The Sun. — London, England, 1837-02-23 00:00:00

h is immediate discharge. I assure you that it has given perfect satisfaction to every person in this country whom I have heard speak upon the subject :—.M'Guire was found at an illicit still. When the police came, he got in his boat and rowed into the middle of the river under a heavy fire from the police. When he got to the middle of the river, thinking he was out of the reach of the fire, he stopped and mocked at the officers, and fired at them in derision. A ball struck him, and he was wounded. He was tried and convicted, and sentenced to seven years' transportation. The case was considered a very hard one, and a memorial praying for a mitigation of the sentence was for warded to the Lord Lieutenant. This memorial was signed by fourteen or fifteen of the most respectable magistrates and a number of the most respectable inhabitants of Loughshelan, and the sentence was commuted to two years' imprisonment. On the occasion of the Lord Lieutenant's visit to the gaol at Cavan, after he had gone through all the wards, the surgeon of the gaol requested the writer of this letter to mention to his Excellency the cases of two persons who were confined in the hospital. He (Mr. Sanderson) accordingly did so, and on mentioning the case of Patrick Maguire the Lord Lieutenant surprised him by his accurate recollection of the facts of the case, and declined to interfere. However, the surgeon represented that Maguire was in a very bad state, suffring from an unhealthy wound, and that his continu- Lice in confinement might be dangerous to him. His Ex cellency, on the joint entreaty of him (Mr. Sanderson) and the other Magistrates present, consented to his release, to the perfect satisfaction of every person whom he had heard speak of the matter in that part of the country. The second case was that of a person tried for homicide, but who had been proved to be insane. He stated that he was then well, but as life had been lost in this case the Lord Lieutenant refused to interfere. Now he (Lord Clements) would ask the House whether the letter of so respectable an individual as this was not better au thority, and more to be relied on, than those anonymous letters which the Learned Sergeant had read to the House ?—( Mi nisterial cheers.) The Learned Sergeant had also alluded to what had taken place in the county of Leitrim, and he would ask the Learned Gentleman whether his informant was not Mr. Potter ? Now, with respect to the Irish Go vernment, be would give his Noble Friend opposite full credit for his intentions whilst Secretary for Ireland ; but he certainly meant no imputation on his Noble Friend (Lord F. Egerton) when he said that at no former period was the same activity used by the police and local authorities to put down disturbance as at present. He was happy to state that the peace of the country had considerably improved. He was in the county of Cavan immediately before the Assizes, and there were only five prisoners for trial. The Learned Sergeant had alluded to the outrage committed on the Rev. Mr. Hogg. He ( Lord Clements) was fully aware of the facts of that outrage, for he was the second magistrate on the spot after the outrage was committed, and his exertions had received the thanks of the Rev. Mr. Hogg, who was his per sonal friend. He had exerted himself to bring to justice the parties who had committed this outrage, but they had not been discovered. To him the peace o the country was as important as to any other man, for he lived in the country in a house without fire-arms, and no attempt had ever been made to intimidate him in the discharge of his duty as a magi :trate.—( Hear, hear.) Now, with respect to Mr. Potter, he wa, introduced into the county by the late Rector of Clune, who employed him as a tithe-proctor ; but his conduct was the cause of continual disagreement between the Rector and 11:s parishioners. At present the living of Chine was occu pi , d by the Rev. Mr. Trench, who was so dissatisfied with Mr. Putter's conduct that he diatnissed him. lie, then, from being a tithe-proctor, joined the anti-tithe agitation. One party said that the tithe-proctors were the cause of all the dis turhance iu Ireland; another party said that the agitators were the cau es of the disturbance ; but it was the peculiar advantage of this individual that he belonged to both parties. Now, he was also an attorney, and in his professional capacity hod prosecuted a Protestant gentleman for having been, as he alleged, connected with this outrage, and as an accessory to this burning. The Learned Sergeant had alluded to the con duct of juries in Ireland. He supposed that if the Tories cause into office they would appoint those men to place in Ireland who would resort to the old system of packing ju ries —(Hear, hear.) The prejudice in Ireland had for merly been so great that the opposite party were never per fectly satisfied with any jury unless a packed jury. The Noble Lord mentioned that, in an affray between the people and the revenue police, where a conotryman was killed, the officer of p o lice was anxious that the Coroner's jury should be empan ndled front a neighbouring parish. Though there was great etc tement he (Lord Clements) recommended that the jury should be empannelled on the spot, and that jury found a ver idiet of justifiable homicide. This verdict gave satisfaction to a ll parties. It was contended on the other side, that to grant Corporations to Ireland would he to subvert the Established ttrarch. Now he did not see what corinectiea there was be t woe,' those Corporations and the Established Church. In the General Association of Ireland they had never said that this wowed injure the Established Church. The most they had said .;as that this measure would lead to a satisfactory adjust nn-,,t of the Tithe question. He (Lord Clements) maintained th tt the passing of this Bill could have no effect whatever pia.judicial to the Established Church. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamwa,rth had denied that the 13;11 would pacify Ireland. Now, he was very far from saying that it would.—( Hear, hear, hear.) All he said ,/as, that it would go a great way towards that e :d; but then he begged the Right lion, Baronet, and the Hon. Gentleman on his tide of the House, to understand that he would not ac cept it as a boon, but only as a right.—( Hear, hear.) lie at.3o thought that the system of Poor-laws which his Noble F r umd had proposed would in like manner tend to the pacifi cator; of Ireland ; but he was very far from saying that either the one measure or the other would in themselves produce that result. The Right Hon. Baronet had asked lion. Mem bers on that side of the House where they meant to stop ; but lie would ask the Right Hon. Gentleman, and those who sat on his side of the House, where they meant to stop ?—( Cries of •• Ilear, hear," from the Ministerial Benches.) There could be no doubt that the people of Ireland were not anxious to :tee things remain in statu quo. The present state of things could not continue without a species of coercion that must produce civil war ; and he should like to know whether the people of England would support the Hon. Gentleman op posite in refusing the people of Ireland their civil rights when such must be the consequence ?—(llear.) Lord F. EGERTON, in explanation, said that his Noble Friend had misconceived or misunderstood the tenor of the observations which lie had made with respect to fair and fac tion feuds. He had not said a word as to whether these things were incurable pr not, or whether the Lord Lieutenant of Ire land had either cured or failed to cure them. He had merely referred to the effect which it had been said the Catholic Asso ciation and the present Association had in putting such feuds down, and drew inferences from thence. Lord CLEMENTS replied that what he meant to sav wai that, so far as the putting a stop to fair and faction feuds was concerned, the pacification in these respects had been ef fected, not by the Association, not by the Hon.' and Learned Member for Kilkenny, but by the firm conduct of the Lord Lieutenant, the Irish Attorney-General, and the police. Mr. Sergeant JACKSON, in explanation, said that the Noble Lord was perfectly right in supposing that the name of the person whose letter he read the previous night was Potter. Ho understood from one of the Hon. Members for Meath that Mr. Potter was an attorney, and a gentleman whose commu nication might be relied on, and therefore he did not hesitate to use it, believing, as he did, that the facts stated in it could be verified if an opportunity for the purpose were given.— ( ar, hear.) Mr. ROBINSON: said that since the last year he had held close communication with his constituents, and he believed he spoko the sentiments not only of the majority of them, but of the majority of the people of England and Scotland, when he declared that they did take a deep interest in the question, and were anything but indisposed to grant to the people of Ireland what they considered their just and legi timate rights. The Union between the two countries, he thought, entitled the people of Ireland to an equality of rights with the people of England and of Scotland; and for his part lie was wholly at a loss to understand the distinction which the opposers of this measure had drawn, or the grounds on which municipal institutions were to be denied to the Irish towns.