Lords Sitting of 9 May 1842

MINUTES.
BILLS. Public— 2a. Exchequer Bills; Victoria Park; Knightsbridge and Kensington Openings. Private — 1a Bathurst, Sir F. H. 11., Bart;, Estate; Bristol and Gloucester Railway.
2a Saundersfoot Railway; Gosport Pier; Kirkintilloch Roads; Duke of Argyle's Estate.
3a— and passed:—Great North of England (Clarence and Hartlepool) Railway; Granton Pier (No. 2); Northern Coal Mining Company; Sir J. Cass's Charity (Shaw's) Estate; Cottenham Drainage.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From the Rev. Thomas Silver, Vicar of Charlcsbury, Oxfordshire, that all great Changes in Church Property may be made without the consent of the Convocation of the Clergy.—From Wisbech, Ely, and other places, for Protection to the Agricultural Interest.—From Temple Michael, and Killoe, for the Encouragement of Schools in connexion with the Church Education Society for Ireland.—From the South Western District of St. Leonard's, Shorediteh, in the Borough of Finsbury, for the Redemption of the Tolls on Waterloo, and the other Metropolitan Bridges.—From C. Richardson, for the Extension of the Term now granted by Law for the Possession or Copyright.—-From N. Bruce, for Inquiry into the Laws of Copyright.

MAGISTRACY (IRELAND) — MR. BIDDULPH.
Earl De Grey,in answer to a question which had been put to him by his noble Friend (the Marquess of Normanby) on a former evening, with respect to the conduct of one of the Irish magistracy, Mr. Biddulph, begged to state to his noble Friend that, since that time, Mr. Biddulph had been struck off the list of magistrates. It was his intention to have mentioned this on Friday evening last, the earliest moment at which he received the intelligence; but as he was prevented by the miscarriage of a letter from announcing the fact with official certainty, he had deferred the announcement till that evening.
The Marquess of Normanbyadmitted that the substance of his noble Friend's communication was satisfactory, although he regretted that his noble Friend had not accompanied it by some statement as to the reason why so just and necessary a step had been so long delayed. Admitting that his noble Friend's statement was in one particular satisfactory, he

249
could not allow the occasion to pass by without offering a few words as to the time and circumstances under which the dismissal of Mr. Biddulph had taken place. To render himself perfectly in order in offering these observations, he meant to conclude by moving for the production of the correspondence between the Lord Chancellor and Mr. Biddulph, and the dates of that correspondence. His noble Friend (Earl de Grey) had protested, on a former occasion, that it was not the duty of the Lord-lieutenant of Ireland to read the newspapers. It was certainly not the duty of the Lord-lieutenant, supposing him to be rightly informed from official sources, to read the newapers with the view of founding any act upon the intelligence to be derived from them. But the question of whether the Lord-lieutenant should read the newspapers for information, upon which to direct his Government, depended upon whether he were supplied by such a constant stream of official information as should render any reference to newspaper information unnecessary. But if the Lord-lieutenant were supplied by a regular and constant stream of official information, then he conceived that the newspapers ought not to be despised as channels of intelligence. He appealed to any of the noble Lords opposite, whether it was not a very great disadvantage that the just and necessary step of dismissing Mr. Biddulph should have been delayed for the space of two months, and until after a Parliamentary inquiry had taken place upon the subject, instead of being, as he maintained it ought to have been, the instant and spontaneous act of a vigilant and united executive. He mainly attributed the popularity which attached to his government of Ireland, to the fact that during the time that he had the honour of filling the office of Lord-lieutenant of Ireland, there was the greatest unity amongst all branches of the Irish Government, and no trial of importance took place without his being informed of it by the law officers of the Crown. The case of Mr. Biddulph had been three times brought, before that House in the last Session of Parliament. That having been the case, was it not surprising that no notice should have been taken of it by any of the officers of the Irish Government, whose duty it was to supply his noble Friend (Earl De Grey) with information as to the conduct of those entrusted with the administration of the law? Were there no pe-
250
