The Sun. — London, England, 1833-03-06 00:00:00

I• err , J -Y,', agains t • . . 'Loud ebeelitiri.:)t ihr i s t h e oppressive lass.--( O a l e '! Len, that some thing s I hear are true , . and t 'itf!;7- . to be no enalition between such discord an t i i n rab ; ,, '": The circumstance 1 shall notice is an at.'nwl,io-, '44 ' of I, gislatien. The Dublin Gazette, 01 it in ih l e " .l , , ai _ ti , ,, i! You wish to conceal anything, advertisea district , I, a h„ 4 '‘ I Gazette —ii to be evidence t thati with pub -1 li, h . "5!1 Proclaimed. The people are; charged i th,i'rus ilh'Ral notices, and this, I suppose, is correct to when I th e ii, t f a ' t e in that rtsrect.—(A laugh.? N , t ow was __. e t a rm Bill as to be put into execution, linf the i;,_ fish, Y b t o Post notiees on the church and ch . ap t e dlitritt h at the Dublin Gazette is sufficient when hear.) If t h e ' A s . to be P°' under martial law.--.--( e w ar l;en the what hat, w ' t t was not to he consistent in all its parts,notice? Ti Itelestutoaalil there be in gi,ing the sa ' ne . , , they will the question of courtsmartial, I thi,,ic . no,t4iltltil.leffect,ial fur their purposes. The arms 44, to dsparaee.....l braver f.tinlY cet 41't5(1 ---the officers also claim no ( m )f eri n t e i n s , hi s l c t h: p k l e ln' r a a n :r:; trii ed : el alf to conced e to them; some are men of t ~., titztti'la,e of plain capaciti e , and others are noi, and ' ''"" for any shining talents ; hut, g ood, ha(• judges litlaiii:lani, take tliem altoo-ether, they are the worst ee raott:i7:thl. The ease ' of Somerville supplies . n p h . ' „'a that point.--(llear hear.) I'lliePhrsiNival duties I have met three ln or tli f e our Ue) C vu 'a r s s e e s in f saw that the Iliii,PaYinasters were involved, and I atoth Party pulled one way, and the colonel's party e t . A (3, with 14,ANT OFFICER, from the gallery, exclaimed Ili isueh w armth, t , No, no!" 1 to mince tisttroet„CONNELL—l say, Ye, yes l ' iteAnnil speak of flsitt„ ;4(4,T:tic) ifritter away my case, tillZ'ffi' name) . a lv e will myself t ment witnessed— ( ioiin ame ll s e ; a _ r b ' n u i : i :l a r ;e l P a s e n a a:t i i cat ci t h• e 'ra are not fit to be Judges of land. totrit eof(;it Officer himse . lf has . n . ot been fitted by the Nth , 'la education for discharging thclr discrimination of d u ti e s : and q t 5 uas not ac ir A that delicate et,i,c,,,i(lives and characters of witnesses or prosecutors t pfe4 tineessary to a Judge. I cannot adequately ex - tl 'e I°Y cen ternet for courtsmartial as l ''aPle Iv n five • ie ensigns or lieutenant _ tribunals tot 7, t!siilslialie firld o'ffiieetrl',efnocmthner, nli court, and thepresenceot Ilitte'itl :Auer is the first guarantee b of impartiality. 4te t , i's nother precaution, to 1,. a ue ttvent ad th •Y-one years of age . e ; but,_ sure, on 'he the other vitt; th at b us t be two years in . the any in order to (He t , kat obedience is the first virtue of a soldi j e u rT e o ut t ,' heir. The reformed Parliament turns .. the I f :';a t t , ue b b . int, the Judge who had s d tud t i n ed di h , u ti o n . g a n n i : b iat t u i r ,e e atihi e ', Y eXprrience had learne . d t , o Ofg rnvereities of guilt and inno:•ence, and to . pour the l ' t illsh 4 ' sr cY into the pr soner's scale, whieunca'tbtw,a7,oe7rieeds a" '..-(Chee ) His vi inti annorum . 't 'sWo -• ".' 9 and he himself is removed to tin.,v,a, _aside as useless, ' lt i l ''' is Yes.Mernethe field.officer. by a British subject conliie twelve Jurors, and i llshi, e , ll e, he is tried , Lsi„ . ' to a n ,. Irishman s twenty-one o y n the panne! if he utter only ' 4 5 t , 5 4 1 their co untenances; but let an ! They ate to a gain t ensigns 4 ., dteid 8 any of the ,' they : the ease ; they we re ordered sis tn o h etyo orders, eoine . 4 ar s there their business IL "Prison dos •s, etltr er must be content with .m them ,,— be im'hagyßwigehltl ti,. 1 r el (Mr. Stanley) triumphs—he h rules her with uncon -11,114 15 'auil is his domain, he 'tivi at biro Three ensigns may, under experience of t l, ' , lt all a r ° , Y , m an ; but has Ireland had no „.-4 dreadful All their Acts certainly were n t , , , i t e v n, iek t e h d e , Nastt'"'"d atrocities were committed by tltaiitt:',ltaient of which stared out and caught their at. cedeiSlitsithl only the grossest wer- remembered. Need ds he r, fusing, and h % taid- th e onl y case of G . ' a ••", 'lll ' u nabl e to identify a prisoner, w of , was in whose person : t lailyj j e s . , a fib)" occasion g i ven a description,offence ? He wa s . i al leti % 4 out and whipped for this . offe lie I b l a hili ty, a ',teem(' time — a second time he d (Hear.) ,„e d . e_clared his , t'i5 i1, 1 ,, 5 ," a second time he was ' , fused, and ' t hi til `,`"iel on a ti,ird 'hoe, a third time was the eele - 14 '4 tl4la he watt flo e g, d. 1 r ., tri„d before t lt loo 'ra e4Q sf Sir Edward Crosby. who ' n as , ho was a „.e•ftaial, when the presiding officer, - 1' had since "'Nis '44aeoons, and a field officer of rank, would bear trith ON the ease. He hoped the t l,ail eft it t ai if pot for his sake, at le” n fo o r ns t e liesake of the t t qa k 1 lt S dward Crosby, tat, , ett er, „., all doubt, the 1. ' , te e ' which proved, almost beyond ) while he read a passage 11l the letter t h at a l i t ; Of his lamented father- —( Hear: his ttt'a, it'sanj kind enough to to the i r itte t , it ent on to state, that a expressr m at e itude to ° 111 4) 4 WIed ge a few days ago t't ally ' vihich gave a decided confirmation (the f i l t t le c r ga be to i n t g h d e a g te e d_ present Sir Edward I,7rost,y,:elived opinion of his (the t ,, , little', tathented father's innocence ( , H a e n a d r. t ) hat T h h is e jl e e t a t t e l r i %''t to to than a nourtler.