Her Majesty's Government would perhaps | to the Commission, and the other with answer his question. Last Session the no- reference to Consolidation Bills relating to tice paper was continually blocked up from the criminal law. Now, with reference to week to week, and at last from day to day, the Commission, I think, notwithstanding with no less than nine Consolidation Bills, the observations of the hon. Gentleman the proposed to be brought in by the hon. and Member for Sheffield, (Mr. Hadfield) that a learned Gentleman. This year the hon. vast deal of very useful information has been and learned Gentleman had changed his furnished by the Commission, and that Parplan. He had given notice of only one liament might safely and wisely act upon Consolidation Bill. Was that an indica- that information in the future. But, contion that the Bills of last Session were not sidering the difficulty of carrying on the fit to be introduced at all? He had very Commission in the form in which it has little faith in the Commission producing been carried on, and the expense occasioned Consolidation Bills that would become law. by Consolidation Bills, I think it will be It seemed to have contaminated even the better to act upon the information already Attorney General, for two years ago he afforded by the Commission before we put made a very long speech on asking for the country to any further expense in emleave to introduce two Consolidation Bills; ploying them to obtain further information. but those Bills, in spite of repeated pro- Her Majesty's Government are therefore mises, were never introduced, frequently considering whether the labours of the as he (Mr. Locke King) had urged him to Commission may not be stopped for a time. bring them in. He now asked if the Go- With regard to the other question-namely, vernment was in earnest about the consoli- the consolidation of the criminal law, I dation of the Statute Law, and when the have to inform the hon. Gentleman that long-promised Bills would be introduced? the series of Bills which are shortly to be introduced by my hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General for England will not merely consolidate but most carefully revise the English and likewise the Irish statutes relating to the criminal law. The alterations which are going to be made by that series of Bills (which will be submitted to the House to-morrow se'nnight) will, I believe, be an immense improvement of the statute law. Of course I can hardly be expected, nor indeed ought I, to state what those improvements are; but I hope the hon. Gentleman will be in his place, because I think he will be satisfied that, in point of the statute law of the country into a fact, Her Majesty's Government will put much better shape than it has hitherto been. I believe I have answered the only question which the hon. Gentleman put to me with reference to the Commission. I MR. HADFIELD, in seconding the Motion, said he thought it was not so much of the expense as of the unproductiveness of this Commission that the country complained. There was nothing whatever to show for all the money that had been expended. It was discreditable to the country that the revision and consolidation of its laws had been so long delayed. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That there be laid before this House, a Return showing the total sum which has been voted for the Statute Law Board and Statute Law Commission, from its commencement to the present time. “Accounts, in detail, showing how that amount has been expended. "Of the Sums which have been paid to Draftsmen out of Contingencies for drawing Consolidation Bills. "Return of the names of Draftsmen employed to prepare Consolidation Bills, and the Fees paid, or to be paid, to each Draftsinan. "And, Copy of the Minutes and Proceedings of the Statute Law Commission (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 78, Session, 1855)." MR. WALPOLE: Sir, Her Majesty's Government have no objection to this Return, except as to the form of it. Part of the papers for which the hon. Member for East Surrey moves has been already printed by order of the House, and therefore, if he will give me leave, I will put in the Speaker's hands a modification of his Motion, with the view of preventing unnecessary expense. The hon. Gentleman has asked two questions-one with reference think that the hon. Member for Sheffield somewhat exaggerated the public opinion as to the Commission when he said that the public complained that the Commission had been of no advantage to the country. MR. LOCKE KING said, he wished to ask if the form in which the right hon. Gentleman proposed to give the return would show the total expense of the Commission? MR. WALPOLE: Yes, the first order will show the total sum. SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE observed that the first part was printed so far back as 1857, and the sole object in giving the return in the form proposed by his right hon. Friend was to save the expense was confirmed. and trouble of reprinting. Motion by leave withdrawn. "Showing the total sum which has been voted for the Statute Law Board and Statute Law Com time. mission from its commencement to the present "Showing how that amount has been expended. "Of the Sums which have been paid to Draftsmen out of Civil Contingencies for drawing Consolidation Bills (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 214, of Session 2, 1857). "Return of the Names of the Draftsmen employed to prepare Consolidation Bills and the Fees paid or to be paid to each Draftsman. "And Copy of the Minutes and Proceedings of the Statute Law Commission, in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 78, of Session, 1855." LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND). RETURNS MOVED FOR. MR. GREER said, he wished to move for a Return of a copy of a judgment of the Master of the Rolls in Ireland, delivered on the 4th of November last, in the case of the Rev. Dr. O'Fay against Major Burke, on a petition for specific performance of an agreement for a lease; and for a copy of the judgment of the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Justice of Appeal, confirming the Master of the Rolis' decree. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That there be laid before the House, a Copy of the Judgment of the Master of the Rolls in Ireland, delivered on the 4th November last, in the case of Rev. Dr. O'Fay against Major Burke, on a Petition for a specific performance of an agreement for a lease. LORD NAAS said, he believed there was no official record kept of the words used by the Judges of those Courts in giving their decisions, and therefore no means of giving the Return moved by the hon. Gentleman. But, in reference to the case itself, he had that morning received two letters, which he wished to make public as soon as possible, in justice to an absent man. The case between the Rev. Dr. O'Fay and Major Burke had attracted a good deal of attention, and the action was brought by a Roman Catholic clergyman against Major Burke, for the purpose of endeavouring to enforce an alleged agreement for a lease, said to have been made between the plaintiff and the father of Major Burke. It was tried before the Assistant Barrister, who decided in favour of the defendant. An appeal was then brought before the Master of the Rolls, and subsequently to the Court of Appeal, by both of which Courts the decision below In order to show the opinion entertained by the Lord Chancellor on the case, I will read to the House an extract from his judgment, in which his Lordship made use of the following remarkable observations: to quit was served, the case was not fairly sub"It was to be regretted that before the notice mitted to Major Burke, who, it did not appear, was made aware before the civil bill proceedings of his father's letter or the other correspondence. He (the Lord Chancellor) could not believe, if the matter had been fairly laid before Major Burke, a British officer and a gentleman, that he would be indifferent to the considerations of good faith and honourable feeling. He thought the opportunity still existed for an amicable arrangement, and he hoped he was not overstepping his duty in suggesting to Major Burke that, under the circumstances, he would best maintain the character of a British officer, the cause of justice, and also the rights of property, by making such an arrangement as to the possession of the farm as would give the petitioner the benefit of the expenditure he had honestly made, with the reasonable expecall cases where parties dealt solely on good faith, tation of being sufficiently secured. However, in which it was most desirable should be observed between landlord and tenant, a Court of Equity could not interpose." In consequence of these observations, and of representations made to Major Burke by his friends, that gallant officer gave instructions to his solicitor to write to the reverend gentleman, offering to make to following letter, which he (Lord Naas) him every reparation in his power. The would read, in justice to Major Burke, was forwarded by his solicitor to Dr. O'Fay:65, Upper Gardiner Street, Dublin, Feb. 2, 1859. "O'FAY V. BURKE.' "Rev. Sir-The decision of the Court of Appeal in the cause petition instituted by you against Major Burke having been communicated to him, I am authorized to inform you that it is not his intention to act thereon, or to disturb you in the possession of the lands in question. Burke's rights to the fullest extent originally "Although the result has established Major claimed by him, he has no desire to take any further steps in the matter, and he will therefore permit you to remain in possession during your life of the house and farm at the same rent as heretofore, upon your executing a formal agree ment to that effect. "I am further to inform you that it is not Major Burke's intention to require payment from you of the costs of the trial in Galway, amounting to £56 15s. 1d., and for which an execution was had against you. "I am, Rev. Sir, "Your most obedient servant, "THOMAS DENNIS O'FArrell. "The Rev. Michael Jos. O'Fay, Rue Castle, Craughwell." This, he thought, under the circumstances, was as much as Major Burke could be ex pected to do, and he was sorry the letter | upon any party, that letter did not alter was not received in the spirit it deserved, the state of the case further than this, that as appeared from the rev. gentleman's if the return were ordered, he should have reply:no objection to the letter being appended to it. He trusted, therefore, that there would be no objection to the production of the documents referred to. "Rue Castle, Feb. 4. Sir-In reply to yours of the 2nd instant, I beg to say that both you and your gallant Sepoy Major, aided and assisted by the unjust laws of my poor country, have already deeply wounded me to my heart's core. Nevertheless, I feel, thank God, under better treatment, that I am now convalescent, and therefore I beg to decline your salvo, as it comes too late. "I have the honour to be, Sir, "MICHAEL JOSEPH O'FAY. "Thomas D. O'Farrell, Esq., Loughrea." Major Burke is now absent from this country. He had thought it necessary to make these observations, in justice to a gentleman whose conduct had been severely commented on, who he knew to be an honourable and humane man, and he trusted that the