obliged to the noble earl for having brought the charge, because it enabled him to show on what flimsy grounds the accusation rested, and how little he was disposed to favour the Roman Catholics or the Association in the manner represented. In the whole course of his administration, it had never fallen to his lot to act as a party man, or to befriend any body in the state at the expense of another. His whole object was, to act with strict impartiality. In doing so he had endeavoured to imitate the conduct of his illustrious predecessor, who had acted during his government in Ireland in a manner that proved him to be a most profound and conHe would now read the answer to the noble earl's letter, written by the Chief Secretary, under his directions. It was as follows:

summate statesman.

"I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your lordship's letter of the 24th. As the observations contained in that letter chiefly turned upon a recent measure of his majesty's government, I thought it necessary that the Lord-lieutenant should be made acquainted with them; and it is in consequence, by direction of his excellency, that I take the liberty of addressing this letter to your lordship on my own account. Having previously to the receipt of your lordship's letter apologized for having inadvertently addressed an official letter to your lordship I should have deemed it unnecessary and obtrusive to trouble your lordship further. I am directed by the Lord-lieutenant to acquaint your lordship, that it is impossible for him on the subject of a measure strictly of a public nature, such as the recent liberation of Mr. Æneas Macdonnell, to enter into previous consultation or subsequent explanation with any irresponsible person. Under this conviction of the duties of the situation, his excellency cannot authorize me to attempt, by any further observation, to remove the misconception under which it appears to his excellency that your lordship labours on the subject of the measure alluded to."

Now, my lords, (continued the noble marquis) what may be perfectly right in the conduct of the noble duke at the head of the government, and what may be sufficient to induce him, acting in his official capacity, to refuse to lay the papers required by the noble earl on your lordships' table may not restrain me from giving some explanation on the subject, and with

the permission of noble lords, and, as I hope, to the complete satisfaction of the noble earl, and all persons interested in this business in Ireland, I think I shall make out a case to justify the course which I adopted; meaning, as I do, to show to your lordships with respect to this case, as I hope to be able to do with regard to all others, that whatever accusations have been brought against me are perfectly unfounded. I repeat, if any accusation be brought forward with respect to my conduct in any part of Ireland, I have no apprehension that I shall be unable to answer it. I have no doubt that I shall be able to do so, not only in this case, but in any other. I had intended, but it appears almost unnecessary to do so, to go into the history of the particulars of the case at length. It is sufficient to say, that Mr. Æneas Macdonnell is a Roman Catholic barrister, a member belonging to the Catholic Association, and an agent from that Association to the Roman Catholics in this country. The noble earl has already described what took place at the two meetings held at Ballinasloe-the delivery and publication of the libels. I must here observe, that the trial and conviction, to which the noble earl has alluded, took place during the administration of my noble predecessor in the Irish government-consequently I have nothing to do with that and I was not required to know any thing officially about the offence that had been committed, or the sentence by which punishment was awarded for it. Indeed, the thing did not turn upon that, but, as has been truly stated by the noble duke on the state of health of the individual referred to. I can assure noble lords, that great pains were taken to ascertain accurately the real state of Mr. Macdonnell's health; and the probable effect of prolonged confinement. This I shall presently show. I arrived in Ireland on the 1st of March, 1828. It was early in the month of April, that I received the first petition relative to Mr. Macdonnell. It was a petition signed by persons of high rank and great respectability; but it is only fair to admit that it was evidently a petition arising out of party principles, and founded in political, religious, and party feelings. Perceiving this to be the case, I informed the persons who presented the petition, that I could not entertain or act upon it. In June, Mr. Æneas Macdonnell petitioned the Irish government on account

have seen Dr. Jackson, and his conversa tion was stronger than his report, if possible. I think the only question is, whether you could take the responsibility of waiting four days for an answer from the other side of the water. I cannot recommend you to do so." I think on that day, the 27th of August, I wrote to the home department. I wrote to Mr. Peel to the effect that I believed it was necessary that I should release Mr. Macdonnell on the following morning. I transmitted the reports of the medical men. I stated, that I would see the members of the committee on the following day, and if I found that I could do so in safety, I would wait an answer from him. I added, that I wished him to understand that I would take the whole responsibility of the act upon myself, but desired to have the advantage of his experience, and was anxious to avail myself of it in this case. On the 30th of August, Mr. Macdonnell sent a memorandum,written in pencil, to lord F. L. Gower, as follows:-"Within the last week, Dr. Collis and Dr. O'Bierne have met Dr. Roney in consultation at Kilmainham on my case; and Dr. Jackson visited me repeatedly. They all concur in the opinion, that I am in a most dangerous state of health, in consequence of confinement. To request an answer of some sort

