The Sun. — London, England, 1834-04-30 00:00:00

THE ARMY. In conformity with a recent order to the army in Ha nover, the hussar regiments are to be converted into regi ments of light dragoons. The Royal Hussars, which here tofore formed the Ist regiment, are to be called " The King's Dragoons the 2d is to be styled " The Queen's Own ;" and the 3d, " The Duke of . Cambridge's Dra goons." On Thursday a squadron of the 17th Lancers, consisting of Captains Kean and Shawe's troops, marched into Ches terfield, on their route from Hounslow barracks, and on Friday morning proceeded to occupy the barracks at Shef field. Leeds is to be the head-quarters of the regiment. (From the Limerick Chronicle.) A squadron and head-quarters of the 4th Dragoon Guards march from Caher on Monday next for Ballincollig, under Colonel Chatterton, and they will arrive there on the Wednesday following. The 85th Light Infantry yesterday went to the field in summer dress, white trousers, rather light wear so early in the season. A company of the 85th, from this garrison, marched to Newcastle West this day. Colonel Holloway, C. 8., with the commanding officer of Engineers in this garrison, and barrack master, made an inspection and survey of the several ordnance buildings in Limerick, including the Artillery-square, Castle Bar racks, S. John's, and New Barracks. The lieutenant colonel this day proceeded to Templemore for the like purpose, and it is supposed with a view to recommend se veral barracks for consolidation in the S.W. district. Captain Tinling, royal engineers, from Woolwich re places Captain Walker, royal engineers, in this garrison. The sth Dragoon Guards, and 80th regiment, from Dublin, left Liverpool on Tuesday for Manchester and Oldham.; On Tuesday evening four companies of the 59th regi ment, from Dublin ' embarked on board the Thames steamer for Liverpool. The embarkation of the remaining companies has been countermanded for the present, and it is probable they . will return to their quarters at Naas. The 83d regiment, although on board transports this week past at Cove, has not sailed for Halifax, Nova Scotia, in consequence of the alarm of disturbances in England. At present the troops at Buttevant are the 51st depot under the command of Major Ross, 76th depot, commanded by Major Hutchinson, and a detachment of the 7th Dra goon Guards under Lieut. Blake. Major Ross, as senior Major, is commandant of the garrison. The 7th Dragoon Guards have got the route from Ballincollig for Caher and this garrison, to replace the 4th Dragoon Guards. Two troops of the 7th will arrive here on Thursday next, under the command of Major Nugent, to succeed the squadron of the 4th in this garrison, commanded by Major Rickaby. The 7th Dragoon Guards are one of the oldest cavalry regiments in the service, and singular to say, per haps the only one in the British army that was not engaged in the late war. The regimental facings are black and gold. The officers of the regiment are Colonel Commandant, Lieut.-General Sir Robert Bolton ; Lieut. Colonel Clark; Majors Gowdie and Nugent; Captains Curteis, Bishop, Bolton, Atkinson, Thewles, and Rich ardson ; Lieutenants Hickman ( Adjutant), Le Marchant, Cunynghame, Gibsone, Hunter, Sandilands, and Blake ; Cornets Holmes, Lucas, Thompson, Lord Viscount Kil coursie, Codrington, Peters, and Clark ; Paymaster Hun ter ; Quartermaster Johnson ; Surgeon Cathcart, Assist ant-Surgeon Barry, Veterinary Surgeon Schroeder. The rumour respecting the removal of the Ordnance Storekeeper and Barrack-master, William Blackwell, Esq. from Duncannon Fort, is without foundation. A full company of the 90th Light Infantry, from Kil kenny, under Lieutenant James, has marched by a sudden route to Carlow, and another company to 3laryborough, to replace the 5 9th regiment. SPAIN. (From our Second Edition of last night. ) We have received news this afternoon from Spain. A detachment of the Spanish army, under Rodil, has crossed the frontier of Portugal, and entered Pinhel, from which the Pretender fled on their approach, taking the direction of Castel Branco. The Infante and his Court left Pinhel on foot, in the middle of the night, and were followed at three in the morning by 80 horsemen, and about 500 persons on foot, forming the whole of that army with which he was to have conquered Spain. All his correspondence had fallen into the hands of the Queen's troops, who were prepar ing to follow him in the direction he had taken across the mountains. _ . It is with great satisfaction we also learn that D. Agustin Arguilles, who has long resided in this country, has been recalled, and named one of the Supreme Council of Spain and the Indies. He has been long known as one of the most eloquent, able, and disinterested men in Spain, and as such was imprisoned in a dungeon during the long period that elapsed between the return of Ferdinand, in 1315, and the revolution, in 1820. Since the subversion 1 1 of the constitution in 1823, he has lived in England, in honourable retirement. We are glad to learn that his friend Quadra is associated with him in his present ap pointment, and that General Alava, the friend of the Duke of Wellin gt on, has received the same mark of distinction from the panish Government. Moscoso is appointed successor to Burgos, instead of Torreno, as formerly reported. • He is represented as a most excellent man, and steady friend ofeonstitutional liberty. The accounts received by letters from the Leeward Islands concur in their statements of the tranquillity which prevails in all the islands. It ap pears that at St. Christopher's the planters in one or two instances have adopted the system of cultivating the land by the plough with great success, and it is supposed that this example will be followed in many instances in the other islands, and will render the planters more independent of negro labour. It will not be long before the owners of estates will see the advantage of letting them to enterprising and skilful tenants, who will introduce such improvements as will render it unnecessary to depend entirely on negro labour. ORNITHOLOGY.—A specimen of that rare bird the Hoopoe (Upupa Epops, of Linnmus) was shot at Skibo last week. This rare and beautiful visitant of our shores is very common in Egypt, where it is seen in small flocks, and is ornamented with a rich crest, consisting of a double row of feathers of a pale orange yellow, tipped with black. The general colour of the bird is brown, crossed by broad bars of white.—Aberdeen Herald. RARA AVM—Last week a martin's nest, with full fledged young, was discovered on the pre mises of a farmer in Cowbit, near Spalding. As early as six weeks ago a pair was observed hovering about his house, and excited the attention of several individuals.—Stamford News. SINGULAR FEROCITY OF A CAT.—A few weeks ago a woman belonging to Aberdeen, in travelling from Paisley to Lasswade, stopped a night at a small village south of Airdrie. In the house where she had taken up her abode for the night there were two Corpses lying—the landlady of the house and her son, the latter of whom had met his death in the following singular manner :—On the death of the landlady the body had been laid out, according to the usual custom, in an adjoining apartment. The same night, however, it was discovered that a favourite cat belonging to the house had got into where the corpse was lying, and eaten away part of the face. The son went into the room to drive away the cat, when, as if maddened by the food on which it had been preying, it flew furiously on him, and bit his arm in several places, mortification took place, and spread so rapidly that in two hours after he was a corpse.— Western Independent. A MONSTER.