culiar circumstances in the trial of Mr. Biddulph which would seem to call for the attention of his noble Friend, and of the Irish government? Why, Mr. Murphy, the counsel, a man of considerable eminence and standing at the Irish bar, and who conducted the prisoner's case, said, at the end of the trial, "and now, Sir,] leave you in the hands of the Attorney-general." And yet this, which his noble Friend (Lord de Grey) admitted to be the necessary consequence of the cross-examition, was taken no notice of until he brought it before their Lordships' House two months afterwards. He owned that this had left rather an unpleasant impression upon his mind. No doubt his noble Friend (Earl de Grey) meant to carry out the intentions of her Majesty's present Government, and to do as much justice to Ireland as was consistent with keeping the present dominant party in power. But he owned that the course of the proceedings in this case, and the ignorance in which his noble Friend had been kept upon the subject, left a disagreeable impression on his mind, and awakened some unpleasing suspicions as to the real hands in which the Government of Ireland might now be thought to rest. His noble Friend had asserted that he did not read the newspapers. He was afraid that some the persons did read them, and from the information derived from them learnt how to shape their conduct. Circumstances of recent occurrence had led him to think that there were some truth in the boast of one of the Government newspapers last year, that its remonstrances had led to a change in the policy of the Irish government. As this was probably the last time that he should have occasion to address their Lordships upon this subject, he begged to add a few words in reference to an address of congratulation upon the diminution of crime and the improved state of the country, recently presented to his noble Friend the Lord-lieutenant by the grand jury of Carlow. He certainly hoped that his noble Friend and the Carlow grand jury were correct in their intimation as to the improved state of the country. He had heard rumours of a contrary description; but taking the statement of the grand jury, and supposing it to be true, he would still remind his noble Friend that the improvements to which his attention was directed could not be regarded solely as the fruit of his own government, but must be attributed in no

251
slight degree to the wise and beneficial measures adopted by his predecessors. The noble Marquess concluded by moving for copies of the correspondence between the Lord Chancellor and Mr. Biddulph, and the dates of that correspondence,
Earl DE. Greywas not aware of any objection to the production of the papers for which his noble Friend had moved. As to the remarks that had fallen from his noble Friend, he had only to repeat now what he had stated before, that the moment that the circumstances of the case were brought under his notice, in such a manner as enabled him to act, he had not hesitated or delayed to do so. With respect to the state of Ireland, and to the address of the grand jury of Carlow, to which his noble Friend had alluded, it was certainly true that the gentlemen composing the grand jury of that county had presented an address to him in which they stated that they thought crime was diminishing in that part of the country, and they expressed their congratulations to him upon that subject. He received their address, and thanked them for it. In doing so he did not arrogate to himself any particular merit for the fact upon which they congratulated him. He merely accepted their representation as to the state of the country because he thought them competent to make it. If they were mistaken, the mistake was not his but theirs. In receiving the address, and replying to the statement contained in it, he had arrogated nothing to himself. He did not want to say, neither had he said that his noble Friend (the Marquess of Normanby's) management whilst in the government of Ireland, had been improper, so that his had been superior. He was only glad to believe that the fact was such as was stated to him, by those whom he supposed capable of forming a correct judgment upon it. If it were so, he claimed no merit to himself because it was so. He was obliged to his noble Friend for the courtesy he had shewn in referring to his conduct upon that occasion. Whilst he remained in the government of Ireland, he should continue to act according to the best of his judgment to promote the general welfare of the country, and without reference to any private objects of his own. His endeavour would always be to do the best in his power, not for himself, but for the country over which he was placed. He had no doubt that the people of that country would soon begin to feel that he had do
252
private objects of his own. As soon as he ceased to give satisfaction to them and to the sovereign under whom he held his power, he should hasten to retire.
The Marquess of Normanbywas satisfied that nothing that had fallen from him could have led to the necessity of such a defence as his noble Friend had adopted. All that he had desired to do was to ask justice for himself, not to impute anything to his noble Friend.
Motion agreed to.

COPYRIGHT.
The Lord Chancellorwished to call their Lordship's attention to the Copyright Bill, which stood for the second reading on the following day. He would suggest that the same course should be pursued with it as had been adopted in the House of Commons, namely, that the second reading should be taken without debate, and that the discussion should take place on the motion for going into committee.
Lord Broughamentirely concurred in the course proposed. All who took any part in the discussion of this measure were actuated only by one motive, to secure to literary men as much advantage from their works as was consistent with the due protection of the rights of others.
Bill to be read a second time without discussion.

MAGISTRATES OF SUNDERLAND.
