The Sun. — London, England, 1837-04-29 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, APRIL 29. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at five o'clock. Lord KINNOUL presented a petition from Perth in favour of Church-rates. Lord ROLLE presented petitions from Barnstaple, and from a parish in Yorkshire, to the same effect. The Bishop of HEREFORD presented similar peti tions from places in Montgomeryshire. Lord PORTMAN presented petitions from Bridport and other places against Church-rates, and from a town in Somerset for an amendment of the Poor-law. Lord SEGRAVE presented petitions against Church rates, from Cheltenham and other places in Gloucestershire. Lord DACRE presented petitions from Bishop Stortford and other places in Essex and Hertford to the same effect. Lord DUNDAS presented petitions to the same effect. The Marquis of SALISBURY presented petitions in favour of Church-rates from Retford. Mr. BERNAL, and other Members from the House of Commons, brought up the Ist Report of the Poor Law Committee, and several Private Bills. The Bishop of WINCHESTER presented petitions in favour of Church-rates from places in Hants and Surrey. The Bishop of LINCOLN presented similar petitions from places in Lincolnshire. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented similar peti tions from Margate and other places. The Earl of RIPON presented similar petitions from places in Lincolnshire. The Duke of RICHMOND presented petitions from places in Sussex, praying for an alteration in the Turnpike Act ; also a petition against the Poor-law Amendment Act. Lord FITZWILLIAM presented a petition against Church-rates from Wakefield, signed by 5,000 persons ; also from Deptford and other places to the same effect. The Noble Lord then said that he had another petition to present, which he would feel it his duty to read. It was from,Ruxton, in Halifax, and against the extension of the Poor Law Amendme'nt Act to that parish. Tho Noble Lord then read the petition at length, and said that he admired the straightforward manner in whir h the petitioners had stated what they feared as grievance 3 ; but he considered they laboured under a delusion in regard to their fears. Lord MALMESBURY said the petition was informal. Earl FITZ WILLIAM moved that it should be received. Lord ABINGER said that the petition was informal, as it had no signatures on the first sheet. Lord MAISIESBURY said that he had made his re mark without meaning any thing disrespectful, for the par ties could again send it forward when properly signed. Earl FITZ WILLIAM said that all he required was, that the petitioners should understand this. The petition was then withdrawn. Lord BROUGHAM presented petitions from Roch dale, St, Martin's, Westminster, St. John, Hampstead, and many other parishes, praying for the abolition of Church- rates. Lord ABINGER presented a petition from the Town Clerk and Clerk of the Peace for Norwich, complaining of unfair conduk towards him by the Corporation of that city, and praying that a clause granting hint compensation might be inserted in the Corporation Amendment Bill. ord REDESDA LE presented petitions from Lilburno and other parishes, against the abolition of Church-rates. PROTESTANT PETITION. The Marquis of DO \V NS HIR E then moved the Ord, :r of the Day, for the reception of the petition of which lie had given notice. The Order of the Day having been read, The NOBLE LORD said he appeared to present to their Lordships one of the most important petitions of the ses sion—it was from the Protestants of Ireland. It was agreed to at a meeting, held in Dublin ()tithe 24th January last, and was attended by men of all ranks ; and as he pre sided on the occasion, lie was proud to say that a more re spectably conducted meeting he had never seen. The grounds upon which the meeting was thought necessary was, that the affairs in Ireland had assumed an aspect whh h gave very serious cause of apprehension to the Pro testants of that country. It arose principally pecans() of the impunity with which the Catholic Association— (No, no, from Lord 'Melbourne and others)—he was ready to receive the correction of the Noble Viscount, thouLb lac thought he was not far wide of the mark in the name lie had given it, He believed it would be more proper to give it the name of the National Association.—( H ea r.) He was now discharging a duty imposed on him by the state of the country ; he need not remind their Lordships of votes which he had given in that House ; he had voted for the Emancipation Act in the hope that it would move beneficial to I-eland—he had been disappointed. He endea voured to promote peace in Ireland at all tlmes.--(tieer, hear.) One of the arguments in favour of emancipation was, that the old system placed one portion of tie community pre-eminent above another—( Hear, licar)— be t now that the Act was passed, and when he look d at the proceedings of the General Association, he consi dered that its object was to place the Roman Catholics in the same state of pre-eminence as the opponents of em.,o cipation formerly were. It was on these grounds, anxious as he was for the peace and tranquiifli y of Ireland, that he had joined his fellow Protestants for the purpose of prese rv ing it.—(H ear .) Th e petition ivas most respectably signed, and had attached to it 200,0;'0 signatures, and would have had many more, but th it was thought desirabl e it s h ou ld he presented :it as early a period as possible. Ile would now read the pie i tion as the course most respectful (in his opinion) to their Lordships and the petitioners. The Noble Marquis then read the petition at length. Viscount MELBOURNE—On looking at this subject, which has created such a stir, and which involves so many matters concerning the interests of the country, I should have expected that some other mode than petitioning would hare been adopted for expressing the opinions, the feelings, the ap prehensions, the fears, and terrors cf those whose names were attached to the petition. Before calling the attention of your Lordships to the topics contained in the petition, I wish to express my opinion of the manner in which the Noble Marquis has presented the petition, and I must say that the language which he has used was exceedingly temperate, ‘ and that, on stating his reasons for concurring in it, the Noble Marquis his observed that propriety vdiieh ought to be observed on such oc casions. I cannot, however, say so much for the language of the petition, nor fail to observe the very different style and manner of those who spoke on the question on the other side of the water. But, considering the importance attached to Cie petition, and the great pomp with which it has been got up and brought forward, I consider it my duty to make a fiav observations on it ; and, first of all, I will call your Lordships' attention to the time of the meeting, and the manner in which it was got up. The meeting was called by requisi tion, and to that requisition, I see the signatures of many Noble Lords opposite. [The Noble Viscount then read the requisi tion, calling on the Protestant noblemen, gentlemen, and citi zens of Ireland to assemble at the Mansion-house, in Dublin, on the 24th of January, in order to prepare a loyal address to his Majest), and draw up petitions to both Houses of Parlia ment against the attempts made to undermine and destroy the Protestant religion.] Now it was said to be a great Protestant meeting, and the requisition was signed by a great number of Protestants ; but it ought to be remembered that there was a counterpart to this requisition, and that a protest was agreed to against holding the meeting. The protest I will read to your Lordships. It is as follows :—" We, the undersigned, feel ourselves called upon to express our deep regret that a notice should have been issued, calling for an exclusive meeting of the Protestants of Ireland in Dublin, on the 24th, of January ; and suggesting dangers which we do not believe there is any reason whatever to apprehend, and which we feel assured not one single faet can be adduced to prove. We lament that a duty has been thus imposed on us of protesting against a requisition which eight members of the House of Lords have deemed it expedient to publish on the very eve of the meeting of Parliament. We consider a meeting of such a character calculated to interrupt the tran quillity which at present happily prevails in Ireland, and in tended only to bias the discussion of measures which we be lieve to be necessary for the promotion of the national inte rests, mid which we hope will occupy the earliest and most dispassionate attention of the Legislature." This protest is signed by eight Members of this House, by forty-four Peers, and by sixteen Peers now generally resident in Ireland. lam not going to make any invidious comparison, but I may he permitted to say that those who signed the requisition did not possess all the property and wealth of the country, and that those who protested against the meeting are possessed of at least equal wealth and property. The protest was signed also by fifty-seven Members of Parliament, the majority of whom are necessarily Protestants, and the great majority of the re presentatives of Ireland ; and, without meaning anything like disrespect, I may say that the meeting formed only a portion of the Protestants of Ireland.