—On Sunday night last, about eight o'clock, as Miss Eliza Hogan, a fine looking young woman, about 18 years of age, the daughter of respectable parents residing at No. 15, Pulteney-street, Islington, was returning home, after having passed the evening with a few friends, on her arrival near Ashby-street, St. John-street-road, she was met by a tall thin fellow, attired in black, with a ferocious countenance, who interrupted her progress in a rude manner. The young lady endeavoured to avoid him, but he followed her for several yards, when he sought an opportunity when there were no passengers near the spot, and rushing towards her, he made a stab at her with an instrument which he had in his hand, and it penetrated the whole of her clothes, and inflicted a deep and dangerous wound in her groin. The monster instantly ran away, as fast as possible, down St. John-street-road. The young lady screamed " Murder," and, weltering in her blood, she hastened, .as well as she was able, to a green grocer's shop a short distance from Ashby-street, on entering which she fainted away. It was immediately discovered that she hadbeen wounded, on which she was instantly carried to the house of Mr. Wilson, surgeon, of Northampton-square, who promptly attended to her, and dressed the wound, which was very deep, and must, from the formation, have been inflicted by a dirk, or some similar instru ment. The young lady, on being restored to her sens es, was extremely exhausted through loss of blood, and she was immediately placed in a hackney-coach, and conveyed to the residence of her disconsolate pa rents, where she is now confined to her bed in a dan gerous condition. Her parents endeavoured to elicit from her as full a description as possible of the mon ster's person, &c., and yesterday information was given at the various police-offices and station-houses in the metropolis of the atrocious act, and it is hoped that the wretch may shortly be discovered and brought to condign punishment. apA:v., 4 • ' , . 1. ,`, „ , POOR LAWS. had the honour to represent (Clare), praying for a repeal of the Union. Mr. WILKS begged to ask the noble lord (Althorp), as tho Poor Laws Amendment Bill was one of great importance to the country, whether his Majesty's government had adopted any means for circulating copies of the bill through the different parishes of England and Wales ? Lord ALTHORP said that no particular means had been adopted for circulating copies of the bill beyond the means that were usually resorted to. Mr. WILKS gave notice that to-morrow he should move that printed copies of the bill be sent to every parish in England and Wales. The SPEAKER said before the hon. gentleman gave his notice, he would beg to apprise him that four copies had been sent to every Petty Sessions throughout the country. He did not know whether that would answer the hon. member's purpose or not, but he believed they had been sent to the amount of 700. Mr. WILKS then withdrew his motion; at the same time giving notice that he would postpone his bill relative to friendly societies to the 14th of May. Mr. LYNCH presented a petition from the county of Galway, praying for a repeal of the union. Mr. MARSHALL presented a petition from Leeds, for the better observance of the Sabbath. Mr. STRUTT presented a petition from the Dissenters of Derby, praying relief. Colonel VERNER presented a petition, signed by seve ral thousands of the Protestant inhabitants of Armagh, against a repeal of the union. CHURCH PATRONAGE. Mr. A. JOHNSTONE presented petitions from se veral places in Scotland against the present system of church patronage. ' Having a number of petitions to pre sent for the better observance of the Sabbath, he trusted, that if the question came on to-morrow evening he and the other hon. members who had petitions to present on that subject, would be afforded an opportunity of doing so. Mr. LITTLETON presented a petition from an indi vidual named Morgan Fouls, praying that he may be ex empted from furnishing a report of the profits he derives from the superintendence of a lighthouse. ADJOURNED DEBATE. The SPEAKER rose andput the question to the house, whether it was intended to go on with the motions for that evening, or to resume the adjourned debate. Lord ALTHORP was understood to say, that it was his wish that the adjourned debate should be resumed, in the hope that it might terminate that evening. THE GENERAL POST-OFFICE. Mr. WALLACE gave notice that, on the 6th of June, he would move for a commission to inquire into the regula tions of the General Post-office. KILMAINHAM HOSPITAL. Mr. A. C. O'DWYER begged to ask the right hon. Secretary at War whether the correspondence that took place on the subject of abolishing Kilmainham Hospital might be produced? Mr. ELLICE had no objection to the proposal of the hon. gentleman, but wished for a few days to produce the correspondence. After a few words from Mr. SHAW, Mr. O'DwvEit ' and Mr. ELLICE, it was agreed that Tuesday the 6th of May be fixed for that purpose. ADJOURNED DEBATE. On the order of the day being read for resuming the ad journed debate, Mr. MULLINS rose and said it was with deep regret that he found himself under the necessity of support ing the hon. and learned gentleman's motion. He had considered the question in all its bearings, and he felt bound to say that the right honourable Secretary opposite in the luminous speech he had made, had signally failed in that part which related to a description of the benefits derivedby Ireland from the union. To demonstrate that part of his speech the righthon. Secretary had adverted to the bonus on the Irish fisheries, but that could not fairly be considered in any way a case in point. ( Hear.} The right honourable Secretary's opinions had wonderfully changed within a short period, be cause he no doubt would recollect a speech he made in the year 1827, in which he inquired what had been done by the legislature for Ireland ; and that he stated on that occa sion that not one remedial measure had been passed to meet the evils and the exigencies which were acknowledged on all hands to exist. Still he could come forward the other evening, and declare that great advantages had been de rived by Ireland from the union, and that various acts had been passed for its benefit. Great caution ought, therefore, to be observed in placing credit on statements coming from the right hon. gentleman who could make declarations so widely at variance with each other. The right hon. Secretary for the Treasury had called upon them to support the resolutions he proposed, when he ad mitted that Ireland was suffering under the severest evils. The right hon. Secretary said that they ought to be content with emancipation, but what did the right hon. gentleman say in 1826 ? Why, that emancipation was only a means of obtaining other beneficial measures. Whether the repeal of the union would be productive of good or bad consequences, an inquiry was the simplest mode of ascertaining. Why then did they refuse an inquiry ? He cautioned the English members how they would lend their sanction to the amendment of the right hon. Secre tary. It was a dangerous one, and the precedent might be made use of against themselves. There was nothing in his (Mr. Mullins') opinion that could be considered objec tionable in the amendment which he would have the ho nour to propose, and he trusted that it would receive the general support of the house. He feared he was wearing the patience of the house, but he would not trespass much further upon their time. Corrupt as the Irish Par liament undoubtedly was, it had been of more service to Ireland than the united parliament had been. Mr. JEPHSON said that the hon. member who had just sat down had expressed his conviction that the nume rical majority of the people of Ireland were for repeal ; but he had not ventured to say that a majority of the men of intelligence and property were for the measure. Those who were for repeal almost exclusively belonged to the lower classes. If the one hundred and five members re turned to that house from Ireland were all returned by the intelligent wealthy classes of society there, and if they unanimously concurred in demanding the repeal of the union, then he would at once admit that no minister would have a right to refuse repeal. (Hear, hear.) The ques tion had been argued affirmatively by the ablest men in Ireland ; but what had they made of it ? He thought they must, by this time, see that it was a most ill-advised step to bring the question forward. Were they, he would ask, satisfied with the position in which their argument now stood ? (Cries of " Yes, yes !" from Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Sheil, and other repeaters.) Hon. gentlemen opposite answered in the affirmative; but he (Mr. Jephson) might be permitted to say, that he entertained very great