— re t t al loyeNte, that when Major Dundas, a relation o commanded that district, that va `l th e , S . rl aa, and who did 'as s ense port of the courtmartial, he at once saw t , actite,r`ence was moat unjust a , a e n i d m, t i h w a d t ia t t h e e ly ev se id n e t n a c n e f„ Pr esi te ‘ . a ut the conviction. lo s ,. th e e i st aP all further proceedings, , Commander at Car -0•0;1 1, 0 ' ,,, ea se of Sir Edward.and with an order 11 i 2 t a otedv"' antieipated th it a I r h ep e !ieae of its interference, 11 44 th, oohs to prevent the possibility,would be sent, Ist°tstlitlhaPPY gentleman shot by torch-light, ' ti t a zPre ' • .d Archibald D . 14,,,,, ati,„ ss arriv, • be`stiet,hl'iligned by the Rev. g i s h t 1 one h w on a s t tt ild ' j aw of Sir Edward Crosby. And, l'Y s, . that 4 111,11 __‘!ntirts such as these w ere were the proper courts An to be tried ? t 4 4 ' r a :4, 111 ' 1 7e ces in his country n et t who had called out tohim_ to name any cour- th o ', tt l th.,4a Powers were abused. 1 lilt ' and he asked the Hon. i• I H le e m d l i t l e i 004 i "hi" ) In one o . f the southern sodth„ nurt ?--(Hear. r name—he what he )4 , i ti ti , 're Was an attorney who . ti tled ~ 'a course of his practice, partly had partly inherited, madeconsderable subject to a Judtte ProPerty • ti ttle le t debt Y' part of this propeity was tsd• No r , to El lady —not an for their a uncommon mode at . that . The Itotnan Catholics of providingthem living as a Zi '44 y g e - 4 1' 1 1 l ady had three sons—one of nd the third at ts°''.l. Th--anan, another at college, and , - gis t es tit t h at was cenom ,'sons to h e t ate of 1 ntney was w her theee . used i inated a loyal tli se art,tt 799. This attorney ca tue ''''ret e e l and thrown into gaol. seemed, had coin t,4tal pr o „ tothe mother, who, it The attorney to ilet;:ki litt.`ealings for recovery of !he ] , udgment, in Limerick : — (.0h ) \ het thtnat unless she immediatey j released the If th e ' b 1',4 sons should be hanged 411 th ll 't of ec • • crick, he would inform 1' " S retary o ask I hr ow, 4 . t tl,t lehancery in Lim the Cursitor imprison tltat ' I Into pr . Hy was his own mother, that she . was a rid 1 Into N 'ili that he also suffered . a long (ii. anacied . ich he was i ht.— P '"') " tv itil ' -xtv-eight pounds in we g tt" g ttl ' . treated with much cruelty, totti The Irons NI .. t ier 0 , 4 Y to , cou rtunartial, however, threatened, but eittl,i4,ltio, c"OY t 0 day the did not take place. mother was d her firmness was rith,.to he r "iir her son was stronF, ttlpti I:aff.ection. She inflexiblyLarntd Member) feel great s 11,4 trier fot.kid the Hon. and , and to yield her ikt,He[l b y it'it Mother ; e Id act like her ; she wa iisy ' l a aed dic e courtmartiai, tar 4 is, charged by proclamation, but the following fe'w' would was brought up to the t .tt ~ "4 tent back to gaol. Thus you Neo d 1 4 th have these fea th tr 4 it,' Bill—the Habeas , be to—courts otigi -ay h • prisoned in any place that may t°ll'ittlalt a N kr..- 5 a i ll n- meetings arep f u n t r an end ; I ' . G,,,t,t, UOiversally instituted; not universal. Not 15.thtt -,iean toil that they are .let not the Right cao Y t l aw y g the general affirmation St et 144i° 44 teL me declaration in the first section,. st ill :ry e ,- e d t i Will te ll hi m , that a particular . t • ve can ht 11,ti0,. thinish the force of a general affirma i person "' . he Lord Lieutenant, or any . person whom ellw i , y et,o. • d to imprison any .., tl itq a ti tvith°Wer, is authorize and ask, , effenees, and calls venteenth section, lis t , 'lto -!tit• eo urtmartial. In these them to be summon!) eet,t, 4,e eight an seventeenth in the i t thes e ' h d ninth, several Acts of Par ss houNett referred to ; and, even the f t t1,,,, 4 , t I aul now go i ng t o state may coupled with t 'art " q tful • this clause, be considered 0 h e t ,ttntb , s but from ofr. 