—( Hear, hear.) They had been told that the exist ence of the present Administration depended on the decision of that House upon this question. He had never given a de cided support to any Government; but certainly he had given to his Majesty's present Ministers a general support, because they had evinced a determination not to yied to the unreason able demands of the democracy, or to adopt the principles of the lion. Gentlemen who occupied the Opposition benches, who were desirous of governing the many—the people of ,England—for the benefit of the few.—(Loud cries of No, no, and Oh, oh, from the Opposition benches, and of Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.) Mr. RICHARDS denied that the Hon. Member for Wor cester was justified in attributing such motives to Hon. Gen tlemen who sat on that side of the House.—(Cries of Hear, hear, Oh, oh, and Order, order.) Mr. ROBINSON saw something like an expression of ex ultation on the part of the Hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition benches at what they considered the near approach of the dis solution of the Melbourne Administration, but he would ask those Hon. Gentlemen, even supposing such an event were to happen, whether they thought any other Government that might succeed to office could go on with the Catholics of Ire land, and a large majority of the people of this country and of Scotland, against them ?—( Hear, hear.) He knew what Vie feeling of the country was upon this important subject, and he could therefore tell them that there was no question which w - mid be more fatal to them as a party than this.—( Hear.) Jie was a member of the Established Church, and anxious to support it ; but at the same time he could not concnr with the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire in thinking that granting municipal institutions to Ireland would be the means of subverting that Church. He regretted ex ceedingly that any one of the King's subjects should possess such influence as it was said the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny possessed; but then he thought his indiscretion in avowing that if he got Municipal Ref o rm h e wou ld carr y aP his other measures was no reason for rejecting this Bill.— (Rear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was mis take.a if he imagined for one moment that the people of this enuatry and of Scotland would ever allow him to re-establish Catholic dominion on the ruins of the Protestant Church in Ireland ?—(Cries of " Hear, hear," in which Mr. O'Connell joined.) The Tithe question had done much to render the Church as unpopular in Ireland, and the only effect which the amendment of the Noble Lord could have, would be to in crease that odium. The only way in which the Roman Catho lics could be conciliated was by a union of interests, and, as 1,1 conceived that this measure would have that tendency, he sitta uld give the motion for the second reading of this Bill his s i n c , .re and hearty support.—( Hear.) f r . RICH AR D S denied that the Hen. Member for Wor cestc r etas at all justified in attributing to Hon. Gentlemen at that ;ids' of the House such a motive as that of wishing to govern'the; many for the advantage of the few.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord the Member for Leitrim had replied to the facts stated by the Hon. and Learned Member for Youghal, but had he disproved any of those facts ? ( Hear.) If the desire were to ascertain whether these facts were true or false, why not grant the committee for which the Hon. and Learned Member for Youghal called? He was anxious, however, to discuss this question on its broad principles. The Noble Lord, the Member for Leitrim, stated that the people of Ireland were entitled to equal rights with the people of this country and of Scotland. No one doubted that ; but then the question was, were not the circumstances of Ireland such as to render it unsafe to grant municipal institutions to that country ? It was notorious that there was in this country a struggle between two great principles—the influence arising from property and the democratic influence—and he would ask whether the latter influence had not been considerably augment ed by the change which had taken place in the English cor porations ? It was by means of the democratic power that many of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite occupied seats in that House, and on that same power it was that his Majesty's Ministers relied for their continuance in office. It had been said that there was no connection between this question and that relating to the Established Church. He entertained a very different opinion ; and therefore, believing that this measure, if carried, would tend to the subversion of the Church, he felt it his bounden and sacred duty to oppose it. —(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member for Kil kenny might be sincere in wishing the welfare of his country, but as he (Mr. Richards) did not think that object could be attained by the course which the Hon. and Learned Member pursued, he must express it as his opinion that this Bill would place a most dangerous power in his hands.—(Hear.) The Hon. Member for Worcester had said that the people of Worcester were in favour of granting Municipal Corporations to Ireland. Now he (Mr. Richards) was well acquainted with that county, and, knowing, as he did, the feeling that prevailed there, he must deny the fact to be so. He might make the same observations generally with respect to the people of England and of Scotland.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord the Member for Leitrim thought that this Bill would tend to the pacification of Ireland. No doubt it might satisfy certain parties in that country; but from his acquaint ance with the state of Ireland he could undertake to say that whatever might be its tendency, it would not be of a pacific character. He had never yet found that the lust for all was satisfied by the concession of apart. On the contrary, ambition was a passion that grew with what it fed upon ; and if these corporations were put into the hands of the majority, they would be used as a lever for the attainnsent of universal dominion in Ireland. The Hon. and Learned Member for Liskeard had on a former night spoken, in periods most elaborately worded, of the extraordinary virtues of municipal institutions —of the occupation they would give the inhabitants in paving and lighting their streets. That Honourable Member also gave one of the oddest illustrations lie (Mr. Richards) had ever heard—he said that the state of Ireland was un tranquil, and that these corporations would give the people of that country something to think about, and draw them off from their present quarrels. Now he (Mr. Richards) could not understand why this should be. If the power was now abused by the minority, how much more likely was it to be abused by the majority.—( A laugh from Mr. O'Connell.) It was sin gular the similarity that there was between the speeches of the Hon. and Learned Member for Liskeard and those of Danton, Marat; and Robespierre, at the time of the French Revolution. They, too, talked of the advantages of municipal institutions, and of the harmlessness of their intentions in demanding them. Yet what was the result ?—( Hear, hear.) What had they ready to substitute, when they bad pulled down all the present institutions of the country ? Neither Danton, nor Marat, nor Robespierre knew what to substitute when they did the same thing.—( Hear.) Mr. C. N. WALKER understood the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down to allege, as a reason for refusing free institutions to Ireland, that England was now in possession of them. But be rose to protest against the assumption that Hon. Gentlemen opposite, because they entertained Conser vative principles, were the representatives of the Protestants of Ireland. It was said that to grant these municipal corpora tions would be to open the door to the unjust predominance of the majority. The town which he had the honour to represent, however, the town of Wexford, afforded conclusive evidence to the contrary. That place was next to Belfast in commercial importance. In the first instance it had been a corporation, in which there was no distinction as regarded rights between persons of different creeds. Then came the days of exclusion, and the Catholics were fur years excluded from the exercise of all their municipal rights. But, about nine years since, it was thrown open to the inhabitants generally, without any distinction of religion or property qualification. The proportion then was of about file Catholics to one Pro testant ; so that power lay entirely in the bands of the former. Now what had been the course of their conduct ? To five vacancies that had occurred in tire burgesses, three Catholics had been ( lected and two Protestants. The first elected was a . Protestant. Next they were about to choose another Protestant—himself. But lie recommended them not to do so, and rather to choose a Catholic, as the Catholics had been so long excluded, and there were so many Catholic merchants of great respectability resident in the town. The reply he received was, that religion made no dif ference, and that fitness for the office was the only con sideration that operated with them. Then, out of nine mayors elected since the opening of the corporation, only three were Roman Catholics, while at least three Pro testants of high Orange and Conservative principles were elected during the same interval. And even after the insult cast upon the Roman Catholics, by the expressions used in mother place-a-expressions calculated to rouse their indig aation and to induce them, if any would, to forfeit their inte grity and impartiality—the mayor selected for the present year was not only a high Conservative, hut one of those gen tlemen who had attended the great Dublin Conservative Meet sing the other day. Again, out of IS bailiffs (or sheriffs) appointed in Wexford during the nine years, three only were Roman Catholics; and the bailiffs of the old Tory Corpora tion were retained after it had been thrown open. Now he (Mr. Walker) thought that one fact was better than many prophecies.