Lords Sitting of 19 February 1839

MINUTES.
Bill. Read a first time:—Borough Courts.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of ILCHESTER, from several places in Somersetshire, by the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, from the Magistrates and Clergy of Dorsetshire, and by the Duke of WELLINGTON, from several Parishes in Kent, for an Alteration of the Beer Law.—By Lord HATHERTON, from a number of places, by Lord RADNOR, from several places, and by Lord BROUGHAM, from Epsom, and other places, for the Abolition of the Corn-laws.—By the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, from Dorking, by the Earl of ILCHESTER, from several places (Somerset), by the Earl of STRADBROKE, from places in Suffolk, by the Earl of HARDWICKE, from places in Huntingdonshire, by the Earl of WINCHILSEA, from places in Kent, by Lord HAWARDEN, from several places, and by the Earl of CLARE, from Galway, against any Alteration in the Corn-laws.—By the Duke of RICHMOND, from Elgin, for an Improved system of Prison Discipline; from the same place, for Church Extension; and from Barnwash, against the Abuses of Turnpike Trusts.—By the Earl of HADDINGTON, from Lochneven, and other places, for Church Extension in Scotland.—By the Earl of STANHOPE, from three places in Essex, against the New Poor-law.

CORN-LAWS—PETITIONS.
Lord Hathertonpresented six petitions from the borough of Wolverhampon and its neighbourhood, signed by nearly 9,000 persons, praying for a total Repeal of the Corn-laws. The immediate object of the petition was a total and unqualified repeal of the Corn-laws. If he (Lord Hatherton) had no other alternative than either a total repeal of those laws, or a continuation of the present law, he should be disposed to take the total repeal. He was of opinion it would be better for all parties to amend the present law rather than to adopt either alternative, by fixing a very small importation duty, and he believed that opinion had gained much ground throughout the country. The present laws were most obnoxious to the maritime interests of the country, to our intercourse with foreign states, and to the best interests of the institutions of this country. These were no new opinions of his. He had expressed them in the other House of Parliament, and had acquired them from a connexion of more than twenty-three years with a manufacturing part of the country, The manufactures of this country had for a long time been undergoing a great depreciation, and this was a very alarming state of things; and when it was recollected, that the prosperity of the country depended entirely on the prosperity of our manufacture, he could

585
not justify to himself the existing Corn-laws. Cotton, woollens, earthenware, hardware goods—none of them had any fiscal duty as a protection to an extent of more than twenty per cent., some not more than three per cent. On what principle, there fore, could he justify to himself a Corn-law protecting duty frequently amounting to fifty, sixty, and sometimes to one hundred per cent.? He hoped, that nothing that passed last night was to be considered as an expression of their Lordships' opinion against interfering, arising on this subject. The proposal then rejected was merely to hear evidence, and he apprehended their Lordships' judgments as to the laws themselves remained perfectly unfettered. He could not think so ill of that House as not to believe, that if any well considered measure on this subject, operating a change somewhat of the nature he had mentioned, were sent up by a considerable majority from the other House their Lordships would be disposed to receive it favourably.
Petitions to lie upon the Table.

OPEN QUESTIONS IN THE CABINET.
Viscount Melbournewould take that opportunity of saying, that their Lordships seemed to be under some little misapprehension as to the state of the Corn-law question under Lord Grey's Government. It was not a matter of any great importance, nor had it any bearing on the state of the question at present, but it might be as well that he should inform their Lordships what the state of the matter really was. It appeared, that in the course of a debate in the House of Commons in 1834, Mr. Poulett Thomson, who at that time held the office of Vice-president of the Board of Trade, expressly said in reference to the Corn-laws, and in answer to the Earl of Darlington who expressed his surprise at Mr. Poulett Thomson's conduct on that question, that "this is an open question in the Government, for the truth of which I appeal to my noble Friend sitting near me (Lord Althorp), and it is on this ground, that I am here as a member of his Majesty's Government, though not in the Cabinet, advocating the opinion, and voting for the motion of the Member for Middlesex."* This statement of Mr. P. Thomson, the Vice-president of the Board of Trade,
* Hansard, vol. xxi., Third Series p. 1277.
586
he considered as proof as to the state of the question under Lord Grey's Government.
The Earl of Riponsaid, with respect to the Cabinet he must assert, that he had no recollection of anything that had passed, which could induce him to suppose that Lord Grey's Cabinet had ever considered the Corn-law as an open question. The Vice-president of the Board of Trade could not be considered as speaking the sentiments of the Cabinet in 1834, and the Cabinet could not be bound by his opinion. He referred to facts, which if they could be gainsayed were capable of proof. With respect to this opinion of the Vice-president of the Board of Trade, he (Lord Ripon) had never heard of it until after it was given.
Lord Brougham: The noble Earl says, that he never heard of this opinion of the Vice-president of the Board of Trade until after it had been given. I never heard of it until this hour. The individual who had given this opinion was not a Cabinet Minister; he was not a Member of the Government in the same sense as a Secretary of State, or a First Lord of the Treasury. He was no more a Member of the Government than under Secretary of State, or a Secretary to any individual Minister. Why last Session a Lord of the Treasury voted in favour of the Ballot, and yet the Members of the Government did not split on the question of the ballot. I still maintain, that this was not an open question. In 1829 I addressed the House and stated, that the landed interest had no right to any protection beyond the cost of the importation. I entirely agree with my noble Friend, that this question was not an open question, and that the statements and votes of those who were so low in office as to be excluded from the Cabinet cannot be considered as proving otherwise.
The Duke of Richmondentirely agreed with the noble Earl, and with his noble and learned Friend who had just sat down, that the question of the Corn-Laws had never been considered as an open question by Lord Grey's Government; if it had been an open question he should have immediately ceased to be a Member of that Government. He deprecated opening the doors of the Cabinet in this manner so long after they had closed.
Viscount Melbournesaid, it was not the case of one, but of ten, Mr. P. Thomson,

