The Sun. — London, England, 1846-06-16 00:00:00

Proper system of cultivation, that they could easily compete With foreigners. If the farmers of Scotland by a regular system of cropping, and a skilful system of farming, could, in the face of an adverse climate, compete pith English farmers who had better land in a superior climate, surely, they in England could compete with the foreigner who only raised 10 bushels of wheat per acre, and bad to bring it 2 000 miles distance. He knew, that as far as this country was concerned, that though the measure was in progrc,s. a rise in rent had taken place in a great number of farms. That was the case in Scotland and England. It was the case even of the tenants of some Noble Lords then in the House. The great estate agent, Mr. Simpson, who must be known to the majority of their Lordships, who had been till recently a thorough-going protectionist, and who had had extensive ex perience in landed property, stated, at a public meeting a few days ago, that he was free and proud to confess that the sliding_ scale and all other scales had fallen from his eyes—(Laughter) —the result of which was that he was now a thorough-going abolitionist.—( Hear, bear.) Being anxious to know on what grounds Mr. Simpson had chanced his opinions, he (Lord Kinnaird) wrote to him for an explanation. In reply, Mr. Simpson stated that the result of his experience wa•. that any restriction on the importation of corn was injurious to the tenant-farmers of this country. He (Lord Kinnaird) had al ready quoted an instance in which, instead of rent falling since the determination of the Ministers on this subject, estates were let at considerably higher rents than before. He believed that the tenant-farmers did care about this Bill. He believed too, that in many instances their fears had been excited by Members of the Legislature who had advocated the cause of protection, Their Lordships would have themselves to blame If any depreciation of rents were to follow the passing of this measure, and his advice to them was a; a landlord that they should not listen to any cleims for reduction. He might state that in many instances, however much it might be in accordance with their feelings, they were doing great injury to the farmer by letting land to him under proper value, because when they did so, the farmer, instead of exerting himself to in crease the produce of the land, was willing to rest, and had rested for many years, believing that he was safe with what was called " the protective principle." He should have wished to have gone extensively into this question, but as many of their Lordships were anxious to ad dress the House he had curtailed his observations. In conclu sion he wished to call their Lordships' attention to one point. He thought that whatever might be their feelings with regard to that body with which he was connected, they at least would give them credit for having remained perfectly quiet; indeed to such an extent had they remained silent at this crisis that some Noble Lords believed that the people in towns had said that they would not get up an excitement on this subject. ( Hear, near.) He believed that a Noble Lord said the other might that they could not do so.—( Hear, hear.) Now, he (Lord Kinnaird) could assure them, from all the applications to the members of the Anti-Corn-law League, begging of them to move at this moment, that the people in the towns were anxiously waiting for thepassing of this Bill. The Anti- Corn-law League had, instead of conforming to those repeated applications, thought it more wise, and mote respectful to Par liament, and to their Lordships' House, that. they should re 111 - main quiet, so that they might not be considered to have moved for the purpose of intimidating their Lordships.—( Hear.) That might have been said of them had they moved en this question at the present moment. He was glad to know that, although it had been said by Noble Lords that her Majesty's Ministers had been intimidated by the League in bringing forward this measure—( Hear, hear, and laughter from G the Protectionist benches)—their Lordships had greatly mistaken the feeling of the country—they greatly mistook the feelings of Scotland, with which be was more intimately connected—because he would say that if this measure were de feated the greatest disappointment would be felt throughout the breadth of the laud, and all he would say was, that he hoped that this amendment of the Noble Duke might not be adopted, as it would have the effect of defeating the Bill.—(Hear.) Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared— For the clause For the amendment Majority in favour of the clause 33 The House then resumed, and The CHAIRMA N reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again to-morrow (this day). The House then adjourned at Half-past Eleven o'clock, HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 15. The SFEAKIER took the chair at Four o'clock. SECOND READINGS. The following Bills were read a second time, and ()Mecca to committed : Clonntel and Thurles Railway Cork, Blackrock, and Passage Railway Great Southern and Western Railway (Cork Extension) Killarney Junction Railway Mallow and Fermoy Railway Thornson's Charity Estate . Waterford, Wexford, Wicklow, and Dublin Railway. REPORTS. The reports on the following Bills were brouebt up, the alterations and amendments agreed to, and the Bills ordered to be engrossed:— Banffshire Railway Caledonian Railway (Dundyvan Branch) Hertford and Hatfield Railway London and Birmingham Railway (St. Alban's and Luton Branch) North British Railway (Gretna Branch) St. Alban's, Luton, and Dunstable Railway Schoolmaster's Widows Fund Shrewsbury, Oswestry, and Chester Junction Railway (Crick heath and Wem Lines) Stockton Gas. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (GLASGOW TERMINI AND BRANCHES) BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. THIRD READINGS. The following Bills were read a third time and passed Argyll Canal. .Ashburton, Newton, and South Devon Railway. Blackburn, Clitheroe, and North-Western Junction Railway. Edinburgh Paving. Fleetwood, Preston, and West Riding Junction Railway. Glasgow, Southern Terminal Railway. Glasgow, Paisley, and Greenock Railway (Polloc and Govan Branch). Gloucester and Dean Forest Railway. Grand Junction Railway (Huyton and Aeon and other Branches). Grand Junction Railway (Huyton and Warrington Branch). Great Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Railway, and Grimsby Docks Consolidation. Harrogate Waterworks. Heywood Waterworks. Lancashire and Yorkshire North Eastern Railway. Lesmahagow, Dalserf, and Coatbridge Mineral Junction Rail way London and Croydon Railway (Thames Junction Branch) Alonkland and Kirkintilloch Railway (Chapel Hall Branch) Morayshire Railway Morecombe Hat hour and Railway Newmarket and Chesterford Railway Norfolk Railway Extensions ( Yarmouth Extension) Portbury Pier and Railway (No. 2) Scottish Central Railway (Denny Branch) South Wales Railway (No. 2) Wishaw and Coltness Railway (Greenhill Branch) Yeovil Markets and Fairs Yorkshire and Glasgow Union Railway. SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY BILL. ADJOURNED DEBATE. On the order of the day for the report on the South-Eastern Railway (No. 2—Greenwich Railway to Chilham, near Can terbury, with branches) Bill being read, Mr. HUME said it was a question whether both the con tending lines should be submitted back again to the Committee, and that was the only way in which the justice of the case could be met. Another course, and perhaps the best, would be to postpone the consideration of both schemes to the ensuing session. These wet e the views that he entertained on the question. Sir G. COCKBURN :aid the Admiralty had done that which, under the circumstances, they thought best to pursue. Their opinion was that going through Greenwich Park should not be allowed till further experiments were made as to the effects on the Observatory. They ought, in his opinion, either to commit both Bills, or postpone them till another year. The Admiralty, entertaining the views it did, had made the report which had been referred to. Sir R. H. INGLIS said he defied any one to read Professor Robinson's report without being satisfied that there was the greatest danger to the accuracy of the observations at Green wich if the tunnel through the park was allowed. He spoke not as to the merits of the two schemes, but to the important question of the Observatory. He thought, how. ever, they ought to place the the South-Eastern Company in the same position they were in before they had altered their scheme in deference to the wishes of the Admiralty. Mr. ESTCOURT briefly supported the decision of the Com mittee. He referred at some length to the report of the Corn.- mittre on the Bill, and held *hat if the Committee had de cided otherwise than they did that the pr ject of the South- Eastern Company would have been mutilated and valueless. After a few words from Mr. A GIJON tIY, Mr. PROTHEROE defended the proceedings of the Com mittee, and stated that they selected the South- Eastern project• because it was of a far supepor or b th I.otorna t. n er to the line projected by the North Kent. extent w The N i , ll line would have interfered to a gr mental property near the metropolis, whereas the South- Eastern line would not, and would pass through the property of Mr. Angerstein, who formerly opposed, but who now sup ported that project. The line selected was one of an im • portant public charact er, inasmuch as it would be a direct railway from London to Gravesend and Rochester, He pre ferred that the 13111 should be committed to the members of the Cmmittee who had heard the whole of the evidence. After a o few wo rds from Mr. Rice, Lord Emelyn, and Mr. H. Bayley, Mr. J. O'CONNELL thought the justice of the case would be met if the House would allo w both parties to come before them again next year. The Intel% st of the public would not be injured, an d such a course would be q uite consistent with the position of both Bills. He saw no mode so well adapted to meet the case, and he believed if it were adopted both parties would come forward then better prepared. Mr. WARBURTON hoped that whatever determination the House should come to, one point at least would be resolved on, namely, that Greenwich Observatory should not be de stroyed. Let any man read the evidence given upon that subject, and then lay his hand upon his heart, and say that this would not be the result if a railway were constructed through Greenwich Park. Sir John Her.chell , Mr. Baggage, the astronomer fromCia ‘ tham ; Mr. Challis, Dr. Robinson, the astr inosner f decisive and weighty evidence ron Armagh, had all givers against Oce the railw a y, in con sequence of the injury th e and Professor Airy was the only emi nent atry would sustain ; and scientific man who had given evidence ill ru nli natd a e r r a i e t t , er if He hoped the House would support the Obser vatory contrary Green wich; that they would not allow a railw ay to there was the slightest chance of the Observato e y b e in g d e . stroyed by it.—( Hear, hear. ) Mr. PLUMPTRE said the South-Eastern were prepar e d to abandon that part of their scheme which passed' under rth e Observatory, and adopt the loop, if the House would all ow them to do so. After a few words from one or two Hon. Members, who called upon the Government to place the South -Eastern Company in the same position that they stood in before the Admiralty gave their consent, On the motion fur resuming the adjourned debate on the consideration of the report of the South-Eastern Railway Bill (Greenwich to Chilham), Mr. AGLIONI3Y wished to know what the House was about to do on this subject, and what position it stood in. If they were about to recommit the Bill, he would offer no objection ; but if they were about to re commit it to the same majority which had before decided the question, they would have the same decision as before. The present inconvenience arose from the fickleness of the Board of Admiralty, and the stipulations which they had made, so as to retain the power to themselves of stopping up the line. Such a course had produced considerable injury to the South- Eastern Company, and was calculated to do them still more. He thought this was necessary, for the expenses, were of a material consideration, and unless these were satisfied there would be no guarantee to the shareholders. Mr. O'CONNELL wished now to inquire whether it was competent for him to move whether it is proper to require its recommittal this day six months? The SPEAKER—Certainly; there was a substantive mo tion before the Home, and he conceived that till the raotioa of TEM the Hon. Member for Dover wt s disposed of no adjudication could be Insole as to the inquiry. Mr. JARVIS conceived that the ease of the South- Eastern Railway had not been fairly dealt with, and that the North Kent ought to be thrown out. It appeared that it was it standing order of Parliament, that no one connected with the railway should have the power of voting for it. He conceived that the report ought to be amended, and that the North Kent line should be beyond the rower of opposition. Hon. Members after speoding thirty-six days in inquiry without any personal interest, hail come to an imperfect decision, and he therefore conceived they ought to have the power of amending the report. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the recommittal Against Majority Mr. PROTHEROE then moved that the Bill be re-com mitted to the former Committee, for the purpose of considering the copies of correspondence and reports on the subject of a railroad passing through Greenwich Park (which have, by order, been submitted to this House by the Admiralty, subsequent to the bringing up of the Report of the Commit tee), and the expediency or inexpediency of sanctioning any of the alternate lines proposed by the Soush-Easteen Rai:way in substitution for the line through Greenwich Park. After a few words from Mr. PLUM PTRE, Sir R. H. INGLIS shook' vote for the recommittal of the Bill, because he was anxious that the South Eastern Company should be placed in the same podtien as they were before the assent of the Admiralty was given to the North Kent line passing under she park. Mr. AGLIONBY would vote for the reeemmittal on the same ground, hut he hoped the Bill would b.. cent to a different Committee to that which gave power to the Admiralty to stop u• 7 a railway on a certain ocntingeney. He intended to vote for the recommittal of the South-Eastern Bill ; and he should, if he had the opportunity, vote also for the recommittal of the rival line, the North Kent. If he bad the opportunity he should also vote that the Bill be referred to a distinct Committee, in order that the four members of the present Committee shculd nit have the same decision to come to; or if it were referred to the same Members, that the Com mittee should be constituted as they were when the Bill was originally referred to them. Mr. ENTWISLE (who rose amidst loud cries of " Oh,") asked, what Hon. Member ha:l moved for the recommittal of the Bill ? The SPEAKER said, that it was on the motion of the Hon. Member for Dover. The gallery was then cleared for a division, when there appeared : For the recommittal ... 135 For the postponement to that day six months... 6S Majority Mr. PROTHEROE must then movethat the Bill be re committed to the former Committee,. with copies of the cor respondence which had passed between the Committee and the promoters. Mr. RICE must then move as an amendment that the Bill should be recommitted to the Committee as formerly con stituted. Mr. PROTHEROE said, that this would render it neces sary for the Hon. Member for Worcestershire, who had for merly been a member of that Committee, to attend for two months, to repeat the evidence which he had formerly heard. He thought this was too great a hardship to impose upon any Hon. Member, especially as the Committee could dispose of the Bill without any such imposition. Mr. HUME conceived that this would be a great injustice to the parties engaged, and inflict a great expense, which was quite unnecessary, as the Committee might dispose of the Bill without either the cost or the delay. The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none took place, Mr. RICE having consented to withdraw his amendment, The Bill was then ordered to be recommitted to the former Committee. NORTH KENT RAILWAY. Mr. RICE then moved that this Bill be also recommitted to the former Committee. Mr. ESTCOURT said that this motion was not for the purpose of re-opening the whole question ; it was for the pur pose of considering the propriety or expediency of sanctioning the South-Eastern Company's line. There was no ground for the recommittal of the North Kent. Mr. AGLIONBY said that he dissented from the opinion of the Hon. Member for Oxford. The decision of the House was required, in order that the South-Eastern Company's 13111 be referred to the same Committee, so that they might consi der the expediency of sanctioning any one of the alternative lines proposed by the South-Eastern Company. He would put the supposition that the Cemmittee were not anxious to support any of the alternative lines, and then the argument of the Hon. Member for Oxford fell to the ground. If it were inexpedient to support the South-Eastern Company's projects, the Committee ought to have the option of deciding on the merits of another line ; and it would, therefore, be great un fairness if they did not have the opportunity of considering the North Kent. Let the Committee take on themselves the re sronsibility of deciding, and let not the House, in the absence of facts, exclude any portion of the subject of inquiry from them. The Committee could not act fairly to the House, if they were to decide in that House upon what course should be taken. Let them have the whole inquiry referred to them, and then let them take what course they might choose. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL said, that it was the opinion of half the Committee that the North Kent line was superior to the South Kent line. There was an equal division of °O nion on the subject, and he thought a fair reason had been presented to the House for recommitting the North Kent line. PROTHEROE bad paid the most particular attention ta the In rits of the two lines since their first appearance in th e con nittee. The circumstances were unchanged which . . ..auenced hint in rejecting the line, which - proposed making a tunnel through Greenwich Park, and he was cer tainly opposed to the recommittal of the Bill. Mr. RICE obarved that his Hon. Friend must be aware, as the Chairman of the Company, that the difficulty of carry ing out the line arose from a deficiency in the estimates, and not from any difficulty of travelling through Greenwich Park, but as he thought that it would not be advisable to procccd further with his motion, he should withdraw it. The motion was accordingly withdrawn. NEW WRIT. Colonel CONOLLY moved for a new writ for a Knight of the Shire for the county of Carlow, in the room of Thomas Bunbury, Esq.. deceased. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. Messengers from the Lords brought up various Railway Bills with amendments. (See Lords' report. ) ENLISTMENT IN TUE ARMY. Captain LAY ARD wishes to sAk a question of the Score tary-a'•. War, whose answer some time hack to a similar ques tion had been misrepresented, and had, in consequence, caused considerable difficulty among the public. Ile believed that no limited enlistment was allowed, but the contrary had gone forth to the public. He wished to know whether or no limited enlistment was allowed? Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT said it was not the case that limited enlistment was allowed, neither was it the intention of her Majesty's Government to allow it. CONDUCT OF RAILWAY BUSINESS. Mr. E. DENISON asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether he had any objection to lay upon the table of the House the plan for the conduct oft ailway business which was pre pared by Lord Dalhousie, and submitted in eatenso by him, on the part of the Government, to the Committee on Railways in the House of Lords? _ Sir R. PEEL said that with regard to any written informa tion given by his Noble Friend in the Committee of the House of Lords, he did not see any objection to their production. He (lid not apprehend that the meaning of his Noble Friend Lord Dalhousie was to give a formal proposition of that plan in the Committee of the House of Lords. At the same time, he must admit, ow the part of his Noble Friend, that the plan was not proposed on the part of the Government. He be. lieved that at the time it was proposed no proposition was made on the part of the Government, either in the Lords or Commons. After a few words from Mr. DENISON which did not reach the gallery, Mr. HUME said that there were certain resolutions to be proposed to-morrow by the Right Hon. Baronet with reference to the broad gauge. He should certainly take the sense cf the House on the three last resolution=. The House would not make itseif a party to what was admitted to be wrong. Sir R. H. INGLIS gave notice that he should move for a supplomental report of the opinions of Dr. Robinson with re ference to the effect of any railway passing under the Royal Observatory at Greenwich Park. Mr. ROSS said that he had a few words to offer in explana tion to the House, with reference to certain remarks made by the Right Hon. Baronet at the Head of the Government at the conclusion of the debate on Friday. upon a speech which had been made by him (Mr. Ross) in the beginning of the evening. He should not have attempted to do so had he tound the words he used reported in the public:papers. The Right Hon. Baronet, in noticivig his speech, asked him in the first instance if he would venture to deny the allegat ions of GuvernMent, and his reply was, ' 6 Yes," but he must say that he did not intend to convey by the word " yes," anything in opposition to what he bad said in his speech, because he did deny the allegati ms of Government to this extent, that if the state of Leland now, according to the opinion of the Government, called for this Coercion Bill, it must be in the same state as was referred to by the Secretary fer the Home Department. He also denies'., and hvs was borne out in his denial, the accuracy of the returns !made and presented to the House. There was no contradiction between his answer and the assertion which he made in his own speech. There was also another point in which the Right Hon. Baronet had put words in his mouth.—( Hear, hear.) He (the Right Honourable Baronet) had said that it was a most monstrous and idiotic assertion that once they departed from the constitution of the country the further they went the better. He did not make such an as sertion as that ; he had said that if it were necessary to turn from the constitution of the country, we ought not to falter in our course until we reached the object which had occasioned our departure. Sir R. PEQ.I. begged leave to explain. What he had said it was not his intention to say. He had said that the state of Ireland required extraordinary measures—that it was in a con dition far from satisfactory. He asked the Hon. Member if he denied the allegations of her Majesty's Gove.-nment in that re spect, viz., that the state of Ireland did require extraordinary measures, and he understood the Hon. Gentleman to say that he did deny the allegation ; and whilst in the heat of debate, some words did escape him (Sir 11. Peel), but which he after wards corrected. He (Sir R Peel) had asked the Hon. Member if he had not said that the outrages in Ireland were so dangerous, and had become so intolerable, that, providod the measure brought in by the Government for the improvement of the relation between landlord and tenant did riot turn out to be beneficial, and if the country continued to exist in 1846 in .the same state as in 1845 and 1844, he for one would think some measures necessary, and even that he could not ob ject to a suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. He ha d said that it was impossible to devise any measure of permanent operation for the improvement g o e f e t t h i e n a relation sb ort of landlord e nd tenant, which con therefore he would not object to vote for a suspension of the t Habeas Corpu Act. Mr. ROSS s —I said that the state of Ireland" was" so un sveltiessftafiolcurt constitution u. was I did not say that it is now. Sir R. PEEL—The Hon. Member had said that he would p as to b e violated,they ea ai o no of they stilladHabeas s hould take care to secur e Corpus Act, and that if the the obj ect they had in such vie m w e , as whichures shouldmigh t be more iu secure it. m ad o o r p e te o d r as would less w significant, but STEAM C OMMUNICATION WITH AMERICA. Mr. MILES wished to ask whether any weekly communi cation had as yet been established between this country and Halifax? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that a. contract had been entered into, on the part of the Government,. with Messrs. Cunard, for a weekly steam communication with Halifax and Boston. Mr. HUME wished to know if a copy of the contract could be obtained. Mr. MILNER GIBSON said that he had understood that the contract was advertised to be open to all her Majesty's sub jects. It was supposed that the Great Western Steam -ship Company had not had the opportunity of entering for the public service between this country and Halifax and Boston. There had been a memorial presented to the Government on that subject, for it was felt very important that there should be a fair competition in the passenger traffic between England as America; and it was abo supposed that the Great Western COM. , pany were fairly entitled to a share in this employment. The ac count which they were going to pay Messrs. Cunard, was 4,0001. for every voyage. That was a great burden, and he got, in addition to the sum of 4,0004, his passenger tralLe ; while the SU T, LONDON, TUESDAY ;EVENIIVG, JUNE 16, -1,44,- Great Western Comprmy,.in order to compete with him. had only to rely ra their passergcr trr.filc. Such a competition could not be borne; and if the contract was not finally signed, he called upon the Government not to allow such a monopoly in opposition to the Great Western. 'die CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the House must bear in mind, that in the year 1538 the contract was offered for the purpose of establishing a communication between this country and North America. That communica tion was tendered by many, and the Messrs. Cunard vi ere the parties who took the etntract. In that contract so made in 1838, provision was made for a weekly com,nunicat ion between Great Britain and North Arnerica. In the first instance, the communication was to have been made fortnightly ; and when it was found that that communication answered, it was then ordered to be made weekly. The Government thought it their duty to enter into the contract with those persona who had in the first instance been engaged by them, and therefore they had given the contract to Messrs. Cunard, and the papers re lative to that sobj,ct had been just moved for. Mr. MILNER GIBSON wished to know whether those papers would be a copy of the advertisement and the contract itself ? The CHANCELLOR ur the EXCHEQUER vim umler stood to :miser in the affirmative. After a fe..y words from Lord J. RUSSELL, which did not reach the gallery, AB'. i BILL. Mr. M. O'CONNELL said that was anxious to maks a statement to the liousa tr,%11 reference to what had tillers from the Noble Cord oprosite (Lord Bernard). He stas anxious that he should appear to tat a any charge without foundation,: but it it app.-ared th .t tie :Coble Lord could prove a contradiction to his statement he would withdraw the charge he ma Is. He bad stat ed, that when the Aries Bill was parsed, the powers given to the magistrates by that Act, for the purpose of de priving of the right to keep arms all riotous persons were not exerted with reference to those persons con cerned in disturbances, but to persons of political persuasion called repealers. Those powers were given to the magis trates for the purpose of suppressing disturbances, but that he thought that they had been used to the detriment of the coun try. The Noble Lord had contradicted that statement, and he (Mr. J. M. O'Connell) now asked him if he meant to say that in that statement he had said anything contrary to or be yond the facts ? If he had done so, he should be quite ready to move for all those papers which would throw light upon the subject, in order that any mis-statement might be corrected. Lord BERNARD said that h e h a d denied the statement made by the Hon. Member, and in order to make the matter clear he would state the facts of the case. In the county of Cork the number of persons applying for permission to keep arms was 700, and out of that number those who were refused amounted only to seven, and out of that number again only four were repealers. The proceedings adopted on that occasion were very far from any party feeling, although those who were rejected were repeal wardens. Out of the seven who were rejected, three were known as had characters. The magistrates had acted on that occasion und-r no political motive, but with the view of preserving the peace of the country. There had been a memorial addressed to the magistrates of that dis trict, stating that many had been obliged to I save their homes at night, and remained in the fields, in consequence of the ap prehensions they were under. He slid not mean to deny that, at the meeting alluded to by the Hon. Member, there were very injudicious expressions made use of by some individuals, but he did say that the majority of the magistrates attended to their duty with strict impartiality. Mr. M. GIBSON asked the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government if the Government would defer the signing of the contract with Messrs. Cunard until the papers which had been moved for could be produced. Sir R. PEEL, as we ul:derstood, said the Government would accede to the request of the Hon. Member. PROTECTION TO LIFE (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition containing 259,000 signatures. He stated that it came from the principal manu facturers of Englwiel against the Coercion Bill.—(The Hon. Member then left the House immediately. ) Lord WORSLEY said that he had some observations to offer to the House upon this Coercion Bill. It was true that the Bill contained temporary measures, but still he thought it would be found, whether temporarily or permanently em ployed, to be equally destructive in its influence. When mea sures of this kind had been before tried in Ireland, they had always produced more evil than good, and had fallen as much, if not more, upon the innocent than the guilty. Did the Go vernment think that the passing of this Bill, with its temporary provision, would remedy those great and serious grievances of which the Irish people so justly complained. It would not even repress the evils which were the effect of those grievances, far less would it remove the cause. He believed that if, instead of introducing these coercion measures, they would remedy some of the evils which at pre sent prevailed in Ireland, they would find that the legislation would be attended with beneficial results.—( Hear, hear.) If the Government of Ireland had the confidence of the people, there wou'd be no necessity for such Acts as these, and let him ask whether the Government did now, or had for some years passed, possessed that confidence ? No ; they certainly had not, and until the Government patronage was bestowed with an impartial hand, and the Government themselves evinced some disposition to improve the civil and religious condition of the people, they never would. Why hew could the present Government hope to obtain the confidence of the people, when they had all along opposed all reforms in the Irish Church ? Some few years ago, while the present Government was the opposition, he remembered Lord Stanley proposed to improve the municipal law of the country, but although the Govern ment had been in Oise now nearly five years, they had never yet attempted to bring forward such a measure. Look again at the conduct of the Government in later times. Look how they acted with regard to the Arms' Act. and to the manner in which they dismissed magistrate's for expressing their poli tical opinions. See how they allowed the monster meetings to go on, in fact silently sanctioning them before they issued their proclamation, and bear in mind the spirit with which they followed up the State prosecutions, and then let the House tell him how a Government who punished such a policy as this could expect to possess the confidence of the people.— ( hear.) They went before their party with regard to some measures ; nay, they outstripped those who opposed them in one course of policy, anti yet they could not act with liberality towards Ireland. They had come forward with a liberal Corn Biel, but they refused to try the force of liberality in Ireland. His opinions were decidedly opposed to this Bill, because, in his estimation, it was only calculated to aggravate, rather than remove, the evil ; and it was for this reason that he should vote against the second reading. He objected to it on principle; and feeling it unnecessary, as well as unconstitu tional, he should vote against it on principle. Sir R. 11. INGLIS said the Noble Lord, not content with entering into a lengthened review, and strongly de nouncing the past policy of the Government with respect to Ireland, went so far as to censure them for allowing his Hon. Friend the Member for Kent to place a notice on the motion paper, with regard to the Catholic Church of Ireland. Now, with regard to that notice of motion, he could assure the Noble Lord that the Government had nothing whatever to do with that motion, nor had they power, he thought, to prevent his Hon. Friend from bringing it forward.—( Hear, hear.) It had been said by the Noble Lord, in the course of the debate, in effect—for he would not be irregular, and refer to speeches of Hon. Members (luring the present session—but he said in effect, that those who sat ground him had made up their minds to support the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London, and to turn out her Majesty's Ministers, whoever they might he. He was unwilling to revive language, but such was the effect of the Noble Lord's words. He ( Sir II:Inglis) could not by any means concur with such a determination ; he had adready given her Majesty's Alinisters his confidence, and he would not stiffer any collateral considerations to influence him against continuing his support. If it was so that the Government had not found time or opportunity to pass on the measure to its present stage at any earlier period ; or if any calamity or acci dentghad h e o c h e e u l r d r e t h d a t to they interrupt ough t t h n e o p t ta t ) g o r ess haveof a t l h l o e w m e e d a s a u n r y e o ; t a h n e d r would g.ve her Majesty's Ministers the s a m e confidence and t measureho u whatever to have interrupted its progress; s t ill he support as lie had given on a former occasion to the Noble Lord opposite, the Member fur Laudon, when he introduced a measure of a similar nature, and more severe.—(Hear, hear. ) It was for the Government to provide for the safety of her Majesty's subjects ; on them rested that care ; when, therefore, they thought and said that any measure was necessary for that purpose, it was not for him to oppose them, for the responsibi lity of the measure fell on them.—(" Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) He had no wish to say or do anything derogatory to the Members for Ireland who sat opposite, but he had given her Majesty's Ministers his confidence, and he would support them in the second reading of the measure as he had in the first. The Hon. Baronet proceeded, in a tone seare&y audible in the gallery, to say that there had been great delay in the pro gress of the measure in that House, a delay which was even irritating.—(lronical cheers.) The measure was a uneasnre of police, for which the Ministers were therefore re sponsible, and however they might taunt him with their cheers, yet being a measure of police, he would give it his support, leaving the whole to rest on the responsibility of the Govern ment. If the Government had made up their mind to press to the second reading this measure, modified and mutilated as it had been in the other House of Parliament, he ( Sir R. Inglis) had come to the determination to support it, but to support it only in the condition in which it then was. Coterie' V ERNER was convinced that some measure was neeessary for the protection of life and property in Ireland, and therefore he would give the present measure his support. At the same time he could not but regret that such delay had been suffered to interrupt the progress of this measure, or any mea sure of the like importance. They had heard of the measure being introduced by the Government at the beginning of the session, but it had been thrown back till this late period ; he hoped now, however, that Ministers would exert themselves with all diligence to forward it. We understood the Hon. Gentleman to say, that he was proud to support a measure which had been introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, even at the risk of being charged with inconsistency, such as they had heard made in that House on a late occasion, although at the same time he would not be understood as prepared to support a bad measure merely because it came from the same quarter. The Gallant Gentle man begged the House to bear with him, while he vindicated himself against a misrepresentation cast on him by the Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State. He said he had pro duced some extracts on a former occasion referring to the state of Ireland; extracts, however, not very agreeable it would seem to the Right Hon. Baronet. The Right Hon. Baronet had not denied any of his statements, nor had he upset any of the evidence laid b e f ore th e House.