr. Deacle had been guilty of all that was imputed to him. The petition which he was about to present to the House, detailed some circumstances with which he was previously unacquainted, of a very grave character. The petitioners stated, that during their imprisonment, letters sent to them were destroyed by the gaoler, though one of them contained an offer of legal assistance. The petitioners also represented, that, on the trial in which Mr. Deacle was defendant, a witness, named Collins, on his cross-examination, could not deny, that he had said, that he knew nothing against Mr. Deacle, and, upon being asked, whether he did not believe, that he would have been prosecuted himself if he had not promised to give evidence against Mr. Deacle, he said, that he believed he should have been prosecuted, if he had not made such a promise; that another of the witnesses, of the name of Barnes, a carpenter, upon his cross-examination, stated that, during the trials under the Special Commission, he being in the dock, and about to put upon his trial, the Gaoler, Beckett, called him out, and took him into a room where there were Walter Long, a Magistrate, and another person, whom he believed to be Mr. Bingham Baring, who told him, that he should not be put upon his trial, if he would come and swear against Deacle. It appeared to him to be necessary to the credit and honour of Mr. Bingham Baring, that these allegations should receive some explanation. The petitioners likewise adverted to statements contained in publications, purporting to be reports of speeches made in the House of Commons by Mr. 383 Francis Baring and Mr. Serjeant Wilde, and declared, that those statements were false, and entirely destitute of foundation, and they expressed their readiness, with the permission of the House, to substantiate that declaration.
§ The Speakerhere called the hon. Member to order, and remarked to him, that this petition did, in fact, comment on proceedings in that House, and denied, as false and malicious, allegations, which, upon the faith of the public channels of information, the petitioners took for granted had been made in that House, and which they considered defamatory of their character. Under these circumstances, he did not conceive the House could receive the petition; and he considered, that the hon. Member was pursuing a line of argument which could only end in one of two things—in the House's rejecting the petition, or else establishing a new precedent, by receiving it.
Mr. O'Connellcould not agree with Mr. Speaker, and said, whatever technical objections might be urged against the petition, still it contained a statement of facts, which, in his opinion, ought to be laid before the House for inquiry and investigation.
§ The Speakersaid, that he had not drawn any inference of his own, but left the suggestion which he had thrown out, to the decision of the House. His object in interrupting the gallant Officer was, lest the gallant Officer, in stating certain matters contained in the petition, the accuracy of which, perhaps, the petitioners could not bear out, should raise a difficulty in the way of receiving the petition.
Mr. O'Connellagain observed, that the petition contained other matter, namely, a statement of facts, which ought to be received.
§ The Speakersaid, the best way, perhaps, would be, as proper notice on the subject had been given to the gallant Officer, to allow him to proceed, and to wait till the petition was brought up, when the House could decide whether it fell within the line which he had pointed out.
Mr. Humesaid, he had read over the petition, and his first impression was, that it was free from any technical objection.
Colonel Evanssaid, the petitioners did not presume to say, that the language attributed to hon. Members had actually 384 been used by them—they only stated, that it had been so represented. Under all the circumstances of the case, he would not trespass further on the attention of the House. He begged leave, however, to make one observation with respect to the part which the Press had taken on this occasion. In his opinion, if there were any case in which the conduct of the Press was not culpable, this was the emphatic case; and he would say, much as he respected both Houses of Parliament, that they would be inefficient for the correction of abuses, without the aid of the Press.
§ The Petition brought up, and read at length, as follows:—
§ "TO THE HONOURABLE THE COMMONS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED:
§
"The humble Petition of Thomas and Caroline Deacle, of Marwell Farm, in the parish of Owsellbury, in the county of Hants—
Showeth—That your petitioners have read with inexpressible indignation, in the public newspapers, numerous allegations made against them, which are wholly false, scandalous, and malicious, calculated to blast their characters, to injure their pursuits in life, and utterly to destroy their peace of mind.
That, amongst these false and scandalous allegations, Mr. Francis Baring is represented as having described your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, as one who, during the late disturbances in this county, incited men to machine-breaking, encouraged them to demand a reduction of tithes, and accompanied them illegally to demand money, and was with them when they received money thus extorted: that your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, was a person who employed the influence of her sex, and the power of her station, to ruin the poor and ignorant who lived in her neighbourhood, and that she was present with a mob when they demanded, extorted, and received, money.
That amongst these false and scandalous allegations, Mr. Thomas Wilde, Sergeant-at-Law, is represented as having said, 'in one case the mob went to the house of a Mrs. Long, headed by Deacle and Boyce, and having compelled her to sign a paper for the reduction of rent, they afterwards demanded money. Fifteen pounds were at first demanded, but they afterwards consented to take five pounds; and after having spent the day in making collections of this kind, they adjourned to the Downs, when Mr. Deacle and Mrs. Deacle, who were with them, superintended the distribution of the money.'