587
Lord Dungannon, Mr. Labouchere, Sir Henry Parnell, the hon. A. Murray, Mr. Vernon Smith, and Sir G. Grey, all high in office, under the Government of Lord Grey, although certainly not Members of the Cabinet, voted in favour of a modification of the Corn-Laws.
The Duke of Richmond: What the noble Lord says only proves now that the underlings of Lord Grey's Government were in a very badly disciplined state.
Subject dropped.

INSULT TO THE BRITISH FLAG.
Lord Colvilleseeing the First Lord of the Admiralty in his place, wished to ask him a question relative to a report which had created a vast sensation this morning respecting the conduct pursued by the French Squadron in the Gulf of Mexico. It was stated, that one of her Majesty's packets, with the British flag flying at the mast-head, had been fired on by a French corvette, forced to heave to, boarded by a French officer, and the commander compelled to surrender a pilot who had intrusted himself to the safety of the British flag, and who was forcibly taken on board the French ship. All this must have taken place under the sanction of the French Commander, Admiral Baudin, as the commander of the corvette acted in accordance with signals made to him by his Admiral.
The Earl of Mintowas glad he could give a perfectly satisfactory answer to the matter referred to. It was undoubtedly true that a pilot had been taken out of a British vessel to pilot a French squadron by a French captain, and that he was put on board a French corvette. He had been informed of it, but before he could communicate with the French Government on the subject, he had received a communication from Admiral Baudin informing him that the young officer had given every explanation on the subject that could be required.
Lord Colvillesaid, it was a most cruel act, and most disrespectful to this country, to force a pilot from on board a British vessel.

PRISON DISCIPLINE.
The Duke of Richmondpresented a petition from the Provost and Baillies of the burgh of Elgin regarding Prison Discipline. They say that nothing could be worse than the state of prison discipline in that place. Now
588
he, (the Duke of Richmond) had recently visited that place, and he would say few men would allow their dogs to be kept in it. He had also visited Edinburgh, and the prisoners of the gaol there he found crowded together in great numbers, and that the discipline in that prison is such that it might be rather said there was no discipline at all. He need only state, that he was standing with the governor of that gaol in the yard, where numbers of prisoners were confined, when the governor begged him not to stand there, or the prisoners would insult him. Now he thought it was the duty of Government to apply a remedy to such evils. In this prison one of the prisoners was the agent of a pawnbroker in the town, and was accustomed to send out clothing and other articles, having advanced money upon them. Such was the discipline of those prisons. He thought no time would be mis-spent in effecting a change in such disorders. It was impossible that any man could come out of such prisons reformed in character. In fact, he must come out in a worse state than when he went in. They were the established schools of vice and crime, and he strongly urged the attention of the House to this petition.

CANADA.—MR. TURTON.
The Earl of Winchilsearose in pursuance of the notice he had given last evening to move that an humble address be presented to her Majesty, praying that she would be graciously pleased to order to be laid upon the Table of the House any correspondence which had passed between her Majesty's Government and the late High Commissioner of Canada, relative to the appointment of a Mr. Turton. He should occupy very little time in stating the grounds, which were but few, on which he brought forward his motion; and he hoped they would appear to the House to be such as to entitle their Lordships to call on the Government to lay those papers on the Table, not on behalf of themselves, but of the country at large. He had stated when he had brought this subject first forward, that he did so from no party or political feeling. He could now honestly also state, that no individual on his side the House was aware of his doing so until he had actually brought the subject forward; nor was any individual on that side of the House aware of his intention of renewing it last night, until he had actually given his notice. There were cir-