of the severity of the sentence, as well as the impaired state of his health. That was a case to be dealt with in the same manner as all other cases of a similar nature. I immediately sent the petition to the judge who tried the cause, and received from him a report upon it. It was of an unfavourable nature. I caused the circumstance to be made known to the petitioner and directed it to be stated to him, that the law must take its course, as there appeared no good ground for interference. Mr. Macdonnell then applied for a copy of the judge's report and opinion on the reference of the prisoner's petition to his consideration. This I refused to grant. Numerous petitions followed this, all of which I refused to comply with. At length a petition was presented, in August, on the score of ill health; it was confirmed by a statement made by Drs. Roney and O'Bierne, who represented that longer confinement would endanger the prisoner's life. This alone in ordinary cases, would be sufficient to justify the immediate release of the prisoner. I have released prisoners in several cases, on such a representation, without further delay or inquiry. But Mr. Macdonnell being a marked character, and the whole transaction being one distinguished by a high degree of party spirit throughout, I thought it necessary, under the circumstances of the case, to appoint a commission composed of medical men of the greatest eminence in their profession to investigate the subject. The commissioners were Dr. Renny, Inspector-general of Hospitals; Mr. Crompton, surgeon-general; and Dr. Jackson, state physician. There was some difference of opinion among these gentlemen as to the health of the petitioner, or rather with regard to the probable consequences of prolonged confinement upon it. All agreed that he was very ill, but they differed as to the degree of danger that would result from continued imprisonment. One of the three desired further time, to enable him to make up his mind on this case. It was given: four days were allowed him to make his own separate report on the subject. He did so and it was of a very decided character, as to the dangerous condition of Mr. Macdonnell. I will now read the opinion of the chief Secretary on the case; formed in consequence of a conversation with the physician, whose report has just been alluded to. The chief Secretary said "I

VOL. XXI.

-

if unfavourable, to get copies of the certificates of the physicians, that I may have them laid before the king, as the ground of application to his majesty. made my application, two persons have been liberated from this gaol on account of ill-health, on the certificate of Dr. Roney alone, who is the official authority and also President of the College of Surgeons."

Here I think it right to state, that, to the letter of the 27th of August to Mr. Peel, I received a reply to the following effect:-" That if he (Mr. Peel) had confidence in a physician giving the opinion that he had serious apprehensions for the life of the prisoner, he would, in such a case, advise the Crown to exercise the prerogative of mercy;" and added, "it appears to me, that you have taken every precaution that could be taken against any imposition being practised, and against any mistake of the motive of your decision, should intended interafter your you, view with the physicians, decide on the liberation of Mr. Eneas Macdonnell." On the 31st (before the foregoing could have

2 B

reached me) I informed Mr. Peel, that I had not found it necessary to release Mr. Macdonnell on the morrow, as I had expected. That he was certainly very ill, but I could not ascertain that his life was in immediate danger; but as the symptoms might rapidly change, and as moreover he (Mr. Peel) might, in his answer, encourage his liberation, I would leave an order of discharge in the hands of lord Francis, to be used at his discretion during my absence at Carlingford, whither I was going for a few days. On the 30th of August, I had written to lord Francis, that after what I collected as the opinion of the medical gentlemen when I saw them at the Castle on Thursday, I should have no scruple in leaving Mr. Macdonnell in Kilmainham until my return from Carlingford. I would however sign an order for his liberation, which he might use, either in the event of more alarming symptoms appearing, or of Mr. Peel's expressing an opinion that he should be set at liberty. Notwithstanding this report of the physicians, upon learning that another physician had arrived from England, I called for a third committee, who examined the prisoner during my absence in the country; or at all events whose report I did not receive until my return to Dublin. That report was in itself so decisive and unfavourable, as to the peril of Mr. Macdonnell from further imprisonment, that I decided upon his instant liberation; and such was my anxiety upon the subject, in consequence of these repeated representations, that I really believe the prisoner himself did not hail with more gladness the dawn of his enlargement from the walls of his prison, than I who opened the doors to him did at getting rid of the further responsibility of his detention under circumstances of danger so represented. I was never afraid of a proper responsibility: I wrote so to the Secretary of State for the Home Department. Indeed such was my guarded and cautious conduct throughout the whole business, that the prisoner might rather have accounted me as actuated too much by sternness, than by any desire to relax from the strict rule of law. After all, what is the object of imprisonment? To punish the individual, to correct him, and, by his example to prevent the repetition of the crime. But it never could be intended to hold the sufferer, merely to gratify the personal ill-will of his prosecutor. This would never have been my plan at least, and the

noble earl opposite, and those of his family who were engaged in the prosecution, would have been just the last persons in the community I should have applied to for their opinion to guide me under such circumstances. I beg pardon of your lordships for this trespass upon your attention. All I am anxious to impress upon you is, that in this, as in every other act of my administration in Ireland, I was governed only by one principle,-that of wishing to perform my duties with the utmost moderation, and the strictest inflexible impartiality.

