The Sun. — London, England, 1837-02-21 00:00:00

by Roman Catholic Members on entering that House ? Everybody knew what he meant to imply by it; and what he had insinuated other Members of his party had said without reserve or hesitation. He did not allude to the Noble Lord who had brought forward the present motion, for his opi nions were always expressed with characteristic moderation; but to a right reverend prelate, who had very recently ac cused the Roman Catholic Members of that House, in a charge to the clergy of his diocese, of treachery, aggravated by perjury :—" When we call to mind that such was the na ture of the measure, such the argument by which it was en forced, I know not in what milder terms the indignation of an honest mind can be expressed, than by characterising the conduct of those who demanded it as treachery aggravated by perjury. No obloquy—however it may be attempted to heap obloquy on all who thus feel and thus proclaim their feeling —no violence of invective—from whatever quarter, and in whatever place, high or low, it may be uttered—shall deter me from giving expression to similar indignation, as .often as it shall be called forth by similar perfidy, exhibited in such a cause." If this was the spirit in which the contest was to be carried on—if this was the animus with which men of high ability and high standing were to enter into it—(Cheers) — they, too, whose sacred calling might inspire them—if not with a little more of Christian charity towards onr opponents, at all events with more of decency and of moderation in ex pressing their dissent from them--(Continued cheering).— he could see nothing in that contest that would not affix in delible disgrace to the national character. But be this as it might, he would never shrink from professing and defending the opinions which he held in that House in the face of the country. He had seen something of the feelings of Eng lishmen of late upon these Irish questions, and he knew that when the facts were fairly stated an appeal might always be made from their prejudices to their justice. They would see the fallacy of the grounds on which the Noble Lord rested his present motion—they would see that there could be no monopolizing, no exclusion, no transfer of powers from one exclusive faction to another, where the power transferred was vested in the whole body of the people. They knew the value of municipal institutions, that they taught men to re spect the laws, and gave them an interest in enforcing them ; and they would see no reason why the people of Ireland should be deprived of these institutions because the majority were Catholics. If they were told that these - Catholics were hostile to England and to British connexion, they would point to the fact that the agitation of the repeal question bad been dropped from the moment that Ireland possessed a Government disposed to do it justice. Lord Mulgrave was what the Honourable and Learned Member for Bath had termed him—a lucky accident. His endeavours had as yet been unassisted by the legislature ; nut one Irish question had been settled by Parliament ; and yet the spirit infused into the executive by Lord Mulgrave had produced both tranquil lity and confidence. Of this the reports of the Judges and of the Assistant-Barristers afforded the best testimony. But in effecting this, the executive had been assisted by local associa tions, framed for the purpose of putting an end to prmdial disturbance, by that very people which the Noble Lord de clared to be incapable of self-government. The people of England were perfectly competent to judge of these facts ; and they would outweigh with them a thousand vague asser tions. Let the House do its duty by rejecting the motion of the Noble Lord—let it sanction the policy upon which the present Cabinet had staked its existence—and they might appeal to the country with the most perfect confidence that public opinion would ratify their decision. (Much cheering.) Mr. MA CLEAN said, the Noble Lord had said that if he were to legislate for Ireland, he would not be guided by the maxims of Blackstone, but, in the language of Mr. Fox, " If he had not conceded sufficient, he would concede more, and proceed in this concession until he had satisfied the people of Ireland." He (Mr. Maclean) said that this doctrine, if pushed to the extremity, was sufficient subject matter of alarm, not only to the Protestants of Ireland, but to the inhabitants of the British empire generally. When using this language of Mr. Fox, the Noble Lord had forgotten to state the answer of Mr. Pitt, and the subsequent declaration of Mr. Fox him self, in reply to Mr. Pitt. He was obliged to the Noble Lord for having characterised the doctrines of which he thus boasted, as the generous, warm, but he could not help think ing, incautious language of Mr. Fox. But what had Mr. Fox himself said in answer to Mr. Pitt ? He said that as the people of Ireland had required the complete independence of the Legis lature, and had got it—so on that occasion, although he did not approve of what he suggested to the House, still he would grant it, because it would be gratifying to the people of Ire land. Did the Noble Lord tell the House that he did not approve of this measure, but that he granted it because it would be gratifying to the people of Ireland ? Did he draw no distinction between the time when this incautious declara tion—as he called it—escaped the lips of Mr. Fox, and the period when that declaration had fallen from the Noble Lord ? Did the Noble Lord not remember that when Mr. Fox incau tiously produced that argument, there were two independent legislatures —that Ireland had an independent legislature, and, he was taunted with striking at the independence of Parlia ment, which he himself had guaranteed in 1782 ? Mr. Fox was for concession ; but what were the concessions which he advo cated? They had already been granted by the Imperial Par liament. The concession of emancipation had already been granted, and equality was so far established. The language of the Noble Lord was a sufficient ground of alarm to those who saw in this measure, not the mere grant of municipal institutions to Ireland, for the purpose of giving to its cities and towns the same privileges that they pos sessed in Great Britain, but in order to found, what the great leader of the Catholics of Ireland told us these corporations would become, normal schools of agitation. The connection between the party of that Gentleman and the Government had been repeatedly denied ; but had any gentleman risen in his place and denied the declaration made by the lion. Member for Tipperary to his constituents in Ireland, that there had been formed between the party of which he was a distinguished member, and the party of the Noble Lord, an indissoluble connection, formed upon the ne cessity of Corporate Reform for Ireland ? But had the Noble Lord and his colleagues taken their ground upon the neces sity of Corporate Reform for Ireland ? No ; they had taken their stand upon the necessity of diminishing the Church Esta blishment in Ireland. That the Noble Lord had represented as the keystone of the arch. Gentlemen on his side of the House were taunted with accusing the Hon. Member for Kil kenny, because he supported the Administration. It was not they who accused him. Let him recollect what his friends said of him. Let him refer to what the lion. Member for Bath had said on the first night of the Session. There was a publi cation which bad recently been in the hands of every one, and in which the most positive declarations were made as to that Hon. Gentleman's Parliamentary conduct ; and as to the views not only of himself, but of those who were kept in office by the support of his party. What was the declaration of Mr. Fergus O'Connor, who had formerly held a seat in that House, and whose independence of conduct while in it reflected credit upon hischaracter ? He taunted the Hon. Member for Kilkenny with dealing treacherously by those with whom he was allied, and said, " After the discussion on the acceptance of the Lords' amendment on the Municipal Corporation Reform Bill, I was sitting at the Westminster Club when you arrived. I said to you, Well, you have sold us at last. You are as mere a Whig as any of them.' Your reply was, Hold your tongue, you fool. I only want the Whigs to do my dirty work, and then I will kick them out as I did the Tories.' " The same writer went on to quote the words of another Member of that House, who said in conversation with him—" What are we to do with this man? Upon my soul I have observed him of late, and he is ruining us as well as the country." The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to argue that no measure of Church Reform would satisfy the people of Ireland—that they would be content with nothing less than the total aboli tion of the Church Establishment ; and he referred to a pamphlet published by Mr. George Cornwall Lewis, who said that the objection of the people of Ireland to the support of the Established Church, was one of principle, and not of degree, and that nothing short of perfect equality would satisfy them or allay the prevailing discontent. In the year 1826, the Catholic hierarchy of Ireland, in conjunction with the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny, could not have gone further than they did go, in protesting against any intention to attack, by overt or insidious means, the integrity of the Established Church in I re l a nd. Th e y en published a