matters correctly with regard to the trustees of a certain property. It was possible that Mr. Johnes might not be correct as to the exact manner in which the revenues in question were distributed, but there seemed little doubt, that he was correct as to the revenues themselves. It was somewhat hard on the gentleman to be thus attacked when the substance of his statement appeared to be well founded. The right reverend Prelate had made serious charges against this gentleman on a former occasion, and he now tried to bolster them up by bringing forward fresh charges. The right reverend Prelate said, that he had evidence that Mr. Johnes's statements were untrue, and he referred to a letter which he said was written by a most respectable gentleman to prove them to be so. That brought the matter round to the question, which he had before urged to the House, namely, that they should probe the subject to the bottom, and for that reason he should be glad to call the persons who could give them information to the bar of the House. The petition which the right reverend Prelate before referred to, as presented in the other House of Parliament, did not mention him, but the right reverend Prelate had chosen to take it to himself, and to direct his remarks to it, and to attack the person who had presented it. The statement which had subsequently been published in a morning paper, seemed to him to be a triumphant answer to the right reverend Prelate; but then the right reverend Prelate said, that the publication of that statement was a breach of their Lordships' privileges. If it was so, the printer might, by the rules of the House, be called to the Bar, and he should, in one respect, be glad to see that done-namely, if it would afford an opportunity of proving the truth of the statement. As to the matter of privilege, however, the Orders of the House were daily more infringed by the attendance of persons to take notes of what passed, and to publish them, and still more again by the remarks made on the speeches delivered there; but the custom of calling people to the Bar for these things was now pretty well discontinued, and he must say that it seemed to him a custom "more honoured in the breach than the observance," JURIES (IRELAND).] Lord Plunkett moved the second reading of the Juries (Ireland) Bill. Lord Carbery could not let this Bill pass without making some observations upon it, and declaring that he was strongly opposed to the measure. It professed to be a bill for the consolidation of the law for the summoning of Juries in Ireland. A more important subject could not detain their Lordships' attention. In his opinion it had been hastily introduced, and without any sufficient necessity. It ought to be founded upon the opinion of the Judges, and the defects of the present system ought to be distinctly pointed out before there was any attempt made to change it. In his opinion the whole intended effect of the Bill was to be found in the first clause, by which men who held a freehold of 10l. a-year value or were leaseholders to the amount of 15l, were to be put upon the Jury list. Why many of these persons could not read the issue they would have to try, and many of them were even ignorant of the English language, yet their names were to be put into the book, and the Judges would have no power of objecting to them. If this Bill were to pass into a law, he was convinced that there would be an end of justice, and of the security of the subject. The law would be liable to be abused by a bad or a corrupt Sheriff. He was confident that if the question were put to the Judges of Ireland, whether it was necessary that any change should be made in the law relating to the selection of Jurors, the majority of them would be against the change, and so would the majority of the eminent men at the bar. Instead of an improvement, he was confident that a more dangerous mode of obtaining Jurors had never been introduced. He opposed this Bill, because he was interested in the welfare of Ireland, which he was sure would be injuriously affected by it. The Earl of Wicklow thought it would be better to continue the present system than to adopt that which was now proposed. It was a curious fact, but it was perfectly true, that among the institutions of Ireland, that which stood pre-eminently forward for its good working was the Jury system. It was said, that the Jury system of the two countries should be assimilated. Noble Lords opposite would better exercise their talents and patriotism if they were to attempt to assimilate the habits of the people and the condition of the two countries, than their system of Jury Laws. If they could do that, then they might come with some degree of plausibility to Parliament, and ask for a law to assimilate the Jury systems of the two countries. If 8 He there was one evil more than another from | believe they would have been. which Ireland had suffered, it was from the willingly admitted, that it was devoid of too great earnestness to introduce laws many of the objections which were obadapted to a rich and civilized country, and servable in the other Bill-that in regard to its refinements, into a country not thus to Special Juries, it adopted the sugges happily circumstanced. It was said, as tions of the Judges-but its main faults another reason for introducing this Bill, still remained. The Jury-book must be that the present system did not work well. filled with names from