The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1825-02-09 00:00:00

li E I ~c~ PAIZLIAMENTAITY INTELLIGENCE. HOIHIR OP LOlNtleleenow, Fink& COAL TfUTTE& Lord SHAFTESBURY ,presented a petition from Newton Abbot sad Newten ha Derbyshire, praying for a repeal of be di ties eto emits earned oonuatise.--Lind on the table. Their Lordships the failloteeif fin Pont is how appeal mum IRISH . ASHOCIA T lONS. After the reading of the Order of she Marquis of LANSUOWN rose, and said—" My Lords, 1 nee; paroant to die wordete I yesterday gave your Lordships, to trove-e-• That an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, patio; that hit Majesty, .ivill be . graciouely pleased to order that , ere be laid before this' House tomes of all despatches made by the Lord latetitenint of grffiend rebuffs to the origin, progress, and asturiof the teligioos and political societies of that conntry, and their consequences.'-1 am Induced to obtrude upon the House on this occasion, because I cannot racoon'e the assertion that has been put into his Blajesty's mood), sod that we have heard in the speech delivered from the Throoe, that • outrages in Ireland have to a great degree ceased, and tied she is now participating in the gene* me t ric:thy i' with the extraordinary•commimicatiom nn. nixed to it, •Asare exists; in that country anociatihreeithich have rtes irrectincilable with the Cohititution, and 'inhalant'', is ilitrox, f tbd by rettsperadoX'aitimosities, to eudangek the peace society, tend to retard the bourse of national icuproutosein ; followed by l'reconsmendation to the Legisbothe to adopt, without delay, tome means to remedy that evil. I also "sv rise in consequence of the 'observations of the Noble Earl oppositi, in slaver tp a question i yesterday put to him, which cooeryed a refusal to lay before the Honsc the documents that hot been re.• envied on this subject ; and I feel that, combining all these cireum. stances. the House is placed in a situation quite singular—l might alemot say.unpteeeder ! ted. Unprecedented, because, as far as my recollection serves, I do not remember a single instance in which, even in a time of war, and when war surrounded us pith dangers on every side, the House was called upon to interfere with' the liberties of ,the people, before a Cpminittee of Inquiry had been ap. pointed, mad before the production of documents shich must show the necessity for so interfering. Be It recollected that this proposi tion does not respect any particular class of his Majesty's subject., but professes to embrace all—to bring all into a situation in which they are not now placed according to the law on the subject. There sertalnly does not appear td'be any distinction to be made between this country and Ireland. It is made'evident that the proceedings of the society to which I have referred, whether or not those pro. eeedingt be strictly legal. have imposed on his Majesty's Govern. relent tbemecessity of making inquiries into the subject : but the House is called upon even without any inquiry : if I do cot succeed in the motion I bring before the notice of your Lordships, the House is called upon, without knowing any thing of the evil, to provide a remedy for it, to prevent the danger when no danger is to be apprehended—when we are not only free from danger, but when the period is one of increasing tranquillity—when there is no fear for the future, and when there is none existing in the present-- when all parties unanimously join in praising the tranquil state of that country—when it is asserted this extraordinary necessity exists. 'this tranquillity has been accounted for in different ways by the ' various patsies concerned.. The Catholic Association say it is towing to their exertions that the present peace of the country is so rranifest. The friends of the Lord Lieutenant say, and perhaps they say justly. that it is owing to his continued care. The friends of leis Majesty's Ministers say that it is owing to the rigorous mea sum which during the last few years they have carried through Parliament ; and perhaps the Gentlemen of the other House may that it is to the many amendments they have introduced into Obit measures that weowe the peaceof the country and Its happy con sequences. however different those opinions may be as to the cause, all parties and persons are agreed in the fact, that there is not in I. land any body of persons willing to disturb the public peace, or, chat will answer toy argument equally well, able to do so. Is this tee moment then for us to tell the public that we are under the MP* cessity, even without inquiry, to create new limitations to, and new restrittions on, the libel', of the subje;t, without giving time to ascertain' the danger against which we are called upon to provide ? ttut persons hate told us that this inquiry is unnecessary, because nt the notoriety of the facts. I must confess that it' at any one iitsment, or on any one subject, I ever thought it wrong to use ttns right of notoriety. I do now think it wrong, because on this sehject.persons tre so likely to be misinformed, and to be in error., A circumstance hes occurred relative to the proceedings of this very Catholic Association, and it has occurred within a few weeks, which bears me out in the observation I have made. The perms who were in error are not those of this country, whose information must have been necessarily limited, but they are the actual Law Officers of Ireland ; able men—who are well known to be so; yet SO completely were they misinformed as to what took place in, that Association, that they were induced to go to the tribunal of the country, and prefer a charge against an individual for uttering se ditious expressions. But what was the consequence? So little were they prepared with their statement and their evidences, that when the matter came to he investigated—not by a petty jury, but by a peed jury—they were not borne out in their charges against this Member of the Association. It is impossible not to perceive that if they had been well informed of what had actually taken place, they would not have gone before a grand jury, and subjected them. selves to such a defeat. There is a great tendency in Ireland, among all parties, to exaggerate whatever takes place in that Assn elation, and men may easily be misled by their feelings to misin terpret the words uttered there. I will say to your Lordships, that those exaggerated reports--the vague statements you may have heard, and the newspaper accounts you may have read, should not induce your Lordships to engage in so very delicate--I may say so very difficult—a task, as the resolution to attack the liberties or the pursuits of the people, and the rights they possess under the laws of England. I ask your bordabips to agree and to be satisfied on these points. In the tun instance you should satisfy yourselves to the existence of the great evil you are called upon to correct ; is the second place as to the nature of this evil ; and in the third place. and above all, you should satisfy yourselves, that in ex tinguishing this evil, or In attempting to extinguish it, you do not create another, and a far greater evil than the one you are attempt.' tog to put down. (Hear, hear.) To be satisfied on each of those intuits, you must require the despetches that have been made by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland on the subject. NVhen you con-' sitter bow difficult it will be to provides, remedy, you must consider how necessary it is that you should receive intormation front those who have the best opportunities of knowing what the evil is, and bow far it extends. The information that should be laid belies your Lordships, should be taken trout the mouths of those persons whose more especial duty and interest it is to attend to the matter. You are about to engage in a task, of which, I think, even WA information, but 1 ant sure without it, although you may see the commencement, no man can tell what will be the end. (Hear, heart. 