The Marquess of Normanbyhad now to request their Lordships' attention to the subject which he had mentioned just before the rising of the House on Friday last. But before he put the question to the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Londonderry) of which he had given notice, he begged to say one word as to the order of their proceedings. He found the other night that a disposition was shown to adhere strictly to a rule of the House to which, on previous occasions, he had not observed that much regard had been paid. He had no objection to raise upon that point, provided that the application of the rule were made stringent and uniform, and to extend to all cases without exception. He owned however, that he had felt the other evening a strong feeling of disappointment, mingled perhaps, with other feelings, when he found that hon. men who came forward at the earliest moment to repeal unfounded aspersions upon their character, were prevented by the rules of the House., and by

253
the backwardness of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Londonderry) their accuser, to whom with a generous confidence they had trusted to make their de-Fence as public as he had made the charge —he regretted, he said, to find that men, so aspersed and so anxious to defend themselves, were prevented by the rules of the House, and by the noble Marquess's backwardness, from entering upon the vindication of their character and reputation at the earliest possible moment. Acting under that feeling, he had determined to afford to those gentlemen an opportunity of putting their vindication before the House upon record, and of rendering their denial of the charge brought against them, as public as the charge itself. He merely mentioned this, in reference to the order of proceeding, that had been adopted on a previous evening. Upon the present occasion, he was ready to confine himself, and he thought it would be most advisable, that the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Londonderry) should also confine himself, to this single and simple point, "Does the noble Marquess adhere to, or is he inclined to retract, the accusation he made against the magistrates of Sunderland on a former evening?" He had no objection to enter again into the general question, upon the proper occasion, but he appealed to their Lordships whether, that evening, it would not be more desirable, that they should confine themselves to the specific point to which he had adverted? He asked this, because the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Londonderry) had intimated an intention of referring to some other points. He certainly thought it was incumbent upon the noble Marquess to prove or retract the aspersions he had already thrown upon the character and reputation of a body of honourable men, before he proceeded to throw out any more. He believed, that there would be no dispute as to the words which the noble Marquess had used on the occasion. His recollection exactly confirmed what these gentlemen alleged the noble Marquess had said of them. It was true, that he was not paying much attention to what fell from the noble Marquess, but all the reports of the newspapers in which any notice was taken of the noble Marquess's speech, were substantially the same; and, indeed, he understood, the other evening, that the reason of the noble Marquess for resisting
254
the appeal which was made to him, to vindicate the conduct of the gentlemen he had accused, was, that he was prepared to maintain the truth of all that he had asserted against them. With these preliminary remarks, he would proceed to read, as part of his own statement, and as a reason for venturing to put the question with which he should conclude, to the noble Marquess, a statement which had been put into his hands as the defence of the magistrates of Sunderland against the charge which the noble Marquess had made against them. It was in these terms:—
"Mayor's Chamber, Sunderland,
" May 4, 1842.
" At a meeting of magistrates of the borough of Sunderland—Present, Richard Spoor in the chair (in the absence of Sir Hedworth Williamson, Bart., the mayor, who is now in London), Andrew White, John Lotherington, Joseph Brown, Joseph Simpson, Richard White, Edward Backhouse, William Bell, Walker Featherstonhaugh;
" An extract from the Morning Chronicle, of the 30th ult. having been read, in which the Marquess of Londonderry is represented to say, in his place in Parliament, ' That the late Government appointed ten magistrates in Sunderland, all of whom were Whigs, and the consequence was, that at the last election they refused a license to every individual who would not vote in accordance with their (the magistrates') Whig principles;'
" Resolved unanimously,—' That the allegation made, that" the late Government appointed ten magistrates in Sunderland, all of whom were Whigs," is incorrect, two of the gentlemen alluded to, having been, at the time of their appointment, and still continuing, of Conservative principles.'
"Also resolved unanimously, —' That the allegation made, that" the magistrates at the last election refused a licence to every individual who would not vote in accordance with their (the magistrates') Whig principles" is totally without foundation, the following being a correct statement of the applications made, and the decisions come to on the occasion alluded to, and when not less than four Conservative gentlemen, resident in the borough and in the commission of the peace (the justices for the county of Durham having concurrent jurisdiction with the justices of the borough), were on the bench.
"The total number of applicants was sixteen. To five of these, licences were granted. One of these five licences was granted to a clerk of one of the most strenuous supporters of the Conservative interest in Sunderland, both master and clerk voting for Mr. Attwood; a second was granted in the same vicinity, which had lately become most densely populated: a third was granted in respect of a very

255
house establishment, which had lately been erected by public subscription, near the seashore, for the accommodation of visitors; a fourth was granted to a widow (without political interest); and the fifth was granted in lieu of an old-established licence held by the applicant, upon condition that the old licence was not renewed, which condition was complied with.
"' With regard to the eleven individuals, whose applications were not granted, four voted for Lord Hewick, two for Mr. Attwood, and the remaining five were not voters. One of the two who voted for Mr. Attwood, the Conservative candidate, had previously supported and voted for the Whig party, but in this instance, openly declared his intention to vote for Mr. Attwood, in consequence of his previous applications for a licence having been rejected.
"In conclusion, the magistrates, though sorry to have occasion to assert it, have ever acted on the principle of discharging all their functions on the bench, whether in the licensing of public-houses, or those more strictly judicial, regardless of party or political considerations, and with reference merely to public duty and justice; and in this course they purpose to persevere.'
" RICHARD SPOOR,
Chairman."
This statement of the magistrates, satisfactory as he should have thought it must have been to everybody, was accompanied by the following letter, signed by the chairman of the meeting of the magistrates, Richard Spoor, and addressed to the noble Marquess opposite, repelling, in the most respectful manner, the charges which the noble Marquess had made against the magistracy of the borough. The reason assigned by the noble Marquess the other evening, for not acting upon this letter was, that it proceeded from some six or eight Whig magistrates. Now what would be thought of the knowledge of the noble Marquess on the subject of the magistracy of the county over which he presided as Lord-lieutenant, when the House was informed that the Mr. Spoor who had signed the letter to the noble Marquess was a Conservative? Mr. Spoor's letter to the noble Marquess was in these terms:—
"Mayor's Chamber, Sunderland, May 4, 1842.