—( Hear.) He hoped the statement he had made would have its weight with Hon. Gentlemen opposite. Ile could further assure them that in Wexford the Protestant and Catholic Clergy were on the most harmonious footing ; that they went hand in band in the search for objects of charity. For a short time it was possible that political exasperation might continue--but lie was decidedly of opinion that, ere long, it would totally subside, if this Bill were passed into a law. Sir F. TRENCH had to congratulate the lion. Member who had just sat down on being the representative of such a town as he had described. It certainly seemed to constitute a brilliant exception to the general state of Ireland. The Noble Lord the Member for Leitrim, had challenged any person to show that a connection existed between the claims of the Irish people to municipal rights, and the Protestant Church in Ireland. He ( Sir F. Trench), for one, was not ashamed to acknowledge himself bigot enough to apprehend that danger threatened the Protestant Church from the mea sure then before the House, and that it was thereby intended to deliver that Church into the hands of the Hon. Member for Kilkenny. The Hon. Member for Liskeard had, in the course of the debate, delivered a very eloquent speech, in which he insisted strongly on certain general principles. But those principles, though just in themselves, were not applicable in the present instance. The case of Ireland was a peculiar one, and demanded a peculiar treatment. The Noble Lord at the head of the Home Department had, in introducing the measure then under discussion, spoken in very slighting terms of the state of the Protestant clergy in Ireland, and in place of pitying the condition to which they were reduced, had spoken of them with what he ( Sir F. Trench) considered an unbe coming levity ; and, instead of suggesting some means of alle viating their condition, he quoted a trifling poem, to the effect that they were enamoured of their present lot. His Majesty's Attorney-General, when out of office, when speaking of Ire land, had used language which had tended to promote the assas sination of the Protestant Clergy in Ireland, and yet, after having used such language he had been promoted to his pre sent high office. It was on the debate on the Irish Church, which took place on the 2d of April, 1835. The Attorney- General then said—" What benefit is conferred on a Christian community by erecting Churches which are a grievance to one set of believers and an insult to the other? Such was the state of feeling in Scotland that at the time of the assassina tion of Archbishop Sharpe, that assassination was actually ap proved by the majority of the people." This was a pretty broad hint, he thought, to the people of Ireland.—( Cries of " Oh, oh !" from the Ministerial side of the House.) But this was not all. The Honourable Gentleman pro ceeded still further, and alluded openly to Ireland : There was nothing done in Ireland to compare with that assassination, and yet it was a common observation by the people of Scotland that the killing of the Archbishop was ' no murder,' he being of a religion opposed to the majority of the people." Surely after such language as that which he had just quoted, the present Government must have had some strong motives for promoting the Hon. Gentleman to the office which he now held. The next passage was—" The scenes that occurred there were of a more aggravated cha racter than those lately witnessed at Carrickshock or Rathcor mack. More blood flowed at Drumclog and Bothwell Brigg. This House ought to reduce the Establishment to such a de gree as may be adequate to the wants of those who professed Protestant Episcopalian faith in Ireland." Such was the lan guage of the Attorney-General, and it did not require any legal knowledge, or any ingenious special pleading, to draw the inference that the reading of such passages ought to pro duce the very worst effects on the people of Ireland. He conceived the Government to be nothing more than the in strument of the Hon. Member for Kilkenny—( Hear)—and, as such, completely under the influence of that Hon. Gentle man's wishes. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said that the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had made a discovery of the passage from the speech of the Attorney-General, which had been spoken two years ago. It was unfortunate that time had not been afforded to his constituents to consider the meaning of the passage ; as, if they had done so, they might have taxed him on the hustings with uttering such language, and, perhaps have refused to return him to Parliament in conjunction with the Right Hon. Gentleman in the chair. There was but one single question to be considered, and on it two species of ar guments had been adduced. Of these some were old, others new, and they were easily distinguished from each other. The old arguments were those which had been used last year against the Bill—the new consisted of other topics, which had been hut lightly, if at all, touched upon before. The first was, that the Protestant Church of Ireland was in dan zer. The second was, that agitation in Ireland had not ceased by the conc ess i ons w hi c h h a d b een a l rea d y ma d e . A n d the Third was, that the Government had not made use of their patronage in a satisfactory mariner. In this last argument there was certainly something of novelty, for no such imputa tion had aver before been made against any other Govern ment. No one, he would venture to assert, could allege against the Tory party that they had ever bestowed their pa- THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1837. tronage on any other than their own political partisans.— ( Hear.) Their conduct on such occasions reminded him of the line of the satirist— " Dat veniam corvis, vexat censura columbas." Much had been spoken against the appointment of Mr. Pigott; but it had not been shown that that gentleman was unworthy of the situation in which he had been placed. Mr. Pigott was a gentleman whose qualifications would do honour to any situa tion. He was a man of first-rate education, and had had his faculties sharpened and polished in the exercise of his profes sion. He possessed an eloquence of the highest order, and delivered the noblest sentiments in the most grammatical lan guage. Any constituency might be proud to have him for their Representative. So much for Mr. Pigott's attainments. As to the difference which it was said existed between the Orange Association and the National Association, of which Mr. Pigott was a member, he would state the words in which the Orange body was properly described. It was stated to be " a secret political society, which excluded all persons of a different faith, and using secret signs and symbols." From meet ings of the Orange body the Press had been always ex cluded, and their proceedings had always shunned the light.—(Hear, hear.) On the other hand, if the mem bers of the National Association occasionally made use of warm language, still all their proceedings were in the face of day, open to public observation, and noted down by the reporters of the public press ; and if anything illegal took place the power of the law was sufficient to punish the violation of any of its enactments. The existence of the National Association had been adduced as an argument against the measure then under discussion. If the National Association had not been formed, would it not have been asserted by the Gentle men opposite that the Irish people were tame and indifferent to the measure, and unworthy of the right they now claimed ? ( Hear.) The Noble Lord, the Member for North Lanca shire, had argued, that from the paucity of petitions presented from Ireland in favour of Municipal Reform, it might be in ferred that the people of that country were indifferent to the measure. The Noble Lord made no allowance for the dis tance between Ireland and this country, nor did he make any allusion to the fact that forty had been presented on Monday (the day on which he spoke), 36 yesterday, and a great num ber to-day.—( Loud laughter from all parts of the House.) In a book on the state of Egypt he had read an anecdote, from which the lion. Gentlemen opposite might have drawn their arguments. The writer of the book visited Mahomed Ali, and in the course of the interview that Chieftain inquired par ticularly about the British Parliament. The subject of elec tions seemed to puzzle him, and he inquired if such men as pleased the electors could be returned.' He was an swered in the affirmative. The next day he informed the traveller " that he had been pleased with the idea of having a Parliament, and would adopt the plan ; but, in order to obviate any inconvenience, lie had determined himself to draw up a list of those who should be elected, and he would elect them himself."