'lel L , it fully appears, that an be tried for any any person ordered filial ttst„l' the Lord Lieutenant may ! from tio taol 'ttersvil • d —(Read thetenthsec_ Bela, ti d sy, 1 • en commute • stiletibe4.4 I have read the tenth. The .. tenth el.i k ha tlla i . here cour , . Me d tisarnit p aces w a pro cot only within ','er the ai tri ts t hey are to be held tsmartial must be be sent to the tar ' tot,i'l,htit under the fourteenth section, who corn' °Nir o ' L ieu; thinks proper may it Mit tett e t i lis , enant g of this say to,triet--may be tried—and for offences i ' NA . tt ~ ao , e. ess co I mplain of. 49 her e, i either before or after the pass -8' 0 1 111 1 4 the' This is the sort of loosen Mitsed ethee aeventeenth section, the only been corn 'hall n 641),,N,11'e nffence so charged, having qu 'Hew ion of th 4 114,,e ''t to the passing the palsing roan ,),:l.i. Ti, Committed c ommitted subsequent of this t Act, shall or r o tolaw; and and th ;ght h i theretote was ones post j ac 4ft eeta 4 for 0 54innioned, ' after a district was proclaimed,. , __ e AI N , a •sed 41,t'hat took place six months before. The rh every seetieuallot thalkteentb seeti,ins should be read it' Enna! O ro ' House, I ask, what is the object oi those t heta of glati t i tet:i• these sections there is not a single . . c n, ahrl tp;„,,tnaY uot be brought within Or ,;" 'tetic, .s.s° hYI these courtsinartial. B y the al n the jurischx otitUtsnot . its....'; ' s i n g l e 'i individual, either in this there is ~,ivutteci 'ildiviZ..l , it may be suppos, d that the i r le and tried...Z(l4o:m t i t House upon whom it wou , t hi' Art Y.e e04,4.4)---ia liabl e to be taken to Ireland, Irelattd. In $ 9 th e , till4attial; for there is not one word in "Y 4 l;nilrer of bending these wrrants t . o taanth sections a similar , power i t granted to courtsomartial to bring witnesses before them ; and when they have them there, thy can try them for what they please. Oh ! there is another feature which I must not forget. It was for the first time de clared in the history of legi s l a ti on exce pt in the instance of offences under the excise and the revenue laws, that where a man was c h ar g e d by an indictment, he was not to be considered innocent till he was proved guilty. I ask how it is such a change is now contemplated? How is it that the first reformed Parlia ment can propose to take away this safeguard? Even the Hirrection Act, or the Arms' Act, were not equal to this. Under these Acts no man was to be convicted un less it could be proved that he had a guilty knowledge of the possession of arms ; but under the present Act, all that is necessary to prove is that a man has arms in his house, and he must be convicted unless he can do that which is most difficult to prove, that he was ignorant of their being in his possession—so that were they hidden for that purpose by an enemy, the probability is that the man must be convicted.. As to signals also, this Act is most remarkable—all signals by smoke are declared illegal. The Bill indeed is as ludicrous as it is atrocious. It is as great a compound of absurdity and atrocity as ever was perpetrated by a Whig Government. What poor man was the re whose chimney did not send up daily a signal of . smoke, if he had anything to cook for his family's dinner ? But here was the absurdity of the Act, that a party of police may see the smoke rising from a poor man's cabin on a tell, which they may fancy to be a signal, and three months after will call on him to take his trial before a court. martial, and call on him to disprove the fact that the smoke is a signal, taking it for granted that it is a signal, unless that fact can be disproved. I hope the Reformers of England will look to this Act. -You talk about confidence in the Go vernment ; and you say that you will pass the Act on account of your confidence ; hut I lope that you were not aware of what this Act really is; and I hope that now you are aware of it, you will feel that it is en Act which ought not to pass this House. It is au Act which places innocence in the situation of guilt—which gives the Government the power of throwing us into secret dungeons—which takes away all ability of re sistance, and suppresses the power of complaint. I fear I weary the House in deecribiug the Bill, but I feel it to be my duty to do so. And this is the composition to which the Noble Lord opposite is about to lend his name —this is the Act which is to have his sanction. I ask you whether this Act is to be taken as a proof of the Union between England and Ireland ? It is, indeed, just such a union as some of the tyrants of old instituted be tween a dead body and a living man, though it not unfre • (ineptly happ-ned that the patre•cency of the dead body affected the life of the other. I beseech the Reformers of England to consider this, and also to consider how it is likely to affect England itself. Let but this Act once take 'dace in Ireland, and let a successful Court manoeuvre or intrigue throw the power of the State into the hands of some of the present Administration, and of some who do not belong to it, and with such an Act in operation in Ireland, Schedule A will he revived, and sou will have one hundred and five Members for Ireland ready to back any Mini-try, however corrupt or despotic. Ministerial machines might anon be put in motion, and you will have just as good an unreformed Parliament as you had be fore. At all events, if you do not, it will not lie from w int of power or inclination, but from want of dexterity.—(Hear.) I ask on what evidence you are about to pass this measure ? Such a Bill as this ought to be grounded upon the most irrm fragahle, complete, and abso lute evidence of its necessity. It is not sufficient to talk about confidence. We must not consent to see the Con etit ution abolished. without the atri test, most irresistible evidence of necessity. This evidence cannot be obtained without a painful, deliberate investigation and inquiry. It is not sufficient to prey- there are crimes ; we all ad mit th,t crimes exist. It is not sufficient to say that crones must be put down ; we all admit that climes must be put down. But is it necessary, in order to do this, to annihilate the Constitution.'