The Sun. — London, England, 1833-02-19 00:00:00

I I 11), d et e r letter e ra phatiea e e r In the Rev Mr. Pally, of Tullow, describing Itte, . `' rt s Made h o An, to y spies in the pay of Fong" persons not a In" ' u p o n "'ace the people from peaceable habits and pre. 1. l'i° t9l) o l eterled antr o t h o e e ni n to take unlawful oaths. He then pro. de a nd °ter Pe " found thef thos e persons as arrested, and the of round: tle „ r , ,h'",..! t o reni. greatest difficulty in prevailing on the heirS - h - e J iote ' "'lee aro b '.'" them to the county The tis niay itrary, an d g ao • acts o f the their authority is all-powerful, as „ m ale be/ proved b , h i e s te ugh. Hid y their conduct in the case of Paddy toot t 11‘71eehr().1"e isthf:tshoer is suspected by them—they enter they do pot t e e o, a respectable person, and a free ilia a a loe t, „ viol ty r ou un-barrel is found, and the ' police drag year, a to d 'adg e r a e our 11 , t h e , te n i n the • e ,fine miles from his dwelling, and , a h l ich s al lilesi nutise for thegul Tullow, In this instance, neither ere evay or) 041 , trat e i_ Co gun-barrel belonged to the father. unit ttt. the d there'"? neuhed—no committal is signed. Wh un! t tover l_t .o it te, are 1t ,,. would be loss of time—unreicessary_ y county. da te !Ace, an sce ell! all and everything—their authority is promised t, r emonstrated with them in this case, and a deiced o to a t' A c c p'll.l)._llStleeof Commons oWnsOUldbring the affair before a Reformed nd ib where I could prove that this same e e rred t rather this ' • ' eeo ken ef t Sil ent ob e victim of police outrage—de e e tri d s s tit , thsi. 'he I f it retel unerated by the present Govern d r ef the of ! li si . r `"e p acific , w ished to rewind those who laboured re y_ Alti, :loon of Ireland. During the reign of ee w ine ~ 4 °, this The t a k e maltreated individual risked the loss t i.) , ' " defending his father, who refused to oto boy any -f til oath • ot / to Mor e se I could bring before this House was nand th e ;Put ent i: l r sti ti P i les of loyalty given by men who are now e trial , soe artial law. lam ready to produce at to ident h ctivi the ( . 4 of thi, iuld n ot r diet;t4reieeHouse, evidence that will show whether measures proposed by Government he expe enfortus3. Iseh not, I r or , e se i denee, e A r nd , l say to you, when I . am prepared with :Le erisooel:te the people with u ought you, to legislate for a country u h c e r was ser' o l ! ett r atv e te hat out the most deliberate inquiry into it and the people of a who e country to be Ag' in ei vi eeth /P the mere ipse dixit of a Minister ? Their / gain h e er iso°' ' 4l What sty the r vf, 11h4 th nvern ment it "—they interfere with the acts of a 10 „ g e, hot o i e . in eo9 0 , _by petitions, and they are guilty of the bj yet 'tltit, rs I ,,, o . ttences--pol it ical agitation. Oh, what folly he re 0 , 0 to rea , 14ai ' t o , thi ng sho f w Ley do not wish for a repeal of the Union, s the more infallible necessity of that re- OF rot tootlesa he' all the p ir measures They , d b y the co or' qht rep eal ~„ • . are contributing more to te e r, And the Union than all the agitators put rinduce siti! whiy should it not be so ? Let us reverse " to ou rt° in _ or i ol es- 4 : 4 Su ppose peee , e -in Irish Parliament legislating fir the , 0 6 ito proy e i , le a s h 'ith Qol, Ph_ n a and passing such laws for them as the „S 3 t e wh at . 0 '• tnent are now endeavouring to pass 'or the ty ? th : sad uld be the consequence? Birmingham would e ut ,v e ,the e fe l ,,!try t h, e _ u o leer determined thous IMIS to remonstrate at o'. stn t Pr oofit 7,, i t their senate- house; Sheffield would ins antly rs d u : h i ': ttet ' t of ior c i t i , on he spirit of her inhabitants; and the very us tit t o .o t. would " rise and mutiny," until the spark 0 0 c o k o u i d 7 ev hem was extinguished in blood. English ," wilt t ore . p k, stie re; ", ‘ vet allow themselves to he debased lay such I. be a j o eie fe , ti rt. s to l h ave t ne i ne why should Irishmen ? For my own 1" ht: e t of ; a "!en ace-used of intentions that I never o °l o o raas , ,r ; tte ( l .. sit tgd feared calumny, I should long since ish Befre ier 0 , h eel eal eaania. o e arena of politics. I care net how much let; t t tse,, r ra . e o _ r d, when the vials of defamation are poured ), i u account of my exertions in behalf of my l o' e uri re t s r o Yi tae f f,ce l' if thatl deservet not calumny, and the English people rnote d e tation o not, when I say, in my justification— cu-let o.le au sash end still to my case be necessary—that I have ever d to tbe i) ,e6 I ti l e s ° e eow _,m , most attached to a British connexion. lo n g` ev s ,„ t ,a2 may be turned against me in Ireland, but r e , e n e isteO l 'oic t pt d r me t as 4 ,v s ung rather than abandon truth. Yes, as titer' 0 a dpi the utility of the connection, and an itn e ; 4 41 •ItY tally • exist, I should prefer seeing this House I „,be e t e ,te e so, o s of ltlee by i o my countrymen, rather than it should be sgreaa day , t Y to c at Lsgislature I repeat that tl • • l x of th e ' e t' , ea to r i‘ ee tur ne , •this avowal is di.cOn te L? ,„„ ," against me in Ireland, but I adhere to or le e ery of 7 a bstract opinion. If I thought that the the Irt 4 ' ~11.-$ t4 te , tl itid „ th e present Government would work well h a ve , ' esr f,,, It% there never d . on _ ee yoti . I ,e ive a man more ready to facile tain you t o it! E , 441 g a ts than I am. 'lle only reason I have d P e ale'', is the injustice of the present Go. a rrfu e, 4, a ward s of u n i a, , my country. That Government I " u u se . „ t ish' fe as i t al ine, 4 l .l Just, so long as it lacks proper' and im e,a a ft tit s ,, 've te, ation ; and this House must legislate, idn' weestia e h lood-winked, until the necessary inquiries Stuar ts •tV Y It, / f i agi t have been accused of selfish motives I a gre! . t set!, and . I „ d ee, e l se e , a° au cried out for a repeal. I can be i . e atii , ed rr, en accusation now, when I declare that this ini iata.'' tt,,, ilti v - "sore of his Aljesty's Government is more ferstood 19. too 3 oro'_i ( iesr repeal of the Union than all my agitation, le i- for 7 ris e ate o ' r e a hundred-fold greater. You may put e e that 0 s p d ,4 40 4 42 • fl gse repress associations , smother public ha revoluti" 4 41 4,''ut, tell ore,b o f Lc eel ti Nee, ow can you gat private conver rch °` ..4 ee ' to yt iet '! t te communication, which, when resorted Uon , c" _ i detts In g rtithi 'ill more dang rims than onen proceedings ? to that pass I will nut with it—that :llinisters, in wish- Id be't . l l e tio tf t ,L 4 ot d ti _ds Act of Parliament , have an after t! ought. 8 not ' „pi n , Dory erected against those who are repealers, for as to vi E s a :eir; - i : ‘ less calculated to ' prevent repeal. I'll tell J oe, against---and I only tell you what ible oef ' p h " to "'nee, believe -- its direction , its real y u g i ' bea nr " e e the collection an d payment of tithes. BY 14 : 4 ' let r) When a . c.oe, 1. 1, 4 ally this Act of I arliamen- shall have „se t e v earib s ee ' j parish resist the payment of tithes, and let I int r o I E4 , tt ( t, k or b y_ any —tee clearest accident—be burned a aeri ce e iJ ite. „ 4 ,,l ' i lay. stack, and then it will he seen to , aed t is attributable. Woe to such a sl t e ,, T r• r i he t ,, t ha n " 8 to the man in it that dares refuses quiryr lj d jef f e !-tt c4 ra hear.) For them no other mercy te coUL h e th e te e d er lic ett !• Li ar pity of dragoons and marines. notfro t ) o; Id niers of Engl end mind what I have ar isen „eel liti ttv gte . '"Y will find the truth of to words—this dial o r iel Int end el ;e. to effect the payment of tithes, and COIYI r eer o ,.e l k th e w hen I say this, I know that I am only o f mu A r elo o „ ntly a ocuteations of selfishness . with which lam a n r ed . , 11 ° 0 1, t , but I will again tell my accusers that h!ly pro ; o' iety re. i f t, d et , st `e t against every shade of midnight crime; Ila A t he d and abhor as much—most probably more m e se ..an- ei e oy, here the i ntihe p r! of fi 44 , 44, th e ery mention of murder and blood. I ana sincere lost but humble advocate of my coun rrsPum.lnelttaie ttizpy eta ready to adopt any additional enact. - Gal of I .'p ee titie nt to it, provided it can he shown that ar l .oo l Pun the Will prevent the crimes complained of— r jo • Y_. re ctld tj,N, pre without making the innocent suffer. sort' Ou / , soya! Would "ng the Constitution ; L- for I wish that !NB- . fecen ce Ou t s r , e h ave re. ris eft te... 5 .; and course to no means but constitu. I offer them—if my profession gives me ,resets h old el! '1. 11, 11'11( 44 e, l i elS rt ern, t Y over la men I s:ice to ne n tk l 1 4 , ,) the y repeat, I here publicly I a _ 0. full extent, my services and cordial co and, hY., 9 r ij e r nl e !e ' , % 3 ' t Z, 4 ;...... u e gest that constitutional law should be w ben qt a , ,, ul„l , that „.h o se h e b re , criminals , or those supposed to be 14: 1 1, rid te "tight before a Jury of their country hose " t ar of ft,. qt tt,, 4 4,1 th " a a , t the Judges of the Idnd should try ;ter- , at l et " of , they should not be sutjected to the e h m itt,g rr tP eor it ' t, (1 4 4 4 1 .. 