HC Deb 10 February 1832 vol 10 cc196-9
Lord Althorp

said that, since he had been a Member of the House, he had always considered it to be his duty never to refuse to present any petition of a respectable character which might be placed in his hands. Acting upon that principle, he had now to present one, in the prayer of which he could not concur. The language in which the petitioners expressed their wishes was undoubtedly, in many passages, very strong, though not stronger, he believed, than the terms in which the House had on many occasions allowed itself to be addressed. One of the passages was, "They have heard with horror and indignation that Mr. Hulton, of Hulton, who was one of the Magistrates in August, 1819, has, in some correspondence which has been printed, spoken of the frightful deeds done at Manchester as meritorious, and even dared to threaten the town with similar occurrences." Whether such a petition should be printed, was, of course, a matter of discretion with the House. It certainly was not his intention to make any motion to that effect himself. The petition was agreed to at a meeting held at Cropper-street, Manchester, but it bore only the signature of Mr. Samuel Hewett, the Chairman. Its object was, to pray that an inquiry might be instituted into the proceedings which occurred at Manchester in August, 1819, when the lives of many individuals were lost. With that prayer he could not concur. At this distance of time he believed that further inquiry into that unfortunate circumstance would serve only to rake up and renew old feelings of political animosity, without affording the means of promoting the ends of justice; therefore, although he had moved for inquiry shortly after the circumstance had occurred, he hoped he should not be considered inconsistent if he were opposed to it after a lapse of twelve years.

Mr. John Wood

said, that he had heard the remarks made by the noble Lord with very considerable pain. He knew that a great proportion of the most respectable inhabitants of Lancashire felt that some inquiry ought to be instituted. The blood shed on that day ought not to be forgotten until it was atoned for. As no inquiry had taken place at the time, he could not regard it as an unreasonable request that some investigation should be made now, when the sentiments of so many persons continued to be so strongly directed to the subject, and an opinion prevailed that injustice had triumphed. It was never too late to do justice. The public attention had been recently excited on the subject by a correspondence which had been published, by which it appeared that some of the actors in the fatal and disgraceful transaction of August, 1819, yet dared to avow the part which they had taken in it. What wonder, then, that the feelings of the friends of the dead should be aroused? The noble Lord seemed to apprehend that evidence could not be procured to make out a case, but he knew many individuals who were prepared to substantiate most important facts relating to that transaction. He felt strongly on the subject, for he had formerly been one of those persons who had endeavoured to bring the conduct of the Magistrates before a Jury of their countrymen. He gave his strenuous support, therefore, to the prayer of the petition.

Mr. Hunt

agreed with his hon. colleague, that there was no reason why the subject should not now be inquired into. It was one which rankled to this day in the breast of the people of Manchester. That the affair had occurred twelve years ago was no answer to the demand for inquiry. Governor Wall had been executed for murder twenty years after the commission of the crime. Until the matter had been investigated, he would never call what had occurred at Manchester anything less than a cool, deliberate murder. Let there be an inquiry, and let it be shown that the authorities were not to blame, and he would never open his lips again on the subject. He would engage to procure ample evidence, if an opportunity was afforded, of instituting an impartial inquiry. There would never be peace and contentment in the manufacturing districts until satisfaction was obtained. To call the attention of the House to the subject, was, he believed, one of the principal reasons of his having been sent there by his constituents.

Mr. Hume

said, if the law placed no limit on the time at which a single murder might be inquired into, there ought not to be any limit to the time at which wholesale murder might be prosecuted. To stifle inquiry, when it was said, that it could be proved that murder had been committed, was to aid the injustice of those who were implicated. He remembered, as if it were but yesterday, the means which were adopted to prevent the bringing forward of evidence at the inquests on the occasion in question. He was satisfied that, in the future history of this country, the Oldham inquest would always be considered as a most disgraceful transaction. It appeared to him also, from the correspondence recently printed in the newspapers, that Mr. Hulton triumphed in the proceedings of that day—proceedings which ought to call up none but painful recollections. He trusted that the noble Lord would alter his mind, and would allow an inquiry to take place at the present period, when there was comparatively little excitement. If inquiry was prevented by the exercise of power at the time, it was monstrous to refuse inquiry when an opportunity offered for prosecuting it without impediment. Inquiry was desirable, were it only to impress upon the minds of persons in authority, that, however long a period might elapse after the commission of an offence, their conduct would not escape investigation.

Lord Milton

would have been very glad if the subject could have been effaced from the minds of the people of Manchester; but he was not surprised that it was not so, and that those whose relations and friends fell on the day in question, should preserve a vivid remembrance of the fact. He regretted the revival of the subject, but he was far from saying that his mind was made up against inquiry; for of this he was persuaded, that if ever there was an occurrence calculated to effect a separation of the lower classes of the community from the higher, the conduct of the Magistrates at Manchester at the period in question, and the conduct of the House of Commons afterwards, had that tendency.

Petition to lie on the Table.