That your petitioners most solemnly declare to your Honourable House, that every thing expressed in the words above recited is utterly destitute of truth; that it is false in matter as well as in expression; that there is not a shadow of ground for either of the above
385
allegations; and that your petitioners, if your Honourable House should think proper to permit them so to do, will clearly prove, at the bar of your Honourable House, the perfect truth of the denial which they here give to those allegations.
That your Honourable House ought to be informed, that an indictment was, just at the close of the session of the Special Commission, preferred against your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, but not against your other petitioner, Caroline Deacle; that a true bill was found, but that the Commission was suffered to expire, without bringing your petitioner to trial; that the indictment was brought on for trial at the last Lent Assizes, at Winchester; that the prosecutors produced the whole of their evidence; that one of their witnesses, of the name of Collins, on his cross-examination, acknowledged that he would not say, that he had not said, that he knew nothing against Mr. Deacle; and, upon being asked whether he did not believe, that he would have been prosecuted himself if he had not promised to give evidence against Mr. Deacle, he said, he believed he should have been prosecuted, if he had not made such promise; that another of the witnesses for the prosecution, of the name of Barnes, a carpenter, upon his cross-examination, stated, that during the trials under the Special Commission, he being in the dock, and about to be put upon his trial, the Jailor, Beckett, called him out, and took him into a room, where there were Walter Long, a Magistrate, and another person, whom he believed to be Bingham Baring, who told him, that he should not be put upon his trial, if he would come and swear against Deacle; that another person, of the name of Prickett, was called as a witness by the prosecutors, and that when the counsel for the defence rose to cross-examine this witness, the counsel for the prosecution interfered, and said, that they meant there to stop the prosecution, for want of sufficient evidence; that the counsel for the defence persisted in a wish to go on, in order that the witnesses of his client might be produced, but that the Judge interposed his authority, observing, that the defendant was honourably acquitted, and could want nothing more; that upon this part of the subject, your petitioners beg leave to point out to the attention of your Honourable House, that Charles Seagrim, the attorney of Francis and Bingham Baring, was the attorney employed in the carrying on of this prosecution, and that the said Seagrim was a codefendant in the action which your petitioners lately brought against the said Barings and others.
That the allegations complained of are, by the newspapers, represented as parts of speeches delivered in your Honourable House; but your petitioners having been informed that your Honourable House will not receive any petition which comments on speeches made in your Honourable House, do not presume to say, that the hon. Members named in this
386
Petition did actually utter the words which have, by the newspapers, been attributed to them; but they complain of the grievous hardships and injurious consequences which have already resulted, and which cannot fail continually to result, from such calumnies being propagated, as coming from Members of your Honourable House, in their legislative capacities; and the more so, since it is impossible for them to escape these terrible consequences, without the interference of your Honourable House, in such way as to your Honourable House shall seem meet.
That, with regard to the words imputed to Mr. Sergeant Wilde, they feel themselves doubly aggrieved, as the said Sergeant was retained by your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, in the action lately tried at Winchester, but he did not arrive at Winchester till after the trial; yet he is notwithstanding represented as making a speech tending to the destruction of your petitioner, while he had your petitioner's money in his pocket, as his advocate.
That your petitioners, deeply lament the necessity which they feel themselves under, of thus trespassing on the time of your Honourable House; but that they hope your Honourable House will have the goodness to consider the extent of the injury done them, as aforementioned, as an instance of which, your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, informs your Honourable House that he was in treaty for a farm belonging to his Grace the Duke of Beaufort, which farm he was very desirous to rent, while the steward expressed an equal desire to have him for a tenant; but that in consequence of the allegations made against your petitioner, as aforesaid, the steward has announced to your petitioner, that the Duke of Beaufprt refuses to receive him as a tenant.
That your Honourable House must be convinced that no individual fortune in the middle rank of life can possibly withstand the assaults made against reputation as afore-mentioned; that your Honourable House will at once perceive that no character can stand against attacks spread in this manner all over the kingdom, and coming forth, as in this case, under the pretended sanction of your Honourable House.
That, therefore, your petitioners beseech your Honourable House compassionately to lend an ear to a recital of the treatment which they have experienced—a recital which they will make as brief as possible, omitting unimportant circumstances, but pledging themselves to prove, on the oaths of witnesses of unquestionable veracity, the truth of every part of the statement which they now submit, in the hope of obtaining justice at the hands of your Honourable House.
Consoled by this hope, they now state—That on the 24th of November, 1830, at about two o'clock in the day, William Lewington and John Switzer, constables of Winchester, came to the house of your petitioners, being the bearers of a warrant, signed by the rev.