—( Hear.) A great body of Pro testants entirely differed and dissented from the objects of the meeting, and the language held at it. That meeting was evi dently held for a particular purpose, and not for the discussion or consideration of any subject, or expressing a deliberate and unbiassed opinion. The terms of admission to the meet. ing show the nature of its object. The conditions are thus described on the tickets That the bearer approved of the object and agreed to the necessity of the meeting, and was Now, to b. amenable to the authority of th e Ch a i rman ." Now, I do not say that they had not a right to call a meet ing in that way if they thought proper ; but I say that was a meeting not for the purpose of discussing or considering a particular subject, but for assenting to resolutions on which those who attended had made up their minds. Resolutions were drawn up and agreed to, and directed to be presented to both Houses of Parliament. I cannot help expressing my great concern that these resolutions should have been adopted. There is great injustice and impropriety in more than one of them; but I am prepared to make every allowance for the feelings by which the Protestants of Ireland are actuated at the present time. I always very well knew that it would bo impossible to carry the Roman Catholic Relief Act into full operation, and to bring about the natural consequences of it ; and necessary those consequences must have been, for it could not be supposed that that Act was to remain a dead letter—it could not be supposed that Roman Catholics were only to be pro nounced eligible to public offices, and that they should never be chosen to them ; seeing that this Act and its necessary conse quences must tend to break in upon the monopoly and power which the Protestants of Ireland have hitherto enjoyed, 1 al ways knew and felt that it could not be carried into full operation without causing for a time considerable mortifica tion and discontent on the one hand, and a certain degree of perhaps undue triumph and exultation on the other. I am ready, therefore, to make every allowance for the feel ings under which the Protestants of Ireland are likely to be labouring at the present moment. Ido not think that those feelings of opposition originated altogether in interested mo tives, or from considerations of the immediate pecuniary loss to members of their own party in such offices and appoint ments. I believe what they most suffer is from the wounded feelings at the loss of superiority and influence which they formerly possessed; and therefore it is that I say again I am ready to make just allowance for any expressions of exasperation and bitterness which are natural to human feelings, and which we have a right to expect on such ec casions.—(Hear, hear.) With all this disposition to make all fair allowances, however, I must say that I consider the manner in which these resolutions have been brought forward at the meeting in question has been such as to far exceed all the latitude, all the freedom of observation, which the circumstances entitled the framers of them to claim. The parties who have subscribed to these resolutions have touched upon matters of the highest importance to the State and to the country with a roughness of handling , a violence of manner, and a latitude of expression, which I consider quite unwarrantable. These resolutions, my Lords, draw a picture from which it would appear that the country was in a state: al most bordering on anarchy—that there was no security in it for life or property ; that the Protestants were in a worse condition than ever the Catholics were in the worst days of the penal code ; that, in fact, there was no parallel to be found for the present state of things in the days of Charles I. and the Irish Massacre, or of the Revolution, when James 11. was master of Ireland. With respect to any fancied analogies of this kind it will be impossible for me to enter upon any such discussion, but if I were inclined to draw a picture of the state of Ireland, I think I might draw a very different one from that comprised in these resolutions, but perhaps one quite as near the truth. All I can at present pretend to do is to go into those points in these resolutions which really state anything like a charge against the general government of the empire, or of particular mat ters in its administration. The first point of this character is that condemning the existence in Dublin of a body called the General Association. With respect to that Association, and the prudence of establishing it, I have already on a former occasion expressed my opinion, and from that opinion I now see no reason to depart. I beg leave to say, however, that under existing circumstances I do not think it would be altogether prudent, admitting the inexpediency of that Association, to exert any active means for its suppression : and the Noble Duke opposite has himself, if I recollect rightly, expressed himself to the same effect. However this may be, I know very well that the Association is not in itself illegal, although there are some persons ih„the country who have declared it was so. I must say I have heard with surprise that a very distinguished member of the Irish bar has stated as his opinion that this Association is contrary to the common last of the land. If that be indeed the case, it appears to ins that the Legislature has been doing what was very unnecessary in passing Acts, which it did on former occasions, against the Catholic Association.— ( Hear.) It was very unnecessary, in my opinion, to pass laws for the abolition of Catholic Associations if this Asso ciation is contrary to the law of the land. So far from this, however, I have always understood it to be the general notion that neither the Catholic Associations, nor any associa tion of this kind, could be met by the common law of this em pire. There have been various measures passed, from time to time, for the repression of seditious meetings. I have never hesitated to vote for such measures, when I thought them ne cessary. Whether it is expedient or not, in general, to resort to such measures, I will not pretend to argue ; but I do nut believe that any Minister would ever lend himself to break in upon the natural liberties of the Constitution with ambitious or designing views. It certainly has always been a matter of doubt with me whether such measures ever add power to a Government for the maintenance of the law; whether, on the other hand, the clamour and discontents which they give rise to du not rather tend to weaken than to strengthen the administra tion of the Government. With respect to the course pursued i towards the Association now in question, I agree and concur n it, and I think that the meeting at which these resolutions were adopted had no reason to complain of the Government of Ireland on that account. There are one or two of the reso lutions which so nearly concern the administration of justice in that country, the well-being of society, and the credit of the Government, that I cannot refrain from making a few observations upon them. One of these resolutions states, " That in the administration of justice the bias of an un friendly government is evident, by the setting aside of the fit and competent gentlemen nominated for the office of High Sheriff. in the constitutional and legal mode by the Lord Chancellor and judges of the land, and the arbitrary substitu tion of others in their stead, Opposed to be more favourable to the objects of the democratic party, and More pliant to the will of the Irish Executive." I beg to say that as to the im putation contained in the latter part of this resolution I utterly and entirely deny it. I deny that the Sheriffs have been en listed on account of their supposed democratic predispositions, or because they were supposed to be pliantly inclined towards the views of Government. With respect to passing' over names in the lists presented by the Judges, 1 believe it is no unusual thing to pass over a whole list in Ireland, where much more latitude of discretion is required in this matter than in England. 