Sitting of 26 February 1839

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of DEVON, from Kingsbridge, against the Repeal of the Corn-laws; and from three places for a more easy means of Recovering Small Debts.

BOROUGH COURTS (RULES OF PROCEEDINGS) BILL.
Lord Broughamrose to move, that the Borough Courts (Rules of Proceedings) Bill, be committed, which enabled him to introduce a subject to the attention of their Lordships of very great importance, and to which he had to beg, not only the attention of his noble Friends behind him and other noble Lords, but more particularly his much esteemed and noble Friend near him. He knew, that a noble and learned Friend of his, not then in his place, also felt very much on this subject, and intended to state his opinions upon it. That noble and learned Friend might differ from him on some minor points in reference to the question now about to be discussed, but substantially they agreed with each other. The importance of this subject arose from the great number of bills now before the House, though not a greater number than

895
usually came before the House for the same purpose, namely, to give to particular local circuits and districts, Local Courts. He found there were twenty-one of those bills now before the House. Some were for the purpose of establishing what were called Courts of Requests, and others Small Debt Courts—but all substantially for the same purpose. Some of them were for places whose importance would seem to justify the passing of some such measures, but others were for other places, the population of which, was so extremely small, and the importance of which places was so inconsiderable, that he was by no means prepared to say such bills should be passed for those places. For instance, his noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Devon), had presented a petition that evening from a place called Kings bridge, praying to have such a bill, and which place he had never heard of before. There were also several other places, such as Hatfield, Glossop, Liskeard, Pontefract, and so on; some of which places were very insignificant and scarcely ever heard of; and it was proposed to establish Courts of Local Jurisdiction in those places, confining the proceedings to certain circuits, and those circuits entertaining causes of debt to a certain amount. So much for the general feature of the case, which consisted in the number of those bills, and the trifling importance of the places for which it was proposed they should be passed. He had now to state to their Lordships very strong arguments against these bills. In the first place, they were in their operation partial—they were varied—they were governed by no one principle, and almost in every one of them the principles were different. There was every variety of detail in the jurisdiction—in the machinery—in the guards provided—in the influence and patronage, and other particulars in which he need not trouble their Lordships. There was, consequently, a series of enactments in which not only no uniformity prevailed, but no well-considered principle adopted by the Legislature was applicable to them, even with certain local modifications which might be deemed necessary. But that was not all—he observed that great as was the variety that governed the frame work of these measures, in no one view of the case were they likely to confer a benefit upon the communities for which they were intended. Then there was a good deal of patronage—three or more
896
officers were to be created by these bills; and from their nature, they were much more likely to be holden by, to have the ditties executed by, and the emoluments bestowed upon, persons connected with local interests, persons connected with the place, persons who had never seen the light of Westminster Hall, who lived in the country, having a connection among the local authorities, and likely to be influenced by them. If, then, the establishment of these Local Courts had a tendency to open the door to jobbing (and he thought he was not using too strong a phrase), it would be for their Lordships to consider whether they were measures which ought to be entertained. There was another circumstance that struck him (he was merely running over the heads of his objections), and it appeared to him to be one of the reasons why these bills were so rife. When they saw places like Glossop, Liskeard, Hatfield, and others less known, seeking for these bills, they naturally asked did the demand come from the suitors? There was one class of suitors from which he believed they proceeded—the tradesmen and shopkeepers, and observe for what. Not because justice was thereby to be got cheap—not because it was brought home to their own doors—not because it was speedy in its operation, but because the Commissioners of those courts were whom? The shopkeepers themselves. Every one of those Local Courts, and that was another circumstance, not a variety distinguishing one from another, but an identity making all of the same feature—every one of those courts had for its judges a page and a half of names much more obscure than the places themselves. The shopkeepers of those places were to be the judges, of whom five in one, seven in another, fourteen in a third, and three in a fourth instance, were to be a quorum. And now observe what followed. He did not say, that it was a practice for the Commissioners to try their own cases. But this was done. A. B. C. would sit to-day, and try the causes of D. E. F., then to-morrow D. E. F. would sit, and try the causes of A. B. C. So that there was a constant tendency in favour of the plaintiffs. Even where an assistant barrister presided, the case must ultimately come for decision to the Commissioners, who were the jury. He hoped there was an intention to pass a general bill upon the subject. Some persons

897
