HC Deb 06 June 1836 vol 34 cc126-30
Earl Jermyn

presented a petition from Bury St. Edmund's, complaining of the appointment of some, and of the non-appointment of other Magistrates for that Borough; and his Lordship entered into a statement upon the subject, no part of which reached the gallery.

Mr. Scarlett

supported the prayer of the petition, and referred to the case of Norwich, where the Magistrates had been nominated from party and political motives. Those persons in whom the inhabitants had most confidence, from long knowledge, had been left out of the Commission.

Mr. Roebuck

spoke to order. The hon. and learned Member was debating on a petition.

The Speaker

decided that such a course was very inexpedient.

Lord John Russell

having been particularly appealed to by the noble Lord who presented the petition, would either make his statement now or on a future day, to which the debate might be adjourned. It seemed to him rather an extraordinary course to present a petition to the House upon the subject before an appeal had been made to the Secretary of State or to the Lord Chancellor. That was the proper course; and if justice were then refused, an appeal might be made to the House of Commons. He had never heard that any want of Magistrates was felt at Bury St. Edmund's; if any were wanted, he was quite ready to add to the number already appointed. Out of the list presented by the Town-council, he had rejected three persons; the absence of one of those he had nominated might possibly occasion a temporary inconvenience. One person he had named was certainly an attorney, although his practice had been to reject attorneys when a sufficient number of respectable and competent persons could be found without them. This, however, afforded no sufficient reason for resorting to the House in the first instance. The noble Lord had not complained that the persons appointed were not respectable; and if they were not numerous, as he had said before, he was quite willing to appoint others. If the town-councils of the kingdom recommended individuals of liberal principles, he thought it would be some time before the House of Commons entertained that objection, and decided that the parties were, therefore, not eligible. During twenty years that he had sat in the House, he had constantly seen magistrates appointed from party and political motives, but he had never on this account thought it his duty to complain, as long as the individuals were persons of respectable character, and adequate to the administration of justice. Now, indeed, a different rule of conduct seemed to prevail, and a course was taken which he had never ventured to adopt. He knew that the great majority of Magistrates in England and Wales had long been opposed to him in politics, but he did not think that a constitutional objection to their being in the Commission. That party could not now bear to lose any of its power; and although he did not complain of the petition, he thought that the House could not properly entertain the question. It was quite impossible for Parliament to institute an inquiry into the particular political opinions of different individuals; and to say that because this or that man, however good his character, and however large his fortune, had, at a certain time, voted in favour of certain measures, therefore, he was not a fit person to be placed in the Commission of the Peace—that was a proposition which he never ventured to make when he sat on the opposite side of the House; and he was sure that the noble Lord, after the very fair manner in which he had stated the case of the petitioners, would not altogether venture to assert that doctrine, a doctrine in his (Lord John Russell's) opinion, most injurious to the prerogative of the Crown.

The Solicitor-General

had the honour of holding the situation of Recorder for the Borough of Bury St. Edmund's, and he regretted that he had not been aware of the intention of the noble Lord to present the petition on this occasion; because, if he had, he would have been in his place when it was first brought forward. He had received from the borough a communication, informing him that a meeting of the inhabitants of that town had been duly convened by the mayor, at which they had come to certain resolutions, which they had requested him, on this petition being presented, to state to the House. It was not necessary for him to state them at length; he would confine himself to stating the substance of them, which was this:—that the inhabitants being duly convened by the mayor, in consequence of a report that such a petition as the one now before the House was about to be presented, met, and came to the conclusion that they did not know that any public meeting of the burgesses had taken place on the subject. [Earl Jermyn: It was not pretended to be a public meeting]. Very well; that got over the difficulty as to the reception of the petition; at the same time it materially diminished the weight and importance of it. At the meeting of the inhabitants, several resolutions were come to, the last of which was, "That this meeting fully believe, that those persons whose names are already inserted in the Commission of the Peace, as well as those since recommended by the Town-council to the Crown, are suitable and proper persons to act as justices of the peace for this borough, and that they do not believe that the burgesses have in any instance been deprived of that proper adjudication of their concerns which Parliament has provided for them by legislative enactment."

Earl Jermyn

hardly knew whether the debate should be adjourned or not. It was very unfortunate that the noble Lord had thrown so much asperity into the debate already, because he (Lord Jermyn) had merely stated the facts that were complained of by the petitioners. He was not himself personally aware of them. In presenting the petition which had been intrusted to him by a considerable portion of his constituents, he had done no more than his duty. There was nothing in the petition which made it at all irregular or improper to present it to the House. He was sorry he had not the opportunity to communicate to the Solicitor-General his intention to present the petition to-day. He did communicate the fact to the noble Lord on Saturday last, and also on Friday. With respect to the counter-resolution, referred to by the Solicitor-General, it did not appear to him that the circumstance of the meeting being held in the absence of the mayor altered the facts of the case as stated in the petition. He thought the hon. and learned Gentleman had given too much importance to the meeting at which those resolutions were passed. With regard to one statement made by the noble Lord, he begged to assure the noble Lord that this was the first time he had ever heard that any communication had been made of a wish on the part of any persons in the borough for the appointment of a gentleman of Conservative principles to the magistracy. He was aware that a wish had been entertained for the appointment of a gentleman who was neutral in politics, but not for any one of Conservative principles.

Lord John Russell

begged to assure the noble Lord that he found no fault whatever with the course pursued by the noble Lord; on the contrary, the noble Lord had given him fair notice of his intention to present the petition. He complained of those who had signed this petition, and had intrusted it to the noble Lord, for not making correct representations to the noble Lord, of the real state of the facts before he presented it.

Petition to lie on the Table.