HC Deb 01 May 1843 vol 68 cc1102-3
Mr. French

wished to put a question to the noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland, respecting a circumstance which had given some dissatisfaction to the parties concerned. It appeared that Mr. Nichols, the Poor-law Commissioner, had, contrary to the wish of the guardians of the Londonderry Union, insisted upon having a new workhouse erected at a cost of 1,200l. The case had become a subject of litigation; but the law officers of the Crown had made a strong appeal to the court before which it was brought, stating that a hostile decision against Mr. Nichols would be productive of the most serious inconvenience. The judges replied that they sat there to administer the law without respect to the inconvenience which their decision might occasion to parties. Now he wished to know whether, after this proceeding, any intimation was conveyed to Mr. Justice Burton from the Crown, that it was desirable that the cause should stand over and that no decision should be given upon it?

Lord Eliot

said, there was no foundation whatever for the supposition that the Irish Government, or any person authorized by that Government, had interfered between the learned judge on the bench and the Poor-law commissioner in the matter of the Londonderry Union. He apprehended that the mistake had originated from some observations made by his hon. Friend near him in open court during the proceedings, when he appeared, not as counsel for the Grown, but for the Poor-law commissioner, and when he expressed a hope that the learned judge would not decide upon a question of so much importance without giving ample time for consideration, and the bench acquiesced.

Back to