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

, 411 1 amendment, if airy se - eased to it, it weuld involve a cemplete alteration in the principle of the Bill beeause it would give permanence to the principles of protection which was soo e ht to be got rid of by this Bill. Those who think the principles of the Bill correct cannot therefore support the amendment of the Noble Duke. The amendment was objectionable even as it regarded the object sought to be obtained. It was proposed with the object of preserving a remnant of protection, when they said almost in the same breath teat such a remnant was not worth having. Protection of such a sort, he believed, would turn out most inefficient •, it would not be worth anything to the agricultural interests. He would at present confine his remarks to these general observations on the amendment, giving the grounds on which he thought it ill advised to make the alterations proposed. Lord CLANCARTY supported the amendment. When they looked at the present flourishing state of the country, they could not avoid coming to the conclusion that they were in debted to protection for it. That protection was at the bottom of all their prcsperity h.d been proved by conclusive arguments in the admirable speech of the Noble Lord the Secre tary for the Colonies, which, however much it hail been cavilled at, had not been answered.—( Hear, hear.) They were told that the Government had acted from the force of circumstances —not the pressure from without or the pressure of the Anti- Corn-law League, but from the growth of the population. On that point, though he was as desirous as any one to see the people supplied with an ample amount of the nece , saries of life, he did not think the measure in question would yield that result. He believed if they removed protection from native industry it would leave the condition of the population worse than it was before. He had heard it stated that the landlorils would be either very ignorant or very good-natured if they allowed the corn-laws to be repealed. To that he would only say, that what was for the general good of the people would also be for the in• terests of the landlord, and the principle of protection he held to be of that character. He thought that the Irish landlords had been hardly treated in the present question, as the measure would press on them with peculiar severity. Ihe effect would not be confined to them, but it would be brought home to the great body of the occupiers of land in the country. It was the tenant farmer that would principally suffer by the passing of this measure. He had read with delight a most able speech delivered by a Noble Lord whom he saw opposite ( Lord Monteagle) some time age, when he was a Member of the other House of Parliament, on the subject of the rep of the leisis lative union between England and Ireland. Now the first paint on which that Noble Lord insisted, on the advantage to Ireland of a maintenance of the union, was the privilege it en joyed by trading freely in corn with this country, an advantage which was increased by other countries being deprived of that privilege. Now, according to the Noble Lord's own show ing, this measure would have the effect of ruining Ireland, which was mainly an agricultural country. If the price of corn fell, so must their incomes and remuneration for labour and capital expended in the production of that article of food. In conclusion, he would remark, that all he asked tor on be half of the farmers of the United Kingdom was the minimum of protection, compatible with the interests of them and the country at large. The Earl of STANHOPE, in rising to oppose this Bill, said that the Ministry did not dare to appeal to the country on this question. They would, however, be compelled to do so before the lapse of twelve months. He denounced many mem bers of the Cabinet, as base, pusillanimous, and perfidious, for the part which they had taken on this Bill. They had acted as base sycophants and servile adherents of a Minister—had acted like filthy reptiles, and ought never to have been taken out of that obscurity in which they hart formerly been. He assured their Lordships that he ever had been and ever would be an honest, consistent, and firm advocate of all branches of native industry. 'though their Lordships were not elected by constituencies, they were yet responsible to their God and their country fur their conduct.—(Hear, hear.) He con tended that even if the present corn-laws were per mitted to remain untouched, the British farmer would not then have sufficient protection.—( Hear. ) Could it be believed that the same persons that had brought forward the sliding-scale in 1812, on the ground that it gave additional protection to the British farmer, should now intro duce a measure to abolish protection altogether ? In voting for the amendment of the Noble fluke on the cross-benches (the Duke of Buckingham) he should not consider himself bound to support the sliding-scale. He should consider himself per fectly free on this question to vote hereafter as he should please.—( Hear, hear. ) Lord BEAUMONT supported the amendment because they Were about, after the experience of three years only, to abandon a most important source of the public revenue. The second ground on which he should support that amendment was. be cause he believed, quite contrary to the opinion of the Noble Earl opposite, that instead of it being an advantage to the farmers to have this delay and allow the principle of free trade to enter into operation gradually, it would be serious and dangerous to him. The third and, perhaps, the strongest reason for his vote in support of the amendment was this, that whilst they had no right whatsoever now to legislate on this subject this year, for another Parliament which would sit before the time came on for their Act coming into operation—whilst they had no right this year to adopt a principle which they durst not and would not attempt to put immediately into force, but which they saddled upon others—another Parliament would be elected which would be called upon to settle this question Again, at the present moment, things were in such a state that they could not know how long they would last. If they were tight, why not carry out the principle ?—( Hear, hear.) It certainly did not savour of courage on the part of the Ministry to act in the manner in which they had done, and he did not not know whether it was quite honest on the part of the pre sent Parliament to carry such a measure as the present in the Manner proposed. Why, what were they doing ? They were diffusing the great and paramount evils which they themselves knew would be attendant upon it, and they were thrusting them upon a future Parliament. It was also a fact that they Were giving an opportunity to foreigners to be prepared at the Cad of three years to overflow the market ; and not alone that, they gave opportunities to bad tenant to exhaus their a nd. Again, they would prevent persons, theyear before the measure came into operation, from solving corn, and there would be a great deficiency in the home market. He felt cer tain that such would be the effect of the measure of the GI.. vernrnent. If the Government considered they were right in their principle, they should have gone on with it, out of mercy to the British farmer. Whoever had framed the Bill was the greatest enemy to the British farmer that could le•--( Hear, hear.) But if they passed the Bill as it at present :stood, he would tell them that they would be making the Armes a free-trader. What right would they have to tax his molt, or prevent his growing tobacco, and the thousand other resVictions which had been imposed upon him by their statues, and svNich would not be removed by the present measure? They had no right t o continue those restrictions, and pass the corn-law. It was not just, nor ought it to be borne. He considered that giving up a fixed duty was a gross sacrifice of revenue ; and, by carrying this principle out revenue would suffer, while no one would be benefited. On these grounds, therefore, he would support the amendment of his Noble Friend on the cross benches. The Marquis of BUTE said that if the Bill did not offer such a protection as was necessary to the farmers, it was his opinion, and that of all the farmers with whom he had ever spoken, that it was better to have no protection at all. In thin e branches of commerce in which he was engaged he had found protection to fail ; and he had his doubts whether pro tection would be really beneficial to agriculture. His expe rience enabled him to say that the farmer did not participate in the fears expressed in that Howe ; nor did he believe the measure would have the injurious effects predicted. The Earl of OA RDWICKE said he would not have again ris en, did he not feel the great importance of the subject. He 'lid not agree with the Noble Marquis who had just sat down, an the opinions he expressed with regard to farmers , who he believed were strongly in favour of protection. Much was said about stability with regard to these laws, but he believed that if they went on as they did they would have no stability. (Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend roust have a bit of land Which no one else could produce—that no land should be culti /Wed for wheat unless it could produce thirty-two bushels an Lord KINNAIRD—I said thirty bushels. The Earl of HARDWICKE—WeII then that was lowering ".again, and that was an important admission from the head 15 i the Loague.—( Laughter. ) He would like to see all land _Produc eut twenty bushels an acre. Not to cultivate land with ° produciog that amount required by the Noble Lord would i ndeed be to starve the people. ( T he Noble Lord t hen proceeded to read several statistical documents in ,Support of his arguments.) He lived himself u p on land o f a heavy clay soil, which produced but twenty bushel s an acre ; it was just that soil which would be thrown out of cultivation by the introduction of the present measure. To make that land produce thirty bushels an acre would be to expend an immense capital which would never, with this Bill passed into a law, bring an adequate return. Mr. Cobden said to the landlords, you will raise your rents—to the farmer, you will increase your profits—to the manufacturers, you will lower your wages.—(He ar.) This gentleman was the Pro metheus of the day.—(Laughter.) He had something good to off er every one, not, however, forgetting the manufacturers. --(Hear, hear.) When they came to the poor clay soils of Eng gland, a ft e r the passing of the Bill, they wild find nothing but a ruined tenantry, and a barren land. What would the county constituency of this country say—would they have Confidence in the measures of their Lordships' House? They were a l o y a l people, but they wer e like all people, they were not dead to au injury, and they would demand to have ever every thing wiped off in th e sha p e of taxation.—( Hear, ) With the prospect of a plentiful harvest, and the amount of grain which this measure would let in, there was the strongest season to believe that a great reduction would take place in the price. lie was persuaded that if the Bill passed, a feeling would be excited throughout the country, which would lead to a general change in the mode of collecting the revenue. He felt certain that with the withdrawal of protection, they would hav e t o transfer to tl.e t radin g and commercial Classes a fair share o f the burdens which were now placed upon the land. The re would have to be an equalization of tithes, the tax to relieve the poor, and the other burdens that were male to bear % present so severe on landed property. Before sitting down, he would refer to a petition, from an important b•:dy, on the present question. He referred to the Bedford Corporation, the members of which were greatly alarmed at the proposed withdrawal of protection. The lan d of the level was entirely kept i n its present state by artificial draining , p rinci p all y !through the steam engine, and after the expenses of preserving it were met, the returns were so small as only to yield I Is. an . aere. They took this low rent, as there were holies that thei ult imate) the land would be preserved by natural drai nin g , as cour se of things was tending to that Point. If they allowed the Bill to pass, they would be doing that which would, he was Persuaded, inflict a most serious injury on the cultivators of the soil. Still, whatever might be the operation of the Bill, he considered thw measure ought not to b e carr i e d w i t h out an ap peal to the people. He was agai nst any cha n g e o f o pi n ion in the Government leading to Bluth a m the House, until such time as the constituencies being carried by of the empire were appealed to —( Cheers. ) Lord KINN AIRD rose to replr to the i Noble L or d, an d to cth b e e B t i e ll r s upport the Bill as it stood, as he th ought toJiwterei i uldthe benefit