589
cumstances in which unhappily Mr. Turton had placed himself, which made him think it was inconsistent with what was due to the character and honour and dignity of the Crown, that he should have received that appointment, as well as, without the slightest desire to injure the feelings of the noble Earl, inconsistent with the best interests of his Government, because it was an opinion which he (Earl of Winchilsea) held in common he believed with all the high-minded people of this country, that the best and only sure ground of respect on the part of the governed towards their Government must be fixed in their private respect and esteem for the persons by whom that Government was composed. With that view, having had the acquaintance of that individual for some time, it was with feelings of private pain to himself that he had brought forward this question at all; but with the honest views he entertained, if Mr. Turton had been his nearest and dearest relative, still be should have taken the very course which he had pursued. On the 27th of April last, he asked the noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government whether that individual had been appointed the legal adviser to the government of the noble Earl. To that question the noble Viscount gave him a most decided answer. The noble Viscount's answer was, that no legal adviser had been appointed, and that upon reconsideration it was not considered necessary to make such appointment. At all events his (Earl of Winchilsea's) information was pretty correct; no matter from whence it came, that such appointment was under the consideration of her Majesty's Government. He then hoped, that the noble Viscount clearly understood, that it was not to any one particular situation, but to any situation at all under that Government, to which his objection extended. Not altogether satisfied with what the noble Viscount had said, on the 30th of the same month, he asked the noble Viscount whether that individual had left the country under any promise, or with any expectation, either from her Majesty's Government or from the noble Earl, of any public appointment when he reached British Canada. The answer he received from the noble Viscount on that occasion was, "I say, then, first of all, that no situation whatever was offered by her Majesty's Government to the gentleman
590
whose name he has alluded to; and next, that that gentleman has gone out to Canada, if he has gone out at all, which I do not mean to deny—without any appointment, without any prospect of an appointment, and without any intention on the part of Government, or on the part of my noble Friend, the Earl of Durham, to appoint him to any public situation whatever.*" When he got that answer from the noble Viscount he was perfectly satisfied with it. Circumstances compelled him to leave town, and a noble Friend of his seeing that gentleman's appointment gazettes as Secretary to the noble High Governor brought the subject under the consideration of the noble Viscount again, and alluded to the statement which the noble Viscount had made, which had just been referred to. On his (Earl of Winchilsea) return to the House, on the 16th of July he stated, that he was not satisfied with the answer which had been given him, and had he been present when his noble Friend mentioned the subject, he should have pressed for a further statement from the noble Viscount. What the noble Viscount stated to his noble Friend was, "He could only say, that it was with great concern and surprise he saw that appointment announced," adding, "at the time he made the statement to this House, which had been referred to, he felt confident, that no such appointment would take place."†When he (Earl of Winchilsea) read this, he could not reconcile it to himself with what had passed; and after having drawn the attention of her Majesty's Government to the subject, he thought, that it must have been known to some one of her Majesty's Government, and that it would be according to the natural course of things, that when he had drawn the Prime Minister's attention to it, he would have been informed upon it. He then expressed his opinion to the noble Viscount, that the answers which had been given to him were not satisfactory, and asked him whether he could give any test to the country of the sincerity of those expressions of surprise and regret which he had publicly stated in that House. The answer he received then was, "Ministers had very recently received an account of the appointment complained of, and had not yet had time to communicate with the government
* Hansard (third series) vol. xlii p. 673.
† Ibid. vol. xliii. p. 1167.

591
abroad. Under these circumstances it would not be convenient to state the course which Government intended to pursue."* He would say, that the country had a right to be informed of any communication which had passed of an official character, and that such a communication must have taken place, from the answer which the noble Viscount gave on the 16th of July, no man could entertain a doubt. He could say, without any reference whatever to party feeling, that if the confidence of the country could not be implicitly placed in the statements of an individual holding the elevated station of the noble Viscount, such an impression would be most detrimental and injurious to every interest of this country. He felt the importance of this subject so strongly, that he did hope the noble Viscount would not refuse to produce the despatch; but if he did, he should feel it to be his duty to press for the production of those papers by dividing their Lordships on his motion, for an Address to be presented to the Throne, begging her Majesty to order those papers to be laid on the Table.
Viscount Melbourneplaced the most entire reliance on the sincerity of the noble Earl, as expressed in his address, that he neither upon the former nor upon the present occasion, brought forward this question with any other than the purest motives, or any other desire than to have manifested that which undoubtedly was the best safeguard to the best interests of the country, viz. pure and honest statements connected with public affairs, on the part of persons holding high stations. At the same time he should be deceiving their Lordships if he were not to state that he felt on seeing this question again brought forward, considerable concern, not on his own account—not on account of the noble Earl, who was more particularly connected with this transaction than himself—but on account of the learned Gentleman who, without being present, and without having the opportunity of defence afforded to him had been made the subject of public animadversions and discussions—animadversions and discussions which must necessarily be very painful to his feelings, and not a little injurious to his prospects. It was impossible not to feel the hardship of the case as it affected him. With respect to what took place on the former occasion, he (Lord Melbourne)
* Hansard, (third series) vol. xliv. p. 203.
592
had only to say that the circumstances which occurred respecting the appointment of that gentleman by the noble Earl, had induced a strong opinion in his mind that no such appointment would take place; and it was under that impression he gave such an assurance to the House as he had given. The noble Earl behind him appeared to have acted under a different impression—in this respect, that he acted under the distinction which he drew on a former occasion between the office he gave and the other offices which were in the gift of the Crown—a distinction which he (Lord Melbourne) owned he could not concur in. But that was the cause of the noble Earl's acting in the manner he did. When he saw that appointment, unquestionably he felt precisely as he had expressed himself in that House—surprise at the appointment which had been made, and concern at the course which had been pursued. He could assure the House that what he had expressed he had stated with perfect sincerity and perfect truth on both these occasions. Now the object of the noble Earl opposite appeared to tat to gain information of the course pursued by him as the head of the Government, upon this appointment being made known to him—an appointment so contrary to what he had professed to expect, and so contrary to the noble Earl's expectations opposite. He apprehended that if the production of those papers were to be granted, the papers would not be found to give information on that point, but he would supply that information, and would now state to the noble Earl precisely the course which was taken on the occasion. After what had passed in that House he wrote a private letter to the noble Earl, expressing unquestionably his disapprobation of the course which had been pursued, and impressing upon the noble Earl the necessity of rescinding that appointment. The noble Earl said, in a letter in reply, that he considered his honour pledged, and most distinctly declined to take such a course. He was of opinion that whatever might be the real merits of the case, it would not have been proper for him to have interposed, so as to have interfered with the Government of the noble Earl, even upon the face of those ordinances which had been submitted to their Lordships. Their Lordships would perhaps not be surprised that he who had recommended the rescinding of that appointment on that occasion,