—(Hear.) Every body ad mite tee necessity of putting dea' ermine; but, in order to do this, must we put down the Conseitution?—(Hear, hear.) I shall notice but very briefly the observations of Hon. Gentlemen who have spoken on the other side dur ing the course of this debate. I shall refer to the speech of the Noble Lord, the Member fir Devonshire, to the speech of the Hon. and Gallant General, of the Hun. and Gallant Naval Captain, of the Hon. and Learned Baronet, of the Hon. and Learned Member for St. Al ban's—the Noble Lord, the Member for Nottingham, the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Right Hon. Secre tat), for Ireland. With regard to the Noble Lord, the Member for Devonshire, the only argument that I could collect from him in favour of this Bill, and the only reason why lie would support it, was, because he was frienthy to Ireland. It this be the case, all I can say, and I say it with great sincerity, and unaffectedly, " May God pre serve us from our friends !"---(A laugh.) As to the Hun. and Gallant General, he did not do much more than de scribe several conversations, which he had with the pea santry in Clare and the North of Ireland ; and be also bole testimony to the hospit mlity with which he was re ceived. All I can do in return is to present my compli ments for the manner in which he has thought proper to evince his gratitude. The Gallant Naval Officer stated, that he had disported himself by hunting in the county of Kilkenny, and he also spike in warm terms of the Irish hospitality—l must say that I do not think he makes us a very good return. He seems to have allowed his appre. hension to prevail so far as to lead him to utter calumnies against the people of Ireland.—(" No," from Captain Berkeley.) I say, Yes.—(No.) I say, Yes—and I tell the Gallant Captain I can prove it. It seems that from some apprehension—l do not use the word in an offensive sense—the Gellant Captain went about armed. He stated that he followed their example.—(" No, no," from Cmpt. Berkeley, " I did not.") I beg pardon of the Gallant Captain. I certainly so understood him, but it appears I am mistaken. The Hon. and Learned Baronet (Sir G. Grey) favoured us with a dissertation upon agitation, and his reasons for supporting the Bill, and, amongst other things, he commented upon some observations of my Hon. and Learned Friend, the Member for Tipperary. I think the Hon. and Learned Baronet induces rue to become a moat incurable Repealer—for when I find a gentleman of his great talents, legislating in such utter ignorance of the state of Ireland, I cannot but feel more strongly than ever the ne cessity for a domestic legislature. The history of agitation which lie gave betrayed the most complete ignorance of the subject. But what I was more particularly surprised at was his ignorance on a subject more peculiarly con nected with his own profession. To a remark respecting the trial of capital felonies by Special Commissions, he an swered as though it was said they should be tried by spe cial juries. It would cause much amusement in Ireland to hear of capital felonies being tried by special juries.— (Hear.) The Hon. and Learned Baronet had said that Repeal of the Union was brought in as soon as the Reform Bill came into this House in order to meet it. There never was a greater mistake—there never was greater ig norance in point of fact. Repeal of the Union was agitated in 1830, when the Tories were in power, and they issued proclamations to put it down. It was agitated in 1831, when the Whigs were in power, before they brought in the Reform Bill, and they also issued proclamations against it. It had been time subject of agitation from the year 1810 to the year 1817, and its postponement was pub licly avowed. Indeed, I myself gained an equality of civil rights in Ireland. Instead of its being brought up to meet the Reform Bill, it was, in point of fact, suspended by the Reform Bill ; and I have little doubt that it would have been totally given up when the Irish Reform Bill was brought in, had that Bill been equal to the English Re form Bill—bad its provisions been framed in a spirit of fairness and equality.