The Sun. — London, England, 1841-02-26 00:00:00

t ~~•-~► d be c - r consti- From the el e EVENING EDITION and also, t h e f ac i l i ty of retaining that right when once es tolished ; w h ereas the measure of it; Noh'e opponent ' othrew obstacles alike in the way of the fraudulent and h:- neit claimant, and left both at the mercy cf vexati itis 00- Ilca-, hear.) On this a-count alone bethought ' 4l ° Bid erititlel not merely to the yrefcience, but to the cordial support of et cry Member who wisbe I to see the re oistita•ion of voter s pl oes d upon a f a i r an d sa tiifaA ry think that But h e was ready to admit that the mein primiple of the 13i I was the echo or (if they pleased) theonew ar rangement, of the Allele franchise in Ireland. He did not Hoe. Members did tight to complain of their uniting t h e two questi ins, fur it stood admiete 1 that the hulk ,i 1 the evils complained of in Irela-id had arisen froth the mistoiderstandirg and doubt olieh existed as to the definition of the t lectiva franchise, on which, notwithstand 'n: all that he had st.i I, it certainly did not ap.. Pear to him (Mr. Morgan John O'Connell) the Noble author of Ott Ref. ran Act had thrown any great light, for he hail never yet heard Lim te'l exactly what he Tr icant to have been the . franchire by the Reform BOO— ( ar, hear.) The Noble Lord had not thought right to dc 80 , but en the words qut t -el the other night by the Right lion, the Attoinor-Gentr for I, elald, the . Nolc ~b r • , nrd samu--" But the great remaining on except the minor ,one of names reainiog on the rcll alter the qualification had ceased, with this exception the great evil consisted in the ambiguity cf th! franchise, and whatever test you take, whether the definition of Sir Michael O'Loghlin, or l ye daition of the solvent tenant test, in either case it was liable to great ambiguity ; it was liable to all those •evils, so fully deserted to ue, the putting men upon their totths as to matters of opinion, and opinion on which oppo site parti es may nil-v.". It was then, as admitted by the c ur Member for Wokefield whe, upon such just pregites h ind come to such an unjust conclusion, most important, if they adopted the test of rating, that they should take such t test as would extend, instead of narrowing the franchise. l e the first place then, the plan proposed wool ] under pre- Poooteigion -ffive a liberal arid extended franchise, but it w ' as still more v iluable, because it introduce] a test on menet fair minds could not by possibility thistakr. A great deal had beet .skid about the low rate at which the lraechise was fixerl •He begged to remind tie [lan. Geotienien who bad mode this objection that if th es , looked to the table, which gave 'the returns laid Eef ire the House, th ey would find the test in the rating proposed by the Bile W ould not exceed the number of those who at present f ormed the constituency of Ireland. lie knew it was said that if the premises were not valued at 51., what right bat the owner to be registered ? And the answer wee, be eouse the beneficial interest, and not the solvent-tenant teat, had been adopted by the Judges. He would not ap , Pell to the evidence of Mr. Leslie Foster io 1829, hut to authority which the Noble Lord the Member for North Le 'leashire'could not repudiate—he me int his coadjutor in LH n Zin,o in the Reform Bill, M-. Solicitor-General -.r ampton, who in the debate on the Irish Reform Bill, 1° r eply to the Hoc. and Learned Member for Dublin, a t beyond I do not hesitate to say, that by the passing of this "11l Irel an d w ill h ave a c ons ti tuenc y far ,yond anything tS of which Sco l en d c an boast, and certainly not much , oehitql that of England."—(Hear, hear, hear..) How ' 115 Nobl e L or d cou ld, after that declaration of the i ntention of the Reform Bill, say that the present consti o ilency of Ireland was extensive enough, he (Mr. Morgan °l2 e O'Connell) could not understand. But it was not f ur him to understand the reasons of the Noble Lord. It Was sufficient for him to see how completely the Noble Lord hid departed from the principles he th , n held, and to t eniirrd Ilor. Members there were a number of restrictions gut • the f ranc hi se of Ireland, with n gard to occupation. +out still, with r egard to the number of vot ,r 3, the Noble thought witild utter:) , overthrow all that bad been ad 'lneed as to the small number of the Irish constituency. 4, Flare , " said the Noble Lord, "is a return which shows t hat the constituency La; increased in number since the Je er 1835. He could account for the Noble fiord'; i gnorarco oa this question ; but why 4 ,e consulted nobody on the subject, he (Mr. Morgan John O'Connell) could not conceive. These rstorets quoted by the Noble Lord said that in Cerk there Welo 5,735 voters', in Dublin 4,167, and in Mayo 2,185, a nd yet the Noble Lord had heard the Noble Lord the Se cretary for Ireland state •that at the late election for Mayo one reason why there was tin contest was that the l oo stitueney did not much exec el 700. Now any one who „ n ew the state of Leland knew that the returns quotel be ` l °e Noble Lord contained the names in the •regiitry of 832 , and that a great number of those 0,1 the old reg:stry .1 . I r e included is the new registration. Now from these - "urns must be deducted the number of those registered at the first registration after the Reform Bill, and consequently though A ntr i m was registered at 5,263 the number must • 3 .tiOninished 3.827 ; Armagh 5,654, must be diminished 2742 ; Ccrk 5,738, must be diminished 3,835, leaving not °' ,oo voters in a county containing 700,000 inhabitants; and Mayo 2,185, must be diminished 1,350 reg s i.roed in 183 q, and whose ' title had since expiied. I , L as sure to excite ill-fee in Ireland when they saw O c o ignorance of the state to the country exhibited by those svho'came forward to lead the legislation of that t o oi G l un trYs but th'y would willingly forgive the igoorarice ,f e e c Y saw a disposition for acquiring knowledge, or of using it genero us ly towards them. But the Noble Lord made of another argument, at which he (Mr. M. J. O'Con •, .7 1 1) confessed he was astonished. He knew not whether L il e uoual caution of the Noble Lord had fled when he ;Vide usee of it, but the Noble Lord had said in his speech - "„ e c other night, " I roil not press upon the House the tionntent /mw e impossible it is to to .ction the application of • ' i s Principle to Ireland alone, bscouse the argument still esl ilY suggest - itself to the rriod of every one who hears t t r , how imp oss ible it is to withhold the same extension of tL e electiv e franchise to the other pars of e Unit e d Kingdom." Now, the Noble Lord should remember that this was a ewe-hamlet argument, I,e'l that if it was good ler exteoding Irish Privileges to ' o egland, it was . e qually good for extending English and 'notch privileges to Ireland.—( Rea., limn) Di t they e ll :elember the application when lush franchises were under "O4cussion° He would not go back to the period of t u ne Iri s h R e form Bill, but on the late que Con cf Vuo'cipal R e form Bill, rights which we e coneseledrto "'Oland and Scotland were resisted when sought to be ° Wetted on Ireland, and were conferred at last in a ma nner even more ungracious than, they had been resisted, a nd i with so man y o bstacles to their application, that; al hough the Act passed last yea - , it was not until the next that or it w ou ld b e i n operation i n I re land.—( He tr, hear.) ars this, he asked, the way in which the' Noble Lord, • the Member for North Lancashire, and the lion. Gentle . l en , opposite, thought equal rights were to be extended to c c 'end ? Was this their notion of the union between the countries, which they regarded as so advantageous, that the Noble Lord declared he ,would resist any alteration Z en teeth e d ea th._ He did not know whether the Noble Pa mphlet, bard exactly spoken of Ireland as the writer cf a ielPhlet, wh o ca lled himself a Conservative Member of t h e House of Commons, had spoken of ir, and who, by the „, was a great admirer of the Noble Lord, and who i s r re that " England is tOe Royal mistress, and Ireland her tributary," a phrase certainly not implying equality i ie tev Orl a moderate degree of inferiority, but character f the moat reckless spirit of intoletant domination. 11 et Wheth er t h e N o bl e Lord would use these t ems or H ' 3 he appealed to act much on the spirit of such language. l c would as k H on . Members what had the general cry r r the Repeal 'of the Union sprung from ?—(Hear.) t iscontent, with misgovernment, and the ate:opts to. h ose who wished to take.away the rights provided by " People of Ireland ?—( Hear.) Did they think that retioin g the measure now before the House they would the discontent and put down the cry ?—(Hear.) hey could not do so ,but they would exasperate the dis loi,t.tteht, and make it show Asclf in more menacing shapes. threat wuld be th last min that House to make use of or menace e , either to an that tleuseor to Great Britaic, li Lif the Hoc. Member for Pembroke wore in the House ti t : . w ould tell him that they who were loudest to declare to ut they would not yiell to menace were often the first I, o l ' o intimid a ted, and those who were the most ready to • 00t 5 .4 of their courage were often the most tirdy in ex it--(Cheers.) F. was absurd to suppose that „Oilmen woutt in these times rebel noainst their Save . but if danger were to be apprehended from abroa f, easbed was there anything more desirable • s. * r o il - that the whole people should be united, dadthat that no part of the empire stroold be in a state of alie • , too and dhcont it ?—( Cheers.) Every concession 4' Ireland had bees made when GI eat lit itai . was t om Utiog under circumstances of difficulty and danger; • 7 e ur•cessions so made' are always received with a bad i v grac e v t re every where victorious, and it was therefore a happy , ( Z , to make concessions to the people of Ireland:— e' to t e o c(B .) By conceding now, they would f.r the first aintf they generous to Ireland in the time of their success; that gratitude would excite in the breasts of the Irish peop!e eu , gratitude which their past conduct had not been ea-- thetated to instP.—(Cbeers. ) Although he rejoiced for s uccess of his countrymen in arms, and for the tri o l ilPhs of Blitish diplomacy, yet lie most rejoiced in tho eit because they gave this opportunity of conciliating .1 4 a ffection, and winning time gratitude 5f the Irish Hear, hear.) With that feting, and in the r e e . its being tealised, he would vote for the second ding of th e Bill . no mr • F.. TENNENT said that as many Hon. Members eni olne ethe r s id e , w h o were oppose d t o the 5L fran lll °' e uere still of opinion that the rest of the Bill o o i is t ' h il o t he caned into effect without that clause, he es t i: d in assure them that if that part were omit , efr e e t the rest woull fall to the ground. The or th of the. 5l, clause would be to give the guardians Ne e oor the means of determining who should have a eleo a°P 4 who tooe—(Hear, bear and in one parish the tot the o f. ha d rati on `o tansactually made out, in antici h e of thii Bill becoming law, a list of those who would qualifi,e ' the L obo ' to vote :ender the present rating, distinguishing teas, v r als fern the Tories in seeurate columne.—( Hear, Sear ! Under the claose two shiPings and a penny yer could nine' we e iocase the franchise, and fine hundrei voters 1l Member hail f or at . annual expenditure cf 501.—(11ear.) Me ssy u• Member their reod some statistical returns to lie so that the Refer n Bill had not faded in the town which el ti l l s . :/ ? c 'ited ( BelfOsc). Now, wbat, would be the effect t eiut o , h t : RO in Belfast.' According to th r Poor-law from th lnere wcte 6,365 houses rated atene 51. in Beliest f to, ri ut numb tr they were to t:einet the ,rnount f the ,e ; t ,e c ° ,l stitueney, 2,105 ; they would hod that the effect te r , t _ ueoveriinient measure would be to add 4,260 eke Macy{ b c ee the present constituency.—( Hear, hear,) Now it er't n admitted by the Noble Lord that property, and • that t u i,:e's, ought to he tbe lasis of represeatetton— Ot te ouha se nione ought to possess she franchise who knew lOirope value Property, and yet by this measure the men of .1 Belftst would be ol:t7tred by two to one by the .1 of .- 3() Us, ( l an : property. The absurdity, the inconsistency, and eettlo -. 4ct "f the Government, measure was such, that be th e ot i l 'ut help thinking that bonne of the Ge itle:nen on he sm o /r.o S a id' were gmally in the habit of suPPrt i l g etit otl i ti ZYs Government would refuse to lend them their Present oceasior.