--(A laugh.) The Hon. Gentlemen opposite wished to treat Ireland as Mahomed Ali did Egypt, and no longer permit it to be a free country. They would on every occasion put a check on Reform, and of course now on Muni cipal Reform.—( Hear.) The Gentlemen opposite were en deavouring to excite agitation by an appeal against the reli gion of the people of Ireland. The Hon. Baronet the Mem ber for Cumberland had openly expressed his detestation of Popery and tyranny ; the press were also proceeding in the same unholy course; and he lately saw a journal which was looked on as a chief supporter of the Tory cause declare itself in a most indecent manner while speaking of the late promotions to the Peerage. The Hon. Gentlemen opposite were trying to renew the plan pursued in 1827, 1828, and 1829 ; they might now again raise the cry of " No Popery ;" but how did they not know that the day might not come when the cry of " No Dissenter" should be raised ?—( Loud cheers.) He called on the House not to wait for that time, but at once to pass the measure then under discussion.—( Cheers.) Mr. GROVE PRICE said, the Hon. Gentleman who last addressed the House had thought proper to indulge in some sarcastic allusions to th ose on his (Mr. Price's) side of the House who opposed the Reform Bill. For himself, he would say that he too had ever been the open, and undisguised, and conscientious opponent of that measure up to the period at which it was carried. Indeed, so strenuous was his opposition to that question that he would have willingly resigned his life if by such a sacrifice he could have prevented its accomplish ment.—( Cheers.) But the moment that question was settled —the moment the fiat of the Legislature had declared it law_ from that moment he had used his honest and best exertions to carry out the principle into practical effect. The able, el e . quent, and elaborate speeches of his Hon. and Learned Friends the Members fur Bandon and of the University of Dublin rendered it unnecessary for him to touch upon topics connected with the Administration of Lord Nlialgrave in Ireland, which otherwise he might have been induced to do. He would not, therefore, dwell further on this point, except to say that the statements of his lion. Friends were well deserving of the serious attention of that House and the country. He im plored the House to recollect that they were called upon to decide on a great question, and that decision, if once made in favour of democracy, could never be reseireled.—( Hear, hear.) —Who could deny that this was a stepping-stone to other measures, of a more serious and dangerous character; or who could tell (if lie might quote from Shakspeare) whether it was to bring " airs from heaven or blasts from bell."—( Ilear.)--- From his experience he could say, that this measure of muni pal reform had been a firebrand in the domestic circle in every town in England, and had roused into action all the angry passions which had so long been permitted to slumber.— (" Nu, no.") He (Mr. Price) repeated this assertion, and what would be the consequence if they invested towns in Ireland with a power like this—a country where a bigotted and intolerant Priesthood reigned paramount and influenced every political movement? Would not the muni cipal elections be determined by their dictation, and under such a domination who could answer for the safety of the Church or any other of the institutions of the country.—( Hear. )—A Noble Lord on the opposite side had expressed a wish that the Clergy of all religious denominations should abstain from interfering in elections. In this wish he (Mr. Price) most cordially concurred, but. at the same time, lie was bound to say, after eighteen years' experience of English elections, he, never knew an instance, except in three cases, where a clergy man of the Church of England had overstepped those legiti mate bounds which a moderate country gentleman might pre scribe to himself.—( Hear.) Could this be said of the Roman Catholic Clergy of Ireland ?—( Mr. O'Connell, as we under stood, said " Yes.") The cry of "Justice for Ireland " was the watchword of a faction ; and, if by justice to Ireland was meant its tranquillity and happiness, they would not do justice to the people of that country, if they sanctioned the present measure. Mr. WOULFE had received a letter from a Noble Lord, whose name had been introduced in the course of this debate by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bandon, requesting him (Mr. Woulfe) to explain some matters referred to by that Honourable and Learned Gentleman. He felt he was called on, in justice to Lord Miltown, the nobleman referred to, to give this explanation. The Honourable and Learned Gentle man had stated that Lord Miltown had been dismissed from the magistracy, or had resigned the commission of the peace to avoid dismissal, in consequence of his having attended and spoken at meetings held for the purpose of resisting the pay ment of tithes. Now how stood the facts ? Lord Miltown never attended a tithe meeting but one, and at that meeting he exhorted the people to pay tithes so long as they were a legal impost.—( Hear, and cheers.) The fact was, the Noble Lord had a personal interest in giving this advice, for he was him self a lay impropriator of no less than seven parishes, and from this source he derived a considerable portion of his pro perty. So much for the charge of anti-tithe agitation brought against the Noble Lord. It was not therefore on this ground that he resigned the commission of the peace, but in conse quence of an intimation he received, that he could not consis tently hold that commission so long as he continued a mem ber of a society called the " Volunteer Association."—(Cheers from the Opposition.) That Association had dissolved itself, and was no longer in existence.—( Renewed cheering.) Did Honourable Members intimate by those cheers that to have once belonged to an objectionable Association should dis qualify a person from holding the commission of the peace? —(Cries of " Hear, hear.") If so, did they apply the same rule to Orange Societies ? Those Societies had voluntarily dissolved themselves, and so had the Volunteer Association. Why, therefore, should not the same rule be applied to both ? —(Cheers from the Opposition.) He supposed it was meant to intimate by those cheers that the Volunteer Association had arisen again under a new name.— (Hear.) But were there no successors to the Orange lodges?—( Cheers.) Were there no new confederations on the old principle ? Let it also be re membered that the Volunteer Association dissolved itself when the objects for which it contended had been obtained. But the Orange Societies did not dissolve themselves until they had been declared illegal. So much for the portion of the state ment which referred to Lord Miltown's dismissal. Now, how stood the fact with regard to his re-appointment ? It had been stated that his restoration took place after he had become a Member of the Genera/ Association. The very contrary was the fact—he was re-invested with the commission of the peace long before he became a member of that Society.—( Cheers.) It was, therefore, not true that he was dismissed for attending an anti-tithe meeting, or restored for joining the Association. —(hear, hear.) It had been stated—(and the car of the House had been grossly abused by the statement).—that Mr. O'Loghlin laid down a rule by which the right of the Crown to challenge jurors had been abandoned. On behalf of his Right Hon. Friend he distinctly denied that allegation. —( Cheers.) He (Mr. Woulfe) had been recently in com munication with the Crown Solicitors on the subject of Crown prosecutions, and his directions to them were, not to give up the right of the Crown to challenge, but that jurors should not be objected to because they might happen to be Catholics or Protestants, and that the exercise of this right should be confined to cases where good grounds of legal objection might exist. In other cases, too, where there might not exist legal grounds of challenge, the direction was to exercise the power where there was any rational ground of objection to the juror. —( Hear.) This course was adopted to prevent any capri cious exercise of the power, and instructions were given to the Crown Solicitor to take a note of, and report, every in stance in which the power of challenging was exercised on other than legal grounds.—(Cheers.) That such a mode of proceeding was wise and discreet few would be found to deny. As to what bad been said of convicts sitting on juries, if it so occurred it was because the directions given had not been complied with ; and, indeed, it was almost impossible that cases of inadvertence should not sometimes occur.—( Hear.) With respect to the case of Mr. Pigott, who it was said was a member of the General Association, he would admit that that Gentleman bad been a member of the Association for a short time.—( Opposition cheers.) He did not use the phrase " a short time " by way of apology for Mr. Pigott.—( Ministerial cheers, and counter- cheers. ): lie merely stated the fact that Mr. Pigott was a member before he accepted the situation of law adviser in the Secretary's office ; tut on accepting that situation he thought it right to be so no longer.—( Opposition cheers.) He did not, however, leave the Association because Of its illegality.