of the farmers themselves. Ile au cause he believed its adoption would lead removal protective duties. Noble Lords s h o u ld consider that her of all was a great difference between a pr ot e ctive duty andatdutye for the purpose of raising, a revenue. From twenty y ears , es - perier.ce he felt certain that land co uld not be p rofita bly culti vated unless they could raise thirty b ushels an acre on i t; and if that were done, it would enable them to sell it at a mode rate price. He admitted that some danger might arise fro m the sudden importation of a large quantity of foreign grain, but he did net think it would be so great as apprehended. Tie would mention a fact on this point. A friend of his told him that there was corn now in bond that could not be nld profitably at less than 60s. a quarter. This was wheat that bad been introduced at the early period of the session— ( Hear, bear)—this, therefore, need not alarm them. A Right Pt ev . p,-elate the other night said the reduction of price would be met by a reduction in wages ; but that he (Lord Kinnard) did not thin .k would be the case. He believed it would be the interest of lan'elords to pay good wages to ensure efficient service, and he further thought, with efficient farmers and a proper system of .cultivation, that they could easily compete with foreigners. It the farmers of Scotland by a regular system of cropping, a I'd a skilful system of farming, could, in the f ace o f an a d verse climate, compete with English farmers who had better land h.'t a superior climate, surely, they in England could compete with the foreigner who only raised 10 bush e l s o f w h ea t per a ere, and had to bring it 2 000 miles distance. H e k ne w, that t as far as this country was concerned, that though the measure had t a k en p l ace in was in progress , a rise in rent 3 great number of farms. That was the ease in Scotia tad and England. It was the case even ef the tenants of some Noble Lords then in the House. The great estate agent, Mr. the majority of their Lordsh ignsowphoniawdho must be known to been till recently a thorough-goire: nroteetioniat, and who had toad erenaive ex perience in landed property, stated, at a public meeting a few dais ago, that ho was free and proud to confess that the sliding scale and all other scales had fallen from his eyes—(Laughter) ' —the result of which was that he was now a thorough-going abolitionist.—( Hear, hear.) Being anxious to know en what grounds Mr. Simpson had changed his opinions, he (Lord Kinneird) wrote to him for an explanation. In reply, Mr. Simpson stated that the result of his experience was, that any restriction cm the importation of corn was injurious to the tenant-farmers of this country. Ile (Lord Kinnaird) had al ready quoted an instance in which, instead of rent falling since the determination of the Ministers on this subject, estates were let at considerahly higher rents than before. He believed that the tenant-farmers did care about this Bill. He believed too, that in many instances their fears had been excited by Members of the Legislature who bad advocated the cause of protection. Their Lordships would have themselves to blame if any depreciation of rents were to follow the passing of this measure, and his advice to them was as a landlord that they should not listen to any claims for reduction. He might state that in many instances, however much it might be in accordance with their feelings, they were doing great injury to the farmer by letting land to him under proper value, because when they did so, the farmer, instead of exerting himself to in creme the produce of the land, was willing to rest, and had rested for many years, believing that he was safe with what was called " the protective principle." He should have wished to have gone extensively into this question, but as many of their Lordships were anxious to ad dress the House he had curtailed his observations. In conclu sion he wished to call their Lordships' attention to one point. He thought that whatever might be their feelings with regard to that body tith which he was connected, they at least would give them credit for having remained perfectly quiet; indeed to such an extent had they remained silent at this crisis that some Noble Lords believed that the people in towns bad said that they would not get up an excitement on this subject. ( Hear, near.) He believed that a Noble Lord said the other night that they could not do so.—( Hear, hear.) Now. he (Lord Kinnaird) could assure them, from all the applications to the members of the Anti-Corn-law League, begging of them to move at this moment, that the neople in the towns were anxiously waiting for thepassing of this Bill. The Anti- Corn-law League had, instead of conforming to those repeated applications, thought it more wise, and more respectful to Par liament, and to their Loadships' House, that they should re main quiet, so that they might not be considered to have moved for the purpose of intimidating their Lordships.--( Hear. That might have been said of them had they moved on this question at the present moment. He was glad to know that, although it had been said by Noble Lords that her Majesty's Ministers had been intimidated by the League in bringing forward this measure—( Hear, hear, and laughter from the Protectionist benches)—their Lordships had greatly mistaken the feeling of the country—they greatly mistook the feelings of Scotland, with which he was more intimately connected—because he would say that if this measure were de feated the greatest disappointment would be felt throughout the breadth of the land, and all he would say was, that he hoped that this amendment of the Noble Duke might not be adopted, as it would have the effect of dereating the Bill.—(Hear.) Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared— For the clause For the amendment Majority in favour of the clause 33 The House then resumed, and The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and obtained leave to sii again to-morrow (this day). The House then adjourned at Half-past Eleven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 15. SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY BILL. ADJOURNED DEBATE. Mr. RICE having consented to withdraw his amendment, The Bill was then ordered to be recommitted to the former Committee. NORTH KENT RAILWAY. Mr. RICE then moved that this Bill be also recommitted to tt e former Committee. Mr. ESTCOURT said that this motion was not for the purpose of re-opening the whole question ; it was for the pur pose of considering the propriety or expediency of sanctioning the South-Eastern Company's line. There was no ground for the recommittal of the North Kent. Mr. AGLIONBY said that he dissented from the opinion of the Hon. Member for Oxford. The decision of the House was required, in order that the South-Eastern Company's Bill be referred to the same Committee, to that they might consi der the expediency of sanctioning any one of the alternative lines proposed by the South-Eastern Company. He would put the supposition that the Committee were not anxious to support any of the alternw.ive lines, and then the argument of the Hon. Member for Oxford fell to the ground. If it were inexpedient to support the South-Eastern Company's proje'ts, the Committee ought to have the option of deciding on the merits of another line ; and it would, therefore, be great un fairness if they did not have the opportunity of considering the North Kent. Let the Committee take on themselves the re sponsibility of deciding, and let not the House, in the absence of facts, exclude any portion of the subject of inquiry from them. The Committee could not act fairly to the House, if they were to decide in that House upon what course should be taken. Let them have the whole inquiry referred to them, and then let them take what curse they might choose. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL said, that it was the opinion of half the Committee that the North Kent line was superior to the South Kent line. There was an equal division of opi nion on the subject, and he thought a fair reason had been presented to the House for recommitting the North Kent line. Mr. PROTHEROE had paid the most particular attention to the merits of the two lines since their first appearance in the Committee. The circatristances were unchanged which had influenced him in rejecting the line, which proposed making a tunnel through Greenwich Park, and he was cer tainly opposed to the recommittal of the Bill. Mr. RICE observed that his Hon. Friend must be aware, as the Chairman of the Company, that the difficulty of carry ing out the line arose from a deficiency in the estimates, and not from any difficulty of travelling through Greenwich Park, hut as he thought that, it would not be advisable to proceed further with his motion, he should withdraw it. The motion was accordingly withdrawn. THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 16, 1846. protest by the late Lord Hclland,in 1925, during the Irish in- i tries, ordered prosecutions before the ordinary tribunals, and surrectien, in which that Noble. Lord said he opposed the inea- i the country was restored to a state of tranquillity. Now, with :ore because it was a susperw ion cf the law rather than regard to the outrages its Ireland, those the Noble Lord had prevention of crime ; and, secon dly, because only Snell mentioned to them were by no means of an unusual or extra measures ought to be a d o pt e d as would generally ordinary nature. In the year 1832, being then in office, he tend to cement the uni on between th e two countries.) had to consider the propriety of introducing a very severe Co llie fact was. as admitted by all who have a ddressed the House, ercion Bill for Ireland ; but he confessed that the whole of Ireland was in a s t a t e o f organ i sa tion and struggle he did not agree with all the measures relating between life and the rights of property. It might be true, end to Ireland, which were agreed to by the then Government. he admitted to the fullest ext en t th e s t a te of outrage in that. Indeed, at one time, he was on the point of retiring from office, country; but the question was, how were they to act. These but finding that his late lamented Friend ( Earl Spencer) had outrages had become almo s t i n digenous to the soil. come to the conclusion that remedial and conciliatory measures The people had not been tre a ted properly by the sue- were not sufficient to meet the circumstances of the day, he cessive Governments of thi s country; they had never consented to remain use of the Government. Accordingly a been treated as subjects. With a people thus re. very harsh measure was introduced for the protection of life and Perna (laced to the lowest d e pths o f misery and destitu- and property in Ireland, and for getting rid of the prevalent tion how were they to act? It was not possible fer disturbances, amounting almost to a civil war, which had broke the malignity of human or inhuman beings to support a system out in that country, upon the subject of the tithes. Muiders if you cannot cure that measure was suspended, and in 1835 a more cruel and disastrous than the presentrelations betweenland- and assassinations were then daily taking place, lord arid tenant, which led to such a vast amount of crime and ment sanctioned the passing of the 13111 ; but in the year 1834 • ' mitigated let measure was introduced, which the country, abdicate it ;if you can, in God's name, us - • met with the general approbation misery. The Hon. Member for Cork said, know the remedy. The Right Hon. Gentlemen at the head of the House—indeed it scarcely met with any opposition; but Government de of the country made precisely the same speech in that House he must state that in the previous year of 1833 his Noble Friend in n rin l e B ipts to Ireland which thirty-two years ago. Ile had referred to that speech, and he Lord Althorp introduced several measures of conciliation. He believed the one speech might be taken for the other, introduced a measure for the abolition of Church tests—a mea with the exception of the names, the dates, and sure for the improvement of juries —a measure for assimilating de not a(t,htaerecdortphoeriartiioantesnotf4,reeltanarlp—plyainergl, introduced During to al remove th the periodgr ie v- since of the tenure of land — a grievance which the Right Hon, were more congenial to the feelings and affections of the great places sgl e measure mentionedhad beenn Baronet stated was the cause of these outrages.