The Press. — London, England, 1856-03-08 00:00:00

1 218 the future mercy of the Crown, or the caprice of its advisers. So, in dealing with the un scrupulous deeds of the Irish mercenary Mal contents, a case must be selected, and a stand made, for future example, and for the cause of public principle. "The Dutchman hunts a rat in a dyke, lest he should good a province." As Parliament, also, according to Lord PAL 3IERSTON and Sir GEORGE GREY, has a Consti tutional right to inquire into the conduct of the Queen's Judges, we shall not be usurping any prerogative in directing notice to the public life and political defalcations of Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH. We have a legal right to do so, so long as we deal with proved and patent t'icts. Her Majesty's Attorney-General (we blush to write it) was a leading chief of the execrable Brass Band. The swindler SADLEIR, the forger G . FLAHERTY, and Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH, were " friends in council," and their dialogues no doubt were most edifying. An inquiry into the public conduct of an Trish Attorney-General, lawful at all times, is peculiarly seasonable now. The history of Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH'S tor tuous life would fill volumes. He began with a vehement panegyric on DANIEL O'CONNELL !* Though a " Catholic " in profession, he then became a " Conservative," and crawled at the heels of the Tory Ministry which crushed and imprisoned O'CONNELL. He wrote " Ireland under Lord De Grey," in which he mocked the Whigs, and scouted the priests. Yet in five years afterwards the man, who was anti priest and anti-O'Connellite in 1845, put him self at the head of the Brass Band of the Pope in 1831! He had been only seven years at the Bar when he got into Parliament, in 1847. He en tered as " a Conservative," but he seemed to attach himself particularly to " my dear Duke of Newcastle,' and Sir JAMES GRAHAM. He was set down as " a Peelite," but it was significant that when the present Premier was ill a scrape, and when the Peelites on the Pacifico debate closed up with the Conservatives, Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH left the Peelites and voted for Lord Palmerston. He then passed for a " loose fish," and some colonial office, it was thought, would have hooked him. The " Durham Letter" came, and no de monstration was made in Ireland by Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH until the Peelites took up their ground, when again he became a Peelite in England, and a Tenant Leaguer in Ire land ! The author of " Ireland under Lord De Grey " joined the confederacy of priestly and Presbyterian agitators. Her Majesty's present Attorney-General then worked in harness with LUCAS and DeFrt, and the clerical declaimers ! Yet it appears that even in 1850 this "right honourable " ambiguity continued to hold himself forth as a member of the Carlton Club. His meanderings, however, could only he described on paper by Mr. WYLD'S ingenious arts of hydrography. They are almost as puzzling as the clue to Rosa mond's Bower at Hampton Court. It is a most remarkable fact that there is scarcely any political connection which he has not joined and then deserted. He com menced an O'Connellite panegyrist. and ended —Sadleirite. He has been against the Pope and priests, and for the Pope and priests. He has been " Conservative " and " Liberal," " Peelite and non-Peelite," and he is now a Whig. To one connection only did he adhere. In Parliamentary Sadleirism Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH was " thorough." There is one remarkable fact, touched on last week, which requires elucidation. No act in Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH'S public career is more perfectly characteristic than his desertion of the Peelites, when the mismanagement of the war put them under cloud. Many of them had opened under a cloud. Many of them had opened the rses for him, ostensibly on the plea of setibt fu e r his election expenses at the ..' ,11r. ; • .ugli4f Athlone. They had done so ~. i ,- . 1 „ii .,.. •, -. iii . tr.:: tec on the authority of Sir George Grey. In . . :, r. W. Keogh assailed the administration j 7 - 7 - - • ~3 . utAti Jury-packing. The debate turned on , 0 • . 1 " 'to ' . tha, accuser . and it appears that even then P. , 4. .teliptoken from many quarters against Mr. "'I. - Its "rs• k oeedipiun Sir ti Grey said that "the member ''-;, ' 60 0 • 'Mother member of the subsequent Brass ....t ly well m Itched," and he treated the house '"C•'. .eel of Mr. Keogh, enthusiastically praising 1 s. ' • I T 4119•Calom he enlist A afterwards! All the other ...uts lisr "this article can be supported by references too pso *x fdlrinewspaper. THE PRESS. lit the solicitation of his confidential friend, EDMUND O'FLAIIERTY. When the Coalition Cabinet was formed, it was arranged with the Whigs that did *hole ificeregal department in Ireland should be #eelites. Lord St. GER MANS, hie Chief Secretary (Sir JOHN Youxu), the Atte'rney-Oeteral tr. BREWSTER), and the Solieiter-Getteral ( r. WILLIAM KEOGH), were, the'refore, all " Fiettlites." As a matter of routine l it pensioned a*th'uncelloi (Mr. BRADY); was again made the highest Equity Judge in Ireland, taking the post by routine. Mr. BRADY was the only legal Whig in the Vicere gal train. On the fall of the l'eelites, Mr. BREWSTER retired with his connection. How did Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH act then ? Never before, as far as we are informed, had he ever spoken, or written, or given his sup port to the Whigs. " Until the demands of "the people of Ireland are conceded, so help "me God, I never will take office." Such had been his oath at Cork in 1851; and at Athlone, in the next year, he had declared that though all of his party (his " party "!) crossed the House to the Whigs, he would not do so, and yet, though he had accepted pecuniary obliga tions from the Peelites, Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH declined to follow the example of Mr. BREW STER, and he vaulted into the vacant Attorney- Generalship, hoping that his conduct would escape notice under the public excitement about the Crimean campaign ! But that can not, and ought not, be the case. The purity of the ermine is concerned here, for Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH 1S a presumptive candidate for a seat in the Irish Judicature. The honour of the Queen's Executive is at stake. We put it to the gentlemen