doubts whether they were so. The question for the house to con sider was, whether it was best for the empire to have two separate and distinct parliaments, or only one ? which was just as if one would ask whether a body would be better with two heads or only one. The demand for repeal had only been within the last few years. There had not been a word said on the subject before ; and what led to it was the settlement of Catholic emancipation. (H e ar, hear. ) Mr. MAURICE O'CONNELL had drawn his first breath in agitation. (Loud laughter.) Whatever the landlords of Ireland might say about repeal, the Govern ment would find that all the intelligence of the country was in favour of the measure. He denied that the union had been advantageous to Ireland. In 1800, the total number of operatives employed in Dublin was 61,076 ; the total number of operatives in employ in that city in the present year was only 14,145, of whom only 10,000 were in con stant employ. ( Hear hear.) In 1800 there were 168 master carpenters, who employed 2,251 men ; in the pre sent year there were only 103 master carpenters, who em ployed only 900. The hon. member gave several other details, which showed a similar disproportion. In Kilkenny, he said (as we understood), there was but one extensive blanket-maker, who employed about 160 persons. The hon. member wholly denied the advantages of union to Ireland, and expressed his firm support of the motion. Mr. PETER was decidedly opposed to any such propo sition as that brought forward by the hon. and learned member for Dublin. He denied the statement that Ireland had not benefited by the union, or that the interests of that country had been neglected by England. 3lr. CHRISTMAS would refer to the long agitation of the Roman Catholic question as one of the great causes of the effect there was so much reason to deplore. He did ' not say no right existed to agitate that question ; on the contrary, he admitted the right, and would even declare his conviction of the propriety of prosecuting it ( Hear, hear); but the practical effect was to keep Ireland in a state which prevented the introduction into that country of British capital. Another of the causes of the present state of affairs was, he believed, the granting of suffrages to the Catholic freehold ers . Th ere b e i ng no p o o r l a ws in Ireland to impose on the landlords the obligation of providing for the poor, those individuals had been more careless than they would otherwise have been as regarded the increase of the population. What, he begged to ask, were the benefits that they were to derive from a repeal of the union ? Even the hon. gentlemen who were the supporters of this measure, were divided as to the advantages which, accord ing to their views, would be its results. The hon. and learned member for Cork (Dr. Baldwin) and the hon. and learned member for Dublin (Mr. O'Connell) promised certain commercial benefits, but one was in favour of protecting duties, and the other was the advocate of free trade. It was quite possible, then, that a Parliament established in Ireland might adopt the principle of prohibition, which could not fail to have a most mis chievous effect on both countries. One of the arguments urged with great force in favour of the repeal of the union was, that it would lead to the return of the absentees to Ireland, but he found that there had always been absentees. Even in 1782 a correspondence took place between Lord North and the Duke of Devonshire, on the subject of absenteeism. The hon. gentlemen who had preceded him in their opposition to the repeal of the union, declared that their principal reason for rejecting the measure was their conviction that it would lead to a separation of the two countries, but he went further than that; he would assert that the repeal would be ipso facto a separation. The present state of opinion in Ireland, influenced as it was by a long course of agitation, was, in his opinion, another argument against the change recommended. The 11911, Wailer haying resumed his seat, mach IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, April 29. The Earl of MALMESBURY presented a petition from a numerous body of the occupiers of land in the neighbourhood of Banbury, Oxfordshire, complaining of distress in the agricultural affairs, which they attri buted to the enormous importations of grain and live stock into England from Ireland. They com plained that they had no chance of competing with the Irish farmer, as they were much heavier taxed, both for the state and for local purposes. It was singular that such opposite statements should be made in different places, but he thought that those persons who complained so loudly of the tyranny exercised over by England were willingly blind to the immense sacrifices made by the people of England for those of Ireland. Lord SUFFIELD presented two petitions from the Dissenters of Lynn, complaining of the grievances under which they laboured, and praying for relief. The Earl of ROSEBERRY presented a petition from two ministers of the Presbytery of Linlithgow, against any alteration in the system of church patro nage in Scotland. They stated they could not agree with the majority of their brethren, and had therefore sent their own petition. The noble earl then presented pe tions from Dunbar and several other places in favour of an alteration in it. Petitions for the better observance of the Sabbath, were presented by the Bishop of Durham, the Earl of Wicklow, and the Marquis of Londonderry. The latter noble lord, seeing the noble earl at the head of the government in his place, wished to ask him what day would be most convenient for him to answer some questions relative to our rela tions at present with Portugal and Spain? (Hear, hear.) He considered it his duty to put them, in consequence of the statements which had appeared in the papers during the last two days, relative to a conven tion. (Hear, hear.) While he was on his legs, he wished to call the noble earl's attention to the case of Sir John Campbell, who had for months past been confined in the prisons of Don Pedro. He was well aware that the noble earl was the last person in the world to refuse to interfere because the person interested was a political enemy. Perhaps Monday or Tuesday would suit the noble earl. Earl GREYsaid Monday would be perfectly convenient for him. Lord ELLENBOROUGH, after alluding to his motion relative to the mandamus of the India Board against the East India Company, said it had been fixed for Friday, but as the second reading of the Warwick Bill had also been fixed for that day, it would be more convenient to fix it for Monday, as he did not think there would be any lengthened discus sion on that evening. Earl GREY said it had been determined that the man damus should not be proceeded in, therefore the noble lord might think the discussion needless. Lord ELLENBOROUGH would like to know the grounds upon which the commissioners had taken so diffe rent a view of the proceeding. The LORD CHANCELLOR, although from circum stances that had taken place the motion of the noble baron would have no effect, had no objection that an opportunity should be given for entering into a discussion upon the subject. The mandamus had been given up upon grounds over which the present ministry had no control. Lord ELLENBOROUGH wished to know whether the noble lord on the woolsack had any objection to the pro duction of the documents which had been received, and on which the board had acted ? The LORD CHANCELLOR could not consent to the production of the documents without a communication from his noble friend at the head of the Board of Trade. He would state on Thursday whether the documents could be produced or not. Lord ELLENBOROUGH said he would bring the subject under the consideration of their lordships on Mon day next. The Marquis of HEADFORT presented a petition from Westmeath in favour of a repeal of the union. The noble marquis could not acquiesce in its prayer, considering it high time that a stop should be put to the agitation that was going on in Ireland. (Hear. ) The Marquis of BUTE presented a petition from Glas gow in favour of the building of churches. _ _ On the motion of Lord ELLENBOROUGH, the Ex change of Lands Bill was reported, and ordered to be taken into consideration on Monday. The Duke of BEAUFORT presented a petition from Gloucester, for the better observance of the Sabbath. The Earl of DURHAM presented petitions from the dissenters of Hull, Brighton, Stapleford, and several other places, praying for a removal of their grievances. CORN LAWS. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from the merchants and bankers of Liverpool, against any alteration in the corn laws. Also, a petition from the owners and occupiers of land in the county of Derby, complaining of distress, and praying for relief. REPEAL OF THE UNION. Earl GREY gave notice of his intention, should the re solutions relative to the repeal of the union be brought up from the House of Commons to-morrow, that their lord ships should immediately proceed to the consideration of them. Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition from the Protestant dissenters of Sheffield, praying for relief. The noble lord.then stated that he wished to draw the attention of his noble friend, the Secretary for the Home Depart ment, to a subject which he considered required some little consideration, namely, the great expense to which counties were put in furnishing returns which were ordered by both Houses of Parliament. He hoped something would be done in this matter, as the grievance was becoming very great. . . - Lord MELBOURNE said that however great the griev ance might be it could not possibly be avoided, because he apprehended that, by the law of the land, every public officer, of whatever description, was bound to make one return within his department, which should be called for by either house of parliament or by any competent authority. It was a matter undoubt edly which required the most serious attention both of the government and parliament. There was at pre sent a committee of that house sitting on the county rates, which, in his opinion, might very well take this sub ject into their consideration, and state what was best to be done. The Exchequer Office Bill was read a third time and passed. OLD BAILEY JURISDICTION BILL. On the motion that this bill should be read a third time, The LORD CHANCELLOR stated that he wished to have it re-committed, for the purpose of introducing some verbal amendments. Before, however, moving that it should be re-committed, he wished to state, that he anticipated the most happy results from it, and that it was with the greatest satisfaction he found it had brought forth a very great degree of warm approbation from the ancient corporation of the city of London. They had suggested a few alterations, and, with the exception of one, he had had the satisfaction of concurring in them, and of adopting such sugges tions. (Hear, hear.) The one that had been rejected was originally part of the measure, but, upon recon sideration, it had been agreed by him and the other learned judges, that it would be better to strike it out. It was necessary, however, for him to add, as he had done on three or four occasions, when he hadthe honour of obtaining the concurrence of their lordships to some important al terations in the law, that vested interests of persons already in office were affected by this bill. He only persisted in carrying through those particular measures as a distinct avowal of his expectation that the same just consideration would elsewhere be given by way of compensation to those who might be in jured by the measure, without any fault of their own. The same principle would guide the operations of the pro posed measure as in the case of the Court of Chancery, which had proved satisfactory to all parties. (Hear.) The amount of the population was 1,820,000, over which this bill was intended to extend its autho rity. A portion of Surrey, Kent, and Essex had often had their prisoners tried at the Old Bailey, while their respective districts were charged with the expense, which would be obviated by the proposed measure. Lord WYNFORD entirely concurred in the principle of the bill.- The house then went into a committee on the said bill, and after the introduction - of several verbal amendments by the Lord Chancellor, The house adjourned till to-morrow. HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 29. The SPEAKER took the Chair at twenty minutes past five o'clock. _ . . _____. Mr. ELLIS presented a petition from the Trades' Unions of Leicester in favour of the Dorchester convicts. —Laid on the table. _ . Mr. E. L. BULWER presented a petition from the city and county of Coventry, for the better observance of the Sabbath. Colonel LYGON presented several petitions to the same effect. Mr. F. O'CONNOR presented petitions for the repeal of the union, from Manchester, Chester, the national union of the working classes of Mayo, from Donegal, Ballinrobe, Ardagh, and other places in Ireland. Mr. AIILDMAY presented petitions from Winchester and other places in Hampshire in favour of the Dissenters. Mr. O'CALLAGHAN presented a petition from Tip perary against the repeal of the Union. Sir W. FOULKES presented several petitions from the county of Norfolk in favour of the better observance of the Sabbath, and for a repeal of the corn laws. Mr. O'CONNELL presented several petitions from Ireland in favour of the repeal of the union. Mr. MAXWELL presented a petition from hand-loom weavers of Salop, complaining of distress. Lord NEWARK presented two petitions from Notting hamshire for a repeal of the corn laws. Mr. HUTT presented several petitions from the Jews of Hull, Manchester, and other places, praying for the removal of their disabilities. Major MACNAMARA presented a petition very nume rously signed by the freeholders of the county which be laughter was occasioned by the number of hon. members who rose simultaneously for the purpose of addressing the house. At least a dozen presented themselves, the greater number being members for Irish constituencies. The SrEAKER called on _ Colonel VERNER, who, to show that the Protestants in Ireland were not in favour of a repeal of the union, adverted to a petition he had that day presented to the house from the place he had the honour to represent. This petition was signed by some thousands of persons, who were entitled, by their respectability, to the favourable consideration of the house. If ever the time came when an independent legislature was established in Ireland, it followed as unavoidable that there would be an independent executive. The hon. and learned member for Dublin had invited the Protestants of Ireland to join the Roman Ca tholics in their efforts to obtain the repeal, but he believed that the hon. and learned gentleman might just as well have exercised his powers to " call spirits from the vasty deep." The government, in making its choice between parties in Ireland, had better look to the rich and powerful body which had always manifested a desire to adhere to British connection, than to that which, under the guise of repeal, sought for separation, which would be assuredly followed up by an inquiry into, and a resumption of what was called the confiscated and forfeited estates. Should the government have the misfortune of losing the con ' fidence of the former party, it would alienate from it.; support the best and most steadfast friends that ever stood by any cause. Already had that party begun to calculate on the conduct of the present government, and its probable results. Already did they begin to think that England granted all her favours to those who hated them, and con temptuously denied to them any protection. Notwith standing these complaints, this body still remained faithful, still attached to the British connection, and it would be unwise to trifle with their feelings. Mr. HUME said, that they had gone away from the question ; and he could not do better than commence by asking what it was which was properly before the house ? for hitherto they had been fighting with the wind rather than treating of the question. Here the hon. member re peated the terms of Mr. O'Connell's motion, and asked was there one word in it about repeal? (A laugh.) He would repeat, there was not one word. He admitted that the hon. and learned gentleman who introduced the mo tion to the house had it in his contemplation to insure the discussion of the question • but he (Mr. Hume) would ask