387
Robert Wright, and one or two other Magistrates of Hampshire, and served it on your petitioners, who immediately, without any hesitation, were preparing to dress themselves in a becoming manner, in order to go with the constables, in obedience to the warrant; that, in about five minutes after the constables entered the house, they were followed with great apparent violence, and with great rudeness, by Francis Baring and Bingham Baring (being two Magistrates of the county), by Robert Wright (clerk), by Mr. Deane (banker) of Winchester, and by one Seagrim, an attorney, of Winchester, who is the partner of another attorney, named Woodham, who are the attornies of Messrs. Francis and Bingham Baring; that, upon these parties rushing into the house, Bingham Baring seeing a friend of your petitioners, of the name of Jervis, in an outer room, who was changing his coat, put a pistol to his head, having at the same time a dagger in his hand; that he then followed the rest of these violent intruders into the inner room, or parlour, where your petitioners were; that then Bingham Baring came up to your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, and striking him upon the shoulder, and then seizing him by the arm, exclaimed 'You are my prisoner;' that at the same time, or the instant afterwards, Francis Baring also seized your petitioner by the collar, while Robert Wright seized hold of the hinder part of his coat; that thus seized, Bingham Baring having hold of an arm, Francis Baring of the collar of the coat, Robert Wright of the hinder part of the coat, Bingham Baring (in a commanding and menacing voice) said to the Constable, Mr. Lewington, (Switzer being sent into the yard to hold the horses) 'Do your duty!' and Francis Baring, on the constable seeming to hesitate, said, 'Do your duty, do your duty!' in a very quick and stern manner; that the constable, in a compassionate tone, while putting his hand into his coat pocket, answered, 'There is no occasion for that, Sir, Mr. Deacle will go quietly.' Where upon, Bingham Baring, looking sternly at the constable, said. 'Handbolt them;' that Lewington put the handbolt on one of your petitioner's (Thomas Deacle's) hands; that while he was doing this, Francis Baring quitted his hold of your petitioner's (Thomas Deacle's) collar, went to another part of the room, seized hold of your petitioner's (Caroline Deacle's) hand and arm, in order to compel her to submit to be handbolted; that in spite of the supplications of your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, who represented in the most feeling manner, the delicate and precarious state of health of his wife, she was brought up by Francis Baring, who held her arm until her wrist was fastened in the same bolt with that of her husband; that Mr. Lewington had been ordered at the jail, to bring a pair of small hand-bolts with him, and that he had them in his pocket, but did not pull them out; that at this time Bingham Baring went into the outer room, for the purpose of disabling
388
the fowling-pieces which were placed in the corner of the room; that your petitioners were now marched off from the inner room, towards the outer room, handcuffed together, Francis Baring still holding the right hand and arm of your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, her left hand being in the bolt; that in pulling her forward through the outer room into the court, she wishing not to go without her bonnet and shawl, he pulled with such force as to pull her hand through the bolt, except that it was held by the fingers, and by a part of the ruffle, which was snapped in the bolt, and there fastened; that Francis Baring, seeing your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, thus loose, put his arm round one of her arms, and held her two hands together under his arm with great force and rudeness, still refusing to suffer her to have her bonnet and shawl; that in the meanwhile Deane, the banker, had quitted the house, and Seagrim and Wright were now on the outside of the house on horseback; that the cart, which had been guarded all the while by Captain Nevill, was stationed on the outside of the yard, about a hundred yards away from the house; that Bingham Baring was now employed in knocking the caps off the fowling-pieces, and pouring beer into the locks; that your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, was now taken to the cart, by Lewington and Bingham Baring, which latter mounted his horse, and rode by the side of your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, and the constable; that Francis Baring, refusing to wait for the bonnet and the shawl, proceeded to force you petitioner, Caroline Deacle, from the house and the court, across the wet and dirty yard, in order to arrive at the place where the cart was stationed; that the servants ran after with the bonnet and a cloak and clogs, which they put on as well as they could, he not suffering your petitioner to use her hands for the purpose; that he then, not however till her feet had been wet, carried her across the yard for a certain distance, by putting his arm round the middle of her body, her head foremost and her heels hindmost, and her person in a horizontal position, and thus, notwithstanding her earnest entreaties that he would allow her to go through the garden, where the way was not only clean, but where the distance was much shorter to the cart; that when arrived at the cart, by the side of which Captain Nevill was sitting on horseback, the Captain alighted and got into the cart; that in the meanwhile Francis Baring applied his hands and arms to the person of your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, in a manner so rude, indecent, and brutal, as not to be described by her, and thus lifted her up upon the shaft of the cart, while Captain Nevill seized her by the arm, and dragged her into it; that while your petitioner's (Caroline Deacle's) person was handled in this rude and indecent manner, the extent of which indecency she refrains from describing to your Honourable House, Seagrim and the rev. Robert Wright were sitting on their horses, and looking on and laughing;
389