thought it was wrong to establish these courts at all. He was of a contrary opinion. But by continuing to establish these courts, a host of local interests was raised up against the general measure which might be hereafter introduced. The Ecclesiastical Courts Bill had been prepared with the assistance of the most learned ecclesiastical and equity judges—but it had never yet passed. Why? Not because any of its promoters had altered their opinion respecting it;—but because there were local interests in almost every part of the country enlisted against it—that is, in every district where a court was established, there were persons whose "occupation would be gone," if the general measure passed. And just so was it with the local courts. He had brought a bill respecting those courts into their Lordships' House, and it was lost only by one vote. He confessed, that he regretted the loss of that bill. He hoped that he should see another of the same nature passed. No one would, with more cheerfulness, surrender the question into the hands of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack; who had, if not more information, greater opportunities for acquiring information regarding it than he had. And the measure would come with much higher authority from the Government. He hoped and trusted he should live to see the bill in operation. It had been stated, in a speech from the Throne, to be the Royal wish, and one more worthy of being mentioned in the Royal Speech, there could not be. It was stated by his late Majesty, that he hoped to see speedy justice on moderate terms, and with reasonable and safe dispatch brought home to the doors of every one of his subjects. He need not tell their Lordships the infinite advantages that would be derived from local jurisdiction. The people would have, in the first place, cheap justice; in the second place, they would have swift justice; and in the third place, they would have, which was not less valuable, constant justice, that was to say, constant access—not twice a year only, but constant access to the judge. No measure would more deservedly obtain the thanks of the people than such a blessing as that. Another great benefit that would be derived from the establishment of those courts would be, that they would be able to transact many important matters, which, at present, for want of such courts, were
898
either not done at all, or very ill done, and in a way that gave no satisfaction; or done by inefficient agents, instead of by agents fully accomplished and well qualified. He would refer particularly to the police, the origin of which police was to be traced to times when the agricultural population was thinly scattered over the country; manor courts were then established, high constables and petty constables appointed. The prevention of crime, the seizure of offenders, would be greatly aided by the establishment of such courts as these. It hardly required any observation from him to satisfy their Lordships of that important fact. The establishment of a rural police, which he believed was in contemplation, could not be established satisfactorily, or even with safety to the liberty of the subject, without also establishing, at the same time, and in harmony with it judicial courts. How much better it would be, that the population should have constant access to a good local criminal judge? His noble and learned Friend (Lord Denman), the first criminal judge of the land, so far from being jealous of the establishment of such courts, was convinced that they would prove a blessing to the country. According to the present law, a boy of ten years of age, for stealing a few apples, might be sent to prison by a zealous magistrate; and though his punishment might be, after trial, only a few weeks or days imprisonment, his imprisonment before trial might extend to three or four months, in the company of accomplished felons. He went to gaol, a poor boy, and left it either an accomplished felon, or with an education to fit him for it. The establishment of local courts, such as he contemplated, might also be made auxiliary to proceedings in equity. Much delay, expense, and vexation might be avoided, if, on disputed points, an order was sent down from Chancery, directing that issue should be joined in the court attached to the locality, instead of having it tried in town. There were, he conceived, other branches of equity which would be benefited and assisted by such an arrangement. Many of the inquiries in the Master's-office might, for instance, be sent down to these courts. He should wish that their Lordships would bear in mind that in what he was saying, he by no means wished to undervalue the services of the Masters in Chancery. They were, in fact, the organs of action of the

899
Court of Chancery. They were the trial by jury of that court. By a bill which he had brought in, he had done all in his power to raise the Masters in Chancery, by placing them on the footing of the judges of the land. His intention was, that they should be as a protection thrown round the Great Seal, and in his appointments to that office he had never made men Masters in Chancery, because the place was a comfortable one. He had never appointed an individual a Master in Chancery, because the place seemed fitted to him, but because be was fitted to the place. As to the idea of any other person applying to the Chancellor, or speaking to him on the subject of such an appointment, he would say, that it would be as great an insult, as great an injustice, and as great a prostitution of power, to allow this, as to allow a person to speak to the Chancellor on the appointment of puisne judge; and during the time that he held the Seals he had recommended persons to the Crown for the appointment of puisne judge even before the Prime Minister had been informed of the recommendation. As far as regarded this measure then, he did not mean to cast any doubts on the utility of the office of Master in Chancery, but he considered that these local jurisdictions might in many instances more effectually perform the functions of the Masters. He would now draw their Lordships' attention to what he conceived to be the necessity that existed for the creation of the office of Public Prosecutor, or of some office analogous to it. Had their Lordships witnessed the circumstances attendant upon trials conducted by a public prosecutor, the great advantage that the judge, the suitors, and all concerned, derived from the assistance of that officer—the great advantage derived by the prisoners also, in consequence of none but proper bills being preferred, they would agree with him in opinion as to the great importance and advantage to be derived from the appointment of a public prosecutor. He was sure that the Central Criminal Court, the jurisdiction of which extended over upwards of two millions of persons, afforded an admirable opportunity of trying the establishment of a public prosecutor upon a great scale. That court had been found to have effected admirably the purposes for which it was intended. A public prosecutor had, in his opinion, become absolutely necessary since