—( Cheers. ) °rill be scarcely Eas an Irish Member, thought itieJ in giving a slent vote on a hs' o.o " oo _ at a terisis, af f ecting ye deeply the liberty arid llo„ oo r o ntY of the county which bid sent him there fli t ~ t ,z , , , -. l ii, 2t i ep A r el ec iz sio b u e s r oho had just sat down had spoke it Olu os gly of the rating tett of the franchise, he thought pert of the Bill.—(Cheers.) He thought the adoption of the rating test as Li principle most unexceptionable—with regard to the amount, t hat was merely a question of detail. His own opinion was that a 5/. frac chiso would not add to the present number of registered voters is Limerick, and he had a lett 'r from the Chairman of the Board of Guardians of the Limerick Union, which confirmed that opinion. With regard .to tie question of the constituency as compared to that of England—the dio. parity was so great that he thought something must be done for Ireland. With -regard to the observations of the Hoe. and Learned Member fr r Bandon on the conduct of the Catholic clergy—he did not think it desirable that such a state of things should exist as should crdlupon the clergy cf any religion to eater the a ens cf politics, and he was convlneed- it was not from their own choice, but from ne cessity, ;that the Roman Catholic clergy interfere with elections. No body of men could Le • more assiduous in their duties than the Catholic clergy of Ireland, anu they were' ost disinterested Li so doir g, as they depended solely on the pittance granted to them by their flock ; aid should a hostile army ever appear on the shores of Ireland, no persons would be found more ci ling or ener getic in repelling sue)] attacks than the Roman Catholic clergy of Ircl ind.—( Hea-, hear, from Sir R. P el, and loud chi ern) As a roof of that, he would appei t. the conduct of the Roman Catholic clergy in Canada, who, throughout the late troubles, had exerted themselves to p , event their flocks joining the late insurrectior.— (Cheera.) With regard to the Bill of the Noble Satre tary for Ireland, it had diffused general satisfactien throughout the country. But he thought if it should be divested of its provision for settling th franc lose, it would be divested of one of its most valuable portions. Be lieving that the measure would be be teficial to In land, he should most cordially support the second reading of the B 11.—( Cheers. ) Mr. SHAW gathered f , om the speech of the Hoc. Gentleman who had just sat down, and fans that of all those who had preceded him, that the c was now scarcely on either side of the House any Gentleman who was not pet eetly aware tat the question they were discussing was a question on the principle cf the franchise, and not of the mr thod of registration. Let it be granted that it was, as hie Noble Friend had described it, a pustsci ipt to the pat e yet still it was lice the poseseript to a lady's lett - 10 which contained the gi t of the correspon leer e. Whether it was to be considered as a pirf ,ce or a teat, as had been al lowed by the Noble author of the Bill, no Gentleman in that House could be unaware that the question they acre discussing on the second reading of that lii 1 was the qucs 'lion of toe franchise, and not of theiegist-ation avotars in Ir e land—it was whether they should submit ste a b/. occu pancy franchise in Ii eland for the present 101 prctit fett.- chi e in count', s, and for the 101. occupancy f-anchise in towns. The .argument was arlmitte Ito Le that by the Right Hoe. Gentleman the Secretary at War in his spee:l - , and sti 1; more was it admitted by two Right Hon. and Learned Gentlemen who had spoken on the other side—lie meant the Right Hon. and Learned Attorney- General for Ireland and the Right lion. and Le trued Vice President of the Board cf Trade—by the entire absence of all reference to it in their speechee.—( Hear.) He beliesel that Hnn. Gentle.nan opposite thought it much wiser to entangle English gentlemen in the &tails of the 811 of his Noble Friend, which was not thee before the House, than to bring their minds to the real question, which was whather they were prepared to depart from the Reform Bill.—( Hear.) If they a ished to test the tincerity of the desire of Ministers to amend the Irish Regigration I iw, they had only to look at the history of Vieir legislation for the last f:w years. In 1835, and at other periuls sites, the Secretary for Ireland 'and tile Law Officers of the Crown in that country had brought forward mea sures,on the subject which they had introduced relectaatly, and canied on slowly. They had ultimately abandoned them all, although, instead cf bring opposed on -1 is (Mr. Shea's) rile of the House, they were sti nt el Oct in their efforts by Hnnou eh le AI emters around him. At length his Noble Fri end, the Month r for North Lancashire. determine 1 th t the admitted evils of the present system should no longer continue. He had ac cordingly brought forward the measure which had since caused such excitement within and out of the House—a measure, how ever, which he (Mr. Shaw) sincerely believed deserved the character which the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War had given of that introduced by the Noble Lord opposite, namely, that it would admit good voters and shut out bad ones; while. on the other hand, the Bill of the Noble Lord the Secre tary for Ireland would only tend to put bad voters on the re gistry, and keep them there.—(Hear, hear.) The measure of his Noble Friend had been met by much personal abuse. But he should say by very little argument directed against the provisions of the Bill. How had it• been met by the Irish party ? Last year the Noble Lord the Se cretary for Ireland, had introduced a measure very appropriately called by a leading Liberd journal in Dublin, and by way of compliment, too, " an embarrassing Bid." The Noble Lord now said, that his 13111- was bold and open, and manly. He (Mr. Shaw), admitting that the Big as' s bold— it was even reckless as regarded its real object.- but he should say it was a covert measure, and that it was, brought forward under false pretences as regarded the purposes it professed to have in view.—( Hear, hear.) He had heard the proposal of the Noble Lord, when he asked for leave to introduce the measure with astonishment and alarm- It was riot that the Noble Lord was over-squeamish in party pelitica, or that he did not consider the Negate Lord a promising disciple of the Movement. But still he did not think that the Noble Lord could have been induced after his own profession, to have lent himself to a project which would unsettle the measures of 1829 and 1832. He believed that the measure was fraught with mischief to Ireland, and tbat it would de atroy the hopes of the permanent , prosperity and peace of that country. The peculiar position of Ireland, in connection with the Bill, had already been touched on, but he wished to add a few words on that subject. There was no Hon. Gentleman, he apprehended, would deny that the great source of the evils of Ireland was to be found in the subdivision of land. and the imperfect state of agriculture there. The Right lion. and Learned Gentletnan the Vice-President of Trade, had said last night that it was the efforts of the Irish landlords which abolished the forty-shilling freeholders. He believed that the Right Hon. Gentleman was altogether mis taken in that opinion. It said, he remembered, that Committees of that House were held in 1825, before which the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, together with Mr. Blake, and many other gentlemen of the same party, were examined ; and Owe Hon. Gentlemen were the principal witnesses for the expediency of abolishing the 40s. freeholders. Mr. Blake went so far as to say that he considered their abolition and the establishment of a higher franchise to be essential to the peace and prosperity.of Ireland, as it would tend to a better division of land, and to the establishment of a substantial yeomanry, and still more because it would tend to give its due weight to property in con stitutin,g the basis of political power in Ireland. A Rep ort of the Railway Commissioners had been published in 1b32, and the late Mr. Drummond stated in his evidence before them, that, in hisopinion, the division of land into small farms, and their subdivision again into smaller portions, was the prin cipal cause of the present impoverished condition of Ireland. Ile stated that the landlords had two motives for adopting the system; first, the desire to swell the amount of the rent-rolls, and next, the wish to possess themselves of political power and influence at elections. Mr. C. Lewis spoke also of the effect of the 40s. freeholders in this respect, and all the nesses agreed that from the abolition of the 40s. freeholders the condition of the country had improved. They said that if that system continued,it would have reduced the tenants to the lowest state of degradation. Mr. Nicholls said that the Poor laws, if established, might not at first work well; but they would, he thought, help to aid the country in getting overits present state of transition. He said he meant by that state of transi tion the period which elapsed between the system of small holdings and the subdivision of lands which now prevailed in Ireland, to the better practice of large farms and. more scien tific husbandry. That period, he said, was always attended with difficulties and struggles, but he added that the Legislature helped as much as possible to shorten its duration. He (Mr. Shaw) would try the Bill of the Noble Lord the Se cretary for Ireland by that test, that landlords of Ireland were now lending themselves to shorten the duration of that state of transition described by Mr. Nicholls. It was but a few days ago that a meeting was held in Dublin composed of gentlemen of all parties for the purpose of forming an Agri cultural Association, and with the view to introduce an im proved state of husbandry into Ireland. He was sorry the Hon. Member for Liskeard was not then in his place, for he thought the observations of that Hon. Member in his speech of last night in regard to the Irish landlords were moot unjust, most uncalled for, and unfounded. He admitted that the Irish gentry did net in general possess the wealth of the gentry of this country, but iliey were compara tively poor, and mere thinly scattered over the coun try. But he must say, that as a body there did not exist anywhere a class of men more benevolent, more charitable, and more indulgent in every way to their tenants, and to the poor of their neighbourhood, or at the same time more anxious to promote their comfort by every means in their power than -the landlords of Ireland. But i was one of the evils which Ireland had to complain of, that gentlemen, like the Hon. Member for Liskeard, talked of that country in n spect to matters of which they were profoundly ignorant. The Hen. Gentlemen said that there were two parties in Ireland—that all were either Orangemen or Radicals. In that opinion the Hon. Gentleman was entirely mistaken. lie (Mr. Shaw) be lieved there was a large class in that country composed of men of all politics and of ail religion:, who were sincerely . anxious for Peace, anti were desirous of' ro-opera'ing for the improve ment of the country, if they we e left free fi om agitation and from leg,slative experiments such as. the Bill then before the House. The lion. Member for Liskeard must have derived his views from his new instructor the lion. and Learned. Member for Dublin. That Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said the other day that Mr. Blacker went the circuit wearing an Orange badge : there was not, however, a word of truth in the state ment. Mr. Blacker had given it his most positive denial, stating that it was contrary to all the opinions and practice of his life.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member, however, had made no apology, and had expressed no regret at the error into which he had fallen. The statement had served his purpose for the moment, and there was afterwards no de nial of rt.---( Hear, hear.) The ideas of some Hon. Members with regard to Ireland were completely one-sided. He would tell the Hon. Member for Liskeard that the Irish landlords were as honourable a class as any in this country, and the Honourable Gentleman should have been more cautious in his statements respecting them.