that the wheel and other parts of the cart covered her habiliments with dirt, and tore parts of them; that at this time, and even in the court-yard, your petitioners earnestly implored that your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, might be permitted to ride her horse, fearing from the state of her health serious injury from the rude joltings of the cart; that this request was positively refused, by Francis and Bingham Baring, and that Seagrim said, 'No: if you had your horse, you would ride as you did yesterday;' that one of the constables (Switzer) said, 'For God's sake, Sir, let the lady have her horse, and I will hold the reins, and will forfeit my life if I lose her;' that upon this, Bingham Baring made answer, 'Do your duty, Sir, or I'll report you;' that the cart was driven by Lewington, and that the horse was a wretched pony; that Bingham Baring urged Lewington to drive faster, which having done for a little while, he said, upon a second application, 'The lady complains of being ill, and says that the jolting hurts her,' whereupon Bingham Baring again exclaimed, 'Drive on—make your way to Winchester;' that Lewington still not driving so fast as Bingham Baring wished, the latter came up, and with a large black stick which he carried, gave repeated blows across the back of the pony: that the pony now went considerably faster, causing the cart to jolt so much that your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, felt great pain, and rose up, by bearing upon the side of the cart, and turning round a little, said to Bingham Baring 'Really, Sir, I cannot bear this—it will be the death of me—I shall be shaken to death;' that your petitioner, Thomas Deacie, putting out his hand, said, 'Sit still, my dear—bear it as well as you can,' and that hereupon Bingham Baring struck across your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, a severe blow with the before-mentioned black stick, which fell upon the arm of your petitioner, Thomas Deacle; that the cart was accompanied by Francis Baring, Bingham Baring, Captain Nevill, the Reverend Robert Wright, Mr. Deane, the banker, and Seagrim the attorney, as a troop of guards, assisting the constables; that when the cart had reached about half a mile from the house, Mr. Deane went off to Winchester, leaving the rest to attend the cart; that when the cart arrived at the top of Winchester-hill, about two miles from the city, it was met by a post-chaise, into which your petitioners were put, in company with the Jailor, who was in it, and were thus conveyed to the common jail at Winchester; that when arrived at the jail, the six persons before-mentioned had disappeared; that the Jailor hurried your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, into a room where certain Magistrates were assembled, amongst whom were Sir Thomas Baring, as he believes, and the Reverend Robert Wright the elder; that in the meanwhile, your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, was put into another room, being the Jailor's kitchen, but afterwards was brought into the same room; that the Magistrates
390
deferred any examination for that night, on the alleged account of want of witnesses, and refused to let your petitioners out on bail; that after this, the Jailor, Beckett, took your petitioners into the passage, and informed them, that he must take your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, and put him into a yard, and that he would give your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, a bed along with the women; that upon hearing this, your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, understanding that her husband was going to be locked up amongst felons, fell into a violent hysterical fit, and was falling backward upon the stone floor, which was luckily prevented by your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, catching her in his arms; that the fit was very strong, and rendered it necessary to open her clothes, cut the lace of her stays, and thus expose her in the presence of numerous persons of various descriptions, the inmates or the visitants of a common jail; that after this, your petitioners were permitted, at the expense of 10s. a day, to live in the apartments of one of The Turnkeys, situate on the felons' side of the jail, and surrounded by felons on every side; that in this situation your petitioners remained from the evening of the 24th of November until the evening of the 27th of November; that on the 25th of November your petitioners were brought before the Magistrates sitting in the jail, and were told that the evidence against them had not arrived; that on the morning of the 26th of November they were brought before the Magistrates again, always guarded by the Jailor or Under-jailor, as if they had been felons, and were now told, that the evidence was in their favour, but that, as all the evidence had not arrived, they must detain them longer; that in the afternoon of the same day, the Under-jailor again brought them into the presence of the Magistrates, always sitting in the jail; that the Magistrates there told your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, that they had nothing against him, and that he might go, but they must detain your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, until the next day, when they expected some evidence against her: that upon this your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, begged to be permitted to remain with his wife, to which the Magistrates answered 'No;' that thereupon your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, fainted away, and was held in the chair, the Magistrates, with Sir Thomas Baring at their head, exclaiming 'Take her away, take her away—she must not remain to interrupt our business;' that in consequence of this, she was carried out of the room in the chair, and your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, was afterwards permitted by the Jailor to remain with his wife; that on the 27th, your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, was brought before the Magistrates by the Under-jailor, and had read to her a deposition of Robert Wright the younger, one of the defendants in the late action, but that she was not confronted with any accuser, nor were either of your petitioners ever confronted with any accuser from the first to the last; that finally your petitioners were
391
released upon bail given-for your petitioner, Caroline Deacle, and your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, without bail in the first instance, and afterwards with bail, when new-pretended evidence had been discovered; that in the meanwhile your petitioner, Thomas Deacle, had declared his intention of bringing an action against the Magistrates for assault and false imprisonment; that after this the indictment before-mentioned was framed against him, and the bill found as before stated, just at the close of the proceedings of the Special Commission, which produced the trial at the Lent Assizes, ending in the honourable acquittal of your petitioner; and that, during the imprisonment of your petitioners, the letters sent to them were destroyed by the Jailor, in one of which was an offer of legal assistance.
