§ The Earl of Charlevillesaid, that notwithstanding the reply of the noble Marquess last night, with regard to the granting of certain returns, he found on looking at the papers, that the object which both the noble Earl who had just left the House, and the noble Marquess professed to have in view, that of seeing who was right, and who was wrong with regard to the proceedings which had taken place in Ireland, could not be accomplished, unless the returns for the two preceding years were granted. He, therefore, stated, that he was authorised by the noble Earl, who had first left the House, to give notice of motion on his behalf for the production of those returns, in addition to those to which he had already alluded. He wished to know whether the noble Marquess objected to the production of these returns with regard to the first point on which 908 difference of opinion had taken place last night between the noble Marquess and the noble Earl.
The Marquess of Normanbyhad no objection to give the returns asked for; in fact, he rather wished that they should be carried hack even beyond the two years, because he was anxious to show that he had followed the same precedents as his predecessors. He again repeated, that he had not the slightest objection to grant these returns. He would just say, in allusion to what the noble Earl had said, that there seemed to be some doubt in his mind as to the identity of the person alluded to; that he had observed that he was not aware of the circumstances of the case, of which, no doubt, the noble Earl was aware, he having made them the subject of investigation. A medical gentleman who had called on him to-day, had told him, that although he could not recollect this precise case, yet he perfectly well recollected that at the time the hulks were broken up, certain of the convicts had been transported to Kilmainham gaol, in consequence of medical certificates stating that they were not in a fit state to be transported. He was too much used to the exercise of this power in Ireland, to state at first whether Coghlan was or was not one of these persons, although he took it for granted, from what the noble Earl said, that he was one of them. He had no objection to acknowledge that he was sorry mercy had been extended in this case, if the case were as bad as had been described by the noble Earl. With reference to the returns, he could have no objection to granting them, although they would not show the whole of the reasons for the commutation of punishment. The certificate of the surgeon constituted only one ingredient in enabling the Government to come to a decision—there were many other causes and considerations which influenced the Government in their decision. With reference to the officer of the medical department, on whose individual declaration it had been said he had acted, he would state, that there was also the surgeon of the transport, who certified as to the inability of the convict to undertake the voyage. In this case the Government had no discretion; and they referred this certificate to the medical officers of the Government, in order that they might ascertain the existing state of the disease, and whether it was of such a nature as to 909 render it unlikely that he would ever be able to undertake the voyage. These certificates were the acts of public officers, and formed one ingredient in the decision to which the Government came on the subject.
§ The Earl of Charlevillesaid, that no doubt one of the reasons for asking for a more extended return was, the number of prisoners let out by the noble Marquess in the years 1835 and 1837—many persons under sentence of death had been let out on those occasions—others under sentence of transportation for life—others under sentence of transportation for fourteen years—others under sentence of transportation for seven years, had been also liberated by the noble Marquess, and out of all these cases, in only forty-one instances, bad bail been required. In the case of Coghlan he would not now dispute as to the validity of the medical certificate, when it appeared, according to the noble Marquess's own showing, that in this instance he had pursued an unusual practice. It appeared, that there had been a regular rule with regard to the commutation of punishment, but in this instance Coghlan, a man of bad character, had been let loose without undergoing the three years' imprisonment to which his sentence of commutation ought to have been commuted, and even without being called upon to find bail. Michael Ryan had been described as an old pensioner who had lost his leg; it would have been much better for the unfortunate prosecutor if this old Colour-sergeant had lost his arm as well. The offence which he had committed had been treated so lightly, that only moderate security had been required of him; himself in ten pounds, and two securities of five pounds each, and the offence which this man who had lost his leg had committed, was the taking a man's head under his arm, putting it into Chancery, in fact, and opening his knife and scooping his eye out. Such conduct as this, on the part of her Majesty's Government, was calculated to shake justice, to destroy the confidence of judges, to destroy the confidence of juries, to destroy the confidence of magistrates, and to cause the people of Ireland to imagine that the Government were assisting those who were guilty of these breaches of the peace.