'l'lier Noble Lord on the Woolsack, I say the Noble Lord on the Woolsack, because every man must know under whose auspices the Hill will be introduced, and must be quite certain that so delicate and precious a pieces of workmanship as I will chow it to be, can be placed in no other bands but his. I say that Noble and 'teemed Lord will require all his ingenuity, and no man can rate that io. geauity higher than I do, to perform the task. If the object of the 43111 be to extinguish the Catholic Association—the Catholic Rent of Ireland as it is called, I ask if the Noble and Learned Lord two the this without destroying the ordinary relations of society ? est: he prevent people of any description from enjoying the tmodderce which other are willing to confide in then] ? If they be willing to receive money which others are ready to g:ve, can he prevent this ? Is he able to intercept opinions oetween one titan's mouth and another man's heart ? Can he prevent one person from putting in his pocket that which etothcr person hands to hint? If he cannot do this. be an' du nothing I and if he does do it lie wilt do worse than nothing, because he will engage in what I will call a legislative milk/. .flut I will endeavour to show your Lordships, because it is kn. portant to consider the difficulties, what those difficulties are. premn'e, indeed, from what I know, from what passed in this , House on another occasion, that the Noble Earl who is anxious to burg this Bill through this and the other House, will tell your I.(oroships., that it is not to be a substantive Bill, but an amend luau of the Convention Act. But there is this difference between them, and your Lordships will do well to consider it: the Convent. Lion Act touches on tangible objects, but this Bill touches on ob jects that are not tangible. This Bill relates to delegations. I will not trouble your Lordships with any observations as to whether delegations be or be not injurious to society; but I know, that noir different circumstance. they may b at serviceable; and I know ttim some men—and those men are among the best this country has pet:educed—have thought that delegations in times of grievance are WO be-ter methods of obtaining redress. I might, among others, more the name of my Learn ed Friend who the other day moved t.se Address, who ha. delivered his opinion, that delegations were not only a harmless but a useful mode of' repairing public grief. MCA'S. I wiil admit that it was a tangible point in the law on vebittit to act, when oaths were administered in Ireland; it might be then fairly said, we will not admit oaths to be administered in tUts, form, as they are calculated to disturb the public peace; but when I see in the Catholic Association Ito outward farina at terded to—no proceeding take place to which there can be any . ra. 1101/1 objection, I ask what, in putting down this Association. wilt you have one more than to get rid of words, and words only ? You may object to the words Catholic Association--Catholic Rent --and the word Rent I admit to be a very disagreeable one—but what will you have done, when you have gotten rid of them ? 1 remember that some years ago, when a certain Noble Lord was the Irish Secretary,.he exerted himself to put down what was thee called theCatholicCoimmittee, and in a short time this Cabals Committee was no more beard of. It is now the Catholic Associ snort, and the Noble Earl may, perhaps,, exert himself as sue. centrally to get rid of the words Associrson and Rent; but the question is, will nut the people still ply that rent 1 Several of pay Noble Friends, who have filled offices in Ireland, must be aware how difficult it is to make the Irish pay any thing. With Obis feeling the taxes have been, in a great degree, removed from them ; but I know that they will find it much more difficult to prevent then, from paying, especially when they are deterred from i; by Acts which they dislike. I have heard Oust many have timed at difficult to get money into their pockets in opposition to the lsw, but I have never heard that any hove found any difficulty getting it out, whatever law may have ex!sted to prevent them. I will tell the Noble Lords what I think they may be able to do, anhough they will out make the rent less, they may make it more. 1 (Lay:other the story of a French poet--M. Piro', I think it is— ante, on the night before his volume of poems Caine out, went to a tne-.d, and said to him--" Pray go to the academy, and say that you think my verses detestable. bet them condemn them, and 1 Ball be s ire to sell the whole edition." For my part, if I were *lowed a poundage on this Catholic Rent, I would say, when the JPeettemetit had met, " this Catholic Rent is a terrible thing." !mild endeavour to get die Parliament to discountenance it, itonnue I should then he sure to increase my profits. It p ig ... .a . . . . . • is certain that wheiesith 'slum has been excited, exertion* would proportionally increase, and with them a determination to carve resolutions, although privately, into effect. I say again, that Jour ships m a y ! get rid of the name " Catholic Rent, but I repeat that yon will do nothing more. I know a story relative to Ireland, which, although a somewhat ludicrous one, was not without its application to the present question, and *hick would, show how ignatent our ancestors were on all subjects which concerned that gauntry. In a remote part of Ireland, where, disturbances and outrages!were too frequent, about the time of the reign of Henry VIII., the Irish were in the habit of exciting themselves by calling out--" Butler-a-boo," and " Groin- a-boo." The wise persons who were, in that day, Governors of Ireland, wrote over to this count accounts that those two words were the cause of all the mischi ef and all the outrages, and that they must therefore be put down. The Cabinet consequently met on the sub ject ; history does not say whether or not there was a division on the question, but it is certain that they came to the resolution of putting down those two words, " Butler-a-boo" and " Crom-a boo ;' and they resolved also that the words should be abolished from the Irish language. As they had, however, sonic feelings of humanity, and as they knew that the Irish must have some ay, they ordained that they might be in future permitted to cry out " St. George ;" but that if they cried either "Butler-a-boo" or " Crotn a.boo," they were to be punished. I do not know whether they afterwards erect the one word or the other, but I know that they continued to commit as much violence and as many outrages as be , fore. Ido not wean to compare the Catholic Association with thoscbarbarians, nee do I mean to make any comparison of those legislators with the trainers of our modern laws ; but I know that they have been equally railing at words, and words alone. Your Lordships must calculate the consequences of the measures it is in tended to propose before you adopt them, because you will not be able to say " if we fail we tail, and sitnply leave things as they were before." Would not the person to whom I hare alluded be as able, if he had the will to do it, to do as much mischief after as be fore he hod Leen brought into the Courts of Dublin ? 1 Mope it is unnecessary for me to say that, in thus troubling your Lordships, I havtleot sought, nor have I thought it necessary to seek, for an op portueity of apologising for the proceedings of the Catholic Associ. ation. With respect, however, to that body, although after what I have said, I must Le or opinion that I have no right to judge of them front the reports I have received, I have no objection to say that, if those reports be true, I have seen much in their conduct and pruceedings of which I must disapprove; but I must add, that I cannot conceive any large body of people, n ore especially of peo ple labouring under grievances, real or Imaginary, and deprived of what we Protestants call religious rights, who are capable of carry. ing on debates without sometimes introducing blamable matter, without saying and doing much which I, and alt persons looking at the subject as I do, must entirely disapprove. But if 1 disapprove of much, 1 also knew that of many of their proceedings 1 approve', highly ; and I therefore think it would be unwise to put them down, even if it were possible to extinguish their proceedings, which undoubtedly had their birth in the (*echoes of tile country. 