—( Hear, hear.) What then, he asked, w as th e c h arge ma d e against him by the Right Hon. Baronet? Why, that in November, 1845, he (Colonel Verner) had said that he thought there would be dish ess in Ireland. The lion. Gentleman was then proceeding to read from a speech made by Sir James Graham in which Colonel Verner had been referred to, when he was interrupted by cries of " Order," and The SPEAKER intimated to the Gallant Colonel that he was irregular. ., Colonel VERNER continued to say that it had been re ported that he (Colonel Verner) had said that a letter had been sent to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in which an opinion was given that a pecunjary grant should be made towards the drain ing of Loch Erne, with a view to relieving the distress in his Ccolonel Verner's) neighbourhood. (The Gallant Colonel was again called to order by the Speaker.) He had just to say that the part of the country there referred to was not within hi s neighbourhood by five and twenty Irish miles. , llr. HORSMAN said that it had bean inti mated b y the Hon, Baronet that he would vote for the second reading on the comemeasure was t n the one conclusionin matters to of vote police. (Mr. Horsma )e haagainstliite, thaf House, an at once I I ) . d o i osed it on the ground others in . ts allee but for reasons differing from those which had been adopted by that the repor . ground that the leave the nice calculation in envfildwenincieciwite,sreanindaroccourrdaetres. to others; were as well got up as usual, ' had noteen pushed forward with would he oppose it because lt ve wiled. He saw two mea - ;the speed that some would ha the Secretary of State wass ati finenddwiiiteh thoughtthe e so reports t too. Nor t N h e o y r d • a the same period and l i berate in its spirit, and __one of them was largelreland people of I had a benevolent aspect to the the two measures the .other was harsh and coercive ; ;Lir-es advancing in that House uriti WPM the workmanship of the same hands. flight mea sure different so much that it might well be deubt T e h d e whether i lh o e n y . Baronet wight be supposed to address himself to the one sure with aiacrity and zeal, as agreeing with his own spirit, but to the other he might require to be stirred and incited as to a task opposed to his liking and his reason. He (Mr. Hors :man) did not vote against it for any of those reasons. Those g rounds on which he opposed it were sat forth in better lan gi rage than lie could use in a document, from which he would rei id to the House, (The 10, Gentleman then read from a protest by the late Lord Holland,in 1525, tieriog, the Irish in surrectian; in which that Noble Lord said he opposed the mea sure because it was a suspension of the law rather than prevention of cruse; and, secondly, because only such measures ought to be adopted as would generally tend to cement the union between the two countries.) The fact was, as admitted by all who have addressed the House. the whole of Ireland was in a state of organisation and struggle between life and the rights of property. It might be true, and he admitted to the fullest extent the state of outrage in that country; but the question was, how 'were they to act? These outrages had become almost indigenous to the soil The people had not been treated properly by the suc cessive Governments of this country; they nail never been treated as subjects. With a people thus re • duced to tLe lowest depths of misery and destitu tion how were they to act? It was not possible fur the malignity of human or inhuman beings to support a syst em more cruel and disastrous th at , th e p re sentrelatiens between land lord and tenant, which led to such a vast amount of crime and misery. The Hon. Member for Cork said, if you cannot cure the eseatey, abdicate it ; if yoa can, in God's name , l et us know the remedy. The Right Hon. Gentlemen at th e bead of the country made precisely the same speech in that House thirty-two years ape. He hod referred to that spee c h , and h. believed the one' speech might be taken for the ether. with the exception of the names, the dotes, at.d the places mentioned in it. During all this p• rig net a single measure had been introduce d to remove the ertev a11:72 of tee tenure of land—a gtievnied which the rUetit ilsrenet. stated was the cause of these outrapes.—( Hear, hear. ) The vesmt measure was nothing mitre than a temporary measure—it contained nothing better than the old provisions. He gave the Gevenment credit for what they had done, and far as far as they had gone ; they had not, however, gone far enough. He believed that a defeat of this last expiring at tempt at misguided legislation would toad to support the Right Hon. Baronet in the course which he thought he ( Sir R. Peel) was anxious to pursue in his government of Ireland. It was high time that a new system should be tried. The past system of legislation had produced an intense hatred in the minds of the people of Ireland against the Administration. He recognised in the present Bill the old system of terrorism, and it would not do to act upon that principle any longer. The system was condemned by all parties. The Hen. Mem ber, who moved the amendment, had as little sempathy with the murderers and assassins as any member of her Majesty's Government. He (Sir W. Somerville) and the other Irish Members oppo;ed this measure, because they could not reconcile with their consciences such restrictions as their own consti tuency would not permit. Mr. COLQUHOUN said that if he felt a perfect confi dence in the Government he could not sati-fy himself to vote for such an unconstitutional measure as the present. If the Noble Lord, the Member far the City of London, were to offer him such a Bill he would say to him first prove your case —(Hear, hear)—and thereby forward your measure with all possible speed. The Noble Member for King's Lynn said there was a decrease of crime, therefore the case broke down. He could not agree with his Noble Friend ; he thought the proofs of the Government of the existence of outrages were overwhelming, and also the necessity of bringing forward some measure for the suppression of these outragee. Ma g istrates of all creeds and classes has stated the difficulty of obtaining evidence and conviction of the assassin. He would say intro duce any measure calculated to suppress these things. Sup posing it, were desirable to increase the number of Irish Mem bers to 100, the case of the peasant and the people of Ireland would be in an alarming condition. He thought there had been a most culpable delay in bringing forward this measure ever since it came into that House. He would not enter into the details of the progress of the Bill through the House of Lords. If the Government hail passed the Bill through the Lords, and proceeded with it with half the earnestness with which they forced the Corn Bill, the Protection to Life Bill would now have been the law of the land. He agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford, that the Bill, as it at present stood, was perfetly inadequate to meet the exigency in Ireland. He objected to the want of power contained in the provisions of the Bill. He also agreed with the Hon. Member for Belfast, that it was unwise to pass a Coercion Bill that would not have the effect of repressing crime, or of preventing the taking away of life. If the two clauses which alone gave life to the Bill were struck out, he should certainly object to it. He begged to ask the Right lion. Baronet at the head of the Government, whether, to gratify Hon. Members opposite, it was his intention to strike out in Committee these two clauses, or whether he was prepared to maintain in all their integrity the proviaisins of the Bill ? If the Right Hon. Gentleman de clined to answer the question, he (Mr. Colquhoun) having no confidence in the intentions of Government, from past expe rience, should certainly vote against the second reading of the Bill. The Hon. Member then alluded to the meeting at Lord John Russell's house. in Chesham-place, which had become notorious during the last few months for political assemblies. Looking at the strange assortment of Hon. Members, having diffe rent political views, at those meetings, he must say that the Noble Lord the Member for London would have a difficulty in deal ing with Ireland. 'The Noble Lord would have a strange team to drive—such restive horses, and such kicking and cur vetting amongst them. He had ruled them before, and past experience must have told him the difficulty of managing them. If they had not had the corn measure this year they would have had a grand educational scheme, which, like the other popular measures, would have been filched from the Noble Lord the Member for London. The course that the Right Hon. Baronet had pursued was for him at the end of the session to give some indistinct hints of the course he meant to pursue, and he went forth to the world as the liberal Minister, the great spirit of the age. At the beginning of the session he promulgated his liberal opinions as a concession to the principles of Hon. Gentlemen opposite. He wanted to see the Noble Lord in power, not from any confidence in his administration, but that it would give them (the Protec tionists) the opportunity, perhaps, of recovering themselves, and of truly appealing to the people of England on the prin ciples they maintained. He should rejoice at having an oppor tunity of recording his vote against her Majesty's Ministers on a want of confidence. lie required a pledge from the Govern ment that the Bill should be maintained unmutilated, other wise he should vote against the second reading. Colonel SIBTHORP said the lion. Member re- quire(' a pledge from the Government; he required none. He had made up his mind to the performance of his duty, and he should fearlessly perform it. Ile was never ac customed to flatter any man, but he could not help recording his admiration for the Noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn. What was the reply of the :Right Hon. Baronet—he would not call him his Hight Hon. Friend—to that speech ? It was most weak and vain. It had been his painful duty to pass much of his time in Ireland. During the whole period, he had never received one unkind feeling or expression from any class in the sister kingdom. He would not support a measure which in his opinion emanated from a Whig Government. He should feel it his duty to oppose the measure. The policy of the Right Horn Gentleman was to pass the Corn Bill, and then, if expedient, to appeal to the country. Petitions had been signed by 250,000 persons against the Bill, and their rejection of the measure ought to be attended to. He could place conklence in neither the Hon. Gentle man's oppwienls, nor in the present Government, for men who had been caught twice in a trap ought never to be allowed to get out of it. He had no confidence in their wish for the wel fare of the country, and he should feel it his duty, when a mea sure more efficient was bro ug ht f orwa rd, to vote for it ; but to get rid of the present Government, which was the best measure he could promote at the present time, he should join certainly with the Noble Lord, and vote against the second reading, of the proposed atrocious measure. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he bad paid particular at tention to the mass of Parliamentary evidence which had been laid down by his friend the Member for the city of Oxford. The Hon. Member was of opinion that if a measure was intro duced on the responsibility of her Majesty's Government for the protection of life in Ireland, that being tlw assumption on the face of the Bill, but it did not much matter what might he the intention cf the Bill, still it was their duty, the Bid having been referred to that House to be deliberated on, to give their assent to that Bill. To that doctrine he (Lord J. Russell) could by no means assent. H e cou ld understand that upon a motion to bring in a Bill, or i n th e fi rs t bringing up of a Bill from the House of Lord s , t h at so muc h was d u e to her Majesty's Government that it might be rieht to consent to the in troduction of the Bill, in order that it might be fully and freely discussed, but that the law-makers of the country were not to consider what those laws were— that they were not to cons i der the e ff ect o f those measures, but blindly consent to them—was a proposition which seemed to him so contrary to all hi s not i ons o f P ar li ame ntary duties that it was impossible for him to countenance that doctrine in any way. In commencing a review of the proposed measure, he was tempted to take the course in objecting to it which was usually adopted by a Minister of the Crown when presenting a Bill for their consideration. A Minister of the Crown, when about to propose any measure o f great i m portance, generally ushered it in by quoting some paragraph affecting the welfare of the country from the speech from the Throne which had been delivered at the opening of Parliament. In the present ca , e he did not think th a t h er M a j esty ' s Mi n i sters could make a similar application, because he thought that the Queen's speech was a strong argu men t aga i nst t h e propose d measure. Her Majesty, in that speech, called attention to the frequent acts of outrage and assassination committed in Ireland. and wished to know whether any measure could not be devised to prevent those outrages, and to bring to justice the perpetra tors of them. A delay of five months, after such an announce ment from the Throne, ensued before any measures were taken.—(Hear, hear.) Her Majesty's Ministers had not suffi cient confidence in the measures they had prepared, or, as it had been said, the press of public business had prevented them proceeding with those measures. There were two courses open, either of which it would have been competent for her Ma jesty's Ministers to have adopted, and would have been per tfbecattlytiocoumsep. atib o le ne w uo it u h rso th w e ou d l i d gn b i a ty se o b f e t et he to G b o a v v e n rr i i n m tr e o n d t u a n n ed d a temporary of foo d m , e a a n s d u r a e l s f o o rt to t the v p o u p n o t r s o e d o u f s introducing l.) the r a r yimpor tation mea sure for the protection of life in Ireland, thus leaving the great measure of the corn-laws in its native integrity open to the un fettered and dispassionate consideration of that House. With respect to the measure, he was boursd to consider the grounds which were urged in favour of the Bill. The amount toof crime consider: e w r 1 : 1 i eh he w w a a s s s b a o i u d n t d o t b o e u t o h n e s i f d o o u r n in ti w o b n a t o f t ma he nu w e r a hounds Minis ters had arrived at that amount of crime ; he was bound to consider whether the present measure did afford that remedy which was likely to increase protection to life and property ; and, lastly, whether measures of a different character would not have removed the cause of the alleged insecurity of life. But at the speechthe Noble Lord who holds the office of S ecretary for Ireland murders committed oftbe Noble th i l n e intro :Weed this Bill in a s p eech which he ow ned gave bins con con- siderable em barrassment. In the early period o' th e sess i on they were told a u d l murders —of thought that t E h a e rl op w en ould day ; have given them some details of th ose ou t rages : but the crimes the Noble Earl mentioned were of an ordinary character, nor could he gather from the statement of the Noble aonfddr he dreadful Earl that they were different to, or greater in amount, than those which bad been committed for several years past. But the Noble Earl put it to him whether, having supported a similar measure in 18.15, brought forward under similar circumstances to those of the present day, he could refuse his assent to the Bill now before the House. He would answer that appeal at once. It was no reason because an Hon. Member had supported a measure which went beyond the constitution at one period of his life, he ought to support it at another; but the Noble Lord having made this appeal to him, he must trouble the House with a review of his conduct with regard to measures of this descrip tion. Soon after he entered Parliament in 1817, indeed in the year 1819, a measure was brought forward to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act, and what was called the " Six Acts" was introduced to remedy the disturbances which then pre • vailed in the manufacturing districts. Following the opinions of the political party to which he belonged, he voted in support of the measure. Soon after he came into office, a disturbance of a similar character, accompanied by declamations of the same democratic character, broke out in the country, but after due and careful examination he came to the conclusion down uFl to or!. First that or He o o u f s i e iteh t o re e a t: s ro k ruee f a o os r tuord a y n t ahc i aci n t uc theri e e s a : e e ßd d gi tn nit i tt l ea lion.r p y ro a pu n o d asra c ol o u n he - et that it was better not to make any a l terat i on i n the constitutional law of the country, a n d h e cause st rn itla a b d e, and with this increased force, and with the aid of pro secutionsunder the ordinary law, the count ry was restored to o manufacturing a disturbance, u tiug di s: cam a state of tranqu illit y . After the night Hon. Baronet th e First Lord o very similar trises—perhaps it was of a still inure alarming cha rac t er — an d theßight lien. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursued the course he had done beLre him. He inf tihtse nature, Treasury occurred e yea don an inerepecl military force to the disturbed „ tricts, ordered prosecutions before the ordinary tribunals, and the country wa s r e s to re d to a state of tranquillity. Now , with regard to the ou t rages i n I re l an d, those the Nobe. Lord had mentioned to them were by no m eans of an unusual or extra ordinary natur e . I n the year 1832, being then in office , h e had to consid er th e propr i ety of i ntro d uc i ng a ver y severe C ' o ercien Bill f or Ireland • but he confessed that he did not agree with all the measures releting to Ireland, which were agreed to by the then Government. Indeed, at one time, he was on the point of retiring from office, but finding that his, late lamented Friend ( Earl Spencer) had mouse to the conclusion that remedial and conciliatory measures were not sufficient to meet the circumstances of the day, lie consented to remain one of the Government. Accordingly a very harsh measure was introduced for the protection of life and property in Ireland, and for getting rid of the prevalent listurbancea, amounting almost to a civil war, which had bloke with the in initiated i 1835 a general approhati o n out in that country, upon the subj ec t o f t h e tithes. Murders measure r i e ,o And assassinations were then daily t a ki ng p l ace, and Parl i a- O v i a lu s ee, andr ment sanctioned the passing of the Bill ; b ut i n t h e year 18 3 4 iia a t su nrese wasstt ! if the I louse— indeed it scarcely suet with any oppesit ion ; but i,e must state that in the previous year of 1833 his Noble Friend Ler.: Altborp introduced aeveral in:Past/re; of ecincWatiini. Ile Aitroduced is measure for the abolition of Church Cs'-is -a mea i care for the mpreyeeiere ct jut nteanues for assimilative; tie rerorations of Ireland.- arid, in 1835, Covernment di elated their intention of eiedjine principles so Ireland which were nainv. coriviial to the and affections of t.lt.r great body of the I eool e. Phe e , ,rilequenee was, confidence trite re posed in the Mlnistry, and the pursuit of a mitigated Coercion Bill tier, intrusted in their hands. That confidence, lie be lieved, vas not violated, for, from a communication which lie had received from his Noble Friend the Marquis of Nermanbv he fouild that the Bill was never put, into c peration. lie had asked his Ni ble Friend whether the knowledge of such a power heist; in the hands of the Gevernment had had the effect of de terring crime ; and his Noble Friend had told him that he thought it had not, for the existence of the power was soon forgotten in IreLnd. The Bill continued in force from 1835 to IF4O, when Government determined it should not be continued. It was said with regard to this Bill, that placing such a power as that which the present Bill gave in the hands of the Go vernment, would have the effect of preventing crime, but if the Bill possessed any advantage of this sort, it was lost by the de'ay which had taken place. Now, with regard to the state of crime in Ireland, he thought in comparing crime with crime, it was well to take the whole crime of Ireland and compare one year with another. The number of homicides in 1832, before the introduction' of what was called the Coercion Bill, was 242 in 1837, 230; in 1840, 125; and in 1842, two years after the Act had expired, ISO. The number of charges for firing houses in 1832 was 328 ; in 1637, 91 ; in 1842, 74 ; in 1845, 78. The number relating to the crime ot attacking houses was, in 1832, 723 ; in 1837, 606 ; in 1840, 229 ; in 1842, 337 ; in 1845, 482. The conspiracies to murder were, in 1842, 24 ; in 1845, 8. With regard to assaults with intent to murder, in 1842, 3 ; in 1845, 2. He thought it was plain from this, that there had been no very great increase in crime in Ireland between the years 1842 and 1845 ; but the Right Hon. Bart. the Secretary for the Home Department men tioned five counties where he said there had been a great in ereasa in er:rne dur;ng the past year, as compared with former years. Now the Right Hon. Bart. the First Minister of the Crown made an admission on this part of the subject which told greatly against the Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman stated thrt crime had increased in Tipperary, Limerick, Clare, and Roscommon ; but with regard to Leitrim, it hail decieased. The total number of crimes bens.- in 1815, 804 ; and for the first five months in 1846," only 105. The Right Honourable Baronet attributed this falling off to increased vigilance of the constabulary force, and the stipendiary magistrates , and to the fact that an overwhelm ing military force was stationed in that country. Why, here was a complete answer to the whole case of the Government, an answer which fully showed that a remedy could be found in the existing and ordinary law of the country.—(Hear, hear.) But, he said, he had inquired into the operation of this law, had made inquiries amongst persons familiar with its opera tion, and he had asked in what manner this law, when a district was proclaimed, was put in force in any county of Ire land. He was told that constables took many persons who were out at night, that these persons were put upon their trial, that their excuse was not taken, and their friends had no weight as witnesses. If these persons had previously borne a good charact r, they were not subjected to punishment, but if they belonged to a suspected class, sentence of imprisonment was passed upon them. But then it might have been trans portation. The House would observe what a discretion thty allowed.—( Hear. hear.) In one of the cases which he had mentioned, the offence as created by law, was one of the most ordinary acts of men—the offence was nothing more than tra velling on the Queen's highway ; yet for this offence a yr an might be brought into the presence of a judge and jury, and if circumstances appeared suspicious, sentence of transportation might be passed upon him. He said that to such a measure Parliament would rightly refuse to give its sanction.—( Hear, hear.) But there were other considerations in connexion with this Bill which very much demanded the attention of the Homo. Whenever Bills of this kind were brought before the House, it had been always thought right to con sider what were the grievances of Ireland, and in what manner these grievances might have been the cause of these offences.