—(Ministerial cheers.) He quitted it be cause, knowing it to be the offspring of popular emotion and popular feeling, he did not think it fitting that a person hold ing ajudicial situation—( Ministerial cheers and counter-cheers) —yes, with an instinctive sense, with a delicate perception of propriety, Mr. Pigott thought it right that a person placed in his position should shrink from a connection with any as sociation which, however legal in itself, could by any pos sibility be supposed to be illegal by any person whatso ever.—( Renewed Ministerial cheers.) Though he would re peat Mr. Pigott did not himself think the Association illegal, he thought it was but a proper respect paid to the Administra tion of justice that all persons connected with the Ministry should withdraw from it.—( Hear, hear.) ,The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had asked what would the Government say if they had to put a case before Mr. Pigott as to the lega lity of the National Association? Now he (Mr. Woulfe) had been grossly misinformed if there did not exist in Ireland ano ther Association called the Lay Association, which was bound in confederacy, both of persons and purses, to carry on a vex atious and expensive litigation with respect to suits in which they were not personally interested—(Ministerial cheers). — namely, the recovering of sums due to the owners of Tithes. Mr. Sergeant JACK SON was here understood to express dissent. Mr. WO ULFE was glad to hear his Hon. Friend's dis claimer. He had thought that there was such an Associa tion ; and he further thought that his Hon. and Learned Friend belonged to it. He was glad to hear that such was not the fact.--( Cheers and laughter.) He would, however, as sume hypothetically the existence of such an Association, and that a member of it was charged with the crime of maintenance. He would suppose this to take place after a change had been made in the Government. He would further suppose that there were many legal gentlemen connected with this hypo thetical Lay Association, and that the Lord Lieutenant ap pointed by the new Administration, selected one of these to fill the office which Mr. Pigott now held, and that the charge of maintenance against the member of the Lay Association should come before this officer. How, in that case, would the Government act ? The answer which the Learned Sergeant would give to him (Mr. Woulfe) on this question, the same answer would he make to the Learned Sergeant.—(Ministe rial cheers.) One Association was at least as legal as the other—with this difference, that the one existed—if not the same, at least extremely similar--for several years ; and it was the opinion of a high legal authority, that it was an Associa tion which could not be reached by common or statute law.— (Cheers from the Irish Members.) The other had not been so tested yet, but perhaps it would soon be tried.—( Hear, hear.) He would now come to that which was the proper topic. The fundamental objection made against the proposi tion of the Noble Lord (J. Russell) by Hon. Members on the other side of the House was, that it would have the effect of transferring the municipal powers in Ireland from the hands of Protestants into those of Roman Catholics. The proposed measure would not transfer power from the hands of the Pro testants of Ireland. He did not wish to speak harshly, but he would say, in the language of Mr. Fox—language which had been used before in the course of the debate—that, instead of taking power from the hands of the Protestants of Ireland, it would only take it from those of a miserable monopoly—from a small faction—who as effectually excluded from their body Protestant wealth and intelligence as they did Roman Catho lics. When the Duke of Wellington introducod the Eman cipation Bill into the other House at the same time that it was introduced into the House of Commons by the Right Hon. Baronet for Tamworth, they both argued that it,lsad the sup port of the great mass of Protestant wealth and intelligence in Ireland. To support this assertion they went into several sta tistical details, and in his ( Mr. Woulfe's) opinion they did so successfully. These details also showed that the great mass of the municipal bodies in Ireland were arrayed against the measure. This showed, then, that the corporate bodies in Ireland were not identified with the Protestants of that coun try.—( Loud Ministerial cheers.) The effect would be not to vivo power to Catholics or Protestants, but to the people of Ireland.—( Ministerial cheers.) It would attsch power to a civil qualification, and confer it on the persons so qualified.—( Hear. ) it would give to the Catholic de facto no more than he was de jure entitled to, and it would give to the Protestants no less. There was a gross exaggeration as to the portion which would be enjoyed by Roman Catholics. He did not impute any wilful exaggeration ; but he wondered how ally one could venture such an assertion who knew how numerous and wealthy the Protestants were in large towns, such as Dublin, Waterford, and Cork. In other country parts the Catholics were as six to one or four to one ; but in cities the proportion was far more favourable to the Protestants. It was curious to observe the different representations made to that House as to the power of the Catholic body when different purposes were to be answered. At one time when civil power was proposed to be given, the cry was—" Oh, you should not argue this question on abstract principles, and apart front the consi deration of what is fit and expedient. You should nut, in the present circumstances of Ireland, confide so vast a power to so overwhelming a body."—( Hear, hear, hear.) But when the feeling of the Catholics were to be outraged, when their just wants were to be overlooked, and their just claims denied to them, why then this vast body was a tiling of insig nificance, easily kept.—( Cheers.) He would, however, take still higher ground. If a fair principle were to be acted upon in the distribution of corporate power, a much larger propor tion should fall to the Catholics than to the Protestants, and to deny their rights on this ground would be a gross viol ation of the Act of Union as well as of the Emancipation (Ministerial cheers.) He did not mean to argue the question, whether the power conferred over the Legislature in England and in Scotland by means of their municipal bodies was or was not, greater than it should be ; but he would ask why should power be conferred on those countries which was withheld from Ireland ? The dissimilarity of the laws as regarded England and Ireland had been urged as an argument. Similarity of laws was no provision of the Act of Union. Not alone would the Act of Union be violated by acceding to the measure of the Noble Lord (F. Egerton), but the principle of the Eman cipation Act would also be grossly departed from. The Noble Lord ( Stanley) argued that in consequence of their religion Catholics should be refused the right to direct their own domestic concerns, and an attempt had been made to re concile this assertion with the principle of the Eman cipation Bill. It was said that the object of that Bill was to equalize all classes in Ireland, and such, it was argued, would be the effect of the proposition for doing away with all municipal rights in Ireland. The dis tinction here, however, was obvious. The principle of the Emancipation Bill was the enjoyment of equal rights, whilst the principle of the Noble Lord (F. Egerton) was the in fliction of equal wrong.—( Ministerial cheers.) The principle of the Relief Bill was to distribute civil power equally amongst all, whilst that of the Noble Lord's measure was an equal destruction of those rights. They were, in fact, the antipodes of each other. No two things could be more dis similar.--( Hear.) It was easy enough to conceive how those who had been the steadfast opponents of the Emancipation Bill could resist the measure of the Noble Lord ( Russell), and on the same grounds, namely, that the granting of power to Roman Catholics should be guarded against : but those who were favourable to that measure departed from their own prin. ciple in opposing the Bill of the Noble Lord. Even the op ponents of Catholic Emancipation departed in some degree from their own principle in supporting the instruction of the Noble Lord the Member for South Lancashire. Their principle was that Protestants should possess power, and that Catholics should not. The object of the Noble Lord was that power should be possessed by neither party.—(Ministerial cheers.) Had the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth acted upon this principle in 1829 it would have saved him from the diffi culties with which he was than beset. He was afraid the Ca tholics would abuse the power which they sought ; and yet he Was compelled to grant it, notwithstanding his misgivings. Why did not the Right Hon. Baronet then adopt the plan of the Noble Lord the Member for South Lancashire, and, in stead of conferring the power on one party, take it away from the other ? (Cheers.) This would have been the more safe proceeding, according to the opinions expressed by Hon. Gen tlemen on the opposite side. But this principle was not known to the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth ; it was a new fangled doctrine, and he defied the House to open the page of this country's history, and show a single instance where the civil rights of a nation were destroyed because they had been abused by a party. It was not only at variance with the Emancipation Bill but with the whole constitutional system of this country. If Catholics were unworthy of corporate power let them be deprived of it, but why should the Protestants of Ireland suffer for their crime ? It was a new principle in the code of laws and the history of this coun try, that civil power, denied to one party because of their reli gious creed, should be totally destroyed in consequence of the misdeeds of one party or the other. To spoliate the Protestant of his rights because they could not be entrusted to the Catho lic, would be no gratification to the latter. The Catholic would prefer a thousand times to see municipal rights in ex istence, though confined to the Protestants, if founded on a fair and popular basis, than see them destroyed altogether.