1 know that there exists a feeling in the mind of every man, arising out of his degraded state in society, if such he his situation, which it is impossible for the Legislature of the country to take bold of, and which no rational man would attack, because it must elude his grasp. If such be the case of a single member of society, how much more must it be so of a large body. I have always thought it better far all panics that, in a country divided by religious and political dissensions, the people should find an opportunity of ex pressing themselves openly to the rest of the community, and of stat ing their grievances, whether founded or ill-founded, in an open and public manner, and neither in secret nor confined, mumbling in this respect those unhealthy vapours which only remained unhealt and mischievous so long as they were prevented from rising, but which, the moment they were allowed to mix with the pure air, lost at once their mischief and their nature. But the specific grounds on which my motion rests are these: that when we are called upon to provide a remedy for an evil, and especially when we are called upon to do so by the Speech front the Throne, it is but right for us to inquire what this evil is; it is imperative that we know against what evil we are called upon to provide a remedy, and to know it from those whose duty it is to take the dimensions of it. If we have not this information we are not competent to judge of the evil, and therefore we are unable to consider of a remedy, which I think it would be perhaps almost hopeless, but which would be, at all events, difficult, to provide. Olt these grounds I move your Lordships, that an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty will be graciously pleased to order copies of all despatches made by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, relative to the origin, progress, and nature of the ileli. pus and Political Societies in that country. The Eul of LIVERPOOL—My Lords, when any Noble Lord' rises upon any subject, he may as well know what is the eubjetd upon lunch he means to address the House ; and when any indi vidual rises to make a motion upon any particular prospective pro ceeding, be might as well wait, when a few days must ex plain what the nature of the intended proceeding is. It is true, that in the Speech which your Lordships have heard from the Throne, his Majesty, after congratulating your Lordships anti the country upon the national prosperity in which Ireland participates, alludes to the existence of associations in that country, which have been produc. tive of the worst consequences. It is true, that his Majesty further recommends iou to consider what remedy may be applied to correct this evil, and prevent these ill effects; and it is true that an Ad dress has been carried up, in which your Lordships reply that you will consider the means of applying a remedy to the evil. There the matter rents. The Noble Lord knows, or lie might know, by the votes of the House, that it is the intention of his Majesty's Government to introduce some measure applicable to the evil, which your Lordships were recommended to consider, but he might have waited to know what that measure was ; he might have waited to learn its character and object, of which, judg ing from his speech, he seems most completely ignorant. The Noble Lord has said that no attempt should be made to abridge the liberty of the subject without inquiry—without infer illation having been laid upon the table of the House. 1 would agree with the Noble Lord if the House did not know the grounds upon which they were called upon to act. These grounds, however, may be of general notoriety ; the proposed measure may be founded upon facts, known to every Noble Lord, as well as to any Member of his Majesty's Government. The Noble Lord had, himself, acted upon this principle at a period to which I shall re. fee Two years ago, when measures were introduced for the sup pression of the Orange Societies, how did the Noble Lord act ? how did the House act ? Did he ask a tittle of information ? Did the House go into any inquiry ?--although the proceedings and character of the Orange Associations were not half so well known to your Lordships or to the country as the proceedings of the Ca thelic Association. Ido not now mean to give any opinion upon the proceedings of the Catholic Association—of that hereafter. I shall not now say whether these proceedings were right or wrong ; but I repeat that, in the ease of the Orange Societies, your Lordships and the Noble Lord acted upon his sole knowledge, end in so doing I think he was justified. But at that period, any advocate of Orange Associations, if they had an advocate in this House, may have risen and asked for Inquiry upon the same prin. ciplca upon which the Noble Lord now demands it for the Catholic Association. But, with respect to the Catholic Association, if the measure to be proposed tested upon official information,—if it rested only on the confidence that ought to be reposed in the Go vernment.— if it rested colely upon the responsibility of his Majes ty's Minister, it may be a fair case for asking information. Even in this case, however, the measure should be known ; but how is the case altered when his Majesty's itliniaters can produce no infor mation, and bring to your Lordships knowledge no fact which is not as well known to your Lordships as to the Executive? It was the peculiar boast of the Catholic Association, and Is mention nei ther as matter for praise nor blame, that all their proceedings were published—that every thing was done openly and in the face of day. I should think that, if Parliament shall think it fitting to adopt any measure which will include the Catholic Association, that Inca sure must be adopted upon the grounds of those proceedings which hare been admitted, published, promulgated, and which no Mem. ber of the Association can deny. The Noble Lord's motion ap pears to me to be without any precedent ; I doubt whether • there may be any grounds whatever for adopting it at any time, but parti_ ticularly at this time, when the House is not in possession of the measure which his Majesty's alinisters are about to bring forward. As to the difficulties which may occur in forming a legislative enactment to affect this or any other Association, I shall not now enter upon a discussion. We should now discuss it in the dark, and had better wait for the light, and not deal with the measure as if berme the House, until the measure actually is before us. But the Noble Lord supposes, I can scarcely conceive upon what grounds, that the measure to be proposed by his Majesty's Minis ters, has been Mundied upon the contrivance of nty Noble and Learned Friend on the Mi oolsack. There is nothing in my Noble and Learned Friend's station which should lead the Noble Lord to suppose that the measure originated with him. As one of his Ma jesty's servants, my Noble and Learned Friend must, of course, have given his concurrence to the measure; but why the Noble Lord should presume that my Noble and Learned Friend has, as it were, concocted the measure, I repeat I know not how to conceive. If the Noble Lord means to insinuate that the measure is my Noble and Learned Friend's, and not the measure of the Irish Government, I can assure him that he is entirely