pastoral address to the clergy and laity of Ireland (and among the signatures to it was that of John M'Halc), wherein they declared that the Catholics of Ireland, far from claiming any rights or titles to the forfeited lands or possessions, result ing from any rights or titles of their ancestors thereto, would defend to the utmost of their power the settlement and ar rangement of property in that country as established by law. What, however, was their conduct now? In a letter addressed to the Lord Bishop of Exeter, a Roman Catholic Prelate, to whom he had already alluded, Dr. M'Hale, made a very clear avowal of very different principles. He remarked in that let ter that, while proclaiming unappeasable hostility to the Church Establishment, he entertained none whatever to any individualfor his honest religious opinions —that, after all the evils it had heaped on his devoted country, it was some con solation- to reflect that the legislative axe had been laid to the Church Establishment—( H ear , hear)—that the pruners of the ecclesiastical vin e y ar d h a d not read the Roman history in vain—that already ten lofty plants, that which poisoned by their influence the narcotic vegetation, had been laid low, and that this doubtless w as a p re l u d e to a further expurgation, which would be continued until, it was to be hoped, not a vestige of the mighty nuisance would remain. The same Prelate, addressing the Duke of Wellington, had asked that noble individual—" Do you think you have any force in binding men's consciences?"—(Hear)—and after wards had openly declared that " after paying the landlord his rent, neither to parson, to proctor, to landlord,, nor to agent, should he consent to pay, in the shape of tithe or any other tax, a penny, which should go to the support of the greatest nuisance in that or any other country." Was anything more required to justify the alarm felt on his side of the House ? Had not a proposition been made only the other night to drive the Bishops from the House of Lords? And was that not an attempt to " disturb and weaken" the Protestant Constitution of this country as by law established? As to the Honourable and Learned Member for Kilkenny, the proofs of his intention were numerous and manifest. A very short time back, that Hon. Gentleman had received a letter from the " Radicals of Lambeth," containing 12 different articles of their political creed. In his reply to them he had expressed his concurrence in them severally, and among the rest, when he came to the pro posal of " no Established Church," his answer was " I agree." Now he (Mr. Maclean) would confess with the utmost since rity that on some points he had great respect for the Radicals, they went straightforward to their propositions. They did not mince matters ; they were for fighting out the great question of democracy and constitutional monarchy ; they held out the language of honest men, and crouched to none in their declarations. But when the advocates of democracy and constitutional monarchy respectively were anxious to come to a fair contest, there rushed between them a third party, not agreeing with either, and prevented them from ascertaining which of the two were the stronger. The Hon. Gentleman favour to define them ?—(Hear, hear.) His Right Hon. iend, the Member for Tamworth, had happily said that they were meant to describe a something which had often been Promised but never could be realised—a phantom that was ever present, but still eluded the grasp—a thing which, like the face of the rainbow, the Irish peasant was taught to chase from d ay to day, to the great waste of his time, and that, like the rainbow, was eternally changing and altering its shape, as loMing one hue this moment and another the next— " Omnia transformant sese in miracula serum." Zo-day it assumed the shape of a Municipal Corporation Bill e---tvas employed for demanding Municipal Institutions for Ireland, and to-morrow it took the form of Universal Suf frage, the Vote by Ballot, the subversion of the Irish Church, or the abolition of the " blood-stained" impost of Tithes. (Loud cheers.) This was not the first time by many that "peace and justice" had been promised to Ireland. Every voice that hailed the passing of the Catholic Emanci nation Bill, and his among the rest, held out that promise ; but it would be useless now to inquire how it had been kept, er in what way the means taken to fulfil it had been received. The Noble Lord opposite talked of justice and peace for Ire land ; but did the people of England know in what that jus tice and peace consisted, or the price that was to be paid for it ? Let the people of England know what was meant by this " peace and justice," and_ then tell them what the price was at which it was offered.—(Hear, hear.) In what he had said in reference to the Dublin Association, and other parties, he had e ndeavoured to avoid all personal allusion. His proposition Was, that those societies had acquired a osition of great s trength and influence, and th a t their continuance was not Only inconsistent with the declaration'of the Noble Lord, be cause the whole of their energies were directed to the destruc tion of that which he had pledged himself to support, but in jurious to the Government of the country. It was not just to wards the numerical minority of Ireland, to tolerate such As sociations. The numerical minority were the Protestants of Ireland. When they approached the Throne and Par liament, with their well-founded complaints, they were re buked, if not insulted, by the Government.—( Hear, hear, hear.) They might bear with this treatment, had they e xperienced it at the hands of the leaders of their opponents ; but when such was the conduct of his Majesty's Government towards ttem, he should like to know what they were to ex- Peet if they submitted to a measure which would place their Corporate towns under the rule of the majority to whom they were opposed ? Was it at all strange that there should exist ie the minds of the Irish Protestants much apprehension with respect to the object for which the Bill was introduced Hear, bear.) They feared that if this measure were granted st would be followed by the abolition of tithes and universal suffrage, assisted by the vote by ballot, and checked and con trouled by the practice of auricular confession.—(Cheers.) When they talked of justice and peace, and at the same time insulted those who presumed to oppose the carrying of such measures as these, all lie could say was, that he should not be surprised soon to be told that it was an insult to the Roman Catholics of Ireland to have either a Protestant Lord Chan cellor, or a Protestant King.—( Cheers.) This might be terught a vain speculation ; but that it was not quite so vain as Pen. Gentlemen might fancy, the extract of a speech of an /ion. Gentleman, which he held in his hand, would show. The speech delivered on the 19th of January, 1837, con teined the following passage :—." Who can see the result of the last rumour, that Mr. Michael O'Loghlin is to be ap- Pointed to the Mastership of the Rolls ? Should anything happen to my Lord Plunket, which Heaven forbid, he would flake an excellent Chancellor."--( Hear, hear.) He did not h elieve"that any more deserving person could have been ap pointed to the Rolls than Mr. O'Loghlin; and, therefore, ne read the extract not with any view of reflecting on the appointment of Mr. O'Loghlin, but to show that he was Justified in glancing at the possibility of a revision of the Ro- Irian Catholic Relief Bill. It was on those grounds that he Stood forward to discharge a duty which he owed to that por tion of the inhabitants of the sister country who entertained a strong opinion that thi s mnasure would be destructive of their interests of the interests of the Established Church. For these and other reasons he had been induced to bring forward now a resolution similar to the one which he submitted for co nsideration last year. The Noble Lord concluded by ra °Ying, by way of instructio n " th at t h e C omm i ttee on t h e Bill for the regulation of the Municipal Corporations of Ire 'arid be empowered to make a provision for the abolition of Such Corporations, and for such arrangemeuts as may be ne eSsary on t h e i r a b ol i tion for securing the efficient and impartial ad ministration of justice, and the peace and good government of the cities and towns in Ireland." The question having been put from the chair, Mr. WARD said it was now just one year since the Noble Lord brought forward a motion precisely similar to the pre sent, similar both in spirit and in words, resting upon the lame grounds, supported by the same arguments—for the only new argu ment w hi ch the Noble Lord had employed was that founded upon the existence of the General Association--and leadin g to the same results which would be produced by the pre sent motion if successful, namely, to extend and perpe wtTite that feeling of irritation amongst the Irish p eop l e to ,j ll the r e f usa l o f one branch of the Legislature t hem justice had unfortunately caused. W as the House newer to escape from this vicious circle when Ireland was eon jeerned ? The people complained of the want of justice, and ustice was to be denied to them because they complained.