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, the late Secretary for Ireland (Earl St. Germans), in proposing this Bill, denied that the majority of these offences were con nected with agrarian considerations. But be (Lord John Russell), after having consulted all the evidence laid before the House, and the report made by Lord Devon's Commission, was convinced that the majority of these outrages were agrarian, and connected with land, arising out of the social habits of the people in reference to land. The Noble Lord then quoted the opinions of Mr. Barrington, Major Shaw Kennedy, and Cap tain Warburton, that the majority ot the outrages in Ireland were agrarian. Here then, he said, were magistrates and . farmers, and who had been so in that country for many years, who had given it as their opinion that alterations of the farms •iffeeted the cilstence, and brought on starvation upon the pea santry ; and, therefore, he considered that eviction from land was the cause of the outrages in Ireland. He said then, that on these grounds, if it was right to introduce met sores of re pression beyond he ordinary powers of the law, it would have been right, at the same time, to introduce other measures, by which the means of existence would have been in creased, and brought within the reach of the peasant. He knew that the Noble Lord (Earl of Lincoln) had intro duced measures of an important character, within these three days, but he thought that these measures ought to have been introduced at the same time with this measure. After hearing only the Noble Lord's annunciation of the Bill, it might, per haps, be difficult to say whether they would be fit for the pur pose. Another measure, it was true, had been proposed for [reland by an Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Poulett Scrope), but he (Lord J. Russell) confessed that he did not expect that measure would remedy the ills of Ireland, but instead would tend to fix them deeper in their place. Another measure proposed for the amelioration of Ireland was the cultivation of waste lands. He thought that the cultivation of waste and outlying lands would certainly abate the competition for land, and would in so much tend to abate the crimes which were being committed. Now,he had already stated, in giving his consent to the second reading of this Bill, that he had ob jections to it. Ile objected to that clause which made it cri minal for a man to be out between sunset and sunrise. But if this clause were taken out of the Bill, he did not see but that it would cease to exist—it would cease to be a Coercion Bill for Ireland. There was an Act passed by the ether House of Parliament, imposing fines on cei tain classes of the people ; and the Whiteboys' Act contained the same clauses. Some such clauses might perhaps have been intro duced into this Bill, but certainly not such as he had seen in the Act passed by the other House of Parliament. If they should proceed to make the people pay for the out rages done in the country, if they set about collecting in the small sums of money for such a purpose, they would most likely raise such an opposition that they would require to send out the military to exact the two-pences and three-pences from the people, to pay for the outrages that had burst out. But he might be asked, why, if he objected to the Bill, he had con sented to the first reading. He said, if he had stated .his ob jections to the Bill, and said that he would not consent to the first reading of the Bill, it would have been said that it was a most violent opposition, that he should not allow a Bill to come into that Mose for the protection of life in Ireland. No, he had not done so, but he had stated his objections to the Bill—objections which went to the foun dation of the Bill. On the first day when it was fixed to come on with the orders of the day, he had Mated that he would oppose it. Other grounds of opposition had been taken. It was said by the Noble Lord (Lord G. Bentinck) on a former night, and it had been reiterated by an Hon. Gen tleman to-night, that they had no confidence in the Govern vernment, and could not give their support to an unconstitu tional measure. This was a Parliamentary ground for op pwition. But, he confessed that, had he thour.ht this Bill calculated to meet the necessities of the case, and that these ne- cessities required such a Bill, he had no want of confidence in her Majesty's Ministers and in their own measures, in re spect to Ireland, and therefore he would not have opposed it. He said it would be no novelty if he had no confidence in her Majesty's Government ; for several years he bad thought for himself, and bad brought out his own independent mea sures. The practical working of the policy which had been employed on either side showed results, and were practical commentaries, proving that her Majesty's Government were mistaken, and they were right.—( Cheers, and counter cheers.) These results showed that the course which they had pur sued and the Government had now partly adopted was right, notwithstanding what had been said of that course when her Majesty's present Ministers were out of office. He attempted on the ground of great i — n ß c . r i,lh e l a e, s t e shoe i e n iat p l opulation to relax the restrictive measures. Upon all these measures the Ministers had changed their course. They had adopted their measures. They had gone far beyond what they proposed in the admission of foreign corn. He gave them every credit for the motives upon which they had acted. It was with some regret that Hon. Members doing their duty should have been so long the objects of slander and calumny as they had been. The Secretary of State for the Home Department accused them when going out of being like pirates who set fire to the ship.—(Cheers.) It appeared that now, having got possession of the ship, they had lived upon the stores which they had left them—( Cheers) —guarded themselves by the charity which they deposited in the cabin—steering by the compass they had left on the deck. It would hardly have been too much if they had expressed some regret that they have been exposed to such charges before the country, with promoting a ten dency to set up a Popish Government in the country, and promoting measures tending to destroy the agricultural in terests of the country. He had felt the poignancy of these charges. It would have been little more than justice to have said that they were not deserving of these attacks. urn T e h d e se H r o io n u . s Member for Newcastle spoke of measures, which he said, he (Lord John Russell) was happy to promote. He thought he was mistaken as to the character of the gr m ie eir e e s s. To preserve the institutions of the country, the stheherosituoguo thought course to innovation. troasp rash r t pursue was Was Manchester, to t s r o e reform. m Leeds,l. Would so ue The uld lt iiavt H na dton)inno. not have all Gentleman l egbm, great see a ea n nat bettertevn s, t o shouldhav have carried c b a e r r irepresentedthese measures? in ot it ho w th a. a c t o o t s n ec s uo e nt r conservative consider, thebify, instead sgortnieeva suouefeehs measure carryinguf Ireland—the l t a h u i da s and securing the lives and property of the people? If this eras the case, then was riot always the most conservative otre t e o l cleansem easur them e o m f coercion, d a e n g d r e delay e from r w e i s s o h r t t o t o 000 n wished utl hd e no to et htper:eoshteearnv hand could the r e,tath led p‘r. institutions oetseenft o f e measur escountsthery o f reform. abuses. d e he should confidence in her Majesty's Ministers. Some Hon regard to Ireland, the Noble Lord, the Member f s o . r Lynn had an overwhelming confidence in the commercial ormtheacsunare;asubreec,aubseec. a l I because soeli had et - yh neo Members yof, the Minister. What was the state of the ease ? There was a large party in Ir e l an d who thought nothing but a native Par liament could pr ov id e proper measures for the redress of their grievances --a party which excited to violence, looks to violence, as its means, and separation as its end. If , s aid the Noble Lord, )ou pass this Bill because it was for the benefit of Ireland, and that out for the measure, you can say to Ireland, we have endea voured to legislate according to our consciences, but if you say any thing else to them — y if ou you c s o a n y s w i case was made d e er t e h d oug a ht it a bad measure, nevertheless we allowed it to pass because there were measures along with it. What more for the benefit of England , g oin g an effect will this have upon the people of Leland. They will say, " You have oppressed us by your laws to such an extent that if we are found looking after a stray cow, or visiting an afflicted parent a few miles off, after the hour of sunset, we are liable to punishment." An d y ou who vote for this measure be cause other measures of a commercial nature go along with it, will say to them; you are punished, not for the security of life, lint because other Government measures were passing through Parliament at the same time ; and for the sake of these measures it is that these restrictions arc placed upon you. In answer to this, the people of Ireland will turn round and, in -a tone of- triumph, exclaim, ts Tell u', is the Parliament com posed of English and of Scotch Members fit to legislate for Ireland ?" Will they (continued the Noble Lord) not seek for a domestic Legislature? Will they not .use their utmost ; eudeavoers to obtain a repeal of the union? What answer would there be to such an appeal ? The unanimous voice of a generous country would join in the declaration, that we have not justice, that we are determined to obtain justice, and, as it is now proved to us that that justice iv not to be obtained from an English Parliament, we are determined to have a Legislature which will represent our feelings and our interests. Beware (said the Noble Lord) in giving such arguments as these, if ycu wish, as I do most heartily, to maintain and to improve the union, anti make it a source of happiness and bles sing to the people of Ireland, as well as a source of inci eased strength to the ties of kindness and good feeling to Ireland, beware, lest you in any way weaken the link which hind the two countries.—(Hear, hear.) Do not set so far apert the governors and the governed. Do not let the people of Ireland believe that you have no sympathy with their feelings, and no care for their wants, that you are intent only uprn other measures in which they have no part. I say, if you are persua,led that this measure is right pass its second reading, and pass it through Committee ; but if you are not so persuaded give no sanetien to it. Let it at once be rejected; let it not be said that such was your conduct, and such your maxim with reference to this measure. The consequence of passing such a measure would not be temporary, it would not be repaired in a year, or five years, or ten years. It would be an irrevocable l oss .—( L oud cheering.) Mr. B. D I SRAELI—If the Noble Lord had felt keenly the unjust attack of those who supplanted him in power, the Noble Lord had at le as t t hi s consolation — he had received a noble revenge.—( Cheers.) A n d h e was sure that each time his pupils rose before him, before that red box— ( Laughter)—to L i aughter)—to whose authority they succeeded, the Lord, he was sure, must have telt, although they had not yet received that expression of spontaneous f ee li ng w hi ch his generous sympathising character expected— ( Cheers)—the Noble e Lord must have been receiving from those Right Hon. Gentlemen and Noble Lords opposite ampl e compensat i on for . the injustice which he is nationally and universally acknow ledged to have suffered from their hands.—(Cheers ) The Noble Lord had treated them that night with the eloquence that was habitual to him whenever he touched upon the affairs of Ireland. He (Mr. Disraeli) was one of those who regretted, and would not refrain from the expression of his regret, that the fate of Ministers should be supposed to de pend, after all that had occurred this session, upon an Irish subject. It was not, however, to any Honourable Gentle man who sat on the benctes near him that this circum stance had occurred. They had shown themselves ready upon the earliest occasion to discuss the question ; and he thought that whatever might have bees the policy of the Go vernment upon other questions—however irritating he might • say that it had been to the outraged feelings of many Hon. Members upon that side of the House, still he thought that, from the first and earliest occasion, they had been ready to dis cuss the matter. It was impossible for the House to forget the circumstances under which this measure had been brought forward. It was an unconstitutional measure, framed for a country which required to be treated with consideration and delicacy. He would remind the House of the manner in which the subject was first brought before their considera tion. The measure was then brought before the consideration of Hon. Members—it was recommended to them . on account of its temporary character—on account of the exigen • cies which called it into being, and then studiouslyconcealed from their notice till it was at length almost forgotten. He had no wish to speak of h s own feelings upon the subject more than was actually necessary, in order to defend his individual vote which he should give upon this measure. If he saw the present measure recommended by Irish Members, or a majority upon whatever side of the House they might nit, he should come to the consideration of the question with feelings different to those which he should have embraced when he found all the Irish Members denouncing the measure as futile.