misinformed. It is Cie measure of the Irish Go. vernment, approved of by the English Government. It is the flea. sure of the Irish Government, founded upon a deep sense of its necessity, and ai the only means tot maintaining the peace and tran quillity of Ireland. I will not now be led into any discussion, either as to the expediency of the projected measure, or its ade quacy to effect the purpose for which. it is intended. If the Bill come up from the other House. that will be the proper period to enter fully upon the subject. Thus much, however, I will say, which I feel, and I am sure every man in the enquire must feel, that associations like that which has been alluded to must of nem sity produce political and religious animosities. destructive of the peace of any country. The Noble Lord has said, what assembly is there that meets fur the express purpose of discussion, in which violent and inflammatory speeches have not been heard? lam as little inclined to tear the effects of inflammatory speeches as the Noble Lord ; they sometimes serve as vents by which bad feeling evaporates, that, if it had remained pent up, might have ultimately produced considerable evil. I agree with the Noble Lord, that when iodividuals meet for discussion, professing different religious and political opinions, it is scarcely possible to suppose that warmth and heats will not arise. and that inflammatory speeches will not frequently be heard. Inflammatory spereben wider such circum stances are little to be dreaded; but when an assembly meets for the purpose of effecting the saute object, when they profess the same faith, and meet with the some views, I am forced to look at their proceedings with feelings something Mfferent I admit, how ever, that not much weight should rest on inflammatory speeches, except so far u they may be constructive Macon The measure to be proposed by his Majesty's Ministers should be founded upon proceedings aifopted and acted %iron. To say more ueon the sub ject now would be premature. 'lb. Noble Lord conceives that the THE BR PRESS; House has some evidence upon what the projected measure is founded, from the prosecution of an able and powerful member of the Association, and because a Grand Jury threw oat the bills which were sent before them, to support this prosecution, I am at a loss to know why the Noble Lord should draw such an inference from the act of the Grand Jury. That prosecution had been mitt. toted for words spoken in public, and which the Law Offic-rs of the Crown considered libellous: the Grand Jury ignored the bills, and of course the case was not sent to triaL From this it was only • to be inferred that the Grand Jury did not put the same interpre tation upon the words alleged to have been spoken as the Law Officers did, and in consequence there waa no finding. Mr. O'Connell was accused of having publicly uttered certain express sions which the Irish Law Officers considered prima facie libel lous; the Grand Jury thought that the expressions proved before them to have been uttered were not libellous now, how did this proceeding lead to any inference respecting the measure which his Majesty's Alinisters proposed to submit to Parliament ? In my opi nion there is no practice more dangerous to the liberty of the subject than that of drawing conclusions from particular trials. By the law of England, the person on trial had the benefit of any doubts which might arise in the minds both of the Grand any' Petty Juries, and it would be a groat and most flagitious perversion of justice, if an individual acquitted by a Jury, should again be brought tbr ward and subjected to a second trial upon the same charge. I should, therefore, always bow to the decision of a Jury upon the only safe grounds upon which such a decision should be consider ed as just, under the particular circumstances, though not perhaps applicable to any general case. Having said so much with respect to the prosecution of Mr. O'Connell, as it was alluded to by the Noble Lord, I may be allowed to add, that the measure to be pro posed by his Majesty's Government, is not grounded, on the words of individuals, but on the general acts of the whole body. It is impossible to; let this subject pass without remarking that if in flammatory speeches have been opade in the Catholic Association, as conceded by the Noble Lord, there never was a period when such speeches were so unjustifiable,—they were unjustifiable, because of the Fs -speedy of the country, and the absence of distress, for distress it cannot be denied has a moral effect upon the feelings of individuals. They were unjustifiable oho, because of the conduct and character of the Government ; for I would ask the warmest friends of the Catholics to admit,- 1 would call upon those Noble Lords who were most decidedly opposed to the 'velem under which Ireland was formerly governed to deny, if they can, that in any country, or at any period. juctice, equal justice, was more fairly administered to all parties, than by the present government of Ireland. There never was a period when Government looked with kinder and more friendly feelings upon that particular class of persons, of whom the Catholic Asso ciation was said to be the organ. In referring to this question, your Lordships will also have to consider another, which I advert ed to in a debate a few evenings ago. I then stated that the Catlin. lie Association, and those who promoted it, were amongst the greatest enemies to Ireland. That this Association was a check to the prosperity of Ireland, that it alarmed persons out of Ireland, who were inclined to favour the claims of the Catholics ; above all, that it prevented the flaw of English capital and intelligence, which was just beginning to direct itself towards Ireland. There can be no question that it had excited those animosities, which it is the object of the Governtnent to allay, and has been their constant endeavour to appease. It is impossible for the Irish Government to succeed in securing the permanent tranquillity and happiness of Ireland, unless the Caiholic Association can be put down. If this Asiociation cannot be put down, you must permit all Associations to run their course, to excite teelings of bitterness and hostility, between the several classes of his Majesty's subjects, and destroy the peace of the country. In respect for the interest of the Catho lics themselves, some measure ought to be adopted, as much for their sake as for any other; the proceedings of the Catholic Asso ciation had made it necessary. As to the motion of the Noble Lord, I believe such a-motion at such a stage was never before made. When the House knows nothing of the bill, when they have not heard that it is founded upon any official correspondence, I can see no grounds whatever for the Noble Lord's motion, and therefore give it my decided opposition. Earl GROSVENOR said, he would trouble the Howie with a few words, in consequence of what had fallen from the Noble (Liverpool.) It seemed to him that the Noble Earl had entirely misunderstood the drift of the Noble Marquis's observations. They arose out of time Speech from the 'throne, which their Lorships heard, and in the principal part of which he (Earl Grosvenor) fully concurred. He concurred on many topics adverted to in the King's Speech t indeed, the only part which he considered defective was that relating to the Catholic Association. The Noble Earl had seemed to take it for granted :hat the Catholic Association were guilty of many monstrous and horrible offences calculated to disturb the peace of the counter. The House had no evidence that the proceedings of the Catholic Association warranted such an inference. The Noble Earl quoted the case of the Orange Association, but did not seem to recollect that on that occasion their Lordships had all agreed--on the con trary, they were now much divided in opinion. Sonic say, with the Noble Earl, that the