593
should not have been inclined to disturb the Government of the noble Earl by insisting on the dismissal of that gentleman. In this situation matters stood until the whole was cancelled by those more serious events which not only put an end to this appointment, but also put an end to the Government of the noble Earl himself. This transaction then entirely merged and was lost in those greater occurrences. Under these circumstances, seeing that this was a question of a very peculiar nature—seeing that it was a question, the agitation of which must necessarily occasion extreme pain—and seeing that no greater satisfaction would be obtained by the noble Earl obtaining the production of the despatches, which as to the greater part of them, would afford no information at all upon the subject, and considering the information he had now given, he trusted the noble Earl would not press his motion for the production of the despatches.
The Earl of Winchilseasaid it was not his intention to have taken this course if the answers to his questions given by the noble Viscount, had been satisfactory. It was the furthest thing from his wish, unless compelled by an imperative sense of public duty, to take any course calculated to inflict pain on any individual. It was a sense of public duty, that had compelled him to come forward now as he had done, and he had to express his regret, that the grounds on which he had come forward being public grounds, communications of a private nature had taken place by her Majesty's Government on this subject; and that he should have to be informed there was no communication of a public character upon it which could afford any information.
Viscount Melbournesaid, none of a public character respecting the latter part of it.
The Earl of Winchilseaexpressed his honest and sincere regret, that when the noble Viscount owed it to the country to take a public course, however painful to him, he should have failed to have taken a public course. Having satisfied his own mind upon this subject he would now leave it in the hands of the House. He could not but express his deep regret at the course taken by the noble Viscount, because, if by an inadvertency the noble Lord intrusted with a great public mission, should have to be remonstrated with, and
594
that was to take place in the shape of a private communication, and the private nature of that communication to be urged afterwards as a reason why the public should not know what had taken place, then the public could not be prevented from having that information to which it was entitled.
Load Broughamsaid, that having taken part in the observations that were made on this subject before, he could not but join with the noble Viscount in expressing a hope that the noble Earl would withdraw his motion, the pressing of which could lead to no advantage after the explanation which had taken place.
The Earl of Winchilseasaid, it was his intention to withdraw it.
Lord Broughamwas extremely happy to hear that which he was not before aware of. Nothing could be more candid and fair than the statements of the noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government. This was a painful subject to allude to, but it would be more painful to him not to make an observation or two upon the subject. However much a circumstance in Mr. Turton's conduct was to be condemned, yet he had long known him, and his noble Friend behind him (the Earl of Durham) had known Mr. Turton for a very many years—he was at school with him; he knew well his excellent general character, his great abilities, and his extensive information; he too, well knew his abilities, and great information, and he would venture to say there was not a man in the profession of the law or out of it, of a more exalted character, of higher honour, or purer spirit, or of a more unblemished character, than Mr. Turton, and that very few men were a greater ornament to the profession of the law, than he was. He felt bound from what had been said, and from the stigma that had been thrown upon him to say thus much. With respect to the particular transaction he was the last man in the world who would stand up to defend an act of seduction or adultery; but he would add, that a noble Friend of his now no more, who, from his official situation as Lord Chief Justice of England, was as sensitive as any man upon a case of this kind, directed his particular attention to the case. He was to hear that case in that House in his official character; and his late noble and learned Friend had said to him there was such a case coming before him; there was

595
a strong prejudice against the party whom he had known for a long time; and that something had fallen upon his ear upon going the circuit in that part of the country, which led him to believe, that that case was not so bad as was generally circulated—therefore, said his noble Friend to him, "have your attention awake to the circumstances." His answer to his noble Friend was, "I shall do so most willingly, but you must assist me in it—you must come and sit with me—I wish to have the comfort of your assistance on the occasion." That noble and learned Lord came—he sat two days hearing the cause and then he said, "I think you will pretty well see now, that I had some ground for my remark." Those who were sitting with him then said they saw very well how it was, and that it was by no means so bad a case as had been supposed, very little out of the ordinary way; and the noble and learned Lord was told, that he had then better go to Guildhall, because they could then deal with the case very well by themselves. Now, he desired it to be understood, that he was the last man to say a word in justification of adultery, but still he hoped noble Lords would not run into excess, which was certainly a very bad thing for morality on all occasions, but remember that cases which were called by the same name presented every shade of variety. Apart from that trans. action Mr. Turton was a man of the highest talent, the most profound information, and upright character.
The Earl of Wicklowcould not conceive that what the noble and learned Lord had just said with respect to the private communications which he had alluded to, was likely to raise the high character of the judicial functions and station of this country.
Lord Broughamsaid, if that was the noble Lord's opinion, it was one of the most astonishing opinions he had ever heard. All that he said was, that his late noble and, learned Friend had requested him to attend to this case, because it required particular attention. Was no attention to be paid to a private communication? Then, what were their Lordships to do when they received an invitation to dinner? [The Earl of Wicklow meant judicially.] He meant judicially too. ["Hear, hear!] Hear, hear!—yes, and understand as well as hear. What was the use of hearing unless noble Lords
596
would also understand? Let not the country be told, that justice was well administered because persons did not choose to understand it. That case had been heard for three days, it was thoroughly, understood, it was properly disposed of, and nothing improper had taken place in reference to any communication made in respect of it, but on the contrary.
The Earl of Wicklow: My Lords, the noble and learned Lord may be as uncourteous as he pleases towards me; for myself I do not care, but the statements will go forth to the public. No insulting language which he from his usual vocabulary may be pleased to use towards me, will alter my impression. It is not my impression that is of any importance, but the statement which the noble and learned Lord has made with regard to the manner in which he has exercised the judicial functions of this House will go forth to the country, and the country will be able to judge between us.
Lord Brougham: And the country will judge most justly. The people of this country have understanding, and can comprehend what is said, and will not run away with all erroneous impressions. I deny having used any insulting language. If the noble Lord will name any one word I said in the presence of your Lordships at all insulting, or which would show an intention to insult, or even to treat the noble Lord with disrespect—if the noble Lord will point out any such word I will retract and apologise for it. I cannot say anything more fair. The noble Lord forgets that he said the most offensive thing which one man can say against another. He said that I and a noble and learned Lord had combined together to defeat the course of justice. Now, whether anything could be more offensive than that, I leave to your Lordships to say.
Lord Abingerwas understood to observe, that it was impossible to suppose, that the communication which had been made to the noble and learned Lord could have any influence on his mind, except to persuade him of the necessity of paying particular attention to it.
Viscount Melbournesaid, that as what he had stated had been misunderstood, he wished to add a few words in explanation. When he said there was no despatch on the subject of the appointment, he meant to refer entirely to the course he had taken as the head of the Government, and which