House would be satisfied that he had done all he could do to make due reparution for any injury that he unintentionally may have inficted on Mr. O'Fay. MR. GREER said, he had no personal acquaintance with any of the parties concerned in the matter. He had received no information as to the merits of the case, except that which he had just heard, and that which he had obtained from the newspapers. But the facts, he thought, were calculated, if properly presented to the Members of that House, to put them in possession of the circumstances of one of a class of cases that occasionally occurred in Ireland, and enable them the better to judge of the relations existing between landlord and tenant in that country. They would then be more competent to determine upon what measures would be necessary to improve those relations. It was for that reason he wished to place on record the opinions of three eminent Judges as to the state of the law in that country. If no official record of the words of the Judges' decisions were kept, he apprehended it was the practice of the Judges in important cases to make notes of the judgments they were about to deliver, and to read those notes as their judgments. With regard to the letter of Major Burke or his solicitor, read by the noble Lord, he was willing to admit that it treated the matter in a very handsome manner, by offering to make reparation for any wrong that had been inflicted, and he deeply regretted that it had not been received in a proper spirit. As, however, he did not bring forward this Motion with the view of casting blame THE SOLICITOR GENERAL said, he would submit to the House whether any good object could be effected by the House making an order for the transmission by the Judges of copies of the judgments they had delivered in the matter in question. He did not know what the practice was in Ireland, but in this country very many judgments were pronounced without any notes whatever. Generally speaking, there were shorthand writers engaged in all important cases, who took down accurately what the learned Judges said, and he had no doubt if the hon. Gentleman were to write to the parties interested in the case they could supply him from that source with full information on the subject. He would put it to the House, therefore, whether it was consistent with their usual practice to issue an order to one of Her Majesty's Judges to transmit a copy of judgment which they did not know had any existence whatever. MR. GREER said, he might refer to the case of "Stubbes v. Hornsby," in 1853, relating to the Drainage Act, in which an order similar to that for which he moved had been made. He believed, if the order were issued, it would not be considered an inoperative order. MR. BAGWELL observed, that the hon. Gentleman having made his statement, it would perhaps be more conducive to the public interests to withdraw the Motion, particularly as the Attorney General for Ireland was about bringing in a Bill on the subject of the relation of landlord and tenant in that country. MR. GREER said, he would withdraw his Motion. Motion by leave withdrawn. House adjourned at Six o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, Friday, February 11, 1859. ASSASSINATIONS IN IRELAND. RETURNS MOVED FOR. THE EARL OF LEITRIM moved "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, for a return of, the police, and in his humble judgment, the police in Ireland were inefficient. He considered the police in that country were less to be regarded as ordinary constables than as political intruments; and if a Committee should be appointed, he would be prepared to prove their utter inefficiency, and that they were political engines in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant. He could not look without considerable anxiety at the continual increase in the powers vested in the Lord Lieutenant, which took place Session after Session, the result of which was that, in point of fact, the Government of Ireland was now an absolute Government. He contended that the Lord Lieutenant and his police-for they were his servants-did not protect life and property in Ireland. He hoped the noble Earl would accede to the Motion, but, if not, he (the Earl of Leitrim) must get the information he sought elsewhere. LORD MONTEAGLE said, that the noble Earl had himself given a sufficient reason that there was no necessity for the Return for which he had moved when he said that the information he sought was already perfectly notorious. He only ap ad hominem conclusive against the Motion of the noble Earl, but not as adopting his statements, any one of which he was prepared at a fitting time to controvert. For THE EARL OF DERBY said, that, in moving for returns of so extensive and unusual a character, he should have expected that the noble Earl would have stated the grounds upon which he made so exceptional a Motion. In point of fact, almost the whole of the information asked for was already before Parliament, in the shape of the criminal tables, which were annually laid before both Houses. Those tables were complete up to the end of 1857, and those for the year 1858 would be pre-plied this observation as an argumentum sented during the course of the Session. In these documents would be found all the information asked for by the noble Earl, except that which it would not be desirable to give. Independent of the objection to re-example, he was not prepared to join the verting to affairs of twenty-two years' standing, he could not see of what importance it could be to any one now to know who were the committing magistrates in cases that occurred so long ago; and the preparation of the Returns, containing information of