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He would not deny that the excitement, the political excite ment, of the last few years, had caused the want of leases in Ireland. The introduction of the New Poor-law into Ireland had been a great experiment, and all these things were matters for the consideration of the landlords, and operated upon them and prevented leasing. But supposing that was not the case, did the Bill of the NOble Lord apply any remedy ? What new impression, he siouldask, had come - over the Government since 1532, or over the Noble Lord? In the debate of 1839, Mr. O'Connell, in introducing the measure, stated, that what he proposed was to reduce the franchise' to Si. Now, what did the Noble Lord say to that? Why, he refuted even leave to the Hon. Gentleman to lay .the hill on the table. He said he could not but think if the motion was assented to, it would be in direct contravention of the settlement that accompanied the Emancipation Act in 1829, and the .ettlement made by the Reform Act in 1832. And the Noble Lord having expressed these sentiments in 1839, and repeated them again :n 1840, he introduced that Bill now before the liou e, Ns bieh contained the very provision§ he had so much deprecated. Much had been said on the questlen of population. Now, he was free to admit that population ought to bp fairly represented, and lea thought, looking at the population 111. jeelend, that it was fairly napresented. if he thought the present 14 would prove a blessiog instead of a curse to Ireland, he would give it his support; tint t,ige mass of the freeholders that would be introduced by the present BM wituld be worse than the 40s. freeholders. The Bill of the Noble I J ON, in his opinion, would he found to be insufficient for the purpoe -s for 'Thigh it was intended ; its provision= were simple enough, but vided an insufficient test, lie was persuaded that no Act ef Parliament could cure.the defect ; dikerences must continue to arise, and to whom could they be referred, if net to the Judges? Upon what ,ground did the Noble Lord change the opinion which he had expressed in 1839? He (Mr. Shaw) contended that , at that moment, there was in the repre,..enta tion of Ireland a preponderance in favour of population over property.—( Hear, hear.) Ho entertained great respect for many of the lion. Gentlemen opposite, the represent,: tives of Ireland, but he would ask if they were not indebted for their seats in that House rather to agitation than to the influence of property'—(Hear.) What was it, .then, which induced the Noble Lord to bring forward this measure ? Was it not because the Noble Lord wai threatened with the withdrawal of the support of the Hon. Member for Dublin, and of the more Radical Members who acted with him, unless he brought forward some such mea sure as that which was then becure the House ? The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin in wi iting to his constituency since the introduction of the Bill, had used expressions in reference to his Noble Friend, which lie (Mr. Shaw) would not disgu.t the House by repeating, and the language of the Noble Lord and the Right Hon Gentlemen the Secreiary at War, tended to encourage such language.. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary at War, had - referred to the arming of France as a reas4n for the passing of the measure ; his language was that France was arming while they were disfranchising and pulling down bulwarks. Perhaps some Hon. Gentlemen would think that that was not strong enough for a Member of her Majesty's Government. But the sentiment was improved upon at the Corn Exchange in Dublin. Mr. Barret said, that if Lord ;;tanley's Bill should pass, eight millions of Irish people would sxclairn " France and the people, not England and fac tion. "--( Hear, hear.) Circumstances may make great dtlie rence ii the language of Hon. Members, rarticularly in that of the Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of War. Formerly he was— " A patriot bursting with heroic rage :" he hal sines been " A placeman all tranquillity and smiles." Now when danger seemed to be apprehended, when the sweets of office were about to recede from his grasp, he conjured up dangers to Ir.land, he cast his eye back to old scenes, and he told taem of " wars, and rumours of wars," " With all the prettiness of feigned alarm, • And anger insignificantly fierce." _(Cheere.) He believed, however, that those gentlemen reckoned without their host. He was persuaded that if any insane attempt were made, there would be found a large ma jority of every class in Ireland, including Protestants and Ro man Ceitholiesi who would be faithful to the laws and to the Crown of this realm.—(Loud cheers.) That was his firm con viction.—(Continued cheering.) The Bill before the House was a violation of the Catholic Emancipation Bill—a depar ture from the principles of the Reform Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman to whom he had already referred.' had pronounced a warm eulogium upon his own loyalty. He didnotdoubt that the lion. Gentleman was now a passing loyal man ; but there had been other times. There was a distinguished and bril liant orator, who, when a Royal Prince was lying upon his death-bed, had used a figure of speech rather more pungent than the swamping of the House of Lords or the sub mersion of the Royal George.—( Hear, hear.) He sincertly believed that on that occasion the excited passions of the Hon. Gentleman carried him beyond what he would othero i e have expressed, and lie would forbear, the•efore, to quote the words. *—(llear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman concluded by saying that if this Bid passed it would confer the elective franchise upon thousands and tens of thousands who were never contem plated by the Reform Bill. sllr. O'CONNELL said that the solemn duty which he had to perform would not allow him to enter into anything like a discursive commentary • upon the speech pronounced by the Right Honouraale Gentleman. He would only ask the ft ou , e to recollect his allegation that about one half of the population of Ireland, more than four millions of gecoele, were in a state of poverty approaching to destitution. He stated that fact, and he read docuthents to prove its accus racy ; and that he had also indulged in a very warm, animated and elegant eulogium upon Irish landlords. The most excel lent landlords in the world, and four millions and a half of tilt population in a state of poverty ! Let them recollect that these two facts were stated by the Right Hon. Gentleman. Whether they were quite consistent with each other he week: leave the English people to determine.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman hal introduced the name of Mr. Richard Barrett, and had refe, red to a speech pronounced by that gentleman. Mr.. Richard Barrett was a Protestant gentle man, and his (Mr. O'Connell's) friend; lie possessed great talent, and when he was assailed lie wan able to d, fend himself. He (Mr. O'Connell) did not shrink from as . rott in; that he was his personal friend. Before he proceeded further lie would refer to a petition which was presented two days ago; one of the mast successful methods of preventing a petition from being ' attended to was to get it read from the table.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He would therefore read two or three para graphs to the House, because he thought it sliest importan that English gentlemen and Scoteh gentlemen, especially such as wee opposed to them, shou.d understand distinstly what were the feelings and opinions of the Irish nation ; and though Mr. Barrett might, perhaps, have been wrong in the length that he went, let them take care that there were not others, and many of the same opinion, in Ireland. It was much more important for them to understand what those opi nions were than to comment upon them, or even to censure them in that House. This petition was presented by the Hon. Member for the county of Limerick. The petitioners sta:el that althOugh they were most true and loyal in their al leg.ance to the Crown, they could not forget that for centuries the country had . been held and governed as a con quered ar.d enslaved province ; that the Irish people held endured every form of wrong, studied insult, and unrelenting oppression that the most sanguinary and unholy religious per secution that ever disgraced a Christian land had devised, any sternly upheld by English rule against the Irish people. The pc:hi iners then went on to state that they had wrung a portion of their rights from their governors by obtaining Par liamentary Reform. That notwithstanding the insult and In justice of the Legislature to the people of Ireland, they had ex ercised their political privileges for the interests of the country, for the securing good and impartial government, and the peace and prosperity of the whole empire. The peti •tioners stated that the plea used by Lord Stanley, in introducing his Bill, was a wilful and reckless false hood, and imelored the House not •on false pretences to deprive the Irish people of their rights and privileges and in conclusion called upon the House to pause and consider whether, in the present state of the poorer classes in England, and the general political aspect of Europe, it was prudent, by a firmal and insulting denial of equal laws and equal rights, to force every man to admit that his country and religion could have no hope of justice or protection from England. He (Mr. O'Connell) perceived at the foot of this petition the name of a gentleman with whom he was exceedingly well ac quainted, he was, in fact, Vicar-General of the diocese. A more exemplary clergyman did nut live. He was a man 01 the highest intellectual and spiritual at'ainments—of an ascetic piety. That gentleman had called upon himself to pre pare a petition of that description, and he (Mr. O'Connell) brought it before the Howe, and read it to the House, in I order to give them a notion of what the sentiments of the Irish people were respecting their present position. The next peti tion was from a different part of the country—he would read but two paragraphs. It appeared also to be drawn up by a Catholic clergyman.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He had performed a task which he thought it incumbent upon him to discharge, in order to show that his opinions were not those of a solitary individual, but were entertained generally, he might almost say, by the people of Ireland. They were well aware of what was going on, they were not so • ignorant as they had been represented by the Learned Re corder, whom We was glad to see in such excellent spirits after his recent misfortunes. —( Laughter.) The people of Ireland understood the question perfectly—they knew that it was whe ther that House would pass a measure to extinguish, the fran- Chise in Ireland altogether, or one that would extend it. That that was the real and solid question before the House could not be disg - uised from common sense, and it was equally clear that this Bill would extend the franchise, though not far enough, and that would extinguish it for ever. ;the Right elpnii. Baronet said, " Fight your battles in the registration courts.' The Noble Lord, by his Bill, intended to make it impossi ble for one to register, and well might the Right Hon. Baronet say, " fight your battles in a field where all our forces arc ready, and from which our enemies are excluded." This was an English act of hostility towards Ireland.—( Cheers. ) The Hon. and Learned Sergeant, the Member for. Bandon, boasted that a majority of the English Members were against the Bill—lie made that a boast, and yet he called himself an Irishman. (Loud cheers.) He would make a present of him to any one who would take the trouble of running away with him.—(Laughter,) The people of Ireland had been injured long enough and often enough, but the present Bill was a worse insult than any, for it mixed up religiousfeeling and jealousies along with its politics. That was not a question of locality— the world was listening to them—foreign countries were not paying the regard to the details of registration, they would understand the question itself—they would know whether it was discussed under pretence. or whether it was met manfully and like Englishmen. All the nations of the earth, who were certainly deeply interested in the welfare of this country, would fully understand the question. France would understand their present position—Spain would understand it—Ru'sia would understand it—and America would understand its objects and its term;nation. They had heard it whispered, but he meant. to speak out boldly, for he stood there the stipendiary of the Lisle people—he stood there proud of having enjoyed that con fidence for forty years, and that it was not diminished, nay. probably at that moment, it was being strengthened.—( Hear. ) The Vice-President of the Board of Trade, who was an Eng lishman—( Laughter)—he begged his pardon most humbly—an Irishman—had given them a distinct hint—the Secretary at War had given them a very distinct hint, almost as distinct a hint as he (Mr. O'Connell) could have wished to do, and yet he was taunted for it.—( Hear, hear.) Was he not Secretary at War, and was it not his business to prepare for any contin gency ?—( Laughter.) They might sneer, but how soon they might ls;.