— (Ministerial cheers.) Though by that course wrong wou ld be sustained by the Catholic, and the Act of Union violated, still it would be Yn no greater degree than by the present pro position.—( Hear.) For his own part, he had always sup ported the Act of Union, because he belie ve d, if proper l y an d fairly acted upon, its essence was, that both co un t r i es s h ou ld b e treated alike, and each receive as much a tt ent i on as t h e ot h er ; that the feelings, the will, the passions, and, if they pleased, the prejudices of each should be alike attended to. How could any man in Ireland be disposed to support the Union? In England a Corporation Bill was given which was denied in Ireland, not because Ireland had no local rights to attend to, but because it would endanger th e sa f ety o f t h e I r ish Church. He never knew an Irish question brought forward that some ill advised friend did not get up and use that argument. It had been used as much against the Dissenter as against the Catholic. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, after demanding that the house should yield to the just claims of the Irish people, con cluded by apologising for having trespassed so long on their time, and imploring those who were anxious to support the connection between the two countries t o s h ow t h a t di s p os ition by their vote in the Imperial Legislat ure , an d f urn i s h t h e b es t argu ments and assistance in their power in favour of the measure.—( Cheers. ) Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the vital importance of the subject compelled him t o a dd ress t h e H ouse , h oweve r un willing. Sectarian and almost bigot as he was now deemed to be by those on the other side of the House—although he had been a firm and consistent supporter of the Catholic claims _he could not but congratulate the Hon. and Learned Gen tleman on his appointment by his Majesty's Government to the post he then held, and the right to which he had so well sus tained by the ability of the speech he had just delivered. He had said that he considered the subject had derived increased importance from that speech. He thought he had not mis understood it, and he did consider that the subject had de rived great importance from the fact of the King's Attorney- General having declared that unless the Bill was passed for the Reform of the Municipal institutions, he would cease to defend the Union between England and Ireland.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) Mr. WOULFE said that the words he had used were, that he should cease to be able to defend with effect the Union. Sir J. GRAHAM did not think the fine-drawn legal subtle ties—( Hear, hear)—of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman would have much effect in disabusing the House from the ef fect those words conveyed. The people of Ireland might now be able to understand the ominous nature of the question propounded, since in the speech of the King's Attorney-Ge neral they were told that the union between England and Ire land could no longer be maintained to be defensible.--( Loud cheers from the Opposition.) His objection to the passing the measure now before the House was the present state of Ireland. Crimination and recrimination had been been ban died about with respect to that condition. It was averred that the National Association was dangerous, and, in reply, they were told of the proceedings of the Lay Association. They were told also that the Orange Lodges, put down last year, had revived, in the form of another Association ; but, by the way of a passing counnent, he would remark that the proceedings of the National Association, which had received the countenance and support of his Majesty's Ministers, were avowedly directed against the laws ; while those of the Lay Association, opposed by his Majesty's Ministers,' were for the purpose of maintaining it.—(Cheers.) Now, it had suited the purpose of the Honouarable and Learned Gentleman that evening not to enter into the details of the charges brought against the Government, he having been content to meet them with a general sweeping denial. But that was the way those charges had been met by the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland? The Noble Lord had attempted to answer the charges, but what answer had he given to the case of Mr. Cas sidy ? (Cries of " Oh," from the Irish Members.) What answer had been given to the letters read since the speech of the Noble Lord, of Lord de Vesci and Lord Oxmantown ? What to the fact of the gaol delivery of the Lord Lieutenant, in which no less than sixty-nine persons were released in three counties? He would come now to the point most important in this question, and that was the appointment of Mr. Pigott. (Cries of " Oh," from the Irish Members.) He contended that it was a fact most important to the understanding of this question ; and how stood the case with respect to Mr. Pigott? He acted with more sense of his duty towards the Association than His Majesty's Ministers ; for the lion. and Learned Gen tleman had thought proper to retire, while His Majesty's Go vernment indulged in no such scruples. Lord J. RUSSELL made some remark with respect to Mr. Pigott, which we could not hear. Sir J. GRAHAM resumed, and said that the Noble Lord would have a future opportunity of correcting him if he stated anything incorrectly. Mr. Pigott, it seemed, had thought it decent and proper to retire from the National Association at the time of his appointment. He would not attach great im portance to the precise date of the communication which was made of the offer of the appointment. If the offer of the appointment had been made before the resignation of Mr. Pigott, why, then the excuse was a mere subterfuge, and the original charge remained untouched.—(Cheers.) 'fhe fact was evident, that his Majesty's Ministers had selected to fill the office of greatest importance to the Crown, as legal adviser to the Lord Lieutenant, a person the most useful and influen tial in the National Association. And let the House not for get the vacancy that was made for the purpose. Who was now the first Sergeant in Ireland, and who possessed until lately the confidence of his Majesty's Ministers ? Why was he not chosen instead of a gentleman totally unknown, and of no pro fessional reputation, to be made Solicitor-General ? Why was this done but for the express purpose of creating a vacancy ? —( Cries of " Hear.") In the speech of the Noble Lord the Secretary at War (Lord Howick) he had proposed two questions of great importance with considerable perspicuity and force. The first was a question inquiring why the subject was put forward as dangerous to the Church of Ireland. The second was, how municipal institutions endangered the Irish Church. The Attorney-General answered the questions not in a very courteous way, by declaring that it was all cant. The Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, in a speech distin guished for ability, had called the introduction of the subject of the Church a hobgoblin phantom of a fanatical fancy. Another Hon. Member had declared that its introduction was a party trick, coming from that side of the House. As to the insinuation, that the introduction of the question of the Irish Church into this discussion was made to be a stepping-stone to power he should not reply to it.--( Ironical cheers from the Ministerial side.) The Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had spoken of the harlot Church of England, as established in Ireland, being the greatest enormity existing in Europe. Mr. ROE BUCK—I said the harlot Church of Ireland. Sir JAMES GRAHAM begged to remind the Hon. and Learned Member, whose legal accuracy and general preci sion were well known, that the Church of England was the same as the Church of Ireland.—(The conclusion of this sentence was lost amid the loud cries of the Ministerial benches.) The Hon. and Learned Member would excuse him if he interpreted the Church of England to be the same as the Church of Ireland. However, that did not bear upon the question. But it was that harlot Church of Ireland which he had declared to be the greatest enormity in Europe. The Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire ( Lord Stanley) had noticed a remarkable fact, that the questions of tithes and municipal institutions were invariably mixed up in the same petition. This was not the result of accident, but arse from an instruction of the National Association, as could be proved by a speech of the lion. and Learned Gentleman the Member for Tipperary (Mr. Sheil), whom he was glad to see in his place.