Your petitioners earnestly pray that your Honourable House will be pleased, in order to afford them a chance of relief from the most direful oppression, to permit, if compatible with the rules of your Honourable House, evidence in the premises to be brought to your bar; in which case they solemnly pledge themselves to prove, by witnesses other than themselves, all and singular the allegations contained in this their humble petition: and with all submission to the superior judgment, and in a firm reliance on the justice of your Honourable House, they further pray that you will be further pleased to adopt such other measures, relative to the premises, as in your wisdom you shall deem to be most meet. And your petitioners will ever pray.
| "THOMAS DEACLE, | |
| (Signed) | "CAROLINE DEACLE." |
| "Marwell, July 29th." |
§ Colonel Evans moved, that the Petition do lie on the Table.
Mr. Francis Baringhad taken the opportunity of stating, on a former occasion, the circumstances of this case; and though there were many things in this petition that might seem to call for a further statement, yet, considering the time he had already taken up on the subject, he felt a delicacy in further encroaching on the public time upon the present occasion. Still, however, he trusted the House would bear with him, for a few moments, while he noticed one or two of the particulars stated in this petition. He did not intend to repeat the statement he had formerly made. When he made it, he did so partly in contradiction of the allegations that had been advanced respecting his own conduct and the conduct of his cousin, on the occasion referred to, and partly with a view of making the House acquainted with circumstances which had not previously appeared before the public. 392 With regard to the present petition, he was prepared to meet it with a full contradiction. He had already made his statement of the circumstances to the House, and there was no contradiction of his statement, contained in any part of that petition, that would induce him to withdraw one assertion that he had then made. The statement now made by the petitioners was contrary to all those put forth in evidence at the trial, and sworn to as true there. There was hardly one point in which the two statements concurred with each other—there was but one in which he and the petitioners agreed together, and that was, in the declaration that the evidence given at the trial was a false account of the circumstances that had taken place. It was said, at first, that Mrs. Deacle came forward in the room and gave her hand to be handcuffed; it was now said, that he (Mr. Francis Baring) had dragged her forward to be handcuffed. At first it was said, that his cousin had shown a gun, and had used it to intimidate; now it was stated, that a pistol and dagger were employed, and the gun was sunk! He wished that the two statements could be published side by side, and paragraph by paragraph. The plantiffs statement, as it was now made, and as it was then made by his witnesses, did not at all agree together, and of course no credit whatever was given to either. There was one point to which he wished particularly to call the attention of the House. It was this:—It was originally stated, that his cousin, Mr. Bingham Baring had carried Mrs. Deacle to the cart. That statement had then been denied, and he had said, that he was the person who had carried her to the cart. It now turned out, even on the petitioners, own statement, that it was not Mr. Bingham Baring, but he, who had carried the lady to the cart. When he had ventured to state that in the House, all the persons who took a different view of the matter said, that that was a matter which could not be mistaken. Now at the time that the witnesses swore Mr. Bingham Baring carried Mrs. Deacle to the cart, Mr. and Mrs. Deacle were both in Court: they had the means of knowing whether the statement was true or not, yet they heard it made, allowed it to go to the Jury, and to be commented upon by the Judge, and never once pretended to express even a doubt of the correctness of the statement. 393 Their Counsel, could not have known the fact, because he was sure that no honourable professional man would have calmly stood by whilst a representation, of the falsehood of which he was cognizant, was sworn to. Mr. Bingham Baring denied, most distinctly, that he had carried Mrs. Deacle, and declared, that she had been removed by another person. To that denial the Attorney for the prosecution wrote an answer. Did he there state, that this part of the charge against Mr. Bingham Baring was incorrect? No such thing; he, on the contrary, re-asserted the calumny, and argued as if there were no truth whatsoever in the solemn statement of Mr. Bingham Baring. He himself had also made a statement, which Mr. Deacle attempted to answer; but he did not venture to say, that his assertions were incorrect. With respect to that statement in the petition, where it was represented that Mr. Bingham Baring was present when Barnes, the carpenter, was told, that he should not be put upon his trial if he gave evidence against Deacle, he could meet it with the most flat and unqualified contradiction. As to the allegation that these prosecutions were all instituted by the Messrs. Baring, and were carried on by their Attornies, Messrs. Woodham and Seagrim, it was totally without foundation. The attornies who had conducted the cause on behalf of his cousin, were the Clerks of the Peace, for the county, who had in that character prosecuted all the parties at the suit of the Crown. They were not the attornies either for his father or his uncle, and they had only been employed in that instance at the recommendation of the attornies for the family because they were thought to know all the facts of the case. He himself left Hampshire a few days after the transactions occurred, and he knew nothing about the matter till he saw the notices of action. He was confident he need not offer any apology to the House for urging a few topics in his defence, when he was put, as it were, on his trial. It was too much that he should bow in silence when his character was calumniated and traduced, and the Government called upon to strike his name out of the Commission of the Peace. He was sorry that the public Press had been dragged into the discussion by the hon. and gallant Member, as he, whatever he might have thought, had never let a word escape 394 him on the subject. He must say, however, that the allusion made to the public Press was not likely to produce any good effect.
