The Press. — London, England, 1853-05-14 00:00:00

MAY 14, 1833. Scullys, the Keoghs. and the O'Flahertys.t.have laughed at the poor simple Britons who, iu the Parliamentary Chamber, were wasting their b rea th upon the dismis sion in which. good souls, they imagined, in the innocence of their hearts, the question of Mr. Disraeli's budget was to be decided. Far better knew their masters in their secret chamber, thus more potent than either Cabi nets or Senates. The mere question is. upon which side will vote the Irish Brigade? This. too, knew Mr. Huyter. He had friends within the camp. The meeting adjourned without. deciding the momentous question upon a doubted expression as to Whig intentions relit tive to the income tax. Upon another day the final resolution was to be taken. The sequel of the narrative we give from the statements of Mr. Maurice O'Connell , made in the presence of Mr. Hayter, and admitted by Mr. Hayter to be tine. Mr. Hayter approached Mr. O'Connell and I inquired from him how his party were likely 1 to vote upon the budget? Mr. O'Connell replied, that their feelings would be greatly influenced by an assurance that the Whigs • w ould not impose the inc ome tax upon Irebull Mr. Hayter replied that they would not : he referred his questioner to a former speech of Sir Charles Wood, and stated that Sir Charles Wood was still of the same opinion. Mr. O'Connell asked, might he (Mr. O'Connell) so state to a meeting of the Irish members? Mr. Hayter gave him permission. Mr. O'Connell then asked that Sir Charles Wood should re peat the same expression of opinion in the house. Mr. Hayter promised that he should do so ; and aceordingly Sir Charles Wood did, that very evening, strongly . and energetically protest against the extension of the income tax to Ireland. Mr. O'Connell stated to the adjourned meeting of the Irish members the result of his communication with ,aft distin- the guished member of t he Whig paty d votes of the Irish Brigade, so purchased , or so entrapped, overthrew the Government of Lord Derby. Apart from quibbling, is there It doubt that all this amounted to an authorised and a very special negotiation? Mr. Hayter is told that the votes of the Irish Brigade would be in fluenced by an assurance that the Whigs, on their accession to power, would not impose an income tax on Ireland. HE GAVE THAT AMR:RANCE. From this daunting fact there is no escape. He did not, indeed, say I am authorised by Sir Charle s Wood to give it, ut he gave it ; he authorised the man to whom he spoke to repeat it to the Irish members; and he promised that Sir Charles Wood should pledge himself to these opinions by openly declaring them in the house. And yet there was no bargain. we are gravely told —nothing but " loose conversations" iu the lobby. The assurance is given by Mr. Hayter for the express purpose of influencing votes ;—l'or that express purpose he authorises Mr. O'Connell to convey it to a meeting of Irish members ;—he professed to tell the sen timents of Sir Charles Wood, not as a matter of casual conversation, but as a matter to in thieure the votes of members upon a solemn occasion. As a pledge of his sincerity he pmo inises for Sir Charles Wood that he (Sir Charles Wood) should make a certain speech in the House of Commons ; and yet. because O'Connell did not ask him for his credentials to speak for Sir Charles Wood, and because Mr. Hayter did not volunteer to produce them. the whole transaction has been gravely and cirenmstantiallv denied. Et cry man who rends this knows that the speech of Sir Charles Wood was made to verify the promise of Mr. Hayter. It was made to catch the votes of all the Irish members, by in ducing them to credit the assurance conveyed to them by Mr. O'Connell. It was not the vulgar bargain of lawyers, in which powers of. attorney are demanded and prodneed at every step ;it was the understanding—we can hardly say the creditable understanding—of gentle men, in which, for every purpose of truth and fair dealing, Mr. Havter was the accredited agent of Sir Charles Wood, and Mr. O'Connell the accredited agent of Mr. Hayter. Sir Charles Wood has not, indeed, attempted to deny his responsibility, but he attempts to wriggle out of it by saying that his pledge was THE PRESS not to place the income tax upon Ireland while Ireland was sutfeling under the burden of the Consolidated Annuities! admitting, dis tinctly and in terms—admitting that he was bound not to impose the income tax while they