— ( Hear.) If they were silent, what would be the inference ? Why, that they were indifferent to the matter in dis- Pute—that they could not appreciate the value of mu nicipal in s ti tut i ons, and cared little for the boon which the Le,gislature wished to force upon them. This was always tine logic of the Conservative party ; silence and indifference Vero always synonimous. In 1831 the people of England, according to Mr. Croker, were indifferent to the Reform Bill, because the three preceding years there had been few Petitions for Reform ; nor was it until the table had groaned Under the weight of petitions from every corner-of the em pire that they could be undeceived. What then was their cours e ? Why, they exclaimed against the vehemence with thick the claims of the people were expressed, and protested t iP„eY would never yield anything upon compulsion.—( Cheers. ) „ney did yield, c a wntithstauding, and just in time But preserve "e country from revolutionary struggle. But now, un `..sught, unwarned, they were repeating the same experiment °I Ireland; forgetting that it must lead inevitably to the „ 44 Me result. Yet surely much had passed, even since last ssion, to convince them of their error. Was the Noble Lord 84tisfied himself with the results of his motion ? Had he tPut an end to agitation in Ireland, by withholding municipal istitutions ?—(Cheers.) What was the argument upon which , t e had now rested his case? Why, that Ireland was one vast p l r ena of political agitation.—( Hear, hear.) That although hotnormal schools of which the ouse had heard so much haq session had not been established, Ireland was governed belt ,by the Lord- Lieutenant, not by the British Parliament, 6 1t °Y a Parliament sitting in Dublin, under the name of the 4eneral Associaiion, debating, deliberating, forestallin the l'lseassions of that House upon every point in which thenwel ts - et 0 Ireland was concerne d ; l ev yi ng contr ib ut i ons and ex -44141g its i n fl uence f rom t h e cap i ta l to t h e remotest corners 4 , 1 % , the country.—( Opposition cries of " Hear.") He (Mr. ard) admitted this to be an evil. But if the Association I s ere an evil, what had produced it 2—(Cheers.) It was 1h amicable after the failure of two successive attempts to bring to tt " arulerible adjustment the two questions in which the Irish o rPla took th e d eepest i nterest. Th e t i t h e quest i on alone— use as that impost undoubtedly was to the Irish people, an d tel blY Odious a s it had been rendered by the late proceedi ngs lhe Court of Exchequer, by which the highest powers of e law had been vested in the hands of its most ignoble and degradedbet functionaries--had failed in producing it. It was L e e Noble Lord's motion, negatived, indeed, in that House, i 1 out into odious perfection elsewhere—( Much cheer: the sponsorship of one of the Noble Lord's p ;041 associates—that was the parent of the Association. No li , o ner were the Irish people convinced that there was a W I I :tY here determined to withhold from them the rights of ow l ets they saw Englishmen and Scotchmen in the tranquil th an upon the insulting plea of national incompetency, 1 they determined to avail themselves of every resource the law admitted of in order to obtain their rights from ;, os. °o le g i s l ature of their coun t r y. —( Cheers.) They combined .this pu rpose. There was nothing illegal in this combi- Teton. Their was no l aw under which the sittings of the eseneral As soc i at i on could be interfered with or suspended : ,!Members simply exercised that same right which was exer sed in various ways by almost every one of those whom he t r,s then addressing. The Conservatives, in 1831, were en titled to protest against political unions; they did not then wi ,?°fl to them. But now that they had covered the land ! s _ (t their Conservative Clubs and Conservative operative as ;euciations—( Laughter and cheers)—with their presidents, and ercre.taries, and treasurers, and public discussions duly regis thee4 by the Conservative press, who saw in them nothing but tie _ purest effusions of patriotism, with what face could they °,,°lncean Association which differed from their own simply b ut 'uls ! that it represented the feelings not of a few hundreds, sp a , ° . l some millions of their fellow-countrymen ? What et s r it es s seas gave to the Dublin Association its national 01." of ten but the existence of grievances which nine Irishmen the bad an interest in removing? Redress the grievance feae s s u : e tv _ .Association falls to the ground—though this, be se ek to 4s the last mode in which gentlemen opposite would rat s aluppress it. The Noble Lord had said that the corpo iknai n .f established, would be in fact so many batteries here nst the Church - and the Right Hon. Baronet the Mem vsbetnier___CuMberland had urged this argument with still greater . or of , t 7ce e . Talk not to me of Municipal Institutions, he said, Yoe rase claims of the Irish people to local government. I tell T he r a. the Protestant Church is upon the verge of ruin. tee, L . prey of the people of Ireland are Catholics : I enter kill Just dread of Popery and Catholic domination, and I te a; ;,e . Yer assent to any measure by which the hands of that 1,14,..nty can be str engthened.—(Opposition cries of" Hear.") had"bWaat Was this but to say, that because one act of injustice slat cheers!"ommitted, injustice must be perpetual ?—(Ministe hos.) He (Mr. Ward) admired the zeal of the Right fea r Baronet, but he lamented his indiscretion. He P ° Pula e that the Prutestaet Church was not sufficiently soul In Ireland to support the additional odium which keyedthus be . . . end cast upon it. Ordinary minds would eavoured to lice sh e , disconnect the two questions, and to cen- Seel eo t _ran people that it was not from motives of religious but the ~."tt the reform of their Corporations was refused ; t zaight th em f . on. Baronet scorned such subterfuges. He theis t, , airle that it was as Catholics that he mistrusted of the and would exclude them now and for ever from the pale wer e denriietr toConstitution, by denying to them rights which vitlter Part of thil e s,°?arn whatever might be his creed, in any ts policy of n e o isritish empire. But this, he repeated, _was tee nettle as a r 111: .Cientlemen opposite. They meant to fight st (l r aised a ga i o ! IgpeuS question. The no-Popery cry was to te mned, and the' t" prejudices of the ignorant were to be in dza to differ fruiost odious imputations cast upon all who yen- Cheer°s) them in the discharge of their political Pe*po C had the la- If this were not their intention, for what tessaoth„,, read igbt Honourable Baronet the Member for see" , at that table, the other night, the oath taken concluded by repeating his conviction of the fatal tendency of the measure proposed by the Noble Lord, and his intention to oppose it. Mr. R. M. BELLEW said that the main objection urged to the present Bill was, that it endangered the Established Church. That argument had been formerly urged against emancipation, and against reform.--( Hear, hoar.) In point of fact, the principle of the proposed Bill--namely, that of giving power to the people—had been conceded by those two ,measures ; and it was idle now to talk of preventing the people of Ireland from obtaining perfect equality in every re spect.—( Hear hear.) The i n fl uence t o b e exerc i se d b y t h e Roman Catholics under this measure would be given them, not as Roman Catholics, but as persons having the required qualification. There never was a period in which the people of Ireland were more united, and in which their demands were more reasonable than the present.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to pass a high eulogium on the government of Lord Mulgrave in Ireland. Mr. YOUNG (of Cavan) said that the great objection of the Protestants to the proposed measure was to be found in the uses to which they had reason to apprehend the corpora tions might be turned. They heard the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny say, " Grant me these corporations, and I will do anything ;" and such a declaration on his part was naturally calculated to excite alarm and suspicion in their minds. They were the constant objects of the abuse of the party to which that Hon. and Learned Gentleman belonged. The Hon. Gentleman concluded with expressing his intention of opposing the measure. Mr. C. BULLER said, municipal institutions were the best legacy which the Romans had left to the nations they conquered, and in the middle ages they were the fastnesses of civilization. By giving the people municipal institutions, you taught them to manage their own affairs, and they could do so better than a central government. If it were desired to make the people respect the law, there was no mode so effectual for doing so as to make them the administrators of it. For his part he thought the establishment of the little republics, and normal schools for agitation, proposed by the Bill, would afford the best possible apprenticeship for the exercise of political rights.--( Hear, hear.) If such were the general advantages of municipal institutions, in what country were they wanted more than in Ireland ? Was it not desirable to arouse the industrial energies of the Irish, and to teach them to depend upon their own exer tions ? Were not the Irish a people whose feelings it was ne cessary to conciliate to the administration of justice ? By making them administrators of the law, would they not become its auxiliaries, instead of being, as they too often were, its op ponents ? Let it be remembered that the Irish had a repre sentative Government. Nobody thought of depriving them of the elective franchise. Would it not, then, be acting a wise part to fit them for the discharge of political duties, by bringing them into friendly contact with each other in the discussion of matters of local interest ? The plan suggested by the Noble Lord the Member for Lancashire would leave only a few subor dinate offices—such as Commissioners of Paving Boards— open to public competition, and it was not likely that respectable men would become candidates for them ; whereas the offices of Mayor and Aldermen would be objects of ambition to respectable citizens.