4 , 1 d i , t . a . r y officers. For the crimes of a tel l ' in 00 1.00 th t , o ! . The n ° le country be put under martial law ? t ', tr s ile Nreer t: s ly_persons Government have to fear— eelltist and ' I . fear—are Whiteboys and White. the like of them, are the onle , portion ei I 00e P et th " 4 Y; th at ar 0. of ie d e enemies resin the amelioration of their tokt4,l aid),it '°ne oppose tance to the execution of (I:,teuara , totieedgt , c,.l Nevlseraegainst them alone, and not against the oat h ' t pleasures should be directed. It is a . t _....ri 300 0 , !arei ti 7P; false, and foul calumn au to dare w aver )1.41 614 '00y a e r ,N ee tt lth tf t le al agitators of Ireland are in Y claic ti c ' t i o ra h t „l'e 4 % 2" infringers of the law. I h y ave " n Y o c w "- I isurre s o ' ! t 4 a te rsed upon the patience of the House, but I tad'irO t e .ofi ce j o ag y for cann so, since my voice has d i et u e lee m the pure se of freedom and of cousti•- • the! , a a i r t . h ee s v t Latt al 4i p, l . lSl o , ‘3.% I have a few remarks more to make— any 4 0 ,q111, rv " , to put to Ministers, Why do you w ree so o / .0 es l ea Measures ? Have you not already a watc a la n - t e gers- oe lt ts tit y 4t,he aLbservient police ? Have re a s 0 0 ta th N ew Ld ?writers , you not reporters your pay ? Do they not attend I d" s h tt? lng o hoe s ;ern. eri a 1, t00.,, 4re not every word that is uttered t deg rr A Ilte ee l i aPe te? not all public preceedings detailed in na ieen iss e t , 85 4 8,d Have •() • f ire b Oh l d Y t naci you not in your power—et your ate 0 , 30 e r , s nn , er iinery to detectall that eat ' t , 'S, re oe s that fo ve a: s y li 0 p et a _ you ? And will not that machinery _ sect , le leane s t°P to all that you may object to ? per fe e e , • t o d r i . e l tei ze ki4 t v ,, tlki to punimuti c oercive powers ? You have Juries VinceB for $ 1 : 0 1; i f J,;:?tts, witnesses Ah ! hut your excuse is that then fie r . v ve r,„ jorieesses ! You want none—yOu want no stn I . )y ee t _ s ( :! ----Yes. you do ; you want that sort ions ),,n..viet without testimony.—(Cheers.) hat s'j‘le'l laril At; i ll: 1 t ec h th„ e bile- , 4' 41, 4 I etttr. th'use to demand that information eve vo r .1 „ e „ , e , eat it not to be biassed or led away Too • f 11e 1 `gee °Y the auth •of aste rs ° t ee e e , tectiesoge they 8. authority any set of m e n, eva to eroo , t), 1 , 4 7 a full should he. I supplicate the House i.BOO e e l , erhi itt et Tst to e it ample, and detailed inquiry into woo l(' t N id tti 00.,, , fte such inquiry that erime y in L i tt i i, e ir! s, e, p _sete t `,4lt, th et t.l,,biatent—that it can be effectually nd l! r :lief can be afforded to the grievances at t be c locli te titi Af tr cob t4 i ° n :,, You are calied upon to legislate ,bteat be fe,,4 IV O! t otti. i " any certain and satisfactory in t let i , th e 'le e 'e " grant the ow /roes or e t ! tl y e t h e row era _ p ers that are asked of martial law, think you, all it it i' l est r 7l ' 441 4, 41 t o P e asant _ h o e (00 , at i , we e t , ek e t render Lim more tractable? "' Lot a b i s; ot 1 ": t. .); with the evils of absenteeism ? ,opotar otei th, ) . 1 0ti g ? 11 , 1 2 rd exact less—will they render n tec le t lee / • 41 0 st Y 4 'ty a t h e 1 0 these questions I distinct! yes to 1; 1 : tei ri l et ty : ... e gr : v y . t, io tif . l etai e w on!_rary ! this is the very process eentii tt ;pi!, t l'ee t tee i gte t h c`rt It I may use the expression is c til*, teat e evils complained of increase to ;he aer ° f ife th e m 'kr,l . Let those • atte': gh e o)mci t hed, duid measures he adopted— ' th 'stee l it tem the troops of the Govern twelv ‘/ ee • el Ste, when be presented th • • ter of ee s , , h e same image c ir e! et 41 1 and ° marched for three days • ti je , Pt ' 5 4 tin., bn, populous sti tio t a county of Loutu—an • ill lilt, Yet e e, "tip I vestig e of • • eultivation—not a ~t;a tri ep "to e this e , twei very n gibepcitnin tfihnsir e f j". . °l ' e , 1 ;,0 . 4 gh niantee'it your 7 op t,o*:tilo,io,:ii.3l,oanze.- !sore implore English t 1 11.° „1 1 ' el/ den ts " strength o _'" Lot to nod niy country . I the mere assertions of Government. I solicit inquiry, and if the result of it should be unfavourable to us—if English:nen should thi k we ought to he governed by such measures as those now proposed, why then I shall be the first to say, let Ireland submit, she will submit, if she he found guilty; for never was a nation so willing to acknowledge her errors, and stoop to the penance that may be exacted from her faults. She has always given proofs of this spirit, though she has been told by Sir John Davis and Lord Redesdale, that with respect to her inhahitants, there was always one I ity for the poor and another for the rich. In the face of a Re formed Parliament I call upon its English Members to justify the expectations that -not only the nation, but the whole if Europe have in them. I call upon them not to give their sanction to these measures—not to condemn unheard, and confound every civil and political right. Be fore they act unjustly towat di Ireland, I hid them, how - ever, he c ,utious, and reflect open the monetary aiid commer. cial system of t' eir country. I bid them,however, think upon the Powers of Europe. Let injustice be done to Ireland, and you will see what weight England will have in the Congress of Nations! Let insurrection and rebellion be created in Ireland, and you will soon se the value of your Three per Cents. upon the Stock Exchange.— (Hear, hear.) Be unjust towards Ireland, and your mea sures of economy will go for nought. You will have an incteased standing army—you will have thousands of other mercenaries under various denominations, to support whom the taxation you complain of must be kept up, if not increased. Besides which, you will have its moral consequences —you will he accused in the face of Europe of ingratitude, and it will be said that Ireland hates you, as she ought, if you sanction such measures to be passed against her. England, your country, is at this moment powerful, for she is compact, and, as it were coiled up. If she is so, she owes it in a great part to Irishmen, who aided her in her political agony, saved her from the weakness resulting from the distraction of party, and restored her to the vigour that, when contented, she possesses. I sit down with the hope that the glad tioings will, ere long, reach my country, that independent Eng lishmen and Scotchmen will prove by their resistance to the passing of those measures, that they prefer the in violability of the Constitution to all other considerations. Their vote upon this occasion will not only preserve the Constitution, but render the Union of the two countries durable. I mean, if that vote be, as I trust•it will be, against the enactment now projected by Government. May they, in the event of their resistance to injustice, in. gratitude, and oppression, have their reward. There is one that I can promise them—their names, how uncouth soccer their sound, will be re-echoed in the valleys of my country, and, at the mention of aem, blessings will be poured upon the heads of those to whom they belong.— (On re-noting his seat, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was loudly cheered.) Lord ALTHORP could not help saying that the Hon. and Learned Member had, in the most unusual manner possible, Bragg, d in the discussiian of the measures that Government contemplated towards Ireland. He would not follow the example of irregularity set by the Hon. and Learned Member, and would defer speaking upon the measure until it was brought before the House, when it would be seen whether the statements on each side were founded in fact or not. The HMI. and Learned Gentle man had stated, at some length, the great evils that would attend the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act; but when that measure was regularly before the House, the House would decide whether its temporary suspension was not preferable to the continuance of the evils with which Ireland was afflicted. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman hal said that there was no relation between present and previous agitation, and he referred to the state of Ireland in 1821 and 1824. He (Lord Althorp) would be pre pared to prove that there existed a strong relation, and that crimes were as great now as they were then, and consequently requited the same remedies. It might be of some injury to his Majesty's Government to allow the statements of the Hon. and Learned Member to go for ward without contradiction. He would not now disprove those statements one by one; but he would pubicly enter his protest against their general veracity, solely with the view that Government might not be injured by them. If the duty devolved upon him to bring forward those mea sures in that House, he would not do so unless he found himself prepared to show that there were absolute grounds for their adoptio n . _ _ Mr. FERGUS O'CONNOR implored the House, as eagerly as did the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, not to commit itself before it had made inquiry and heard satisfacteiry evidence. He denied that Ireland was in the disturbed state Ministers represented it to be in. In his county a large one (Cork), there was but one instance of murder lately, and he would ask whether that isolated crime justified the putting of the whole county under m irtial law ? He agreed with the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, that this was an Act, not to repress agitation, but to insure the payment of tithes. The Mi nistry were about to govern with bayonets and bullets, and would dwindle from having been the most popular the country had had for some years, to be the most unpopular and nio•t sincerely detested. If they meant to make Ire land a colony, they could not adopt better measures than those they propos-d. The Right Hon. Secretary opposite him hail said, that he would resist the repeal of Union to " the death ;" now, in his turn, he would use the same expression, solemnly declaring that he would resist the ado/Finn of the present measures to the death. He begged the House to reflect, that though by this mea-ure they drove eight millions of their fellow subjects beyond the pale of the Constitution, and that though they might de stroy many of the most refractory of those people, many more would remain who would long remember the wrongs they suffered under so tyrannical an act. Colonel CONOLLY said, the lion. Member for Dublin had given a very eloquent and impressive description of the grievances which Ireland was suffering, and deprecated the measures which bad beer. adopted and were in course of adoption towards that country. He considered that those measures were for the protection of the peaceable inhabitants, and to relieve the loyal and well-affected from a tyranny infinitely more terrible and more despotic than any which could be experienced under the most absolute Governments. He knew that in Ireland there was a system e;f organized and unconstitutional combination against pro perty.—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial Benches.) It was too notorious a fact not to be known to all who were at all acquainted with Ireland. The province of Leinster was in a most disturbed state, and he could not conceal it without incurring the most aA ful responsibility. He himself had bad occasion to know it. He lived within ten miles of Dublin, and he was threatened with having his house burnt down if he would not turn away his steward. The lion. and Learned Member for Dublin hail stated that he never attended any of the meetings held in Ireland to pro cure the abolition of tithes. Now, he had sworn infor mations before him that that gentleman did attend an anti- tithe meeting at --. [We could not catch the name.] —( Loud cheers.) There was a delusion practised on the nation—a delusion which was likely to draw destruction upon it; and he begged to ask if a man who was thus driv ing the most ignorant of the people to destruction—who was resorting to the most improper means to goad them on— and who was holding out to them prospects of impunity for their most violent and illegal acts—could such a man, he asked, have the proper feelings of humanity in his breast?— (Loud cheers.) He was sorry thus to expose the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, but he conceived it a duty he owed to that House and to the country—and he hoped that his testimony, humble as it was, might tend to disabuse the House and the country, and to open their eyes to the scandalous imposition which was practised upon thern.—(Cheers.) Mr. SHELL said, that the Gallant Colonel had fur nished in his own person some evidence of the character of those military tribunals which were to supersede the ordinary judicature in Ireland. His manifest impartiality, iiis freedom from all passion and all prejudice, strongly, no doubt, recommended the dressing of justice in regimentals. —(Hear, hear.) Who could be so unreasonable as to object to a triumvirate composed of such men as the Gal lant Colonel ? Who could think his liberty or his home in hazard, when they were to be confided to men who, under red coats, bore so much calm disinterestedness as the Gal lant Colonel ? He had told the House a narrative respect ing his steward and his house—why did he not condescend to go into some particulars which extended beyond him self? Is the Habeas Corpus Act to be suspended, and the Constitution to be outraged, because the Gallant Colonel has received threatening intimidations relative to the me nials in his employment ? He (Mr. Sheil) had risen prin cipally with a view to the statement of facts. The House seemed indisposed to go into the details of the proposed at itute ; but it was as well that the House and the public ,hould know the exact state of things, and that if the Le- g :slat nre was to strike at the vitality of freedom that it should not be aimed in the dark. The administration of justice, it was alleged, was impeded, nay, almost ar rested in Ireland. This was broadly stated ; and with- out inquiry, without the decencies of a preliminary Coin mitt& of investigation, the House was called upon to legislate on this bold and unsupported asseveration. There had been recently in Ireland several trials connected with tithe combinations. Offences were charged that related to grievance by which the national sympathies were most deeply moved. There had been trials in Dublin, Cork, Kerry, Clonmel. The House would, no doubt, suppose, that in all these cases, no witnesses, no juries, no verdicts could be pro cured. How would they be surprised, when they were in formed, that in every one of these cases there had been convic tions.-- Loud cries of " Hear.") Yes, he repeated it, convic tions. In no one case had there been an acquittal; the de fendants were convicted, sentenced, and some of them are at this moment in their prison-houses; their pallid faces might, . through the bars of the dungeon, contribute evidence to the necessity of the abolition of Trial by Jury and the establishment of martial law.—(Hear, hear.) Thus it was that the grossest delusion was practised on the credulity of Englishmen. B e should turn to another topic. It would not be uninteresting, as matter of history (ter the House would entertain a curiosity on the subject), to inquire how far the present measures were in accordance with the opinions previously expressed by the members of the Government respecting the Insurrection Act. But there he was wrong, for in no other instance had such a mass of penalty been accumulated. This measure was, in quality and quantity of infliction, without a parallel, and stood unprecedented in the annals of domination. Let him be then allowed to trace, with as much brevity as possible, the history of the Insurrection Act. Lord Castle reagh, in 1801, did not introduce that Act, but proposed a martial law, and the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act for three months. He grounded his measure on the results and inquietude of the late rebellion, but declared that he should only embrace three months in his Penal Statute, and in the interval institute an inquiry, in order to ascertain whether a further extension were required for public safety.—(Hear ) The proposed measure is to embrace years.—(Hear, hear.) Castlereagh asks for months, and Lord Grey asks for years. By whom was that requisition for martial law opposed ? By Mr. Grey—(Hear)--who exclaimed against the tyranny of such a proceeding without inquiry. Here was Ireland hot and reek ing from civil war. Mr. Grey demands inquiry, and Lord Grey stands in need of none, when he insists on measures, before which the Castlereagh code sinks into insignificance, and al most evinces a regard for freedom. In 1807, Sir A. Wellesley introduced the Insurrection Act, which was modelled on an Irish sanguinary statute passed in 1796. Most of the Whigs opposed the Bill, with the exception of Mr. Grattan. H e founded his support on the perils of the State, arising from the French war, and the existence of a revolutionary conspiracy. In 1814, Sir Robert Peel applied for this terrible Act of Parlia ment. He stated that "in Ireland there existed a combina tion against the Government; that the people had committed great barbarities, and that Juries and witnesses were intimi_ dated. The Carders, who derived their appellation from the use of wool cards, with which they tore the flesh from the bones of their victims, had committed the most frightful enormities." Was not this a horrible state of things ? Did it not equal, nay exceed, all the details of savageness which have furnished the pretexts of . such copious expatriation ? Well, what did the Tory Secretary demand? Not martial law—not a scarlet tribunal—not the extinction of the right of petition—not the change of a venue, but the renewal of the In surrection Act.