Commons Sitting of 22 September 1831

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By Mr. HUME, from Eleanor Windhurst, praying for Relief, her Husband having been imprisoned for selling Berthold's Political Pocket Handkerchief. By Colonel EVANS, from Warwick, Winchester, Battle, and Manchester, for an inquiry into the case of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle.

SALE OF BEER ACT.
Mr. Littletonpresented a Petition from the Archdeacon and Curates of the Archdeaconry of Stafford, and also from Burslem, complaining that the morals of the people had been much injured by the operation of the Beer Act, and praying for its repeal or modification. The petitioners considered it to be their duty to protest against that Act, and he must say, that he thought those who had petitioned against the Act had been harshly treated. It was certainly

483
true that the Act had produced more evils than was thought possible by its friends of whom he was one; and as the clergy were bound to take care of the morality of the people, they considered themselves justified in petitioning against the Act.
Colonel Davieswas most anxious that the poor should have a wholesome and nutritious beverage, and yet it was most important they should be kept from the public-house. He, therefore, thought it was an evil to allow Beer to be drank on the premises. The establishment of beer-shops in country parishes had introduced great evils, over which the magistracy had no check or control.
Sir Jacob Astleysaid, he had just received a letter from a Magistrate in Norfolk, who had made the interests of the poorer classes the study of his life, and he said, that the country was in a state of confusion; there were constant quarrels, the morals of people were deteriorated, and and their families starving; the women all exclaimed against the beer-shops as the foundation of all these evils. He was afraid the new Beer Bill would not prove an adequate remedy for these injurious effects produced by the last.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, these complaints arose wholly from prejudice, and were not deserving the attention of the House. He had never before heard beer was a deleterious liquor, likely to promote all sorts of immorality. He had always been of opinion that there ought to be a free trade in beer, and that the venders should only be obliged to give security against any breach of the peace, or disorderly conduct being committed on their premises.
Sir Richard Vyvyansaid, the hon. and learned Member was always ready to attribute improper motives to those who differed from him; no country gentlemen or clergymen wished to deprive their poorer neighbours of a wholesome beverage, or to interfere with their comforts. The wives and children of labourers it was who felt the evils, and lamented that the Act had been passed.
Mr. Huntsaid, the beer-shops in general sold bad beer, and the best alteration that could be made was, to prevent them selling any but what they brewed themselves. He had seen no petition from the wives and children of labourers against the bill; the petitions only came from the Magistracy and Clergy.
Mr. Littletonassured the hon. Member, that in the petition he had just presented there was not the name of one Magistrate, but it was signed by every other respectable inhabitant of the place, without any exception.
Petition to be printed.

PROSECUTIONS FOR RELIGIOUS OPINION.
Mr. Huntrose to present a Petition from Huddersfield, praying that the House would interfere to prevent prosecutions for the expression of opinion, and complaining of the imprisonment of the Rev. Robert Taylor, and of Messrs. Carpenter and Carlile. The petitioners also complained of the frequent and improper interference of a self-constituted tribunal, called the Society for the Suppression of Vice.
Mr. Wilbraham,in reference to the imprisonment of Taylor and the others, said, that, some time since, a petition had been presented from Macclesfield, and he had since then received a letter, stating that neither the Mayor nor any of the principal inhabitants, knew any thing about the matter, and that their sentiments were very different from those of the petitioners.
Mr. Humedid not conceive that the petitioners were under any obligation to consult the Mayor upon such an occasion, nor did it follow that the petition might not express the opinion of a considerable number of respectable persons, in a town which contained many thousand inhabitants. He believed that to have been the case; he supported that petition, and he should also support the prayer of this.
Mr. Stricklandstated, that many of the petitioners were exceedingly moral and religious people to his knowledge, and decidedly opposed to religious persecution. He concurred with them in opinion, that it was advisable such prosecutions ought not to be permitted.
Mr. Hunt,in moving that the petition be printed, said, he had also presented the petition which had been alluded to as coming from Macclesfield, and he had not presented it as the petition of the inhabitants of the town, but of the Political Union Club there established.
Petition to be printed.