900
the Prisoners' Counsel Bill had passed, because, in a case where the prisoner employed counsel and the prosecutor did not, the judge who was said to be the prisoner's counsel could hardly do his duty without a little bending on the side which had no counsel, in order that the case might spring into an upright position. In such a case, without a public prosecutor, the judge would be placed in rather an invidious position; and without some plan of the sort to which he had referred was established, justice could not properly be administered. The establishment of Local Courts upon some just foundation would give, in his opinion, great facilities to the administration of justice. A public prosecutor had been found to be of great benefit in the places to which he had referred in the administration of justice, because he believed it had been always found that Grand Juries, with their divided responsibility, had never proved so effectual as a public prosecutor, with his undivided responsibility. He trusted, that their Lordships would excuse him for having occupied so much of their time, but in a case of such great public importance, he considered it his duty to state to the House what his opinions were upon the subject.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that he entirely agreed with his noble and learned Friend so far as he had pointed out the necessity of having established some well-connected rules and principles for the formation of these courts. He felt persuaded, that nothing could contribute more to the proper administration of justice, than some well-regulated established principles on this subject. Many propositions had been stated by the noble and learned Lord which could not be controverted. So great a deficiency in the several local districts of carrying into effect what ought to be done, both with regard to the civil and criminal jurisdiction, and the multitude of applications brought up for bills, showed what was wanted. It was true the business was sometimes done by local acts, but it was only done partially, and not in a way to effect the due administration of justice. Many of those courts were presided over by commissioners, and unless they had some superior authority over them, such courts were productive of anything but justice. The means of recovering debts cheaply and speedily were but a small

901
part of the benefit to be derived by the community from having a well-established, well-constituted system of local courts. With respect to the courts of Equity with which he, the Lord Chancellor, was more particularly conversant, nothing could be more inconvenient, and nothing more defective, and nothing more expensive, than the course at present in existence of carrying into effect the every-day proceedings of a Court of Equity. To take as an example a matter of lunacy, which, though it might not strictly be considered as a proceeding in the Court of Chancery, yet was a proceeding before the Lord Chancellor; if a commission was to be executed in the country, that commission was merely granted by the Chancellor; but there was no person that he could appoint, or that he could direct, to preside over the execution of the commission. It was necessarily, therefore, directed to commissioners, and whether those commissioners should be well or ill selected depended a good deal on those who were prosecuting the commission. This proceeding was attended with great expense; and it was not known who the persons might be, who should preside over, perhaps a long trial—a trial which would incur great expense, and upon the result of which investigation the fate of an individual, as far as his liberty was concerned, depended. There was no local authority that could be appointed by the Chancellor to govern or preside over such a trial. Then again, as regarded examining witnesses in equity, it was not according to the constitution of that court to have witnesses brought up to London to be examined to save expense, as it was supposed a commission was granted to examine them in the country. But whose duty was it to examine them there? Why nobody was appointed for that purpose, and therefore again commissioners were employed? Then as to taking an answer in the Court of Chancery: there was no person regularly appointed to do that. In short, everything that was to be done, relating to the business in the country, in the Court of Equity was to be transacted by parties selected there—always at great expense—and through them a multitude of the business of the Court of Equity necessary to be transacted was transacted. He would not advert to the criminal jurisdiction. He did not apprehend their Lordships would entertain any doubt, that it was
902