—( Hear, hear.) body of the people. The consequence was, confidence was re- The present measure was nothing more than a temporary posed in the Ministry, and the power s o f a mitigated Coercion measure—it contained nothing better than the old provisions. Bill were intrusted in their hands. That confidence, he be lie gave the Govenment credit for what they had done, and 'levet], was not violated, for, from a communication which he fir as far as they had gone; they had not, however, gone far had received from his Noble Friend the Marquis of Normanby enough. He believed that a defeat of this last expiring at- he found that the Bid was never put into c peration. He had tempt at misguided legislation would tend to support the asked his Noble Friend whether the knowledge of such a power Right Hon. Baronet in the course which he thought he ( Sir being in the hands of the Government had had the effect of de- R. Peel) was anxious to pursue in his government of Ireland. terring crime ; and his Noble Friend had told him that he thought It was high time that a new system should be tried. The it had not, for the existence of the power was soon forgotten in past system of legislation had produced an intense hatred in Ireland. The Bill continued in force from 1835 to 140, the minds of the people of Ireland against, the Administration. when Government determined it should not be continued. It He recognised in the present Bill the old system of terrorism, was said with regard to this Bill, that placing such a power and it would not do to act upon that principle any longer. as that which the present Bill gave in the hands of the Go- The system was condemned by all parties. The Hen. Mum- vernment, would have the effect of preventing crime, but if the ber, who moved the amendment, had as little sympathy with Bill possessed any advantage of this sort, it was lost by the the murderers and assassins as any member of her Majesty's delay which had taken place. Now, with regard to the state Government. He (Sir W. Somerville) and the other Irish of c rime in Ireland, he thought in comparing crime with Members opposed this measure, because they could not reconcile crime, it was well to take the whole crime of Ireland with their consciences such restrictions as their own consti- and compare one year with another. The number tuency would not permit. of homicides in 1832, before the introduction of Mr. COLQUHOUN said that if he felt a perfect confi- what was called the Coercion Bill, was 242 dence in the Government he could not sati-fy himself to vote in 1837, 230 ; in 1840, 125; and in 1542, two years after the for such an unconstitutional measure as the present. If the Act had expired, 180. The number of charges for firing Noble Lord, the Member for the City of London, were to houses in 1832 was 328 ; in 1837, 91 ; in 1842, 74 ; in 1845, offer him such a Bill he would say to him tirst prove your case 78. 'file number relating to the crime of attacking houses —( Hear, hear)--end thereby forward your measure with all was, in 1832, 723 ; in 1837, 606 ; in 1840, 229 ; in 1842, possible speed. The Noble Member for King's Lyun said :337 ; in 1845, 482. The conspiracies to murder were, in there was a decrease of crime, therefore the case broke down. 1842, 24; in 1845, 8. With regard to assaults with intent to He could not agree with his Noble Friend ; he thought the murder, in 1e42, 3 ; in 1845, 2. He thought it was plain proof s of the Government of the existence of outrages were from this, that there had been no very great increase in crime overwhelming, and also the necessity of bringing forward some in Ireland between the years 1842 and 1845 ; but the Right measure for the suppression of these outrages. Magistrates of Hon. Bart. the Secretary for the Home Department men all creeds and classes had stated the difficulty of obtaining tioned five counties where be said there had been a great in evidence and conviction of the assassin. He would say intro- crease in crime during the past year, as compared with former duce any measure calculated to suppress these things. Sup- years. Now the Right Hon. Bart. the First Minister of the posing it. were desirable to increase the number of Irish Mem- Crown made an admission on this part of the subject which bers to 100, the case of the peasant and the people of Ireland told greatly against the Bill. The Ri g ht H on. G ent l eman stated would be in an alarming condition. H e t h ought there hail tort crime had increased in Tipperary, Limerick, Clare, been a most culpable delay in bringing forward this and Roscommon ; but with regard to Leitrim, measure ever since it came into that House. He it hail decreased. The total number of crimes being would not enter into the details of the progress in 1845, 804 ; and for the first five months in 1846, of the Bill through the House of Lords. If the only 106. The Right Honourable Baronet attributed this Government had passed the Bill through the Lords, and filling off to increased vigilance of the constabulary force, and proceeded with it with half the earnestne ss w i t h w h ich they the stipendiary magistrates, and to the fact that an overwhelm forced the Corn Bill, the Protection to Life Bill would now ins military force was stationed in that country. Why, here have been the law of the land. He agreed with the Right was a complete answer to the whole case of the Governme n t, Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford, that th e Bill , as it at an answer which fully showed that a remedy could be found in present stood, was perfetly inadequate to meet the exigency in the existing and ordinary law of the country.—( Hear, hear.) Ireland. He objected to the want of power contained in the Rut, he said, he had inquired into the operation of this law, provisions of the Bill. He also agreed with the Hon. Member had made inquiries amongst persons familiar with its opera for Belfast, that it was unwise to pass a Coercion Bill that tion, and he had asked in what manner this law, when a would not have the effect of repressing crime, or of preventing district was proclaimed, was put in force in any county of Ire the taking away of life. If the two clauses which alone gave laud. He was told that constables took many persons who were life to the Bill were struck out, he should certainly object to it. out at night, that these persons were put upon their He begged to ask the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the trial, that their excuse was net taken, and their friends had no Government, whether, to gratify Hon. Members opposite, it weight as witnesses. If these persons had previously borne a was his intention to strike out in Committee these two clauses, good character, they were not subjected to punishment, but it or whether he was prepared to maintain in all their integrity they belonged to a suspected class, sentence of imprisonment the provisions of the Bill ? If the Right Hon Gentleman de- was passed upon them. But then it might have been trans (dined to answer the question, he (Mr. Colquhoun) having no portation. The House would observe what a discretion they confidence in the intentions of Government, from past expe- allowed.—( Hear, hear.) In one of the cases which he had rience, should certairly vote against the second reading of the mentioned, the offence as created by law, was one of the most Bill. The Hon. Member then alluded to the meeting at Lord ordinary acts of men—the offence was nothing more than tra- John Russell's house, in Chesham-place, which had become yelling on the Queen's highway ; yet for this offence a wan notorious during the last few months for political assemblies. might be brought into the presence of a ude and jur, and Looking at the strange assortment of Hon. Members, having diffe- if circumstances appeared wisp' • sentence of transportation suspicious rent political views, at those meetings, he must say that the Noble might be passed upon him. He said that to such a measure Lord the Member for London would have a difficulty in deal- Parliament would rightly refuse to give its sanetion.—( Hear, tag with Ireland. The Noble Lord would have a strange hear.) But there were other considerations in connexion with team to drive—such restive horses, and such kicking and cur- this Bill which very much demanded the attention of the vetting amongst them. He had ruled them before, and past House. Whenever Bills of this kind were brought before experience must have told him the difficulty of managing the' House, it had been always thought right to con them. If they had not had the corn measure this year they sider what were the grievances of Ireland, and in would have had a grand educational scheme, which, like the what manner these grievances might have been the other popul a r m e asures, would have been filched from the cause of these offences.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, the Noble Lord the Member for London. The course that the late Secretary for Ireland (Earl St. Germans), in proposing Right Ho n . B arone t had p urs ued was for him at the end of the this Bill, denied that the majority of these offences were con session to give som e indistinct hints of the course he meant netted with agrarian considerations. But he (Lord John to pursue, an d h e wen t f o rth to the world as the liberal Russell), after having consulted all the evidence laid before the Minister, the great spi r it of the age. At the beginning of the House, and the report made by Lord Devon's Commission, was session he promulgated his liberal opinions as a concession to convinced that the majority of these outrages were agrarian, the principles of Hon. Gentlemen opposite. He wanted to and connected with land, arising out of the social habits of the see the Noble Lord in power, not from any confidence in his people in reference to land. The Noble Lnrd then quoted the administration, but that it would give them (the Protec- opinions of Mr. Barrington, Major Shaw Kennedy, and Cap tionists) the opportunity, perhsps, of recovering themselves, tats Warburton, that the majority of the outrages in Ireland and of truly arpealing, to the people of England on the prin- were agrarian. Here then, he said, were magistrates and espies they maintained. He should rejoice at having an oppor- farmers, and who had been so in that country for many years, tunity of recording his vote against her Majesty's Ministers on who had given it as their opinion that alterations of the farms a want of confidence. He required a pledge from the Govern- affected the existence, and brought on starvation upon the pea ment that the Bill should he maintained unmutilated, other- sentry ; and, therefore, he considered that eviction from land wise he should vote against the second reading. was the cause of the outrages in Ireland. He said then, that Colonel SIBTHORP said the Hon. Member re- on these grounds, if it was right to introduce measures of re quired a pledge front the Government ; he required none. pression beyond the ordinary powers of the law, it would have He had made up his mind to the performance of his been right, at the same time, to introduce other measures, by duty, and he should fearlessly perform it. Ile was never ac- which the means of existence would have been in customed to flatter any man, but he could not help recording creased, and brought within the reach of the peasant. his admiration for the Noble Lord the Member for King's He knew that the Noble Lord (Earl of Lincoln) had intrc- Lynn. What was the reply of the :Right Hon. Baronet—he duced measures of au important character, within these three would not call him his Right Hon. Friend—to that speech ? days, but he thought that these measures ought to have b een It was most weak and vain. It had been his painful d u ty t o i ntro duced at the same time with this measure. After hearing pass much of his time in Ireland. During the whole period, he only the Noble Lord's annunciation of the Bill, it might, per had never received one unkind feeling or expression from any haps, be difficult to say whether they would be fit for the pur class in the sister kingdom. He would not support a pose. Another measure, it was true, had been proposed for measure which in his opinion emanated from a Whig Ireland by an Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Poulett Scrop-a), but he Government. He should feel it his duty to oppose the (Lord J. Russell) confessed that he did not. expect that measure measure. The policy of the Right Horn Gentleman was to would remedy the ills of Ireland, but instead would tend to pass the Corn Bill, and then, if expedient, to appeal to the fix them deeper in their place. Another measure proposed for country. Petitions had been signed by 250,000 persons against the amelioration of Ireland was the cultivation of waste the Bill, and their rejection of the measure ought to be attended lands. He thought that the cultivation of waste to. He could place confidence in neither the Hon. Gentle- and outlying lands would certainly abate the competition for man's opponents, nor in the present Government, for men who land, and would in so much tend to abate the crimes which had been caught twice in a trap ought never to be allowed to were being committed. Now, he had already stated, in giving get out of it. He had no confidence in their wish for the wel- his consent to the second reading of this Bill, that