HOUSE OF LORDS.

THURSDAY, JUNE 25.

The Lords, in a Committee of Privileges, decided against the claims of the Bishops of Meath and Kildare, to take precedency of the English Bishops, except those of London, Durham, and Winchester.

The House being constituted,

Earl Stanhope stated that Mr. Gurney, the short-hand writer, had made a claim for compensation for his trouble in taking down the evidence on the Welsh Inclosure Bill, which his lordship had objected to in that House, against the poor people who opposed it. This, he contended, was a breach of privilege. The business ought regularly to have been done by the Clerks of the House, and these poor people had not agreed to employ a short-hand writer.

Lord Walsingham stated the usual practice to be, to propose to the parties to employ a short-hand writer; and if they agreed, they paid him in the proper proportions.

Lord Redesdale adverted to the great advantages, in point of dispatch, which attended the practice of employing shorthand writers; and could not conceive how this could be considered as a breach of privilege.

Earl Stanhope said, these poor people had not agreed to employ a short-hand writer, and therefore were not liable. If he attempted to force his demand at law, he would bring him before the House in a more serious manner. He would here drop the matter for the present.

Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

THURSDAY, JUNE 25.

Sir W. Scott gave notice, that he should move to bring in a Bill relating to the inferior Ecclesiastical Courts. It was not his intention to advance it through all its stages this session, as it would materially affect many parties, who might wish for a longer time to adjust their measures.

On the second reading of the Local Token Bill,

Mr. Vansittart stated his intention to move a clause, making it penal to coin any new tokens, though those in

circulation might remain till after the meeting of next session, and all the copper tokens might continue. The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow.

AMERICAN SEÁMEN.

Mr. Robinson (though the honourable baronet was not in his place, who had brought forward the subject to which he was about to call the attention of the House) thought it his duty to state what he had to offer. As soon as the honourable baronet had mentioned the case of an American seaman, who it was said had been impressed, he (Mr. Robinson) had made it his business to inquire how the fact stood, and ever since had attended in the House, for the purpose of making such observations as to him the case appeared to call for, in the presence of the honourable baronet. This, however, the honourable baronet had not given him an opportunity of doing; and as he had made no further observations on the subject, he (Mr. Robinson) took it for granted that he meant to say nothing more about it; but content with having mentioned the circumstance, the hnourable baronet was willing to leave the business altogether to the Admiralty. On Monday the honourable baronet had mentioned the circumstance again. He (Mr. Robinson) had been in the House early in the evening, waiting to reply to any thing that might have been said on it, but nothing of the kind having been spoken of, he (Mr. R.), as the public business was pretty far advanced, had no idea that it would then be alluded to, and had therefore left the House. He understood the case to have been formerly stated by the hon. baronet to be as follows:-That an American seaman had been impressed, and was now on board the Enterprize. On inquiry, he (Mr. R.) found that it was true that a person had been impressed in the course of the last month, of the name of Jolin Williamson, who, at the time of his being impressed, had stated himself to be an American citizen, and who had subsequently applied to the American Consul to be released, on the ground of his being an American seaman. On inquiry, however, it had turned out, that the man, though when seized he had stated himself to be an American seaman, and that he had been discharged, was recognised by one of the gang as having deserted from the service of this country, about two months before, when ashore-and this had been admitted by the man himself.

He could farther state, on the general principle, that nothing was so little desired as American seamen, whether they were pressed or not; as having such persons was likely to lead to some inconvenience and embarrassment: and whenever application was made by a person impressed for his discharge, on the ground of his being an American seaman, if his statement on investigation proved to be correct, he was immediately discharged.

Mr. Croker stated himself to have been also ready to give a satisfactory answer on this subject. He had just left the House, and was only in the lobby at the time the honourable baronet adverted to it on Monday.

LINCOLN GAOL.

Sir Samuel Romilly, after moving that the petition of W. Houlden might be read, observed, that although at first it had been his intention only to move that a Committee be appointed to consider the petition, yet he had fixed a distant day, that an opportunity might be afforded to the party against whom the complaint was made, of answering one ex-parte statement by another of the same nature. The notice had afterwards been delayed for the convenience of different Members, though he should not con. ceive this to be a sufficient apology for the postponement, unless the petitioner had been discharged from prison, and thus rendered an earlier inquiry the less necessary.-But though his original intention had been thus confined, yet in consequence of what had been stated by an honourable friend (Mr. Brougham) on a former occasion, he should now enlarge his motion, and move that a select Committee be appointed to consider the state of the prisoners confined in Lincoln gaol, and the conduct of that prison. No man could be less inclined than himself to propose any measure which might interrupt that system of subordination so necessary in the government of a prison, or to weaken the respect due to the magistracy; but he did not carry his feelings to the extent of allowing that abuses should be tole rated in our prisons, or that the culpable connivance of a magistrate should be overlooked-(Hear, hear !)—and that such abases and such connivance had taken place, he thought himself justified in saying, both from the petition before the House, and other statements of sufficient authority. He was sure, that the House would feel that there were no persons whose sufferings were more to be pitied than those of