MR. AND MRS. DEACLE.
Colonel Evansmoved for a Select Committee to inquire into the allegations of the petitions of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle.
Mr. Wilksseconded the Motion, with the understanding that no discussion would take place, as it was the desire of Messrs. Barings themselves that this Committee should be appointed.
Mr. Francis Baringwished that the Committee should be appointed, and promised to afford all the information in his power.
Lord Althorpsaid, it was perfectly consistent with the character of his hon. friend that he should pursue such a course; the House was not bound, however, because the parties interested wished their conduct inquired into; and as a precedent, it became a serious question whether they ought to appoint a Committee, to inquire into a transaction which had already been made the subject of judicial inquiry. In his opinion, the House ought not to pursue such a course, except in some very extraordinary case: he did not think this was of that character, and he therefore felt bound to oppose the Motion.
Mr. Humesaid, there appeared to have been a complete misunderstanding on the subject. He had understood, that when a Committee had been mentioned, as no objection had been then made, that Ministers would not oppose the appointment. He admitted it was a case of vital importance to the magistracy, and to all those interested in the management of local justice, but as all parties seemed anxious for an investigation, he thought it ought to be granted. At all events, as an unexpected opposition had been created, he should move that the Motion be adjourned.
Lord Althorpobserved, he had given no pledge either way, but he certainly had no intention to agree to the appointment of a Committee. Instead of adjourning the Motion, he would recommend the hon. and gallant Member to withdraw it, on the understanding that he should bring it again forward on Tuesday next.
Mr. Baringobserved, that the question was one of a delicate and important nature, as it affected the magistracy of the county of Hants, generally, and several of them particularly. He felt an extreme anxiety to have the whole facts investigated before a Committee, and he was, therefore, much disappointed that his noble friend recommended that the Motion should be postponed. Petitions were coming in from various parts of the country, upon the aggravated accounts published in the newspapers;
486
while upon the spot, and in the vicinity of the place where the transactions occurred, the popular view was very different. The delay until Tuesday would permit further misrepresentation, and therefore he very much regretted it.
Sir Thomas Baringearnestly hoped his noble friend would reconsider his opinion against the appointment of a Committee, on the ground of its making the House a Court of Appeal; the parties interested required no such thing; they only wished that the truth or falsehood of the allegations contained in the petition of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle, should be inquired into; and if hon. Gentlemen considered that it contained a charge against a Magistrate, for tampering with a witness, he thought that would be sufficient to justify the appointment of a Committee.
Mr. George Robinsondid not think the appointment of a Committee would tend to relieve the public mind from any false impressions it might have taken up with regard to this case; and he should, therefore, follow the noble Lord's example, and oppose it.
Sir James Scarlettregretted the Motion had not been at once disposed of, as the delay might establish a precedent, which they might find it difficult to deal with in other cases. The Motion was to inquire into the prayer of a petition, which brought charges against certain individuals and Magistrates, after their conduct had been duly investigated before the proper tribunal. It appeared to him, that they were about to create a dangerous precedent by appointing a Committee; for if it was once established, that the House of Commons was to inquire into alleged instances of misconduct on the part of Magistrates, which could be made the subject of indictment, and determinable by the ordinary Courts of justice, he did not know where they could stop. They would soon have cases enough of the kind on their hands; there were discontented individuals in every county, who would hasten to bring such charges, if they found there was a disposition in the House to listen to them. Opposed as he was to the Motion, he should have preferred settling it at once by a division.
Mr. Huntsaid, the hon. and learned Gentleman had been heard to declare, that the Courts were open, to investigate charges against Magistrates, of the nature of that now before the House; but he

487
forgot one essential particular, that was, the expense attending the application. He had always understood that the House of Commons was the proper place for injured individuals to apply for redress. The parties complaining and the persons accused, were anxious for inquiry, and the public were also desirous of it; why, then, should it be refused? He believed, from all he heard, that a gross act of injustice and oppression had been committed upon a female, by gentlemen of rank and fortune; and she and her husband had no means of redress if that House refused to listen to their complaints.
Mr. Paulet Mildmaysaid, as the hon. member for Preston had been pleased to give an opinion on the case, he could only reply, that he, as a Magistrate of the county of Hants, was most anxious for immediate inquiry; and he had no doubt, the result of such an inquiry would not only completely vindicate the characters of the accused, but also prove, that at a period of great danger and difficulty, their conduct had been such as to entitle them to the gratitude of the country. Many persons who were disposed to find fault with the want of energy displayed by the Magistrates, when turbulence and incendiarism were stalking through the country, now that the danger was past joined most loudly in the cry against them.
Mr. George Lambobserved, that it appeared to be the general opinion, that the discussion should be postponed, as a misunderstanding was alleged to have taken place; he therefore deprecated further remarks, and put it to the hon. member for Thetford, whether the question should not be at once postponed.
Colonel Evanssaid, he was ready to acquiesce in the suggestion made, and withdraw the Motion for the present; but he begged it to be understood, the proposition for the delay had not proceeded from him. As for the various statements made by different Gentlemen on the present occasion, all that he felt bound to do, when the matter was fairly brought under consideration, was, to shew there were sufficient grounds to institute an inquiry.
Motion withdrawn.