a class he could not That was a most manifest error. them consult the twelve Judges on that mitted-such a crowd of individuals as Let approve. Such a host of persons were adpoint. The noble and learned Lord oppo- would disgrace any Court of Justice, and site had done him the favour to show him he sincerely hoped that this would be cora letter from them on this subject. letter was supposed to express their opinion must all know, that it was a total deviation That rected in the Committee. Their Lordships in favour of the proposed alteration. It from the Constitution, to make a money did, in fact, say no such thing. Its meaning qualification the sole qualification for these was mistaken. He would undertake to important duties. The old Acts of Parliastate, that so far from saying, that the pre- ment on this subject, particularly of the sent system did not work well, they were reign of Edward 3rd, stated that "character of a contrary opinion. They desired no and intelligence" were leading qualifications change, but merely said, that if this Bill for a Juror-that "the most efficient and was to pass, certain alterations which they least suspected" individuals were the mentioned ought to be made, but they persons to be chosen. The Sheriff's oath, thought it not desirable to alter the law. too, bore strongly upon this point; and proper Did then this recommendation of change without its repeal he did not see how they come from the public Commissioners in could pass this Bill. That oath distinctly Ireland? No, it did not; for those Com- required him not to look to one qualificamissioners, in their report, say that, having tion alone, but to all qualifications-to inquired of the Sheriffs and Sub-Sheriffs as see that every person called as a Juror was to the efficacy of the present Jury laws, of sufficient standing in life and of sufficient their answer had been a recommendation character. This, however, he should endeaof them as they now stood, and a denial of vour to amend in Committee. One part, the existence of any possible reason why connected with which there would be the they should not work well. From whence, greatest difficulty, which he considered then, did this Bill come? He would tell would be wholly inoperative, was that them. It came from a learned King's which devolved such heavy and responsible Counsel, who was high in the confidence duties on Magistrates. It required them of his Majesty's Government, and to whose to hold a Special Sessions, to take and suggestions they were ever ready to listen. register the names from the various barony It came from a learned person in a silk collectors. Now, he had long acted as a gown, who had continually merited all the Magistrate, and he well knew the difficulty high encomiums which had been pro- of the duty which those functionaries had nounced upon him. The Bill was of his to perform-he well knew the labours they recommendation, and it must be considered had to go through at Assizes, Sessions, and by their Lordships as a new ingredient in Petty Sessions. He well knew how diffithe dish of sops for Cerberus which his cult it would be to get them together; and Majesty's Government were in the habit of if got together, that it would be impossible administering to that learned Gentleman. that the book could be formed. These Their Lordships had not a choice whether were the grounds on which he could not they could reject this Bill-such an alter- give his concurrence to this Bill, and which native was not left them-because the would induce him, in the Committee, to Government was pledged-most unad- move such amendments as he thought calvisedly, as he thought-to this measure. culated to remedy the evils which he found It was, therefore, impossible that they in it. should reject it. Still he acknowledged, that when compared with the last Bill on that subject which had been before their Lordships, it was decidedly of an improved character, though those improvements were not so great as their Lordships were led to done wrong-they had indeed been guilty measure. Why had they been called upon | tail. In his own experience, under the English Jury system, he had seen two Baronets, a higgler, and a gentleman's servant, on the same Special Jury. A complaint was made to him (Lord Wynford) by the two Baronets; but he told them he could do nothing, for that he could not turn those men out of the Special Juror's box whom the law had placed in it. Nevertheless the Bill itself was sufficient evidence that there was not a sufficient class in Ireland from which to form the Special Juries as there provided. It might, therefore, happen, that though a person ought to be tried by a Special Jury, he might, nevertheless, be in fact tried by a Common Jury. The object of the Bill was to assimilate the Irish to the English system of Trial by Jury. Now, although he highly applauded the alterations in the Criminal Law, which had some years ago been introduced by a right hon. Baronet, and was satisfied, that if full effect had been given to those alterations, crime would, in a great degree, have been put down, and the continuance of capital punishments rendered less necessary, he could not bestow the same commendation on the right hon. Baronet's Jury Bill. The effect of that Bill had certainly been to lower the character of Special Juries in this country. Nevertheless, it might have made Common Juries more like Special Juries, but it also made Special Juries