§ The Earl of Charlevillewished to know whether the noble Marquess (Marquess of Normanby) would grant him a return of all communications relative to the commutation of the sentence of Michael Bryan? He was induced to ask this question because the noble Marquess had on a former night stated, that he was induced to grant this commutation principally on the certificate of the surgeon of the gaol where this man was confined. He had in consequence written to the sur- 1262 geon of Tullamore gaol, who returned an answer, that he never gave any such opinion; on the contrary, that he stated expressly, that the man was free from disease. This man had a pension, which was forfeited by the felony which he had committed; and the second question which he wished to put to the noble Marquess was, whether this pension was restored through the same influence that had affected his release from confinement?
The Marquess of NormanbyThe noble Earl had made a great confusion in the statements which he attributed to him. What he stated on a former night was, that this man was not sent on board a transport ship in consequence of the refusal of the surgeon of the vessel to receive him, but that there were many reasons which subsequently induced him to mitigate the sentence. This man had been convicted of a horrible outrage, in which be had forced out the eye of another person; and one of the reasons which prevailed with him in commuting the sentence, was the memorial of the prosecutor, to whom he understood that the prisoner had given as compensation the sum of 10l. As to producing the memorial, he had a great objection to bringing forward documents which were considered confidential. With respect to the pension, he knew no more about its restoration than the noble Earl; nor did he suppose, that the Irish Government had any better information on the subject.
§ Conversation dropped.