WHITE-BOY ACTS.
Mr. Stanleymoved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the 15th and 16th of Geo. 3rd, commonly called the White-Boy Acts, which inflicted the penalty of death for a class of offences
488
of frequent recurrence in Ireland, and which the Special Commissions in Clare and Limerick were sent forth to repress. These offences consisted of malicious injuries to property, sending threatening letters, procuring arms by threats, and others, which were now punishable with death. He proposed to substitute transportation in lieu of this, as being both more humane and more efficacious, for experience had proved that the people were more terrified by instant transportation, on conviction than by the fear of capital punishment. Another anomaly in the law he proposed to remedy—namely, that at present turning-up of land, breaking out-houses, &c. were punishable by the present law with death, if committed at night; whereas, if the same offence were committed by day, it could only be punished as a misdemeanor. Now he wished to put both on the same footing, and have the punishment transportation for life. Another anomaly was, that a man who incited to these crimes was punishable with death, while he who committed them was only a misdemeanant; and this distinction should also be taken away. Another object he had was, to repeal some clauses of the old Act, empowering Magistrates to seize the arms of suspected persons—that is, Papists; and he thought it too hard now to have any distinction on account of sects remaining. He wished, at the same time, to give notice, that it was not his intention, considering the present state of the session, to bring forward the Bill for consolidating the laws relative to the importation and possession of arms in Ireland, of which he had previously given notice. He meant to move, however, to revive for the year the Act as to keeping arms, which had just expired, and next year to bring forward the bill to consolidate all these laws.
Mr. O'Connellconcurred in the necessity of amending the White-Boy code, and making it less sanguinary. Late circumstances, particularly in Clare, had proved that a milder system was better and more efficacious than the former severe one. There was one question, however, he wished fully considered; it was the right of challenge. Under the present severe law, the person accused could challenge twenty Jurors, but under a milder law this right would be taken away, and he wished it to be continued.
Sir John Newportexpressed his satis-

489
faction at the proposed amelioration of the laws, which, he was sure, would have a most beneficial effect in the prevention of crime. He would avail himself of that opportunity, to offer one or two remarks on that class of offences which related to the turning-up of land. He had no wish that the Legislature should interfere between landlord and tenant, but public opinion could do much, and he trusted that the decided manifestation of it, both in and out of the House, would prevent the exacting such exorbitant rents, sometimes amounting to 8l., 9l., or 10 l. an acre from a poor creature, for an acre of potatoe land.
Mr. Northsaid, he should be most happy to give his humble endeavours in the Committee, to render the proposed improvement of the laws as perfect as possible. He concurred with the hon. and learned member for Kerry, in the desire to retain the peremptory challenges; he had often witnessed the pleasure which the exercise of this power afforded to the friends of accused parties.
Mr. Henry Grattanrejoiced at the right hon. Gentleman having brought in a Bill of this description, for never had any country such a list of sanguinary statutes as Ireland. The White-boy Act involved this gross absurdity, that if a house were burned or destroyed, it would be necessary to prove that the country was in a state of disturbance before a man could get compensation; the consequence of which was, that at the Assizes there was a most extravagant quantity of hard swearing. The next was the Arms Act; and the people's feelings were exasperated, when they saw one man allowed to carry arms merely because he was a Protestant, and the Catholic not allowed to possess any. Then there was the Insurrection Act, which had given rise to the most dreadful oppression. He knew a case in which a man was transported for having had gunpowder, to the amount of one pound, in his possession, and which had actually been found by a child. The Algerine Act was intended to put down all meetings of the people, and deprived them of the right of petitioning for the redress of their grievances; hopes were entertained that it would stop the expression of the sentiments of the Irish nation; but, thank God, it concentrated public opinion, and induced the people to demand a complete change in the mode of government. Ireland, for the last three centuries, had
490
been governed by Acts like these; and was it to be wondered at that the people were dissatisfied? The proceedings proposed with respect to the Arms Bill were most unconstitutional, and he could tell his Majesty's Government, that, if they had endeavoured to have brought the Registration of Arms Bill into operation in Ireland, such was the feeling of indignation throughout the country, that they would have excited an insurrection. The gentlemen of Ireland would as soon have submitted to have had their backs branded, as to have suffered the indignity of being deprived of their arms, unless they were stamped. The truth was, that such had been the treatment of the people by the Government, that no body of men had any security in the administration of justice. Whether Whigs or Tories were in place, Ireland was never governed in a satisfactory manner. As for the turning-up of land that had recently taken place in the west of Ireland, he was not surprised at it. Men worked for ten hours a day, and were only able to earn 8d. a day, and the landlord demanded 10 l. an acre for his ground. They had also to pay tithes to the Protestant clergymen, whose religion they considered as little better than idolatry. He was happy to perceive that a spirit of union was rising in Ireland, which would make itself heard in the remotest parts of the empire, and would command the attention of Government.
Mr. Shawobserved, nothing could be so impolitic as to have such severe punishments, that they could not be enforced without exciting the sympathy of all classes. It was advisable that punishments should be moderate, but certain.
Motion agreed to, and Bill ordered to be brought in.