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The present Government governed by the Roman Catholic majority, and the last governed by the Orange minority. There could be little doubt that at first all Protestants would be turned out of municipal offices ; but the majority would soon get to squabbling among themselves, as all majorities did, and then the Protestants would become of importance, inas much as they would be able to turn the scale. No better plan could be devised for preventing the formation of great parties, than setting the people discussing all sorts of minor questions. He supported the Bill, because he believed it would raise an effectual barrier against the influence of demagogues and the Roman Catholic priests. He understood his Majesty's Mi nisters—( A laugh)--they declared their conviction that the establishment of municipal institutions was a boon which Ire land merited, and that they were determined to give it to her. They had stated that they would stand or fall by that question. That was honest and patriotic conduct, which merited the sup port,of every real Reformer. Now he wanted to know the Right Hon. Baronet's intentions equally well. By what system of Irish policy was he prepared to stand ? If he should come into office on such a principle as that to which he had just alluded, it was to be hoped that the Irish people would resist his govern ment. He for one would say, that his approbation of the means, and the extent of their resistance, would depend on nothing but their success.—( Cheers from the Irish Members. ) The Irish people would possess the sympathy of every liberal mind throughout the civilised world. Let the Right Hon. Baronet recollect that before such a principle the strong mind of the Duke of Wellington quailed. If the Noble Duke would not maintain the exclusive system at the hazard of civil war, was the Right Hon. Baronet prepared to do it ?—(Hear.) Ho thought far too highly of the Right Hon. Baronet to sup. pose that he contemplated the atrocity of involving this coun try in a civil war, in oisaler to keep up the Church Establish ment : but he believed that the Right Hon. Baronet had not well considered the consequences of the measures he was now pursuing. He had not considered that the only course which, as an honest man, he could take, if he turned out the present Ministers on this questions was to come forward, and introduce precisely a similar measure. Mr. P. BOR. THWICK said that the question was not what Parliament had done at a former period, but what it was necessary to do now ? He wished the question would come before the people of England to-night, and he would abide by the people of England's decision. Let Hon. Members oppo site appeal, if they dared, to the constituency of England. If he were to shelter himself under the wings of the Noble Lord who introduced this debate, he might admit that the present municipal corporal ions were an abuse ; and lie might ask, was it the way to remedy them to put power into the hands of the opposing. faction ?—he might ask, if you wish to tranquillise Ireland, is it the way to succeed to place in actual collision contending factions ? Would the collision which might take place be attended with the pacification of Ireland ? They asked for justice to Ireland—justice equal to that which had been already granted to England and Scotland. Had they yet done justice to England—had they yet done justice to Scotland? What was the justice which was demanded ? Was it the heathen goddess, with blinded eyes and equal scales ; or was it the halt and haggard beldame, whose sword had but one edge, and whose measure was ini quity? If he thought this measure calculated to injure the Protestant Establishment in Ireland, he should oppose it on that ground only; but he thought there were sufficiently solid grounds for opposing it on its own merits ; and not from co-relative arguments. The contest now was one of demo cracy against monarchy—infidelity, not individual, but national, against religion. Not whether liberty should remain, but whether our mixed Constitution should continue at all. Such being the state of the question, he had but one course to pur sue, and that was, to vote with the Noble Lord who had to night opened the debate. Mr. POULTER held the claim of Ireland to Municipal Corporation to be totally unanswerable; and he deeply re gretted that the course of argument pursued last year was to be pursued again on the presnet occasion. Ile would admit that there were certain proceedings in towns which could be performed without Municipal institutions ; but that argument fell short of the real principle of these national claims. These institutions formed an important branch of the education of the people of Ireland. The question was not a political one; for neither King nor Minister could nominate a Mayor or create a Town Councillor. Reference had been made to some strong resolutions which had been passed in Dublin. Although he deeply regretted those resolutions, he looked upon them as having contemplated nothing like an appeal to force, or an appeal to arms.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He _conceived that they contemplated a legislative reeognition by this coun try. The same principle of construction which was applied to the coronation oath might be applied to the oath taken by Hon. Members. On the discussion of the King's Coronation Oath, Lord Somers said :—" It is said we are going about to alter the Constitution of the Church. Tho Ugh the Consti tution be as good as possible for the present time, none can 'be good at all times ; therefore I am for the word may,' and that will be a remedy at all times.". Polexfen said--." We are all agreed, and I hope ever shall he, to support the Pro testant religion established by law • 'we desire to consider whether the latter word should be added or not. There is no manner of reason against it : we , all agree ,in substance, But if, by the wisdom of the nation, it shall , Y.)e"thought fit, to alter it, we are at liberty to do it." An immense majority of the House was prepared to resist the principle of instalments —(llear, hear)—but at the same time that same majority would resist any thing like spoliation of our institutions— ( Hear, hear)—and it wis injustice on the part .of Hon. Mem bers opposite to attribute such intentions to them. He advo cated the Bill, but at the same time was most ready to main the supremacy of the law, and those means which would best contribute to the tranquillity of the.country, and the protection of property.--( Hear, hear.) Mr. E. TE NNE NT should not wish, for the amusement of the Hon. Member for Liskeard, to play the part of Hamlet leaving out the court and Ophelia. " He should at once apply himself to the question before the House, and in doing so, should first advert to two charges, which had been brought for ward—the one by the Hon. Member for St. Alban's ; that Hon. gentlemen on his (Mr. Tennent's) side of the House re fused to the people of Ireland municipal government, from motives of religious intolerance, because the majority of the people were Catholics ; the other by the Hon. Member for Louth—that they offered an insult to Ireland by refusing to her the same self-government which they had extended to England and Scotland. He denied both of those charges. The charge of religious intolerance was only founded on the artifice of those who, having been guilty of political treachery, sought to place themselves behind the shield of religious in tolerance. In reply to the second charge, he would say, that the amendment of the Noble Lord threw open the corporations, and gave to the people of Ireland the power of self-govern ment, and there was not a single respectable householder to whom it would not give a vote in municipal corporations. He admitted that the Roman Catholic religion was a serious evil—that it was a mysterious symbol of combination, lay and secular.. The feelings of the people of Ireland were kept fixed on this question, only by mixing up with it the more ex citing topic of Tithes.--( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Kilkenny had said last session that if this Bill were rejected, the table would groan under the petitions which would be presented to it. Where was the effect of his predictions? It was only to be found in the existence of the General Associa tion, which devoted all its time to the question of the Church, and Tithes, and to quarrels and reconciliations between indi viduals. It was rather a remarkable fact, that of the number of members who had been received into that Association be tween the 27th of July 1836, and the 19th of Jan., 1837, the total number being 2,945 members, only 263 were Protes tants—(Cheers)—and of these 84 were inhabitants of Lon don.—(Loud cheers.) Of the remaining Roman Catholics, 600 were bishops, and clergymen of the Church of Rome, so that upon an average there were two Roman Catholic ler gymen to one Protestant layman.