he had obe fare of the country, and he should feel it his duty, when a mea- jections to it. He objected to that clause which made it en sure more efficient was brought forward, to vote for it ; but to minal for a man to be out between sunset and sunrise. But if get rid of the present Government, which was the best measure this clause were t a k en ou t o f t h e Bill , h e did not see b ut that he could promote at the present time, he should join certainly it would cease to exist—it would cease to be a Coercion Bill for with the Noble Lord, and vote against the second reading, of Ireland. There was an Act passed by the other House of the proposed atrocious measure. Parliament, imposing fines on certain classes of the people; Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he hail paid particular at- and the Whiteboys' Act contained the same clauses. tention to the mass of Parliamentary evidence which had been Some such clauses might perhaps have been intro laid down by his friend the Member for the city of Oxford. duced into this Bill, but certainly not such as he The Hon. Member was of opinion that if a measure was intro- had seen in the A c t p asse d b y th e ot h er H ouse o f P ar li ament. duced on the resp ons ibili ty of her Majesty's Government for the If they should proceed to make the people pay for the out protection of life in Ireland, that being the assumption on the rages done in the country, if they set about collecting in the lace of the Bill, but it did not much matter what might be the small sums of money for such a purpose, they would most likely intention of the Bill, still it was their duty, the Bill having raise such an opposition that they would require to send out been referred to that House to be deliberated on, to give their the military to exact the two-pences and three-pences from the assent to that Bill. To that doctrine he (Lord J. Russell) people, to pay for the outrages that had burst out. But he could by no means assent. He could understand that upon a might be asked, why, if he objected to the Bill, he had con motion to bring in a Bill, or in the first bringing up of a Bill tented to the first reading. He said, if he had stated his ob from the House of Lords, that so much was due to her Majesty's jections to the Bill, and said that he would not consent to the Government that it might be riaht to consent to the in- first reading of the Bill, it would have been said that it was a troduction of the Bill, in ordei: - that it might be fully most violent opposition, that he should not allow a Bill and freely discussed, but that the law-makers of to come into that Honey for the protectiou of life in Ireland. the country were not to consider what those laws were— No, he had not done so, but he had stated that they were not to consider the effect of those measures, Isis objections to the Bill—objections which went to the foun but blindly consent to them —was a proposition which seemed to dation of the Bill. On the first day when it was fixed to him so contrary to all his notions of Parliamentary duties that come on with the orders of the day, he had stated that, he it was impossible for him to countenance that doctrine in any would oppose it. Other grounds of opposition had been way. In commencing a review of the proposed measure, he taken. It was said by the Noble Lord (Lord G. Bentinck) on was tempted to take th.e course in objecting to it which was a former night, and it had been reiterated by an Hon. Gen usually adopted by a Minister of the Crown when presenting a tleman to-night, that they had no confidence in the Govern- Bill for their consideration. A Minister of the Crown, when vernment, and could not give their support to an unconstitu about to propose any measure of great importance, generally tional measure. This was a Parliamentary ground for op ushered it in by quoting some paragraph affecting the welfare of position. But, he confessed that, had he thounht this Bill the country from the speech from the Throne which had been calculated to meet the necessities of the case, and that these ne delivered at the opening of Parliament. In the present cave cessities required such a Bill, he had no want of confidence he did not think that her Majesty's Ministers could make a in her Majesty's Ministers and in their own measures, in re similar application, because he thought that the Queen's speech spect to Ireland, and therefore he would not have opposed it. wae a strong argument against the proposed measure. He r He said it would be no novelty if he bad no confidence in her Majesty, i n th a t speec h , called attention to t h e frequent Majesty ' s Government ; for several years he had thought acts of outrage and assassination committed in Ireland, for himself, and bad brought out his own independent mea and wished to know whether any measure could not be devised sures. The practical working of the policy which had been to prevent those outrages, and to bring to justice the perpetra- employed on either side showed results, and Government t etical tors of them. A delay of five months, after such an announce- commentaries, proving that her Majesty'sheerand counter rnm c n hee w r e s7 ment from the Throne, ensued before any measures were mistaken, and they were rigbt.— (C ', which they had tir taken.—(Hear, hear.) Her Majesty's Ministers had not suffi- These results showed that ent the had co n u e r N s v e a tly adopted P was cient confidence in the measures they had prepared, or, as it sued and the Goyernm what had been "' said of temt course had been said, the press of public business had prevented them right, notwithstanding Ministers were out of office. proceeding with those measures. There were two courses when her Majesty's hpresent of great increase in population to open, en • her of which it would have been competent for her Ma- He attempted . t e ground lax the restrictive measures. Upon all these measures the jesty's Ministers to have edopted, and would have been per- re . dchangedThey had adopted their • • of the Government and Ministers had their course. fectly compatible with the dignity that House. One course would have been to have introduced measures. They had gone far beyond what they proposed in Hegavethem every credit for for the purpose of introducing the impor- the admission of foreign corn. with a temporary measure some sure which they had acted. It was some tation of food, and also to have introduced a temporary mea- the motives upon sure for the protection of life • in Ireland, thus leaving the g r eat regret that Hon. Members doing their duty should have been measure of the corn-laws in its native integrity open to the un- so long the objects of slander and calumny as they had been. fettered and dispassionate consideration of that blouse. The Secretary of State for the Home Department accused With respect to the measure , he was bound to consider the them when going out of being like pirates who set fire to the It appeared that havinggot • now, possession which were urged in favour of the Bill. The amount ship.—(Cheers.) grounds of crime had lived upon the stores which th e y h a d consider: he was bound to consider in what manner Minis- left them—(Cheers) — guarded themselves by the charity which to tern had arrived at that amount of crime ; he was bound to they deposited in the cabin—steering by the compass they had consider whether the present measure did afford that remedy left on the deck. It would hardly have been too much if they which was likely to increase protection to life and property ; had expressed some regret that they have been exposed and, lastly, whether measures of a different character would not to such charges before the country, with promoting a ten have removed the cause of the alleged insecurity of life. But dency to set up a Popish Government in the country, and the Noble Lord who holds the office of Secretary for Ireland promoting measures tending to destroy the agricultural in introduced this Bill in a speech which he owned gave him con- terests of the country. He had felt the poignancy of these siderable embarrassment. In the early period of the session charges. It would have been little more than justice to have they were told of dreadful murders—of murders committed in said that they were not deserving of these attacks. The Hon. the open day; and he had thought that the speech of the Noble Member for Newcastle spoke" of measures, which he said, he Earl would have given them some details of those outrages : (Lord John Russell) was happy to promote. He thought but the crimes the Noble Earl mentioned were of an ordinary he was mistaken as to the character of the measures. character, nor could he gather from the statement of the Noble To preserve the institutions of the country, the Earl that they were different to, or greater in amount, than best course to pursue was to reform. The Hon. Ge n tl eman those which had b e en committed for several years past. thought it rash that Manchester, Leeds, and all the great But the Noble Earl put it to him whether, towns, should be represented in that House —that it was a having supported a similar measure in 1845, brought serious innovation. Was it so ? Would it not hare been forward under similar circumstances to those of the better to have carried these measures? Would it not b present day, he could refuse his assent to the Bill now before conservative if, instead of carrying this Bill, th • turnede more the House. He would answer that appeal at once. It was no attention to the grievances of Ireland e serious reason because an Hon. Member had supported a measure to consider, by some such —the social grievances which went beyond the constitution at one period of his life, 1 - :e and securing the lives measure as cultivating the wastes' ought to support it at another; but the Noble Lord having was the case, then was and property of the people? If this made this appeal to him, he must trouble the House with a resort to riot always the most conservative to measures of coercion, and delay measures of reform. He review of his conduct with regard to measures of this descrip- wished to preserve the institutions of the co un t ry , an d h e s h ou ld tion. Soon after he en t ere d P ar li ament in 1817, indeed in wish to cleanse them in some degree from their abuses. With the year 1819, a measure was brought forward to suspend re gard the to Ireland, the Noble Lord, the Member for Lynn, Habeas Corpus Act, and what was called the " Six Acts" could not vote for the present measure, because he had no was introduced to remedy the disturbances which then pre. confidence in her Majesty's veiled in the manufacturing districts. Foll • the • 'the other Ministers. Some Hon. Members Following opinions on of the political party to which he belonged, he voted in support had an overwhelming confidence in the commercial policy of of the measure. Soon after he came into office, a disturbance the Minister. What was the state of the case ? There was a of a similar character, accompanied by declamations of the large party in * Ireland native Par same democratic character, broke out in the country, but after Hai ent eeuldd who thought nothing but t a redress of their prom e proper measures for thee ooks duo and careful examination he came to the conclusion grievances— to violence, a party which excited to violenc i e, , l that it was better not to make any alteration in as its means f said the Noble the constitutional law of the country, and he came Lord, andseparation as its itendwas for the benefit of you pass this Bill because, down to that House to ask for an increased military and eon- Ireland case was made and that you considered a stabulary force. He recollected that the Right Hon. Baronet out for the measure - sa y to Ireland, we have endea the First Lord of tho Treasury acquiesced in the proposal he voured to legislate t:cycoourdeiann to our consciences, but if you say made, and with this increased force, and with the aid of pro- any thing else to them—if you say we thought it a bad measure, secutions under the ordinary law, the country was restored to nevertheless we allowed it to pass because there were measures a state of tranquillity. After the Right. Hon. Baronet the more for the benefit of England, going along with it. What First Lord of the Treasury came into office, a disturbance, an effect will this have upon the people of Ireland. They will in the manufacturing• very similar in its nature , occurred des- say, " You have oppressed us by your laws to such an extent triete—perhaps it was of a still more alarming character—and that if we are f oun d l o oking after a stray cow, or visiting an theßight Hon. Baron e t the Secretar y of State for the Home afflicted p aren t a few mi les off, after the hour of sunset, we ar e Department pursued the course lie H And you who vote for this measure hadtlone b e f ore hi m. He liable to p un i s hment." be sent down an increased military force to the disturbed dis- cause other measures of a commercial nature go along with it, will say to them, you are punished, not for the security of life, but because other Government measures were passing through Parliament at the same time; and for the sake of these measures it is that these restrictions are placed upon you. In answer to this, the people of Ireland will turn round and, in a tone of triumph, exclaim, " Teil us, is the Parliament com posed of English and of Scotch Members fit to legislate for Ireland ?" Will they (continued the Noble Lord) not seek for a domestic Legislature? Will they not use their utmost endeavours to obtain a repeal of the union? What answer would there be to such an appeal ? The unanimous voice of a generous count] y would join in the declaration, that we have not justice, that we are determined to obtain justice, and, as it is now proved to us that that justice is not to be obtained from an English Parliament, we are determined to have a Legislature which will represent our feelings and our interests. Beware (said the Noble Lord) in giving such arguments as these, if you wish, as I do most heartily, to maintain and to improve the union, and make it a source of happiness and bles sing to the people of Ireland, as well as a source of increased strength to the ties of kindness and good feeling to Ireland, beware, lest you in any way weaken the link which Lind the two countries.