1 will not go through all the cases which have been referred to, but will merely state that I have received infor mation upon the subject of them which has been perfectly satis factory to Me, and which I believe would prove equally sat isfactory to your Lordships if you were to go through them. The three persons who have been particularly referred to it became neces sary to pass over on account of the death of Baron Smith, who hid presented them, and the impossibility of obtaining any traces as to the inquiries upon which he had founded LiS recen:mcr.tiation. In Louth the Chief Baron departed from the course which Judges always pursue on these occasions, and did not a•k the sheriff anythieg on the subject, but made out a list of his own, which list, on account of its not being found, d upon local information, was found to be very defective, and it accordingly became imperative upon the Government to sup ply its defects. I again deny that sheriffs have in any case been selected upon political grounds, or in a manner not sus ceptible of the most complete and satisfactory defence. And now, my Lords, I cannot help thinking that this resolution, throwing discredit as it does upon the very fount of justice, has been very hastily adopted, and that some better information should have been obtained on the subject before it was framed. But the next resolution goes beyond everything in violent, rash, intemp7rate, hazardous, and dangerous expressions : " That the patronage of the Irish Government, and its prero gative of mercy, have been abused to the furtherance of purposes injurious to the peace of the country, the admi nistration of its laws, and the stability of British connec tion ; that partizans have been placed in office as assist ant barristers, as magistrates, as officers in the con stabulary and police, whose recommendation in some in stances has been their unscrupulous attachment to a faction ; and that appointments made in this spirit have been subsidiary to the creation of fictitious votes, and have greatly prejudiced in public opinion the administration of justice." Now, in the first place, as to the allegation that the Government of Ire land places partizans in office, I put that altogether out of consideration. This is an accusation to which every Govern ment has been equally open, and it has and must ever be the practice that Government should not put men in high offices of state whom they suppose to hold political opinions not in unison with their own. But when this resolution comes to cast a slur on a gentleman in the execution of his public duties, accuses him of placing fictitious votes upon the register, I do say that the framers of this resolution ought to have some real foundations upon which to rest such a charge before they venture to bring it forward.—( Cries of " Hear, hear." With respect to the prerogative of mercy, any alle gations against the fairness of, its administration cannot but excite the strongest feelings of alarm and terror in all who hear it. Under this feeling Parliament has always been ex tremely tender in touching upon this matter, and I must say that I cannot conceive anything more dangerous to the public peace and safety than bringing the exercise of the Royal pre rogative of mercy under constant discussion, either in this or the other House of Parliament. If it is really supposed by any persons that Government has lent itself to administer this prerogative for the advancement of its own interested motives, then I say it is the duty of those who hold .such an opinion to do their utmost to remove that Government from power. There is no other remedy ; and without this I think I am entitled to style this a most unjustifiable, rash, and imprudent resolution.—( Hear, hear, hear.) I know that many objections have been raised against the manner in which my Noble Friend the Lord Lieutenant, has pardoned certain individuals in the course of certain journeys through the country. lam sure that my Noble Friend is himself per suaded that such is not the course which should be generally pursued in such matters; but at the same time I consider tat in the peculiar state of the country at the time a bene ficial effect might be produced at the moment by such a proceeding ; and I can assure your Lordship that on none of these occasions has mercy been extended without the fullest consideration of the cases of the prisoners. With respect to the general state of the country, we are led to believe from these resolutions that it is in a most dreadful state of anarchy, that life and property are alike unsafe, and that such a state of things prevails as to call loudly upon your Lordships and the Government for the interposition of their authority. Upon this subject I beg your Lordships' attention to the con tents of a letter from a gentleman for whom I entertain consi derable respect, and who, I believe is held in much regard and esteem by some ,of your Lordships who belong to the county in which he is assistant barrister, I mean the county Tipperary. Every body knows that this is a county in which, if any where breaches of the law are very apt to prevail, and therefore we may not unreasonably infer that when things are going on well here, that an average degree of peace and good order pre vails throughout the country.—(The Noble Viscount here read a letter from Mr. Howley, as we understood the name to be, but in a manner so indistinct and hurried that not a single word of it reached the Gallery.) Now, my Lords, this gen tleman also sends a letter from the under-sheriff, giving some gratifying information respecting the execution of writs in that county, but more particularly those in that most critical matter, Tithes.—(The, Noble Viscount here read a shorter communication, which was as inaudible as the last.) Now, my Lords, I think it will be admitted that these are gen tlemen who must know something of the real state of the country in their particular districts, and unless we are to suppose that they wilfully sat down to write merely what would be agreeable to the Government, I am at a loss to con ceive how we can discredit their statements, thjit the condition of the country in the place they write is at present, compara tively speaking, very satisfactory. Ido not wish to hold out too sanguine an expectation on this subject, however, because I know that periods of the greatest tranquillity are sometimes THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 29, 1837 immediately succeeded by outbreakings of discontent and mis rule. I take these statements merely for as far as they go, and I say that they are a complete answer to this petition and the resolutions now under your Lordships' notice.--(Hear, hear.) Amidst one or two general topics, which I sincerely wish had not been introduced, there is an bservation upon a point which has sometimes been referred to in this House, namely, the perjury which the Roman Catholic Members were supposed to have committed in voting for the Bills which have been introduced on the subject of the Church of Ireland. Now, I cannot allow that to be a just charge of accusation against these Members, because I cannot condemn any of the Hon. Gentlemen who voted for that measure without at the same time condemning myself. I, my Lords, have not taken that oath, but I am bound to its intention the same as if I had.--(Hear, hear, hear.) My desire is for the maintenance of the Church, and if I believed that that measure tended to weaken or endanger that Church, I should be guilty, not of the crime of perjury, but of a still greater crime, that of ac ting against my own principles and feelings.—(Loud cheers.) Saying this, I cannot by any possibility condemn these gentle men, because, if I did, I should be condemning myself also. Ido not approve of that oath. I wish it had never been in troduced into the Act. We all know how it got in ; it was because we could not get the Bill without it.—( A laugh, and " Hear, hear.") The opponents of the measure called for securities before they could be brought to accede to it ; but on considering the matter, they found that there were no securi ties which could be given them ; so they took this oatln'which they considered as something in the nature of a security. 1 must repeat, however, that I consider that oath to be in itself highly objectionable. In my opinion Members of Parliament ought to come to their duties unshackled and unprejudiced upon any subject whatever; they should come entirely free to act according to their judgment ; and any such an oath as this is very much in the nature of that which I object to very much upon the hustings, namely, pledges, which are equally contrary to the spirit and wording of the writ, which directs that persons shall be sent to Parliament with sufficient power to consent to such measures as may be introduced before Parlia ment. Now, I will suppose that such an oath had been adminis tered to Parliament before the period of the Reformation —it would have been argued, doubtless, by the Roman Catholics of that time that this oath prevented Members voting for the Re formation. But Ido not think so. And if I had lived in those days, and had to take such an an oath, I would still have voted for the Reformation.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Not to en ter into more detail, I must say that there are many more of these resolutions the tone of which I cannot approve of, and that I am extremely sorry to see them signed by persons of any weight and character in the country. Is it possible, my Lords, that you can ever expect peace or tranquillity in Ire land whilst you continue to attack the religion of so large a ma jority of its population?—( Hear, hear.) It would be no light matter to declare war against even a small religious sect ; how much more serious the undertaking to make war against the religion of a whole population ?—( Hear.) If .Gen tlemen should take it into their heads to persuade persons to give up the supposed errors of their creed, that was a proceed ince. which I could not pretend to prevent; but atthe same time those entrusted with the safety and councils of the nation shoUld think a little before they assault with invective the re ligion of so large a portion of the population.—( Hear, hear. ) 1 have trespassed upon you Lordship's attention with these ob servations upon some of these resolutions because, from the manner in which they have been brought forward, and the names which are subscribed to them, I considered that they called for particular obsetvation.