so minute a character, would involve great expense and labour, without being of any corresponding value. If the noble Earl had advanced any reasons for seeking those Returns, he (the Earl of Derby) would have considered them; but, as it was, he hoped the House would support him in resisting the Motion. THE EARL OF LEITRIM said, he had not anticipated any objection to his Motion. The fact being perfectly notorious that a vast number of assassinations had taken place in Ireland, and it being also very notorious that in very few instances had there been convictions of the criminals, he had expected that the House would have assented willingly to his Motion. He had gone so far back as 1836, because that was the date of the passing of the Police Act. A great deal depended on the efficiency of noble Earl in the censure he had pro- He admitted that there were un minals, from the sympathy they obtained among the people, could not be apprehended and brought to trial; but it was far from being generally true that the law could not be administered in Ireland. Though some few but cruel outrages had remained undiscovered and unpunished, Her Majesty had from the Throne borne testimony to the present satisfactory state of Ireland. There was no exception of Ireland made in the Queen's Speech from the general state of peace and good order, they were justified in saying that Ireland was now pervaded by a spirit of law and tranquillity. The words of the Speech were emphatic, and were as follows: "I am happy to think that in the internal state of the country there is nothing to excite disquietude, and much to call for satisfaction and thankfulness. Pauperism and crime have considerably diminished during the past year, and a spirit of general contentment prevails.' Yet it is painful to think that it is, under these circumstances, that a Proclamation of an unusual and an alarming character had recently been issued by the Lord Lieutenant. He did not think it advisable that the policy of that step should be discussed at the present moment, when the trials of some of the parties against whom the document was specially directed were pending, and when the Government were precluded from giving explanations; but the matter would hereafter form a proper subject of inquiry and consideration. He would not prejudge the case by any observations of his; but this proceeding, like every departure from the ordinary forms of Government and procedure, required a justification. He trusted the Government would themselves produce papers to show the grounds on which they had acted. But this could not be asked or expected till after the approaching assizes. He hoped the noble Earl (Earl of Leitrim) would see that to call upon the law officers of Ireland, just when they were engaged in preparation for State trials at the assize, to furnish those returns was unreasonable in itself, and was, besides, asking them to do that which he was quite sure any man of much less energy and much less industry than he knew his noble Friend to possess could do for himself, by going into the library and calling for the annual Returns from 1835 to the present time. From these Returns he might get almost all he wanted, for he would get the list of persons committed, indicted and tried, the verdicts of the juries, the sentences, and a return showing how far these sentences were carried into execution. VISCOUNT DUNGANNON said, if it could be shown that the Executive Government of Ireland had shown any apathy in the suppression of crime, that they had not used the utmost exertions to bring the perpetrators of the assassinations which had recently been committed in that country to justice, he could then see that there was some reason in the Motion of the noble Earl. But he must say that at the present moment such a Motion was peculiarly ununcalled for. It was true, as was re marked by the noble Lord who had just sat down, that there was unfortunately a disposition among the people of Ireland to sympathise with malefactors, to conceal them from the hands of justice, and to facilitate their escape. But no blame on that account rested on the Executive Government; they had done everything that could be done to bring offenders to justice; both with respect to the attempted murder in Donegal and the more recent assassi, nation of Mr. Ely in the Queen's County, with which district he happened to be more immediately connected, the Executive Government had done all that men could do to bring the murderers to justice. Under all these circumstances, therefore, and as the Motion seemed to him to cast an indirect and unmerited reflection upon the Irish Administration, he thought his noble Friend ought not to press for these Returns. Notwithstanding the commission of these recent outrages, he must still express his belief that at no period was Ireland in a state of greater prosperity than it was at the present moment; and he was convinced that this statement would be borne out by all who like himself were connected with Ireland, and were interested in her welfare. One word more. He must protest against the attack of the noble Earl, when he called the Irish Government a despotic system, and said that the police were mere tools in the hands of the Executive Government. He believed, on the contrary, that the police were a most efficient body of men; and, that though among such a large body instances of inefficiency or of misconduct might be found, yet, upon the whole, they had been of great service to the country. THE EARL OF DESART said, that although undoubtedly crimes of a very atrocious character had recently been perpetrated in Ireland, they must be looked upon as the acts of individuals and not as |