—(Hear, bear.) Do not set so far apart the governors and the governed. Do not let the people of Ireland believe that you have no sympathy with their feeli ngs , an d no care for their wants, that you are intent only upon oth er measures in w hi ch they have no part. I say, if you are persuaded that this measure Wright pass its second reading, and pass it through Committee; but if you are not so persuaded give no sanction to it. Let it at once be rejected; let it not be said that such was your conduct, and such your maxim with reference to this measure. The consequence of passing such a measure would not be temporary , it would not be repaired i n a year, or five years;or)ten sears. lt would be an irrevocabl e loss.—(Loud cheering. Mr. B. DISRAELI—If the Noble Lord had felt kee n ly the unjust atta c k o f t h ose who supplanted him in power, th e Noble Lord had a t l east t hi s consolation —he had received a noble s revenge.—( Chee rs .) A n d he was sure that re e c a e c i pupils rose b e f ore hi m , b efore that red box—(Laughter)—toe' whose autho r ity th ey succeeded, the Noble Lod,h was sure, must have felt, although they had not yet received that expression of spontaneous feeling which his generous svmpathising character expected— ( Cheers)—the Noble Lord must have been receiving from those Right Hon. Gentlemen and Noble Lords opposite ample compensation for the injustice which he is nationally and universally aeknovv !edged to have suffered from their hands.—(Cheers.) The 1 Noble Lord had treated them that night with the eloquence that was habitual to him whenever he touched upon the affairs of Ireland. He (Mr. Disraeli) was one of those who regretted, and would not refrain from the expression of his regret, that the fate of Ministers should be supposed to de pend, after all that had occurred this session, upon an Irish subject. It was not, however, to any Honourable Gentle man who sat on the benches near him that this circum stance had occurred. They had shown themselves ready upon the earliest occasion to discuss the question ; and he thought, that whatever might have been the policy of the Go vernment upon other questions—however irritating he might say that it had been to the outraged feelings of many Hon. Members upon that side of the House, still he thought that, from the first and earliest occasion, they had been ready to dis cuss the matter. It was impossible for the House to forget the circumstances under which this measure had been brought forward. It was an unconstitutional measure, framed for a country which required to be treated with consideration and delicacy. He would remind the House of the manner in which the subject was first brought before their considera tion. The measure was then brought before the consideration of Hon. Members—it was recommended to them on account of its temporary character—on account of the exigen ties which called it into being, and then studiouslyconcealed from their notice till it was at length almost forgotten. He had no wish to speak of h s own feelings upon the subject more than was actually necessary, in order to defend his individual vote which he should give upon this measure. If he saw the present measure recommend e d by Irish Members, or a majoity upon whatever side of the House they might it, he should come to the consideration of the question with feelings different to those which he should have embraced when he found all the Irish Members denouncing the measure as futile.—( Hear.) This was not the first measure of the sort which had been forced upon Ireland. He was not, however, prepared to say that occasions might not yet arrive when extraordinary powers would be required by the Legislature of the United Kingdom. If it be true with reference to the state of Ireland—as he be lieved it was admitted to be true by all parties with reference to the state of England, namely, that while they had been dis cussing the principal and political measures of England—the Constitution of the people of Ireland had been neglected. He would not weary the House with the memoranda which he could in a moment give to them. This Coercion Bill was pro posed on the 22d of January ; it was ordered to be printed on the 16th of March ; it was read a first time on the Ist of May, and ordered to be read a second time in June. This was the temporary measure which the Government seemed to make eternal. Let them look at the early adjournments of the House while this measure was under discussion, and they would see the importance attached to this measure. On the 20th of April there was no House, and on other days other measures were taken before the Coercion Bill, although it was first on the order of the day. It was evident that there had not been an earnest, even if there were a serious, intention on the part of Government to bring forward this measure. He could call the statistics in this measure the statistics of shuffling.—(Hear, hear.) It was net his intention to enter into the merits of the Bill itself, although be could point out many details; but one circumstance wa s very remar k a bl e, v i z., that the Bill of her Majesty's Ministers did not apply—( Hear, hear)—to the dis turbances which had been brought forward by the Secretary for , the Home Department. It was very satisfactory to find at the present moment that there were any circumstances of a kindly feeling in Ireland, even in the wilds of Munster, though it was only with regard to the introduction of Indian maize. It was unfortunate that this intelligence, which was communicated through a very influential organ—which was generally favour- i able to her 'Majesty's NI inisters,although not personally favou ra bl e i to her Majesty's Ministers themselves—he meant the Time was at the sane time accompanied by a report in the same journal of a mutiny in Limerick gaol in consequence of the substitution of Indian Maize for their ordinary food.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) There never was any individual who had acted more fairly to any Government than the Noble Lord near him (Lord G. Bentinck). There never was any indivi dual who had given a more full and fair intimation of the course which he and his friends intended to pursue than the. Noble Lord, and he could not therefore admit that any argu ment against the consistency of the Noble Lord was proved, for no person could deny that the Noble Lord had fulfilled his engagement in a just and complete spirit. He was not pre pared to admit that the accusation brought forward against the Nob le Lord with regard to the Factory Bill was at all better founded. Two years ago, when that measure was brought for ward, the Noble Lord had voted for the Government measure, but did that preclude the Noble Lord from voting for the mea sure of another after that lapse of time? This was called by her Majesty's Government inconsistency.—(Laughter. ) The Right Hon. Gentleman said—l have changed my policy, but are you, the Member for Lynn, the person to reproach me ? You, who changed on a Coercion Bill—who voted for a first reading, when you did not intend to vote for a second; and who have changed your opinion on the Factory Bill. The Noble Lord had violated no confidence, nor betrayed any trust.--(Hear, hear.) It could not be said that the Noble Lord got into Parliament by promising to vote differently for the Factory Bill. It could not be said that the Noble Lord, with practised duplicity, supplanted a candidate on the hust ings, by professing opinions; which he meant to oppose when he got into Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had not turned the Noble Lord (the Member for London) and his Friends out of office, for attempting to carry a measure, which they were now themselves promoting.—( Hear, hear.) This was the charge they brought against her Majesty's Ministers. They were not to be met when they made these charges by the taunt of having changed their opinion on the Factory Bill. The quarrel is great and national, not a miserable individual squabble between individual Members of Parliament ; and they were riot to be answered by a Secretary of State or a First Lord of the Treasury saying, " Don't remind us of our pledges, we have discarded them long ago; the electors who sent us to Parlia ment, and by their confidence made us Ministers of the Crown, we can lead and direct just as we please." But he (Mr. Disraeli) would tell the Right Hon. Baronet— Tu oblitus es, sed meminentur omnes, Afeminit fides." He would give the House an instance from the speech of the Right Honourable Gentleman of the con spiracy practising against the Parliament of England, and if he or any of his friends could explain them, he would not only be glad, but surprised. It was used when the Right Hon. Gentleman was vindicating himself and his principles, in that high-flying tone which he so well knew how to assume when occasion required—( Laughter.) He wanted that an swered—he asked it before, he asked it again and again, and the Right Hon. Gentleman called it bandying personality.— ( Hear, hear, and cheers.) But a few weeks afterwards, how ever, the Right Hon. Gentleman informed the House that he was going to explain the whole circumstance. He (Mr. Disraeli) was sitting opposite to him, and was listening atten tively to evety syllable that fell from his lips—he could have said nothing that could have escaped his observation. Twice he told them, and dazzled the eyes and ears of all, that he was about to give an explanation. Instead, however, of doing so he read some confidential communication, which had no refe rence to the subject in question. That explanation he had never given, and that they required.—(Hear, and cheers.) Why he (Mr. Disraeli) reminded the House of this was in consequence of the observation made a few nights ago at the conclusion of the Right Hon. Gentleman's speech, when he said that "the accusation of his (Sir R. Peel) wishing to oust the Noble Lord (J. Russell) from settling that question, was the foulest calumny which the most vindictive imagination ever dictated to a virulent tongue."—(Tremendous cheers.) He who described this as the most vindictive calumny, was describing the conduct which he himself practised.—( Great cheering.) He ventured to allude to this, in order to explain the attack which he made on the Noble Lord with regard to his political consistency.—(Cheers.) As for consistency he (Mr. Disraeli) thought that the Noble Lord might be ready at any time to put it against that of the Right Hon. Gentle men.—(Tremendous cheers.) But he (Mr. Disraeli) did not wish the constitutional principl es o f the country to be left to political squabbles.