597
he had thought himself bound to do in consequence of what had taken place. That, however, was conducted by private correspondence; but there was some other correspondence from his noble Friend, then at the head of the Colonial Department, in which he stated, that the appointments of the Executive Council were approved of, with the exception of the appointment of Mr. Turton, of which he expressed disapprobation, and requested an explanation, in order that the noble Lord might not suppose no official notice was taken of that appointment.
The Earl of Durham.My Lords, it is impossible for me to allow this discussion to pass without addressing a few words to your Lordships, not so much on account of the speech of the noble Lord opposite, as on account of the statements mad by the noble Viscount at the head of the Government. And I feel it necessary to recall to your Lordships the statement I made yesterday, and to adhere to that statement, in the essential part of it, as regards my own character—namely, that I made that appointment on my own responsibility, and without considering that I had in any degree committed her Majesty's Government on the subject. I considered, and I still believe, that I had a right to avail myself of the privilege which has been accorded to all Governors as regards honorary Executive Councillors, who have been distinguished from the mandamus Councillors in consequence of the opinion given by Attorney and Solicitor General Garrow and Shepherd, that the appointment of honorary Councillors never could officially come before any Government. Now, my Lords, whatever may be the impression existing on the mind of the noble Viscount, I most distinctly assert to your Lordships, and I hope, whatever may be your prejudice against my public career, that you will at least from what you have seen of me, give credence to what I distinctly and solemnly assure you of—I assert, that I considered, after what had passed, I was justified in giving any appointment to that learned Gentleman, provided it did not affect her Majesty's Government. I did it on my own responsibility, and acted strictly and honourably according to the understanding that existed between us before I left. Now, my Lords, I will not shelter myself under the recommendation of any individual in this country as regards this appointment. If
598
any such recommendations were given to me from any quarter, it was solely done in the hope of benefitting me, and it would be ungrateful of me to shelter myself under those recommendations. I therefore, distinctly and openly avow, that it was upon my own responsibility, that I gave the appointment to that learned Gentleman. I considered I was acting according to the pledge I had given, and the understanding I had come to with the noble Viscount before I left, and which understanding has been since corroborated by those who were conversant with it. The noble Viscount has entered into a narrative of this transaction, and has stated to your Lordships, that private letters, and public despatches, were written on this subject, and that in a private letter I had declared my honour was pledged, and that I could not retract the appointment. First of all, with regard to those private letters. It is perfectly true the noble Viscount did propose to me to rescind that appointment, and I declared, that having already made it, and having refused the resignation which that learned Gentleman tendered me of the office, that I could not in honour rescind the appointment, and the only course left to me, therefore, was to tender my own resignation; and to repeat an expression which I made use of in one of my letters—I would rather cut my right hand off, than do any thing which could be considered as having a tendency towards the discredit or disgrace of that learned Gentleman. With regard to the public despatches, I must say, after what has passed, that I do think I have a right to call for the production of those public despatches. I am not ashamed of them. I wish the despatches I wrote may be made public. Or, if noble Lords do not think proper to move an Address for them, perhaps the noble Viscount will give me leave to read a copy of that despatch. I will not have it supposed, there is any thing in the despatches I wish to conceal, or that any thing further than the motives I have stated to you, would induce me to make the appointment. It would be an infinite satisfaction to me, if every word I wrote in private, and every word I wrote in public, on this subject, were detailed to the House. I have no cause to be ashamed of it; and it would be seen that the circumstances in which I was placed with regard to that learned Gentleman, were such that

