ページの画像
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

Mr. W. Pole thought the question put too peremptorily; but he would inform the honourable gentleman, that a respite was granted in the first instance, on which the reprieve was afterwards founded.

Mr. Tighe did not think his question peremptory-(hear!)-and wished farther to know if the respite was in writing?

Mr. W. Pole said, the respite was given in consequence of the representation of the Judge who tried the prisoner; he supposed it was in writing, but could not state particulars, as he was in London attending Parliament at the time of the transaction, and the first he heard of it, was by a letter threatening him with assassination. The man (Hall) was now on his way to Botany Bay.

Mr. Tighe said, that his motion called for all the papers connected with the case of Hall, in the possession of the Irish Government. The order of the House had not been complied with, as the respite was not produced. He moved, therefore, now, that an address be presented to the Prince Regent, for copies of the respite, reprieve, or pardon.

Mr. W. Pole did not intend to oppose the motion, but insisted that the order of the House had been complied with. A Member should specify particularly what papers he wanted. He hoped the honourable Member did not intend to shirk this question, and not bring it on this session. He was convinced that all who read the papers would allow, that the Execative Government of Ireland would have been guilty of great injustice, if they had not attended to the representations of the Judges. Judge Osborne, and the other Judge, who tried the prisoner, in letters to Sir Charles Langston, stated their conviction that the man was insane, both from his conduct at the trial, and from other sources of information. It appeared that the man, when a little intoxicated, was outrageously loyal, and completely insane on that topic, and threatened to kill every man whom he called a rebel. They recommended that he should be either transported, or sent as a soldier on foreign service (hear, from the Opposition.)

Mr. Whitbread observed, that the honourable gentleman was anticipating the defence, before the charge was made.

Mr. W. Pole rose to order, saying that he was making no defence of himself.

Mr. Whitbread remarked, that the honourable gentleman was, as usual, confounding himself with the Lord Lieu tenant. As to the threats of assassination, he also (Mr. W.) had been threatened with death unless he altered his line of public conduct; but hoped that the honourable Secretary was as far removed from it as himself, whose assassination was put off, because the threatener had a wife and family. The honourable Secretary bad thrown out a challenge, as to the conduct of the Irish Government : so called upon, he must say that he thought the Irish Government had acted very improperly. The prisoner had made no plea of insanity, and indeed his drunken derangement could not be conceived as an extenuation of his offence. It was improper too, to recommend such a man as fit for foreign service, where spirits could not be kept from him; and he might, in his first intoxication, kill some of his comrades for being less violently loyal than himself. He did not think that the subsequent conduct of the prisoner, at the time of receiving his pardon, any proof of insanity ; many persons who had made up their minds to die, received a pardon with equal indifference.

Lord Castlereagh regretted that a delay was produced on this subject, by moving for the respite; and hoped that the honourable Member would bring on the question before the close of the session, in justice to the Irish Government.

Sir F. Burdeft thought that the House ought to be jealous to preserve its controul over the conduct of the Judges, as it was one of its most useful duties. He saw no impropriety in the present motion, as it might be intended to form an impeachment of the Judges upon it. The copy of the respite was important, to shew what was done between the 19th and the 25th of the month. It would be important also to have a copy of the pardon. He thought the bonourable Member had not merited the asperity of language used by the honourable Secretary.

Mr. W. Fitzgerald trusted the honourable Member would now bring forward the debate this session, in justice to himself as well as to the Irish Government. This discussion was the more called for, on account of the unfounded calumnies which had gone forth against the Lord Lieutenant, in the Dublin papers, and assemblies. He remarked also on what he thought unseasonable levity in the honourable gentleman (Mr. Whitbread), on the subject of

assassination, after the recent afflicting instance of that crime.

Mr. Martin (of Galway) said, it was the first time he had ever heard it urged, as a matter of complaint against the Government, that a pardon had been granted, on the recommendation of the Judge who tried the accused person. It was certainly the constant practice at the Old Bailey. But it had been alleged the man tried was insane; if the fact was so, he could not be guilty of any crime. He thought, therefore, the conduct of the Judges was absurd, in granting a conditional pardon. The man ought to have had a free pardon, or none at all. He should, therefore, vote for the motion.

Mr. Brougham said, this was no very delicate question; it was no less than discussing the character of the judicial system in Ireland. He must, therefore, deprecate any farther discussion at present; there could be no doubt, he thought, but that these two Judges had good grounds for their recommendation, though the reasons given did not appear to be satisfactory. He should, therefore, vote for the subject being postponed, for the purpose of having farther information.