—(Cheers. ) The Right Hon. Gentleman, in order to put an end to the am bition of the Noble Lord, made an o th er attack upon him. He said that the Noble Lord had assumed a license in debate which exceeded its legitimate bounds ; and the . Secretary -at- War also admonished the Noble Lord, and reminded the House that they had been addressed by him in la nguage w hi c h had never been used t o th em before, and which, he trusted, would never be used to them again. It appeared that the Noble Lord used strong language , and his having addressed them as Janissaries had excited t heir strop indignati on He (31r. Disraeli) saw th a t t h e S peaker did n ot in interfere on ' th a t occa sion ; and wh en h e saw that men, the meminent of their time, had also used stong language in that House, he was not surprised that the Right Hon. Gentleman did not interfere. He had t o regret t h at t h e gentleman o f this new generation would f did not app ear t o k now th e hi s tory of their timei the speech He take th e lib er t y , h owever , o f qu oting a passag e fr om of a Gentleman, who was much admired by the Noble Lord, the Member for London ; and as these were mealy-mouthed times, it would be well to know how Ministers and the op ponents of Ministers occasiona lly expressed themselves, Th e Hon Gent. here read an e xt r act from a speech of Mr. F ox on the Indian Bill, in which that gentleman implored them, " for God's sake, not to triumph . by an infamous string of b e d- c h am b er Janissaries;" and aga in, in anot her pa.sage, in refer ence t o the opposition of his opponents, lie designated it as the "work of the Pretorian Guards." Bu rke also made use o f th e s trongest langua ge h in reference to IS opponent s . O n one occasion he said that " the whole compass of language did•not afford terms sufficiently adequate to describe the contempt with which he regarded them." In another place he said that their conduct " reduced them to the level of the meanest and basest of the species." And then came the Secretary- at- War, and told them of lan( 7 , , uage that had never been used in Parliament before, and which he hoped would never be used again. He (Mr. D.) would stronly recommend him to get Fox's speeches, and to study them day and night, and he would promise him that if he did his knowledge of Parliamentary lan guage would be improved, and he would find that his nervous and masculine eloquence would not suffer by the perusal. He confessed that it was one to which he could not allude without unaffected pain.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) It was very possible for Gentlemen to treat with derision the memory of a great man ; but he confessed that whatever might be his feelings on the conduct of any individual who had been a dis tinguished citizen in this country, and particularly an illustious Member of that Senate—if he had left them for ever he could not have received an allusion to the subject with the miserable derision which he had just ezpetienced.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) It seemed that after his Noble Friend the other S U N ___.... 7„.:/7,,.t:..,_,,...t.'5,,6)) night had used that language, whit tfltatigh-,Parlial.-' i and authorised by the greatest author lea,:itPitet°,,,,. '''',,,,,..,..' '4l their minds, and te astound the Secr 9tt- 'ar 10 1 , g,,, ,_,......-., ‘ Felled by no common warmth, made tioe---alltialo whae', i'7l touched a secret sore. The Noble Lo e.llll*lgu'" of 'OR' I :...upheeris,,arid to so ainnyhips e t p t r y ese o n ff c e e nc b e eca o u n se th h u wo k rat ' ' tali - r--: Member fur Lynn, if he badany characteristih t t it was the total absence of affectation and pretence. The Noble Lord had never forced himself there into the place which he occupied. He was thrust against his will into the position which he occupied. He had always said that he had not much skill—that he was not a statesman, and asked them why he could not get somebody else —that he was bred a soldier and never aspired to more than the reputation of being a high spirited matiand a gentleman. That was the character of the Noble Lord, and he believed that he had obtained his limited wish. He did not know his Own powers—he (Mr. Disraeli) thought he had great abilities. There were dozens of such men, but the fact was that the Noble Lord had no am bition. Any one that knew him intimately, knew that the idea of raising himself with the State had never entered into his head.-_( Hear, hear.) It was once the happiness of the Noble Lord, and it was still his pride, to have filled the humblest station of the political career near a great Minister ; and from that period he had not wished to occupy any office however exalted, and e-en the Right Honourable Ba ronet admitted, that as regarded the Noble Lord, he was a consistent, but a pure and disinterested supporter. The Noble. Lord might have expressed himself with unust.al warmth and vigour, for, without any prete n ti on to oratory, be spoke 1 from the heart. He was not sere that the racy vigour of his brave honesty An How. MEmaza (on the Oppo - ition title of the House) — Yes ; the racy vigour suits the stable mind.—(Laughter.) Mr. DISRAELI—Yes ; he was not sure that this brave i honesty is not worth all that modern eloquence with which we pompous plausibility an d so l emn adroitness— h a ) l that - 1 all stale sophistries—(Olt,N oh,— that damnable iteration of and cold common-place which are held out to us as models of eloquence._ (Oh, oh, and loud laughter.) The Noble Lord, speaking with earnestness, and remembering his position—the only Position in public life he ever aspired to—the humble Position which a political career could offer to a great Minister and bound to him by the nearest and dearest ties, the Noble Lord said the Right Hon. Gentleman had hunted to death Mr. Canning. The Noble Lord said that, in 1829 the Right Hon. Gentleman admitted. or rather had announced, that in 1825 he had informed Lord Liverpool what was his opinion with regard to the Catholic q u e s o t io g n e . r plo{sesib(it,hteoßraisgihstt their claims, c G la e im nt s l , em an an d ) ev h e a:l if s t a h id ey it co w u a ld s only besettled by hi s l eaving o ffi ce ; he was P no ln that sacrifice t o hi mse l f. The Noble Lord, rereparembdetriongmathkee conduct of that Right H on. Gentleman, in 182: e to Mr. Can ning, and remembering the effect of the conduct of the Ri g ht Hun. Gentleman on th e career and probably or. the life of that statesman, and taking the position laid down by the Right Honourable Gentleman himself that it was base in a Minister to conceal his opinion, asked him how it was in 1825, when he changed his opinion on the Catholic question in the year 1827, having announced that change at so late a period after he had formed his opinions. The reason of that change was given by the explanation with regard to the cause of severance with Mr. Canning, and never would be forgotten in that House. The Right Honourable Gentleman had made an answer which he would not reca pitulate—not from any desire of being unfair, but because it was fresh in the recollection of every one who listened to it. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that, in the year 1825. he did of course, deny his communication with Lord Liverpool ; and he had said that, in 1829, when he announced that communi cation, he announced nothing more than he announced in 1827, in the presence of Mr. Canning himself. It was a remarkable circumstance, as the House would recollect. The Noble Lord had accused the Right Honourable Baronet of having, in 1829 acknowledged, or rather announced, the change of his opinion on the Catholic question in 1825, that announcement being made in a speech of 1829. The Right Hon. Gentleman never read that speech—the Right Hon. Gentleman had read the speech which he made in 1827, in the presence of Mr. Canning. It was remarkable that the Right Ikon. Gentleman never referred to the speech on which the Noble Lord alleged the great accusation then before the House. The position of the Right Hon. Gentleman was that in 1829 he only stated in that House what in 1827 he stated he had urged in his communication to Lord L;verpool. in the presence of Mr. Canning. He would w i s h to read to the H ouse t h at speech of 182.9, where the allegation of this great omission was contained. The Right Hon. Baronet referred Hon. Gentlemen to the speech of 1829, but he never read it, and, therefore, he (Mr. Dis raeli) would read to the House what took place in 1827. It was but due to the Right Hon. Gentleman to open that pas sage in Hansard, as the question was too interesting and too important to be passed in silence. The Right Hon. Gentleman said, " As far as my own course in this question is concerned." Mr. R. YORKE—Which Right Hon. Gentleman ? ( Loud cries of " Order.") Mr. DISRAELI proceeded to quote :—" As far as my own course is concerned, it is the same which I have always held in my mind since 1825, when he was principal Minister, Tend found myself in a minni ity on this question.. When I saw the number arrayed against me, I found my own position unten able. When I found I was left in a minority do this ques tion, I wished to be relieved from the responsibilities and the duties of office, and in consequence of the decision given against me in that House, I wished to be relieved from that office." He was ready to admit that it appeared that the Right Hot, Gentleman used the same language in 1827, nor did the Right Honourable Gentleman say anything which he did not say in 1827, in the presence of Mr. Canning. There was no con tradiction to that by any of the intimate friends of Canning, or those most intimate with the conduct of public men in this country. And what was the impression of the House at that time, when that speech of 1829, an extra et from which he bad just read, was written? He made no charge against the Right Hon. Baronet, but he said that this was a garbled and muti lated report ; or, to use the softer language of that House, it was a correct report of what was said. Now, it really amounted to this, whether or not that important statement was made by the Right Hon. Baronet? That was really the great question.—(Hear.) It so happened that there were two reports of that speech. There was not oily that of Han sard, which appeared after after a long interval, but there was that which appeared in the ‘. Mirror of Parliament," and which paper was reported by men of education, talent, and of the greatest intelligence. The speech of the Right Hon. Baronet was taken don n in short-hand by verbatim reporters. When this speech was made, a great question then agitated the public mind, and the course pursued by the Right Hon. Baronet was that which suggested itself to his mind at the time as the only one which he could adopt tinder tlie cir cumstances. It was a most important question to the country, and related to the great Catholic question.—(Hear, hear. The Right Hon. Gentleman then felt that the time was come when something respecting the Catholic claims should be done. He stated to Lord Liverpool that something should be done with respect to the Catholic question. There was such a thing as a version of a speech—a speech for the House, and a speech for posterity.—(Hear, hear.) It so hap, pened that the speech of - the Right Hon. Baronet was both ways; and now they read both, and compared the speech of 'the hour with the speech of posterity.—(Cheers.) It hap pened that at that time a very eminent gentleman, who was at the head of a great Protestant party in that House, re. marked that if there was a time for consenting to the Catholic question, the Right Honourable Baronet—in justice to his own character—in justice to his friends—and in jus tice to Mr. Canning ought to have consented before. If, said the Honourable Member, the question was not found necessary in 1825, when brought forward by Mr. Canning, why did he again vote against it in 1827, when Mr. Canning was in office, and then advise it in 1E29: 1 (Great cheering.) These were the remarks in an Hon. Mem ber's—in the speech of Sir Edward Knatchbull—(Hear, hear. ) —and it was well-remembered by all who listened to the speaker, that it brought an answer from the Right Hon. Baronet. He did not answer that speech in the language which he quoted from Hansard, as the speech of the Right lon. Baronet. His answer was the speech of Hansard, but not the speech of the Mirror of Parliament. It was no doubt a revised speech, a corrected speech. It was marked in Hansard as the speech of the Right Hen. Baronet—and there was this most remarkable note appended to it—" printed with sanction, and by the authority of Mr. Secretary Peel." ( Hear, hear. and cheers from the Protection benches.) Now. with respect to the speech in the Mirror of Parliament, he had inquired who it was that reported it, and he learned it was reported by Mr. Barrow, a first short-hand writers gen tleman who was one of the as well as one of the first scholars of the day, they would not doubt the ability and correctness of Mr. Barrow, but if they did, he fancied that that speech had the alsobeenreported in the Times newspaper of 1929, wherein_ Ri g ht H o n. Baronet was made to say that the time was come when something must be done with the Catholic question. He did not bring those statements forward without wishing that the Right Hon. Gentleman should have the opportunity of answering them. He had quoted them from anonymous works, but it should be remembered that anonymous works, at times, were written by those who were high in office, and who were above writing any thing contrary to fact, at least wilfully. He found it stated in a work of great reputation, that Sir Robert Peel bad a letter in his writing-desk, which he had written to Lord Liverpool, stating that it was high time that something should be done with respect to Catholic claims. This was stated in the Edinbusgh.Reriese, and it was signed anonymously ; but it should be remembered that that work was read in 56 highest circles, and quoted as a great authority ; and best of all reasons, that it s contr ib utors were menofhdigfherratnhke and of great attainments. It was within eight and forty hours afterrae Baronette r N o l f r. c. whicho Cst m n o e Canning gave commenced appearedvh e at t the Right t Ri o b geht opposition, s o lion.prou d , which t h G e ntlem an attiec gi t dhet e r Re c d h o n a a - t. the time, and h a d been consideredeversinee, w to as have outraged all decency. It was agreed up on , at a party of gentlemen, held in—he wou ld not • say m what great house, though he had been told—where they were dining. It was enough for him to know that they came down to that House, and the Right Hon. Gentleman was amongst them. It was a party favourable to the s hippi ng i n t eres t, p nd theehwh ic h in Rightt Heoonn.taGeend tleman d e li vere d h imse lf o f - a s peech a e arfl ini o rn or o e dern exc tlm m es g . , an d far language far more vehement,: mere passionate than any y h a t n d H Hon . 