—(Loud cheers.) The Re port of the Commissioners described the existing corporations as being objectionable and suspected; and yet it was those very Corporations that the, Noble Lord (J. Russell) now pro posed to restore.—( Cries of " No, no.") The Hon. Member then complained of the manner in which the prerogative of mercy had been exercised in Ireland, for the mere purpose of acquiring a bad popularity, and referred to the case of " Deni son v. Magrath," tried at the summer assizes for Dundalk. It was a criminal information for sending a challenge, and was accompanied with some aggravating circumstances ; and the defendant, after conviction, refused even to apologise for his conduct. His sentence was one month's imprisonment, with a fine of ea, and sureties to keep the peace. The fine was, however, remitted, on the interposition of the Hon. Member for Louth, and he was set at large to laugh at the Court of King's Bench and its jurisdiction.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Was the House prepared to receive the announcement that since July last the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland had liberated no less than 470 convicted criminals, without reference to the Judges who tried them ?—( Cheers). Ile also understood that the orders for the discharge of several of these prisoners had not even as yet been dispatched from the Castle, though the gaols had been delivered and the felons were at large. He would ask whether such was the healthy state of society of Ireland, that such proceedings would not increase the democratic power there ? and whether the present was so well organised a Government that the House would consent to in crease its patronage ? The present measure, like every other proposed by the present Government, went to increase the number of offices, and consequently the patronage of them, they being, as a matter of course, in their gift. Would there not be Rccorderships to be given away in every corporation in Ireland ? Were there not police magistrates and revising barristers to be appointed for every town within the operation of the Bill ?—( Hear. ) But let the House look to the mode in which the legal appointments had been made—( Cheers)-- and he would ask whether it would consent to give the Go vernment the means of effecting further abuses in this respect ? —( Cheers.) If the present state of things were allowed to go on, there would be no necessity to extend to Ireland the principle so strongly contended for by the Hon. Member for Bath to be introduced into this country—namely, vote by bal lot ; for he would assert there would not be very soon a person with a roof over his head, who would not be in possession of the franchise. When persons were nominated to these law appointments who were not legally capacitated to hold them, bet merely in consequence of their being political partisans; what effect must it have on the minds of the people ? How must they feel when they saw, that in order to maintain their political ascendancy, the Government had destroyed the impar tiality of justice?--( Hear.) He knew that the people were dis satisfied with the administration of justice, not only in these minor courts, but in the higher tribunals of the country, where persons were appointed to offices who entertained strong feel ings of party spirit, and for political purposes. These ap pointments were not entitled to receive the confidence of the nation, while the country was deprived of the services of men in every way their superiors.—(hear.) Now, as regarded the abuse of legal patronage in Ireland, he would refer to what had taken place as to the appointment of a gentleman to fill the office of Accountant-General to the Court of Chan cery, a situation which required in the holder of it great ex perience, and a great degree of accurate knowledge in the details of the business - of that Court ; but a youthful barrister had been appointed, of no standing in his profession, whose talents had not been developed, or were at least unknown, until selected to fill this office; but in consequence of his being the brother of an eminent Irish solicitor. He ( Mr. Ten nent) respected that gentleman, but the question involved in the appointment was, that of political influence. A Mr. Davis had discharged the duties of the office in a most efficient man ner for some time, and his claim to fill it was supported by the Masters in Chancery, by other high authorities, and a memorial was signed in his favour by 600 solicitors re presenting the suitors in that Court; but unfortunately his friends were not in power, he had no political influence, and the consequence was that a youthful barrister was appointed in consequence of his being a brother of a solicitor professing liberal opinions. The whole conduct of the Irish Government was such, as regarded the appointments in its patronage, as to inspire that country with alarm. There were many circum stances which, though trifling in themselves, were galling to the people, and, as a whole, they tended to aggravate the dis content. Never, in the most palmy days of Protestant ascen dancy, had any Government ever so exercised its patronage for party purposes as had the present. Considering what the present constitutions of the Corporations of Ireland were, and that the present Bill would only go to transfer power to a party which was more numerous and more formidable, and that without any security being offered, that there would be less abuse than existed at present, he called upon the house not to rush into the adoption of the reckless course proposed to them by his Majesty's Government.—( Hear.) He trusted it would examine the propositions of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, and that of the Noble Lord the Member for South Lancashire (Lord F. Egerton), because they were calculated eminently to effect those desirable objects --the impartial administration of justice, and the peace and good government of towns in Ireland.—( Cheers.) Lord MO RPETH--When I last addressed the House, I submitted it to the indulgence of the House, that when indi vidual charges arc brought forward, it is always impossible at the moment to be prepared with the particular answer without an opportunity of consulting the official documents on the sub ject ; but 1 have found in every case, after I have had the op portunity of consulting th ose o ffi c i a l documents—the source of authentic information—that the colouring which has been put upon the case of the parties bringing the charge has been alto gether stripped off, and a satisfactory answer afforded. I en deavoured to the best of my ability to travel through most of the charges which were brought forward on the last discus sion by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bandon. There was one case particularly alluded to, that of Maguire, wh o was liberated by the Lord Lieutenant on his visit of inspection to the gaol of Cavan, the man being impri soned on a charge of shooting at a revenue officer, a charge which naturally appeared to the House to be one of considerable magnitude. Now it appeared by a memorial to the Lord-Lieutenant in favour of the prisoner, signed by ma gistrates of all parties—( Hear, hear)—that it had clearly been shown on the trial, in the opinion of the magistrates, that the shot was not fired with malicious intent, but out of mere bravado—(Oh, oh, from the Opposition benches)—out of mere bravado, I repeat ; for it was proved on the trial that the boat from which the prisoner fired the shot was at the time about three-quarters of a mile from the shore on which the re venue officer stood.—(Great laughter and cheers.) The fair inference, therefore, was, that the attempt was not so grossly malicious as the sneers of Ilyyt. Members opposite would seem to infer. Upon this memorial. being .forwarded to the Lord- Lieutenant, a correspondence took place between the Lord- Lieutenant and Baron Pennefather, who presided at the trial, so far has it been from the fact that in any case of serious magnitude the Lord-Lieutenant has acted without having pre viously the fullest and most unrestrained communication with the judges.--(Hear, hear.) The result of the corres pondence was, that Baron Pennefather, while he did not recede from his original opinion, in the course of his correspondence declared that it was a point for the consi deration of the Lord-Lieutenant, and the sentence was then commuted from transportation for seven years into impri sonment for two. This, however, was not the point of quarrel set up by the Hon. and Learned Sergeant, but the subsequent liberation of the man. That liberation took place in consequence of the unanimous representation of the gaoler, the sub-gaoler, and the local inspector.—(Laughter from the Opposition.) On what grounds ? Not because the prisoner had behaved well in his prison s but because these par ties declared that they could not answer for the man's life if lie were longer confined.