those who had merely read the motion of the hon. and learned member for Dublin, whether the amendment and address by which it was proposed to be met were applica ble? It appeared to him that they were playing at a game of cross purposes. (Oh, oh.) The question for the house to consider was, what would be the probable consequence of continuing the legislative union. On this point the whole inquiry hinged. There was no one more convinced of the advantages of maintaining the union than he ; nor did he believe that the hon. and learned member for Dub lin would have advocated the measure of repeal, if he had any hope of good and availing measures of relief for his country from a British Government. What was the object of the union, and what would be its effect should it be car ried into execution? should be the questions for the house. Its object was to do away with anarchy and confusion ; had it been successful ? He would not offer his own reply to this question, but he would let the actions of the legis lature and the extraordinary powers required by . the Go vernmentm onyofm stand s gvo f r n o ther m ent r . e ( p H I y e . r . T ) h e n s e e w w e o r n e l d s u n ffi o t c ifeonl follow testi mony s h t i i - s hon. friend (Mr. O'Connell) through the ancient records of Ireland, which, though interesting enough in an histori cal point of view, were still unconnected with the question befo T before the house. hon. and learned member There had mbeeenrfor Dublinexaggeration on insisted i sito b s oth sides. d that nothing had been done for Ireland since the union ; whilst the right hon. Secretary to the Treasury insisted that all had been done which could be done. (No, no, from the Ministerial Benches.) No, no. The hon. member had said so, and had spent half an hour in reciting the good acts of the Imperial Parliament towards Ireland. In reply to this part of the right hon. gentleman's speech, he would quote from another made by Mr. Spring Rice, on the motion for passing the Insurrection Act, on the 7th of February, 1832 :—Mr. S. Rice said " the house hail been confidently told by the noble marquis that the re enactment of the insurrection law, with the passing of the Habeas Corpus Act, would serve effectually to put down the present disturbances in Ireland. But how could the noble lord rely so much upon the efficacy of laws which, having been already tried, had proved totally ineffectual to the restoration of tranquillity in Ireland. They had been ineffectual, because within the long periodthat had elapsed since the union was carried, no inquiry had been instituted —no attempt had been made to ascertain or to remedy the real and general grievances of Ireland." Here was an ad mission, that from the period of the union up to 1822, no attempt had been made to remedy the real grievances of Ireland. These words he himself heard uttered by the right hon. secretary in that house ; and it was now too hard to have it from the same authority, that the Imperial Parliament did all in its power to further the interests of Ireland, whilst this sentence stood in Contradiction to the assertion. (No, no.) No, no ! Why, the words of the address proposed by the right hon. Secretary were these —" That both on general and special grounds, that union had been hitherto eminently conducive to the interests of Ireland ; and that they (the imperial parliament) had enacted, and still had under contemplation, various mea sures for the good of that country." How did this agree with the assertion, that " no attempt had been made to remedy the real and general grievances of Ireland?" (Loud cheers from the Irish members.) If in the address a given time had been stated for the benefits conferred, it might be in some sort intelligible. As far as the present debate had proceeded, one half of it had been personal to the member for Dublin, and wherever the word agitator was used, it was echoed by cheers. (Hear, hear.) Did the house be lieve that the influence of the hon. and learned gentleman had no grounds ? It was founded on the wrongs of his country (Cheers from the Irish members) ; and it was not to be wondered at, when goaded beyond the bounds which patience could no longer endure—by wrongs which the gentlemen on the opposite benches had on former occa sions so forcibly and frequently depicted. Was it, he asked, to be wondered at, that the firm advocate of Ireland should possess influence with his countrymen? He would again quote to the right hon. the Secretary to the Treasury the way in which Mr. Spring Rice accounted for agitation. That gentleman on a former night said, " It had been observed by Lord Bacon, that to allay sedition you must expel the matter of it;' but he (Mr. Rice) was sorry to say that no measures were taken to expel the matter of sedition in Ireland." (Loud cheers from the Irish mem bers.) It was thus the member for Dublin had been made an agitator by the government, which took no measures to expel the matter of agitation ; and they added to his power as an agitator by the personalities in which they indulged. Even the very emancipation bill had a clause personal to him. (Loud and continued cheers. ) Was Ireland used fairly, or acted equally by in the Reform Bill ? (" Hear, hear," from Mr. O'Connell. )Pre viously to that measure 240,000 persons were deprived of their right in the elective franchise, and were afterwards denied an equality with the people of England. (Hear.) On no occasion were the people of Ireland treated as on an equality with the people of this country. In support of this opinion he had the assertion of an hon. baronet at the fp, other iororuecn nsudesi untst present r d :h e enyxj t uothco extent that a itnetttgltham t agett h ni:hvmoss e dneeevadcei house (Sir Francis Burdett), who, in 1822, asked, " Was it to be tolerated that Ireland should m the know nothing of this country but through bloodshed and the gibbet?" (Loud cheers from the Irish members. ) He (Mr. Hume) was not an advocate of repeal. He did not think it would improve the condition of Ireland. On the contrary, he was of opinion it would add to her evils. (Cheers.) In the, proposed address, it was incumbent that the existing evils of Ireland should have been stated, that their existence should be deplored, and remedial measures proposed. It should have solved the question whether the happy consequence looked to from the union had ensued. It decidedly had not, for in continuing the church esta blishment, as it at present existed in Ireland, they were aggravating the evils which existed in that country. He would read to the house a document illustrative of these evils. It was a letter written by the Marquis of Anglesea to Earl Grey in October, 1832, as follows :—" First and foremost in importance, and in its immediate pressure, is the question of a reform in the Protestant Church of Ire land. This establishment, which at all times far exceeded the religious wants of the Protestant congregations, has hitherto been upheld by the State, mainly on the ground that it served the temporal use of consolidating the connec tion of the two countries." What an admission ; how worthy an object for a church to effect. " But this service it no longer performs. Instead of strengthening the connexion, it weakens it. Any Government henceforth pledged to maintain that establishment as it now exists, must be wide-spread eenviepne:cr nttro splendourhuoi brought into constant and permanent collision with public opinion, and the prejudices and passions of the Irish peo ple." Could any government (the hon. member here asked) pledge itself to support an establishment thus de scribed? Could any ministry, except a Tory one (A laugh) be its advocate? He then continued the letter-- However attached myself to the doctrines of the Protes tant church, and however anxious to discountenance any violent changes in its temporal condition, it is impossible for me not to sce that the prevailing resistance to its legal s m ay eventually place at the disposal of the state a national s fund, to be applied to necessary national purposes." Here oanbonumebentntntis clergy etylcnyrrneai :ysra:yegbnalfdmoeyync tredwPthtrhi hetoeseioattveffhtoenfaditeaor a strh e t oati i liwscho mindss instead niei er fee-simple snogept establishment mbrj aletuei respect eihn i