"My Lord—As chairman of a meeting of the magistrates of this borough appointed by her Majesty's late Government, I have the honour of transmitting to your Lordship a copy of their resolutions.
"By these your Lordship will perceive either that the newspaper report is incorrect, or that your Lordship has been led into error. In
256
either case I feel convinced that your Lordship will be anxious to correct, in your place in Parliament, on Friday next, any erroneous impression which may have been made on the public mind regarding the conduct of the Sunderland magistracy.
"I have the honour to remain, my Lord,
"Your Lordship's most humble and obedient servant,
"RICHARD SPOOR.
"The Most Noble the Marquess of "Londonderry, Holderness House."

The Marquess of Londonderry: Read the postscript.
There is no postscript. Was it possible, he would appeal to their Lordships, whether a more proper, more respectful, more gentlemanlike address could be made to the noble Marquess than that of Mr. Spoor? And he put it to any one of their Lordships, if they had received such an appeal to their feelings, what would have been their conduct? Was there any one of their Lordships who would have sheltered himself under the technical plea that the appeal was not made to him by his Peer in Parliament, and therefore that he was not obliged to do justice to those whom he had aspersed. What, after all, would such conduct amount to but the claiming, as a Member of that House, an immunity (which the law allowed as a protection for the exercise of high functions, but never intended to be perverted to lower and less worthy purposes) from all legal proceedings which might be taken against any individual in any other place who might venture to speak so erroneously and so injuriously against the character of an upright and an unoffending man. He was one of the last persons who would question the value of the privileges of Parliament when applied to the great interests of the country; but he was satisfied that it would soon be held by the country to be an intolerable and an unjustifiable nuisance if persons were enabled to avail themselves of it to refuse to render justice after they had committed wrong. What was required of the noble Marquess on the receipt of the letter which he had read? The noble Marquess need not have expressed any opinion; but he was bound, on receiving this intimation from the magistrates, whose conduct he had impugned, to make their vindication as public as he had made the accusation. Could any of their Lordships believe that these Gentlemen were not speaking the truth? There were eight of large and expensive bathing and lodging-

257
them assembled together, they were speaking of the acts which they had themselves committed, and they signed a solemn declaration that they had committed no such act as the noble Marquess had attributed to them. In what a situation, then, would they be placing themselves if they were not supported by a perfect consciousness of the truth of every word they asserted. What was the charge which the noble Marquess made against them? That they had refused a licence to every individual not of Whig principles. How was that charge met by the magistrates? In the clearest and completest manner. They expressly resolved, without one dissentient, that the charge was wholly without foundation, and they disproved it by a reference to facts. He believed that he might here very safely leave the question, as far as related to the magistrates of Sunderland; but he felt bound to add one word in justice to one individual, named in the paper to which he had called their Lordship's attention. The mayor of Sunderland was Sir Hedworth Williamson, the late Member for the northern division of the county, and high sheriff, and those who knew him must feel that there never existed a person in the world less likely to pervert his judicial power to any party purpose. He had constantly acted as chairman at the quarter sessions, and had authorised him to say that no licenses had ever been refused on the ground of politics. Besides Sir Hedworth Williamson had assured him that he never heard of such a thing discussed as the granting or withholding licences on party grounds. When he stated this, he thought he was strengthening the case of the gentlemen who had been so unfairly dealt with by the noble Marquess. Who was it that made this accusation against the magistrates of Sunderland? The Lord-lieutenant of the county whose duty it was, if he believed the information upon which he acted to be true to make such representations to the Government as should lead to the instant dismissal of magistrates who had so grossly abused their power. But it appeared to him that those gentlemen, in repelling the accusation made against them, were speaking the plain and simple language of truth. If they were doing so, the noble Marquess had been induced, by the most extraordinary credulity, and upon most unworthy information, to make an accusation which had no founda-
258
tion in fact. Nobody doubted that the noble Marquess believed what he stated to be true; but with the opportunity which his situation of Lord-lieutenant of the county afforded him of obtaining the most correct information upon the subject, his credulity was doubly blameable. The conduct of the noble Marquess in this matter confirmed him, in the opinion that his appointment to the Lord-lieutenancy of the county of Durham was a most unfortunate one. What were the qualities that should distinguish a Lord-lieutenant? Perfect fairness, perfect impartiality, and above all, a rigorous and careful spirit of inquiry which should lead to the perfect conviction of his mind, before he adopted any particular act. There had been instances in which the expression of an opinion of Parliament as to the unfitness of particular individuals to fill particular situations, although followed by no specific vote, had yet had an effect, and been followed by consequences. He wished to remind her Majesty's Government of that fact. He said that this act of the noble Marquess was, of all others, the most inconsistent with the due discharge of the duties of a Lord-lieutenant? That he, who should be the vindicator of the character, the supporter of the rights of the magistracy, whilst he was at the same time the careful superintendent of all their acts— that he, in his place in Parliament, should have made a statement against the magistracy which they at once found, by reference to documents, to be utterly unfounded — that he should have done this, showed that he was wholly and totally unfit for the situation to which her Majesty had been advised to appoint him. Nothing could prove any one more unfit for such an office than a determination, in spite of all proofs, not to render tardy justice to persons who felt they had been most undeservedly censured. He had the greatest respect for the private character of the noble Marquess, and in expressing himself so strongly now, he confined himself to the public position and the public acts of the noble Marquess, and would conclude by putting the question to the noble Marquess, of which he had given notice, whether he was disposed to retract or adhere to the accusation which he had made against the magistrates of Sunderland?