• at war, and then Isis advice, which had been scouted, would soon be followed. He cared not how he might be ca lumniated. He stood there as sincerely to preserve the con nection between the two countries as any one amongst them, convinced, as he was, that it might of the greatest use to both, and that it could not be severed without great danger to each. He differed with them as to the mode in which that connec tion was to be carried—he thought that Parli-ment was not the proper place to legislate for Ireland, and that was abundantly proved by the speech of the Hon. Member for Wakefield, who spoke strongly in favour of the Bill of the Noble Lord; he had stated he would vote against it.—(Cheers ) He admitted that enfranchisement was due to the people of Irelace I, but he could not bring his mind to give them it. It the I louse were true in its allegiance to the Crown, was it not their first duty to make Ireland the arm of England in battle; and her firm fiend in peace? Did not the Hon. Member for Liski and tell them last night that no country ever suffered so much from another as Ireland had from England? The people of I eland knew that they had suffered seven centuries of misery, that for four centuries it was held as a goad and valid plea in any Court to plead that the plaintiff was an Irishman, and that if a man was charged with murder, it was enough for him to plead that the party was an Irishman. in order to make it no felony, and that the same price was paid for the head of a Ca tholic as for the head of a wolf.—(Hear,, hear.) The Irish people knew all these things ; they might forget them, but. never, while they were treated as outcasts and aliens.—( Cheers. ) When the popular idol succeeded, and was in perfect power, then the English were more sanguinary towards the Irish than they had ever been under any regal tyrant. Ilutshe would come to more modern times. He would ask whether the Irish people did not know the financial robbery that was committed uatin them by the Act of Union? At that time the debt of England was four hundred and forty-six millions, while the Irish debt was only twenty millions. They hail doubled the English debt i-ce. Then, suppose that the Irish debt was doubled also. that would give forty epillions she would be liable to, in place of being mortgaged for the whole of eight hundred millions. If Ireland ever became. wealthy, it would never be for herself, but for England's taxes and imposts. Lst them allow, at any rate, that they hail not given the blessing of .prosperity when they were robbing them oh their franchise on the Around of their poverty. He approached another sub ject with more of . reluctance, but he did not know why. Could the people be contented whoa oneeeighth of the popula tion had a rich Church establishment at the cost of the whole ? (Hear, hear.) They had lately obtained a reduction of one-'ourtla and since then there has been more tran quillity in the c: untry than for a long period 'before; but they were not contented. and lie told them they never woisjil b e e while any part of the imposition lasted ; and if they threw tlCataddjtjonal teriovance into the cauldron, they must thank themselvei if it bfiaTea dyer. They had boasted nf the Ulster requisition in favour of the Bill 'of the , N(We tisrd opposite i let them look at it; they will find the names 'of '2lt 3 { clergymen 9f the Established Church. There they were dr reyed 01, , txpt t libertiepseopfithcfrios;noi:tlhe. e was, rr rhse ofw Ocldehaoti • Om . way to convey th Again, reeoffeCt the Irish isVtee not obtained a Corpofate Reform Bill equal to Englaw . That Bill iiesatsia an irisn . to them, _England got a Corporate Rehm in Bill, bit aga n the people of Ireland were insulted by being told that'the Church prevented them from obtaining a Bill equally good. In England every person rated to t \sioor to the !slue of a H suN, LONDON, FRIDA , FEB sixpence. had the franchise as a burgess; hut because a man had the mi , fertune to be born in Ireland, he must be an oc cupant to the value of 10/. before he .obtained the like right. Did they think that all these things did not rankle in the hearts of the Irish people? Let them not lay the flattering unction to their souls; for they thought both deeply and indig nantly over these matters. What fell from the Learned Re corder only last Session ? He stated, .in the debate on the Municipal Bill, that " the Poor-law came into useful opera tion—at all events, it would supply a safe criterion for the basis of the franchise." Wby did he not whisper to the Noble Lord, when he moved the amendment, that the Poor law was a safe criterion for the basis of the franchise? It might have been useful to him, and have saved him from falling into gross emote Again, they complained of the abolition of the 40s. franchise. It had been often said thatwas a compact —a bargain. He disdainfully denied that—they obtained Emancipation withoiit any compromise. The Learned Doctor opposite (Dr. Lefroy), and the Learned Sergeant (Jackson) , had both read part . bf the evidence given by him, and they had made it appear as if that evidence had been given in the year of the Emancipation. They had both misrepresented him, and had carefully abstained from citing the page. He said, carefully, because in the first answer the House would. have found that he said there were two species of 40s. franchise — one in perpetuity, as in England, and no man would have thought of touching it.—( Hear, hear.) Then there was the derivative francise, and he stated that the master of the Orange Lodge in Cork, a most respectable man, could bring 600 Catholic voters led by a Catholic Magistrate, to vote just as he pleased. But that was in 1825. It wastaid that they were disfranchised not for their religion but for their dependence on their landlordi. Nothing could he more con trary to the fact. They were di•franchised because they were ('a.holics, and because they were independent. In 18e5 they were driven in like live stock to the hustings ; but a great change took pace since 1825. In that year they came over in the time of Prosperity . Robinson, as Cobbett had so well named him, at the time when they were sending 16,000,000 of capital to the An des to seek for employment. They came and carried the Bill through that House; but it was ignominiously thrown out in he House of Lords. Did they think the people of Ireland were dead to all feeling? What was the consequence? The 40s. freeholders of Ireland took up the quarrel. Dawson was re turned for Louth against all the power of the Fosters ; in 1826 Villiers Stuart was returned for Waterford against the united strength of the Beresfords ,• and in 1828 the noble 40s. free holders of Clare returned himself to . that House. It was the 40s. freeholders, by their independence, that won Emancipation. and it Vas followed by their extinction, and yet the Noble Lord had come out upon him (he was a bold man, to be sin e). The Noble Lord pt esumed to state that it was on account if their dependence that they were suppressed, and not on account of their religion. He was astonished that any man occupying the station of the Noble Lord should forget so completely every fact of the case. The House would recollect that 63 Catholic Noblemen and gentlemen, quite as high and aonourahle as the Learned Recorder, who had stated that they .vere not the very v dthiest —63 of them came to London to ttend the progress of the 1311, and the moment the Bill was in troduced to disfranchise the 40s. freeholders a meeting was .lel.l at the Thatched House Tavern, and he (Mr. O'Connell) draw up a petition, praying the House, if they were only to be emancipated on the terms of dis:ranchising the 40s. freeholder:,to reject the Bill rather than disfranchise them.—( Hear, hear.) He was surprised, therefore, at the mistakes that were made by Hon. Members, and, above all,' by the Noble Lord the Nlember for North Lancashire, who knew well that if they were. Protestants and dependent they would be retained, but that, b. ing Catholics, and independent, they were disfranchiied, and that was called a settlement of the question. It was such a settlement as Gil Blas was offered in the cave, when he was aled, " What will you give me if I give you your own ?" lustice and humanity were in favour of 40s. freeholds, and the people of Ireland felt that in their disfranchisement they had seen outraged and insulted. In England the Reform Bill did not act upon the the franchise as they had supposed. It was extending it in their corporate towns, and extending it also in counties, and why had they not granted the same measure of justice in the L ish Reform Bill ? Because the ame spir t prevailed th en as prevailed at present. He (Mr. O'C.) accom e anied by Lieutenant Newport, waited upon the Secre t..ry of State for the Home Department (Lord Althorp), and they left him with a strong impression that the Irish franchise .vould be extended. He would do him the justice to say that he did not commit himself. They returned to those who had delegated them, and so strongly were they impressed with the opinion that the Noble Lord was with them that they reported he Noble Lord was with them. But the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire, who brought in his Registration rill—his Extinction Bill—took care to secure Lord Althorp. l'hey were sent for to a second interview, and they found here the Noble Lord opposite and the Noble Lord he - Secretary for the Colonies. They were not en reefed, but they. were prevented from urging their claims rincipally by the interference of that Noble Lord. they left discomfited and defeated, and-in spite of all their best end avours, the 40s. freeholders were disfranchised.—(Hear, hear.) Were they not refusing the people of Ireland a proper Reform hill now ? Ile had learned from one of the ablest men, an-i one of the most pleasing speakers that ever addressed a public assembly, the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter, .hat it seemed to him somewhat extraordinary that they should seek to sweep away all the 101. franchises. But the Hon. and Learned Member did not seem is recollect that if they had a 01. property they must be worth a Si. tate. They had strug gled. in va'n for their rights and privileges, and for an equal share of repr seetation with England. It was what they laime I now. He had claimed it last year, and was opposed by the Noble Lord (Morpeth), who had been very properly taunted with resisting it then, and yielding it now.—( Hear, hear, hear.) But had the opposite party now yielded it? If the Niable Lord had used a bad argument last year, and found chat the time was come now, the Noble Lord having apparently made a case for a registration Bill which had been carried by , nthusiastic majorities, the Irish people had now obtained that far play that the Bill for extending the franchise and making it derinite and certain had been brought in, and, so far at least, they had succeeded. But it was said they had made out no ca , c, and the Nobie Lord, with his excellent mode of dis posing of any thing in the shape of objection, for nobody was a better debater, had read from a document on the table the state of the franchise in Ireland. The Noble Lora said— " How can you say the franchise -is not sufficient whin I find here - the extent of it." The Noble Lord was not in that House a short time ago when the Hon. Member for Belfast gave an explanation of the docu ment. " Now you have an ample franchise—there are 17,000 in Dublin, and I find there were 14,5110 on the register at the last election." How many had lie (Mr. O'C. ) polled? 3,500. His colleague had polled about a dozen less, and the Hon. Can didate on the other side had polled 3,400, so that there were under 7,000 out of a registry of 14,000, and he and his colleague were returned by a majority of on:y 80: The actual number registered, and voting was not 7,000, and in Dublin, the con .atituency was better watched on both sides than any where else.-(hrear, hear.) Why should he proceed to comment on that ? The Noble Lord had taken a column headed entitled t 6 register at - the date of this order." He found.that the date of the order was the 25th of February, 30 that every man who had ever registered appeared upon that list, the eight years not having elapsed. All that had died come to life, and were on the list—all those whose terms had expired—all those who had changed their residences and had re-registered--all those who had changed their residence, and had not re-registered, were there—all those who had lost some lives out of their leases—all those who had parted with a por tion of their franchise—in short, all the dead, extinguished, and duplicates—everything was there, and when a doubt was thrown out that the return could not be relied on, the Noble Lord asked why did the Government present' such a'paper ?