—( Cheers. ) The Earl of RODEN said that the Noble Viscount bad read the requisition signed by the Peers who called the meet ing. The words contained in that rcquision were most con stitutional in their nature, and most defined in their charac ter ; that the single purpose of calling that meeting was that they might approach that and the other House of Parliament, and bring before them those grievances under which they had suffered. The protest referred to by the Noble Viscount ap peared in Dublin for the first time on the morning of the meet ing, and was signed certainly by some most respectable Peers, and by some other individuals of the highest respectability. For some of those Peers he entertained the greatest respect, for many of them the greatest regard, but he must beg leave to say that they took a little too much upon themselves when they put their names to that document. What was the lan guage of this protest ? The protest objected to the meeting calling itself exclusively a meeting of the Protestants of Ire land. So far it might he correct. But when they stated that the object and intention of those eight Peers who signed the requisition was for a particular purpose, he bogged leave to say that they bad right whatever to state what the intentions of other individuals were, unless they had grounds of knowing what those intentions were.— ( Hear, hear.) When he saw the names of the Duke of De vonshire, the Duke of Leinster, and of many other noblemen who signed that protest, he was satisfied that many of them were acquainted e ith the circumstances of the country, but many of them put their names to the document as members of a party.--( Hear, hear.) It was totally impossible for them, from their absence from the country, to be acquainted with the real state of the country, and whether there was tranquillity or not. The noble individuals who signed the protest stated that they believed that the measures which it was the object of the meeting to frustrate were necessary for the promotion of the national interests. That might be so or not. But those Noble Lords stated that they believed that tite meeting was calculated to interrupt the tranquillity of Ireland, and this tranquillity the Noble Viscount referred to. It was with asto nishment that he heard a Minister of the Crown, who ought to be acquainted with the real situation of his Majesty's subjects in Ireland—it- was-with astonishment that he heard the Noble Viscount re-echo this language about the state of tranquillity of ,Irelaud. lie thought that some of the Noble Lords who signed the protest must hove been dreaming of the tranquillity of Devonshire-house, or of their comfortable residences in Yorkshire.--( A laugh.) They could never have known the situation in e blob the Protestant clergymen of Ireland ware placed at this moment.—(Hear, hear.) The tran quillity of death it was that reigned in Ireland. It was this tranquillity ; and be would prove it by a reference to the documents presented by the Government itself—by the proclamations of the Lord-Lieutenant for the last twelve months ; and then lie would ask whether it was a token of tran quillity when he informed their Lordship, that for the last twelve months there had been 290 proclamations in the Go vernment Gazette ; and of these 71 were for actual murder.— ( Hear, hear. ) But let their Lordships remark how this tran quillity had increased. From the 7th of February to the 23d —being only sixteen days—the proclamations for actual mur der had been 11.— ( Hear, hear.) Where, then, was the tran quillity referred to by the Noble Viseount ?—( Cheers.) He could refer to other instances to show what grounds there were for speaking of this tranquillity. He would trouble their Lordships with an application from the Rev. Francis Killaire, of Waterford, to the Asylum Fire and Life Insurance Office in Dublin, who, in answer to the application, said that they were willing to effect an insurance on his life, but They must except in the policy, cases of death from popular violence or assassination—exceptions which were now always introduced into policies upon the lives of Protestant clergymen in Ire land.--( Hear, hear.) The folio sing was a letter that was re ceived in answer to a similar application : " Albion Life Insurance Office, Dublin, March 3, 1837. " Dear Sir—ln reference to the insurance proposed by you to the Albion Company, on your own life, and submitted to the Directors in London, the 28th ult., I regret to acquaint you that, under the present aspect and state of some parts of Ireland, the Directors very reluctantly decline your proposi tion. Inclosed, therefore, I beg to hand you a Bank of Ire. land post-bill for 28/. 17s. 6d., being the amount left with me in the event of the Directors accepting the insurance on your life, the receipt of which please acknowledge. . " I am, dear Sir, your obedient servant, " Rev. Wm. T. Homan." " JOHN H. JAMES. These examples went t 6 show, at all events, how ill founded was the declaration of the Noble Viscount. Those of their Lordships' House who were in the habit of knowing any thing of the proceedings of what was called the National Association of Ireland would remember that, on the first announcement of this legal and Constitutional meeting, the National Associa tion, or whatever it was called, met, and entered into certain resolutions, feeling indignant that Protestants should presume to call a meeting for the purposes set forth. On that day one of the Members of the Association moved that a Committee should be appointed for the purpose of taking means to pre vent this Protestant meeting.—( Hear, hear.) And what were the means proposed ? That one hundred thousand men should be marched into Dublin to overawe their proceedings. These men in buckram, however, had never appeared. But it was also stated by a Learned Gentleman, a Member of the Association, and one whom the Association acknowledged to be their owner—for he remembered that when an individual resisted an attempt on the part of that Learned Gentleman to put him down, some person in the meeting called out, " Is it not your own Association, Mr. O'Connell ?"—that Learned Gentleman, referring to another - Protestant meeting that had been held in the county of Down, stated that if that (the late meeting) should have the effect which the Protestant meeting at Down had had—namely, the effect of producing a change in the administration of the country—the consequence must and should be a bloody and brutal rebellion in Ireland. Such was the language used. 'lt was like telling a crowd not by any means to nail the unfortunate victim's ears to4he pump.—(A laugh.) The people were warned, indeed, not to raise a rebel lion, but they were told to be ready in case of such a circum stance by the great mover and director of his Majesty's Ad ministration.—( Hear, hear.) There were other proofs of the tranquil state of Ireland. When their Lordships found such expressions as he should read made use of openly, anct,avowed at a meeting in Dublin, it was a proof, indeed, of the tran quillity of the country.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The lan guage was used at a meeting at Carlow, at a dinner given there. The Noble Lord then re ad the f ollowing pas sage :—" Men of Carlow, are you ready ?—( A y , ay.) lam the last man to recommend the shedding of one drop of blood ; but we have tried every means of attaining our just rights, and they have failed. We have no course left us now but that which I have hitherto always deprecated—the shedding of blood. Blood must be shed.—(Uproar, and Hurrah.) My reason for now saying that blood must be shed is to prevent the shedding of blood, for if your enemies again get into power they will shed your blood." He was anxious to ascer tain, when he found this language denied, who were the per sons that attended the dinner. He found that the following persons were present :—The stipendiary Magistrate, Captain Vignolles, Lieut. Torrens, of the Fusileers, and the Chief Commissioner of Police. He begged to ask if Captain Vig nolles had made any statement to his Majesty's Government with respect to the words used at the dinner ?—( Hear, hear.) If Capt. Vignolles were present and heard there seditious. words, which were calculated to raise his Majesty's subjects into rebellion, and did not make any mention of them or re port them to the Government, he was totally unfit for the re sponsible station he filled, and ought -at once to be 'dismiised. —(Hear, hear.) He would call their Lordships' attention to another paragraph, which appeared the other day in a paper well known to belong to the party of which the Noble Vie. count was the head, and he would only ask the Noble Viscount had the Attorney-General for Ireland been directed to prosecute the individual who had been guilty of putting such words upon record ? The words were these :—" The day that would give a Tory Mi nistry to the empire would summons a million of Irishmen to arms. There would be a fearful rising—a simultaneous outbreak—a terrible struggle. A rebellion in one county in Ireland cost England eighteen thousand men, and twelve mil lions of additional debt. A prmdial disturbance in another took six months in harassing service to 35,000 men before it was even partially suppressed. What would it cost were all Ireland in arms ? A people with nothing to lose, and every thing to hope—once committed to a conflict—our natural ad vantages of position—every valley a ravine—every hill a for tress—every fence a bastion—a hardy people, and the ap proaching season when they could bivouac in the fields—all the smelly military and police stations absorbed by the popu lation—union—the courage of right and of despair animating us within, and the sympathies of the world without. Let England pause before she will let loose Toryism in Ireland with this its inevitable result, for, whatever may be the result of such a struggle, England would come out of it, even at the best, a third-rate nation !" He need hardly call for any other proof of this boasted tranquillity than the complete dead letter in which the law lay with respect to the recovery of property by Protestant clergymen.