599
I was bound even to make a sacrifice myself, rather than he should suffer. And now, my Lords, one word with reference to that individual. I feel very much obliged to my noble and learned Friend below me (Lord Brougham) for having called your Lordships' attention to the eminent professional talents of that Gentleman. I had known him from his earliest infancy, but we were separated by the ordinary circumstances of life—he went to India and I remained in this country. I knew his professional talents—I knew, besides, when he was recommended to me, that he had been employed as Advocate-General in India, by Lord Combermere, above a year and a quarter—that Lord Amherst confirmed the appointment, and that he discharged his duty so well to the satisfaction of the Governor and Council of India, that they did what was a most unprecedented thing, namely, voted him 5,000 sicca rupees, and also a vote of thanks for his conduct. [Lord Brougham.—As Advocate-General.] Yes; a vote of thanks for his conduct as Advocate-General. Is it to be endured therefore, that I should be blamed for appointing to this trumpery office, a man who had filled the highest judicial situation in India? Was I to be denied the privilege never denied to Lord Combermere or to Lord Amherst, of taking advantage of his legal and professional services? Not only that, but the inhabitants of Calcutta, Bengal, and Madras, elected him their agent in this country, to be in communication with our Government. All those unfortunate circumstances, which have been made so much of here, were matter of notoriety, and were known in Calcutta, and yet he received these proofs of the confidence and esteem of those who knew him. Why, he held the office of churchwarden of the cathedral church in Calcutta up to the hour that he left India. Whatever may be your opinion, my Lords, and whatever may be the ridicule noble Lords opposite may make of the matter, I suppose a person appointed to that situation in the Church, could not be considered as a very immoral person. Under these circumstances it was, that I availed myself of his services—services unpaid for to this very hour. He has not received one farthing—he has not received any appointment for his services, and no man could possibly have acted more faithfully or zealously
600
in the discharge of his duty. And now, my Lords, you will excuse me, I hope, if I tell you very frankly and very decidedly, that I shall not be sorry on my own account if the noble Earl makes a specific motion relative to this appointment, because I am prepared to meet him whenever he thinks proper to make it. But the noble Earl must be aware of the consequences to which that must naturally lead. He may think it advisable to discuss this question upon this individual case, and I may meet him on that, but it cannot end there. I shall be prepared to discuss the question on general principles, and I feel I shall have a right to enter on the general question of adultery, considered in reference to the conduct of public men, and the great regard your Lordships have for decorum, I am sure, will augment your regard for justice. I feel I am entitled to do that. Aye, and I will go into an inquiry into the case of every public man who may have received official employment after having committed adultery. [A laugh.] I am very well used to all these obstacles and impediments which noble Lords endeavour to throw in my way, who will not, with all their sneers and jeers, drive me from the course I have pointed out for myself. I tell noble Lords, that I utterly disregard all their sneers and interruption, and I give them this notice, and from their knowledge of my character they may be sure I will act up to my promise, that if this ex post facto condemnation is to be followed up, that, at any rate, the case of every individual who has been employed in an official situation, and who has been guilty of an adulterous act, shall be brought forward for inquiry. Whatever course the noble Earl may think right to take, with regard to withdrawing or pressing his motion, I say I will second him in any demand for documents I may have addressed to her Majesty's Government.
The Earl of Winchilsea: I shall discharge what I think to be my duty in this or any other matter. I know myself too well to care for the taunts of any man. I will act up to my principles, and if the noble Earl should bring forward any case of the nature he alluded to, I will give him my support, and be entirely uninfluenced by any principle but that of doing my duty to my country.
Motion withdrawn.

WESTMEATH ELECTION.
The Marquess of Westmeath, in moving for the additional papers relating to the investigation held at Mullingar, before John Brooks, Esq., said, he had given notice of a motion respecting the election for the county of Westmeath, which he had determined to bring forward to-day, whether the noble Marquess at the head of the Irish Government were in the House or not, "That these papers be laid on the Table." There were forty-eight pages of evidence with remarks appended.
The Marquess of Normanbywas not aware what the papers were, that the noble Marquess had alluded to, but he dared say there would be no objection to their production.
The Marquess of Westmeathstill thought it his duty to make the statement. The evidence he had stated was contained in forty-eight pages, and the paper appended to it was a judicial opinion on the evidence. A noble Lord had last night said, that the easiest way to dispose of a case was to put aside all evidence, and it would appear in his case the commissioner had passed over the whole of the evidence, and had brought in his name in a manner wholly unjustifiable. He said, in the first place, that the Marquess of Westmeath did not attend this investigation; he then said, that he was directed to hold an investigation into certain circumstances which took place at Mullingar. In the first place, he found it necessary to say, he had never made any charge on that subject; in December, 1837, a certain statement was made before the magistrates of the county of Westmeath, respecting the matter to which those papers related, when the chief constable said, he could give the magistrates no information; he consequently wrote to Lord Morpeth, asking leave for Mr. Rowan to communicate to him the information required. He got no answer to this letter. In June he called the attention of their Lordships, and shortly after received a letter from Mr. Drummond, stating that his letter had been sent to Lord Morpeth, that it had subsequently been mislaid and that search was making for it; but what would their Lordships think, when he told them that those identical papers, which could not be found on the 11th of December, were found in the hands of a political club at Mullingar, and
602
had been inspected by four Roman Catholics. And, nearly a year after this, the Secretary was anxious to make him believe they were lost. The circumstances were certainly not such as Mr. Drummond had stated them to be, but it appeared that in September, Mr. Drummond had a long interview with Mr. Sheil, and now he had something to say respecting the conduct of Government. Mr. Rowan and the constabulary force had received the thanks of the Lord Lieutenant through Colonel Shaw Kennedy and Mr. O'Donoghue, for their good conduct at this election. Now, what was the conduct of the Lord Lieutenant towards these officers, to whom they had returned their thanks? These officers had thought it their duty to make a representation against the conduct of two persons whom the Lord Lieutenant was pleased to protect. He did not wonder at this, because one of these persons had been appointed a magistrate against his expressed opinion. The Lord Lieutenant was thus in some measure implicated by that appointment, be was committed to it, and it was necessary to see if he could not justify it. Now, what was the course the Government took? Mr. Daglaseau, who was the chief-constable, received the order at his station in the county of Louth to go to Dublin on the Monday: he went there on the Tuesday. On the Wednesday he saw Colonel Shaw Kennedy—set off for Mullinger on the Thursday, not having received any information respecting the investigation, and on the Monday that investigation took place. What was the mode adopted at this investigation? The Government positively put their own officers on trial, and not the persons charged with misdemeanour of the officers of the Government. In consequence of Mr. Daglaseau objecting to this course, he was distinctly told by the Counsel on the opposite side that he was to consider himself on his trial. His Counsel then demanded that the answers of the gentlemen to the charges which had been brought against them should be furnished him. Mr. Daglaseau was not furnished with them, the chairman, saying, that it was not at that stage of the proceeding that that application should be made. The only opportunity that Mr. Daglaseau had for looking at these replies had been when they were sent down to him at his station at Loath, at which time he was not