SUGAR REFINING ACT.
Mr. Burgerequested the noble Lord to postpone the bringing up of the Report on this Act until Wednesday next, as the attendance of Members was at that moment much too small to allow the motion on this important subject, of which he (Mr. Burge) had given notice, to receive adequate consideration. He hoped, however, that, after what had already taken place, the noble Lord would not persist in pressing the Bill.
Lord Althorpsaid, he had already declared the subject was under inquiry, and that the Bill was to be in force for but

491
one year. The Government did not intend to abandon it.
Mr. Robert Gordonsaid, the West India planters understood, that this Act was not to be renewed until they had received official notice. Frauds were constantly committed under it, and foreign sugar brought into the market for home consumption, whereby the revenue, as well as the planters in the colonies, sustained injury. It was said, an experiment had been tried at Liverpool which proved the accuracy of this statement.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, he had received no notice of this experiment, but it might have been tried without his being yet aware of it; but if it had not been tried yet at Liverpool, he could assure the hon. Gentleman it was about to be tried in London.
Mr. Robinsonsaid, he considered the commercial and colonial policy of the Government most absurd, and he would take care, at all events, to bring forward the whole question relating to sugar refining next session. It was proper they should come to some understanding as to the application of the general principles of the doctrine of free trade, and not apply them in one or two instances, and keep up a system of restriction on some of the most important branches of traffic. If it was intended that the colonies were to be abandoned, let it be done before they were thoroughly ruined.
Mr. John Weylandsaid, this was a most pernicious Act, as it injured our own colonies, and gave an advantage to the sugar grown in foreign colonies, where the slave-trade was still carried on. The application of the principles of free trade to our West-India colonies was most objectionable. For the interests of humanity too, the slave-trade ought by all means to be discouraged, but this Act offered a premium to it.
Report postponed.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE.
Lord Pollingtonmoved, that Lord Mexborough should be allowed leave of absence for one month, on the ground of urgent private business.
Mr. O'Connellopposed the Motion, as he did not think business a sufficient apology for absence at such a moment.
Motion withdrawn.
Sir Richard Vyvyanmoved, that Mr. Davies Gilbert have leave of absence for one month on urgent private business.
An Hon. Memberdid not see how they could grant this when they refused the leave of absence to Lord Mexborough.
Mr. O'Connellthought it right to say, Mr. Davies Gilbert had come to him and stated, that the business was of the most pressing nature, which demanded his immediate attention.
Mr. Robinsonthought it very inconsistent of the member for Kerry (Mr. O'Connell) to oppose the one motion, and agree to the other on precisely the same grounds. He objected to that hon. Member deciding who was to have leave and who not. He should oppose the Motion.
Motion withdrawn.