—(Loud cheers.) Let us come to 18122. Lord Wellesley sent a dispatch to the Government, stating that the south of Ireland was in actual rebellion ; the insurgents had posted themselves in thousands on the hills of the county of Cork—murder stalked in open day, and the horizon was at midnight in a blaze with conflagration. The facts were in the memory of most of the Members of that House. Lord Wellesley asked for the Insurrection Act. Now hear what was said by the Members of the Government. The Secretary for the Treasury, Mr. Spring Rice—(There he is—let him, a real friend of his country, recall his language to recollection.) Mr. Spring Rice said, " That it was quite unwarraweble to have recourse to coercion, without previous inquiry.- , -Woud cheers.) How could the Noble Lord rely on the efficacy of laws which had proved wholly ineffectual for the restoration of tran quillity in Ireland ? Lord Bacon had said, that to allay sedi tion you must allay the matter of it.' What must Englishmen think of a tribunal invested with the power to transport their fellow-subjects without the intervention of a Jury.—(Hear.) As to the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, he asked English Gentlemen whether they would assent to such a mea sure if applied to their own country ? He called on the Eng lish Members to deal with Ireland as they would with their own country —nay, he implored them not to allow the Con stitution to be unnecessarily violated ; if they did, they must be prepared for the consequences."—(Hear, hear, hear ) This was the adjuration uttered from this side of the House, of which the Member for Cambridge was then an ornament, and lie (Mr. Sheil) would adopt the same language of emphatic en treaty, and implore them to deal towards Ireland as if she were truly incorporated with this great country. For God's sake do not tell us one day that Ireland is like Yorkshire, and another, act towards us a part which would make the blood of every Briton boil if it were applied to himself. But to go on—What said Lord Ebrington ?—(Hear, hear.) He said that " he never would assent to such frightful and oppressive mea sures."—(Loud cheers.) What said Mr. Brougham—not Lord Brougham and Vaux.—(Hear, hear.) "He would seri. ously ask whether gentlemen perceived the extent of the power which they were thus incrusting to the hands of others. They gave to Magistrates a right to enter into the most retired and delicate part of any dwelling-house, and a power to force the chambers even of females ; and should any person be found absent, even after this domiciliary visit, without reason being assigned, he was liable to transportation. And all this they did without the interference of a Grand Jury—without the petty Jury, by verdict--without appeal."—(Loud cheers.) And this is the man who calls on us now to do the very self-same thing —nay, more—to vote for the statute which he thus reprobated as an outrage to all humanity and all law ; a superaddition, that renders the former Act merciful by comparison, and makes us desire, as a boon, the solitary blessings of the Insurrection Act. He had not yet done with the Ministers. There was another before him—the great champion of Reform—who had been so often gloriously defeated in its cause, and had at length won a victory which would be remembered to all after time. There he is (pointing to Lord John Russell). In 1824, the renewal of the Insur rection Act was proposed. What said Lord John Russell ? ( Hear, hear, hear.) He said, "If we were told that in Aus tria, Russia, or Prussia, a law was in operation, by which the people were confined without light in their houses for twelve out of twenty-four hours, should we hesitate to pronounce such a law arbitrary and absurd ?"—(Loud cheers.) And is the Act, which was arbitrary and absurd in 1524, reasonable and just in 1833? Was the law changed? or have the men who de nounced the law undergone any transmutation ? So much for Ireland. Turn now to England, and see whether any Mini- ster ever acted, or dared to intimate that he would act, such a, part as you are about to perform towards your miserable and helpless dependant. In 1819, Lancashire was in a condition represented to be most awful. Hundreds of thousands were said to be in arms ; but hear the narrative given by Lord Stanley, as foreman of the Lancashire grand jury. It is one of the documents on which the Six Acts were founded ; fur ther, there was an inquiry. Although the facts were noto. rious, yet, where the rights of Englishmen were concerned— aye, of Englishmen —you did not dare to trespass on the Con stitution without an inquiry. But where Ireland and her liber ties, and the peasants' home, and trial by jury, and the whole Constitution, and the very name of liberty, are involved.— * * * * * * * But it is better to proceed to the narrative. Lord Stanley said, after describing the training and drilling—" One of the most powerful to which the disaf ' fected have resorted, is a system of intimidation, which pre. vails to a most serious and alarming extent ; not only have threats to persons and property been made use of, and put into execution, but even combinations have been formed to dis countenance and to ruin tho4e publicans and shopkeepers who have come forward in support of the civil power. To such an extent does this prevail, that individuals who are well disposed have been deterred from expressing the sentiments which they really entertain, and from giving information which may lead to the detection of the offenders. The object of the lower classes in general is no other than to reverse the orders of so. ciety which have been so long established, and to divide among themselves the landed property of the country. In one popu lous district, no warrant for ordinary offences, or other legal process, can be executed ; the payment of taxes has ceased ; and the landlords are threatened with the discontinuance of their rents." This document is signed " Stanley."—(Hear, hear.) It presents an appalling picture of the condition of a large portion of the north of England, at that peculiar moment when public credit had received a great shock, and the fabric of the State trembled at the concussion. What course was proposed by Ministers ? Inquiry was first resorted to ; evidence was laid before a Secret Committee, and the case having been heard in detail, the House proceeded to pass the Six Acts. But put them all together—(the Legislature did not attempt to condense in one concentration of despotism, the entire mass of coercion)—put all the Six Acts together, and do you find that the aggregate and sum-total can be weighed with any sort of equipoise against the single Act of Parliament now proposed by the Ministers for what they call the tranquilliza. Lion of Ireland ? Did they establish a tribunal of three Cor. nets of Dragoons to arbitrate on the liberties of Englishmen ? —(Hear, hear.) Did they subvert the tribunals of the country, and raise a new military judicature on their ruins ? Did they change the venue ? Did they trample on the right of peti tion Did they strangle all discussion ? No. But they did introduce one clause, which they drew from the Irish Insurrec tion Act, which gave a right to a Magistrate to break open a man's house to search for arms.--(Near, hear.) Now hear —not a mere speech—not a flourish of opposition rhetoric-- not a declamatory ebullition—but a solemn protest, entered on the Journals of the House of Lords, and thus embodied in the records of the country. The following is the Protest : " Because this law is in its very nature peculiarly liable to abuse; interest, credulity, malevolence, revenge, party violence, and indiscreet zeal, may equally, with a sense of duty, contribute to call it into action ; and the powers given for it s execut i on o f breaking, either by day or night, into any house, or place where information may have been received that arms are kept for illegal purposes, must unavoidably expose the persons and prop er ty of his Majesty's subj ects to injury and violence that cannot be suffi ciently guarded against by the provisions made in the Bill for that purpose. This is not a mere apprehension —experience proves that such effects may be expected from it. In Ireland, it is well known, nothing more contributed to irritate the people, and to promote acts of private resentment and revenge, than the abuses which took place, particularly the insults which were offered to women, in the exercise of a similar power." This is the protest entered at that peculiar and most alarm ing juncture, on the records of the House of Lords. By whom ?—(Hear, hear.) This protest is signed (and let the name ring in every ear, and reach to many a heart)—this pro. test, this denunciation of a single clause in the Insurrection Act grafted on one of the Six Acts, was signed " Grey."