something worse than Common Juries. He was old enough to remember when a Special Jury at Guildhall consisted of persons who were generally so well informed as to be able to teach the Judges on questions of commercial law; but it now happened that, by the accident of the ballot, persons were put on Special Juries at the Guildhall, and called upon to try commercial questions, who knew no more of commercial law than the crier of the court. He was informed, however, by those better acquainted with Ireland than he was, that the persons qualified under the present Bill would not be sufficient to furnish the number required for Special Juries in Ireland; and that it would probably often happen in practice that, when a party in an action tried to get a Special Jury, and underwent all the expenses, he would have a good chance of having his cause tried by a Common Jury. Understanding that the Bill was in opposition to the practical experience of the Irish Judges, and foreseeing that very serious consequences would follow if such a measure became law in the present state of the coun try, he should move, by way of Amendment, that the Bill should be read a second time this day six months. ing the people with a confidence in the laws and institutions to which they owed allegiance. All that the agitators did was to take artful advantage of the unsettled state of the public mind in Ireland, and to stimulate it for their own sordid purpose. But let them convince the people of Ire which had so long laid waste their country was at an end; let every poor Irishman, at present uncertain of the very means of existence, with famine and rapine staring him in the face, the only choice left him being to starve or to emigrate, let him feel that he had a stake in the country-that he was not to starve in the midst of plenty; let him be taught to have confidence in the law, and tranquillity would not be violated. Let him feel that the laws were meant for his protection, and not as a machinery to oppress him, and they might laugh to scorn all the arts of all the agitators that ever marred the peace and prosperity of any country. Were they surprised at the influence exercised by Mr. O'Connell and his men? The wonder was, that it was not greater, for surely no more fitting tools and ready dupes could be devised than an excitable people goaded on by physical want and political oppression. It was, therefore, because he conceived the present Bill was calculated to induce confidence in the jury tribunals in Ireland, and thence respect for the laws, that he would give it his best. support. To say that it was demo cratic in principle was no objection, unless it was clearly shown that it would call into existence, as Jurors, persons whom the Irish would less confide in than the present class of Jurors, and that could not be shown, for the contrary was the fact. The Marquess of Clanricarde was surprised at the objections urged by the learned Lord to the principle of the Bill, that it was neither more nor less than a step towards assimilating the legal institutions of England that the misgovernment and oppression land and Ireland. Did the learned Lord see the full force of this objection, that if it was good for anything as an argument, it would be an argument for a Repeal of the Union? What was the ground on which Mr. Pitt proposed and carried the Union? Was it not that it was the best means of assimilating the institutions of the two countries? But, then, said the learned Lord, the English Jury system would lead to abuses in Ireland; it was too democratic in principle for the present condition of that country. Why, if this were admitted as an objection, then Trial by Jury should not have been introduced into Ireland, for it had led to abuses. Why, in fairness, argue from the abuse against the use? If the system had worked well in England, why not extend its advantages to Ireland. But, said the learned Lord, you should first assimilate the condition and moral habits of the two nations. Why, that was the very object contemplated by the Bill. What its supporters wanted was, to induce that confidence in, and respect for, the laws in Ireland, which had so long been the blessing of this country. In Ireland the people in general had no confidence in the law; they, in fact, knew those who administered it but as so many legalized tyrants. The law to them was but a machinery of oppression, instead of protection; hence their approving sympathies were readily extended to its violators or its victims; who, instead of, as in this happier country, being regarded with condemnation and abhorrence, were actually sacred in the eyes of their fellow-villagers. Having, then, no confidence in the ordinary tribunals, and thence no respect for their ordinances, they redressed their own wrongs as they could; and thus revenge-which, according to Bacon, was but a kind of "wild justice"-became invested, in the eyes of the lawless ignorant Irish marauders, with the very attribute, and garb of a virtue. It was absurd to attribute the deplorable working of this mischievous delusion to the "sayings and doings" of Mr. O'Connell and his followers. The grievance lay deeper; it had its source in centuries of misgovernment and oppression; it could only be remedied by inspir Lord Ellenborough presumed that the view taken of the measure by the noble Baron who had just sat down was different from the view taken of it by the noble and learned Lord