—(Cheers from the Irish Members.) So far, therefore, as the Honourable and Learned Baronet is about to legislate on a supposition of the accuracy of the facts which he stated, he is about to legis late under an erroneous impression. The Hon. Member for St. Albans declared that his support of the Bill was founded on the intimidation that prevailed in Ireland ; and in proof of that intimidation, referred to the case of the trial of the murderers of the Rev. Mr. Goring. I wish very much that an inquiry could be instituted into time trial of that case, as I am sure I could prove that no intim midation did exist, and that a very exaggerated and erro neous impression has gone forth to the world on this sub. jest. The murder of Mr. Goring took place about ten years before the trial took place, and I assert, without fear of contradiction, that his son-in•law was not a mate. rial witness, and that he was not absent through intimi dation. What would have been the conduct of the Soli citor-General, or of those who attended to prosecute on behalf of the Crown, if he had been a material witness; more especially if threats were used to prevent trial t nthts atten dance b tene dance ? Why they would have caused h postponed, and have detained the prisoners, or at least placed them under strict rule. The Hon. Gentleman ms totally misinformed. Ile son-in-law was nut a material evidence, three or four witnesses were produced. The ease was a measuring cast ; the Judge expressed doubts; the Jury gave the prisoners the benefit of the doubt, and acquitted them, and nothing ever happened to any of the witnesses who came forward to give evideece against them.—(Hear, hear ) I have great respect for the talents of the Hun. I.lleinber for St. Albans ; and when I see a man like him legislating for Ireland under such li ignorance of her real state, it adds another circum stance to strengthen the conviction of the necessity of re peal. I trust, however, that the mistake into which he has been led will not be auffered to operate to the injury of Leland, hut that be will review his opinion, and not take part against Ireland, at least without previous inves tieation. As to the Noble Lord, the Member for Not tingham, who came forward with much of that diffidence which is frequently to be found united with an excellent character, and a mind not altogether unconscious of its own powers, he certainly has made a very important statement respecting the state of crime in the county of Carlow. He said there had been 400 crimes in that county within the last two months; but he did not take into consideration that all the assaults which had hap pened at two contested elections, which were contesteif with peculiar animosity, were included in that list ; and I do not doubt that at least 250 cases of that description are included in the 400.—(Hear, hear.) And what was the proof which he brought forward to show that the Sheriff could not obtain a sufficient number of Jurors through the intimidation practised—that he was obliged to furnish them with an escort? No ; but that he had raised the fine on absence, from 201. to 501. I will not detain the House by any lengthened allusion to the observations of the Hon. and Learned Member for Leeds. He said he had read my speech, and that he drew cert tin deductio ns from it. I say the Hon. Gentlemen is mistaken —that lie has not read my speech, or at least that he has not read it in an authentic form. I will refer him to three papers —the Resister, the Pilot, end the Freeman's Journal. In these papers my speeches are generally correctly given—not, perhaps, with the exact phrassolney, but at least with sufficient accuracy of sense. The Govern ment in Ireland has taken one paper into its pay, and established another for its own purposes. I do not blame them for this, but I will mention one circumstance. One of their reporters, no friend of mine—the man, indeed, who gave information against me to the Marquis of Anglesea—l did not exchange one word with him till I met him at the Political Union—and he there declared that he had never reported my speech in the manner in which it "'as published, but that the editor of the paper had altered it unknown to hint after it had been sent in, and in the presence of the other reporters there he felt it his duty to disclaim it.—(Hear.) If the Hon, and Learned Member wishes to read my statements as to Ire land, let him look to the Edinburgh Review. He will there find c ilumnies enough in relation to Ireland. There never was a composition containing more falsehood. Let him refer to one article in particular on the subject of Elections in Ireland, and I will undertake to prove it to be full of calumnious assertions and falsehoods on the po pular party in Ireland.—(Hear.) I shall dismiss much of incidental observation and remark, and come at once to the more immediate consideration of the measure before the House. The first thing that is said of it is, that it is so unconstitutional—so foreign from every principle of that Constitution which has been so long our boast —so utterly destructive of every principle of civil libetty, as to find particular favour in the eyes of its framer..—(Hear, hear, hear.) This, they say, con stitutes its great merit, as there is no danger of its ever being brought into a precedent. Ridiculous assertion ! It is as a precedent that its greatest danger consists. The courtssnartial have already firmed a precedent for it—and it in turn will form a precedent for future invasions of the Constitution Hereafter when any Minister brings forward an unconstitutional measure, and when he shell be op posed by those who will call themselves Whigs, be will refer to this teeasure with triumph, and will say—" You gave five judges only—l give nine, and they must be unanimous. I send my prisoners to the common gaols— son to some private and secret dungeon." Anti when he fells short of you in the slightest degree, instead of blushing for his infraction of the Constitution, he will feel himse f entitled to boast of his fiber day in bringing forward a measure less arbitrary and I levoric than yours. Oh, hew I fancy I heir the cheer which will ring from those benches when he shall taunt the minority with this mea sure. This Bill goes to the very furthest limits of uncon s irutionality, and leaves a wide bound within which to range,—(Hear.) I know that I am wearisome to the House, and what is worse I have only begun.