§ Sir Thomas Baringsaid, that as his name had been introduced in a manner not very creditable to him, he was desirous of troubling the House with a few words upon this subject. He was well aware that every person who acted in a public capacity, in that House, or out of it, was liable to have his conduct traduced, and his character calumniated; and for himself, he could only rejoice, that when this was done with regard to him, he had the opportunity which that House afforded of answering the calumny. The hon. Member who had introduced this petition had not had the common courtesy to give him the slightest notice of it—a conduct which he should not have pursued towards the hon. Member under similar circumstances. He was charged with having at first resolved upon committing Mr. and Mrs. Deacle to prison. That charge was not true. It was said, that Mrs. Deacle had fainted in the chair, and that notwithstanding her state, he had ordered her away, saying that the Magistrates could not be troubled with her, or some expressions to that effect. He utterly denied having ever said so. He had not, to the best of his recollection, heard her utter a single word; he had only come into the room accidentally at the moment when Mr. Deacle was having some evidence (his own he believed) read over to him. At that moment he saw a female in a chair, but he did not hear her utter one word. He looked over the evidence cursorily, and the cruelty of which he was then guilty was, to suggest to his brother Magistrates that Mr. Deacle should be admitted to bail. He took no other part whatever in the proceedings. When these statements were thus found to be unsupported by the fact, he thought that the House would not feel much inclined to give great credit to other statements in the same petition. At the time that these persons were brought to prison, he was occupied, at a distance of eight miles, in endeavouring to suppress a riot occasioned by other parties, and to take those parties into custody. On his return he again read over the evidence in Deacle's case, and then, upon a more attentive perusal than he had before given it, he found the evidence stronger than he had before supposed, 395 and he surrendered his own opinion to that of the other Magistrates. These were the facts of the case as far as he was concerned.
Mr. Francis Baringwished to be permitted to say, that there were other statements in the petition which he had not noticed, but he hoped he should not be taken to have admitted the truth of them because he had not contradicted them.
§ Mr. Serjeant Wildesaid, that from his having mistaken the order of the proceedings in the House, he had not been present when this discussion began. He begged to express his regret at that circumstance. It seemed that he had been made a subject of accusation in the petition, and he found that he had been reduced to that situation from his having discharged what he considered to be his imperative duty as a Member of that House. The petition, so far as it referred to him, was not expressed in those courteous terms that might be expected; but he looked to the substance, not to the form of it. He wished to recal the attention of the House to what had occurred on the former occasion. He had not then expressed any opinion of what, had taken place; for he had not been present at the trial; he had not gone into those parts with which he was not personally acquainted; he had merely stated what he knew from the depositions that had been laid before him. The chief ground of complaint against the Magistrates, however, appeared to be, that they had themselves superintended the execution of their own warrant in the case of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, instead of leaving it to others, as was the usual practice. No impression, unfavourable to the Magistrates, as he conceived, ought to arise from this circumstance of their superintending the execution of the warrant themselves, as the state of the country made it not only justifiable, but made it their duty to exert more than ordinary vigour in support of the law. The case should stand or fall upon its own merits; and, in discussing it, it would be little in accordance with his feelings to rank upon the side of harshness, oppression, or injustice: he had never embraced that side. It had been said that, in the former debate, he asserted that Mr. Deacle accompanied a mob to Mrs. Long's, to extort money. He had never stated any thing of the kind, and he knew not where it was so reported. 396 He had taken the trouble to look over the reports of what fell from him, and, though not precisely, they were generally accurate. All he could say, was what the witnesses had sworn to in the depositions which had been submitted to him. After referring to the substance of the depositions against Mr. Deacle, the learned Serjeant reminded the House, that Mr. Deacle was only indicted for a conspiracy. He did not wish to deprive him of the benefit of the verdict of acquittal; but it was not unnatural to suppose, that those who had given evidence against him, at the moment when the transactions he was charged with taking part in were going on, and the country in alarm, when they found the country was quiet, should feel their sympathies awakened for their neighbour, and that they should wish to soften the charges they had made against him. All the statements he had made had been founded on the depositions that were brought to his notice, in the discharge of his duty in assisting the King's Attorney General in the public prosecutions. Unfortunately, on account of the absence of Mr. Chambre from town, he had not been able to bring those depositions with him. He now came to speak upon a matter more immediately connected with his professional practice, and his character as a Member of that House. A retainer had been left at his chambers some time before the trial. It was anticipated that he could not be able to attend at the Winchester Assizes. The person who left the retainer was told so. He thought he was bound before everything to discharge his duty in that House. A letter was written to the effect he had stated by his clerk. That retainer gave him no information of the nature of Deacle's case. Hon. Members must not confound a retainer with a brief. A retainer only contained the names of the parties. He (Mr. Serjeant Wilde) had never seen Me. Deacle or his Attorney—he had had no communication whatever with them—and it was not to be supposed that the leaving a retainer with a one guinea fee was to prevent a Member of that House from doing his duty there. If any persons did suppose that, he begged they would keep their retainers to themselves. He considered, that his duty in that House was paramount to all others. He had no knowledge whatever of the case.