-- (Hear, and cheers.) The Noble Lord ought to have been there to have heard the Hon. Member for Belfast admit with candour—and candour was not his forte—that it was a fictitious return, and yet the Learned Recorder, although told it was fictitious, with a power of countenance unequalled had quoted from that document. He would remind the House that that was not the only injustice that would be done there by the Re form Hill. Another crying one was, they had remodelled the constituencies and the representation—they had added to the county Members, he cared not for what object. How did it happen that in every county in England, without one being omitted, in which there were 100,000 inhabitants, they had added two to the number of Members returned? How did it happen that while they did so, in no county in Ireland had they added a single representative? They were governing Ireland, and' wanted her to join England in her battles. They wanted her to share in her burthens to the extent that the poverty they had created enabled her to, contribute; and what return had they received for all that? They were told that there was-an union, and should there not be an identification—ought :here not to be an assimilation? And how could they come out upon him, and tell him that there was an union as regarded he franchise? How did they estimate the English counties, in giving them the additional Members ? Did they estimate property? No such thin", they took popu lation.—( Loud cheers.) He would show that they had taken it in more instances than one. The Noble Lord and the Learned Recorder had alluded to their having four millions in a state of destitution and pauperism, but they had made no estimate of wealth or property in England in granting the fran chise a they had based it entire y on population.—( Hear.) And did they think there was not common sense enough in Ireland to appreciate the insults to the country and the injustice that had been done her ?—(Hear, • hear, hear.) He would put it to the good sense of the people of England, who, notwithstanding the prejudice against the people of Ire land, had, he would say, much good sense; would not the people of Ireland feel that state of things ? Notwithstanding the miserable confusion of the speech delivered by the Hon. Member for Wakefield (Mr. Las.elles), he would tell them that Cumberland, with 1•26,680 inhabitants, had got, on the passing of the Reform Bill, two additional Members, and now possessed four. Cork, with 713,716 inhabitants, had two Members before the Reform Bill, and had not got one in addition. They took it by population! Here was their population for them. Northumberland, with 179,176 in habitants, got two additional Members ; and -Down, with 337,871 inhabitants, had two Members before the Reform Bill. and had not got one in addition by that measure. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman proceeded at some length to detail the differences of population in various • counties in England, Scotland, and Ireland, and to show that population was the basis of the franchise, and not property ; and proceeded to say that they might tell him there was a union between these countries, but he would ask th , m , was it such a union as he, a lover of liberty, insisting on an equality of rights with them, ought to be content and satisfied with ? And'il he had a right to be dissatisfied with it, would they throw another poisonous ingredient' into the cup of discontent, by refusing an extension of the franchise? The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said he had proceeded to show the injustice done. to Ireland by the Reform Bill, in a comparison of the popUlations of Wales and the county of Cork, which latter, lie contended, from 'its population, was entitled to as many representatives as Wales. He really felt some gratitude to the Noble Lord (Lord Stanley) opposite, not for his intention—not for his motives, but for his not having left the franchise to ex tinguish itself, or rather for net having suffered the landlords to put it out. But for him the people of Ireland might not have so successfully resisted the extinction of the franchise. It WEIS he (Lord Stanley) who summoned them to the field. He would not detain -the House long by going through all those documents to which he had alluded. Those which he had read might serve as specimens of the whole. • They would show the anormous population of their counties—the enormous extent of their then franchise —they would show the enormous population of the Mei counties, and the miserable deficiency that existed in the franchise of these coun , ies. But it was property that was wade the test of the right to vote forro;th ! Upon what princip c, he- would ask, did they disfranchise the boroughs ? Upon what principle, hut on that of population alone. Upon what principle did they enfranchise the boroughs. It was on the prinai ple of populat ion al ane. They used the same principle to dig- franchise and to enfranchise the boroughs. 'I hey used the principle of population wherever and whenever it suit ed their purpose ; and they now took the people cf Ireland and said to them " You are poor, and, iherefore, ytu shall not posers the franchise." NI by that was the very raasim that. they ought the more to posses it. Was it not the poor , man that mos t wan t e d eve r y assis , ante that he could get. l'orty-one years had the Union now lasted, and their excuse, in the present the forty-first year of the Uniqn, for not giving Or juStie t i was, that they were too ppm:. -4Hear, } l eaf, flow at bencheS:) He de sired Hqnsehold Suffrage. Were lie asked whether he would extend that Bill to England,* lie would say that readily and heartily would he use every exertion of his to extend it to England, because he would claim no sight for himself that he would 1. 1 4 extpud tct oilibrz,--:(lllinisliliuir cheers, ) Having something more to say, he disldted entering into the discuslion *of the question how the franchise should be rated. The Noble Lord (Stanley) brought in a Bill to regulate the franchise, and did not venture to tell them what the franchise was. Was ETARY 26, 1841. English good sense to stake a machine without knowing for what? He (Mr. O'Connell) had great respect for the talents of the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter (Sir William Follett). It was impossible not to feel such respect. There was a fascination about his eloquence that could be derived only from the highest emanations of talent, and, he thought, kindliness of disposition. He (Mr. O'Connell) did not mean to pay any idle compliment to€ one who differed so decidedly with him in political opinion, lrit he thought that that Hon. and Learned Gentleman united the qualities of a powerful advocate with judicial determination ; he would make a good Judge, but he (Mr. O'Connell) was greatly sur prised to hear him speak of the beneficial interest. He (Mr. O'Connell) retained his &d love of profession so far as to trespass on the House to show how clear a case he had against the opinions advanced by the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen. The Noble Lord the Member for Northumberland (Lord Howick) had attributed to him (Mr. O'Connell) opinions on the subject of beneficial interest, which had not been uttered by him, and which he wished to correct. He (Mr. O'Connell) thought that the beneficial interest was that which it was worth to a man after deducting his labour and cultivation. So that his own labour was no more an ingredient in the beneficial interest thin if he had got another man to perform that labour, He did not Mame the Noble Lord for the statement which he had attributed to him (Mr. O'Connell). It was no doubt owing to mistake. He (Mr. O'Connell) stated that the freehold fran- of 10. was first created by the Emancipation Act; by that the franchise was, as he believed, clearly of the value of 101. He would not go on quoting what this man or that man said on the subject.—( Hear.) It was manifest the re . porters cii not Understaud what he said on the subject. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman- then proceeded to compare the clauses respecting franchise in the Emancipation Act and the Reform Bi 1, and to contend that if they meant the same they would have contained the same words, but that if they meant differently the words would differ, which was the ease. He was glad to get out of this subject, but he had felt it right to vindicate the Judges against the attacks made upon them. He would to Heaven he had suck a Judge as the Hon. ani Learned Member for Exeter. The Learned Recorder had - - • • • • - - read the opinion of Judge Crampton, who had said there was nothing but a wire-drawn and refined distinction between a meeting of the Judges in the Court of Exchequer and a meet ing in a party in which a brother Judge consults. Was there not this distinction, that in the _one case there was a writ of .. --- error, and in the other no appeal ?—( Hear, hear.) It. was a mockery—with all respect•to the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter—was it not a mockery to say all the Judges should be bound by the opinion •of the majority ? The statute ha'l given an appeal to a single Judge.; it had called for the opinion of . a single Judge. and he was bound to give it upon oath. Itwas not given to the twelve Judges, and why not? If they had done so they must have gone further, and have given it to the House of Lords. They could not leave the franchises of the people to the Judges, neither could they give an appeal to the House of Lords, because they could not give their franchises to the House of Lords.—(Hear, hear.) He therefore laughed to scorn this species of courtesy to the Judges which frittered away the rights of the subject, and took from them the power of appeal, and he would remind the House that the Stuarts for feited the Crown for meddling with the Judges.--(Hear, hear ) And now he respectfully appealed to the House to grant them the franchises they demanded. It was the inten tion of the Reform Bill to grant it, and he had the authority of a gentleman would vote against him that it ought to be in creased. He had the authority of common sense and reason, and of every principle• of justice, that they ought to be put upon an equality with the Eng lish. He asked them, therefore, to give them justice. He had shown them their grievous er.mes towards Ireland They had been told that .the Orange party had been making concessions for the last fifty years. But he would tell that party that they had been for more than a century violating the treaty of Limerick.—(The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was here, as throughout the greater part of his speech, heard very indistinctly, and seemed to labour under peat illness or great emotion. Scarcely a sentence could be correctly understood in the gallery.) America had been lost to Great Britain, be cause the latter had rejected all terms of conciliation. In 1792, when this country was in a state of apparent security, the petition of the Roman Catholics for emancipation was thrown out•upon the motion of Mr. Latouche, the Member for Kildare. But before the year expired, the aspect of affairs was changed, and in the November of that year an Emancipation Act was passed.—( Hear, hear.) They talked to Catholic Ire land of ingratitude, but they forgot that they passed the hrst Act of Emancipation only after they had lost America. It was (as we understood the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen) one of the splendid errors of Napoleon that he overlooked the con dition of Ireland. •It was the infidelity of Franco that secured to Great Britain the Catholic priesthood of Ireland.—( II ear, ) And he agreed with his Hon. Friend, the Member for Limerick, that if an invasion were to take pace to-morrow, that priesthood would be foremost in sending their flocks in arms to oppose the invad, rs. But let them be told that they were demon-priesthood—(Cheers)—that they were surpliced ruffians—( Cheers, :and some confusion)—let them see the ant Jezabels of Liverpool sending petitions' with 27,000 signatures so rienouneing them, and let them see the House of Commons yielding to such petitions—(Cheers, amidst which the conclusion of the sentence was lost,) " You tell me" (sa.'d the Hen. and Learned Gentleman) " you do t;ot feel. Who ever heard of Englishmen feeling?—( Cheers. ) . . You have a perseverance in your people of which` no othei nation can boast; and I have not the folly to think I can terrify you. Ink I will advise.—(Cheers.) I ask you, how long will son be at peace with France?"—(Cheers.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then proceeded to refer to the returns laid before the French Chambers to show the state of prepara tion for war in which: that nation had placed itself. - There was in France an army of 500,000 men, with a reserve of 150,000. The French felt themselves humiliated, and they were watching for the domestic dangers of this country.— ( Hear, hear.) Would it not be wise in such circumstances to have Ireland in a state of conciliation ?