—(A laugh). Yiiu have two things to establish the necessity of this Bill as applied to predi-il agitition, and the necessity of coer cion as applied to political aeitation. In order to do this, you must first pursue an investigation as to the causes of predial agitation. No man could legislate for the removal of this evil without perfectly understanding the cause. I (lid expect the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), who supported this measure, would have given us some states. ma like dissertation on the causes of this agitation. It was his duty te have done so. He did riot, however, think proper to enter into this subject.—(Hear.) It was ad mitted by some Members, that tithes are one of the causes. The Right Hon. Gentleman denied this ; but the Noble Lord, the Member for Nottingham, who was well acquainted with the state of Ireland, said that Ire land would never be tranquillized until the system of tithes should be put an end to. the vestry cess and grand jury ee-a, the rack-rents, and the conduct of the landlords, also had borne their part. Now, if these are some of the causes of predial aeitation, in what manner does this Act provide a remedy? It gives more power into the hands of the clergy, and do you think they will not use it? It gives more power to the collectors of cess of various kinds, arid gives more power to the landlords; it gives them more dominion over their tenants; and the Right Hon. Baro net has himself spoken of a Parliament of landlords, and referred to the improbability of landlords entering heartily itito a reform of these abuses. But the Right Hon. Ba ronet himself has done much, no doubt unintentionally, to increase the distress of Ireland—l mean by the change of the currency.—(Several cheers.) I know that many a family has been ruined by that change—a change which has increased their rent and their burdens, but diminished the value of their commodities, and driven them from comfort to distress, and from distress to the commission of these very crimes. I have often deliberated whether it was not my duty to use my influence for the pur pose of driving the Government to a bank restriction, and to a cheaper currency. I have not done so yet.— (Oh ! and, Hear, hear.) But I am quite con vinced that much of the distress which exists can not possibly be alleviated without a cheaper cur rency.—(Hear, bear.) My Hon. Colleague has rather unceremoniously introduced the name of the Rev. Mr. Dwyer; that man is proved to be a persecutor and an ex tortioner. A poor widow obtained a decree against him for exacting too much tithe ; she went with a bailiff to enforce the decree, and point out the tithe, and he actually took advantage of an Act passed for very different pur poses, summoned her before a bench of Magistrates, who fined her 21. under the Wilful Trespass Act, though she was merely seeking to enforce a legal decree. This is a fact which is supported by a letter that I have from Mr. Stantoe Lambert, late Member of this House for the county of Galway, and a most respectable gentleman.— (Hear.) It was the duty of Ministers to show, before bringing forward a Bill for authorizing unconstitutional measures, that all legal means of remedying the evils of which they complained had been exhausted. It was also their duty to show that there existed no other unconstitu tional means going beyond the law which they had not exerted. On this ground, too, I shall be able to show that there exists no necessity for having recourse to such measures. If his Majesty's Ministers had applied for any such measures, there is not a single man who would not have been ready to support them in such measures. The House would have voted them unanimously. Now some such measures had been suggested by the Committee in Queen's County ; and they must have known of their existence and of their efficacy. This is why I ar raign them ; this is why 1 accuse them ; because they knew that there existed effectual means, and because they did not use those means which I can demon strate that they kr.ew they had ready ; for here is the evidence before the Committee of last year. My accusa tion is, because they have not used the means which had been tried before, and tried successfully. They have never tried Special Commissions in Ireland in any instance in which they have not been successful. They have tried them also successfully in England. The report states, that the Special Commission in Queen's County had been eminently successful for the time. His Majesty's Mini sters ought not, therefore, to have hail recourse to such steps as they now proposed, unless they had already tried, without success, those means which have been