The Marquess of Londonderryhad listened with the greatest attention to the speech of the noble Marquess, and it ap-

259
peared to him that the noble Marquess desired to make an attack upon her Majesty's Government; the latter part of the speech certainly seemed pointed against the appointments of that Government—questions which he thought ought not to have been mixed up in the statement that had been made by the noble Marquess. When the noble Marquess had brought forward all his statements on the subject of the magistracy on a former occasion, he had been met by the unanswerable arguments of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack; but the noble Marquess had, nevertheless, armed himself again in every way for the purpose of coming down to the House and renewing a determined attack upon the same subject as connected with the humble individual who then addressed their Lordships. Considering the ability of the noble Marquess, his experience, and the high situations he had filled, what fell from him ought to have weight and authority, but before he sat down, he trusted be should stand excused before their Lordships, and be entitled to claim their verdict of acquittal from the charges brought against him by the noble Marquess. He must, at the same time declare, that he had felt the other evening somewhat hurt at the want of courtesy on the part of the noble Marquess; for if it had been the intention of the noble Marquess to ask the questions he had then put, the noble Marquess might in the morning have given some notice to him, in order that he might have come down prepared to answer; and he was the more disposed to think so, because in a postscript, to the communication he had received from Sunderland, was an intimation that copies of the resolution of the magistrates had been sent to the Marquess of Normanby and Sir H. Williamson. He had asked the noble Marquess to read that postscript. [The Marquess of Normanby: There was no postscript to the letter I got.] There was one in mine, which said,
"A copy of the resolutions has been forwarded to my Lord Normanby, as also to Sir Hedworth Williamson, who is now in town"
The Marquess of Normanby: The noble Marquess must see that such a postscript could not be in a letter addressed to me.
The Marquess of Londonderry:Why not? It gave information, that the resolutions were sent to Sir H. Williamson as well as you. He trusted, now, he might be allowed to state, in his own way, the reasons why he had not volunteered a statement on this subject on the
260
former evening. By the postscript he had alluded to, he was led to believe that either the noble Marquess or Sir Hedworth Williamson would have acquainted him in the course of the morning of the receipt of such a communication, as they had got, and he had waited at home in such expectation. Under the circumstances, he did not conceive that it would have been regular in him, upon coming down to the House, to presume to originate any proceedings upon the letter and resolutions of the mayor and council, and, therefore, he did not take the initiative. That, he apprehended, was the proper and dignified course to take. On the 20th April, the subject of the magistrates had been under discussion, and on that occasion he stated, that there were ten Whig magistrates in Sunderland. On the 23rd of the same month, he received a letter from a respectable resident friend, which was as follows:—
"In Whig times, there was only one Conservative borough magistrate in all the boroughs in Durham, and in Sunderland, the appointments were all Whigs, and no Conservative. In Sunderland, the Whigs have still a majority of two, and in Gateshead the Conservatives have now four, and much they were needed, for Gateshead had a Radical agitator appointed by the Whigs, whilst all the Conservative appointments were men who had taken no public part; and Gateshead has now only its proper number in comparison with other boroughs. In the county I find the Whigs have a majority of sixteen, and this is reckoning all the parsons, who, with few exceptions, never act. There are in Sunderland ten magistrates appointed by the Whigs, and all Whigs—Sir H. Williamson, Mr. W. Bell, Mr. J. Lotherington, Dr. Browne, Mr. J. Simpson, Mr. R. Spoor, Mr. A. White, Mr. R. White, but was Conservative before his appointment; Mr. E. Backhouse, and Mr: W.' Featherstonhaugh."