remained. What miserable shuffling is this ! Would to heavens that there was a parliamentary tri bunal of criminal justice, before whom the whole set could be indicted for obtaining votes nutter false pretences ; and we venture to say the records of such a tribunal would present no more palpable ease of p o litical swindling than the dexterous maiseuvre by which the Irish uwmbers were cheated into the placing of the mongrel Administration in power. We must still have our words as to the denials of Monday night. The facts are now known ; they were not known to the public then. Ilta Mr. Hayter knew then as well as he does 110 W to WllOlll tile StlltelllelltS in the press and the insinuations in Parliament re friTed. He had not forgotten his conversation with Mr. Maurice O'Connell. On Thursday night he distinctly recollected it, although his memory was not so vivid as to his perhaps more explicit interview with Mr. French. Ilia, distinctly remembering that he hail given Mr. O'Connell au assurance as tee the intentions of the. Whigs if they succeeded to power—dis tinctly remembering that be had given that assunnwe for the express purpose of influ encing the votes of Irish me mbers —distinctly remembering that he had authorised his assur ance to be repeated —distinctly remembering that he had promised that Sir Charles Wood should state the same sentiments in his plaice in the house —distinctly remembering all this, he dexterously managed to make the following statement to the home :----" 1 am exceedingly " obliged to the honourable member for bring " lug the matter to au issue ;" by which we protest plant men would have understood that - the matter" had been placed in such a position that the whole truth 1111114 110 W be disclosed. That Mr. Hayter was " exceedingly obliged" to the Inniounible member for the issue he had raised we have not the slightest doubt. understand," he continued, " the hon. " member for Cambridgeshire to say that some " person alleging himself to be an agent of " the Whig party, some time during the finan " cial statement of the lute Anincellor of the " Exchequer, took upon himself to attend a " body of Irish gentlemen, and state that be " was authorised to make this proposal •• namely, that, if they gave their votes for the " purpose of overthrowing the late Govern " ment, the Government likely to be tOunded " upon its ruins would undertake not to im " pose the income tax upon Ireland." And, having thus chosen his own ground, he proceeded with what lawyers call a special traverse of the charge : " I (never wan «othoriged) by any person, or " any body of perso ns, to make (11114) C OM " inunication to any person or any party. 1 never did attend any meeting of any kind in "my life of Irish gentlemen. 1 never started " to any person at any time (that .1 vas autho " rised to state) that, in the event of the Govern " meld of Lord Derby being overthrown, the " Government to be substituted in its 'dare would undertake not to impose an income " tax upon Ireland." The words in italics are those dexterously introduced to make the statement true. But with confidence we appeal to the judgment of every right-minded and honest-hearted man, whether Mr. Hayter was not bound in fairness and candour to add to this statement some allusion to that communication with Mr O'Con nell which he so distinctly recollected. Doubly bound he was so, when he heard the oracular solemnity of the Recorder of I don accept with judicial gravity, though hardly with judicial discrimination, his special and skilfully-framed denial, as a contradiction to the fact of any negotiation. " The statement " of that negotiation," said the profound wis dom of Mr. Wortley, " is utterly unfounded." Mr. Hayter sat silent while judicial impar tiality laced this eonstruction on his words, and placed them so to the generous prejudice of oths. Once and for all we leave the Havter and O'Connell intrigue to the judgment of the Dri- 27 tish publie, who now know the secret means by which the Conservative Ministers were driven—or. ‘ve shonld say. intrigued—out of power. Vie W. in the full confidence that ut for ring that judgment the only perplexity will 1w whether deeper disgrace belongs to the unworthy pledge of December, its scanda lous violation in April. or the skilfully- framed evasions of Monday night. TRANSPOIITATION—THE CONFLICT OP COALESt'EII lONS. IT is less strange than memorable that Lords Aberdeen total Neweastle should have eX - pressed emitrailietory views