— (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.) Grey I alas, Sir, is it even so ? On this signature, compared with the Act of Parliam..nt now in progress, all commentary would be superfluous. " Grey I" The name so frought with honour, so encompassed with fame, is sufficient. Wherefore should we waste ourselves in denuncia tions of this measure, when that single name attached to this recorded anathema against oppression speaks with an eloquence a s potent as it is brief, and swells emotions in every man's bosom, and recalls recollections to every man's mind, which the noblest oratory and the most elaborate sanative would fail to produce. He had quoted many documents, but he could not deny himself the gratification of referring to one with which he should conclude. He had already stated that Lord Castlereagh, in 1810, had proposed martial law, and a suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. Lord Castlereagh had started a Reformer, and as Curran used to say, came into the House of Commons " cantering on a griev. ance."—(A laugh.) He was originally almost a Republican— (No, no)—it was said Mr. Grey, in his reply to Lord Castle reagh, adverted to his early Jacobitlism in those remarkable words :—" There were Ministers who, when out of place, were factious, who started questions to mislead the people, who lured them into schemes of reform to overthrow an Ad_ ministration, and then not only abandoned the people, but ac cused their old abettors of treason for that they had taught them to do. If Jacobinism was licentious out of place, in place it was tyrannical, and filled the country with terror and coercion. It was the :parent of Reform when out, and of despotism when in.—(Loud cries of " Hear.") He demanded in quiry, and repudiated the doctrine that a measure of severity ought to be adopted, because it was to be confided to hands so lenient as Lord Cornwallis."—(Hear.) And where was the man who would now tell us, that despotism is to be established in Ireland, because a kind, generous-hearted man was to be its trustee? Is not this a most fatal doctrine ? How long is he to continue the depositary of the trust ? How can you answer for his successor ? The Viceroy may be changed, but the statute will remain; and whipping, and laceration, and tor ture, and all the horrible train of calamities that attend the exercise of military authority may hereafter follow this fright ful measure. He should not accuse this Government, or any man connected with this Government, of any disposition to cruelty and actual oppression ; but how could they guarantee the contingincies of the future ? Their theory might become another's practice. They were to fabricate the law, that Lord Anglesea might keep it in the scabbard ; but hereafter ano ther hand might draw it forth and steep it to the hilt in blood It might be thought that these observations ought to have been reserved forthe transmission of the Bill from another place. No, for it was of importance that at once, before any further progress in this enterprise of oppression had been made, the House,—the Commons of England, the people of England, the Ministers themselves, should see what they were about to do. Look at your own work ! Behold the mass of ponderous manacles you prepare for Ireland ! Examine every chain — weigh every link—and then you will, as we do, tremble at their imposition ! You will shrink from the degrading office of fastening and rivetting them upon us. The In surrection Act, martial law, suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, abolition of juries, change of venue, extinction of the right of petition--discussion at an end—the incarceration of the pea. santry in their foul and loathsome hovels—the denial to them of the very air of heaven—the sacrilege to be perpetrated in the sanctity of their houses—their privacy violated—their wives and children dragged at the dead of night by a ferocious police from their wretched shelter—complete, absolute, unqualified despotism established—liberty annihilated in substance, and not even its shadow left behind. Good Heaven !is this, is all this necessary ? Will nothing short of this suffice ? Bad as the condition of Ireland is alleged to be, is all this unparalleled oppression, unexampled in the history of this nation, and un surpassed in that of any other, indispensable for what is called the repose of Ireland? Nay, forbear, relent—we are at your feet—we are prostrate before you—your pride must needs be satisfied—give way to your better and nobler feelings, and remember that the assertion of the liberty of others is the noblest office you can perform, after the vindication of your own. Mr. O'CONNELL rose to free himself from a scandalous imputation which, in his absence, had been cast upon him by the Hon. Member for Donegal, who had stated that a man had informed him upon oath, that at a meeting against tithes, he (Mr. O'Connell) had exhorted the people not to pay tithes, &c., and that he (Mr. O'Connell) had for his attendance received 501. He most unequivocally denied the charge thus brought against him ; but lie must say, that ii any person really swore to these slanders before a magistrate, that magistrate had committed a gross breach of duty in not forwarding an in timation of it to the proper quarters. For himself (Mr. O'Connell) he solemnly declared, that if the name of this per son be given him, he will indict him for wilful and malicious perjury, and more than that, he will indict for subornation of perjury all those who had any share in inducing the man to commit so abhorent, so vile, so gross a perjury. Colonel CONOLLY said, that he would assert that the Hon. Member for Dublin had come to the town of Leislip, and stopped at the house of a tenant of his (Colonel Conolly's), named Herbert ; that the Hon. Member here spoke at a meet ing of the nature mentioned by him, and that a subscription for the O'Connell Fund had been got up among the spectators and others, amounting to 501., which the Hon. Gentleman received. Mr. O'CONNELL denied having attended any meeting at that town, except an anti-union one. _ _ _ . Colonel CONOLLY repeated his previous statement, He was not in the county at the time—(Great laughter among the Irish Members)—but he arrived at the town a fortnight after, when the oath was made before him. The man in question had refused to pay the vicar his tithes, but he (Colonel Conolly) had refused to receive his rents till the tithes were paid. Mr. STANLEY rose to give an explanation of several facts which had been alluded to by the Hon. Member opposite (Mr. Sheil), and of which that Hon. Gentleman had given notice of moving for further discussion. He (Mr. Stanley) had no in. tention of offering any opposition to the production of the papers relating to the trials at Clonmel, and, indeed, he in. tended to elucidate these cases by a few additional papers. That Hon. Gentleman denied that in any instance had intimi dation or undue influence been exercised; that there had been no difficulty in empannelling jurors, or obtaining evidence or jurors, and that there had been convictions in every case, which he (Mr. Stanley) would not at all deny. The Hon. Gentleman had taunted the Solicitor-General with havinggiven directions to set aside all persons who were Catholics. To this assertion, in the name of his Learned and Hon. Friend who was unfortunately absent (the Solicitor-General), he would give a most decided negative. On the contrary, that Learned Gentleman had given the fullest directions in the most public way, that no juror should be set aside on account of his religion, but only such as could not be supposed impartial judges from intimidation and fear of danger, and there were as many of these Roman Catholics as Protestants. The Hon. Gentle_ man said there had been no combination, no intimidation, no . . difficulty in empannelling Juries, &c., no disturbance, no po litical agitators to calm it. At the period in question, there were no less than three prosecutions for combination, and a fourth for the wilful and deliberate murder of a clergyman. The three first were combinations not to pay tithes ; there had been a resolution passed about this time by the Clonmel Inde pendent Club, signed by a number of persons, who shortly after pleaded guilty to a prosecution for combination. The resolu tion stated "that those who signed it held themselves solemnly bound in the face of the country, never to have any public or private intercourse with any person who should become the purchaser of goods put up for sale for tithe, church-rates, or vestry cess."—( Hear, hear.) This was not intimidation or combination.---(Hear, hear, "No," from the Irish Members.) He would leave it to the House to judge whether this was not the way to intimidate and produce undue influence. The Hon Gentleman had stated that there had been no difficulty in em pannelling jurors or witnesses. In one case, where Mr. Penne father, a Protestant himself, and more curious still, the son of a Protestant clergyman, was brought upon a prosecution for coin. bination not to pay tithes—in this case, as a strong proof how little intimidation was feared, he could only state that the prin cipal evidence against the prisoner was obliged to be escorted to the Court by a large party of military—(Hear)—his brother lying in bed at the same time, in consequence of a murderous attack made on him, because he had dared to become the pur chaser of some land at a public sale, seized for non-payment of tithe.