—( Cheers.) The particulars of the case of Armstrong I have not at the moment by me, and I therefore cannot well enter into the details of the outrage on his ditch, which has been so eloquently dwelt upon—( A laugh)—but I must say, I cannot consider this a case of suffi cient magnitude to be lugged in head and shoulders in a de bate upon the question whether Corporate Reform shall or shall not be given to Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the number of prisoners liberated by the Eord Lieutenant, I shall, with the leave of the Honourable and Learned Member, wait for the returns moved for by the Honourable and -Learned Sergeant before Igo into the point. I have no wish to make any concealment on the subject—( Hear, hear)—end indeed, with the view of making the returns full and complete, I shall move, that in addition to the returns required by the Hon. and Learned Sergeant, there be returns made dell the memorials presented to the Lord Lieutenant in favour of prisoners. Nothing has been said by the Hon. and Learned Member who last spoke to impugn the chief grounds on which we rest to test the policy of the measures which the Government of Ireland have pursued—namely, the general de crease of crime in that country. The Noble Member for South Lancashire has told us he has advices from Tipperary, not corresponding with the statements we have made on the subject. All I can say is, that neither I nor my Noble Friend near me kayo quoted any thing but the official docu ments, and have relied on no more suspicious information than the charges of the Juries at Assizes, and of Assistant Bar risters at Quarter Sessions. But the Hon. and Learned Member for Belfast wishes to renew the attack commenced by the Hon. and Learned Sergeant on the subject of the rules laid down for setting aside Jurors in criminal cases. The ex pressions used by the Hon. and Learned Sergeant arc these. I should not go into the subject, but that I have been dragged ipto it. The Hon. and Learned Sergeant says, "He should now mention a matter of fact illustrative of the practice, and it was ono which he thought would oc casion some surprise in the minds of Englishmen.--( Hear.) It was the case of a Protestant family, named Carter, resident in the Queen's county ; they were tenants of Lord Marybo rough, and, at the time to which he referred, were in posses sion of a piece of land, for which they paid rent, and to which they were j us tl y ent i t l e d. Th ey procee d e d to f ence it tn. An attack was made upon them, and one of those poor men was so severely beaten that he lost his senses, and he believed was at present the inmate of a lunatic asylum. The same parties beat the elder Carter, and put him to death. They were indicted for murder. One of the parties known, or at least very gene rally believed, to have been assisting in the perpetration of this crime, openly, in the noon-day, was giving his assistance to the prisoners respecting their challenges of the jurors ; but the Crown no longer exercised its privilege of puttin g by, add of course there was no verdict." In answer to this Ido not wish to rely upon any other document than a letter which I will read read from the gentleman who conducted the case for the Crown, Mr. Tickell, whose name is synonimous with the highest inte grity and honour, and whose testimony will perhaps be the more readily received by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, from the circumstance that Mr. Tickell is by no means enthusiastic in his attachment to the existing Government._-( Hear.) Mr. Tickell's letter runs thus : " 10, Clare•street, Feb. 11, 1837. " Dear Master of the Rolls—l have just read the report of Jackson's speech, to which you referred me in your notes I never before heard the slightest imputation against Mr. Dil lon (the person to whom I presume be alludes as one who was generally believed to have been a participator in Carter's mur- THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1837. der), and I really was exceedingly surprised at the Sergeant's statement in this respect, With respect to Mr. Dillon's assis ting the prisoner's attorney as to the challenges he should make, all I can say is, that I did not see him do so, and that neither did, as I believe, Mr. Geele. Mr. Dillon belongs to what is called the Liberal party; he is a brother-in-law of Mr. Lalor, the late Member for the Queen's County, and either has been called, or intends, I hear, to be called to the bar. The Crown solicitor, acting upon the instructions he received not to set aside individuals on account either of their religion or their party politics, did not object to Mr. Dil lon being on the first jury, not being aware of there being any other ground of objection to him. With respect to the second statement of Jackson—that on the succeeding trial, a convict—a man found guilty of offences of the same class with those for which the prisoner was indicted—was on the jury, it was discovered, after the jury had been sworn, that a man, of the name of Fitzpatrick, (an ex tremely common one in Queen's County) was on it, who had been about three or four years previously convicted of a riot. Some doubts exist in the mind, I believe, of Mr. Gcale, whether the juror and the convict were one and the same per son. There certainly was a Fitzpatrick indicted in 1813, but his prosecutor was also indicted by the Crown for perjury.— ( Hear, hear.) At the last trial of those tried for the murder of Mr. Carter, the next of kin, or some person professing to act on their behalf, called on the Crown to abandon the pro secution and to allow them to conduct it, with a view mani festly to the selection of a jury. This we refused to do, and also declined to allow an int er f erence w ith th e conduct of the trial. Mr. Geale, however, stated in court to the attorney of the next of kin, that if he would suggest to him any substan tial cause for setting aside any individual he would do so, but that he would not exercise that right merely because it was al leged that a man eas of that or this party. Had we acceded to the wishes of the next of kin in this case, we could not have re fused a similar request which was made in the eery next circuit town—Carlow; when it was suggested to the Crown solicitor to hand over the prosecution in Sly's case to the next of kin, with the view of thus exerting the Crown's right of setting by. In this latter case, there were eleven Protestants on the jury, and I have no hesitation in saying (although the jury was as respectable as could be), that if strong political feelings were to be allowed as a cause for setting by some of those gentlemen, who were as honourable and as good jurors I firmly believe as could be selected, might also have been objected to. Again, in another trial, which took place in Maryborough, that of Abbot, a Protestant, who was tried for the manslaughter of a Roman Catholic, no juror was set by on the part of the Crown. If, however, the next of kin had been at liberty to exercise that privilege, a jury of Roman Catholics might have been se lected, and that, too, in a case in which the prisoner would not have been alio:lel a single peremptory challenge. The prin ciple laid down by you was acted upon in the fairest and most impartial manner ; and I have not the slightest difficulty in stating my belief that it was productive of much more good than evil. Divided and inflamed by party spirit, as many parts of the Home Circuit were and are, it has struck me with sur prise how generally, notwithstanding, the juries have done their duty. Ido not believe that a single person was set aside on either of the two last circuits (at least not more than two or three, if there were any), and yet you will find that whilst the number of convictions in England, as com pared to the acquittals, is, I believe, about one in four, the proportion on the home circuit hero is the reverse, there being three or four convictions for one acquittal. During the last two circuits we bad some party cases, arising out of tithes. In the county..of Kildare, the jury convicted a rich farmer, of the name of Prendergast, of having been concerned in one of these riots. In Meath a similar conviction took place; there were several other instances in which the juries, even in what might be called party cases, honestly discharged their duty. • " In summer assizes, 1835, there were, I learn from the so licitor, forty-one convictions out of fifty-seven trials on the home circuit. " In Lent, 1836, out of one hundred and thirteen trials, there were eighty convictions, and in three cases the juries disagreed. "In summer, 1836, out of sixty-seven trials, there were forty-six convictions, end five cases in which the juries could not agree. " Now, out of the whole of these cases, I could not fix upon a dozen in which I should have differed from the juries, nor do I recollect half a dozen in which I thought the Crown had any reason to complain. It appears to me, therefore, an un fair way of judging of the operation of a general principle, by selecting for observation a particular case like that of Car ter's. Even in this latter one much might be said to justify the view taken of it by some of the jury as to several of the prisoners. The approver on the last trial _ committed a very important error in identifying one person for an other; but granting that a conviction should have taken place, the general result of the system should be looked at, and the evils of it fairly balanced with its advantages. " Believe me, dear Master of the Rolls, " Always truly yours, (Loud cheers.) " E. TICKELL." Mr. Sergeant JACKSON protested that he had .not used the expression attributed to him in reference to Mr. Dillon ; he had said nothing of the sort. Lord MORPETH—The expression regarding him that he was generally believed to bo a participator in the crime. Mr. Sergeant JACKSON said that all he said was, that a party in question was giving his advice as to the challenging of jurors. Lord MORPETH continued—Let the House consider the summary of the case of the Carters. It has been tried three times. In the two first instances the Jury were not agreed. The question then came before his Right Hon. and Learned Friend whether the same parties should be tried a third time. Evidence had transpired to attach suspicion to another party, and the Right Hon. and Learned Judge had to say whether the same persons should be put on their trial again, and whe ther, if so, the persons against whom suspicions had just arisen should be tried with them. The three prisoners were tried together; and on this third trial an approver committed an error in identifying the party ; yet now, because on this third trial the July cot l no: find the men guilty, it was stated that justice was not done in Ireland. The Hon. and Learned Member has quoted other cases, and into the particular circum stances of those cases I shall make it my business to inquire. I was in my place during the whole Session; my Right Hon. and Learned Friend the Master of the Rolls, then Attorney- General, was also in his place to meet any charge that might be made respecting this very case of Mr. Carter.