expedient that the criminal administration of justice in this country should be much more frequent than it had been. He did not undervalue the duties of the magistrates of the counties, but if it were necessary, that the criminal justice should be more frequently administered, it could not be expected, that gentlemen would sacrifice the whole of their time for the purpose of trying prisoners and discharging the gaols. Those subjects had been matter of discussion, and their Lordships were aware, that in the course of the last Session, a bill was brought into the other House, but which did not reach their Lordships' House, intended to remedy that evil. He had heard but one objection to such a proposition, and that was the expense. But let them take the administration of criminal justice, and they would find, that if the sessions were only four times a-year, the expense would be much increased, inasmuch as the criminals must remain in prison for one or two months, or at the very least for some weeks. The great object was (independently of the inconvenience and injustice of keeping men in prison untried for any length of time) to lessen the expense of the support of these prisoners. That charge fell principally on the counties; but if any local judicial authority were established which held its sittings continuously, that expense would be altogether avoided. If they had an officer in the country who would execute all the duties growing out of the Court of Chancery, they would thereby save the suitors much of the expense they were now subjected to, and effect a great public good. In such a case they were not to take into account only the increased charge on the country, but how far the community at large would be benefited. It was impossible to enumerate the multiplicity of affairs which might be discharged by such an officer. The first object was, to see such an officer established, and if established, there would be no difficulty in finding business for him. The great difficulty would be to find an officer capable of transacting all the business that would be thrown upon him. He had been anxious to have such an officer, and was glad the subject had been taken up by his noble and learned Friend, and brought under the notice of their Lordships, because he deemed the establishment of such an officer of public benefit.
Lord Abingersaid, that when any specific measure should be brought forward in reference to the subject which the two noble and learned Lords who had just spoken, had submitted to the consideration of the House, he should then be prepared to discuss it; for he thought that that would really be the proper time for the discussion. In the meantime he must protest against any general declaration of opinion being taken to bind him to the approval of any particular measure that might be introduced. He must be permitted to say, that nothing was more easy than to find fault with existing institutions, for it was impossible for any human institution to be perfect; but before they destroyed what existed, they ought to consider well the advantages of what they proposed to substitute. He recollected, some few years ago, to have heard, in the House of Commons, most eloquent declamations uttered against the existence of local jurisdictions, until at last the House of Commons was schooled into their abolition. That, however, passed some time ago, and now it seemed that the period had arrived when all that was then done must be undone, and local jurisdictions again be established. Without at all denying, that there might, under the present system, arise expenses to suitors and other persons, which, under a new system, might be got rid of, he nevertheless thought that the establishment in each county of judicial tribunals to try causes would create great inconvenience, from the diversity of their decisions, and would finally raise a clamour in the country against the system. A fashion had now begun, too, of making the institution of grand juries a topic of declamation. For his part, he must say, that he never would consent to the abolition of grand juries. He was of opinion that the institution was of the greatest benefit to the country. It brought the people in daily, nay, hourly, connexion with the administration of justice; and nothing could be more advantageous for the security of property and life, than that the magistrates of England should frequently intervene in the administration of justice. It was now said, that the administration of criminal justice was not so frequent as it should be in each county, and that therefore some new judge must be appointed. Whether there might not be an advantage in having a judge to preside at quarter sessions, he
904
was not prepared to say; but he protested against the cry, which, ascending from low to high quarters, was now beginning to prevail, that the interference of the people of England in the administration of justice should be dispensed with; for, whatever inconvenience or expense might attend the existing system, the advantages greatly outbalanced, in his opinion, the disadvantages. He thought that the jurisdiction of the county magistrates ought to be upheld and encouraged, instead of weakened or destroyed. Of course he could pass no opinion on a measure not yet before the House; and he had only risen to address their Lordships, in consequence of the speech of the noble and learned Lord, which, however, had no connexion, as far as he could see, with the bill now about to be committed.
Lord Denmanexpressed his satisfaction that this Bill had given rise to the presen discussion, which he could not but consider had been of the greatest importance, because it was a subject which required and demanded the fullest and most complete consideration. He thought his noble and learned Friends pad stated defects of considerable magnitude, and he did not think the remedy was ever thought of until those defects were made known as a grievance among the public generally. He did not think the present was an occasion on which he ought to give an opinion of his own as to the remedies to be applied to those serious grievances. He was disposed to think, without pledging himself to any particular measure, that this bill did not interfere, in any degree, with any plan which might be devised for the future improvement of the administration of the law. By the Municipal Corporation Act, the right of regulating and approving of such rules as the judges of the inferior courts might recommend was given to any three of the judges. A Committee of the Judges had met last term, and the result was, a bill had been prepared, which he would have the honour of laying before their Lordships. That bill would be applicable to courts in general, and it proposed that every action in the inferior courts should commence by writ of summons, and that there should be frequent holding of those courts. He did not think any objection could well be made to the bill, but he had no doubt, their Lordships would, under the circumstances, think it ought to be received.