e ficla e etres p di nos - htaf r b o oriyorni arrived ea d t and he o t s .h d e: e s i n pr t e rb d i , t e e dl h n , l t ohal advantage vdf thenia g h et as i tt was oheb clause se, d oo e m riN p •e o c from I l ledto t f he funds. eel,is the general Su c h I have and , unchangeable op reluctantlyopinion of the Irish people upon this subject ; and I am equally impressed with the apprehension that un less the parliament takes the lead in the work of now inevitable innovation, the recent confederacy against tithes will prove to have been only the first of a series of de plorable struggles between the government and the national antipathies—that every day during which those struggles are protracted the government will find itself less in a , condition of imposing its own terms—and that, sooner or later, the gual result mug be, an V Atintekt and aricligniAecl compliance with demands which we had not the foresight— ' or rather, perhaps, the power to concede." Were ever words more prophetic than these? (Cheer:.) The hon. Secretary for Ireland had promised to vindicate the law in Ireland, but how had he effected it ? Why, by making his Majesty the general tithe collector in Ireland (Cheers) by setting aside the ordinary course of justice ; and notwith standing the assistance of soldiery, police, and constabulary, in an attempt to do what was impossible with a whole nation resisting, they collected 12,000/. at an expense of 25,000/. Was not the government compelled to retract every measure it proposed ; and what was the result ? ; After pronouncing tithes extinct—after the triumphant promise of vindicating the law—the government called for new power in the Coercion Bill to put down the disturb ances to which their own act gave rise. (Cheers.) The hon. gentleman then proceeded to read another extract from the Marquis of Anglesea's letter.—" I know that the times have passed when the will of the minister could de termine the acts of the legislature ; still I cannot refrain from urging on the attention of my colleagues the claims of I this suffering and too-long neglected country, to a partici ' pation in the benefit of that enlightened policy which has already conferred so much benefit on other parts of the empire. (Signed) " ANGLESEA. " Phcenix Park, Oct. 9, 1832." (Hear.) Surely, if the statement were correct, and he thought it was, the imperial parliament had neglected the just demands of Ireland. How, then, he should like to know, could hon. members, who admitted this fact, con sent to an address, worded in the way proposed by the right hon. gentleman? The course of proceeding which he suggested was a most singular one. In his opinion, it was unconstitutional as well as unusual. He had never been able to find one single instance in which that house interfered by address in order to put a stop to inquiry. (Hear.) If parliament had, as the address declared, done all that could be done for Ireland, that country would be in a very different state to that in which it now was. Why, when the right hon. gentleman talked of the increase in her exports and imports, he forgot that the population of the country had doubled, and that on that account alone a large increase was to be expected. But the real question, after all, was not what was the amount of exports or of im ports, but what was the comparative comfort of the mass of the people before and since the union. (Hear, hear. ) Whilst on this subject he would call the attention of the house to a debate that occurred on the 24th June, 1823, when Sir Henry Parnell delivered a speech which, putting aside the statistical details, most completely corresponded with the tone of his lordship's sentiments :—" Another way of judging of the state of disturbance in Ireland is by referring to the Statute Book : from this it appears as follows : Years. That the Insurrection Act was in force from 1796 to 1802 6 That Martial Law was in force from 1803 to 1805 2 That the Insurrection Act was in force from 1807 to 1810 3 That the Insurrection Act was in force from 1814 to 1818 4 That the Insurrection Act was in force from 1822 to 1823 1 Out of a period of 27 years, these laws were in force for... 16 But in addition to these two acts, others of a similar un constitutional kind have been passed within the same period. The Habeas Corpus Act was suspended from 1797 to 1802 ; again from 1803 to 1806 ; and again in 1822. The Arms Act, allowing domiciliary visits, and prohibiting the use of arms, was in force from 1796 to 1801, and has been in force from 1807 to the present time, and now forms a standing law of the country. The Peace Preservation Act, by which a regular gendarmerie was appointed, has been in force from 1814 to the present time. Taking together the periods of disturbance, as before mentioned, with the periods for which the Martial Law and Insurrection Acts have been in force, we obtain the following table of actually existing disturbances in Ireland : Period. Years, 1. From 1792 to 1802 2. 1803 to 1805 a 1807 to 1810 4. 1811 to 1818 5. 1819 to 1823 —26 4 " That is, out of a period of the last 31 years, no less than 26 years have been years of actual insurrection and dis turbance. The following conclusions may be drawn from this case of Ireland as to the means taken for suppressing disturbances. First, that as often as any disturbance has appeared, since 1795, it has been immediately followed by some new law of a severe and coercive character. Se condly, that a regular system has thus grown up, and been constantly acted upon, of dealing with discontent and dis turbance with severe and coercive measures. Thirdly, that this system has completely failed ; for, in the place of discontent and disturbance being diminished, great as they were in 1795, they arc still greater at the present moment." There was no subject of which the Irish complained more than the state of the church. (Hear.) Let honourable members endeavour to conceal the fact from themselves as they pleased, it was impossible not to come to the conclu sion that this was the case; it was impossible not to admit, then, that the compulsory payment of tithes was the cause of almost every disturbance that had taken place in Ireland. He contended government had not dealt fairly and frankly with Ireland. Their course of policy should have been more manly ; they should have fairly met the grievances of Ireland, and not have endeavoured to keep up, for tem porary purposes, an overgrown church establishment. Let the house only refer to the speech of the right hon. secre ,heanirdrihtaetiwonas p s r u o c r l e u d th e y i n m l u r s e t l a c n o d m e i in c o t o h n e s e c q o u n e e n h e s _ e t o a f ry tit o h n es t sion that whatever might now be the inclination, the Im perial Parliament had hitherto neglected their duty to wards Ireland. (Hear, hear.) Why should not Ireland be treated like an integral part of the empire? Why should Ireland be governed like a province of England? Why should a colonial establishment be kept up, th ere ? W hy should Ireland be managed by a viceroy, with a delegated establishment? The machinery of government in Ireland was alone of such a nature, as to create those factions and heart-burnings for which, unfortunately, that country was too well distinguished. Coercion had been the constant cry. It was in vain that they called on Parliament to try the effect of a different system. (Hear, hear.) Had this system been altered? Had not force, also, been the order of the day, since the present ministers came into office ? He believed there was now a greater force in Ire land, than had ever been kept there before or since the union. (Hear.) The hon. and learned member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Lefroy) had said that, in his opinion, the more powerful the church the better for the country. (Hear, hear.) He thought, however, the hon. gentleman would find few members in that house who would agree with him in opinion. For his own part, it was impossible that he could agree to the address, though the right hon. gentleman had stated that it was so worded that every member of that vilified Imperial Parliament would readily give his sanction to its amendment. As far as the original motion of his hon. and learned friend was concerned, if it had not