—(Hear.) Some cases connected with the administration of justice, to which he would refer, would afford an additional proof of the security of life and property, of the efficacy of the law, and of the manifestation of tran quillity. The Noble Earl here referred to several cases, in which, he said, notwithstanding the clearest evidence of guilt, the criminals were acquitted in consequence of a preponde rance of Roman Catholics on the juries. They had beard that those assembled at the meeting in Dublin, who had agreed to those resolutions, and signed the petition, the great majority of whom resided in Ireland—they had heard, it said, and that by a Minister of the Crown, that they were a miser able monopolising minority. He would ask, was such lan guagelbecoming in a Minister of the Crown when he spoke of as respectable, as loyal, as important a part of the community, as any in the British dominions ?—( Loud cheers.) He would say this, that if such language were used, it neither proved the great sagacity, nor the great temper, nor the great judgment of the individual who had used it.---(Loud cheers.) That they were a minority he confessed, but not in the sense in which that term had been applied in another place. if they were miserable, he was forced to confess that their misery arose from their loyalty.—(Loud cheers.) It was stated that the Protestant meeting was an exclusive one. That it was im possible for them otherwise to express their opinions ex perience already proved. A meeting was held some time since in the Coburg-garden in Dublin. At that meeting the Protestant citizens of Dublin, the loyal Protestant gentlemen, attended, for the purpose of delivering their opinions against the resolutions about to be brought forward, and the proposal made with respect to the conduct of the Hon. and Learned Member for the University of Dublin.—( Hear, hear.) What was the consequence? A most violent assault was made upon them. At the head of the persons who committed the assault there was a person of the name of Reynolds. He was tried, and found guilty of an aggravated assault and of a riot, and was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment, and also to pay a fine to the King. But what was the result? After one month's confinement Mr. Reynolds was liberated without any reference to the judges who tried him. Was such a proceeding as this calculated to produce respect for the law or for the administrators of the law ? He begged to call attention to a letter that had been written to him by a gentleman who described himself as a Conservative Whig, and who had been at one time an active supporter of the Noble Viscount's Administration ---[His Lordship then read the letter]. Mr. Thomas Reynolds was a leader, and the na ture and efficacy of his guidance in the field of battle formed one of the principal subjects for the consideration of the jury on the trial. That trial was had before a jury whose re spectability none has affected to doubt, except so far as dis qualification for discharging the duty of a juror may be inferred from the fact of being Protestant 1 The jury certainly have been disparaged in that respect by their creed ; for it is said, triumphantly, that the majority were Protestant. It is not, however, alleged that any of them was Orange, or marked as party men. Such as they were, however, they found Mr. Reynolds guilty, after a very long and patient investigation of the case by the court and jury, and after the ablest defence which very able counsel—Catholic counsel, too —court make for the patriotic culprit. The verdict met with the fu'l approbation of the two presiding judges—one the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, the other a very learned, very discriminating, and most merciful judge, Baron Smith. Their sense of the verdict, and their estimate of the quality of the offence, is, perhaps, best ascertained by the sentence they pronounced—an imprisonment for nine months—greatly aggravated, probably, in the opinion of the convict, by also binding him to give security to keep the peace. Mr. Reynolds was committed to prison in execution of this sentence. As a matter of course in Ireland at present, the liberal press im puted the conviction to the jury—the Protestant jury !—as if they were men utterly unfit, in their opinion, to sit in judgment on the trial of a Liberal Reformer, even under the direction of judges to instruct and charge them in matters of law, though the riot arose from a Catholic populace sitting to try—no, not to try, but after condemnation without trial— to pronounce sentence on a privy councillor and a legislator, absent, unheard, and undefended I It was also matter of popular complaint that the judge had misconducted himself in his charge, and that both his judges had been guilty of injustice, by pronouncing a sentence unwarranted in its sea erity by the facts, even if the verdict of guilty were not it self an unjust one. He would now make an observation or tiro respecting the National Association in Ireland, which had been adverted to by the Noble Viscount. The complaint made by himself and friends was that persons had been se lected for official and highly responsible situations from the National Association, who had been engaged in a way that was detrimental to the interests of the nation, and who had been parties to the passing of resolutions subversive of the Protestant religion—resolutions which declared that nothing but the voluntary principle would satisfy them. The,appoint ment of those individuals was complained of on that ground, and not because they professed the Roman Catholic religion. He had the pleasure of being acquainted with many Roman Catholics, for whom he entertained very great respect. He certainly did most cordially abhor and detest the doctrines of the Church of Rome ; he believed them, as he he had sworn he did when he first took his scat in their Lordships' House, to be idolatrous and superstitious ; but he nevertheless entertained the greatest respect for the persons professing them, and he was anxious to promote the interests of those persons, conceiving that their religion ought to make no dif ference in that respect.—( Hear, hear.) He rebutted thee the observations of the Noble Viscount, and would say that he did not participate in the statements on which the Noble Viscount had animadverted. He must say, also, that he was not influenced by party feeling. It made no difference to him who sat on this or that side of the House. He would de rive no advantage from any particular party being in power: he had no political ambition to,gratify. He could only be benefited by the formation of a Conservative Administration, as every man would be who had property to lose 'and a cha racter to maintain. That for which he contended was the great principle of civil and religious liberty in its true sense ; he contended for the toleration of the Protestant religion in Ireland ; he contended foil protection to those poor Ro man Catholics who were convinced of the error of their faith, and were anxious to come over to the Protestant religion, but who were prevented by the Power exer cised over them from obeying the dictates of their con science. There existed a party in Ireland which kept that country in chains, and as long as such a state of things continued he would vote against the measures which he thought likely to strengthen that party, and would oppose them by every means in his power. The Noble Viscount had acknow ledged what had been the effect of these measures—he said they had proved a great discouragement to and had inflicted a severe blow upon the Protestant religion. That such an ad mission had come from a Protestant he much lamented. He felt that he was bound to stand up against these measures, and though we lived in degenerate days, when the spirit of " li beralism," as it was called, but he- would term it infidelity, had nearly swamped the land, yet he believed there was still to be found, not only in their Lordships' House, but in the great mass of the middle class of society, a spirit of pure Protestantism, which would spring up and show itself possessed of such power as would convince Parliament that Protestantism could not be destroyed. He considered the country to be on the verge of a great crisis ; he was of opinion that the time was not far distant when the question to be decided would be, whe ther they must respect the Legislative Union or the Act of 1829.