HC Deb 29 August 1831 vol 6 cc767-8
Mr. O'Connell

presented Petitions from J. Harris and two other persons, who were convicted at Stafford of an offence under the Game-laws, and had been subjected to an imprisonment of eighteen months. The petitioner complained, that Mr. Kean, who was the agent employed to prosecute, was Under-sheriff of this county, which afforded him an opportunity of striking the Jury which was to decide on the case. This was a practice which he reprobated, and which should be corrected; and though he might not impugn the motives of the party, still, he considered it a matter of great importance, to prevent even a suspicion, that the administration of justice was tainted. He had stated these particulars, as a Member of that House was concerned in the case.

Mr. Littleton

said, he knew very little of the petition or the practice alluded to. He, however, thought, it was not improbable, that the Under-sheriff, conscious of his high character, might have been regardless of the responsibility he had taken upon him in the case. He did not, however, mean to defend the practice. It was not true, that the parties had been imprisoned for eighteen mouths. These men had been met by some person in his employment, and, from what he could learn, it was fortunate for them they had fallen into the hands of so humane a person as Mr. Kean, as they might have been prosecuted under Lord Ellen borough's Act.

Petition to lie on the Table.

Mr. O'Connell

presented a Petition from Joseph Shaw, complaining of the conduct of certain Magistrates for the county of Stafford. It appeared, that the petitioner, who was accused of a breach of the Game-laws before these Magistrates, was, by their order, turned out of the room in which his case was to be heard, and denied the assistance of his Attorney. In this case, the Magistrates were acting judicially, and the petitioner was clearly entitled to have his case heard in the presence of his Attorney. The Game-laws were bad enough in themselves, without the addition of being badly administered. One good effect of the Reform Bill would be, to correct the Magistrates. No poor man could expect justice, when he might be convicted by irresponsible Magistrates.

Petition to lie on the Table.

Mr. O'Connell

presented another Petition, from Mr. Jones, the Attorney who defended Shaw, complaining of the treatment he had experienced from the Magistrates, and for which he brought an action of damages, but the defendant struck a Special Jury, composed of gentlemen of the same rank in life with himself, and with whom he was in the habit of associating. The Jury gave a verdict in his (Jones's) favour, but awarded but 1s. damages. The Judge said, they ought to have given 2001. at least, and signed a certificate to set aside the verdict. The petitioner prayed the House for a fair administration of justice.

Mr. Littleton

said, it was a case long gone by. Among the many communications he was constantly in the habit of receiving from his constituents, he did not remember one which complained of the magistracy of the county of Stafford. He had not meant, however, to complain of any want of courtesy on the part of the hon. Member who had presented the petitions.