been for his speech, he should have felt no hesitation in voting for the words of his mo tion. But his speech was so clearly a speech in favour of repeal, that he felt he could not vote for the committee, lest by so doing he should be held to countenance that mea sure. (Cheers.) He thought they were bound first of all to try a little longer what this Parliament would do for Ire land, before they encouraged the agitation of this ques tion. Therefore, thus, he did not say, as many gentlemen said, that nothing could ever induce him to become a re pealer ; he was at present its opponent. But if he should find that justice was continued to be denied to the people of Ireland—if they could not obtain their rights, then he thought the question was one that ought fairly and pro perly to be agitated. The hon. member concluded by reading his proposed amendment— '. That the present state of Ireland is afflicting to its inha bitants and dangerous to the wellbeing of the United Kingdom ; and although some salutary laws affecting the Iris:i people have been passed by the Imperial Parliament, yet we deeply regret that the beneficial results anticipated from the legislative union have not been realized. The failure may, however, be attri buted to the error of Parliament, in refusing or delaying the re dress of substantial grievances, and not applying more exten sively those remedial measures, chiefly as regards the established church of Ireland, which a liberal and benignant policy would dictate. our causes the' i T e n a o t v w . o w f i a pplication of such measures of improvement and reform, both direct best o f andust complaint,earliest o to in church and state, as, by doing justice, will best promote the all linow existing peace and contentment of the people of Ireland ; and by thus.se. full curing 1 its b e n p e r n t c o i i t jl t e h z e a ß n r d i t give o a n d s t d i i t t u i o t s i t n r c e r n e g as u e l their at t t h a c e h m m t e h n e t and prosperity to the , mplre." Lord Althorp and Mr. Shaw rose together, amidst loud cries for each, but Mr. Shaw giving way— Lord ALTHORP proceeded ; he said that he almost felt some apology was due to the house for rising to address them at this stage of the debate, but he feared that he should be considered as not performing his duty unless he stated briefly the grounds of his opposition to the motion of the hon. and learned member. The question appeared to him to be so entirely exhausted, that he thought it would not be possible for him to advance anything new. He should, therefore, only trouble the house with some few ob servations on what had passed in the course of the debate. The hon. gentleman who had just sat down had stated, that half the speeches against the motion were occupied by attacks on the hon. and learned gentleman. He cer tainly admitted that much of the debate consisted of such attacks. (Hear.) But, on the other hand, a great deal more than half the speeches on the other side were filled with quotations from the speech made by his right hon. friend in 1823. (Hear, hear.) There had, indeed, been more of reading in this debate than in any other that he ever remembered. Many attacks had been made upon his hon. friend for inconsistency. But he could not admit that because a man opposed the enactment of a union 34 years ago, he was guilty of inconsistency in now opposing its repeal. (Hear, hear.) Whatever might have been said by Lord Grey in 1799, in the heat of debate, on a question so exciting as that question was at the time (and, though young, he well remembered hearing the very speech that had been quoted from)—whatever might then have been said by Lord Grey could not fairly be applied to the connection between England and Ireland, as now existing. Nor could his then opposition to the union be held in the slightest degree inconsistent with his present opposition to its repeal. His right hon. friend (Mr. S. Rice) was more hardly used still. He was attacked for the alleged inconsistency between his opinions now and in 1822. Where, he should like to know, was the inconsistency ? In the quotation brought forward, his right hon.,friend complained, that the window tax and hearth tax still existed in Ireland, and that Catholic emancipation was still refused. Wliy, every • one of those measures demanded by his right hon. friend 1 had since been carried. Was it then to be said that he was inconsistent in now declaring that the imperia l Parha : ment had shown every anxiety to do justice to I reland Really such a charge was a very hard one. The hon. and learned gentleman, in the speech in which he in troduced his motion, went into a long detail of what had occurred in the ancient history of Ireland . That detail, however, had been admitted by all who spoke on either side of the question, not to bear directly on the ques tion. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned gentleman appeared to him to argue, during the whole course of the debate, as though Ireland,' up to the time of th e union, had always been in a state of independence. If so, whn_t became of the great revolution of 1782, which did, indeed, I to a very great extent, establish the independence of Ire• land? Up to that time, surely, the hon. and learned gen tleman would not pretend that Ireland was the inde p er.; dent country he endeavoured to represent her. with the hon. member for the county of Cork, that th(T should not look at this question in reference to allele', history, but should rather consider whether the repeal of the union, at the present time, would be of any ado!'" tape to the empire at large, admitting that, . Is such considerations, they should have regard, pri,r. cipally, to the interests of Ireland herself, thou, , t 1 constituting the smaller portion of the empire. Til e i ii li member for Cork had stated that the only ground on w. i to he would vote for the motion was, that he considered it e be a preliminary step to " repeal of the union." T a t a n , merely a motion for a committee of inquiry, as t "'" gentleman who spoke last had described it, t h e hon. men.t ber for Cork would not have voted for it. He was '''' prepared to say that, as a measure of parliamentary tactics; a motion for a committee might not have caught sl. ? votes which the direct question could not have o btaine i hear.) With regard to the letter quoted but he thought with the hon. member for Middlesex, til this was so avowedly, in point of fact, a motion for rePe,a,_: that no member opposed to repeal could vote for it, on the ground of its being only a committee of inquiry. (g ear ' He agretd last night her hon. member for Clonmel, and again by the hon. me in for Middlesex, he did not know exactly what it was. Fro e l the speech of the hon. member he believed that it purpor t . to be a private letter from Lord Anglesea to Lord Now he thought if Lord Anglesea had written such a P r ': vete letter to Lord Grey, that it would have been show' . to him. Neither did he think the style of the quotationi which he had heard at all like the style of Lord Anglesea 5 letters. (Hear.) As far as he remembered what had bee i l ,l quoted last night, he mentioned it to Lord Grey, w 1 1, 5 ,„ 3 4 that he did not remember any such letter. He had 1 ` . ,.. -: more of it to-night. Of course it was difficult to go" - direct negative to such a statement, but he believed tha i t 1 ,,1 such letter had ever been written to Lord Grey by ."