TRIAL OF THE EARL OF CARDIGAN. (Hansard, 28 January 1841)

§ The Lord Chancellor

had to inform their Lordships that he had felt it his duty to hold a communication with Mr. Justice Bosanquet, who presided as senior judge at a recent sitting of the Central Criminal Court, upon a matter connected with certain proceedings which had taken place respecting a Member of their Lordships' House. He had received from Mr. Justice Bosanquet the following answer:— Montague-place, Jan. 28, 1841. My Lord—In answer to your Lordship's inquiry respecting the proceeding at the Central Criminal Court, in the case of the Karl of Cardigan, in October last: I have the honour to acquaint your Lordship, that an indictment having been found by the grand jury against the Earl of Cardigan for feloniously shooting, with a loaded pistol, at Harvey Garnell Phipp Tuckett, with intent to murder, to maim, and disable him, and to do him grievous bodily harm against the form of the statute in that case made and provided, Mr. Adolphus (as counsel for the Earl) moved the court to direct, that the recognizances of the Earl and his sureties for his appearance at the Central Criminal Court might be respited to the ensuing sessions, on the ground, that the Earl being a Peer could not be tried in that court, whereupon it was ordered, that the recognizances should be respited accordingly, to afford an opportunity of removing the indictment to be tried before a proper tribunal, either of the Lord High Steward, or of the [Souse of Peers. I have further ascertained by inquiry of the clerk of arraigns, that similar orders have been made at each subsequent sessions for the respite of the recognizances. —I have the honour to be, my Lord, your Lordship's obedient servant. J. B. BOSANQUET. The right hon. the Lord High Chancellor. Their Lordships being thus, by the authority of the judge before whom the question arose, put into possession of a knowledge of the facts, it was for their Lordships to say, whether they thought it right, that the course which had been adopted in all similar cases should be adopted on the present occasion, and that 137 would be for their Lordships to appoint a committee to inquire into the course of proceeding which it would be proper for the House to pursue upon the information laid before them. If it should meet the pleasure of their Lordships, he would propose that a committee be appointed. He found, upon consulting the journals of the House, that the practice in cases of this sort had not been uniform. Sometimes Peers had been individually selected to form a committee, but in the majority of cases the committee consisted of all Peers who had attended during the existing session. This was the course adopted in the last case of a similar nature that came before that House. His Lordship then moved, that a committee be appointed, consisting of all Peers who had attended during the present Session, to inspect the journals of the House with respect to the trials of Peers in criminal cases, and to report thereupon.