at the head of the law in Ireland. To him (Lord Ellenborough) it appeared strange, that having yesterday passed a Bill to take away Trial by Jury from the Irish on the ground of its inadequacy to its purpose, their Lordships were now called on to pass a Bill, which if the noble Baron's understanding of it was correct, was intended to introduce a very inferior class of persons into the Juries of Ireland. In a moral state of a country there could be no greater advantage than to extend the number of persons capable of serving upon Juries, but in a demoralized state it was highly dangerous, as it exposed them to be acted upon either by intimidation or by partiality, He was quite sure that the noble and learned Lord was anxious for the fair administration of justice, and that he would acquiesce in any Amendment that would improve the operation of the Bill, and more especially that would show the animus with which it was passed. For it appeared to him that there was not so much danger from the actual provisions of the Bill as from a misinterpretation of the motives of those provisions. What he dreaded was, the inference that would be drawn from the enactments, rather than the enactments themselves. If the Bill were passed in quiet times, it might be attended with no inconvenience, but being passed in very unquiet times, he feared its effects might be injurious. What was the ground-work of the Bill? Had any complaint been made of the recent practice with respect to the impanelling of Juries in Ireland? So far from that, the Juries there had conducted themselves in a manner to excite astonishment, and had given more courageous and better verdicts than could have been expected. And why? In consequence of the manner in which the Sheriffs had exercised their functions. The noble Lord referred to the evidence which was given before a Committee of the Lords on that subject, in order to prove the good composition of Juries in Ireland. It was rarely that he differed from his noble and learned friend behind him; but he doubted | whether his noble and learned friend was right in supposing, that the Bill originated with Mr. O'Connell; because he held in his hand evidence given on oath by that hon. and learned Gentleman of a contrary tendency. The noble Lord read Mr. O'Connell's evidence, from which he deduced the inference, that even now the Sheriffs in Ireland were not enabled to select a sufficient number of proper persons for Special Juries. And yet, the object of the Bill was to bring inferior persons into Special Juries, instead of superior persons, which were required. He was quite aware, however, that his Majesty's Ministers were committed to the Bill; and he regretted it, because he could see no reason for the measure. But, at any rate, it was desirable that no false inference should be drawn from it. He thought, therefore, that it would be well to provide, that the Sheriff should have the power of adding to the book the names of any persons qualified, but omitted by the Magistrates. For the apprehension was not that unqualified persons should be admitted-but that qualified persons should be omitted. If the Bill were so amended, that no false inference might be drawn from it, and that its animus might be shown, it might, perhaps, be productive of some advantage. The Earl of Roden wished to state the ground upon which, in addition to those already stated by his noble friends near him, he opposed the Bill, which he considered a most dangerous measure. That ground was, that the present Judges of Ireland were unanimously opposed to the principle of the measure-namely, the Juror's Book. He deeply regretted, that the noble and learned Lord had brought it forward. There was no good reason why any change should be made in the present mode of striking Juries in Ireland. But as his noble and learned friend near him had observed, it was a sop given to Cerberus. It was for the purpose of redeeming an unfortunate pledge, although at a risk of the lives and property of his Majesty's loyal subjects in Ireland. Lord Plunkett, in reference to the expression which the noble Lord who had just sat down had repeated, after the noble Lord opposite-namely, that the Bill was a sop to Cerberus, declared himself at a loss to know the meaning of the expression. If he were compelled to guess who was meant by Cerberus, he should say that he supposed Mr. O'Connell. Whether Mr. O'Connell would be a proper guardian for the place of which Cerberus was the keeper, it was for the noble Lords to say ; but he (Lord Plunkett) had not introduced that learned Gentleman in any such character to their Lordships. Too much stress had been laid on the name and influence of that Gentleman, for he could assure their Lordships that he was not to be induced to bring in a Bill because Mr. O'Connell approved of it, or to be diverted from bringing in a bill because Mr. O'Connell disapproved of it. All that he asked himself was, if a measure was a fair and a proper one. But there never was a more wild and ridiculous supposition, than that the present Bill originated in any suggestion of Mr. O'Connell. It was founded on the measure which had been introduced by Sir Robert Peel, who certainly was not very likely to act in concert with Mr. O'Connell. If this were a Bill intended to conciliate Mr. O'Connell, he (Lord Plunkett) found himself in good company in proposing it, for it was not his Bill alone; it was likewise the Bill of the |