The Earl of Clancarty said, that the noble marquis had thrown the onus from his own shoulders upon those of the noble duke. But the impression upon his mind was not removed. He thought it was necessary to satisfy the public mind, by the publication of the physician's report, or of an extract from it, that the individual's life was in danger. Such was the usage in such cases. It appeared from the noble marquis's statement that Dr. Cheyne did not sign the report, as was mentioned by the noble duke. The prisoner was often seen in gaol in sound health.

The Duke of Wellington said, he was sorry if he had told the House what was not the fact; namely, that Dr. Cheyne signed the physician's report. If that was not what the noble marquis stated, he was sorry to have been mistaken on that point, and apologised to the House.

The Marquis of Anglesey said, he believed he was incorrect in stating that Dr. Cheyne signed the report. The mistake was this: as he was leaving town, he wished, as soon as Dr. Cheyne arrived, that he should join in the consultation; but when he arrived at Carlingford he was informed of the prisoner's extreme illness, and he therefore sent orders for his immediate release. His impression was, that Dr. Cheyne, not having been present at the former consultation, and not having seen the patient, refused to sign the report; but the other three physicians signed it.

The motion was put, and negatived.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Monday, April 13.

CHESHIRE POLICE REGULATION BILL.] Mr. Egerton moved the order of the day for the second reading of this bill.

Mr. Leycester objected to the measure,

as calculated, by the introduction of a stipendiary magistracy in that county, to cast a reflection upon the conduct of the local magistrates. In his opinion, the business of the county of Chester had been as well conducted as that of any other county in the kingdom, and he regretted to see the right hon. Secretary in the House at that early hour, as he had apparently come down for the purpose of exercising the influence of ministers upon a mere private bill. He felt it his duty to move, that the bill be read a second time this day six months.

Mr. Secretary Peel denied, that the bill was entitled to the appellation of a private bill. He found in the preamble, that it was a bill for the better prevention of crime in the county of Cheshire, and he really thought that that circumstance afforded a sufficient reason for his now appearing in the House. As one of the Secretaries of State, he felt himself bound to take a part in the discussion, and to declare, that if the county of Chester was willing to bear the expense of this improvement, he saw no objection to the magistrates making the trial. The hon. member had asserted, that justice was well administered by the local magistracy; but when he looked to the increasing expenses attendant upon the conviction of criminals in the county of Chester, he could not believe that some reformation might not be effected. It had, indeed, been in his contemplation to apply a measure somewhat resembling that contained in the bill to all the counties of England; and he had even wished the hon. member for the county to postpone the bill for some time with that object; but it was found, from the nature of the subject, and the number of concurrent jurisdictions, that the previous inquiries must necessarily be very extended, and would occupy a very considerable period. Feeling, therefore, that the present bill would be an improvement, and recollecting the number of applications which were constantly made to the Home Office for the - assistance of the Bow-street officers, he willingly gave his support to an attempt to organise an efficient local police. He begged, however, to say, that although he did not acknowledge this to be quite a private bill, he should abstain from voting upon it, lest he should be supposed to interfere with local interests; although he strongly recommended the hon. member to permit the bill to pass through its pre

| sent stage, in order that its provisions might be thoroughly examined in the committee.

Mr. Western was anxious, that the bill should be postponed, till the general measure respecting the police should be introduced.

Lord Belgrave was anxious that the bill should at least go into the committee. The provisions of it were, he thought, highly necessary, and calculated to facilitate the administration of justice.

The amendment was withdrawn, and the bill read a second time.

POOR LAWS IN IRELAND.] Mr. Wilmot Horton took occasion to contradict a statement which had gone abroad, that he was adverse to the introduction of Poor Laws into Ireland. What he had said was, that the Poor Laws should not be introduced into Ireland, unless the laws of the three kingdoms were assimilated upon that subject; and that he undertook to prove when the subject should come under discussion. While he was on his legs, he begged to express a hope that the hon. member for Newark (Mr. Sadler) whom he saw in his place, would be present at the discussion of the 7th of May, in order that he might become sensible of the scandalous manner in which he had misrepresented the opinions and the objects of the Emigration Committee [cries of hear !].

The Speaker observed, that the hon. gentleman, who had been a member of that House so long, could not but feel, that he was acting in a manner highly disorderly, when he ventured, in the first place, to request the attendance of any other member at a discussion which he announced as about to be entered into ; and, in the next place, when he commented upon observations which it was presumed had not been delivered in that House.

Mr. W. Horton said, he was never before called to order in that House, and would bow to the chair; but he still thought, when expressions were uttered charging him with conduct and principles which he disavowed, some allowance might be made for the warmth of his manner. He would not, however, then pursue the subject, and meant to give no offence.

Mr. Sadler said, he would be in his place on the 7th of May, and would be ready to meet the right hon. gentleman in a discussion of the subject on which the right hon. gentleman had risen to address