The Earl of Devonsaid, they were not called upon to decide whether the officer proposed by the noble and learned Lord should be appointed. He was an old chairman of Quarter Sessions, and he was sure that the magistrates would not stand in the way of any improvement of the law. The subject of the trial of offenders came under the consideration of a Committee of their Lordships' House last year, and he had been directed, as their Chairman, to submit a bill to their Lordships, and he had only forborne presenting that Bill, by finding, on the Votes of the other House, that the noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department, had given notice that he should bring the subject before that House. He thought that, concurrent with this bill, they ought to have regard to the question of the summary conviction of offenders.
Lord Langdale: Although there may be some irregularity in this incidental discussion, I am very glad that it has taken place, because I cannot help hoping that some public advantage may arise from the various suggestions which have been made. I do not mean to trouble your Lordships by discussing or expressing any opinion on the general question of Local Courts, but confining myself to that part of the subject with which I am most familiar, I hope I may be excused for expressing my opinion that for facilitating proceedings and inquiries in the Court of Chancery, there is great need of local authorities both ministerial and judicial. The jurisdiction of the court extends over the whole country, and many things are to be done personally by persons required to obey the orders of the court. When a defendant has appeared he has to put in his answer. In London, there are proper authorities to receive the answer with the sanctions required—but all defendants cannot come to London, and in the country there are no permanently constituted authorities by whom the answer can be taken; and to supply the defect, it is necessary to create a competent authority on each occasion by commission; and when the answer is taken by such authority, there are no regular means provided for its conveyance to London: the party is to find a messenger who will carry it to London, and swear that he received it from one of the commissioners, and has since kept it in his own possession; and, notwithstanding the difficulties which sometimes occur in getting this done, the party is held to be in con-
906
tempt if he does not perform it in a limited time. Again when witnesses are to be examined, there are proper officers established to perform that duty in London, but none such in the country, and this defect has to be supplied by creating an authority for each occasion, or in other words by issuing a commission. And the commissioners, who are not always the most competent persons, have too often the means of making the execution of the commission subservient to their own convenience or pleasure. Great unnecessary expense is occasioned to the suitor, and when the depositions are taken, a messenger is to be found to convey them to London. Besides these, there are many other ministerial duties connected with the proceedings in Chancery, which must be performed in the country, where there are no permanent or regular authorities provided to perform them; and I cannot help thinking that the suitors and the public have great reason to complain, that a remedy is not found for defects which can hardly be considered otherwise than as grievances. What reason can be given why officers should not be provided to enable suitors living at Carlisle, or Liverpool, or in Cornwall, to swear their answers and examine their witnesses in their own neighbourhood, and have their answers and depositions officially conveyed to London? I have never heard a reasonable objection to such ministerial duties as I have referred to, being intrusted to permanent local authorities. Various ministerial duties are intrusted to local authorities created for each occasion, and there seems to be no reason, why they should not be intrusted to local authorities created for all such occasions, and steadily subject to the authority of the court in London. But I go further, and. think that other duties having more of a judicial character, might well be intrusted to such local authorities. When long accounts are to be taken between parties resident at Liverpool, and all the books and documents which relate to the subject, and are often very numerous and bulky are at Liverpool, and all the witnesses who know anything of the matter are also there, why are every body and every thing necessary for taking and verifying the account to be brought to London? My Lords, I am persuaded that such regulations might be framed, and such a system of control established, as would make it perfectly safe and satisfactory to the suitors, and a great saving of expense, to have many operations of this

907
kind, and many important inquiries, conducted in the country—but for this purpose you must have competent authorities; and I rejoice at the discussion which has taken place to night, in the hope that it may lead to such authorities being provided.
Lord Broughamconcurred with his noble and learned Friend who had just sat down in the satisfaction he expressed at the question being brought under the notice of the House, and he believed that be was perfectly regular in his proceedings, as he had given notice of his intention to make the statement last night, and he was happy in any way to be the instrument of stirring such a question, and calling their Lordships' attention to it. He had heard the speeches of his noble and learned Friends, and it filled up the measure of his self-gratulation to find that they agreed with him that some change was necessary. Allusion had been made to a speech delivered by him in the other House, and he was proud to say, that in looking over the points of that speech, he found that only one recommendation contained in it was not now the law of the land.