—( Hear, hear, bear.) But not one word was said of it ; neither was one word said of Mr. Fogherty's case then. But the Lreat secret of Mr. F og h ert y' s o ff ence ( sa id th e N o bl e ord) was, the decision which he formed in the case of lodgers at Belfast. Tho great outcry raised against him was, that he, in order to try the question, bad refused to admit the claims of lodgers that came before him. This case was afterwards argued before the twelve Judges, and what was the result? Why, that the decision of Mr. Fogherty was right. —( Loud cheers.) But with what superior purity had Ho nourable Gentlemen opposite valued non-resident freemen ? ( Loud Ministerial cheers.) " The point of non-residence need not be mentioned I "—(Cheers and laughter.) And then a law was passed, and a decision of a Committee of the House of Commons came to enforce this virtuous mandate.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member for Belfast had complained of the Irish Government, that they had not given Judgeships to Mr. Warren and Mr. Brewster. With that comulaint he (Lord Morpeth) had no right to quarrel ; nor would he quarrel with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's ob jections to the appointments made to the Assistant Bar risterships. On both these classes of appointments the Irish Government were willing fearlessly to rely.--( Cheers.) He must refer to one thing which fell from his Noble Friend who opened this discussion, but who, whatever party differ ences prevailed, never acted in a manner of which any one could justly complain. The Noble Lord said that he (Lord Morpeth) had endeavoured to fasten upon the members of a former Government of Ireland the cause of the party feuds and factions that disgraced Ireland. Now, he (Lord Morpeth) should be very loath to make any charge of so grave a nature against the Government of which his Noble Friend (Lord Anglesey) formed so prominent a part. He wished to state what it was that he had said. He believed his words were —that these factious feuds in some instances met with conni vance from the neighbouring magistrates, and that they had not always been met with sufficient energy with a view to their suppression by the central Government of Ireland. That was a widely different thing from saying that the Government of Ireland had connived at these proceedings.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Now with respect to the question immediately before the House—( Hear, hear, and laughter)--to which lie begged to invite the attention of Honourable Members. In the first place he would observe that the course had again been resorted to—when the force and propriety was urged of conferring on the people of Ireland those institutions and privileges which had already been conferred on the people of England and of Scotland—of turning round upon the ad vocates of this policy, by pointing either to some enactment in the laws already existing, or to some measure which was in progress through the [louse, as inconsistent with that policy. Last year the Constabulary Bill was referred to as of consider able service in this way. Indeed it was felt by Hon. Members opposite to be of such use to show that the Constabulary Bill was an efficient measure for Ireland, while it justified a de parture from a similarity of legislation for the two countries, that it was passed with a prodigality of confidence in Ministers through the House, without censure ; but it was found neces sary afterwards to send it up from the other House for curtail ment. Well, to-night, of all things, the Poor-law Bill had been put forth as a satisfactory reason for any Corporation Bill, but as it struck him with still more infelicity. It was urged that a per fect identity of legislation was not observed with respect to the Poor-law Bill. The Right Hon. Member for Tamworth had adopted this argument on a late occasion, and asked, " 1)o you mean to apply the same principles to Ireland with respect to the poor-laws ? It is the law of England and the principle of the English poor-laws, that every person who is lame or blind, or old or impotent, has a right to demand pe cuniary relief. That is the principle of the law of England, and do you mean to adopt that principle in its full extent in Ireland ? I know many who clamoured for identity of legis lation, and assailed us with the charge of insult, ImA shrunk from it when the poor-laws came into consideration." Now, what was the principle which his Majesty's Government pro posed to establish with respect to a Poor-law Bill for Ireland ? If this point were carefully looked into, lie (Lord Morpeth) thought that the principle of that Bill would be found to bear considerable analogy to the principle of the Municipal Bill then under discussion.—( Hear, hear.) The Poor-law Bill professed to establish a large electoral body, occupying tenements of the annual value of 51. by whom a select representative body should b e c h osen f or the purpose of administering the law discreetly and with equity, and to manage the local funds for the benefit of the general body. Now, the Corporate Reform Bill proposed also to establish a large electoral body possessing the same identical annual qualification of five pounds, by whom a select repre sentative body was to be chosen for the purpose of adminis- • tering the local and general fund discreetly and economically for the benefit of the general body. Thus far, in detail end mode, the provisions of the two measures ran very nearly all fours. But, granting that there was some variety in the enactments of the poor-law system already established in Eng land and those which were contemplated for Ireland_ and he owned that the surprise to him was that any Bill could be con templated for Ireland which contained so little difference from the law of England—(Cheers)—but granting that some diffe rence did exist, the House must not forget that in dealing with a poor-law they were dealing withewhat hadiong been the sub ject of law in one country, but which had never been the subject of law in the other; while in dealing with Corporations they were not dealing with what had been long familiar to one country and utterly unknown to the other, but they were dealing with what had been long standing . institutions in both countries; and th at t h ey were now only seeking to apply similar principles to those institutions in Ireland which had al ready been applied to the Corporate institutions in England, by removing the corruptions which had crept into them, and purifying them from analogous but far more exaggerated abuses.--( Cheers.) To do this seemed to him natural, rea sonable, and just; to refuse to do it seemed to him to be most unjust, and especially when that refusal was grounded upon the pretext of inferiority and inability.—(-Loud cheers.) .6uch a course was so inconsistent with justice that it seemed to him almost to amount to phrenzy.—(Great cheering.) There was one mode of objection which, whether prominently put forward in speeches on the other side, or running through them in a stealthy under -current, would be found still to pervade and colour them all, which he could not in the slightest degree comprehend ;—that was, that if the House should take this or that course they would be contribut ing to the influence and preponderance of Roman Catholic religion over the Irish nation.—(Loud cries of " hear, bear.") Now he would not say that the great bulk of the property, but certainly the great majority of the humbler and middle classes of the people of Ireland were Roman Catholics ; and those classes were ascending in the scale of preponderance every year. They were going on, one class above another, in a gra dual progression of improvement. It was for this that he would kindly strive to elevate the Catholics in the social scale of citizenship rather than persecute them. This was the whole staple of the argument of the Hon. Member for Cavan's speech ; to much of which he (Lord Morpeth) gave his entire concur rence. Catholic influence had found its way in all those de partments of industry in which the humbler and middling classes more especially were wont to move. Hence it was that Catholic schools and Catholic Chapels were raising up in every corner of the land. And could the House grudge these people this rapid advancement, or, finding,them making it, could they refuse them a participation in the offices of their local Go vernment ? In England the official functions were mostly in the hands of members of the Established Church, because the most wealthy, the most prominent, and; numerically; the greatest portion of the community were of that persuasion.