Association is guilty cf all abominations, others conceive that the speeches of some of the Members had been violent and intemperate, but that the proceedings of the Associs. tion are not calculated to produce any serious evil,—whilst many state, that those proceedings have hitherto produced no mischief, but, on the contrary. an infinite deal of good. The Noble Earl would not find the House nnanitnous on this question, as they had been on that of the Orange Associations. It was not to be supposed that his Majesty's Ministers had not received sonic com munications from tha Irish Government, or that they should come down to propose a penal enactment upon the general knowledge attainable by any ordinary individual. He had heard something of a Declaration of the Catholic Association, but he could perceive nothing of a seditious nature in that document. He considered the Catholic Question as one of vital importance; and unless the Government set this question at rest, it would keep Ireland for ever in a state of irritation. Was it wonderful that, in endea vouring to obtain the opinion of the Catholic body—considering the warm and generous character of the Irish nation--they should sometimes speak with less temper and moderation than some Noble Lords might &aim ? Was it wonderful that in their en deavours to obtain the great end in view, the Catholics should have done something apparently intemperate ? A large proportion of Protestants in Ireland joined with the Catholics. and were anxious to promote their views. He believed none were actually ad verse to those views but the Orange faction. This faction the Catholics charged with the spoliation of their property—with re taining a bitterness and hostility which affected even their lives. He did not mean to say that these charges were well founded ; but sach was the opinion of the Catholic, and was it matter of surprise that they expressed themselves warmly and indignantly. He (Earl Grosvenor) was a Protestant, attached to the Established Church. from conviction as well as profession, yet he would say to the Catholics persevere —never relax until you have attained your abct. Earl Grosvenor concluded by supp o rti n g th e motion of the Marquis of Lansdown. Lord HOLLAND said, the argument upon which the Noble Earl (Liverpool) depended, and which lie urged with the greatest force was, that the proceeding against the Catholic Association was not yet regularly before the House. The Noble Earl seemed prodi giously pleased, as he recapitulated it frequently in the course of his speech. In the beginning, however, he had prudently ab. stained from letting their Lordships know the precise object of his Noble Friend's motion, nor had lie brought it under the considera tion of the !louse, in reference to the proceeding to be proposed by Government. Their Lordships were told they knew nothing of the proposed measure; they did know something, however, through the King's Speech, and he (Lord Holland) conceived the denial of the information moved for by his Noble Friend, unprecedented, indecent, and unjust. The Noble Earl had often come down with papers on which to found laws abridging the liberty of the subject ; he had come down with abominable green bags, and with volumes of papers libelling the character of the country ; and yet no man was heard to say that the Bill was not before the House—that their Lordship should wait until the Bill came up from the House of Commons. The Noble Lord had never before said, the pro ceedings are not yet before you, you are called upon to do something, upon the allegation of a great evil, but there is to be no inquiry." How were they, lie would ask, to know the character and extent of the ovil ? how to get at the remedy, if the information desired was withheld ? It was impossible that their Lordships should not agree to it, if they considered the object of his Noble Friend's motion. The Noble Earl said that the present proceeding had a precedent. Ile (Lord Holland) denied that there was any precedent. The Noble Earl was fond of precedents. On the occasion of the measure for the suppression of Orange Societies, he (Lord Holland) had said, " not content." He took blame to himself for not having more fully stated his opinions at that dine; but although lie had no great prediliction for the Associations at whom that measure was aimed, he had said " not content" because he disapproved of the principle. It was net true, however, that the measure was taken up without inquiry. It was urged that it was only the extension of a law already in force in England, and which was found effective in that country. Lord Melville. then Mr. Secretary Dundas, when introducing the measure. said, that after considering the subject, he had concluded, that as the measure was 'bona to be useful in England, he thought it would be equally so in Ireland. lie supposed it was not Intended that their Lordships should take the King's Speech into considera tion ; they must not speculate on any proceedings until they should be introduced by Ministers. It appeared that the Irish Conven tion Act was to be the model for this new penal enactment. Ile was no great admirer of that law, nor if he desired to make a new law, would he consult the Irish Statute book for precedents, and particularly not at the frightful epoch of 17113. In justice to the Irish Parliament, however, he would say, that the period to which he had adverted was one of great alarm. It was the time of the delegates, when there was an intention of actually calling a rival Parliament at Athlone ; and, in addition to this, it was on the eve of a foreign war. He was glad to see the Noble Earl, who still held the Privy Seals (Westmorland), in his place. That Noble Lord was not particularly squeamish in the measures which he in troduced to support Government; nor was he particularly mealy niouthed in expressing his indignation at the schemes of the dis affected against the Government. But did the Noble lord !nark out the Convention? Did he advise in the King's Speech that it should be put down? lie tecommended conciliation and* con. cession, and the Convention Act stands on the Statute Book immediately preceding the only act of real concession ever granted to the Catholics. They were now advised to mark out the Association as a tit subject for new penal acts. But how could 'their Lordships decide upon the remedy without suf ficient information ? The King's Speech supplied them with very unsatisfactory information on the subject. He had read the words which alluded to the Catholic Association many times,but could nut perceive that any case was made out by those word.. The Speech sets out with a statement of the prosperity of Ireland, and also of its tranquillity; it then goes on to state that associations exist, and.recorumentla Parliament to , Institute an inviry, in cram to apply an adequate remedy. How is the remedy to be got at, unless Parliament shall have a clear and correct view of the extent and character of the evil? But what does the Minister say ? lie says, " Good God 1 it is irregular, it is unparlia mentary, to inquire you want to get information before the 11111 comes up." What is the general proceeding in such cases ? To ask questions of the Judges. But on this par ticular question the House was not at liberty to ask questions el the Judges, but acs immediately to proceed to the re. medy. At all events, if a penal enactment was necessary. their ! Lordships should not act rashly. If there were sufficient grounds, there could be no reasons for extraordinary haste; because Ireland was prosperous and undisturbed, therefore their Lordships would have ill ticient time for inquiry.-1 Here Lord H. read the consecutive passages of the King's Speech relating to Ire. land.