—(Hear.) This was not the first measure of the sort which had been forced upon Ireland. He was not, however, prepared to say that occasions might not yet arrive when extraordinary powers would be required by the Legislature of the United Kingdom. If it be true with reference to the state of Ireland—as he be lieved it was admitted to be true by all parties with reference to the state of England, namely, that while they had been dis cussing the principal and political measures of England—the Constitution of the people of Ireland had been neglected. He would not weary the House with the memoranda which he could in a moment give to them. This Coercion Bill was pro posed on the 2'2d of January ; it was ordered to be printed on the 16th of March ; it was read a first time on the Ist of May, I and ordered to be read a second time in June. This was the temporary measure which the Government seemed to make eternal. Let them look at the early adjournments of the House while this measure was under discussion, and they would see the importance attached to this measure. On the 20th of April there was no House, and on other days other measures were taken before the Coercion Bill, although it was first on the order of the day. It was evident that there had not been an earnest, even if there were a serious, intention on the part of Government to bring forward this measure. He could call the statistics in this measure the statistics of shuffiing.—(Hear, hear.) It was net his intention to enter into the merits of the Bill itself, although he could point out many details ; but one circumstance was very remarkable, viz., that the Bill of her Majesty's Ministers did not apply—(Hear, hear)—to the dis turbances which had been brought forward by the Secretary for the Home Department. It was very satisfactory to find at the present moment that there were any circumstances of a kindly feeling in Ireland, even in the wilds of Munster, though it was only with regard to the introduction of Indian maize. It was unfortunate that this intelligence, which was communicated through a very influential organ—which was generally favour able to her Majesty's Ministers,although not personally favourable to her Majesty's Ministers themselves—he meant the Times, was at the same time accompanied by a report in the same journal of a mutiny in Limerick gaol in consequence of the substitution of Indian Maize for their ordinary food.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) There never was any individual who had acted more fairly to any Government than the Noble Lord near him (Lord G. Bentinck). There never was any indivi dual who had given a more full and fair intimation of the course which he and his friends intended to pursue than the Noble Lord, and he could not therefore admit that any argu ment against the consistency of the Noble Lord was proved, for no person could deny that the Noble Lord had fulfilled his engagement in a just and complete spirit. He was not pre pared to admit that the accusation brought forward against the Nob he Lord with regard to the Factory Bill was at all better founded. Two years ago, when that measure was brought for ward, the Noble Lord had voted for time Govem rment measure, but did that preclude the Noble Lord from voting for the mea sure of another after that lapse of time? This was called by her Majesty's Government inconsistency.—(Laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman said—l have changed my policy, but are you, the Member for Lynn, the person to reproach me ? You, who changed on a Coercion Bill—who voted for a first reading, when you did not intend to vote for a second; and who have changed your opinion on the Factory Bill. The Noble Lord had violated no confidence, nor betrayed any trust.—(Hear, hear.) It could not be said that the Noble Lord got into Parliament by promising to vote differently for the Factory Bill. It could not be said that the Noble Lord, with practised duplicity, supplanted a candidate on the hust ings, by professing opinions, which he meant to oppose when he got into Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had not turned the Noble Lord (the Member for London) and his Friends out of office, for attempting to carry a measure, which they were now themselves promoting.—(Hear, hear.) This was the charge they brought against her Majesty's Ministers. They were not to be met when they made these charge!, by the taunt of having changed their opinion on the Factory Bill. The quarrel is great and national, not a miserable individual squabble between individual Members of Parliament ; and they were not to be answered by a Secretary of State or a First Lord of the Treasury saying, " Don't remind us of our pledges, we have discarded them long ago; the electors who sent us to Parlia ment, and by their confidence made us Ministers of the Crown, we can lead and direct just as we please." But he (Mr. Disraeli) would tell the Right Hon. Baronet— " Tu oblitus es, sed meminentur omnes, Meminit fides." He would give the House an instance from the speech of the Right Honourable Gentleman of the con spiracy practising against the Parliament of England, and if he or any of his friends could explain them, he would not only be glad, but surprised. It was used when the Right Hon. Gentleman was vindicating himself and his principles, in that high-flying tone which he so well knew how to assume when occasion required—(Laughter.) He wanted that an• swered—he asked it before, he asked it again and again, and the Right Hon. Gentleman called it bandying personality.— ( Hear, hear, and cheers.) But a few weeks afterwards, how ever, the Right Hon. Gentleman informed the House that he was going to explain the whole circumstance. He (Mr. Disraeli) was sitting opposite to him, and was listening atten tively to every syllable that fell from his lips—be could have said nothing that could have escaped his observation. Twice he told them, and dazzled the eyes and ears of all, that he was about to give an explanation. Instead, however, of doing so he read some confidential communication, which had no refe rence to the subject in question. That explanation he had never given, and that they required.—( Hear, and cheers.) Why he (Mr. Disraeli) reminded the House of this was in consequence of the observation made a few nights ago at the conclusion of the Right Hon. Gentleman's speech, when he said that "the accusation of his (Sir R. Peel) wishing to oust the Noble Lord (J. Russell) from settling that question, was the foulest calumny which the most vindictive imagination ever dictated to a virulent tongue."—(Tremendous cheers.) He who described this as the most vindictive calumny, was describing the conduct which he himself practised.—( Great sheering.) He ventured to allude to this, in order to explain the attack which he made on the Noble Lord with regard to his political consistency.— (Cheers ) As for consistency he (Mr. Disraeli) thought that the Noble Lord might be ready at any time to put it against that of the Right Hon. Gentle men.—(Tremendous cheers.) But he (Mr. Disraeli) did not wish the constitutional principles of the country to be left to political squabbles.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman, in order to put an end to the am bition of the Noble Lord, made another attack upon hint. Ile said that the Noble Lord had assumed a license in debate which exceeded its legitimate bounds ; and the Secretary- a t- War also admonished the Noble Lord, and reminded the Hou se that they had been addressed by him in language which had never been used to them before, and which, he trusted, would never be used to them asrain. It app eare d t h at t h e N o bl e Lord used strong language, and his having addressed them as Janissaries h a d excited their strong indignation. He (Mr. Disraeli) saw th a t the Speaker did not interfere on that occa sion ; and when h time, had also usedestoanw that l men,.the h mostemine i r i i e t o w f . their not 4. o n n g . uafe en i tlem n t an t House, surprised that the Right Hon. did interfere. He had to regret that the gentleman of this new generation did rot appear to know the history of their time. He would take the liberty, however, of quoting a passage from T ro t t: s r o e r c d , of a Gentleman, who was much admired by ° meal -mouthed the Member for London ; and as these w times, it would be well to know how Min e fs e ters and y the op ponents e xpressed themselves, The of Ministers occasiona ll y Hon. Gent. here read an extract from a speech of Mr. Fox on the Indian Bill, in which that gentleman implored them, " for God's sake, not to triu m p h b y an infamous string of bed-chambe r Janissaries;" and again, inanother passage, in reference to the opposition of },isopponents, he designated it as the "work of the Pretortan Guards." Burke also made use of the strongest language in reference to his opponents. On one occasion he said that " the whole compass of language did not afford terms sufficiently adequate to describe the contempt with which he regarded them." in another place he said that their conduct " reduced them to the level of the meanest and basest of the species." And then came the Secretary- at- War, and told them of language that had never been used in Parliament before, and which he hoped would never be used again. He (Mr. D.) would stronly recommend him to get Fox's speeches, and to study them day and night, and he would promise him that if he did his knowledge of Parliamentary lan guage would be improved, and he would find that his nervous and masculine eloquence would not suffer by the perusal. He confessed that it was one to which he could not allude without unaffected pain.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) It was very possible for Gentlemen to treat with derision the memory of a great man ; but he confessed that whatever might be his feelings on the conduct of any individual who had been a dis tinguished citizen in this country, and particularly an illuitinus Member of that Senate—if he had left them for ever he could not have received an allusion to the subjeet with the miserable derision which he bad just experienced.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) It seemed that after his Noble Frieud the other rilght hail used that language, which though nitllarAntiqa and authorised . by the greatest authorities, appeared to astoslo;ip their minds, and to astound the Secretary-at- M'ar, being 7- pelted by no common warmth, made another allusion which touched a secret sore. 'f he Noble Lord the Member for Lynn —he said so in his presence because he knew bins to be superior tip any petty offence on the subject—the Noble Member for Lynn, if he hatlan v characteristic more than anotistr, it was the total abs ence of affectation and pretence. The Noble Lind had never forced himself there into the place which he occupied. Ile was thrnst against his will into the position which he - occupied. Ile had always said that he had not much skill—that he was not a statesman, and asked them why he could not get somebody else —that he was bred a soldier and never aspired to more than the reputation of being a high spirited man and a gentleman. That was the character of the Noble Lord, and he believed that he had obtained his limited wish. lie did not know his own powers—he (Mr. Disraeli) thought he had great abilities. There were dozens of such men, but the fact was that the Noble Lord had no am bition. Any one that knew him intimately, knew that the idea of raising, himself with the State had never entered into his head.—(Hear, hear.) It was once the happiness of the Noble Lord, and it was still his pride, to have tilted the humblest station of the political career near a great Mi n i ster ; and from that p er i o d - lie had not wished to occapy any office however exalted, and even the Right Pouburable Ba ronet admitted, that au regarded the Noble Lord, he Was a consistent, but a pure and disinterested supporter. The Noble Lord might have expressed himself with unusual warmth and vigour, for, without any pretention to oratory, he spoke from the heart. He was not sure that the racy vigour of his brave honesty An HON. MEMBER (on the Opposition aide of the House) — Yes ; the racy vigour suits the stable mind.