—( Hear, hear.) The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said, the Noble Lord had objected to the protest which he and others had signed. He admitted that when they spoke of tranquillity they used the term in its comparative sense, and, taking that view of it, he must contend that it was used most justifiably. The Noble Earl, to show that the word as employed in the protest was not warranted by the facts, had referred to letters dated in March, and which referred to what took place at the last as sizes, which were at a period subsequent to the signing of the protest; for when he signed this paper he instituted in his mind a comparison bntween the then state of the country and what it was in former periods. The Noble Earl found fault with the practice of the Government with respect to the selection of juries, but in doing so he misrepresented the facts. He said ' the Crown had given up the. practice of setting by jurors, but he should have gone further : lie should have said that they had abandoned the practice of setting by jurors on account of their religion.—(Hear.) There was a material difference between the two statements. The Noble Earl had also referred to certain trials, in which he stated that - the men were acquitted, though they were proved to be guilty. He must remark, that when a man had been acquitted by a trial by jury, it was a strong assertion to say that he was guilty. Formerly men were put aside be cause they were Roman Catholics, and the consequence was, that the people had not what it was most essential that they should have- , -confidence in the juries. But the Noble Earl said that the consequence of the present system was, that men came to be tried by those who were accomplices. In making this charge instances ought to have been quoted. It did so happen that in one case which had been alluded to elsewhere an accomplice was on the jury. The mats had been convicted three years before of a riot. But if they were disposed to carry out the principle that every man who bad been convicted of a riot, whether before magistrates summarily, or before them at quarter sessions, was thereby disqualified to act either as judge or juror, he would ask them did they con template carrying it into their own House ? (Cries of " Hear, hear.") With reference to the liberation of Mr. Reynolds, why was not that mentioned last year when his Noble Friend, the Viceroy of Ireland, was in his place for the purpose of meeting any ease that might be brought against his Government ? The fact in this instance was, that the Lord Lieutenant applied to the judge for his notes of the trial, and having laid them before the law officers of the Crown, they re- ported that the conviction was contrary to law.—( Hear.) Tl.e Noble Earl complained that this protest imputed motives to those by whom the resolutions were passed at the Dublin meet ing. The resolutions were signed by eight Peers of Parlia ment, at the head of whom was the Noble Lord. He called the Noble Lord the head, because he looked on him as the chief mover in all these proceedings, because he had lately performed the character of an agitator on that side of the way. He was, in fact, the great anti- O'Connell agitator.—( Hear, and a laugh.) What could that meeting have been held for by those eight Peers? It could not be to petition Parliament, be cause in their places they might address Parliament, if they had any complaints to make ; it could not be to address the Crown, because they were privileged as Peers to have an audience of the Crown. What other motive, then, could exist than that which those who signed the protest thought was the motive of the meeting ? He recollected that last Session a meeting took place at which the Noble Earl played the part of the great agitator, and he knows what took place afterwards. He had seen the speech made by the Noble Lord in Dublin, and he had heard how the sentiments in that speech had been received. They had seen it stated that there were to be a change in the Government. They had beheld the. northern light which shoee conspicuously and brilliantly at Glasgow. They had heard it proclaimed aloud by the party of the Noble Lord, " We shall triumph, and Protestantism will be in the ascendant again." That was the note which ran through the country ; and when the Noble Lords came forward at that time, it did appear as if some human feeling was operatieg upon them—it did seem as if they were anxious to push themselves forward into a good place, when they thought the victory was nearly achieved. If it had been possible for the Noble Earl and the Noble Marquis to make out a good case for their resolutions, it was their duty, as Peers of Parliament, not to stop there.—(Cheers.) These were the resolutions ; arid he would say that, to the common apprehension of any man, they charged the Irish Government, one with at tempting seriously to affect the liberties and privileges of the people, and the other with conniving at treason.— ( Hear, hear.) The words were " seditious organization which waS connived at by the Irish Government." That was an opinion 'which ought not to be lightly entertain -d, and still less ought it to be highly expressed. It went some thing beyond legitimate party warfare. It was an allegation which ought to be made, if not a matter of impeachment, at least the subject of a motion here and elsewhere.—( Cheers.) He could not think that either the Noble Marquis or the Noble Earl was sincere in the imputation ; and if they were not—if they had used those words without intending that a very pre cise construction should be put upon them—he thought there ought to be some retractation on their part. He would recal to the minds of Noble Lords what was the course which a former Government pursued towards the late Lord Fitzwilliam —what were the sentiments of Lord Castlereagh when the conduct of Lord Fitzwillinm was under discussion. He said that " the Noble Earl, in imputing to Ministers the crime of sheltering the Manchester Magistrates, had shown such dis trust of the Government that it would have rendered them liable to the imputation of weakness to continue him in his office. It was essential to the due administration of a popu lar office, and to the dignity of the Crown, that none of its servants should hold opinions derogatory to its honour and character. Lord Fitzwilliam, when he went to the meeting, at York, virtually resigned his office." Was there any thing in the conduct of Lord Fitzwilliam at all to be com pared with the conduct of the Noble Lords at the Dublin meeting?—( Hear, hear.) The resolution proposed at York only prayed for an inquiry into the conduct of the Magis trates ; it did not say that they were guilty, still less that the Ministers of the Crown had been guilty of any misconduct— ( Cheers.) The course pursued by Mr. O'Connell had been much censured by some of the Noble Lords opposite, but his Noble Friend on the second bench (the Earl of Donoughmore) had, he believed, attended a meeting at Tipperary, when a vote of thanks was carried to Mr. O'Connell. It was said to be the Noble Lord by whom that vote of thanks was moved ; at all events, the motion was carried with acclamation.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He had a great dislike of political associa tions. He never did connect himself with any, and though not much given to prophesying, he would say he thought he never should. He, however, did not think it becoming in an Irishman to mention associations with disrespect. What carried the first free trade in Ireland? What carried the independence of the Irish Parliament? He would ask, also, what caused the Catholic Emancipation Bill? He did not li e political associations, beealse h thought they always be tokened a distempered state of society ; but he must also say that open associations were at all times the least objectionable. Doubtless their Lordships would recollect what, on the rejec tion of certain measures, occurred last year.--( Hear, hear.) Remembering the feelings which were excited at that time, he thought there was as much excuse for the founders and mem bers of the National Association as ever there was for men con nected with any Association that ever was formed. That As sociation he did not belong to, but lie must say he was strongly tempted to belong to it at the close of last session.—( Cheers.) The reason why he did not, was because lie knew it sometimes happened that though such bodies set out on sound and good principles, they had not always wise heads and sound hearts to direct them, and resolutions were passed which it would be bad to pass over in silence, and it would be unbecoming and inconvenient to be at constant variance. He should be sorry to-see any attempt made by the Government to put the Asso ciation down ; that was nut an object to be effected in any way but one, which was to satisfy the reasonable part of the nation that there were no grounds ' that there were no suffi cient reasons, for maintaining it. He was more satisfied that. his name stood on the protest than if it were attached to those resolutions which had been so strongly worded, which were so triumphantly carried at that tumultuous meeting, the subject of their deliberation, but which were not acted on. These resolutions were voted on the 24th of January, and here they were now, on the 28th of April, this being the first time their Lordships had said one word on the subject.