—( Hear.) Trhough the national strength of this empire, we might set the whole world in arms at defiance, if the people of the empire were united, with the confidence of equal rights aid equal justice. In the kingdoms of Prussia and the Netherlands, it had been attempted to oppress the Roman Catholic portion of the people. In the former it had been deemed wise to make timely concessions ; the integrity of Prussia was unimpaired. The King of the Netherlands had adopted an opposite course, and he conse quently lost Belgium.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. O'Connell) would not threaten Hon. Members on the other side of the House, but he would tell them they were the real Repealers. —(Cheers.) So much so were.they considered by the people of Ireland, that he •had been requested to make, the Noble Lord . the Member for North Lancashire a member of the Repeal Association.—(Cheers and laughter.) He was sure no one ever deserved it half so well.—( Hear, hear.) He admi.ted that it would be unwise of the people of Ireland to have recourse to violence in their resistance to the measure; and while he (Mr. O'Connell) had influence in that country, and while the Catholic clergy, who were their unpaid magistracy there, could had the people, they would never again have the pleasure of a rebellion in Ireland.— ( Hear, hear. )i They might have outrages, but they would not -have a rebellion. The object of the present measure was to restore the old Orange ascendancy. They taunted the pre sent Government with being the slaves of -the Irish party ; and he believed the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Pembroke, was kind enough to quote him la t night. He wished the Right Hon. Baronet had quoted him more accu rately. He bad spoken'of the offer made to him (Mr. O'Con nell) of the office of Chief Baron, and said that he was unwilling to pollute justice in his person. He did not know 'whether the Hon. Baronet used the expression, but if he had he was .totally mistaken. Looking at the reports he found that 'there was a difference in the expressions, but that the substance was the same. What he (Mr. O'Connell) had -said was, that he had refused the offer of the Justiceship because he had feared, first, that lie would be compelled to manifest a partiality for those who differed with him in politics, for the sake of presery • ing the character of the Bench ; and secondly, because, lest from an affectation of user-candour, he should not do justice to those who were his political friends. They would have no such refusal from Honourable and Learned Gentlemen on the other side.—(Hear, hear, hear, and laughter.) They would have no scruples of that kind to contend with. For the motives he had stoted he had refused the offer made to him, however much he might have desired to enjoy the " otium cum dignitate." • But it appears that the people of Ireland were now to be handed over to the Orange party—that Orange party who would not allow a man to travel on their roads. That was the case in civilised Ulster. He had gone to Bel fast—he had a right to go there ; and one Magistrate had ac cused the Government—because they had sent troops to protect his life—that they were Repealers, while the windows of the room in which he was were broken by anmob. He didnot complain of but he wished to show the spirit which animated the Orange men of Ireland. He found in the Irish newspapers, that when it had been found he had passed unknown through the-town of Dromore, a large mob collected there, and having fired at his (Mr. O'Connell's) effigy—he wished to know whether their arms were registered—afterwards burned it, and, in the midst of party cries, excited a disturbance in the town, and severely injured a Roman Catholic who attempted to remonstrate with them. Those were the men on whose support the party oppo site must rely. Need he remind the House-of the assault on a Roman Catholic's house, some years ago, in Armagh. On that occasion an Hon. and Gallant Member opposite—and there did not exist any where a man of a higher charac ter—was a witness of the disturbance ; and yet, in that case, the party went wholly unpunished.—( Hear, hear.) Again, an Trish party had fired, a few years ago, on inoffensive children at Molyash, in the county of Monaghan; and but a !ew days ago an inoffensive individual had been assailed at a fair at Fermatusgh, and but C.r interference he might have been grievously injured. All that had happened in the North, in what was called the flower of Ireland. Let him again return to statistical details. In four counties only in Ireland was there a majority of Protestants. In Ulster itself there was a majority of 116,000 Roman Catholics; while in the other province the numbers were ten to one, and in the county of Clare there were 286,000 Roman Catholics and only 5,0001 3 ret est ants. Could they in their endeavours to suppress the liberties of such a population call out the militia? Could they insult Ireland by so doing? He believed that they could not. All that the Irish people asked was justice and equality ; but they wouldresist to the last the attempt to extinguish their franchises. Let English Gentlemen recollect the risk they were running, and for what? 'Why, compared with the risk, it was for no thing.—(Cheers.) He should doubtless be told that he had threatened—that he had used high language.—(Cheers.) He had spoken in a tone and temper that became the representa tive of the Irish people.—(Cheers and laughter from the Op position.) He was the representative of the great majority of them—(Cheers)—and he was trusted by them.—(Cheers. He should be told that lie had spoken sedition, but let them recollect that he had spoken it to warn them of something worse than sedition. He would be degrading himself and his country if he were to submit to take any right of franchise less than England.—(Cheers.) If they pasted that Bill, they would be depriving him of a great part of his power over the Irish people. He asked them to do so—(Cheers)—he asked them to disarm him of his power, by doing justice to his country—(Cheers. )—but if they refused, they would arm him with ten-fold power, because they would arm him with right.— ( Loud cheers. ) Sir ROBERT PEEL could not accede to the justice of the eulogium which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had passed Upon himself, that he had spoken in a tone and temper worthy of the representative of the Irish people. —(Loud cheers. ) Any speech delivered in a tone and temper more unworthy of that character he had never heard. —( Vehement cheering.) He did not complain of the high tone he had assumed, but he di 1 complain of the apparent delight with which lie had gloated on the history of the past animosities between the two countries.—(Loud cheers.) He had met with no sympathy however —k Continued cheering)—not because the House was indifferent to the welfare of Ireland—(Cheers) — not because.they were actuated by a desire of reviving past disputes between England and Ireland.—(Loud cheers.) lie would tell the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that there were notlen men in that House who responded to his efforts to rip up and exasperate all the old animosities.—( Load cheers. What was the use of dwelling on the history of vast differences —of alluding to what the Hon. Gentleman 'called the oppi es sip of seven centuries.,—(CheeiS:)i The Hon. and Learned Gentleman allitcrect to a time 'when he said that a wolf's load. waS - iafued at'the same price as the head of po Irish Catholic, and would have it insinuated that the spirit of those days actuated the Legislature of the piesent. And on that part of • a • the representation pt; the Ron. and Learned Gentleman, he would asp; the Noble Lord oPposite, the leader of that -House, and *the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland, if they be t eyed t hat that was a correct assertion. —( Vehement cheering. ) And in the allusion to the part which Ireland . might take in case of the growing difficulties of this country, he would again say that he believed • the 1-lon. and Learned Gentleman was holding a language unworthy of the representative of the Irish people.—( Loud cheers.) He believed that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was libelling his country—( Vehement cheering)—when lie insinuated that they would nbt assist us in repelling the attacks of France or America; if by any un fortunate occurrence of circumstances a quarrel . should arise with either of those countries. He had heard with pleasure the mere generous, and he believed the more just representa tions of an Irish representative—of an Irish Roman Catholic, who, indignant at the attacks made upon the fair fame and character of his country last night—in the course of that night's debate said that he did not believe that if a quarrel came his countrymen would separate themselves from the destinies of . . this country, but had made it his proud boast that, whatever might be their domestic quarrels on the registration, or the extension of the franchise, the Roman Catholic priests would be the first to rally their flocks round the standard of England, and forget all minor differences in their eager support of the common cause. —( Cheers.) Hehoped the Right Hon: the Secre tary at War, the Right Hon. the Vice- President of the Board of Trade : and the Hon. Member for Liskeard, the three who had attempted by menace to extort from the House con cessions, even against their reason and against their conviction, if so it might be—he hoped they had _ listened to the speech of the Honourable and ,earned Alernter—he hoped they had well considered what prospect there was of those concessions being made on the same grounds, arguments for the subsequent Menaces—he hoped flat after the candid avowal of the Ilon. and Learned Gentleman they would consider what further concessions the Hon and Learned Gentleman might hereafter demand in the course, perhaps, of next Session, as the price of the purchase of peace.—( Cheers. ) That was the only part of the speech of the Hon. Gentleman for which he could give him credit. The Hon. and Leamcd Gentleman said, thaY: if they granted him that conceision, it would disarm him of much of his power. But what was the tenor of the who'e of the first part of the speech of the Hoe. Gentleman? Di , l he not tell them that although they had made a sacrifice of one-fourth of the revenues of the Established Church fur the sake of peace and conciLa tion that that would now be of no advantage unless the other three-fourths were sacrificed ?—( Loud cheer ing.) What was the spirit of the whole of the speech of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman? With the expres sions of peace and . conciliation on his lips, such a deter mined profession of intolerance he had never heard —(Loud cheers.) Why he had brought it forward as a matter of grave charge against a clergyman of the Church of England that he had done, what ? That he had petitioned the House of Com mons. Why,`the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had begun Lis own speech by readieg a petition to the Howe of Commons from a,Vicar-General of the Roman Catholic Church. if a Roman Catholic Vicar-General might, in s•roug and emphatic langu ge, not immediately connected with his religious func - _ _ petition the HOUEC of Commons—and who que'stionel his right to do so—surely the Hon. and Learned Gentleman might extend the same measure of justice to a minister of the Established Church, who, having . heard that the sacrifice of a quarter of the revenues of that Church had done nothing for the purchase of peace, but that the re mainder was required, had presented a petition to draw the at tenfion of Parliament. Surely the Hon. Gentleman could not contend that that was inco-rect or unreasonable. —( Loud cheering.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had com plained of attacks on the Judges. Certain of the Judges had agreed with him in opinion, and their opinion had been com mented on ; and the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that nothing could be so unwarrantable nr so unworthy as to call the purity of the Judicial Bench in question. But five minutes had not elapsed before the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, find ing that the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench (Mr. Justice Crampton) differed with him in opinion, attacked that Learned Judge in the molt vehement manner, forgetting all he had said of the unworthiness of these attempts at the degradation of the Judicial Bench.