—(Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh," from the Irish benches.) The speech he alluded to had been deli vered in the Coburg Gardens, when it was said that seven millions was to be the talismanic word which was to frighten this country into granting municipal institutions. The Right Hon. Baronet then read an extract from the speech, in which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said that the people of Ireland " must and shall" have municipal institutions, and con nected this subject with that of tithes.—(The words of the quo tation were lost from the loud cries of "Bar,"iand "Order.") The Right lion. Baronet then continued, that to establish the con nection of the two quotations more closely than even the speeches of the Hon. Members for Liskeard, for Bath, and for Tipperary, he would beg the House to remember the im portant declaration made by the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny, in which he said " Let me get the Whigs to a certain point, and I will drag them the rest of the way."— (Cheers.) In that speech the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had proclaimed his support of the voluntary principle, the se paration of the Church and State, of household suffrage, of vote by ballot, of the expulsion of the Bishops from the House of Lords, and of an organic change in the House of Lords itself. And in that speech he summed up this enume ration by saying, " Give me but Municipal Reform, and I will effect all the rest." Thus, then, was the connection of the two questions established. The Reform Bill of Earl Grey was specific and finite, and was in that respect alone very different from the present, which had avowedly an ulterior ob ject in view. The Right Honourable Baronet then read an extract from a speech of Earl Grey's, to the effect that it was only by conducting the Government on safe and mode rate principles that he could expect to carry it on, and by a careful attention to the settled institutions of Church and State : adding, that upon no other principles could an Admi nistration be conducted with advantage or safety. What, too, had been the declaration of the Noble Earl a few days before his Government had been broken up? This occurred on the 6th Junc, 1834, when the Noble Earl said that he wished to see Reform carried to the fullest extent that the abuses and necessities required, and he would appeal to their Lordships and to the judgment of the country whether any attempt had been manifested by his Majesty's Ministers to press that great principle beyond what it necessarily required. Now although the Government of Earl Grey had received the support of some lion. Gentlemen entertaining ulterior views, yet it was necessary to refer to the state of parties at that time before the comparison of the Noble Lord could be borne out. The old Whig party at that time was unbroken, and the Radicalsin that House were comparatively small to those who gave their support to his Majesty's Ministers. But what was now the state of affairs ? The measure now before them was not— like the Reform Bill of Lord Grey, specific and finite. They well knew what was their power of giving effect to that deci sion. But was the relative strength of parties the same now as it had been before ? Was not the Radical party stronger by the secession of the old Whigs? Was there no compact between them and the Government ?—( Hear.) If he understood at all the nature of the union or coalition which now existed, it went to give Downing-street and office to the Ministerial party, in return for which the Irish Church was to be sacrificed to the National Association.—(Cheers.) So much was he convinced of it, that his decided opinion was, if those gentlemen who sat on his side of the House seceded for only one short month from their attendance, within that period household suffrage, vote by ballot, annual Parliaments, and the voluntary principle, would be established in Ireland by a most triumphant majority.—(Hear, hear.) It was stated on the other side, that the motion for the abolition of Corporations, brought forward by the Noble Lord the Member for South Lancashire, was an Orange device. That statement he (Sir J. Graham) was free to say, was utterly unfounded. He did not desire to enter deeply into the details of the measure be fore the House, but there was one of them to which he could not avoid calling the attention of the House. It was the alteration made in it as regarded the appointment of sheriffs in cities and towns in Ireland. That alteration was not explained to the House by the Noble Lord who in troduced the measure.—(Hear, hear.) In the Bill of last year it was provided that the Sheriffs in cities and boroughs should be selected as they were in England —that was by the mode of popular election. His ( Sir James Graham's) side of the House urged against that project, that it would give an undue control to the public over those who had the administration of justice in their hands. His Majesty's Ministers yielded to the arguments then urged, and altered the Bill. The Bill before the House, however, suffered materially from the alteration then made on the suggestion of his side of the House. By the present measure, it was proposed to give the popular body a right to return three names as eligible to the office of Sheriff, which three names the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland was to have the power of setting aside, without assigning any reason. It then proposed to give the same right of returning three names to the municipal body, but with the same reservation of power to the Lord-Lieutenant also. A great deal had been said against the setting aside jurors by the Crown on peremptory challenge, without any reason being given. He (Sir James Graham) was glad to find that a limit had been set to that power, and in so far the explanation of the Hon. and Learned Attorney-General for Ireland was sufficient and satisfactory. But if the weight of public opinion was so strong as to cause that relinquishment of a right by the Crown, on the grounds that it was unpopular, what would it be in the case of the measure before the House, when a power, analogous in its nature, but capable of being made more obnoxious—the power of rejection without cause of the six gentlemen selected by their fellow-citizens for the office of Sheriff—was con ferred on the Lord Lieutenant ? If it were intended that the power conferred on the Lord Lieutenant should not be exer cised in the case of those names returned by popular election, then was there a deceit practised towards the country, and a contravention of a solemn decision of the House. The deci sion he alluded to was couched in an objection of the Com mons to an amendment in the former Bill by the Lords—which was to the effect of giving to the Clerks of the Crown and Clerks of the Peace in cities a life interest in their respective offices. The objection was urged in a conference between the two Houses. It ran thus :—" The Commons object to the amendment because they consider such offices as are connected with the administration of justice in Ireland should be re moved from local influence, and placed directly under the Crown." But if the concession were not a real one what was it ? It was either a colourable one, or an act of tame sub mission to the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny. It was an attempt to deceive the public, or an attempt to deceive one who would not be deceived—to satisfy one who would not be satisfied. The Noble Lord the Home Secretary admitted that there was a great analogy between the Bill before the House and the Bill on the Poor-laws--that was between the subject of both. Now, what did Mr. Nicholls say in his Report on the state of the poor in Ireland? He said in substance that he did not believe there were the means of constituting Boards of Guardians in that country, and the Noble Lord, in corroboration of the correctness of that belief, gave the Central Board the power of suspending such of the Boards of Guardians as they thought fit.— ( Hear, hear.) Mr. Nicholls went still further, for he stated that he believed the mode of creating a Board of Guardians for the Poor would be at present dangerous in Ireland; yet the Noble Lord proposed in the measure under discussion to confer all the power upon the popular body. How did he re concile the discrepancy ? The Noble Lord in his speech on the Poor-law described the state of Ireland to be one of men dicancy, vagrancy, and ma a Kling. He said, moreover, that many of them had arms in their hands, and with them com mitted acts of violence and illegality. The Noble Lord further illustrated his case by a story of an ejected tenant who fired at the new occupant of the farm of which he had been dispossessed, and shot his servant. That was the Noble Lord's illustration of the state of Ireland at present ; but he ( Sir J. Graham) would read to the House something still more curious. Perhaps the House was aware that Downing-street had been lately delivered of a pamphlet.—( Cries of " Oh," " Hear," and laughter.) It was worthy the attention of the Attorney-General for Ireland.