—( Hear.) They enjoyed those offices without, as far as he was aware, giving ground of any real umbrage to others. He hoped that nothing now remained to prevent their dissenting brethren from taking their appropriate share of those offices and honours. Cheers.) So in Scotland the great majority of offices was in the hands of Presbyterians. Now Ireland was, he would not quarrel as to what degree, but in a considerable degree, Catholic; therefore, if they remained in their natural, and because natural, their most healthy state, the Catholics would still be found in greater abundance in all those departments which were open to Catholic energy and enterprise, and attain able by habit s e e activity and of business.—(Cheers.) Whe ther the Roman Catholic faith and doctrine, as such, were to lose or gain ground was it question dependent upon higher ar bitrement than that of human legislation.--( Cheers. ) It only depended upon them to do juotly and fairly by all.—( Cheers. ) There was one striking and startling argument, indeed, which he owned very much surprised him, and still more so as coming from the Hon. and Learned Member for Tarnworth— (Laughter)--and which had been confirmed by his Noble Friend who had moved the amendment. He meant the ground, now for the first time taken, or at least for the first time set forth, whereon to rest the denial of corporate govern ment and privileges to the people of Ireland, that it might be found prejudicial to, and affect the interests of, the Established Church.—(Cheers.) And, exclaimed the Noble Lord, is this from the friends of the Church ?—(lmmense cheering)— from the champions of the Establishment ? (Renewed cheers.) Is the Church strong enough, is she deeply-rooted enough, in the veneration of the Irish people—is she conge nial enough to the Irish people--is she so clear from all ground of offence, that you can afford to make her the scapegoat against every c h arge , t h e b u l war k aga i nst every attack?— ( Tremendous cheers.) Is her structure so sound, or her fabric so firm and so impregnable, that you can call together all the scattered elements of enmity to select her omit as a mark, and to assail her port-holes?—(Continued cheering.) What (continued the Noble Lord) was the state of the case ? The bulk of the Irish people, whether with right reason or not, considered the denial of corporate government and pri vileges to their, after they had been conceded to England and Scotland, as a grievous injury; and they were in a most excited and inflamed state a t th e mode in which they conceived that grievance was inflicted on them, and at the ground on which they conceived it to rest. What, on the other hand, was the state of the Church? On totally distinct grounds it had already become obnoxious and unpopular, and he must admit that it was, and to a great degree, threatened and exposed, harassed and impoverished. Her revenues were but scantily paid, and her ministers in many instances most painfully destitute. And what in this case did the Hon. Gen tleman opposite propose to do to help to raise her head— ( Cheers)—to restore her, by increased forbearance, to favour ? Why, they _virtually told the Irish people, " Most probably it would have been thought right to give you Municipal Corpo rations. The natural presumption (said the Right Hon. Ba ronet) would have been to confer on you what has already been conferred upon the people of England and Scotland. There is considerable presumption in favour of a municipal law for Ireland, on account of the antiquity and simplicity of the in stitution." But after admitting this natural presumption, to exist, the Right Hon. Baronet stepped in and said—" This must not be carried into effect, because the interests of the Church might be implicated and prejudiced, and the . current of equal legislation, if applied to the corpora tions of Ireland, might be found in some collateral manner, to affect the full and fair, and round ae•cpor tions of the Ch urc h Establishment—( Great cheering)—and therefore the people of Ireland must not have Municipnl Corporations." They were not to choose their own chief magistrates; their Town_councils were not to meet to discuss and legislate for their own minute local affairs; not because these bodies, as far as he (Lord Morpeth) was aware, could - directly affect the interest of a single clergyman, much less of the Church itself, but because the Right Hon. Baronet feared the moral contagion of that very principle of equal law, and responsibility, and self-government, which could call those municipal bodies into being, would weaken the foundations of that other great corporate body—the Church--to the rotten ness of which he and his friends were thus adducing the fore most and most formidable testimony, and to the hostility to which they were themselves administering the most natural, reasonable, and, under the circumstances, he would almost say justifiable, and even inevitable feelings.—( Cheers.) He (Lord Morpeth) and his friends had been reproached - with being the enemies of the Church ; but they had never carried their enmity to that fatal pitch, as to hold out that to save the Church they must demolish the Corporations of Ireland.— ( Immense cheering.) That the only tenure of her prolonged existence was to make her rear her naked front over the raised, and stark, and denuded tenantry; and the only ground of her security was the denial of equal rights and the destruction of free institutions.—(The Noble Lord resumed his scat amidst the most vehement cheering.) Lord STANLEY rose, but the cries of " Divide" for some time prevented him from proceeding. On their subsiding lie said it bad been his intention undoubtedly not to have offered any observations to the House in the course of that evening; feeling, in the first place, that the general impression on the part of the House was that this debate must necessarily be prolonged; and secondly, that the course of the details, so far as he had been witness of it, was one of inquiry into details and minute particulars by lion. Gentlemen on one side of the House and the other ; and the speech of his Noble Friend himself—till indeed they heard that extraordinary conclusion to which he came--( Opposition cheers)—was rather a reply to what had been detailed, or to a small portion of the detail brought forward in the hearing of his Majesty's Government by his Hon. Friend the Learned Sergeant ,behind him. But towards the conclusion of his Nobl e Friend's speech he rested the case on broader, on better, on more intelligible grounds, and on those grounds connected with the maintenance and se curity of the Protestant -religion in Ireland. Fearless of the scorn and fearless of the eontumely with which the very name of Protestant appeared to be met on that side of the house—( Great cheering from the Opposition benches, with groans and reiterated cries of " No," from the Ministerial side)—he would say—(Renewed cries of "No !" and groans, which several times interrupted the Noble Lord when he attempted to proceed)—he would say, that fearless of any such reflection, and notwithstanding the taunts directed by his Noble Friend against those who dared to rest their ob servations on such grounds, he must assert one intelligible ob jection to this measure, which was, that it was intended and calculated to be the destruction of the Protestant Establish ment in Ireland.—( Opposition cheers.) His Majesty'sGe vernment had put it forth indeed that thy were the friends of the Church—( A laugh)—that they desired to o s u up p a o t r i t tn ti sey her influence—that they desiremdotroeeixntdeinsdsolhuebrlyherpower—that foundations ndo desired to lay deeper and and his Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland, in the begin ning of his speech—he a Minister of the Crown—said it was unnecessary for him to enter on the broad question, be cause he subscribed so entirely to those doctrines which had been propounded even by his Hon. and Learned Friend, the Member for Liskeard ( Mr. C. Buller).—( illuelt Opposition cheering.) Lord MORPE TII—I said not one word about subscribing to Isis doctrines.—(Ministerial cheers.) Lord STANLEY resumed. He hoped then that he did misrepresent the opinions of Iris Noble Friend; but when he found his Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland commencing his speech by stating that the main question it was uncecessary for him to enter into, after the comprehensive view taken of it by his Hon. and Learned Friend die Member for Liskeard, he did not think it exhibited an extraordinary want of penetra tion—he did not think it betrayed a remarkable dullness of perception—if that expression did convey to his mind, and to the House, an accordance of sentiments between the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who took that comprehensive view and his Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland, who stated that his lion. Friend having taken it, it was unnecessary for him to go into the subject ; but if his Noble Friend did not take that view, he would turn to the conclusion of his Noble Friend's speech. What was the topic at the end of his speech ? The rottenness of the Church of Ireland.—( Loud cries of " oh I" from the Ministerial side.) Why, really, it was very dif ficult to understand what was meant ; and his Noble Friend seemed to share with the rest of his Majesty's Government