—( Hear, hear.) The numbers of sonic of the divisions might have worked some little change in the state of mind in which the Noble Lords were in Ireland. He would advise the Noble Lords not again to sign resolutions, unless in their places in Parliament they were disposed and able to defend them in a way becoming the grave manner in which they ought to be passed. The Earl of DONO ITGHM ORE said he had had certain misgivings in his mind as to the' quantity of power which would satisfy the Roman Catholics. Different members of his family had been the strenuous, the zealous, and the un compromising advocates of the Catholics of Ireland; but it was on the clear and perfect understanding that any poli tical power with which they were entrusted would not hie used to the injury of the Protestant establishment. Now, since the passing of the Catholic Relief Bill of 1829, all the engage ments which were entered into with the Protestant subjects of Great Britain and Ireland had not been faithfully kept. It was not necessary for him, at this time of day, to repeat to their Lordships in what way they had been violated ; but let him ask their Lordships if they recollected the evidence taken be fore the Committees of this House and the other House of Parliament ?—( Hear, hear, hear.) Was it not stated that the Protestant subjects of Ireland would be secured if tha't relief measure passed.? He did his utmost to get the Bill adopted ; he voted for it ; and what was the consequence of the passing of that Bill of 1829 ? Would they refer for an answer to the raging war which had been going on in Ire land? 'The other day, in Tipperary, a Protestant minister was starved to death. Were such circumstances to make no impression on his mind ? He was ready now, and he always should be, to admit the Catholics to a full participation in all the blessings of the British Constitution, but at the same time he was determined to maintain the Protestant Institutions in Church and State. These were some of the reasons for which he signed the resolutions ; but another reason was the attempt to pass the Municipal Corporation Bill, which he thought would tend to destroy the Protestant religion. For three years he had done nothing,. because he did not believe his Majesty's Government would leave the Protestants of Ireland in the state in which they found themselves. With respect to the statements of the Noble Viscount respecting the tranquillity of Ireland, it was evident that they proceeded from misinformation. From the accounts in his (Lord D.'s) possession, it appeared that in the space of only three years and a half, no fewer than six hundred and forty-one human beings had in that country been deprived of life. He asked if, under such circumstances, the country was in such a state as to justify the Lord Lieutenant in liberating from gaol in that country ninety-six persons ?—( Hear, hear, hear.) He trusted that he was no enemy to the extension o f mercy in any quarter to which mercy ought to be ex tended ; but, recollecting the difficulty of getting evidence and obtaining convictions, what must be the consequence of the Lord-Lieutenant's coming the day after and letting out of prison almost all who had been - convicted ? Was such a cout se as that calculated to assist the local magistrate in securing peace. No other feeling but that the Judges were tyrannical and the Juries in error could justify the Lord Lieutenant in this kind of wholesale liberation. The Noble Viscount oppo site had declared that he was quite sure the Noble Earl at the head of the Government of Ireland would not have interposed so freely with the Royal prerogative without the fullest pre vious consideration. Now , what was the extent of that con sideration ? One morning his Excellency goes to the gaol of Clonmel, and, without any communication with a single county gentleman, discarges fifty-seven persons. And that was called the fullest previous consideration.—( Hear, hear, hear.) After a while his Lordship sent to the Governor of the gaol to order their discharge ; when the answer to this superfluous requisition was, that they had been already dis charged many hours before. Among the prisoners who were thus let out, were two men of the names of James and Thomas Milbourne, whose crime was shooting at with intent to murder, Thomas Cleary and son. Without any previous in. quiry these men were liberated from prison. Another person, of the name of Bryan, had been convicted of a most grievous and wanton assault, amounting almost to a deprivation of life. He had been ordered to be imprisoned twelve months, and to find securities for his good behaviour for five years. What followed ? That on the 22d of January this man was turned out of gaol without giving any security whatever. Now the course thus pursued was most detrimental to all good government. It was most painful to him (Lord Do noughmore) to make these statements. He had been charged with a want of consistency in politics. The charge was unfounded. He (Lord Donoughmore)had been charged with proposing a vote of thanks to Mr. O'Connell, in the county of Tipperary. He had done so, and he felt perfectly justified in having done so. After the Reform Bill had been thrown out in the House of Lords it had been thought neces sary to get up petitions on that subject in Ireland. For his conduct on that occasion he had proposed a vote of thanks to Mr. O'Connell; and if that Hon. and Learned Gentleman's conduct had been as praiseworthy down to the present day, he (Lord Donoughmore) should have been happy to repeat the proposition. _ The Earl of GLENGALL wished the Roman Catholic Peers of Ireland would take pattern by the Roman Catholic Peers of England. The Protestants of Ireland had been called " a miserable monopolizing minority." Undoubtedly they were the great monopolizers o f the land. In Tipperary' there were 550.000 acres, cf which not more than 30,000 be - longed to the Roman Catholics. In Galway the proporti proportion in the possession of Catholics was much grTiteled of land in the possession of Protestants compared with rester. - Surely the Protestants possessing this property tthe t o h e Noble protection. v sco l u n n t Howley,.ro h ose ,cver, t m assistant-barrister of Tipperary. It seemed, order had re to ad sh a o l N e v a th er e f t r r o a m riqu A i l l r l i . .t w y eOfe ea rned. the charge of Judge Foster at Clonm el, that that Judge totally differed upon the subject :from Mr. J-I?,se,d._ ley. In the last year more murders were co mmittee l ts Tipperary than had been committed dur in g several year* before. In the last five years t here bad been 9`28 c o mmitments for murders in Tipperary ; in the lasts three years the number had been 573. During the last year 1,567 persons had been committed to g aol in L the county of Tipperary. After referring to a circular letter addressed by Mr. ‘Drummond to the governors of the ale' rent gaols in Ireland, desiring information with respect to the character and conduct, the state of health , &c., of the pri soners, and whom he would recommend for lib er eion, m tha Noble Earl proceeded to show the evil resu lts of such is taken lenity. Several of the Tipperary magistrates bad bard eett murdered, and others had been fired at. It w as reall y I upon the magistrates if, after having faithfully discharged the painful part of their duty in committing prisone rs, they vnre not allowed to partake in the grace of extend in g clement:Vs The petition did not impute the liberation of the se criminals: any political feelings on the part of the Lor d-Lieutenant ; but it was undoubtedly the case that many libe rations had taken place which were wholly unjustified by the eircemstances of the case. [The Noble Earl here described se v e ral instances of the kind.] In the nomination of sheriffs the most efficient persons had been passed over, and others appointed .