The Marquess of Normanbywas most anxious to meet the impression of the noble Earl or the impression of other 910 noble Lords, and would do so when the noble Earl opposite (Earl Roden) brought forward the question he had given notice of at the commencement of the Session. Perhaps the noble Earl would have the kindness now to fix an early day for bringing it forward. He did not wish to ask any indulgence of the House, but he desired to have some specific day named, in order that in the mean time, he might refresh his memory on the circumstances of the case, in order that he might be enabled to answer the question of noble Lords, and refute the imputations that had been cast against his government in Ireland. The noble Marquess opposite (Marquess of Westmeath) had concluded last night by stating, that he had thrown open the doors of the prisons in Ireland. Now upon that subject all he would say was, that of course he, as well as other men, was liable to error; but this he could conscientiously say, that in the exercise of the prerogative of mercy he had been justified in the course he had pursued by the opinions of the Judges, who had stated, that he had exercised it with care and attention, and in accordance with their views upon the subject. When the noble Earl brought forward his motion on the subject, he should be enabled to refute completely the aspersions that had been cast upon him in that respect.
The Marquess of Westmeathsaid, that the noble Marquess opposite seemed to think, that noble Lords on that side of the House had not dealt fairly with him in bringing forward the subject as they had done, and not reserving it for a field-day. He would venture to say, that if the House were to sit there for a week, and every night until twelve o'clock, they would not be enabled to consider all the acts of misgovernment on the part of the noble Marquess during the time he was Lord-lieutenant of Ireland. The noble Marquess seemed to think, that the matters that were brought forward were extremely trifling and hardly worthy of the attention of the House. Was it a trifling matter, he would ask, for a man to have his eye gouged out? He wished to God, that the noble Marquess's government had been anything but what it was; he wished he could have praised instead of blamed him, but having the interests of Ireland at heart, he should never hesitate, notwithstanding the taunts of the noble Marguess, to bring forward facts and circum- 911 stances, he felt himself compelled so to do when from a sense of duty.
The Earl of Rodenhaving been personally alluded to by the noble Marquess, felt himself called upon to make a few observations. He had felt it his duty, at the commencement of the Session, to state, that it was his intention to call the attention of the House to the disturbances that had taken place in various parts of Ireland. He was extremely anxious, when he did so, that there should be a full attendance of noble Lords, particularly those who were connected with that part of the country where the disturbances had taken place. Such being his wish, it was impossible for him to name a certain day, until he had had an opportunity of communicating with those noble Lords. When he had done so, and had ascertained the time that would be most convenient for them, he would take care to inform the noble Marquess. Having said thus much, he wished to make a few observations on the statements of the noble Marquess relative to opening the gaols. He had stated, that the noble Marquess had thrown open the gaols in consequence of the course he had thought proper to pursue when he visited several towns in the tour he had made through Ireland, particularly at Mullingar, where the noble Marquess had given orders to the gaoler to liberate not less than nineteen persons. At that place there was a gentleman of the name of Brown, who had a servant named Thomas—that servant was cruelly beaten, and left for dead—two individuals of the names of Gannon and Ward were taken up as accomplices in the assault; they were brought to the Court of Session, tried and convicted, snd ordered two years and six months' imprisonment, and at the expiration of that time to find sureties of 20l. each to keep the peace to all her Majesty's subjects for seven years. This took place in the month of January; in the August following the noble Marquess made his tour through Ireland, and among the nineteen persons he had ordered to be liberated at Mullingar were these two individuals, thereby shortening the duration of their punishment for upwards of a year and a half, added to which they were set at liberty without entering into sureties to keep the peace. After their liberation a most barbarous murder was committed, and those two individuals were now in custody 912 on suspicion of being accomplices in that murder. True, that according to the principles of the law in this country, no man was guilty until he had been found so by a Jury of his country, but to say the least of it, he thought the extension of mercy in this case by the noble Marquess was totally uncalled for. He was as anxious as any man to give the noble Marquess credit for a desire to extend mercy, but he must say, that in such cases as those he had referred to, the mercy of the noble Marquess had been in the extremity of cruelty, because it left the innocent part of the community to the mercy of the worst of characters. It was an act of cruelty towards the Jury and the Judge who tried them, and he would venture to say, that the species of mercy which had been extended by the noble Marquess to the delinquents, had done more to increase the disturbances in Ireland than any other act of his during the time he had represented his Sovereign in Ireland. The peaceable inhabitants of Ireland were desirous that the course pursued by the noble Marquess and the Government should be brought to light, and when it was he would venture to say, that it would be found to have materially affected the peace of Ireland. They had, however, now done with the Viceroyalty of the noble Marquess in Ireland, and he should be acting with hypocrisy if he did not say he was heartily glad of it, He should like to see the office of Viceroy done away with altogether; but, if the Government appointed another individual he trusted they would select one who would adopt a course by which he would draw to the Castle of Dublin all the resident gentry of Ireland, and restore that system of order in the country which the loyal people of Ireland had a right to expect.