603
suffered to copy them, but was ordered to send them back by the orderly dragoon who had brought them. He was put on his trial for exceeding his duty, and no opportunity was afforded him to rebut the charges. Now, it was mentioned at the head of the evidence—before the evidence was gone into—at the very commencement of the minutes, that counsel on behalf of Mr. Daglaseau having stated, that that gentleman was not in possession of copies of the replies made by these magistrates to the charges brought against them, such copies were furnished to him by direction of the court; such was not the case. These documents had been refused them, and yet this statement was made in order to make the proceeding appear less unfair. When Mr. Daglaseau was furnished with these copies does not appear. They may have been furnished him subsequently but certainly not at the commencement of the proceedings. He would read the report of the trial from the short-hand writer's notes, which he intended subsequently to move for, so that if he committed any mistake the noble Marquess would have an opportunity of correcting it. He did not understand what right the Lord Lieutenant had to institute investigations of this kind—he seemed to take authority in his own hands, like a third Daniel, to come to a very wise decision. He would not go further into the subject until the papers were laid before the House; and he would only mention a part of the investigation, which bore a personal relation to himself, that there was never seen anything so unfair. A Mr. Egan, Crown prosecutor, had been asked whether he (Lord Westmeath) was not a member of the Liberal Club in the county, when the Liberal Club had never been mentioned during the course of the investigation? Their Lordships after some hard swearing, would he surprised to hear that he never was a member of a Liberal Club in Ireland. He believed that the term liberal was used by a band of persons whose only object was to place the whole of Ireland under the dominion of the Roman Catholics. It was true that previous to the passing of the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, being of opinion that the representation of Ireland was too much of a family concern—that he was the member of a club called the Independent Club, the members of which were associated together for the purpose of making head against such a system of
604
representation. Matters, however, in Ireland, were now changed. The Irish Reform Bill, and the Roman Catholic Relief Bill had passed, and the Roman Catholics could not any longer complain of being excluded, and therefore, since then, that club had been broken up. He did not believe, that he had attended that club more than twice, and yet for that he was to be accused of having changed his principles, trusting that the House would pardon him for having occupied so much of its time, he would conclude by moving the motion of which he had given notice.
The Marquess of Normanbydid not complain of the want of candour on the part of the noble Marquess, because his former experience of the manner in which the noble Marquess usually brought the subject forward, prevented him from doing so. But he complained of its being brought forward as it had been with reference to the interests of truth, as concerned in the present investigation. There could be no doubt that the noble Marquess's intention was to state that which would lead their Lordships to a just and fair conclusion; but he did not believe that any other person, with the exception of the noble Marquess, would have brought themselves to believe the facts which he had stated. Now, what were the facts of the case? Why, the papers had not been printed more than a week, and yet the noble Marquess, without giving him the slightest notice, or referring him to a single document, brought this question forward in spite of his communication to him, that he was not aware of the facts connected with the subject; and that he had had no opportunity whatever of communicating with his noble Friend, the Secretary for Ireland. He had only arrived from Ireland last night; and until that afternoon, he had not the slightest knowledge of any intention on the part of the noble Marquess to bring the motion forward. He could not take upon himself to allow the publication of these papers, without inquiring how far they bore on the investigation of the question. If the noble Marquess would now withdraw his motion, and give notice of his intention to bring it forward on a future day, in order that he might have an opportunity of communicating with Ireland, then he would tell the noble Marquess whether he would or would not assent to his motion; and when he came forward, to meet the noble Mar-