of Eng land to say what opinion should be enter tained of such a career as Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH has passed through? We shall use no dis paraging appellations upon this occasion. The only epithet we need apply to the Attor ney-General is his own name—Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH. Here, then, is the case, and now is the time that a constitutional stand must be made against the audacity of the Irish Malcon tent faction who came in to Parliament " not "to shine, but to sell." English politics turn upon facts, and the " hard facts " in this case can be piled to mountain height over Nlr. WILLIAM lixoou. The Queen's service, the honour of the Executive, the fair fame of Par liamentary life, are all involved, and, unless Parliament desires to he mobbed by malcon tents from Ireland, the case of Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH must be grappled and dealt with, not according to the technicalities of statutes, but by the law stamped from the hand of Omnipo tence itself upon the hearts of all honest men. CHURCH RATES. THE prime reason stated by the Government for consenting to the Bill for the Abolition of Church Rates is noticeable. The position taken up by Sir GEOROE GREY is, that though it may be very well to speak of the sanctity, the antiquity, and the legality of Church rates, yet the plain practical difficulty exists that they cannot be enforced. What is this argument worth when employed to justify their abolition ? The reason why there has never been a law for the enforcement of Church rates is because the right was never until lately questioned. As a people, we do not devise remedies for contingent difficul ties ; we wait until occasion calls for inter ference ; and the consequence is, that our whole system of law, politics, and religion, has grown up out of the requirements of spe cial emergencies. A legal right is confronted with a practical impediment. What is the course which this country has always pur sued ? To abolish the right or to devise a way for its enforcement ? Had the former been the custom, it is difficult to say what part of our Constitution or our law could by any possibility have survived ; yet this is the course which the Ministers propose to adopt. Church rates, according to the opinion of the judges, are binding on the whole popu lation ; but they are now to be abolished, SATURDAY 9 i because some parties r e f use d to pay them. What is this but to abdicat e the primary func tions of Government ; to shun all esponsi• bility, and to abatiddh a fight as soon as it is questioned' Let us AupOose that a like kind of diffieulty arose as tb the collection of Cus toms dr &wise; that so* kind of quibble would he found by whits ft their collection might he filsputea, &ea itlY one doubt that the pr tidal eheelf vdie hot soon meet with a practical remedy ? Bnt, conceding that some change is necessary, and that there is justice in the complaint of the Dissenters that they are called on to support a Church with which they have no sympathy, what would seem to be the natural mode of relieving them ? Surely, to grant their request. Under the existing system, the grievances which arise from Dissent are borne at least equally by Dissenters and Churchmen. If the former pays money to the Churchman, the Churchman has the mortification of being thwarted and overruled by the Dissenter. So far the inconvenience is common to both, and no reform can be just that does not relieve both. But what is the proposed measure? Were it not for the inveterate prejudices which prevail on religious topics, all the world would exclaim against it. Dissent is to be relieved of its burdens and retain its privi leges ; and the Church is to lose its privileges and retain its burdens. The Dissenters are no longer to pay rates, but they are still to be entitled to control over their expenditure. The Church is no longer to receive rates, but her services may still be exacted. If the voluntary principle and the rights of consci ence are to be the basis of Church rate abolition, let the system be fairly carried out. At all events, let us not refuse to one man's principles what we concede to another mans pocket. The Home Secretary is of opinion that the Church would be a gainer by this treatment. The system of exclusiveness would be highly injurious. We rather think that if we re lieve Dissenters we must relieve the Church, and if we unfetter her hands we must unfetter her head—that is to say, we must leave her to judge for herself in this matter. The free dom she has purchased by the loss of an im memorial tribute we must not attempt to qualify. - It is questionable whether other than good would come from drawing a broader line of demarcation between the two parties. If man is a Dissenter in earnest, why should he want to interfere with the Church ; if he is not in earnest, why should he merit indulgence? Anythiug that should help us to discriminate between these two classes would be of service to religion. No one can say that Government has dealt with this question in either a dignified or com prehensive manner. Mr. DRUMMOND said truly, that they had far better have brought in a new measure of their own, than have attempted to cobble up Sir W. CLAY'S Bill. Such a course would have entailed responsibility. It would have required the exercise of some degree of foresight, principle, and administrative capa city ; and the Palmerston Cabinet preferred to postpone the difficulty to the last moment, and then to trust to the chapter of accidents. It is impossible to discover, on the notion avowed by Government, any need for a Church rate Bill at all. If the voluntary system is to prevail, the voluntary system, by their own account, is now in full force. Those parishes only vote Church rates which are favorable to Church rates. There is no compulsion in the case. What more could the most ardent ad vocate of voluntaryism desire? The conduct of Lord PALMERSTON on this question deserves a concluding word. Last year he voted against the Bill, and in the minority ; now he votes for the Bill, and in the majority. What is the reason of his change? A contemporary has been unable to discover any principle of action in his career. But one principle he seems to have kept steadily in view—to avoid minorities. Whatever party, or whatever side of a question, is hi the i!s cendant, may count on Lord PALMERSTON as its adherent : he is ever strong upon the stronger side. l l f t I l f i i