—(" Hear," and laughter.) The Foreign Office had been in labour, and it had brought forth—not a mouse, but a book--a hopeful bantling it was. ( Laughter.) It was christened in due form, and its name was " The Policy of England towards Spain." In that pamphlet it was attempted to gloss over the painful atrocities which dis. graced the civil war now raging in Spain ; and the murder of Cabrera's mother—( Cries of " Oh, oh I" from the Mini sterial side of the House, and cheers from all the rest)—the assassination of Quesada—( Cries of " Divide," on the Trea sury benches)—and the mutilation of his body, were treated comparatively as trivial matters. An attempt was made, as he had already stated, to gloss over these things. That pam phlet also contained a reference to the state of Ireland which was not uninstructive, coming from the quarter that it did ; but perhaps the House would rather hear the " juvenile Whig" speak for himself, than have his (Sir J. Graham's) interpreta tion of his words. Not only were the atrocities alluded to attempted to be palliated or glossed over, but a comparison was actually instituted between Spain—a country where a civil war, unequalled in its intense atrocity, was at present raging —and Ireland, very little, he was bound to say, to the ad vantage of the sister country. What said the pamphlet ? In allusion to the state of Spain, it went on—" Let us look at home, and examine what passes here under our eye daily, with every circumstance favourable to the punishment of crime and the repression of vice, surrounding us, and then we shall be enabled to form some estimate of the ex tent of the difficulty which Spain, situated as she is, has to encounter. Some of the provinces of Spain are larger than Ireland, yet I much doubt whether, in taking an account of the relative quantity of crime committed in both countries, in a given space of nine—say twelve months—the balance would be in favour of Spain and against Ireland. With all their troops and munitions of war it is impossible for any Government to exercise its functions properly unless the peo ple are taught to see their own interests in the suppression of vice and crime."—(Cheers.) That was the parallel drawn by the juvenile Whig of Downing-street between Spain and Ireland. The pamphlet said—" The Spanish monk is ge nerally an illiterate and most illiberal person, but he is, notwithstanding, well versed in intrigues, and possesses a thorough knowledge of the management of the peasantry about him. He is cunning, deep, designing, and artful. Mixing in every thing, he knows all that is passing; and by means of auricular confession, he has a power over their affairs which none but himself can possess. An army of such men, in a country like Spain, is sufficient to overturn an empire." He (Sir J. Graham) would repeat, with a little alteration, that an army of such men, in a country like Ireland, was sufficient to overturn an empire. (Hear, and. cries of " Oh.") He (Sir J. Graham) would not then stop to inquire into the amount of the funds of the National Associa tion or their application. He would only remark, in passing, that the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny, in a letter from Derrynane to a Rev. Gentleman who suggested the pub lication of receipts and expenditure, recommended by all means the publication of the receipts as often as possible.-- ( Mr. O'Connell—Weekly.) Weekly, then, as the Hon. and, Learned Member said ; but not a word about the expenditure. __(Hear, and a laugh.) Mr. Burke said, in terms which he (Sir James Graham) would not pretend to quote literally, as lie had not the passage by him, talking of the subject of abstract rights, " that, of all abstract rights, none is so clear as the right of self-defence. The sword is a weapon of self-defence. If a man ask me for my sword, and I am aware that his intention is to cut my tlroat with it, would I not be a fool or a coward if I did not refuse it to him ?" So was it with municipal institutions in Ireland. They were the sword. If, then, he (Sir J. Graham) knew them to be asked for purposes which he considered fatal, would he not, in Burke's words, " be a coward or a fool if he did not refuse them—(Cheers)—if he gave the deadly weapons into an avowed enemy's hand 27—( Hear, hear.) It came to this—he saw clearly that the Protestant Church in Ireland was in the utmost danger.--( Cheers.) Those who considered nothing but its destruction could afford to make light of the cry, " The Church is in danger," but those who, like him, considered it a great national blessing, heard the sound with anxiety and fear. That it was in danger needed there any further proof than the speech of a Minister of the Crown, the Noble Lord the Se cretary for Ireland, when, the other night, he spoke of its rot.. tenness ?—( Cheers.) Wherein was its rottenness? In what did it consist ? Not in its foundation, for that rested on the rock of ages—(Cheers, and cries of " Oh, oh")—not in its bulwarks, for they were built up in the hearts of a million of brave men, who, knowing that it was their duty to defend it to the last, would rather die than give it up.—( Cheers.) Still he (Sir J. Graham) would admit that there was rottenness in it—(" Hear, h ear ," an d " Oh" )_..but that rottenn ess con sisted alone in the hollow, wavering, insincere support given to it by the Ministers of a King who had sworn at his coronation to defend the united Churches of Great Britain and Ireland in all their rights and privileges. —( Hear.) They had prepared for " The rent the envious Casca made," but— " This was the most unkindest cut of all."—(Cheers.) He certainly must say, not in bitterness of spirit, but from the bottom of his heart, he wished "an enemy had said this l" (Loud cheers.) Ministers had declared against that Church, and when Ministers had so declared, was it to be wondered that it had assumed a most formidable aspect 2—(Loud cheers.) What was the demand ? Justice for Ireland. So also did they on the Opposition side contend for justice to Ireland.— ( Loud cheers.) Justice to the Judges ofLlreland, whose feel ings were outraged—whose opinions were insulted_. whose sentences were reversed by the Lieutenant of the King; justice to the Magistracy of Ireland, whose authority was de graded by the fact, hardly denied, that turbulent violators of the law were placed in the commission of the peace, side by side with its accredited guardians and defenders—(Loud cheers)—justice to the Protestant clergy of Ireland, whose legal rights were overborne by open violence, whose property was despoiled with impunity, whose lives were attacked in open day, and from whom the protection of the King's Govern ment seemed almost to be withdrawn in the face of the tyran nous hatred of a persecuting majority—justice to the freehol ders of Ireland, who were overawed in the exercise of the elective franchise by the daring, daily, constant interference of those priests, who, according to the creed of the multitude in that country, held in their hands the keys of Heaven and of Hell—(Cheers)—and brought to bear the hopes and fears of another world on the passing struggles of this—justice to the entire people of Ireland, by vindicating the majesty and supre macy of the law with unflinching impartiality and manly bold ness, whereby they might hope life would become more se cure, and the rights of property more respected in that un happy country. Those were his demands, and the demands of those with whom he had the honour to act, of justice to Iv : . land.—(Loud cheers.) And when they had satisfied ther d ..... then, but not until then, they should be prepared to colisiil,er the extension of popular privileges in that country, and. en counter even the danger of the Ministerial " Normal schools of peaceful agitation."—(The Right Hon. Baronet sat down amidst the loudest and most enthusiastic cheering, which con tinued some minutes.) Mr. SHE IL—The Right Hon. Baronet commenced his speech by saying he believed he was regarded by this side of the House as a sectarian and a bigot ; whether his speech was calculated to remove any such injurious impression, I will leave those who heard it to determine. —(A laugh.) I can not help thinking that he has made use of language, in speak ing of the Roman Catholics, such as no Roman Catholic. ;.n this House would have ever applied to the Protestant Churc%. --(Cheers.) No Roman Catholic in this House has spoken of the Church of England, or of the Church of Ireland, in language so derogatory as that which they have heard applied to them by a Member of that communion—as that which they have heard, not with disgust —no such thing, but with a feeling of commiseration—( Hear, bear)—with a feeling of sur prise that a person who once sat on this side of the House, and «'llO was so strenuous and uncompromising an advocate for reform, that he defied all its consequences in Ireland, should on this occasion be so far led away as to utter the ex pressions which have been heard from him. Why did he speat: of Spain ? Whv did he refer to the atrocities which kayo been committed' in that country ? Why was Cabrera'', why was Quesada's name introduced 1?—( Cries of " Hear hear.") I will not call the Right Honourable Gentlerr•an a bigot —( Hear, hear)—but he will pardon me if I tall him a con vert. —( Laughter.). On this occasion he has exhibited all that zeal and enthusiasm for which cr.. , nver'sion—conversion h° , it—is proverbial.--( Loud Cheers.) In the course of his speech, which was certainly an extremely discursive one, ha did me th e h onour to refer to a speech of mine, and I must confess he spoke of me in terms which were most comP ll- mentary. 1, i n re t urn , must say I hear him always with the most unqualifi e d pleasure he is in h eart most gene rous and humane, and his t ongue carr i es conviction to the min d. r ( Chee rs an d l aug h ter. ) I remember an instance of this in a speech made by the Right Hon, Baronet at Cocker-