—(Cheers.) If the extension of the fran chise were just—if it were cons'stent with past engagements—if it were consistent with the • great legislative Act which had given emancipation to the Roman Catholics—if it would con duce to the order and social welfare of Ireland he would en treat the House to forget the inflammatory lanugage of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman — to forget the spirit of his decla- mation, which was so calculated to inju - re any cause, and to do what was just in spate of the advocacy of the Learned Gentleman. If, however, they were not satisfied that it was politic to dis turb settlements that now existed—not to disturb but to sub vert them—if they thought it would not procure the social welfare of Ireland, then he would say, don't pass it in the hope that by passing it they would secure the favour of that Hon. and Learned Gentleman, or advance the cause of conciliation. —(Cheers.) Why did he say this ? The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had insinuated that the diminution, or rather the want of an extended representation in Ireland, was a greater injury than no representation at all. The Hon. Gentleman had used these words, that it was not only an injury but an in sult to the pe Tie cf Ireland to give that country 105 Members. The Hon. Member had also used these words which were appli cable to the Noble Lord oppnsite, that it was natural chat those who were injured and Insulted should continue to hate them. Now he ( Sir 11 Peel) was not the man who hai in- lured or insulted them. It was the Government who passed the Reform Bill that was responsible. --(Hear, hear.) Would it not be wise, therefore, that they should well consider the . whole of the question, not making any partial distinctions ; but if they were to make concessions against their reason and con viction for the sake of peace, they should snake the whole con cession that was demanded from them, and not give to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that by which he would extort the rest, without even purchasing a temporary calm.—(Cheering. ) Supposing that the foreign prospects were more cloudy next year than now, and supposing that the Honourable Gen tleman should give h:s notice for !extended 'representation, and supposing that the Honourable Gentleman had said, If you don't give it to me I shall force it from you, would that Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary at War, tell them that they shoeld csncede that which was asked, for the purpose of making Irtland available as the right arm of England? The Hon, Member fir Liskeard had seemed to dwell with much complacency upon that state of things, when insurrection did not break out, but when he said by the cunning device of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman insurrection was ready to break out.— ' (Hear.) He had heard with disgust it stated that the present was a question not of votes but of arming—(Cheers)—would, the demand for increased representation be a question of arm ing and not of votes? Would the Honourable and Learned Gentleman promise, if this concession were made, that lie would abandon all future schemes of agitation, and de part from those devices by which he keeps a country under the menaces of insurrection.—(Cheers.) He had al ready disturbed the peace of the country, interrupted its in dustry, and prevented the importation of capital into it— (Cheers )—and would he accept the compliment of the Hon. Member for Liskeard, that he it was who had devised an in strument eminently applicable for the purposes of insurrection? If the present measure was a just one—if it was for the welfare of Ireland, then he trusted that, notwithstanding the state ments of that Hon. and Learned Gentleman, the House would show its determination to do justice to Ireland. Let those who had public duties to pc: form claim to themselves the privilege of dispassionately considering whether the measure then under their consideration was a measure perfectly con sistent with tho best interests of Ireland, and whether it was calculated to advance the independence of the electors, and promote the social welfare of the country.—( Hear, hear.) He would now consider what the real nature of the present proposal was. Could they deny that it was a proposal to sub vert the present representative system in Ireland, and to give a new representative system? By the Bill it was proposed, in the place of the present franchise in Ireland, to have a declared franchise, and rating to - the extent of fit In England they had a declared franchise, independent and beyond all rent and charges. In Ireland they proposed to attach no such condition to the freehold—the mere rating of the freehold was sufficient te,give a vote,--k gear, hear'.) The . freehold .it self, might' be - worse than nothing ; there might be mortgages or other in cumbrances upon it absorbing altogether the profits. In Ireland that would be no disqualification. (Cries of " Hear, hear.") The freeholder, once rated, was not called upon to give that- assurance which the English freeholder must F ive, that his freehold was above rents and charges. In Ireland the freehold franchise was to be entirely free from them. They proposed a lease freehold franchise of fourteen years, for which they required nothing more than a rating to the poor. Of coarse residence was not required. All that was required was occupancy. That franchise was a more ex tensive one than the household franchise. It was not the old scot and lot franchise which was abolished, becatr,o the scot and lot voter was dependent ; far it was not necessary fur a five pound leaseholder to pay any taxes ;it was not necessary for him to pay the Poor-rates. Nay, it was not necessary that the property which he held -should be liable to the Poor-rates. Though his property was chargeable to the Poor-rate, he was under no obligation. to pay it. Therefore, in the ca eof the freehold franchise, as he had said before, it was free from rents and incumbrances. In the case of the leasehold fran chise, it exempted the voter altogether from any obligation to pay the rale in respect of which the franchise was acquired. In the towns they had reduced the franchise arbitrarily from ten pounds to five. had they assigned any reason for this ? Had they proved that the franchise in towns was diminished?— ( Hear, hear.) -Had they any suspicion that it was so ? Nqw, he did not intend to enter at all into the details of this ques. tion ; not one word would he say about beneficial interest, not one word about the solvent tenant test. When his Noble Friend's Bill came on lie should be ready to discuss the de tails of it; " but I will not permit myself " (addressing the Government benches), "to be diverted from the consideration of the deformities of your measure by being drawn into a discussion upon the clauses of my Noble Friend's."— (Loud cheers.) The introduction of that Bill was the main argument upon which this measure was made to rest.— Nut one word had they heard from Ministers in defence of this measure.—(Hear, hear.) They had not said one ward to convince them that they were consulting the real interests of the people ; they had not said a word to prove that the mea sure would be for the social welfare of Ireland. The single argument which they brought forward as a justification of this measure was, that his Noble Friend had brought forward some other measure • for the amendment of the registration. Now, in order that he might not. be misconstrued, he would say at once that he admitted the evils which were so generally complained of arising out of the uncertainty of the franchise, and the necessity that there was for adopting some mode of de fining and determining it. He admitted, too, that these evils were aggravated by the unfortunate differences which existed in Ireland upon the subject. With whom the blame of 'that difference rested lie would not inquire ; but he was bound to respect the motives of the Judicial Bench. It was perfectly unjust, however,. to object to the Bill of the Noble Lord be cause he had not suggested a satisfactory mode of defining the franchise. It was not just to say, You shall not cure the ad mitted evils until Parliament can agree to a definition of the franchise. Still snore monstrous and unjust was it to say, We will not allow- you to cure the imperfections of the Irish reistration unles you con sent to subvert the Reform Act.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Menlbr. for the Queen's county had said yesterday that nothing be more disgusting and demoralizing than the of Irish registration, and those evils were admitted, _a o n i a I set five years were suffered to elapse without the prof at os i a iirrht that present system t medy. The Member for Carlow had stated o ; the franchise the most imperfect and absurd definition year, said the Hon. was that adopted in the boroughs. , ea a r motion Was made should be an 01 Baronet, yeuro a w ttr s e k s i s e i gf thetl se 3 H l e i n u i s s e te r thati al b ch e L n a e c r l e i benches, instruc tion to the Committee before they proceeded with the Bill, to define the franchise. Who opposed that? The Noble Lord and Hon Gentlemen opposite. They divided against that in struction, and thus decided upon this ground, that the matter required serioas consideration, that they had not sufficient evi dence, that they were not in a condition to define the franchise. Now, he would ask, in what better condition were they then ? What had been the result of their subsequent deliberation? By the Bill they made a complete revolution in the franchise. It destroyed the freehold franchise altogether. It was not only imperfect, but it abolished altogether the test of profit de rivable from the freehold. It would work a complete subvers sion of the franchise. It was a franchise worse than that of to ur and lot. It was more extensive than the household suffrage,t etnr ut a se n e d tiht , ta l e i tr e et there e o ir u ee l t d ew ask, aastiti Toiwemat,sri titten nehgeoan Catholics i s, nteenweßi entered with lei retelfide Act?en - nt passed without the slightest g lt ag m e .a m s Ca wa th s olic party,no compact precluded it l b f tb t e ha ß t om ß a il n l I t e ;l , r ) C ;ia t tol L sv them from agitating any question of thought proper. But a compact Was entered into that had all the force of a public engagement, pact was gat 'reduced to writing or embodied in Act of although thatc i o,arn r - liament n yet the 'Nobl e Secretary for the Colonies would not deny thatahere were compacts made which bound public men , and which Legislatu res ought respectto if they hoped to gain confidence in thei r d ec i s i ons. The declarations of Lords .Althorp and Grey, when the Reformßill was under discussion, had already been quoted. He would therefore pass on to what fell from the fion. Secretary for the Colonies in 1837. EVENING EDITION. Upon that occasion he said that, having forwarded the Reform Bill, he telt himself bound, by the engagements then entered into, and that although the people were not precluded from requiring a reconstruction of the representation-( Hear, hejr) --yet he would be guilty of a breach of ' faith and honour towards those with whom lie thus acted, if he caunteaenced such demands. He quoted that for the purpose of demonstrating, that, although it might be competent for Parliament to revoke and repeal a solemn act like the Reform Bill, aithoa s th there was no written p'edge given, yet there might be circumstances in which public men, having engaged the consent of large masses of the people, having made con cessions on one ride and compromises on the other-there might be circumstances wherein, for the public interests, it was necessary to adhere to the promises and the declarations then made. Now, what were the circumstances under which be brought forward the Emancipate ;n Bid. History was now asserting its rights, and it was hardly necessary for him to preserve that delicacy which must be main tained by a Minister of the Crown on recent events. It was perfectly well known that in bringing that Bill forward they had to contend with the scruples of the Sovereign. It was brought forward in 1829, and in the preceding year the House of Lords, by majority of 44, refused to entertain the question of relief at ale He brought fog ward that measure, and it was perfectly well understood that before it passed the constituent body in Ireland should, if possible, be made inde pendent-that the 40s. freeholders should be abolished, and a 10/. franchise substituted. lie had no doubt it was upon the faith of that condition that the Bill received the assent of many -it was upon that assurance that many gave it a re luctant assent. The Noble Secretory for the Colonies would not deny that, fir, only a few nights ago, he admitted that that formed part of the contract. Even the Noble Secre tary fee Ireland acted upon a different impression from that which actuated him now. - He refused leave even to the Hon. and Learned Member fur Dublin to bring in a Bill for the alto ration of the franchise ; he rested his refusal upon the double ground that the measure thee proposed was a measure that would subvert the settlement made by the passing of the Catho lic Relief Bill of 1829, and that made by the Reform Bill in 1832. Now he had said last year, and with perfect sincerity, that he was for the fulfilment, on the spirit in which it was brought for ward, of the Reform Bill. He adhered to that declaration, and he thought they were bound to say that the spirit in which it was brought forward should le fulfilled on each side, and that el.' the conditions attached to it should be performed. So far from wishing to restrict the bona fide franchise in Ireland by any measure of registratiOn, he confessed he should see with great pain (he was sure his Noble Friend entertained the same sentiments), any great diminution of the franchise in Ireland inconsistent with the spirit either of the Relief or the Reform Bill. He should suspend his judgment until he saw the evi dence. He should know the extent to which it prevailed first he should learn the fact ascertained, next the extent, and next the causes that had led to it. He should see whether it was attributable to the reluctance of the landlot d to grant leases, or whether it did not arise from the unwillingness of the unfortu nate freeholder to be placed in such a position between his landlord and his priest.