§ Viscount Lismorecould not concur in the view taken by the noble Lords opposite as to the Government of his noble Friend the noble Marquess in Ireland. The administration of his noble Friend had given general satisfaction in that country. The country owed much to his firmness and decision. Some parts which had been in a disturbed state, had by the vigorous administration of the law been restored to tranquillity, and the chief actors in the disturbances had suffered, or were now suffering, the penalties of the law.
The Marquess of Normanbyas to the 913 opinions of the noble Lords opposite of his government, he would only say, that however much he might regret the loss of their good opinion, yet it was gratifying to him to know that the opinions of those noble Lords with respect to his government in Ireland were not shared in common with the great mass of the community in that country. With respect to the case of Gannon and Ward, who had been released by his order at Mullingar, he would briefly state the particulars connected with it. Soon after their conviction he had received a memorial signed by many highly respectable gentlemen in that vicinity, stating their belief that the men were wholly innocent of the crime of which they had been convicted. On receipt of that memorial, he directed Mr. Ellis, the assistant-barrister of that county, to make inquiries into the case, and the report of that gentleman was, that there were great doubts of the guilt of the men. There were several communications with others on the subject, and the result was, his decision that they ought to be discharged. Now, any one hearing the statement of the noble Earl would imagine that he (the noble Marquess) on his way through Mullingar had directed the release of the men, along with others, without any previous investigation of their case; but the fact was, he had decided upon their release before he left Dublin for the county of Longford, and he only waited to make some further inquiry of Mr. Brown, the gaol inspector, before he directed their release. Their case, as well as those of the whole of the prisoners discharged, had undergone a careful consideration. As to the commitment of the men on a charge of murder, he could say nothing to it beyond the fact, that the men were not yet brought to trial on the charge.
The Marquess of Normanbycould not say whether that course was followed in this particular case, but he supposed it was so, as the general practice was so, to bind over parties whose sentence had been remitted.
The Marquess of Westmeathsaid, that he was on the bench during the trial of these men, and that from his recollection of the case, he should say, that their case was not one in which the exercise of the prerogative of mercy was called for. The 914 defence set up for one of the parties was an alibi, to show that he was at a particular bridge, a considerable distance from the scene of the assault, at the time, or so soon after, that he could not have committed the offence; but that attempt completely failed, and was considered by the bench to be a great aggravation of the crime. He did not know what magistrates the noble Marquess had communicated with on the subject, but he had not done him the honour to consult him on the matter. [Viscount Melbourne: Why should he?] The noble Viscount asked, "Why should he?" He would say why should he not? Would the noble Viscount be so good as to state the reasons why he should not have consulted him on the occasion? He had been on the bench during the trial, and he had the honour of being the lieutenant of the county, and he did think, therefore, that something more than mere courtesy ought to have induced the noble Marquess to communicate with him on the subject before he released the men.