The magistrates said, there were two Conservatives, but they did not name the two; was he then to take their declaration, when he had such information as he would read in the letter of another friend, on whose authority he could rely? One letter stated that this Mr. Spoor was only a pretended Conservative. [The Marquess of Normanby: Name the writer.] He would give the name to the noble Marquess if it were the pleasure of the House. The writer of the letter said, that if Mr. Spoor were only a pretended Conservative, it was very laughable, for he had voted for Chaytor and Lambton, and this was the Mr. Spoor who signed the letter. He was

261
justified then in what he stated; and was it, let him ask, a matter for which he was to be censured? He was sure, that with such information as he possessed, the noble Marquess would have acted as he did. The writer, who was Mr. Wright, a most respectable, intelligent, and influential man, said, that Mr. Spoor sometimes voted for Chaytor and Lambton, but generally he voted for Thompson, and pretended sometimes to be a Whig, and sometimes a Conservative. From the documents which he held in his hand, it was quite clear that ever since Mr. Braddyll selection, Mr. Spoor had voted with the Whigs. It also appeared upon authority equally good, that Richard White had joined the Whig party; his correspondent observed, that Mr. White had been considered a Conservative, but yet there could be no doubt of this, that he said at the last election that if he voted for any one, he should vote for Lord Howick. This, as his correspondent remarked, was a pretty specimen of his Conservatism. If any of their Lordships would take the trouble of going through the long papers with which he had been furnished on the subject, they would see that the statements which he had made were fully borne out by the evidence. They would also see that the late Government had appointed none but Whigs to fill the office of magistrate in Sunderland and in Gateshead. Amongst the accusations brought against him by the noble Marquess was this—that he said the borough magistrates of Sunderland granted licenses to persons of their own political opinions, and refused them to those who held Conservative opinions, or supported Conservative candidates. The observations which he had made in that House on the subject had been, as usual, reported in the newspapers; but it so happened, that the Morning Chronicle put an interpretation upon his remarks which did not accord with the words he used, or with those imputed to him by the other journals. He did not carry his charge against these borough magistrates to the extent which the construction put upon his speech by the Morning Chronicle would seem to warrant. His allegations were, that they were not wholly free from the influence of political bias, nay, he had no doubt that they might have been very much influenced by their political feelings; but he did not go the length of saying, as he had been represented to have said, that they had in every case refused licences to Conservatives, and granted them to their
262
own supporters—that they, in fact, refused licences to all who did not vote at the last election in favour of the Liberal candidate. He might have said, that the magistrates, being all Whigs, and having the power of licensing given them, possessed an undue and improper influence, which he had heard and believed they might have abused. But they never could have been so absurd as to profess they would not give licences to Conservatives. To him it appeared singular, that the Morning Chronicle should have been the only paper which appeared to misapprehend' the purport of his remarks, and put a construction on them which he did not think they warranted, and he thought also that he had a right to complain of the want of candour with which he was treated in that journal. He hoped their Lordships would allow him to read an extract from a letter which he bad received from Sunderland, and which he thought was well calculated to throw light upon the present inquiry:—
"There was a quarterly meeting of our corporation yesterday, at which I was present. After the business was disposed of, and there had been long discussions on various matters, the parties present got up to go away, when the town-clerk said there was some other matter to be transacted, and began to read some papers relating to the borough-rate, which 1 fancied was some matter of form as to laying on the rate, and therefore, having another appointment, I came away. I have since learned, that after I had left the council-room, a political Quaker of the name of Hill, a shopkeeper, set on, I have no doubt, by some of our Whig justices, produced a Morning Chronicle newspaper, and called the attention of the corporation to your Lordship's speech in the House of Lords, in which you are reported to have said, that since the last election, the ten Whig justices refused to grant any license to anybody, unless he were of their own party, and the Quaker urged upon the council, that as they had recommended these ten Whig justices to the late Government for appointment, the corporation were bound to vindicate the justices from such an unfounded attack. Upon this I understand a discussion ensued, the two or three Conservatives who happened to have remained (nearly all the Conservatives having left) contending that the report was incorrect, that it was different in other papers, that the corporation had no business in the matter, and that it was ridiculous for the council to permit the malignant party feelings of the Quaker to be tolerated at that board. It ended by the Quaker carrying a motion that the meeting should be adjourned for a fortnight, and that in the meantime, the town-clerk should make inquiry, and ascertain whether

263
your Lordship had made such a charge against the Whig justices, or not. So the affair stands. I wish much I had been present, but I had no idea that the matter would have been brought on, or, indeed, that any further business beyond matters of form about the rate was to be transacted. I have no doubt they laid off until they saw I had gone, and in fact until nearly all the Conservatives had left the room. I have no doubt your Lordship did not say what the Morning Chronicle represents, but that all that your Lordship would say would be, that as these Whig magistrates had the power of granting licenses, it gave them an undue influence at elections, but without bringing any charge that they avowedly refused licenses to any except their own party."