Mr. Humesaid, he regretted that the 397 hon. and learned Member had not removed the impression which what he had said on a former occasion had made on the House; the more particularly as the hon. Member had made that statement, not from his own knowledge, but from depositions. He submitted to the House, whether it was fair towards Mr. Deacle, who was now absent, that the merits of his case should be decided on by mere depositions. He did not know Mr. Deacle; the only feeling which induced him to advert to his case was, from an impression that he was a man who had been harshly and severely dealt with; in fact, there was no specific charge brought against him; and, in the absence of positive proof, the prosecuting party had recourse to that very convenient instrument, a conspiracy. By this means, Mr. Deacle was mixed up with a party, seven of whom were sentenced to death. He did not consider this a question referring solely to Mr. Deacle, but one of great public importance, and he hoped to see justice fully done. He would be glad to know who it was that ordered Mrs. Deacle to be separated from her husband. The hon. Baronet (Sir Thomas Baring) said, that he had not ordered Mrs. Deacle away, but, on referring to the petition, it appeared, that what the petitioners alleged was, that the Magistrates, with Sir Thomas Baring at their head, exclaimed, "Take her away, take her away; she must not remain to interrupt our business." He wished also to know who it was that ordered Mrs. Deacle to be handcuffed; if it had been the hon. Member, he was quite sure he would admit it. At present, the House did not know who it was, and he thought they were, in consequence, bound to institute an inquiry, and to take measures to remove persons who had been guilty of such improper conduct, from situations which afforded them an opportunity of committing similar acts of severity. He thought justice required, that the hon. and gallant Member who had presented this petition, should fix an early day on which to bring on a motion to refer the petition to a Select Committee up-stairs, in order that the allegations of the petition, and of the parties against whom the petition was directed, might be thoroughly investigated. This was necessary, to prove to the public, either that the Magistrates were innocent, or that, being guilty, they would be dealt with as their conduct deserved. In making 398 this suggestion, he put Mr. and Mrs. Deacle wholly out of the question, and looked only to the public interest which was involved in such charges against Magistrates.
§ Mr. Cutlar Fergusonsaid, that the hon. member for Middlesex was mistaken upon one point. It had been sworn, that Mr. Bingham Baring was not present at the handcuffing, and that hon. Member had himself stated the same fact. He was quite ready to believe, that the allegations of the petition were much exaggerated. He was ready to believe this, as well from the statements of hon. Members of that House, as from the small damages recovered by the petitioners. At the same time, however, it was quite clear that, in the case of the petitioners, an extraordinary course had been followed by the Magistrates, which nothing but extraordinary circumstances could justify. He concurred in the desire expressed by the hon. member for Middlesex, to know who it was that ordered Mrs. Deacle to be handcuffed; for that act was disgraceful to a civilized country, and the House ought to be ashamed of having any person a Member of that House who could order a female to be so treated. It was certain, that Mrs. Deacle had great reason to complain of the hardship, in having been handcuffed and dragged to a gaol, for it must be recollected, that Mrs. Deacle had never been brought to trial. He thought, too, that Mr. Deacle had also much to complain of, when it was attempted publicly in that House to prove him guilty of acts which a Jury had declared him to be innocent of. Under these circumstances, whatever exaggerations there might be in the petition, Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, in his opinion, had great reason to come to that House, in order to clear their character.