The Earl of Wicklowowned, that he was surprised at the question asked by the noble Viscount, why should the noble Marquess, the late Lord-lieutenant of Ireland, have consulted his noble Friend, on the intended release of these two prisoners? Such a question carne with a bad grace from the noble Viscount, who had himself brought in the bill establishing Lords-lieutenant of counties in Ireland, for this one, amongst many other avowed purposes, of being the organs of communication between the Government and the magistracy of the county. The station which the noble Marquess held ought to have entitled him to a communication from the head of the Government on that subject. Much as he had been surprised at the remark of the noble Viscount (Melbourne), he was still more surprised at the observation of the noble Viscount on the subject of the "tranquillity" of the part of Ireland to which he referred, and to the alleged cause of that tranquillity. He was sure the noble Marquess would not join the noble Viscount in that statement. The tranquillity mentioned by the noble Viscount must be the county Tipperary tranquillity, and not that sort of tranquillity to which those were accustomed, who lived in really peaceable counties. Tranquillity! said the noble Viscount; why, it was only a short time 915 ago that part of the noble Viscount's own grounds were ploughed up at night by a band of lawless men, and the noble Viscount was obliged to call in the aid of the Queen's troops for his protection. That certainly did not look very like tranquillity. It was impossible, if all the cases relating to the noble Marquess, and Ireland were to come before that House at once, that they should meet with fair consideration. He really had nothing in his experience to complain of the noble Marquess; he believed that the noble Marquess had always meant well in the Government. He certainly was one who did not approve of the system which he had established, but that was a different thing; he was not one who disapproved of the noble Marquess in carrying out that system. But what had principally drawn him out on this occasion was this, that they had heard a great deal about the prerogative of mercy being too great a prerogative to be delegated. It was formerly absolutely necessary that the prerogative of mercy should be there established, but that cause now no longer existed; steam by railroads and by sea had brought this country and that together, and there was now no longer any necessity for the office of Lord-lieutenant. The office was now going a begging. It was a question whether that was not a good opportunity for her Majesty's Ministers to consider the propriety of abolishing that office, and saving that great expense to the country, and doing away with these complaints against the Lords-lieutenant. He would have a Minister of the Crown, as secretary of that country, to reside there while Parliament was-not sitting, and to be in that House when it did, which would, in his opinion, be one of the greatest benefits in the ad-Ministration of the affairs of that country.
§ Viscount Lismoresaid, that the ploughing up of his estate had been alluded to, he would it were the ploughing up of it. Unfortunately it was the side of a very barren mountain, of which the people had attempted to peel the surface, in order to get manure. He had appealed to the magistrates when he required their interference, and had received ample justice and perfect security.
§ Viscount Melbournedid not wish to cast any imputation whatsoever on the Lord-lieutenant, the noble Marquess of Westmeath, for any jealousy he had shown. The reference in the present case 916 had been made to that quarter to whom it was always made—to the assistant barrister, and it was from the report of the assistant-barrister, that the Government decided. It was not in any respect customary to take the opinion of the chief magistrate on this subject. The noble Lord had taken the opportunity to introduce matter very wide and foreign to the subject under discussion. He said, that it would be well to do away with the office of Lord-lieutenant, and particularly on account of its exercise of the prerogative of mercy; and he conceived, that the prerogative of mercy could be well exercised on the advice of Ministers. He was of a different opinion. He thought, that one great reason why it could not be exercised here was, that it could not be properly or satisfactorily exercised here. Nor did he think, that proper information, could be obtained, or that the duties could be satisfactorily discharged here, and that was one reason amongst many others e by he should object to the arrangement of the noble Lord, rather hastily thrown out and adopted—an arrangement which was of more importance, and which would be followed with greater consequences than the noble Lord apprehended at present. He would not go into this subject farther than to state, that the Ministry had no intention to adopt this arrangement of the noble Lord. He did not believe, that there was any measure that would play more into the hands of those who wished for the separation of the two countries, or that could have a worse effect between them, than that of the noble Lord.
§ Returns ordered.