° - Anglesea. privy Mr. RONAYNE did not state the letter to be apr one. It was an official memorial, addressed by Lord An glesea to his colleagues, on the state of Ireland. Lord ALTHORP—The hon. member for Cork made h and several allusions to him in the course of his s P eee 'hon. did him an honour which he did not desgrve. Lord e A 1 - , gentleman did him the honour to say, that he (That thorp) would at once understand his statements• ber honour he disclaimed. (A laugh.) The hon. lee" 1 0.. said that it was a most convincing prospect of the agrie an • by the turd ruin of a country when they exported both corn a, a cattle at the same time. He really could not follow hot derfr that ient do a an hr individual vme member mh abet to this conclusion ; nor could he see oof of runt ° t r ni ls w du o amr u would epdti tion oa s soon o ob n fe e meat be a tr referredui n i ne d Dublintiof he i e , 0 - . ~:1 . the agriculture of any district in the circumstancean that 3 r t f h a f ri o e n r c K e o the same time it had sold cattle and corn. This he k n d l • c c i not, and he did not see why the same reasoning shouldn't apply to a nation. (Hear.) The evidence of his he"' A cai smaller than it formerly was. Now this he wold% in g* that looking at the evidence of that hon.gentleman , 1 : 1 " t " - „ je l l could more strongly prove the great improvement w l ` ti at . had taken place in the agriculture of Ireland than es l e t evidence—and no man, he was sure, was more compecvi, to give an opinion o the subject. pei of I lle te saY i dence of others, lie might, perhaps, be allowe" • hat t its the something of his own knowledge. He knew t i w ith the exertions had been made by gentlemen conneete' the x agriculture of Ireland to improve it. He knew ,1 su , 1 pense to which they had gone, an d he was sure that ;n Iture of an expenditure must tend to promote the agr- --u d d ea lt the country. (Hear.) The hon. gentleman ha of the with this question rather unfairly. He had s poken i ase"' fair of Ballinasloe, and said that fair had not incre But that was no proof of injury to agriculture. There well many good causes why it should not have increased• 0 7,, the period of the union the fair of Ballinasloe was the . ~_.a one of the kind in Ireland, whereas many other fairs 1 , 1 !, 1 since been established. (Hear.) The hon. gentian:ll;r said, " Let us keep our corn, and give us the meal" ~' roe suming it." No doubt, if they had the means 1. _, 1 n ot suming it, corn would be kept. But when they 1:",,, be the means, the only effect of keeping the corn W be that corn would not be grown, and ag-riculture woulda_ig effectually ruined. (Hear, hear.) H e was not i o ll re s,,, ie any exaggerated statement when he said, that bef s.N L,',.. 0 union the usual price of land in Ireland was front 1 Tes gears 0, to eighteen years' purchase. In 1830, at _aasahalf lands in Limerick fetched twenty-two aunrdatase, .rid 01 purchase; in 1831, twenty-seven years' p years'put' 1834, in the county of Galway, twenty-seven _ t. _ • he supposed, was another proof of r chase also. This, - t• ruin which had fallen on the agriculture of Irelai!.l. (Cheers.) If the statements of the hon. member l? .. Kildare were to be attended to, the fact was that the agr; s , culture of Ireland, instead of being deter:oratel, was gre b 3 : l _, improved. (Hear.) This was a question which 1i!.., 2 1 0 l sorry to be obliged to debate on such statements• raj. what he knew of the inquiry now going on into the e t ,, i , tion of the poor in Ireland, he hoped and trusted tha t the would be the last time they would have to discuss.otrr, question on those grounds. The result of that n i , i u ri ` a :. would be to . place the improvement of agriculture a ) ° D ie nufactures in Ireland beyond question. (g ear " a sinc e • transfer of 16,000,000/. f rom t h e f un ds to Irelani co, the union was another circumstance which str en g 3 Another Anot l firmed him in the view which he had take" 1 „ t it w as very strong argument against the motion vcas , ` n - vo l v ing 3 utterly impossible to repeal the union w ithou t . ' je w hich , separation between the two countries. Th e f : r a i . amw ortl this had been put by the right hon. mein be r - ge had at i in his admirable speech was unanswerabl e. , w hi c h ha' . tentively listened to the whole of the deb a `f $ had even since taken place, and not one of the spe,aser at. bar t• attempted to touch the argument of the righ t disused to He appealed, therefore, to those who might he , a vote for the motion of the honourable and learn ssibie to for Dublin, to consider in what way it would he undere such carry on the government of the two beet,countries,, wade circumstances. An experiment of the kind host eril e° • from the year 1782 until the union, and that .es had beeo had not succeeded very well. The two countrie os very nearly separated in their lines of policy t" " licy o f )11', tion of the regency. If at that period the po_ , w ,_ tie d i ( Fox had prevailed in the Government of Ireland, 4 40 ,c1. policy of Mr. Pitt prevailed in the Government of . 1 ' e wholcile‘:' there could be no doubt in the minds of th_ o r s e must hal what took place on that occasion, that tirliees. Even le, been a separation between the two couent -- 5 be considero the occurrences of the last two or thr/?)_ fl a r ce et • the u nioi , i with reference to a supposed n on- s" , l e atly man, who knew between the two countries. Cou t t _ e d member for Dui the opinion which the hon. and lehe course of policy put: v ernmen, had so repeatedly pronounced on t and who line" t Go sued by his Majesty's present d learned gentleman ° lus t the influence which that hon• an th a 9 for a moment ed . have in an Irish Parliament, suppose ec t ~ remained conn , the two countries could have long entlennin to the hon. and learned g A i The effect of agreeing lrelan - %t motion would be to place the legislature of _,.,„..,. Th _ situation similar to that in which it was before I tt i_ e l re an! being the case, he (Lord Althorp) could not CO e t he to'', possibility of continuing the connection betweena Toro: countries under such circumstances. The hon. a n was a% member for Dublin said that the Irish Parliarnen,toese ha d dead, but that it only slept. What power that i 'phog i e to establish a legislature for Ireland he (Lor",, ut bf , knew not ; and •yet how it could be established, u_neeenet Parliament of this country, he was at a loss to held .°",.. It had been said that the promises which had he e n,ord t , to effect the Union had not been kept. He )i e P' 3 ,:i. thorp) admitted that the postponement of Cae , res t o ; ,0 cipation, which was one of those promises , was "lose j .vs He had always contended that it was so. rorte er p a quoted his speeches, and those of his friends in.' fl ed t ha ipr ought to recollect that they invariably m aintal ro gic . . a justice would be done to Ireland until Catholic 4 ,,, , the)"alma.oe •t, tion had been granted. But at the same P.. - t h a t rci r e• held that after justice had been done to Ireland in _ co d e ° f _ to r t'ley would resist any attempt on the part of the rf o r e w ''', t bo land to carry such a question as that which was orter s O f ho , consideration. It had been urged by the sllP rijarti en' ear , motion, that if the existence of the Irish l'a i , ha ve ha t been allowed to continue, that Parliamen t WOO' a cid t hat ried the question of Catholic Emancipation ; nrt of we e had occurred in 1793 had been quoted in s i l r - c i Ir i ls, ar lia•• opinion. How often, however, had he Irish 'idea, assert, and in that house, that the . Ston e thr., ment would have never carried Cathol%roto it wai tion. Even when the measure was brough t t o hicl l , te aly, English Parliament, the year before that in t i re ;lotw oo It, carried, it was rejected by a large majority of the C r a he el when it was brought forward by a minister f ther e ba el° cl was carried : but he did not think that l- _ r o f th e li e a separate legislatore in Ireland any ,i n is i te_ cipa tin% di ,, would have been found to propose e n c ti: g real• ce to admitted that the delay of emancipation s e 7 t grieva il , the. appointment to the Catholics, and a g r ea t evils O li l at . 11 them ; and also that it had inflicted g r not think, l at hohc country ; but at the same time he did inklreland, C it tha t there had been a separate Parliament i. Ile f' ,0 emancipation could have been carried at soamp ly ai'' to a d , : the question before the house had been for lli"'d r es e° (I f e lt (Hear, hear, hear), that it was unnecessary , ose a net " dbe used any thing further. Indeed he s hould c luty, an a, the house at all except as a matter 0. 1 „ j u g tr e lcce r ,; that he ought to apologise to them for ' _,,,,,,, 110._ w it', upon them even for so short a time. fl a " ' e lude of h uld el ) " tion 1, 5 stated his views upon the subject, he s 0 • s t the 01° e ob , expressing his intention of v oting a€ blip [. Til at ° the lion• and learned membel' for Du i n ; _ „,wo, . 44 1 lord here sat down, but immediately had 5 ' be li c OP begged leave to add a &NY wordo.l. At •