in the. 111111111111111 debate of last 'Tuesday on the subject of trans portation ; and it is more memonible than strange that their morning apologists should also, while continuing the discussion, have overlooked their inconsistency. It is natural that the l'remier tool his Colonial Secretary should evince their hostility to Earl t ;ivy by their eaptious replies ; but we did not conceive that their agreement against him wits to be balanced tat the same evening by their disagreement with each other. Here are their dicta side by side. both taken from the Times of W ei l lie mbly lot : Eon Tit‘N,o'.,wivrioN--Tay: Ai: \ TIO\\4I'MITATIII".;- 1-: \lll. 01 , WI Illot EN. ralt: lay sir.wa . uaTi 111 llnlw, the noble , earl 11144 1111.. a lino µmate.' Mitten'• throuwit.liti treated the %hole ul ii..s tanterl) 4.‘ktinl; iu the 1,1 10 - '1.1..1111Pa 114 if the 11111111/)1111.111. Il SlVelslllll 111 111101141 11-1111•II/Ir. I N l eetillll 111114 entililry Na,. also 111115511. N4M, 11 511 tatly it thmtlite.444 111.1. 1111111111% *llit'll dour 1101.1101 11o111 . !, 15111 Noe die %Po 101 In 1.• a great antmoipa to ‘I. 111. • 5 41'111 161 . 1. 1114-is 1.11111111111, 1114 1 . ..rt....4 of W.' lint s' it 111111 44,11111114,0. like. Nod 11011'11111 too vim:cll.' till 1111 eit Shaul, joils 11,011110 e% hn diets.. OW , t 111 , 11 st ill 1111 Stela at 11'NIIN1s.•1latioll. rennin. iiiii 1 I 11.1111, 11141 I. Ile Noir Nell MN are that 1;...1 MI loon, wid,rablrllll.oller NUM it 11111 inonslblo• loi 11114 tolo`lllo 4 too list e• 1140111 t lee. (Or the liven noloiliono ..1 1011 I'\lwllllµ 111 Figur , . and 111 10,4011'11A 11.1.11• lo o ter 1' t 1. 1 .1 1, 111 NIIII.II I 11111. 'lllO 11 Ull4 WI 1111111111`11/ Mt Al lot 1110 In' to.lll, 11. r c‘llllllole., to SMI. brrnnw • sysitelet of tree• Weieto.lll Ani.tritlio. I 110 1114 Vlll.l* . itei %bpi cootentele.re•el toe e ,aetreeo, q • uit, • fittletl, that tlerre•fort. it rigive 111111 Ihe toelde earl— this( shoonlet loa• 11.0. prglrvt oor 1 ..101 %%111. t-ilililor ills the• being hatteeleml 1111.11. 0111/1 11111 he 61'Ur\e''1 11. 14 . .41...11er the 1.1111.. m. bra' N Wash 1.1551.1 In ilinnalnee Ihat it Nita liar milielo II o11':111 11 I e the in %%Well It 111111 1114'11 t 11111 1 1 1 1111 . 41. rooollio - eel loy Colonel Jovial). This instructive diversity WKS priVlttCly 1111-6(141 6(141 by several noble lords. and publicly re marked by the. Lord Chief .lustive, who with laitetised quickness anti legal precision pointed out the contrariety. "The noble earl at the " head of the tilovernment," said Lord Camp bell, " was, he Intel told them, in favour of NW " tinning transportation, mitt the noble duke " was its mortal enemy." The Lord Chancellor, who is lillllllOsell to belong to the Whig section ()I the Ministry. thought proper to lecture Lord Campbell on his speech. No doubt it is sufficiently no al ifylng to these Coalitionist ministers to find the Whig .Instiee of England exposing their divided counsels. lint the perplexity this occasions is not shared by the dashing journalist who submeribes to the /timbals of the I hike of Newcastle, and ignores his Prime Minister. in the summary averment that "statehuten of all parties feel that the t ime is " come when we must deal with the muss of " our criminal population at home." If the world is int much conveyin' with the question, whether L o rd Aberdeen is a statesman in the eyes of his followers and subordinates, it is interested in this exposure of the prineiples upon which the supposed htlitl'sllllll l S Cabinet eonhtrtteted ; tuul i 11, 1• letitill it 4 de►ived front the Collt,llldictioll in which its a pologists are involved. Is this l'abinet so ricketty, sIS warped and worllicaten that it is already crumbling away into what llurke denominated " the dust and powder of individualisni? Is it Si) baffled and bewildered by its own cross purposes that the treatment of English crime and criniiiials is only another of its many vete grestnatm .' And when will these open questions be' fairly catalogued, that we may know what questions are reserved ; or whether there are any upon which ministers are as cer tainly unanimous us upon the propriety of their retaining the in :lieges without the responsi bilities of office ? TILE DoCKYAIII) INQUIRY. WE lidlleve to our determination to t.bstain from commenting upon an investigation which has not yet terminated. declining for the pre sent all the invitations which party her is acc umulating for acknowledgment hereafter. 1