—His Lordship resumed—There was nothing of emergency, no dread of immediate danger. The Speech could not satisfy Par liament that any measure was necessary ; nor had the :Minister af forded any materials for judging of the nature of the evil. The passage which relates to Associations incompatible with the spirit of the Constitution, might as well answer for the Irish Cabinet, or perhaps for the English, as for the Catholic Association. The Speech said, " those Asociations " had adopted proceedings irreconcilable with the spirit of the Constitution."—Most true; the spirit of the Constitution was, that a Cabinet should act in concert, or, at least agree, on all ques tions of vital interest ; but th • Cabinet was formed out of die. union and a spi i. of incessant counteraction. It used to be the custom to take one white sad ot e black man. This was now carried much further; it was not applied to the Cabi net, but to the Movers and Seconders of the Addresses, and to the passages of the King's Speech. The foolish prosecu tions in Ireland were a proof of it. The Irish Crown Law yers called out both " Cron' a boo" and " Butler a boo." It was said the Association would excite animosities. There was nothing more likely than that such a divided and distracted Cabinet would perpetuate animosities. The spirit of disunion pervades all their actions, even to the King's Speech. They hail set out upon the prilessed principle of giving no triumph to either party, instead of which they had given a uiumph to both. The new measure. if it was founded on the Convnuon Act, would probably affbrd a second triumph to the party which it was intended to aftiet. He (Lord Hullar.d) affirmed, that when that Act was passed. it was called an Act to gratify spleen, to distort the most htilliant perioll of our history, and that it would give power to seditious asso ciations, and would enable them to order a man to enter the !louse of Commons and bid bins take the mace from the Speaker's table. The Act enacted that none should so debate, save and except the Knights and Burgesses to serve in the Parliament there assembled But it did not so save them. The Act then went on to save and except the House of Convocation, duly and kgally assembled. When a similar Bill is introduced, it ought to save and except the Privy Council appointed by his 3lajesty to consider of the affairs of state. He (Lord Holland) was sorry to detain them longer, con sidering the narrow ground on which the question rested. They had been told to proceed with care till further evidence was before them—till the remedy came up from the House of Commons. That would be proper enough, if they were to take for granted, contrary to uniform usage, that the Act itself was founded in justice. If the measure did pass. it must he on the plea of necessity ; but he should be loth to believe that the necessity did exist ; for it would most certaitily have the effect of abridging . the liberties of that part of the kingdom where so large a portion of the subjects were already excluded from the benefits of the Constitution ; hut hewn jured them, for the safety of the empire, for the sake of their own characters, as they would go down to posterity, not to suffer this proceeding to go forward, as it would, render their duty both pain ful and disgusting. Earl BATHURST said, that from the statement of his Noble Friend (Lord Liverpool) lie did not at all wish that the proposed measure should be proceeded in on other information than that with which every hotly was amply provided. It was on the pub lic proceedings of a public body that they were called to adopt this measure. It had been said In the course of the evening by a Noble Lord (Grosvenor) that in this measure they could not reckon on his support, and they did not wish it if he did not grant it when it would be shown that it was lircessory for the tranquillity of Ireland that the Association should be put down. His Noble friend (Lad Liverpool) had said that be would not be drawn into a discussion of a question relating to the Association, till the proper time; for it was not then the time to take into consideration what measures were to be adopted. The Noble Baron had said it was an Irish measure. Lord HOLLAND begged to say that it must be a misapprehen sion on the pan of the Noble Earl, for he had not said any such thing. Earl BATHURST said, the; the facts of the ca-c were, that the individual who brought this Bill forward was the S..cretary for Ireland; this he stated, that it might not be considered a: a mea sure of the Noble Lord to whom it had been imputed (the Lord Chancellor). If their Lordships thought further information wss necessary, they would wait till they saw whether this measure really did encroach on the liberty of the subject. Lord GROSVENOR explained. Lord HOLLAND explained. The Earl of CARNARVON said, that statements had been talked of, but they had heard nothing stated; and, when a state ment had been called for, it was refused. A Noble Lord had apologized for having enter ed so deeply into the subject, when he (the Earl of Carnarvon) really thought he had only entered into the exordium of his speech. His Majesty in his Speech recommended the renewal of the inquiries into the state of Ireland, and had in the same breath declared that it was in a flourishing state. The Speech he (the Earl of Car narvon) believed to have been composed by the whole of the Cabinet united : this was visible from the various character of the Speech : it expressed different sentiments in every para graph ; the fact was, each Minister in his turn put in a sentence. They were called upon to adopt atroog measures on the score of necessity, but in reality to impose new laws to fetter liberty. The Address to the Speech was, as usual, an echo, and, unlike other Speeches, did not pledge them to enter into cir cumstances which they might think affected the country; but ' it did pledge them to remedy an evil with which they were not acquainted ; here they had to wait for information, which had been freely given on former occasions. It had been said that the ques tion was in another place; a Noble Lord (Liverpool) had said he would not argue in the dark when he himself caused the darkness; and according to the Noble Lord's theory, they must wait till they received the promised light front the house of Commons. Was the preamble of the Bill to be the only informaticut upon which they were to ran new Acts? Was this to be the light which they were to receive on the subject ? Were they to be persuaded to say Content or No: i'ontent to any Bill which the House of Commons might send up i• Were they not to exercise their ownjudgrnent lie (the Earl of Carnarvon) believed that, though Ministers might trifle with the question, it would involve the safety of the empire at large. The Noble ord had said they . were public proceedings, and of which they could judge, whilst in the same breath it was stated that it was not upon general notoriety alone they formed their opinion, but upon despatches from the Lord Lieutenant; whilst they must form their opinion from the newspapers. The 'Noble Earl had said that the great danger to Ireland was the per. feet unanimity of the proceedings. The Government well knew how to put down a disturbance; they knew the Insurrection Bill could he easily obtained; in that case they had every paper they asked for. Ireland was now tranquil, and a great number of his Majesty's Ministers were unanimous; but they could not now even afford them a speech ; they tagged a few sentences together, but carefully shunned all argument. There was not one appeal to the loyal feelings of the country ; no rallying round the Throne, &c. which they heard on former occasions. He (the Earl of Carnarvon) should think he did not do his duty it be did not en. deavour to obtain that information which Ministers ought to give. The Ministers objected to the unanimity of the assemblies in Ireland, and he now hoped that a divided assembly was not about to contrive an act that might be productive of very extensive mischief. The House then divided.