There had been an explanation attempted of these matters, but he was informed, that the meeting at which that explanation had been proposed was a secret meeting, where none but those who belonged to one party attended. They got the meeting up after an adjournment of the first meeting and that of course prevented a fair examination of the question. The explanation given at that meeting set forth that sixteen licenses were applied for, that five were granted, and that one of them was granted to the clerk of one of the most strenuous supporters of the Conservative candidate (Mr. Attwood), but they did not state who that clerk was, or how he himself voted. They stated that only five licenses were granted. It might be so; but they took care not to tell the public to whom those five licences were granted—no information as to whether the parties who got them were Whigs or Conservatives. What was the inference? Why, that every one of them belonged to the same party as the magistrates who granted those licenses. If the noble Marquess wished to convince himself and the House that he had been in error, and that the statement of the Whig magistrates was the only statement to he relied on, then the noble Marquess had better move for a return of all the licenses granted in Sunderland from 1S36 till 1842, distinguishing by the poll-book the politics of the publican, shewing whether he voted for Whig or for Conservative. He had stated to their Lordships the substance of the communications which he had received, and he had read some documents to them at length, hut the information which reached him was not derived from one source alone. His information was sustained by testimony from different quarters, some of which, with the permission of the
264
House, he would read. It was a letter from a person in Sunderland:—
"I trust your Lordship will excuse the liberty of this letter, but a charge has been brought against me which is destitute of truth, and although it has been published only in a low and obscure newspaper (the Sunderland Herald) it may possibly meet your Lordship's notice, and therefore I beg permission to set myself right without loss of time. At the close of the quarterly meeting of our town-council, held on Wednesday last, after Mr. Wright and several members had left, and the whole were on the point of leaving the room, amidst much confusion, Mr. James Hill, a Radical Quaker, called the attention of the few remaining members of the board to a newspaper report of your Lordship's speech in the House of Lords on the conduct of the Liberal magistrates of this borough. Some very improper remarks upon your Lordship were made, and I took my part in repelling them, by stating in substance and I believe very distinctly, that Lord Londonderry was incapable of making a false statement, and if the question was put even to that meeting, I was satisfied it would be so decided; and further, that I was quite sure no one present believed the charge brought against Lord Londonderry, and, therefore, the shortest plan was to submit that question to the meeting. The Herald party, to answer their own vile purposes, and to make an attack upon your Lordship, gave a very different reading of the matter, and made me the defender of the Whig magistrates, instead of your Lordship, my remarks being thus reported.—'Certain charges are alleged to have been made against the magistrates, why not take the sense of the meeting whether they are true or not? The charge here is by substituting the magistrates for Lord Londonderry. Again—'There is no one here believes the charge, and what can you do?' The perversion in (he first extract makes the disbelief in the second to apply to Lord Londonderry; whereas, had the first been correctly given, the disbelief would have been that Lord Londerry would have acted improperly. Again, ' If the Marquess ever made the charge, I am sure no person believes it.' Whilst I said, ' I was sure no person believed the charge made against the Marquess.' And thus by a very slight, but a most wicked, transposition of my words, I am reported to have given utterance to sentiments the very reverse of what I really said."
He trusted that he had now succeeded in giving to the noble Marquess a sufficient reply. If the noble Marquess would move for the return to which he referred it would then be clearly seen by the House whether he were right or whether he were wrong. As to the noble Marquess's allusions to the unfitness for the appointment of Lord-lieutenant; whatever might be the good taste and propriety of his remarks, or by

265
whatever motives instigated, he assured the noble Marquess that he cared not for any appointment, only so far as he could in holding it, promote the public interest, or render himself useful in the public service, but he thought it was hardly worthy of the noble Marquess to get up an attack upon him for the purpose, as he vainly imagined, of "flooring him." He ought rather to direct his attacks against more distinguished Members of the Conservative party—against those with whom he would be more equally matched, and again exhibit the same spectacle which he did the other night. He confessed, too, that he noticed with regret the animosity with which the attack was carried on. He had seen a good deal of the noble Marquess formerly in Durham, and he thought that kindlier feelings might have been shown; but of this he should at present say no more. He should merely observe, that the noble Marquess's proceedings appeared to have been carried on as if it were supposed that he would fall a weak and easy victim to the first assault. Perhaps, also, the circumstance of his being selected might be accounted for by his having been the first to raise the standard of Conservatism against Whig domination in the county of Durham. It was well known that he was the first to endeavour to stem the political influence which by a dexterous management of the Reform Bill was created in that county for the benefit of the Whigs. Before he sat down there was a point to which he wished to refer. It had been supposed by an hon. Gentleman in another place, that he attempted to cast reflections upon the character and conduct of the noble Duke who preceded him in the office of Lord-lieutenant of the county of Durham. He never did any such thing nor anything like it; he stated to the House the position and circumstances in which he found the county magistracy; but he never said one word against his predecessor. However he might, when living, have differed with him in politics, the more especially as the power of recommendation was not altogether vested in him, but had been exercised by Bishops of Durham, at all events he had been silent on the subject. In another instance, also, there appeared to have been a great misconception with respect to something that had been said in another place. In alluding to Gateshead, and the revolutionary feeling which prevailed in that town, he made no mention what-
266
ever of the present Member for that borough; all that he stated was, that the former Member for Gateshead was in the habit of annually bringing forward a motion to exclude Bishops from the House of Lords; and that circumstance showed, as he thought, a strong revolutionary tendency in those who sent him to Parliament. Now this, it appeared, had brought on him a most undeserved attack, it was said, that he employed his princely fortune and used his political influence in a manner that alienated from him the respect of the county in which he resided. Of course, it was the right of any one to attach or withhold respect as he pleased; but it was too much for any individual to take upon himself to be the organ of a great county. That gentleman had been but recently transferred from Hull to Gateshead. He had been recently introduced into the county, and it was difficult to discover from what sources besides his own party feelings he derived his information, if sentiments such as those had been delivered by a great and dignified character, such as his noble Friend behind him, or even of any distinguished statesmen over against him, they would sink very deep in his mind; but considering the quarter from which they really came, he utterly disregarded them, and he would pay no attention to anything which came from one who was in the habit of bandying about such terms as "calumniator" and " liar." He should only say, that such accusations from such a quarter not only passed by him as the idle wind, which he regarded not, but he considered that the expression of them reflected honour, and not disgrace.