Mr. Tighe said, he never meant to ground any charge against the Lord Lieutenant for granting mercy; on the contrary, he thought he was right, and that he ought to have granted a free pardon. There was no plea of insanity brought forward by any jury, and he could not consider it right that a man should be deemed insane as to the crime of murder, and yet be punished as sane, by being transported for manslaughter; which was neither more or less than saying, that he was sane as to one crime, and insane as to the other.

The motion was then agreed to.

Mr. Whitbread, in the absence of Lord Folkestone, and at his request, postponed the motion which his lordship had previously in the course of the evening put off to Thursday, to Tuesday next.

Mr. Tighe moved "that the notes of the Judges in Ireland on the trial of Walter Hall, Esq. for murder, in February last, be laid before the House."

Mr. W. Pole said, he readily agreed to the motion; and so well convinced was he of the rectitude of conduct both of the Lord Lieutenant and the Judges, that he would be happy if the papers came over in time, that the honour

able gentleman would bring forward his motion during the present session, which would, in all likelihood, last longer than the honourable gentleman expected; and if there were any other papers he wished for on that subject, they would be readily granted. The motion was then agreed to.

EAST-INDIA FINANce.

Mr. Creevey rose to submit to the House certain Resolutions, relative to the situation of the Finances of the EastIndia Company;

Mr. Wallace objected to the whole of the Resolutions, as having no connection with the Bill now before the House; which did not go to the consideration of the comparative situation of the East-India Company now and in 1793, but merely to this, whether any public interposition should be made in behalf of the Company, and if sufficient provision had been made to secure the public against loss. He denied that the estimate of the affairs of the Company taken in the year 1793, was a fair criterion by which to judge of their prosperity at the present moment, that estimate being formed for a peace, and not for a war establishment, which unfortunately the Company had to support almost ever since. He concluded by moving the previous question, which was carried, and all the Resolutions were negatived. On the question for the third reading of the East-India Loan Bill,

[ocr errors]

Mr. Whitbread wished to know from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what measure he had in contemplation to propose as a substitute for the Duty on Auctions, which, he understood, he had agreed to give up.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, he had not in contemplation a commutation, but he hoped he should be able to adjust a regulation relative to the same tax, which would answer the object, and be free from the objections under which the measure he had agreed to wave was supposed to lobour.

Mr. Wallace moved the third reading of the East India Loan Bill; and after a few words from Lord A. Hamilton and Lord Castlereagh, a division took place, when ́ the numbers were,

For the third reading,

Against it,

Majority

50

8.

42

The Bill was accordingly read a third time and passed.

IRISH TYTHES,

Mr. Parnell moved the order of the day for the second reading of the Bill to exempt portions of land attached to cottages in Ireland employed in the growth of potatoes, from the paying of tythes.

Sir W. Scott opposed the principle of the Bill, and impressed upon the House the duty it owel to take care that private property was not unnecessarily invaded. He con fended that tythes were as much the property of the labo rious clergy, as the rents of land were the property of individuals; and if the honourable Member (Mr. Parnell) was an xious to relieve the cottagers in Ireland, he could do it much more effectually, and quite as justly, by bringing in a Bill to provide that they should pay no rent to their landlords. As the principle of the Bill was altogether unprecedented, as well as impolitic, he moved that it be read a second time on this day three months.

Mr. Barham contended, that the Bill was founded on this principle, that there was a degree of pauperism which ought to exempt from the payment of tythes. But as things stood in Ireland, instead of the poor deriving assistance from the revenues of the Church, the Church in some degree depended on the very poorest of the poor. Custom in this country would not tolerate such demands on the cottager; and it was extremely hard that a rich clergyman in Ireland should so far forget his interest and his duty as to exact his dues in a way that might deprive a poor cottager and his family of a day's food. He never would admit that church property stood precisely on the same foundations as every other kind of property. The former was given as a trust, to which the performance of certain duties was annexed. The right bonourable gentleman had talked of the laborious church of Ireland; but he had always understood, that it was the richest church in Europe, and also the idlest,-he would not say from the fault of its Members, but merely because many of its Members had no dutics to perform. Though the Bill might be objectionable in some of its parts, he was still for entertaining it, on the ground that the House, by shewing a disposition to remedy the grievances which existed, would do something for the tranquillity of Ireland.

Mr. Hawkins Browne opposed the principle of the Bill. It would afford no alleviation to the hardships of the pea

« 前へ次へ »