— Contents - - 201 Non-Contents - 42 Majority against the motion . . 22 The House then Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Tuisru,r, Fge. 8. EQUITABLE LOAN BANKS. • Colonel DAVIES obtained leave to bring in a Bill to enable the Equitable Loan Bank to sue and be sued, and servo notices in the names of their clerk or secretary. RA I 1,-ROADS. Lord STANLEY obtained leave to bring In a Bill for cooking a rail-road between Liverpool and Manebester. FIRE INSURANCES. Mr. DUNDAS presented a petition from the Chamber of Corn. merce of Edinburgh, against the high rates of insurances against fire.—Ordered to lie on the table. INTERCOURSE WITH IRELAND. Sir J. NEWPORT presented a petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Waterford, praying for a freer communication be. tween Englatul and the south of Ireland.—Ordered to lie on the table. FRIENDLY SOCIETIES. Mr. S. COURTNEY presented a petition from an individual, named Suter, praying an alteration in the laws respecting Friendly Sodeties.—Ordered to lie on the table. COALS. Sir E. KNATCH BULL presented a petition from the Corpo ration of Deal against the duty on sea• borne coals.—Ordered to he on the table. __ HOUSE AND WINDOW TAX. Colonel PALMER presented a petition from certain parishes in the city of Bath, fur a repeal of the House and Window tax.— Ordered to lie on the table. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL presented a similar petition from the pariah of St. Peter in the East, in the City of Oxford.— Ordered to lie on the table. • REPEAL OF THE USURY LAWS. 3lr.SergeantONSLOW, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill for the purpose of repealing the laws with regard to Usury, said, that when he recollected the proceedings upon the subject during the last Session, when there were 121 for his motion. and only 23 for the amendment—when he recollected ilie liberal policy contained in some of the passages of his 3lajesty's Speech, and the manner in which restrictions had been taken of trade in general, it was scarcely necessary for him to add, that in no period of his life was he justified in the expectation of stronger support for the measure which he was about to propose, for the repeal of thnse laws, for which, in their origin, there could be no possible foundation either in policy or law. During the last Menton there was no objection made to the me asu re, except one, which was in tact no objection at all _that the Bill should not pass because some evil consequences might follow. It was the part of the Legislature to look at the greater and less' decree of inconvenience, and to enact that measure which carried with it the greater degree of benefit to the community. There never was a period where, on account of the state of the money market, less mischief could be effected by this measure than at pre sent. In consequence of the state of that market, the laws respect ing usury were at present totally inoperative. The success of his measure would not throw a burden upon any elms. His object was, that money, like every other commodity, should find its level. The Learned Gentivinan niade sonic observations upon the obiec tions made to his measure in the course of the last Session, which were inaudible in the Gallery, and concluded by asking leave to bring in a Bill for repealing the laws which ptohibit taking certain interest for money or limiting the rate thereof. AIL DAVENPORT would oppose the Learned Member's Bill. It would, fn his opinion, ruin the landed interest. Mr. J. SMITH regretted there was any intention of opposing 1 the measure. lie did net expect any opposition to it, in co•se quence of the triumphant arguments by which the measure was supported. Ile, for his part, was anxious to declare that be did not know a sirgle principle more distinct, more clear, or unanswer able, than that on which the measure 14' his Learned Friend was founded. In the event of a division, he hoped his Learned Friend would not pursue the course adopted by him last Sesston,when, front • feeling of courtesy, he deferred the c tnsideration of the question, not once or twice, but for a dozen times. His conduct was no doubt kind and considerate, hut opposition was the result of his conciliatory conduct. Ile hoped the Bill, if leave was obtained to bring it in to-night, would be discussed in • few days, when there . would be a large attendarce of Alembers; and he was not afraid to maintain that the opposition of the Learned Gentlemen would be shown to be founded in mistake. Mr. CURWEN would oppose the Bill, more especially at the present moment, when the state of the public mind was such, that speculations were afloat which it was scarcely credible could be tolerated by common sense. At such &period, when 168 millions wen subscribed to these speculations, if the Usury Laws were nut in existence, he would votelor their enactment. .... Alr. Sergeant ONSLOW said, the logic of those who opposed his Bill seemed to be this—that because the money of this country was carried into foreign countries, where no laws of ours could re strain these speculations, we were therefore to keep up these laws, which caused that of which complain: was made. The House then divided, and the numbers were— Ayes- 52 Nuts - 43 Majmity for bringing in the Bill 7 SMALL DEBTS RECOVERY BILL. Lord A LTHORP would merely say, this was like the Bili he submitted to the House last year. lie apprehended the isms of its rejection then to be. because no compensation was allowed for sinecure offices: then, as now, there was no compensation pro_ posed ; but, as it appeared the general wish that such should be given, he would feel It his duty, upon the second reading of the Bill, to submit the matter to a Committee, and ascertain who should receive compensation, and who should not. The names and numbers of these individuals should be selected, and they would, he trusted, be found fewer than w a s g en e r a lly su pp ose d. lie would giant this for the sake of carrying the measure through the House; and if he did not succeed, he hoped some other Member would. Ha then moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the more speedy and easy collecting of small debts in Engla..d and NVales -- Leave given. BRITISH SUBJECTS IN INDIA. Mr. HUME said, that as he had estended his motion for • greater number of years than was at first his object, he would, for the purpose of seeing how far the Minister would cor.cede to him, postpone die discussion until Tuesday next. STATE OF IRELAND. Lard ALTHORP, in alluding to that part of his Majesty's Speech which mentioned the inquiry into Ireland, wished to know when the Committee woula sit upon the subject. Mr. WYNN said, in reply, it was the intention that the Com mittee should resume its labours on Tuesday neat. COMMITTALS TO THE GAOL OF LONDONDERRY. Dr. LUSH INGTON. in moving ter the copies of the committals of two men and their wives to the gaol of Londonderry, said, he had good reason to think (from all the inquities he could make) that the important parts of this case were true. In the course of last year it appeared that two persons, professing the Catholic religion, were married by a Popish Priest, to two females. members of the Church of Scotland. Informations upon this subject were laid before the 3lagistrates, founded upon the violation of the tuarriage laws in force in Ireland. In consequence of this violation, sum monses were issued against all the married parties, and the magis trates thought it their duty to commit the husbands and wives to separate parts of the gaol, and they were kept apart in prison for several weeks. The warrant under which they were commftad stated their offence to be an illegal marriage, and the statute which they violated rendered them liable to three years' imprisonment without bail or mainprize ; it appeared strange that this Irish law ettould violate, in the most revolting manner, every principle of