—(Hear.) To show how easily Juries were empannelled, it would be sufficient to state, that out of 205 Jurors, whose names were called over, 175 did not answer. Mr. SHEIL, as we understood him, said he wished to know how they had been called over ? Mr. STANLEY continued.—ln another case, out of 222 who were called, 172 did not come. In another case, where 244 were called, only 30 were set aside ; and a great Majority did not come at all. He admitted that the system of arraying all the rich and powerful—and consequently more sensible—indivi duals at the head of the panel, was a bad one. Among those who had been set aside were many who, like the Hon. Member opposite--he meant no disrespect—had presided at political anti-tithe meetings, and who had made themselves busy at similar proceedings, and it had been thought that such were not exactly the persons to sit in judgment on persons under prosecution for offences similar in character to those which they themselves had been guilty of. He recollected an instance where one of the persons who had been called upon to act as juror in a combination case, subse. quently pleaded guilty of the identical offence. Under these circumstances, he considered the Solicitor-General —ho would not say justified—but hound in duty to set :side the names of all such. In the dreadful case of the murder of Mr. Bowen—this was not a tithe murder, but a foul and deliberate act of unprovoked assassination-288 persons' names were called over before a jury could be formed; of these, it was true, 53 had been set aside by the Crown, 26 were challenged by the prisoner, and 28 begged to be excused. On this trial four out of the 12 were Protestants, the other eight were Catholics : so much for the exclusion of Catholics from juries. The prisoners were acquitted from want of evidence; but why was this want of evidence ? Not from intimidation or fear of danger, of course, but only from this circumstance : that the son-in-law of the murdered man, who would have produced the most material evidence, sent word that he dared not be a witness for fear of his life. Here was no intimidation: here was one witness obliged to come to the place of trial under pro. tection of a troop of horse ; and another, the son of a man bar barously murdered, dared not give evidence against the mur. derers of his father.—(Hear, hear.) After these facts, let the Hon. Gentleman make out his case against the Solicitor-Gene ral if he could. Let him prove his statement about the Clonmel trials; let him set forth his arguments before the people of England, and then see if he can prove the law to have its full, free, and impartial course.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. RONAYNE de n i e d tEat intimidation had anything to do with the non-attendance of Jurors, which (we understood him to observe) was a remissness of but too ordinary occurrence in Ireland; out of 150 called, it was very rare to hear of fifty having obeyed the call. Mr. CALLAGHAN said lie had taken the earliest oppor tunity of stating his opinions upon the subject under discus. sion. He must say that his Majesty's Ministers had given a description of the state of Ireland that was not warranted by the real state of things in that part of his Majesty's dominions. With respect to the county of Cork, with which he was more immediately connected, the grossest misrepresentations had been made. On information similar to that on which his Ma jesty's Ministers were now about to act, the Government had acted in the time of Lord Castlereagh. Questions had been asked respecting the law which authorized the course of pro cedure with respect to Ireland. No statute could be adduced ; but it was said by the Judges, that their course of proceeding was law in all ages, that it was law before the existence of statutes, This was but a poor defence. His Majesty's Mi• sisters were acting upon false information. It had been repre sented that the Grand Juries did not do their duty.—(Hear.) Instead of not being ready to convict in cases of disturbance of the peace, they were, in fact, too ready. The object of all parties in Ireland now was the repeal of the Union; and that would continue to be their object so long as they could not re. pose confidence in the Ministry. Ireland was not the country to endure coercion, and those who had advised measures of that nature were taking the most effectual means for widening the breach between the two countries. Mr. O'DWYER observed that the Right Hon. Gentleman sir. Stanley) had brought no proof whatever of the allegations which he had made respecting the state of Ireland. Mr. STANLEY alluded to the trials at Clonmel. There were some convictions on that occasion for the CroWn. In one case there had been a slight anachronism in the speeches from the opposition side. Allusion had bean made to the case of Mr. Going, which occurred ten years ago, as if it had been a recent transaction. The Right lion. Gentleman here used some strong language respecting the conduct of the Opponents of the Ministry. An HUN. Mennen spoke in strong reprobation of the Metts sures contemplated by his Majesty's Government. Mr. CHARLES ED WARD STUART said, he would re. quest the indulgence of the House for a few moments. A great deal of virulence had been mixed up with the discussion, and appeals had been made to the feelings of Englishmen ; bet there was one feeling of Englishmen to which attention had not been paid, and that was—the feeling which prevented all Englishman from striking one whocouid net strike again. The Opposition knew that his Majesty's Ministers Were precluded by circumstances from premature discussion. For the tdvan. tage of the subject, it was necessary that the law ahould be pa ramount; and any remissness in enforcing the laws was in fact an attack upon the liberties of , the people. Mr. MAURICE O'CONNELL spoke in reprobation of the measures of his Majesty's Government. He observed that the remarks which had been made respecting the backwardness of Jurors to come forward, was in a great measure founded in miss take. It had been customary for the officers whose duty it was to enforce attendance to excuse the parties for a fee of two shil lings or half a crown. An Hon. MEMBER, whose name We could not learn, declared that the south of Ireland was in a perfect state of peace, and that there had been no difficulty there in obtaining convictions, no intimidation of witnesses or jurors. For what purpose were the oppressive measures proposed by his Majesty's Government intended ? For the preservation of the system of tithes. Of this, however, he was convinced, that as long as the tithe system was continued, and as long as the tithes were levied by Peelers, so :ong would be the Irish people in a state of dissatisfaction. Ile had himself been a Catholic, he then became a Protestant, and afterwards a Presbyterian. But while he was a Protestant he never had had an opportunity of entering a church, he had never seen a clergyman, he had never been able to go to prayers. Why should tithe be paid by those who, as in his case, had derived no benefit from it? There never was a country so ins jured as that he came from. From the moment at which he heard of the measures which his Majesty's Government intended to introduce, he had not had a single night's rest. They pre tended to call their measures measures of security and pro tection. He could call them nothing but measures of degrada tion and humiliation.—(Hear, hear, hear.) An HON. MEMBER (name unknown) professed to enter tain the best feelings towards Ireland, and had even heard with great regret the attacks which had been levelled in so. cession at the Lord Lieutenant, the Judges, the Clergy, and the Po lice. Those attacks argued badly for the persons by whom they were made, as they showed that they suffered with diffi culty any kind of government.—(" Misgovernment," from an Hon. Member.) At the same time he was ready to allow that if his Majesty's Government had managed the powers already 'intrusted to them with discretion and vigour, no additional powers would have been necessary. Ho would also say, that a call for extraordinary powers came with a very bad grace from the present Ministers, since it was well known that, for the last fifty years, no Government in this country had been so strong. An indisputable proof of that strength had been shown in their having had the power to destroy the very House of Commons which placed them on the Treasury Benches, in their having had the power to control the House of Peers—in their having obtained an authority front the highest personage in the land, which they used for unconstitutional purposes.