found suc cessful both in England and Ireland. If we are to suffocated—if the liberty of Ireland is to be trampled upon—if we are to be taunted as the protector° of crime —let then the Reformers in the House require the Mini sters to show that they have tried ell the means which have been suggested in the report ; for whose is this re port ? Though the Right Hon. Secretary, who was a member of that Committee, did not attend (I also was a member, and was able to attend only one day), the Right Hon. Secretary must at least have read it. He had the power of exercising his judgment with respect to it. If he hid objected to any parts of the report, would Sir Henry Parnell have made such a report without carefully listening to his suggestions ? They tell this House that the Queen's County was quieted by a Special Com mission, and give as their authority the evidence of the Lord Chief Justice, which states that such has always been the case in Irtiand, and that of Mr. Bat rington, for seventeen years Croon solicitor on the Munster circuit, the largest in li eland —one inure intelligent, more honour able, mote entitled to meilit in point of integrity than whom does not exist amo ng th ose w h om I now a dd ress , or one more entitled to the character of a gentleman, and none his superior fur trustworthiness. I implore the House to hear, before it proceeds, the testimony of this man—that special commissions have been tried, and have succeeded'. The Hon. and Learned Membir here men tioned the cases of Cork, Kerry, Limerick, and last of all of Clare. With what face, he continued, could they pre tend that they had not already sufficient powers, when with these powers, such as they were, they had succeeded in quieting that county at a time when it was in a state of actual rebellion—at a time when the peasantry were actually in possession of the county, when they dug up the potitoes, took possession of the tolls on every railroad in the county, committed murder in the open day, and were, in short, in military possession of the county. I wish the Reformers in this House to weigh dispassionately the evidence, and report upon this subject before they ven ture to give their sanction to the suspension of constitu tional law in Ireland. It is proved that special commis sions have produced their effect in England ; and in the name of justicet—in the name of the Constitution (and then they might sneers—in the name of liberty, I. t them call on Ministers to retrace their steps, and tell them they ought not to presume to ask for unconstitu tional powers, until they prove that there exist no constitutional means adequate to the occasion. I differ from the opinions of eery Honourable Friend the Mem ber for the University of Dublin with respect to the Assizes. The Assizes have civil business to perform. the Special Commissions have nothing to look to but the object for which they were sent—rhe putting a stop to the outrages in the disturbed districts. It has been tri • umphantly shown that special commissions never were unsuccessful. The Hon. and Learned Member proceeded to read various extracts from the report and evidence on the Queen's County, to show that they already possessed adequate means for the suppression of disturbance. If a case such as that which had been made out had been ad. dressed to an impartial jury (I mean nothing offensive), I should have been stopped in my evidence, and the jury would have hurled the plaintiff out. But the Ministers took care not to have recourse to these constitutional methods, because they would then not have had it in their power to treat the nation as they pleased. You have heard, by their own confession, that they had these means; but they have thought this Act preferable, because their doing so would have destroyed the grounds which they had for claiming such measures as the present, and would have disturbed their progress to the authority and despotism of this measure. Teat despotism and that authority which they now claim would not have existed if they had first had recourse to the constitutional expedient of special commissions. I utterly deny that any evidence whatever has been adduced to show the necessity of ulterior mea sures. The Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Secretary (Mr. Stanley) have made, it is true, some particular statements. They have mentioned a threatening notice against Parson Dwyer, and I do not know how many Parson Dwyers may be in that red box. The Right Hon. Secretary has told us of a number of Lord Lieutenants who have written to him on the disturbed state of their respective portions of Ireland, and urging the adoption of measures of coercion ; but he has not mentioned the name of one of those Lieutenants; so that with respect to us who are called upon to legislate according to their evidence, their evidence is entirely unanimous. I will tell you a little of the history of some of these illegal notices. In the county of Wicklow, a number of these notices were sent to ladies and their husb drids. Among others, one was addiessed to the son of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland—he would not call him one of the young Hannibals, but the Vicar of