HL Deb 06 August 1822 vol 7 cc1869-72

The following will be found a more correct Report of the Speech of the Marquis of Titchfield, on presenting a Petition from Lynn, praying the interference of the House for a Remission of the remainder of Mr. Hunt's Sentence, than the one given at page 1.

The Marquis of Titchfield

presented a petition from some inhabitants of the town of Lynn, praying the interference of the House, for the remission of the remainder of Mr. Hunt's sentence. He said, he would not trouble the House with reading the whole of the petition, but he wished to read enough of it to explain the object and motives of the petitioners in their own words. The noble marquis then read some parts of the petition, in which the severity of the sentence and the cruelty practised towards this victim of ministerial hatred were spoken of, and the case of sir Manasseh Lopez referred to as precedent in favour of Mr. Hunt. The noble marquis pro-

of this, and of other measures, to relieve my people from some of their burthens.

"My Lords and Gentlemen;

"The distress which has for some months past pervaded a considerable portion of Ireland, arising principally from the failure of that crop on which the great body of the population depends for their subsistence, has deeply affected me.

"The measures which you have adopted for the relief of the sufferers meet with my warmest approbation; and, seconded as they have been by the spontaneous and generous efforts of my people, they have most materially contributed to alleviate the pressure of this severe calamity.

"I have the satisfaction knowing that these exertions have been justly appreciated in Ireland, and I entertain a sincere belief that the benevolence and sympathy so conspicuously manifested upon the present occasion will essentially promote the object which I have ever had at heart—that of cementing the connexion between every part of the empire, and of uniting in brotherly love and affection all classes and descriptions of my subjects."

ceeded to offer some observations on the subject of the petition, but in so low a tone of voice, that few of them were audible in the gallery. We understood him to say, that he was glad of this opportunity of observing, that he cordially agreed with the petitioners in the object they had in view, although he differed with them decidedly as to some of the reasons they had assigned in support of it. He certainly could not assent to any imputations against his majesty's ministers for their conduct in this matter, for he thought they had done no more than their duty in ordering the prosecution of Mr. Hunt. Still less could he participate in any reflections upon the courts of justice. To such he would never consent to lend himself in any instance, unless supported by strong presumptions, that they had conducted themselves unworthily, and had forgotten the sacred functions they had to administer. But the same respect for courts of justice which forbad him to listen to any thing that tended to impugn their decisions, unless upon the strongest grounds, made him also exceedingly anxious that they should never become even the innocent instruments of oppression. Such an occurrence he should consider a great misfortune, and it would happen in the instance of Mr. Hunt, unless the House gave him, and he would add the court itself, the benefit of its interference. For when the sentence of two years and a-half-imprisonment was awarded, it was unknown to the judges that Ilchester gaol was in the bad condition which is now discovered to have been the case; nay, more—it was believed by the judges to be in a state exactly the reverse, and was fixed upon on that very account. Could it be believed for an instant, that if the judges considered two years and a half imprisonment, in a gaol under proper regulations, a sufficient punishment, they would have awarded the same term of imprisonment, if they had anticipated, that the punishment would have been inflicted with extraordinary severity, or that there was that liability to it, which might be inferred from any one act of undue coercion or capricious restriction? He would comment as little as possible upon the conduct of a man now in the situation of an accused; but he could not help remarking, that his very defence in the case of Gardiner, where a blister had been applied to the man's head for unruly behaviour, afforded a strong presumption against him; for he owned, that he had ordered that extraordinary punishment inadvertently. If he could talk in that way, and plead a fit of absence, as an excuse for such shocking misconduct, he had certainly no right to complain of the strongest language, that had been used against him. Two years in such a gaol, might, by all accounts, be estimated as equal to two years and a half in any other, and it was upon these grounds that he thought the House called upon to interfere; not to defeat, but to give effect to the intention of the court, that what the judges meant should be the punishment of Mr. Hunt, should be the punishment really inflicted—that and no more; and that the court should be in the same situation as if it was now to decide upon the case anew, with an accurate knowledge of the state of the gaol in question. As a matter of favour he would never have consented to an address to the Crown in behalf of Mr. Hunt, but for the reasons he had given, he considered it nothing more than simple justice. He felt sure of being quite impartial in this recommendation, because being convinced of the illegality of the meeting at which Mr. Hunt presided, and reflecting upon the circumstances that had occurred at the time, and that had occurred since, he was certainly not disposed to wish Mr. Hunt to be treated with any indulgence. But the question was simply, whether more should be meted out to him than was intended by those upon whose discretion the punishment depended. He thought there could be little doubt, that if the case had been reversed, and that Mr. Hunt had been receiving alleviations of his imprisonment, which could not have been in the contemplation of the judges, the home department would have promptly interfered, and it was the more called upon to interfere when the excess was the other way. He trusted, therefore, the ministers would pursue on this occasion, the course they took, in his opinion so properly, on the occasion of the motion in behalf of sir Manasseh Lopez, and thereby render unnecessary the motion of the hon. baronet which he should otherwise cordially support.