— (Loud cries of " Order," and murmurs.) He repeated it, that they had obtained an authority from the highest personage in the land, which they used for unconstitutional purposes ; from such Ministers a call for additional power came with a very had grace. At the same time, looking at the state of Ire land, contemplating the midnight murders, the midnight as sassinations, the destruction of property of every description in that unhappy country, he certainly thought that very strong measures were necessary to restore it to tranquillity. Minis ters charged the other side of the House with agitation. But did he not see on the Tseasury Bench a Noble Lord who had himself unfurled the standard of agitation—who had spoken of the conduct of the Parisians in the revolution of July, and of the tricoloured flag with respect ? Did he not see behind the Treasury Bench an Hon. Baronet who, when he was on the other side of the House, was constantly bringing forward Mo tions of agitation ? How could his Majesty's Government complain of agitation, when by their mismanagement they had allowed the great agitator to escape after conviction ? He would support his Majesty's Government, but he begged them not to understand that they had his confidence.—(Great laughter, and cries of " Hear, hear.") Mr. HUME wished his Majesty's Ministers joy of their supporter, whom they had just heard. He entered his protest against the doctrine of the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Gentleman, that the time chosen for this discussion was in convenient and improper. This was the very time for such a discussion. When the House of Commons was called upon to vote away the public money, that was the time at which to consider whether those who were to have the management of the grant were entitled to confidence. He must say that he never witnessed a more humiliating spectacle than the situa tion of the lion. Gentlemen opposite. No men in England ever stood in so disgraceful a position. Having changed sides in the House, there was only one man on that side who had not changed his opinion, and who still maintained the senti. ments which he had always professed. The present was not an Irish question alone—it was one of immense importance to the people of this country. He was convinced that no. thing could thoroughly remedy the existing evils in Ire. land, but the destruction of that which had ever been the curse of Ireland ; and that the entire removal of the Church Establishment in that country was indispensable to the restoration of its tranquillity. What had been said by an Hon. Member was perfectly true; namely, that the people of Eng land were now called upon to wage war with the people of Ire land for the sake of the Church Establishment. For that pur. pose Parliament was required to place eight millions of people under military rule, and out of the protection of the law. He asked the people of England to look to themselves. The pro posed measure was calculated to keep up the estimates. Not a single man of our large military establishments could be re. duced. The Government would wapt all the force they could procure. The opinions which he was now expressing were not the opinions of yesterday. He had stated them when the subject was less a matter of importance to England. He had then declared that the Irish had always been kept in the condition of a conquered people; that civil war had been promoted—that civil rights had been denied; and all for the maintenanceof that which was the great blot in the institutions of Ireland—the Church Establishment. Lord JOHN RUSSELL had not intended to address the House, but in consequence of the extraordinary and very vio. lent attacks which had been made upon his Majesty's Ministers by the Hon. Member for Middlesex, he begged leave to say a few words. The Hon. Member for Middlesex talked of the change of opinion on his (Lord John Russell's) side of the House. He for one, and he was sure on that part he might also answer for his Hon. Friends near him, was not conscious of any change of opinion. No man, when he pretended to consistency, did more than state that the line of conduct which he pursued was consistent with regard to the object he had in view. The Hon. Member for Middlesex said the object which he had in view, was the total destruction of the Church. Esta blishment of Ireland. - Now, that was an object which, neither he (Lord John Russell) nor bis Noble Friend near bim ever hid in view.' What. right - thanhad the Hon. Member for Mid dle.sex to'call them in6;onsistent ? In the course of the debate an Hon. Member had done him the honour to refer to a speech of his, in which he had characterized the Insurrection Act at that time proposed, as a measure of oppression and injustice. 1 But if that Hon. Member would refer to the beginning of the speech, he would find that he (Lord John Russell) had said that there were circumstances in which he should consider the Insurrection Act in Ireland necessary. As a proof of this, the Insurrection Act had been introduced several times, and he had never opposed it. But on the occasion to which the Honourable Gentleman had alluded, he had maintained that, according to the evidence before the House, the Insurrection Act was not necessary—(Hear)— and being an enemy to any measure of extraordinary vigour, unless justified by necessity, he on that occasion opposed it. But was it to be maintained, that because he opposed it on that oc casion, he was precluded from supporting it on an occasion when the circumstances of the case were entirely different? ' Although in 1824 he opposed a measure because he considered it unnecessary, he was surely not liable to the charge of incon sistency, if, in 1833, and under different circumstances, he sup. ported the same measure, considering it to be, as his Noble Friend had termed it, the least of two evils—a measure which, while it caused a temporary, suspension of liberty, was calcu. lated to restore that public peace which was the foundation of all liberty, Whenever he had been the advocate for religious liberty, with reference even to this country or to Ireland, he meant a religious liberty equal to all. He never meant that any portion of the people should be deprived, for the sake of any other portion, of the power of acting according to their own discretion ; he never meant that the Protestant who in his conscience thought it his duty to pay tithes to the Protestant clergyman, ought to have nis life threatened, and his house burned for his opinion. Without inconsistency, therefore, he might support the measures now proposed with respect to Ire.. land. He wholly denied that the argument of the Hon. Member for Middlesex had the slightest basis ; .and he hoped that that Hon. Gentleman would not again indulge in a strain so unbecoming to him, but would confine himself to those economical speculations so peculiarly suited to the character of his mind. The Hon. Member reminded him of one of the heroes in the " Dunciad," who, having— ., --- climbed a stranded ghter's height, Shot to the black abyss, and lu ngpd downright, The serious judgment all the crowd. admire; Who, but to sink the deeper, rose the higher." Mr. FINN observed, that he had opposed the Insurrection Act in 1824, because there was no evidence of its necessity ; yet now, without a tittle of evidence whatever, the Noble Lord was, it seems, prepared to approve not only of the .Insurrection Act, but of other measiires of still greater severity. No one ss ould deny that the tithes , in Ireland were a grrat evil, and that those who received them, whether magistrates or clergy. / , men, exposed themselves to universal execration. The con duct of his Majesty's Goverin, of on this subject had pro voked the people of Ireland. The Noble Secretary of State, in the other House, had talked, last Session, of the extinc tion of tithes, and the Irish people, taking him at his word, had supposed that some proposition to that effect would be made. It was now, however, generally believed in Ireland that his Majesty's Government had viewed anti_ tithe meetings with a favourable eye, because those meetings alii,rded them a pretext for the odious measures which they were now submitting to Parliament. What was the real o!ij,et of those measures ? To put down the robber and the murderer ?—No I to collect tithes at the point of the bayonet - • -fa put down what, he trusted, they never would put down-- - popular freedom in Ireland. The English Government had long tried to pia down the Catholic religion in Ireland. Had they succeeded ? And did they think they could eradicate poli. tics), more easily than religious opinions? On the contrary, the more they opposed, the more they would confirm those opi nions. It was human nature. There was no more drivelling poney that] to attempt, by violent and tyrannical measures, to change opinions. He felt it his duty to express his execration of the measures proposed by his Majesty's Government. They were about to break the last link which united Ireland to Eng land. They cherished liberty for themselves, but they thought the Irish people not worthy of it. When they taunted the Irish people with being corrupt, they ought to recollect that it was English gold and English policy that had effected that corruption. From 178 . 