8 . sionat e Gentlema n sspeeches c r h l e s hear.) On the third dfi t y he afte b r e he had received his ch aracter and delivered one of mos t t v h i e ole ß nt ig. for candonr , and sincerit y , i t rae ry h • that had ever been made in that H ouse , which called for th e ce l e b ra ted reply from Mr. Canning, that he was always re a d y to meet the attack of an open and honourable enemy, but he despised iend. Now, the sneaking insinuation of a l ur ki ng foe in the garb o he would not en t er i nto any details aswn to whether the Right Hon. Ba ronet hunted down Mr. r.Can ning, because that was the poetical phrase, used meta phorically, to describe the feelings of the friends, and relatives of Mr. Canning, with regard to the transactions with which they - were familiar, and because if he were to do so he must go into secret councils, and quote secret correspondence, read passages from newspapers, set up and maintained for a particular purpose,—(Hear, hear.) He must go into details of matters which the Right Hon. Gentleman addressed to the new generation who have entered Parliament since these events had occurred, and in vindication of his own character ; but let him remind the House that it was not a vindication made on the spur of the moment, although the Right Hon. Baronet might have had an imperfect knowledge of the details of what occurred nineteen years ago, for the Right Hon. Gentleman took three or four days to get up his case, which was to make an impression upon the rising generation. He thought, however, he had proved from the extracts which he had read that the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman in vindication of his own character was garbled. (Hear.) He had brought them evidence —unintentional evi dence—confirmatory of the impression left upon the minds of those who witnessed the occurrence of these events, and whoa were cognisant of the unenviable avowal before the Rousa:. nineteen years ago..—(Cheers.) But a complaint was made against his Noble Friend that he had called the Right Honourable Gentleman " his Right Honourable. friend." The Right Hon. Baronet asked if the Noble Lore believed that he hunted Mr. Canning to death, how was lei justified in calling him his Right Hon. Friend ? and as far a s he possibly could do he would deal with that question. He remembered when the Right Hon. Baronet was at the head o: a phrasaical confederacy, called the " Conservative party."— ( Hear and laughter.) He remembered then the Right Hon. Gentleman had more than 300 Hon. Priends—(]:soar, anti laughter)—many of whom he did not knowbfname--I,Laugh. ter) —many of whom he certainly could not recognise , and yet most of whom called him their Right Honourabb <. Friend. In that time the Right Hon. Baronet seemed to thin that he was the sole Minister of England, and he came tq the tablt NEW - i WRIT. Colonel CONOLLY moved for a new writ for a Knight of the Shire for the county of Carlow, in the room of Thomas Bunbury, Esq.. deceased. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. Messengers from the Lords brought up various Railway Bills with amendments. (See Lords' report. ) ENLISTMENT IN THE A RNIY. Captain LAY .t RD wishes to ask a question of the Secre tary-at-War, whose answer some time back to a similar ques tion had been misrepresented. and had, in consequence, caused considerable difficulty among the public. He believed that no limited enli,tment was allowed, but the contrary had gone forth to the public. He wished to know whether or no limited enli-tment was allowed ? Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT said it was not the case that limited enlistment was allowed, neither was it the intention of her Majesty's Government to allow it. CONDUCT OF RAILWAY BUSINESS. Mr. E. DENIsON asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether he had any objection to lay upon the table of the House the plan for the conduct of i ailway business which was pre pared by Lord Dalhousie, and submitted in eztenso by him, on the part of the Government, to the Committee on Railways in the House of Lords? Sir R. PEEL said that with regard to anv written informa• tion given by his Noble Friend in the Committee of the House of Lords, he did not see any objection to their production. He did not apprehend that the meaning of his Noble Friend Lord Dalhousie was to give a formal proposition of that plan in the Committee of the House of Lords. At the same time, he must admit, on the part of his Noble Friend, that the plan was not proposed on the part of the Government. He be lieved that at the time it was proposed no proposition was made on the part of the Government, either in the Lords or Commons. Atter a few words from Mr. DENISON which did not reach the gallery, Mr. HUME said that there were certain resolutions to be proposed to-morrow by the Right Hon. Baronet with reference to the broad gauge. He should certainly take the sense of the House on the three last resolutions. The House would not make itself a party to what was admitted to be wrong. Sir R. H. INGLIS gave notice that he should move for a supplemental report of the opinions of Dr. Robinson with re ference to the effect of any railway passing under the Royal Observatory at Greenwich Park. Mr. ROSS said that he had a few words to offer in explana tion to the House, with reference to certain remarks made by the Right Hon. Baronet at the Head of the Government at the conclusion of the debate on Friday, 'upon a speech which had been made by him (Mr. Ross) in the beginning of the evening. He should not. have attempted to do so had he found the words he used reported in the public:papers. The Right Hon. Baronet, in noticing his speech, asked him in the first instance if he would venture to deny the allegations of Government, and his reply was, " Yes," but he must say that he did not intend to convey by the word " yes," anything in opposition to what he had said in his speech, because he did deny the allegations of Government to this extent, that if the state of Ireland now, according to the opinion of the Government, called for this Coercion Bill, it must be in the same state as was referred to by the Secretary far the Home Department. He also denied, and he was borne out in his denial, the accuracy of the returns made and presented to the House. There was no contradiction between his answer and the assertion which he made in his own speech. There was also another point in which the Right Hon. Baronet had pup words in his mouth.—( Hear, hear.) He (the Right Honourable Baronet) had said that it was a most monstrous and idiotic assertion that once they departed front the constitution of the country the further tney i, ent the better. He did not make such an as sertion as that ; he had said that if it were necessary to turn from the constitution of the country, we ought not to falter in our course until we reached the object which had occasioned our departure. Sir R. PF.F.:L begged leave to explain. What he had said measures —that if d not hi required sint e e n x t t i r o a n e r t , o i i ii s a a y r . y t t re w la a n s dition far from satisfactory. He asked the Hon. Member if he denied the allee,tions of her Majesty's Government in that re spect, viz., that the state of Ireland did require extraordinary measures, and he understood the Hon. Gentleman to say that he did deny the allegation ; and whilst in the heat of debate, some words did escape him (Sir R. Peel), but which he after wards corrected. He ( Sir R Peel) had asked the Hon. Member if he had rot said that the outrages in Ireland were so dangerous, and had become so intolerable, that, provided the measure brought in by the Government for the improvement of the relation between lansilord and tenant did not turn out to be beneficial, and if the country continued to exist in 1846 in the same sta te as in 1845 and 1844, he for one would think some measure s necessar y , and even that he could not ob jtehcatt to i t a of the Habeas Corpus Ac t. He hamanent 'l said operation for the improvem ent of the relation of laT:dlord and impossible er.sion to devise any m easure of p er tenant, which could take any effect in a short time, and that therefore ho vsould not object to vote for a suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. Air. ROSS—I sa id that the state of Ireland " was" so un satisfactory. I did not say that it is now. vote e ir R. PEEL—The Hon. Member had said that he would sttchm for a suspension of the Habeas constitution was to be ' the object they had • STEAM COMMUNICATION violated, they should take care to secure Corpus Act, and that if the significant, but still i n view, which might be more or less in secure it. e measures ur e s should i o WITHuI db e adoptedAMEßlC a s would A . Mr. MILES ' wished to ask cation had as y e t been wheth er any wee kl y commun i- Halifax ? established betwe en thi s coun t ry an d The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER sa id t h at a contract had been ente re d i nto, with Messrs. Cunard, f or a no the pa r t o f t h e Government, Halifax and Boston. weekly steam communicati on w i t h Mr. HUNIE wished to know if be obtained. a copy of th e contract could M. MILNER GIBSON said that he had understood that the contract was advertised to be open to all her Majesty's sub jects. It was supposed that the Great Western Stearn-ship Company had not had the opportunity of entering for the public service between this country and Halifax and Boston. There had been a memorial presented to the Government on that subject, for it wa , felt very important that there should be a fair competition in the passenger traffic between England and America; and it was also supposed that the Great Western Com pany were fairly entitled to a share in thisemployment. The ac count which they were going to pay Messrs. Cunard, was 4,0001. for every voyage. That was a great burden, and he got, in addition to the sum of 4,000/., his passenger traffic ; while the Great Western Company, in order to compete with him, had on) , to rely en their passerger traffic. Such a competition could not be borne; and if the contract was not finally signed, he called upon the Government not to allow such a monopoly in opposition to the Great Western. i he CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the House mutt bear in mind, that in the year 1838 the contract was offered for the purpose of establishing a communication between this country and North America. That communica tion was tendered by many, and the Messrs. Cunard •ivere the parties who took the contract. In that contract so made in 1838, provision was made for a weekly communication between Great Britain and North America. In the first instance, the communication was to have been made fortnightly ; and when it was found that that communication answered, it was then ordered to be made weekly. The Government thought it their duty to enter into the contract with those persons who had in the first instance been engaged by them, and therefore they had given the contract to Messrs. Cunard, and the papers re lative to that subject had been just moved for. Mr. MILNER GIBSON wished to know whether those papers would be a copy of the advertisement and the contract itself ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was under stood to answer in the affirmative. After a few words from Lord J. RUSSELL, which did not reach the gallery, ARMS BILL. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said that he was anxious to make a statement to the House with reference to what had fallen from the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Bernard). He was anxious that he should appear to make any charge without feundatien,: but if it appeared that the Noble Lord could prove a contradiction to his statement he would withdraw the charge he made. Ile had stated, that when the Arms Bid was passed, the powers given to the magistrates by that Act, for the purpose of de priving of the right to keep arms all riotous persons were not exerted with reference to those persons con cerned in disturbances, but to persons of political persuasion called repealers. Those powers wore given to the maeis rates for the purpose of suppressing disturbances, but that he thought that they had been used to the detriment of the coun try. The Noble Lord had contradicted that statement, and he ( Mr. J. M. O'Connell) now asked him if he meant to say that in that statement he had said anything contrary to or be yond the facts? If he had done so, he should be quite ready to move for all those papers which would throw light upon the subject, in order that any mis-statement might be corrected. Lord BERNARD said that he had denied the statement made by the Hon. Member, and in order to make the matter clear he would state the facts of the case. In the county of Cork the number of persons applying for permission to keep arms was 700, and out of that number those who were refused amounted only to seven, and out of that number again otel err were repealers. The proceedings adopted on that occasion were very far from any party feeling, although those wlio were rejected were repeal wardens. Out of the seven who were rejected, three were known as had characters. The magistrates had acted on that occasion under no political motive, but with the view of preserving the peace of the country. There had been a memorial addressed to the magistrates of that dis trict, stating that many had been obliged to I eave their homes at night, and remained in the fields, in consequence of the ap prehensions they were under. He did not mean to deny that, at the meeting alluded to by the lion. Member, there were very injudicious expressions made use of by some individuals, but he did say that the majority of the magistrates attended to their duty with strict impartiality. Mr. M. GIBSON asked the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government if the Government would defer the signing of the contract with Messrs. Cunard until the papers which had been moved for could be produced. Sir R. PEEL, as we understood, said the Government would accede to the request of the Hon. Member. PROTECTION TO LIFE (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition containing 250,000 signatures. He stated that it came from the principal manu facturers of Ene/end against the Coercion Bill.—( The Hon. Member then left the House immediately. ) Lord WORSLEY said that he had some observations to offer to the House upon this Coercion Bill. It was true that the Bill contained temporary measures, but still he thought it would be found, whether temporarily or permanently em ployed, to be equally destructive in its influence. When mea sures of this kind had been before tried in Ireland, they had always produced more evil than good, and had fallen as much, if not more, upon the innocent than the 'guilty. Did the Go vernment think that the passing of this Bill, with its temporary provision, would remedy those great and serious grievances of which the Irish people so justly complained. It would not even repress the evils which were the effect of those grievances, far less would it remove the cause. He believed that if, instead of introducing these coercion measures, they would remedy some of the evils which at pre sent prevailed in Ireland, they would find that the legislation would be attended with beneficial results.—( Hear, hear.) If the Government of Ireland had the confidence of the people, there wou!el be no necessity for such Acts as these, and let him ask whether the Government did now, or had for some years passed, possessed that confidence ? No ; they certainly had not, and until the Government patronage was bestowed with an impartial hand, and the Government themselves evinced some disposition to improve the civil and religious condition of the people, they never would. 'Why how could the present Government hope to obtain the confidence of the people, when they had all along opposed all reforms in the Irish Church ? Some few years ago, while the present Government was the opposition, he remembered Lord Stanley proposed to improve the municipal law of the country, hut although the Govern ment had been in offiee now nearly five years, they had never yet attempted to bring forward such a measure. Look again at the conduct of the Government in later times. Look how they acted with regard to the Arms' Act, and to the manner in which they dismissed magistrates for expressing their poli tical opinions. See how they allowed the monster meetings to go on, in fact silently sanctioning them before they issued their proclamation, and bear in mind the spirit with which they followed up the State prosecutions, and then let the douse tell him how a Government who punished such a policy as this could expect to possess the confidence of the people. ( Hear, hear.) They went before their party with regard to some measures ; nay, they outstripped those who opposed them in one course of policy, and yet they could not act with liberality towards Ireland. They had come forward with a liberal Corn Biel, but they refused to try the force of liberality in Ireland. His opinions were decidedly opposed to this Bill, because, in his estitnation, it was only calculated to arraravate, rather than remove, the evil ; and it was for this reason that he should vete against the second reading. He objected to it on principle; and feeling it ueneeessary, as well as unconstitu tional, he should vote against it on principle. Sir R. FL INGLIS said the Noble Lord, not content with entering into a lengthened review, and strongly de nouncing the past policy of the Government with respect to Ireland, went so far as to censure them for allowing his Hon. Friend the Member for Kent to place a notice on the motion paper, with regard to the Catholic Church of Ireland. Now, with regard to that, notice of motion, he could assure the Noble Lord that the Government had nothing whatever to do with that motion, nor had they power, he thought, to prevent his Hon. Friend from bringing it forward.—(Hear, hear.) It had been said by the Noble Lord, in the course of the debate, in effect—for he would not be irregular, and refer to speeches of Hon. Members during the present session—but he said in effect, that those who sat eround him had made up their minds to support the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London, and to turn out her Majesty's Ministers, whoever they might he. He was unwilling to revive language, but such was tl.e effect of the Noble Lord's words. He ( Sir R. Inglis) could not by any means concur with such a determination ; he had adready given her Majesty's Mirsisters his confidence, and he would not suffer any collateral considerations to influence him against continuing his support. If it was so that the Government had not found time or opportunity to pass on the measure to its dentpr ese h n a t d stage r a r t e a d n t s o • i earlier u p t t period he o o g r r e if s as noyflthe calamity me a and though he held that they ought not to have allowed any other su o r e r ; ac ' measlre whatever to have interrupted its progress; still he would give her Majesty's Ministers the same confidence anti support as he had given on a former occasion to the Noble in troduced a opposite, the Member fur London, when he a measure of a similar nature, and more severe.—(Hear, hear. ) It was for the Government to provide for the safety of her Majesty's subjects ; on them rested that care ; when, therefore, they thought and said that any measure was necessary for that purpose, it was not for him to-oppose them, for the responsibi lity of the measure fell on them.—(" Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) He had no wish to say or do anything derogatory tdthe Members for Ireland trho sat opposite, but he bad given her Majesty's Ministers his confidence, and he would support them in the second reading of the measure as he had in the first. The Hon. Baronet proceeded, in a tone scarcely audible in the gallery, to say that there had been great delay in the pro gress of the measure in that House, a delay which was even irritating.—(lronical cheers.) The measure was a measure of police, for which the Ministers were therefore re sponsible, and however they mighs taunt him with their cheers, yet being a measure of police, he would give it his support, leaving the whole to rest on the responsibility of the Govern ment. If the Government hail made up their mind to press to the second reading this measure, modified and mutilated as it had been in the other House of Parliament, he (Sir R. Inglis) had come to the determination to support it, but to support it only in the condition in which it then was. Colonel V ERNER was convinced that some measure was neeessary for the protection of life and property in Ireland, and therefore he would give the present measure his support. At the same time he could not but regret that such delay had been suffered to interrupt the progress of this measure, or any mea sure of thelike importance. They had heard of the measure being introduced by the Government at the beginning of the session, but it had been thrown hack till this late period ; he hoped now, however, that Ministers would exert themselves with all diligence to forward it. We understood the Hon. Gentleman to say, that he was proud to support a measure which had been introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government, even at the risk of being charged with ineonsistency, such us they had heard made in that House on a late occasion, although at ~ he same time he would not be understood as prepared to support a bad measure merely because it came from the same quarter. The Gallant Gentle man begged the House to bear with him, while he vindicated himself against a misrepresentation cast on him by this Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State. He said he had pro duced some extracts on a former occasion referring to the state of Ireland; extracts, however, riot very agreeable it would seem to the Right Hon. Baronet. The Right Hon. Baronet had not denied any of his statements, nor had he upset any of the evidence laid before the House.—(Hear, hear.) What then, he asked, was the charge made against him by the Right Hon. Baronet? Why, that in November, 1845, he (Colonel Verner) had said that he thought there would be distress in Ireland. The Hon. Gentleman was then proceeding to read from a speech made by Sir James Graham in which Colonel Verner had been referred to, when he was interrupted by cries of " Order," and The SPEAKER intimated to the Gallant Colonel that he was irregular. ~ Colonel VERNER continued to say that it had been re ported that he (Colonel Verner) bad said that a letter had been sent to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in which an opinion was given that a pecuniary grant should be made towards the drain ing of Loch Erne, with a view to relieving the distress in his (Colonel Verner's) neighbourhood. (The Gallant Colonel was again called to order by the Speaker.) He had just to say that the part of the country there referred to was not within his neighbourhood by five and twenty Irish miles. te it t.o. h v a t d he be s e e n eoe i d nt v i e m a a d t li ;d g. b o y n the ee ground that the measure was theo ne conclusion e m l u a s t t t o e n r matters to vote police. at against lee it, 11:Ie said would t that. . ing from those which had been adopted hy but for reasons differing at opposed it on the ground others in that Ilouse, and once Hon. . Baronet ii°R S t l h i re inaccurate. He would that the reports alleged in evidence homicides and murders to others ; leave the nice calculation of . (Mr. Horsman) had come to these reports that they the Secretary and he thought so too. Nor were as well got up as usual, had been pushed forward with would he oppose it because it not He saw two the speed that some would have wished. same period mea sures advancing in that House during the . . . of State was satified with Ireland • had a benevolent aspect to the people of , the other was harsh and coercive ; the two measures —one of them was large and liberal in its spirit, and differed so much that it might well be doubted whether they were the workmanship of the same hands. The Right Hon. Baronet might Lie supposed to address himself to the one mea sure with alacrity and zeal, as agreeing with his own spirit, o p t os v e o d t e th againsti'i his likin g f e e t: d ahniys of r e ason those. v l e i a e s o ( n N s l . r . T H h o o r s s e but to the oth er h e m i ght require to be stirred and incited as to man) a task did o n p grounds on which he opposed it were set forth in better lan guage than he could use in a document, from whieh he would road to the Holm. (The In. Goutlernan then road from a