confined debtors. The House had taken such a view of their 413 hardships, that it had even broken through the law for their Felief, and an Insolvent Act was passed almost every session. Debtors were the more especially deserving protection, as the remedies, in case of injury, were such as persons only could enjoy who were able to pay the expences of litigation, and thus might be supposed to be out of the reach of persons in their wretched.circumstances. The particular case which now called for the attention of the House, was, that of a person confined for debt, by the order of a magistrate-whose name, though he had omitted to mention it on a former occasion, he would now state, as there was no doubt some friend present who would be able to defend him :-the prisoner was, by the order of Dr. Illingworth, committed to solitary confinement for eleven days and nights: which imprisonment might have continued much longer, for the order was indefinite, except for an accidental circumstance. It was important to consider for what crime this commitment had been directed; and here he must say, that he knew not the authority by which Magistrates were allowed to proceed in this summary way against confined debtors. No doubt all reasonable restraints should be adopted to prevent escape: but he considered the debtors as the prisoners of the Sheriff, and not of the Magistrates-hear!). By the common law it was assuredly so: but it was said, and given as the opinion of some lawyers too, that the 31st of the King invested Magistrates with this new power. read the statute with great attention, and could not find any He had such authority there given. If it existed at all, it was indirectly given to them as having power over houses of correction; but it ought to have been in plain and direct terms. He had, however, no hesitation in saying, that no such authority existed; and what did it signify that some lawyers had said it did? The Act of Parliament was open for any body to read it; nor was it for lawyers to affix a meaning to it which was not obviously there. Had, however, such power been given, it ought to have been exercised like all other powers, with discretion, and not capriciously, and, as in this case, with a wish to find the person guilty. The offence of this person was, that he had been dissatisfied with the expence of the prison bed. This was a subject which many years ago employed the attention of the Legislature; and the 32d George II. c. 33, sec. 4, had provided that prisoners might take their own beds into the prison. This

enactment was made to prevent that most obvious oppression of gaolers, the demanding and exacting a large price for such accommodations. When the petitioner desired this allowed indulgence, he was placed in the Pauper ward, among 13 beds, in the heat of summer. There were two doors to the room, one of which was only necessary for securing the prisoners, but the turnkey insisted on shutting both. The petitioner remonstrated, and perhaps pretty strongly, against this act of wanton authority; and for this offence was carried before Dr. Illingworth, who heard the complaint, but no crime being proved against the prisoner, expressed concern that the charge was not established. This regret did not last long; for afterwards he ordered the prisoner into close confinement, which he underwent 11 days, and was then released, because the news of a conversation which had taken place in the House of Commons on Mr. Finnerty's case, reached Lincoln at the end of that time. It was impossible here not to acknowledge the great advantage arising from the debates of that House being made public. It was fortunate for himself and friends to find, that though they were frequently in minorities, yet the observations which they might make, were productive of some good. He recollected two instances, one in which he had been in a minority of 16, the other of only 6; and soon afterwards he had the satisfaction of seeing the abuses abolished, which, at the time he denounced them, were denied to exist. The conduct now complained of, seemed imputable to corrupt motives on the part of the gaoler, and to connivance on the part of the Magistrate (hear, hear! from Mr. Ellison.) No doubt the honourable Member was prepared with an answer to these charges; yet he (Sir Samuel) could not but recollect, that when on the consideration of a former petition, in which it was stated that three guineas a week were asked for a room, and on Mr. Finnerty's asserting his inability to pay such a sum, a Magistrate bad hinted that a subscription was on foot which might enable Mr. Finnerty to defray the expences: he could not but recollect that on this occasion the honourable Member for Lincolnshire, though pressed and fully instructed, had given no answer to that imputa tion. Since the facts stated in the petition, there had been a meeting of the Magistrates of Lincoln, who had come to some resolutions, which to him (Sir S. Romilly) appeared extraordinary. It appeared that there were nine sleepingrooms in the prison, two of which it was resolved should be