§ Sir George Clerkdid not rise to prolong this discussion as to the merits of the Deacles, or the conduct of the Magistrates. He should not have risen at all if some member of the Government had, as he expected, taken notice of a ground upon which, in his opinion, the House could not receive the petition. This ground was, that the petitioners stated that they had suffered by speeches delivered in that House. The petition had, doubtless, been drawn by some very ingenious person, and he believed that it had fallen from the hon. and gallant Member who presented 399 it, that the petition, as originally drawn, could not have been received by the House. This showed the animus of the petitioners, which was also further apparent from the fact, that the hon. member for Portsmouth and the hon. member for Newark had been compelled to refer to and to repeat what they had said on a former occasion. Under these circumstances, he put it to the House, whether the petition was not a palpable violation of the orders of the House. At all events, he should be prepared to give a negative to the motion of the hon. and gallant Gentleman, that the petition do lie on the Table.
§ Lord Althorpwas not present when the petition was presented, but had read the passage to which the hon. Baronet alluded. It was true that, by an evasion, the petition did allude to speeches that had been made in that House, and it was true also, that, by the strict rule of the House, such petitions could not be received. He did not, however, think that the rule ought to be strictly enforced on all occasions, especially as there was a rule equally strict, but not enforced, against the publication of speeches delivered in that House. The hon. Baronet should recollect, that it was only by evasion that the Debates of that House were published. As to this petition being allowed to lie on the Table, he did think that they ought to be very cautious how they rejected a petition which contained an attack upon one of themselves. He certainly should not object to the petition being allowed to lie on the Table.
Mr. Estcourtsaid, that if the Order alluded to by the noble Lord was an improper order, it ought not to be allowed to stand upon the Journals, but while it stood there he could not agree, that it was right to suffer it to be evaded. The language of the petitioners was ingenious and cautious, but the object of the petitioners was apparent. The petitioners said, "The allegations complained of are, by the newspapers represented, as parts of speeches delivered in your honourable House; but your petitioners having been informed, that your honourable House will not receive any petition which comments on speeches made in your honourable House, do not presume to say that the hon. Members named in this petition did actually utter the words which have, by the newspapers, been attributed to them." Now, the petitioners did not venture to say that they disbelieved the speeches to 400 have, been delivered in that House; but they continued in the following words;—"But they complain of the grievous hardship and injurious consequences which have already resulted, and which cannot fail continually to result, from such calumnies being propagated as coming from Members of your honourable House in their legislative capacity; and the more so, since it is impossible for them to escape these terrible consequences, without the interference of your honourable House, in such way as to your honourable House shall seem meet." It did not appear, that this allegation of the petitioners was true. The petitioners ought to have made out that they could not obtain redress for the publication of these calumnies without coming to that House. He believed it was well known that persons circumstanced like the petitioners, could obtain redress from the law for calumnies which had been propagated in the manner stated in the petition; and that it was not necessary for them to come to that House for redress. It could not be pretended, that the House sanctioned the publication of Members' speeches. On the contrary, such publication was, by the order of the House, a breach of privilege. Under these circumstances, he considered the proceeding of the petitioners to be very disorderly. If the petitioners could show that the Courts of Law were not open to them, then they might come to that House, but not until then.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, that the hon. member for Oxford did not carry his objection far enough. The hon. Member ought to enforce the order against the publication of speeches, if he enforced the rules of the House against this petition. Would the hon. Member do this, and call the editors of all the newspapers up to the bar; he should think not. If statements were made in that House, it was well known that they would go forth to the public; and if those statements were incorrect and injurious, evils would result which ought to be complained of. He would only say, with regard to the case before them, that, in his opinion it called for farther inquiry. That inquiry might for aught he knew, end in the most triumphant justification of the Magistrates; but he must say, that the two innocent persons—for the petitioners had been proved to be innocent—from whom this petition came, had made out a strong case for inquiry.
Sir Francis Burdettconcurred with the hon. and learned member for Kerry. This was a question which concerned the public justice of the country. Personal considerations were involved in it, but the main point was a public one, and regarded the manner in which certain Magistrates had exercised the powers confided to them by the law. He was free to confess, that he thought this was a time at which such complaints as these ought to be investigated. The hon. and gallant Member who had presented the petition, would, of course, take into consideration the best mode of investigation. As to the objection upon a point of order, the hon. Baronet (Sir George Clerk) who raised the point, had admitted, that the petition was so drawn as to avoid infringing the rules of the House, and had declared, that much ingenuity must have been exercised by the person who so drew it. If, then, it had been skilfully and successfully endeavoured so to frame the petition as not to offend against the regulations of the House, he did think that it would be a most extraordinary proceeding to reject such a petition, especially when the administration of the laws, the liberty of the subject, and the character of many individuals, were deeply involved in its allegations. He would not offer any observation upon a single point of this case, except the handcuffing; and upon that he must say, that he considered it most improper to handcuff persons under the circumstances in which the petitioners were placed, take which version of those circumstances they pleased.
§ Petition to lie on the Table.