2 to 1792, no country could be making so rapid a progress in arts and arms as Ireland ; but then England .gain asserted her power, put Ireland under foot, and destroyed hef Independence. God only knew what might be the result of the measures now proposed. He deeply deprecated and deplored them. The Irish people would never consider the English people in any other light than as their equals. They would never submit to insolent domination. What right had the English to attempt it ? The Irish people admitted that the English were their equals, but they would never admit their inferiority. Any attempt to assert it would have no other effect than to generate that immortal hatred and that uncon.. querable aversion with which tyrants were always regarded. The resolutions of the report of the Committee of Supply were then read and agreed to. Mr. ROEBUCK moved a resolution, "That it is highly cri, foinal in any Minister or Ministers, or other servants under the: Crown of Great Britain and Ireland, directly or indirectly to use the powers of office in the election of representatives to serve in Parliament, and an attempt at such influence will at all times be resented by this House as aimed at its honour, dignity, and independency—as an infringement of the dearest rights of every subject throughout the empire, and tending to sap the basis of this free and happy Constitution." Lord ALTHORP said there could be no doubt of the truth of the Hon. Member's resolution. But it would be very un usual in that House to affirm such a resolution, without some ca,e being made out that his Majesty's Ministers had so used or abused their powers. The Hon, Gentleman had not stated that such was the case. As an abstract proposition, certainly it was impossible to deny the truth of his resolution. Mr. WARBURTON recommended the Hon. Member for Bath, if he thought he could make out a case, to withdraw his motion for the present. Mr. ROEBUCK said he thought he could do so, and, there fore, he would adopt the suggestion of the Hon. Member for Bridport. Mr. SHAW moved for returns of offences against the law, committed in Ireland, in the years and 1832, so far as, those returns could be made out by the Irish Government. — Agreed to, The House then adjourned at a quarter to one. HOUSE OF LORDS, FEmtuear 18. The Loan CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at five o'clock. The Earl of CAWDOR presented two petitions from flaverfordweat, and two from Milford, praying for the abolition of slavery. Lord ELLEN BOROUGH said, he was about to move for seine returns, but if the Noble Lord opposite had any ob jection to their being produced, he would not press it. A retw n had been laid on their Lordships' table that morn ing, made by the chief constable of Ireland, of all out rages committed within their bailiwicks up to June, 1832 , He wished to move their Lordships that a similar return p s' i 'e es7 o nt i3 s l ; j :t: t : i n ffi of t{i in t t h i e -. '•e. laid before !heir Lordships, made up to the la'est period. ni4h:o ago, many d E u ar a n R ,,g, E b ' !h a ds aheied but,ht da described er c ri o bt t e l id l ) d e a few persons who had suffered from thoe outrages prekrrei to intention n ) w, t y i h o it n e, eh t f o ohr d ee e n l t a oh y we t i h rb e rLo ß ou i Bill which lil:t,.. h anr e dt h .i -diff,r in silence, instead of making it known, on account of the risk they would have run. He hoped that the Nob e ad g e c h t L t: i b t r ) d . h h i s a e d d m n u t o o y subj Lord ELLENBOROUGH had no intention whatever of impeding the progress of the Bill introduced by e Noble Earl, The returns which he moved for was all he evidence upon which their Lordships could ii.ree to such a Bill as that was; therefore he regretted that his Majesty's Ministers had not thought it their duty to lay the Bill on the table on the first , !ay of the session, or that they bad not, at all events, laid the evidence upon which they hid introduced such measure before their Lordships at that early period. A measure of that importance ought nut to he passed without the fullest consideration. If there were no ob jection to his motion he would then move it. Viscount MELBOURNE sail he had not the s!ightest objection to the production of the information re quired by the Noble Barron. The Noble Lord would see, that in the present stare of Ireland it would require sotne consideration as to giving the names of those in dividuals upon whom outrages had been committed.— (Hear.) It would be necessary not only to omit names, but kcalities, in order that persons might not be pointed out for further vengeance. Lord ELLEN BOROUGH said there would be no dif fio.ulty in the case, for be did not wish for names ; all that he called for was a statement of facts. The Marquis of WESTMEATH said that, of his own knowledge, he could bear testimony to the statement of the Noble Eat! (Grey) that at present such a return as was called for could not satisfactorily be made; it must be very inaccurate. Earl GREY did not expect that in that House lag should have met with any opposition to that measure ; which his duty had forced him to introduce ; least of all, upon the part of those who bad been most anxious for such measure. As he said before, he saw no objection to the production of t'.e rsturns, but he sincerely trusted that it would tisrow no impediment in the way of, or delay that measure, which in sincerity be believed was necessary fur the safety of Ireland. The Noble Baron founded hi• motion upon the assumption that these returns acre necessary before that Bill ought to he agreed to, because it was a strong one. One of the reasons why that Bill was so strong was that it might be effectual. When he passed the limits of the C institution he thought that strong measures were rt quisize in order that they might be effectual, and that the necessity for them might be short. If • did not expect that any delay would be thrown in the way of the Bill by means of that motion. Lord ELLENi3OROUGH would only say he was sorry the Noble Earl had not laid on the table of the House such n,F , rmation as would have rendered his motion unnecessary. He did justice to the feelings of the N. , ble Earl, because 1. 0 believed he must have felt great pain in bringiii for. waid such a strong measure. It was bacri6c,ng the whole of the Noble Earl's former political feelings; therefore he was perfectly aware it must have co,t the Noble Earl much painful feeling before he could bi iog himself to introduce such severe measures.—The motion was then agreed to, .nd the returns ordered. Lord COLVILLE postponed his motion for the reap ointment of the Select Committee on the state of the We s t India Colunics from Thursday, Feb. 21, to Tues day, Feb. 26 Mr. BERNAL, and others from the Commons, brought up a copy of the report made by the Committee appointed to inquire into the Factory system. Lord TEYNHAM moved that the report might be p. inted. His Lordship also gave notice that un the ht of next month he would introduce a Bill the object of which would be to have inspectors and guardians appointed of the children employed in factories, justice culling aloud upon the House for some measure to prevent a continuation of the present demoralizing and injurious e ifcct of the system. Lord ELLENBOROIJGH begged to call the attention o: the House to the great . expense attending the printing of separate reports of this sort. Be thought the double ,xpeme of printing reports in both Houses might be avoided. Earl GREY thought there was a great deal of good ,rose in the Noble Lord's observations. The suliect had Icon under the consideration of a Noble Friend in tine other House, who had in contemp;ion the proposdl of some plan in order to remedy the enormous vxpense attending•on the present occasion. IRISH COERCIVE BILL. Earl GREY moved the order of the day for the second r:-ailing of this Bill. Lord WICKLOW could not allow this Bill to pans a , e eood reading without making a few observations. Ile hogged to be understood, however, as not about to offer il te slightest opposition to the measure; on the contrary, :rom his experience of the state of Ireland, he could a•-sure the House that the mad and melancholy picture which had been drawn of Ireland the other night by the Noble Earl (Grry) was not o verstrained, and any measure which could be calculated to relieve that unhappy country from the state of degradation to hich it was reduced—a state that rendered it do•graoe fill to the civilized world, nay, that would be considered a disgrace in the eye of the savage or the inhabit:J:l:s the Sandwich Islands would have his most cordial aupport.—(Hear, hear, hear.) To the No4le Lords 1