—(Hear, h hear, hear.) It was well known that a Member of the National Association had been appointed an assistant bar rister fur the county of Longford. He must say that the system of appointing partisan assistant barristers, such as Mr. Tighe—( Hear, hear)—was calculated to defeat the ends of justice. That gentleman, when adverting to the names of certain electors, said the House of Commons had no right on earth to strike electors off the list. Mr. Hudson, another assistant barrister, and two others well known, bad acted on a similar way—had replaced on the registry names rejected by the Carlow Election Committee, and one of those very names had been struck off that day by the Committee now sitting, and the rest probably would be treated in the same way. Now it ought to be remembered that dad assistant' barristers were bound by their oaths to administer the law faithfully and impartially, yet some of them were members of the General Association, consequently bound by another pledge to obstruct the law relative to the collection of Tithes. Their Lordships also would recollect that a Bill was brought in last year for placing the constabulary force in Ireland or, a new footing; and he had been told by Members of both Houses that it was distinctly understood during the discussion on the Bill that the officers who had served in the former constabulary force should have the preference in the new ap pointments. Colonel Shaw Kennedy had been placed at the head of the new constabulary body—that appointment met with unanimous approbation, and might be said to have been adopted by acclamation in both Houses. Now, whit was the course which was pursued when the new Act came into operation ? Twenty-three new officers were appointed at an expense to the county of 12,0001. a year, and that, too, at a time when, according to the representation of his Majesty's Ministers, the country was in a state of tranquil lity. He doubted the tranquillity of the country, and though an increased force might be required, he did not think to that extent ; but certainly he must regret the appointment of Mr- Lawrence Crewe Smith to the office of stipendiary Magistrates who was a member of the Association, and who must necessa rily, on that account, obstruct justice in the execution of the law. With regard to sub-inspectors, twenty-five had been al" pointed, and seven of these had never been in the police be' fore, and there were also 150 who had been in the old police, and were left without appo intments. Thene were eighteen paymasters, only two of whom had been in the Falk* before. An Act was passed last Session for appointing certain number of Crown solicitors with a salary of 200 1 . * year, and four of these gentlemen were members of the, Asse ciation. These were the Crown solicitors for Tipperary, We meath, and Sligo (another county was mentioned by the ,robl e Earl, but we did not catch the name). These gentlemen ha a , important business at the Quarter S essions. A vast numb of tithe cases were decided at these Sessions, and the Cro solicitors were bound by their oath to carry the law ittt° effect, while, by their connection with the Association, thtl were pledged to a contrary course. He Might mention an iii . ; l ‘ stance to show how the law was administe red. Much IA", been said about the system of appointing pacificators, an great stress had been laid on that by a Noble Lord opposite, Now, be believed most of these pacificators were dram-selle rs and shopkeepers in towns ; he believed, at least as far a s re--* garded Tipperary, all the bona fide Roman Catholic gentrl had invariably kept aloof from every Association of that sort- In Tipperary there were no Orangemen ; but certain partieor to suit their purposes, made all Protest ants Orangemen. Tb,e Nob!c Earl concluded by sayinr , that he would not trolllo. their Lordships further, and thanked them for the attenfjolt with which they had listened to his remarks. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE had declined to sign the , protest, though he concurred entirely in the sentiment§ whch it contained. He concurred in the sentiments Watts! i he thought it was proper to call the Protestants of Irela nd to a sense of the impropriety of their conduct, and divell them from a course so inconsistent with• their former coll." duct, and so dangerous to the peace of the country.—( Heel. hear ) He could not help remar kin g the inconsistency °1- the Noble Earl who spoke last but o ne ; that Noble Earl sal% the resolutions met with his entire concurrence ; and whY! leeceuse he had apprehensions that a Bill would be brough''_ into Parliament by his Majesty's Ministers f o r reforming Of Municipal Corporations of Ireland; and in the same slice°. the Noble Earl told the House that he had supported the . 11 , ° ' man Catholic Emancipation Bill in the full desir e that his Ma' jcsty's Roman Catholic subjects might enjoy all the privilege° v of his other subjects—no, not all the privileges —he knew privilege} could nut enjoy all the privileges—he knew that with o a reform in the Municipal Corporations they could not ell them ; and notwithstanding that , he t ells the House thsa he quarrelled, with a Bill which was to be introduced, a° charged the Government with all mariner of offences, even Wit,.ls treasonable practices, because he apprehended his Majcs, tl Ministers were about to introduce a Bill for Co r p oration I'4: form, by which they might carry out those ve r y principles e; which he supported Catholic emancipation.—( Loud cheers:tit, The petition had been got up because Nob l e Lords oppose.' considered their lives and property insecure, and they IT, no hope but in the House of Lords. Why the petition did agreed to three months ago, and yet the Nob le Marquis "14 notwithstanding not think it worth while, all the alarm 1 1 1 b anxiety under which he laboured, he did not think it to while to come to the House the first day of the Session apply for relief, but had for three months allowed the and property of his Majesty's subjects to remain in insectirli —(Cheers.) However, after two months had e la p sed fr° o the commencement of the Session, the Noble Marquis g s e d, notice of a motion, and moved that the House be surneaoato Well, he was anxious to see what was the object of the 1 4° 0 Marquis's motion ; but the Noble Marquis did no t present 4 petition—no, he postponed his motion, and left to the lee o f of the Catholics the lives and property of the Protestae ts e re Ireland for two weeks longer. And as to the powers to be el l )/ cised by their Lordships, the Noble Marquis seemed tolait indifferent on that point ; for after 'having allowed the le ° 4 0 to hang over so long, when he does bring it o n, he el le, the Lord Lieutenant with something likd treasonable used and when he is asked if he bad any motion to propose, answer was no, he had not even a notice of motion te g of --(Loud cheers.) Yet he had allowed persons to trulelloo. statements trom newspapers in any quarter, which the. be st vernment had no means of contradicting; and wbe. t e statements are embodied in the petition, the Noble lvi a . r 3,ei moved that the petition be read, and he read actor ta ble himself, and concludes by moving that it do lie o n the 11 5 ,., _(Cheers and laughter)—and was that all the Noble ;j a i quis and the Noble Lords who 'signed the petition ie t lo etl, to do for the purpose of quelling disturbances in Ire to ? and enabling the landed proprietors to collect their r e de' But Noble Lords opposite had gone into som e minuet de' tails; they had adduced some trifling cases, which thelera C flounced as irregular and contrary to C onst i tu ti o nal 0° fa ct* ment, but they had not given any general data, or arl had to which his Majesty's Ministers could reply. True thej a e impugned the general government of Ireland, " 5 re ought to be remembered that they impugned it onlY B o pee, garded the exercise of two constitutional functions-e-ti'ductel rogativo of mercy exercised by the Crown, and the coughs hi jurymen—( Hear, hear)—and these charges were br t oe persons who arrogated to themselves the name of C° o ll te s p of tionalist—who used the word Constitution at e v ery _ O O O their proceedings ; the word was constantly in their le e e., as if it were their peculiar property.—( Hear, be a %tiolle o Now he would tell them that he regarded the Const.t - b s t highly as they did, and could inform them also that "effe"':, Lord-Lieutenant did, he did after due consideration.--2ade te hear.) He would state the result of the applicationsl;oo.; the Lord-Lieutenant for remission of punishments. fr`00,?.,, return which he held in his hand, it appeared tha, t o o enl l T o 12th of May. 1835, to the 31st of March, 1837, tuouigrio lof cases reported unfavourably and favourably to Lord with be were as follow :—There were reported unfavou ra bly'. e t o i''„ reference to the judges, 588 cases, and after referece_urted!:; judges, 546, making altogether 1,134 ; of cases r r e ., 95, vourably there were 259 ; after reference to the inug e to a ds' ' after reference to the magistrates, 77 ; on refereeforel, medical officers, 108; and 108, 162, and 285, on reel, nisKi riso tion respectively from the solicitor of the reve n ue, ro allao trates anti inspectors, and the governors of pn' the rel it " s / with some other cases altogether 2,338. He , Was boOs 7/ entitled to ask if the Lord-Lieutenant had :wee", want of consideration after the cases he had a d 01 311/ 0 0 O ( Hear.) But other matters had been introduced, f the ll o tO had been made on the exercise of the prerogative no t e pi respecting the appointment of sheriffs. He woulu_ Night to all the cases adverted to, but he was prepared i t: a 11 0 ' s jje fact, and it was undoubtedly fortunate that he " ac te hi n iet; confute one of the most prominent statements isi the aPY'e Noble Lord who spoke last. That referred to Noble der ment of a sheriff for the county of Louth. The i ': ls said the Lord Lieutenant had been guilty of 0 0 " i, 0 0 00 ence and undue exercise of the Royal prerogati!,e_owiuKA pointment. He happened to have the means of r ei en67,ll l ! really did occur. Three gentlemen were ree meat' the Chief Baron. The first was Mr Fortescue, 11.0, ilw y e cation being made to him he declined the appoi nt bet d, Noble Earl imputed blame. sa y t The Earl of G LENG ALL was understood to _ ta ble , Earl always believed Mr. Fortescuo to be a most reaPe" vidual. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE—The noble 0° 0 0 ? mitted he was most respectable, and there be gfe imputed in that instance. The next gentleman "