—(Laughter.) Mr. DISRAELI—Yes; he was not cure that this brave honesty is not worth all that modern eloquence with which we are so often favoured—all that pompous plausibility and solemn adroitness—( A laugh)—all that damnable iteration of stale sophistries—(oh, oh) —and cold common-place which arc held out to us as models of eloquence.— ' (Oh, oh, and loud laughter.) The Noble Lord, speaking with earnestness, and remembering his position—the only position in public life he ever aspired to—the humble position which a political career could offer to a great Minister and bound to him by the neare s t and dearest ties, the Noble Lord said the Right Hon. Gentleman had hunted to death Mr. Canning. The Noble Lord said that, in 1829 the Right Hon. Gentleman admitted. or rather had announced, that in 1825 he had informed Lord Liverp oo l what was his opinion with regard to the Catholic question. H e (the Right Hon. Gentleman) had said it sins no longer possible to resist their claims, and even if they could shaecserifittcleedtobsh• i h m is se le lf a . vin T g li o e ffi N ee o b ; l e h e Lo w r a d a o th n a l) ; ning, and rememb er i ng the effect eomfatult, conduct of that Ri g h t li on. Gentl in remembering prepared to me e lion. Gentleman on th e career and t on to? t tA h hi e er. l ß i C fe iagnh o - tf that statesman, and t a ki ng the posi tionlaid down by the Right Honourable Gentleman himself that " base in a Minister to Concea l }). it was him how it was in 1825, when he changed his Op o m prn n io'n on the Catholic question in the year 1827, having announced that change at so late a period after he had formed his opinions. The reason of that change was given by the explanation with regard to the cause of severance with Mr. Canning, and never would be forgotten in that House. The Right Honourable Gentleman bad made an answer which he would not reca pitulate—not from any desire of being unfair, but because it was fresh in the recollection of every one who listened to it. . The Right Hon. Gentleman said that, in the year 1825, he did of course, deny his communication with Lord Liverpool ; and he had said that, in 1829, when he announced that communi cation, he announced nothing more than he announced in 1827, in the presence of Mr. Canning himself. It was a remarkable circumstance, as the House would recollect. The Noble Lord had accused the Right Honourable Baronet of having. in 18f:9 acknowledged, or rather announced, the change of his opinion on the Catholic question in 1825, that announcement being made. in a speech of 1829. The Right Hon. Gentleman never read that speech—the Right Hon. Gentleman had read the speech which he made in 1827, in the presence of Mr. Canning. It was remarkable that the Right Hon. Gentleman never referred to the speech on which the Noble Lord alleged the great accusation then before the House. The position of the Right Hon. Gentleman was that in 1829 he only stated in that House what in 1827 be stated he had urged in his communication to Lord Liverpool, in the presence of Mr. Canning. He would wish to read to the House that speech of 1829, where the allegation of this great omission was contained. The Right Hon. Baronet referred Hon. Gentlemen to the speech of 1829, but he never read it, and, therefore, he (Mr. Dis raeli) would read to the House what took place in 1827. It was but due to the Right Hon. Gentleman to open that pas sage in Hansard, as the qbestion was too interesting and too important to be passed in silence. The Right Hon. Gentleman said, " As far as my own course in this question is concerned." Mr. R. YORKE—Which Right Hon. Gentleman ?-- (Loud cries of " Order.") Mr. DISRAELI proceeded to quote :—" As far as my owe course is concerned, it is the same which I have always held in my mind since 1825, when he was principal Minister, rand • found myself in a minor ity on this question. When I saw the number arrayed against me, I found my own position unten able. When I found I was left in a minority on this noes tion, I wished to be relieved from the responsibilities and the duties of office, and in consequence of the decision given against me in that House, I wished to be relieved from that office." He was ready to admit that it appeared that the Right Hon. Gentleman used the same language in 1827, nor did the Right Honourable Gentleman say anything which he did not say in 1827, in the presence of Mr. Canning. There was no con tradiction to that by any of the intimate friends of Canning, or those most intimate with the conduct of public men in this country. And what was the impression of the House at that time, when that speech of 1829, an extract from which he had just read, was written? He mad e no c h arge aga i nst t h e Ri ght Hon. Baronet, but he said that this was a garbled and muti lated report ; or, to use the softer language of that House, it was a correct report of what was said. Now, it really amounted to this, whether or not that important statement was made by the Right Hon. Baronet? That was really the great question.—(Hear.) It so happened that there were two reports of that speech. There was not only that of Han sard, which appeared after after a long interval, but there was that which appeared in the " Mirror of Parliament," and which paper was reported by men of education, talent: and of the greatest intelligence. The speech of the Right Hon. Baronet was taken down in short-hand by verbatim reporters. When this speech was made, a great question then agitated the public mind, and the course pursued by the Right Hon. Baronet was that which suggested itself to his mind at the time as the only one which he could adopt under the - cis. cumstances. It was a most important question to the. country, and related to the great Catholic question.—( Hear, hear.) The Right lion. Gentleman then felt that the time was come when something respecting the Catholic claims should be done. He stated to Lord Liverpool that something should be done with respect to the Catholic question. There was such a thing as a version of a speech—a speech for the House, and a speech for posterity.—(Hear, hear.) It so hap pened that the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet was both ways; and now they read both, and compared the speech of the hour with the speech of posterity.—(Cheers.) It hap.. pened that at that time a very eminent gentleman. who watt at the head of a great Protestant party in that House, re marked that if there was a time for consenting to the Catholic question, the Right Honourable Baronet—in justice to his own character—in justice to his friends—and in jus tice to Mr. Canning ought to have consented before. If, said the Honourable Member, the question was not found necessary in 1825, when brought forward by Mr. Canning, why did he again vote against it in 11327, when Mr. Canning was in office, and then advise it in 1829 (Great cheering.) These were the remarks in au Hon. Mem ber's—in the speech of Sir Edward Knatchbull—(Hear, hcar. ) —and it was well-remembered by all who listened tor: the • speaker, that it brought an answer from the Right" Won. Baronet. He did not answer that speech in the langoane which he quoted from Hansard, as the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet. His answer was the speech of Hansard, but not the speech of the Mirror of Parliament. It has no doubt a revised speech, a corrected speech. It was marked in Hansard as the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet—and there was this most remarkable note appended to it—" printed with sanction, and by the authority of Mr. Secretary Peel." (Hear, hear. and cheers from the Protection benches.) Now, with respect to the spOch in the Mirror of Parliament, he had inquired who it was that reported it, and ho learned it was reported by Mr. Barrow, a gen tleman who was one of the first short-hand writers as well as one of the first scholars of the day, they would not doubt the ability and correctness of Mr. Barrow, but if :hey did, he fancied that that speech had also been reported in the wherein the Right Hon. Baro ne t was Tim's a a newspaperde sav that f th iB e 2 Pi e was coins when something must be done with the Catholic question. He did not bring those statements forward without wishing that the Right Hon. Gentleman should have the opportunity of answering them. He had quoted them from anonymous works, but it should be remembered that anonymous works, at times, were written by those who were high in office, and who were above writing any. thing contrary to fact, at least wilfully. He found it s t ate d i n a work of great reputation , that Sir Robert Peel had a letter in his writing-desk, which he had written to Lord Liverpool, stating that it was high time that something should be done with respect to Catholic claims. This was stated in the Edinburgh Rau w, and it was signed anonymously ; but it should be remembered that that work was read in the highest circles, and quoted as a great authority ; and for the best of all reasons, that its contriebuso Hon. d G to pi r ro s o w u e r , e t he n aG e nt l eman l men tehme o afßn Right t g hh h te H r c a bo n anr k s: and of great attainments. It was w ithi n e i g h t and forty ho u rs- r. t he to Right r a a ft e e t r er h o l f r. whicil Canninghe appeared Baronet commenced that opposition, which was considered at the time, and had been considered ever since, to have outraged all decency. It was ag ree d upon, at a party f gentlemen, held in—he would not say in what great house, though he had been told— w h ere they were dining. It was enough for him to know that they came down to that House, and the Right Hon. Gentleman was amongst them. It was a party favourable to the shipping interest, and the Right Hon. Gen tleman delivered himself of a speech which contained e c hara ct er role h languag e f ar more vehement,: far more exc iting, and f ar more passionate tha n a n y th e y heard in modern tim_es.-4 Hear, hear.) On the third day after te he Righthad e for candour , and sincerity,rHeoneiv.Gedenhti ls and delivered one of the most violent and passionate speeches that had ever been made in that House, which called for the ways ready t the attack of an o p en and honour able enemy, but he celebrated reply from M r. Cannin g , that he was al : res m pi ee despised the sneaking insinuation of a lurking foe in the garb of a friend. Now, he would not enter into any details as to whether the Right Hon. Baronet hunted down Mr. Can ning, because that was the poetical phrase, used meta phorically, to describe the feelings of the friends, and relatives of Mr. Canning, with regard to the transactions with which they were familiar, and because if he were to do so lie must go into secret councils, and quote secret correspondence, read passages from newspapers, set up and maintained for a particular purpose.—(Hear hear.) He must ge into details of matters whi c h th e Right ' Hon. Gentleman addressed to the new generation who have entered Parliament since these events had occurred, and in vindication of his own character ; but let him remind the House that it was not a vindication made on the spur of the moment, although the Right Hou. Baronet might have had an imperfect knowledge of the details of what occurred nineteen years ago, for the Right Hon. Gentleman took three or four days to get up his case. which was to make an impression upon the rising generation. He thought, however, he had proved from the extracts which he had read that the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman in vindication of his own character was garbled.-- ( Hear.) He had brought them evidence—unintentional evi dence—confirmatory of the impression left upon the minds at those who witnessed the occurrence of these events, and whc were cognisant of the unenviable avowal before the House. nineteen years ago.—(Cheers.) But a complaint was made against his Noble Friend that he had called the Right Honourable Gentleman " his Right Honourable. friend." The Right Hon. Baronet asked if the Noble Lorc: believed that he hunted Mr. Canning to death, bow was 11E justified in calling him his Right Hon. Friend ? and as far as he possibly could do he would deal with that question. He remembered when the Right lion. Baronet was at the head of a phrasaical confederacy, called the " Conservative party."—.. ( Hear and laughter.) He remembered then the Right Hou. Gentleman had more than 300 Hon. firiends—( Hear, and laughter)—many of whom he did not know byname—(Laugh. I ter) —many of whom he certainly could not recognise i .and yea most of whom called him their Right Honourable Priers& I In that time the Right lion. Baronet seemed to think-that be • was the solo Minister of England, and he elm to lite.tabla