The Marquess of Normanbyobserved, that the noble Marquess had not stated the names of the parties from whom he had received his information: he addressed the House at considerable length, and left that out altogether. He had not told the House who it was who informed him that the magistrates of Sunderland had used their functions for party purposes.
The Marquess of Londonderryrecommended the noble Marquess to move for the return which he had suggested.
The Marquess of Normanby:Will the noble Marquess adhere to his charge? The words may be different but the charge was, that the magistrates had used their magisterial functions for party purposes in granting licences. The noble Marquess has given no explanation. I pause to give him J an opportunity of doing so.
The Marquess of Londonderry:I think I have given the noble Marquess every possible information. My impression, from what was within my own knowledge and from information I received, was, that they, like other magistrates in many other counties, used their power of granting licences for purposes of political partisanship.
The Marquess of Normanby: Now, there can be no longer any dispute about the words, for the noble Marquess has repeated the substance of the charge—that these magistrates, as well as others, have used their magisterial functions for political purposes. On the part of the magistrates of Sunderland I repudiate the charge, and I have stated the grounds upon which I do so, and I ask the noble Lord whether he had any other authority they so used their magisterial power? The noble Lord had said that the magistrates got up a hole-and-corner meeting. There is a strange confusion in the mind of the noble Marquess. The meeting consisted of all the magistrates against whom the noble Lord made his accusation, and they have stated the grounds upon which they deny the accusation. I am surprised that the noble Marquess can think that such an explanation as he has given to your Lordships could, in the slightest degree, be satisfactory. I must say that there has been a complete misapprehension with respect to the former Lord-lieutenant of the county—the Duke of Cleveland. The number of county magistrates appointed in his time was twenty, of whom twelve were Whigs and eight Tories. And, with respect to the noble Marquess's allusion to the manner in which a Gentleman, a Member of the House of Commons had come into the county, I must say that, that Gentleman came into the county, I believe, in the same manner in which the noble Marquess came into it, namely, by marriage.
The Duke of Wellingtonwould not prolong an irregular discussion; he should only trouble their Lordships by remarking, that he thought one of the topics of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Normanby) might as well have been omitted, namely, a reflection on the Government for having appointed his noble Friend Lord-lieutenant of the county of Durham. Now, his noble Friend was the head of one of the greatest
268
properties in the county; he had rendered services to the county of Durham; he had liberally expended a large sum of money in making a harbour in that county; and he did think, that the attack of the noble Marquess upon the Government for selecting his noble Friend to fill this office in the county of Durham, which was vacant —founding his attack upon this, that his noble Friend had thought proper to resign the office of Ambassador to St. Peters-burgh because he had not the confidence of the House of Commons in that office— was not quite fair and proper. He should make only one more observation. He agreed with his noble Friend that he was quite right in not volunteering to come forward on the subject of the letter, when he received it, had he reason to believe that be would have heard from the noble than his own impression, when he made Marquess or some other noble Lord on the the charge against these magistrates, that subject. He knew well that it was the practice of some most respectable Members of Parliament not to explain in Parliament words which might have fallen from them either in the heat of debate or otherwise, when they might be questioned about them out of doors. He did not mean to say that that course was invariable, and that it might not be departed from with great propriety on many occasions, and, in the event of any injustice being done, that the party doing it might not think it his duty at once to atone for it in the House. But it was not the practice for Members of either House of Parliament to come forward to explain at the moment when persons out of doors might think proper to require it, and if his noble Friend had so come forward, he would have made himself instrumental to a breach of the privileges of the House. He would not trouble their Lordships further than to express his belief that, in all the county of Durham there was not an individual upon whom the appointment could have been more properly conferred than his noble Friend.
House adjourned.