human justice, that, upon an examination in a Court of Justice, a pollen should be compelled to name the Popish Priest who per formed the marriage ceremony ; this, upon the part of the Pfleb!, was a capnal offence, and if the other party refused to give the ne cessary infonuation, he was subject to imprisonment for three years. This, e yen in that melancholy abstract of the penal cede consisting of cam tea inflicting injury on the Catholic population, struck him as one a f the grossest violations of justice ; every clause of the laws passed at the same time was of a similar construction. and must prove that weir operation would lead to discontent and disaffection. The lot a:Anne enacted, that if the Priest keew either of the parties moseying to be a l'rotestant, he should be sub ject to all the penalties. nese acts of vengeance upon the put of our ancestors were augmented year after year, and by the Bth of Anne, the Popish Priest who celebrated a marriage in which either party was a Protestant, sons guilty of a capital offence; but how was the knowledge of the Viiest proved if either was a Pro testant at the time of the marriage' it was allowed, concluded, and acknowledged, that the Popish Friest celebrating the marriage knew the party to be Protestants, and was therefore guilty of the capital offence. In all the disgusting annals of penal codes, either in England or Ireland, it was impossible to find one containisg a greater violation of the first principle of justice, namely, that a person should be presumed innocent until his guilt be proved. In the 12th of George the First, chap. the third, it was stated, that clandestine marriages by Popish Priests were the source of incon venience and ruin to families. He would call upon Gentkmeu to observe the preamble of this law. It was not enacted on account of Its actual necessity, nor because it was called for by any great and crying evil, but the preamble states the law was passed be cause many families suffered inconvenience from these clandestine marriages. This was contrary to all the principles of legislation ; and it is upon this Act the Priest is guilty of the felony in question. The law declared, that when a person was suspected to be married by a Priest, it was competent to any Justice of the Peace to sum mon the party suspected, examine him on oath, and compel hhu to name the clergyman, and thus the party may be obliged to be tray the individual whom he had induced to commit the act. And if any person refused to name the clergyman who celebrated the marriage, it was imperative upon the Magistrate to commit that person tor three years to jail, witetout bail or mainprize. All those penalties were renewed, and Acts on Acts were linseed, to the 23t of George the Second. There were down to that period six or seven Acts upon the same subject; but th,'re was one passed in the year 1793, and by this statute he was led to believe that all these were abrogated. This law declared and authorized the Catholic subjects of Ireland to be in a great measure like their fellows, with regard to offices, and the Popish Priest was no letterer liable to the penalty of death for the celebration of such marriage as that he had ailed. ed to; but the marriage was declared vcrA, and the Priest was liable to a fine of 50111. • but the construction of this law in Irelar.d may be, that after the tunishment of death, the tine of 5001. was to be inflicted also. I e was not prepared to say whether this was the construction or not ; but he was informed it was the opinion of men possessing high legal knowledge in Ireland, ti: tt by the con struction of those laws the Priest was to be hanged airst and fined afterwards. (Laughter.) He was glad to have it in his power to state, that when a communication was made to the feint: fiovera ment respecting this act of injustice, the parties were liberated: but it was the bounden duty of the Government to pursue sack steps and adopt such measures as may prevent the future recur. renew of such disgraceful proceedings ; it was for this object he moved for the production of the copies of the committals. He also 1 wished to show the country the state of the laws in regard to the Catholics. It would be his wish, if it were within his power, to persuade the House to have those enactments abrogated, and those anomalies avoided ; more especially at this period, when most unfor tunately, in his opinion, a measure wag about to be brought formed in that House, which must give discontent and dissatisfaction to the Catholics of Ireland. He would be glad to be an instrument, however humble, in removing those disabilities and restrictions under which they labour. It was not good policy to excite or ag gravate feelings (Wenger or resentment, especially with regard to the sacred ceremony of marriage, in which are involved the strong est and warmest feelings of the hesrt of man. These restrictions ever tend to excite hatred against that authority which lays them on. 110 knew of no reason that could justify these restrictions. He never heated of a reason why six millions of Catholics should hesubjeet to these re strictions. This was positive injustice. He would ever conceive it all act little short of positive injustice, to sacrifice the peace of the country for the purpose of imposing restrictions on the larger num bee. 'the Learned lieutleman concluded by moving that there be laid before the House copies of the committals in the month of November, 18'20, of two men of the name of Quoigly. of Anne Loudon, and of Martha Loudon, to the gaol of the city of London. derry. Sir G. HILL would state, that the Magistrates alluded to ly the Hon. Member who spoke last were not to be excelled as Magistrates, or as resident Gentlemen, by any individuals what ever. In consequence of the share they had in this transaction, their names were already before the public—they were tried before I that tribunal now exercisir.g its jurisdiction in Ireland, over every man who was influenced by a coascientious sense of duty. These Gentlemen have been arraigned before the Catholic Assoc-tutor:— they have been reproached and vilified—the severest and handiest epithets have been lavished upon them—they have been denounced to the population, and have been held up as objects of venpesnee by the Popish Parliament. A. to the circumstance to whah the attention of the House was now called, the facts were—that a Priest had displayed considerable activity in celebrating marriages 1 between the Catholic males and Protestant women, which caused great uneasiness. (Hear. hear.) lie gave no opinion upon ti,e subject, but such was the fact ; nor did he think this should be a source of astonishn n when it was recollected that the parents were Protestants. The name of the Priest who celebrated these marriages was O'llaherty. The parries who conceived themselves injured by the conduct of this individual being Presbyterians, ap plied to the Presbytery, to see if they could protect themselves by IaIe;AWV be whiel he w( le nU1 ..%. d »c he wail . n rst co this ef Y011;sw• who ac h marriage.: Mr. MA RE. March, for lea Taxes. A petition n Member whon wecoull not ho !ming the Hi 31r. H. DA' snuff, tobacco. or vessels grist nuary, 1825 The Menthe very numerou. CAEN)he Assoc &nous toleratioi subversion of collected rents On t.l;eiuer Mr. M I tented when th that the Assoc woo of politics Mr. BRIG] in the gallery. Mr. lIERH Illegal interest After which o'Cloek. HC Yr. Spring Clot Commi the disturb/La-lc The Chan the Bar of Mejesty to t "I receive Add, - as. `• Your con dived, and y ,aces which t .e surest pit brine Provid of toy kingdoi deeLanjov." Mr. (it Or ea painting lery of Porte perial A rmie and 1814, le dreg Portrai and which, Artist. Mi Painting a f copy of whic Marquis of Emperor, f, wings of h Gallery erre Hermitage. who distinge ar e to be ph late Princess previous to 1 York, arc al The g ee , Council at rouriats trio -