Lord Abingerhad not made any allusion to the speech of the noble and learned Lord; he had said, that he had heard long and eloquent speeches in another place upon the subject, but he had not said that it was from the noble and learned Lord.
Bill went through Committee. Report to be received.

GRANTING PARDONS (IRELAND).
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 20 l. 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 Normanby: as 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 Earl of Rodenasked, had the men been bound over to keep the peace on their being released?
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.

PRIVILEGE—COURTS OF LAW.
Lord Redesdale Lord Redesdale moved, that the officer of the House be allowed to attend the Court of Queen's Bench with the minutes of evidence before the committee upon the state of New Zealand, which evidence having been communicated to the Commons, had been published by them, and an action for libel brought upon it.
Lord Hollandsaid, he thought this a very serious question, and not to be lightly decided.
Lord Lyndhurstsaid, the affair had arisen from the publication of the evidence by the House of Commons, and there would be an absolute failure of justice if the motion was not agreed to.
Lord Hollandthought, there was a question of principle involved.
Lord Melbourne: When does the trial come on?
Lord Lyndhurst: Thursday.
Lord Holland: I am not prepared to oppose the motion, but I think it involves very serious questions.
Lord Lyndhurst: Those questions are open for discussion hereafter. No privilege can be surrendered in consenting to the application under particular circumstances.
Lord Holland: It is all very well to say, that the question can be discussed hereafter; but if the application is granted in this case, it will be demanded as a matter of justice in others. The point may be raised, whether any of your Lordships may not be called upon to give evidence in a court of justice as to words spoken in this House. Are committees less under protection than the House itself? It is a fundamental principle, that nothing said in Parliament can be questioned in courts of law; that is one of the privileges of the House of Commons. I don't know what effect this application, if granted, may have upon that question. It is not to be granted as a matter of course.
Lord Redesdalesaid, he would have given longer notice if it had been possible. There was no analogy, in his opinion, between proceedings in their Lordships' House, and proceedings before committees because of debates in that House, there was no authorized report, as there was in the case of the committees. The reporters might publish the debates, but it was not by the authority of that House, and this point was jealously watched in order to secure perfect freedom of debate. He wished to be bound by the decision of the House.
The Lord Chancellorthought the party ought to have made the application earlier.
Lord Lyndhurstsaid, his noble Friend near him had drawn a very proper distinction. There was no publication of the debates in that House, but the evidence in the committees was taken down by the proper officer, and that was communicated to the other House of Parliament, who published it to the world, and when it was published, everyone had a right to make comments on it. It was a case of extreme hardship.
The Earl of Mintosaid, the same thing might have happened if the evidence had not been communicated to the House
918
of Commons—any one might have published part of the evidence taken, before a Committee of their Lordships' House—but had it ever been pretended, that the party could come to their Lordships for a justification; although it was true, that it might serve him if he could obtain it. Their proceedings had always been considered as entirely closed.
Lord Hollandsaid, this was a question of great constitutional importance. He remembered, that in the famous case between Mr. Fox and Mr. Horne Tooke, a question arose as to what had passed in a Committee of the House of Commons, and Mr. Horne Tooke wished to make it evidence, but it was decided there could be no inquiry into what had passed in that. Committee.
Lord Redesdalesaid, that if any privilege was likely to be given up by acceding to his application, he would be the last one to make it. The ground on which he rested his application was this, that the evidence had been published by the authority of the other House—their Lordships having communicated it to that House. The evidence had been publicly sold, and would their Lordships refuse the individual the legal evidence of proving that what had been published had taken place before the Committee. He did not think, that if this application was acceded to, it could be drawn into an injurious precedent.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, there could be no doubt that in this particular case it would be for the benefit of the party to have what he asked, but he thought it was of the greatest importance that their Lordships should consider the extent to which applications of this sort might be carried.
Lord Lyndhurstsaid, that if the House was not disposed to grant the application, probably the Court of Queen's Bench would postpone the trial when these circumstances were stated to it, arid then the matter could be brought before their Lordships for reconsideration on Thursday next. He would beg leave, therefore, on Thursday next again to submit the case to their Lordships' consideration.
Subject postponed.