-(Hear.) • He must know all these things before lie could form his judgment as to whether the remedy was'necessary ; and, above all, before he framed a judg ment of the nature of the remedy to be applied. He should inquire whether the restriction of the franchise arose from the nue illingriess or refusal of the landlord to grant taxes, and if that were to be the Alin, there was no remedy whatever. The new franchise in counties depended on the grant of leases, and it might be defeated by the refusal of the landlord. How could he decide upon so important a question, and advise a. remedy, for the evil 'alleged - to exist, when, for aught he knew, that remedy might be perfectly insuiliciere?- -t, Hear. ), He had said it was made a condition for the Relief Bill thaw the 40s. freeholders should be • abolished. Their object was to establish, if possible, an independent constituency in Ireland a constituency not independent merely of their landlords, but their intention was to establal, if possible, a constituency that shoUld be free - from the influence of the p: Test as well as the undue and unjust influence of the landlord. -(Cheers.) Had they abolished the 40s. freeholder on wanton and arbi trary grounds-was it a mere sacrifice to the caprice of any party that required it? Why there was the most irrefragablw proof from the Roman Catholics themselves, that they were a curse to Ireland.-(Renewed cheers.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman denied that he had given such evidence. Let him look at pages 163, IES, and 167 of the Lords' Report.-(Hear, hear.) It was upon the evidence of Roman Catholics that they had abolished the 40s. freeholders_ The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in his evidence, had marine a reservation in favour of fee-simple freeholders It was quite, true Inc had. but he (Sir R. Peel) wad like to know hews many bona fide fee-simple 40s. freeholders there were then-ex isting? The Hon. and Learned Member's language was, " The system of 40s. freeholders in Ireland was essentially different from that in England. There were, however, some who had a fee-simple estate, and these nobody would meddle with. As re ga'ded those who load a derivative interest there was an immense accumulation of perjury from the mueiplicity of oaths, and they were part se the live stock of the estate."-(Choirs. ) lie was risked, Da you think you would avoid the evil of e patens; by raising the franchise?"-and his answer w- e e, " I do."-(Cheirs.) " A man who had the 101. fratwere se , would be known among his neighbours ; he would have a character to preserve." "Do you think the raising of the qualith ation would be productive of great benefit to Ireland ?" -" I think it would."-(Cheers ) In my humble judg ment, it would he no small benefit, if we got rid of any por tion of the perjury, and it is the commencement of what we want, much in Ireland, a substantial yeomanry."-(Loud cheers. ), Now, let the Hon. and Learned Member aces:tent for the fe e s.: dence and the denial.-(Renewed cheers.) Yes, it we e o w y evidence of the Hon. and Learned Member, and of th 4 R m.. and Learned Membn• for Tipperary-they were the men weee had sacrificed the 40s. freelialders.-( Loud chee r s,) Th ey had given the evidence that had tended to conv; i n ee the public mine that, as it existed the franchise we.:l b. mockery of in-, dependence. One instance was given, when a gentleman tr e at ma le 2,001) electors in his estate in Tipperary. The Hon. and: Learned Member now argued that, because parties were poor, they were not the less entitled to the franchise, anal that it was an insult to Ireland to withhold the frauchisc front !the poor. That was the Gentleman who held that langusgo in the year 1825, " 'there were heart-rending scenes following elections, and after al political feelings, it was difficult to reconcile one self to those miseries." Hs (Mr. O'Connell) was asked s' ele following question :-" Did not that system give a direct. ere _ mium to mismanagement?" Answer, " certainly didear were complaints made even to the clergy of wrote' . JCS be i ng compelled to swear that they were forty shilling .d there frecheldere when they could not conscientious'y have given teat oath." If he (Sir It. Peel) supported in a liberal stern mere letter, the constituency which it' , and not in the V establish -if he asked the ten , r een ' was intended to semi freehold to be constituted at• it was by he was to be told that that was + ea Emancipation Act, en insult to Ireland. Because he would not add to the se emu which was proved in the year 1825 to have exhibiteed "heart rending scetaes-to ruin the freeholder NN 110 vetees against his landlord-to expose wretches to perjury, or F . ,,reari nl6 .. that they were forty shilling freeholders when they reall y were , not"-he was told that he insulted the people Of Ireland, Did he insult them when he sought to establish that " respectable yeomanry" which had been men tioned. lie (Sir R. Peel) wanted to show Hon. Members that the sacrifice of the 40s. freeholders was not an arbitrary act of theirs-that the abolition of that system was for the social welfare of Ireland as shown from the evidence that they had read, Anti that they should not now turned upon with a motion for the re-establishment of the 40s. freeholders ; that it should 'not now be said that they intended to injure and insult, Ireland, when they only desired to adhere to the compact which had been made-when they Wished 'to peevent that mockery of independence which the 405. freeholders exhibited.-(Opposi tints cheers.) He would take the evidence of a Roman Catholic priest, the Rev. Mr. Tighe ; and that clergyman was asked what would be the effect of making a 10/. freehold as the basis of the franchise? He replied that he thought it would establish an order of freeholders that, in his opinion; from their intelli gence, would go an moral agents to vote.-( Hear, hear, hear.) The majority of tat House-such was the effusion into it--did net well remember the 40s. freehold system. They who were some twenty years in Parliament understood that system. He would give a detail of it to those who did not understand the syastem. He took it from high authority-from the evidence of county Members, who were not prejudiced in favour of the Conservative interest., as was made clear by Her Majesty's Government-the evidence which he would quote was that of Mr. Dominick Browne, the then Member for Mayo. Here then was a short detail of the 40s. freehold system. That Gentleman said, " Suppose a farm of 100 acres Wee to be let out, it would be subdivided into 20 or 25 portions-it would be let at a greater rent than the grazier could afford for it, and those persons who occupied the land would register es 405. freeholders out of these separate holdings, for which they paid a rack rent. lie knew upwards of sixty persons on one lease who were joint tenants, and paid a rent of 70!. a year, which he believed to be a rack rent, and every one of them registered." Sixty persons paying a rack rent of 701. a year, and each person registering as er 40s. freeholder ! The gentleman before quoted (Mr. Browne) knew a place where sixty-six persons were 'Mile upon Bishop's land, which in Ireland did no t crea t e afreehold. The object l' the landlord was to create a freehoid for the men living on the Bishop's land, and for that purpose he let them a barren mountain-part of his estate -at 124 a year in a joint tenantry, and every one of these sixty-six registered. Hb also knew of a good num ber of tenants who had taken leases in 1814, when land was exceedingly dear. These persons had been two years re gistered as 40s. f ree h o ld ers by v irtue of their leases ; t hey thought the received a reduction from their landlords of 50 per cent to enable them to vote ; but still he t r h e o nte. But landlaid was entitled to enforce the wh i ole tn which the there were further details of the h m e an vo n t e er . . The landlord landlords secured the dependence o f f t une( a 40s. freehold, attached to a small p himself, and, in doing so over the tenant, secured 40s. freeholder. Now, it was secured the dependence of t t was to prevent such abuses, ds as these--it which freehold, by the ope-riaSoetnooof the control that he had upon such giouti f conciliating the Roman Ca tholics, e o that°swhich could contribute to the veolfutd' t n : t e i T f -"r vierres n) consider whether the Iran and not merely for the purP Irelasnod,mtuheaht th e e o y a l t a p r l o a u in g e h d t of. forwardpia aoeialim b p u ro t the o p posit l e d ( now introduce would be liable to just measure which perversion to is tic 1' the 40s. freehold system w as? the same for a short time, all undue influence of the Let them put aside,. fran chise Noble whi Lord eh h e 1 the and inquire mac t icrfranchise proposed may not parte , landlord him perverted to the worst purposes, and to obstruct the o e h b Noble der Lord t o pr N o .o p t o e s , e d b t y h that givingvery be .Ireland of see al rogress in e improvement.- ( Hear, hear, would of land or tenements to he rated at 5/. provided he had held it over fourteen years. Now it was admitted there was great political excitement inlreland; a great desire to command poli ticalqueaalrfy) a Th l e iou N s influence through the means of votes. The objection to his Noble Friend's Bill was, that it would operate a; a restric tion of the franchise ; the boast of the Noble Lord's Bill was, that it would extend the franchise. Could he (Sir It. Peel) have a more conclusive proof that there was in Ireland a natu ral di , position by the use of land to increase political influence_ Now where would be the difficulty of procuring float influence which the 40s. freeholds gave by means of the Noble Lord's Bill ? By means of the Noble Lord's Bill any man whet chose to divide his estate might qualify a certain number of persons and secure their dependence actually by the same means as secured the dependence of the 40s. freeholders. There might he a house. ' and a vote attached to it moire valuable than the House itself. The lease need be of no value.-(Cheers.) Let lion. Gen tlemen observe the influence operating upon the landlords ; the double influence of gain and political power because it clearly appeared from the report of their °t Se en largeiminissio ath ner i .s a t t ha a t small holdings let at much higher rentsth 07 quantity a land than fo r a large quantity. ones, there was greater competition for a a small evidence that the rent paid yet in the county of Armagh , w There w he ntest of ait came to the the rate, was rated at a qua rter or one-fifth that b e i ng paid. This, then, was a mea t ea t inducement to divide pr o p er ty i n t o small i w eei ngs , the landlord gaining a great increase ; but superadded to that, was another motive-that of political influence. Now, who were the parties who acquired political power by the old system of 40s. freeholders?-The Right Hon . Baronet then quoted the evidence of Mr. Justice Day, as to the effect of the 40s. freehold suffrage, but no more of the, quotation reached us than that it was " a sort of un:see versal suffrage.") Mr. Dominick Browne was asked, ee' it was not the etstom for attorneys to Inv, small esteeis (Cheers)-and 'the answer was, " 'Yes; it is a very crewmen custom." Another was asked whether 'hien 'did not eain con- • sideration and influence With the Grand Juries by making 40s. freeholders, and he -said'" Yes." Another said it was a recommendation to the Magistrates to make them. So they would see that under the 40s. freehold system there was great temptation to abut. Now, he wished to know f Men. 111