605
quess, he should be ready to go, point by point, into the whole of the case. He had no desire of concealment—he was anxious that his decision on the whole case should be before their Lordships. Indeed, he had intended himself to have moved for it; and he had now no objection to assent to that part of the motion of the noble Marquess, and he would see what further part he could assent to when he had had sufficient time to make inquiries on the subject. He thought, that it was impossible to attribute that importance to the matter which the noble Marquess thought it entitled to—it arose out of the excitement of an election. He thought, that no party were entirely free from blame, but no party required further notice to be taken of it than the intimation of his opinion. When he told the House that it was six months since he had looked into the papers, he thought the House would take a different view from that of the noble Marquess, as to the fairness of calling for the papers at the present moment, especially when he had told the noble Marquess, that if he would only give notice, he would be glad to adopt any course that would be most convenient. He thought the appearance of the benches of that House did not say much for the importance of the subject the noble Marquess had brought forward. He pledged himself to prove, when time had been given him, to look into the papers, that Mr. Brooke was a most honourable man, and that the insinuations of the noble Marquess, that Mr. Brooke had been influenced by a desire to look to the Government for support, were totally unwarranted, and unjustifiable. He thought the insinuations of the noble Marquess would lower him in the esteem of that House and the country, and he defied him to prove them. He would also defy the noble Marquess to prove the statements that he had made against Mr. Drummond. That gentleman held a public office, and he must tell the noble Marquess, that he had feelings as well as himself. He did not believe, that the conduct pursued by the noble Marquess—the unwarrantable and unjustifiable course he had pursued, would have been adopted by any other noble Lord in that House. He would not impute motives to the noble Marquess, but the noble Marquess had ideas of duty very different from the generality of men. As the noble Marquess had alluded to Mr. Sheil, the ma-
606
gistrate, and had stated, that he (Lord Normanby) ought to have been impeached for appointing Mr. Sheil, he would just advert to a letter from the magistrates of Westmeath to that gentleman, but before he did so, he would say, that he believed him to be a most excellent and efficient magistrate, and that he had never seen any reason whatever to regret his appointment. The letter to which he would advert, from the magistrates of Westmeath, stated, that they were convinced he had never sat drinking in a public-house, and that his character was perfectly free from all such imputations. He had begun by stating, that he would not answer the noble Marquess now, but he should have no objection to do so when he had all the facts and details before him.
The Earl of Wicklowwas not surprised at the anxiety of his noble Friend to bring forward the present subject, because, in the papers before the House severe accusations were made against him. He wished for an explanation on one point, which was, how it happened that the Council appointed by the noble Marquess opposite (Normanby) to go into the country to investigate the matter, had not made any report? In his opinion, the papers furnished would be of no value without a report, and he hoped, that the noble Marquess would adopt some means of ascertaining the truth of the documents.
The Marquess of Normanbysaid, it was probable that Mr. Brooke, the commissioner, was of the same opinion as he himself was—that the whole was a very trivial matter—that the only thing in the shape of a charge which did or could affect Mr. Sheil's character was done away with. He suspected that Mr. Brooke thought it was not necessary, under the circumstances, to make any report, and perhaps, when the whole of the papers were laid upon the table, their Lordships would be of a similar opinion as Mr. Brooke and himself as to the very trivial nature of this affair. That this was the case in his opinion, might perhaps be some little excuse to their Lordships for his not being able, at the distance of six months, and without notice, to enter into dates and details with perfect accuracy.
Lord Hollandthought, if the noble Earl felt surprised that Mr. Brooke had not made a report, his astonishment would extend to the whole proceedings of Parliament, for a great number of the Com-

607
mittees, both of that, and the other House of Parliament, had only reported the evidence, and not made any particular report upon the facts. He felt bound to deprecate the motion of the noble Marquess, on account of its being brought forward without notice.
Lord Cloncurrysaid, that not to report was not only the best thing the learned Gentleman could do, but it was almost the only thing he could do. Circumstances, such as occur in every election room, came out in evidence before him, which could not be reported without conveying an unfavourable impression against the humble individuals concerned in them.
The Marquess of Westmeaththought that the circumstances of which the noble Baron talked so lightly, constituted, in reality, a very serious case; the magistrates were grievously insulted, and the chief constable was spit upon from head to foot. The noble Marquess had appeared to wish to fix upon him the charge of desiring to convey to their Lordships an impression of an unfavourable nature against certain public men. Now, as regarded Mr. Drummond, he had not stated anything of which he was not prepared to bring forward what he conceived to be satisfactory proof. He was most unwilling to enter into charges against the absent; but that Mr. Drummond was not a member of their Lordships' House, and consequently could not be there to defend himself, was not a reason why he should abstain from doing his duty in that House. He was not in a condition to know that the noble Marquess was in town, and could not therefore give him notice; but he had already given notice to the House of his intention, and he was obliged therefore to bring the matter on. With respect to the testimony of the Westmeath magistrates, he would only observe that Mr. Sheil was never accused of drinking in a public-house, except in the newspapers, in which it was said that he (the Marquess of Westmeath) made a statement to that effect in that House. Now, he distinctly declared that he never said anything about drinking in a public-house; he said that Mr. Sheil had been found in a public-house, and what he stated was true; and moreover, he believed that if it had not been for interference on the part of the Government, every individual concerned in the affair would have been taken into custody, and carried before a magistrate,
608
and fined for being in a public-house after hours, under the Tippling Act. Mr. Sheil was, therefore, acquitted by the magistrates of that of which he was never accused. As to the motion, he had no hesitation in acceding to the suggestion of the noble Marquess, and withdrawing it for the present. But he must not forget to remark, in reply to the noble Marquess's observation as to the course he had pursued that evening, being such as no other noble Lord in their Lordships' House would think fit to pursue; he must say that he had pursued no course but what conscience dictated as his duty, in order to show what was the state of the county of which he was lord-lieutenant; and in reply to the noble Marquess's not very courteous, or rather very rude, remark, he would say, that the Government of Ireland had been carried on in such a way by the noble Marquess as he believed no other nobleman in the peerage would have carried it on.
The Marquess of Normanbyhoped that, notwithstanding what had fallen from the noble Marquess, that the House would not conclude Mr. Shell to have been really liable to a conviction under the Tippling Act. When the whole of the evidence and documents connected with the affair came before their Lordship; he had little doubt but they would form nearly the same opinion on it as he himself had done.
Motion withdrawn.