Bray, for lie was the Vicar of Bray. He pose screed something of his father's shrewdness, and observed. I think I know that hand. He set to work, and traced it to a Protestant, a poor Orangeman, who was soliciting a place in the police. Thus the Rev. Mr. Plutiket served to show a little of the nature of these notices. It always happens, thad when the number of these notices are numerous in any district—that diseict is censidtered dis turbed, and the number of the pot.e is in c nse quetice increased. It is, therefore, the interest of all who are desirous, and have any hopes of being so employed, to make the number of such notices as great as possible. The ground fer the adoption of these meaedires is Agrarian crimes ; but I have stated, that doting the last twenty years, special commissions have repeatedly put a stop to that sort of disturbance. Tee Hon. and Learned Member then noticed the remarks on the case of an assassinatioe, and observed, that it was equally atrocious whether it had been committed on account of an aged female, or on account of tithes. I have thus (continued the Hon. and Learned Mem ber) said enough to prove that the House ought to be sa tisfied that there existed a necessity for having a recourse to unconstitutional measures, and should proceed only on the evidence of the necessity. But now I will take up the other side, and demonstrate that they were not ne cessary, on the evidence of Members on the other side itself. I am sorry to be obliged by my duty, at this late hour of the night, to trespass on the patience of the House.—(Hear.) I will demonstrate, on their own showing, that the passing of this Bill is not necessary. First, the disturbance is merely local, and confined to par ticular districts. There is no disturbance in Ulster or in even Munster, nor is it universal in Leinster. I deny the existence of any in the county of Louth. There it is admitted that there exists a deceitful tranquillity. In Dublin county and in Dublin city there is no extraordi nary disturbance. I a King's county, iu Kikenny, in Longford, in Drogheda, and other counties, the people are tranquil. In Meath several persons have been convicted lately of assaulting the police, the persons who so assaulted them being drunk at the time; when the chief of the police observed, that as the people of Westmeath behaved NO peaceably, he thought it would be best for the police to forgive them. Only a small portion of Ireland is actu ally disturbed—only a population of about five hundred thousand out of eight millions. And is that trifling proportion of disturbers to afford sufficient reason for outlawing all the rest?—(ll . ear, hear, hear.) I would ask the Member for the Tower Hamlets, if the Union between England and Ireland be really entire, whether it would be equally just to extend the same mea sure to England and Wales on account of these partial disturbances? I have to ask on what grounds it is stated that witnesses have been intimidated? The Noble Lord has stated that he has heard of no instance of injuring a witness. Lord ALTHORP (as we understood) denied that state ment, and observed, that he had referred to Queen's County. Mr. O'CONNELL—Witnesses have been threatened, for they have a deep interest, es it is the invariable prac tice, in the case of such threats being used, to remove the witness from the abode of wretchedness to a place where lie can live in plenty. One instance bad been brought forward by the Right Hon. Secretary, which occurred 19 years ago, of two witnesses, husband and wife, of the name of Delain. The barony of Colinaugh was much disturbed, and these came forward as witnesses on a Crown prosecution. I defended the prisoners. The husband, Delain, gave a very good, and a very consistent account of what he wished the Jury to believe to have been the na ture of the transaction in question. But his wife, on being subjected to a cross-examination, and not having heard her husband's testimony, betrayed the whole plan, although she perfectly agreed with her husband's evidence on all those points which they had settled between them. Baron George said, " Mr. O'Connell, here's a capital in. dictment. You need not take up the time of the Court with it, for no Jury could convict in such a case." What was my astonishment when I was informed that the pri. soners had, notwithstanding this, been condemned ? The Whiteboy Act gives the power of trying an offence of this nature either as a misdemeanor or a trans portable felony.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The same facts had been laid as a midemeanor, and the four pri soners suffered the full severity upon this conviction. Delatii and his wife returned to the country. They were assassinated. The husband and wife were both assay. sinated ; but the child, whom the mother had held as a protection, was taken away and kindly treated. But what reason does that affo:d for having recourse to any unconstitutional methods? Eight men were executed for that crime. (file innocent man was executed, who was proved to have bad no more connexion with the murder but that be had walked for a short distance along with the murderers before the commission of the act. He had served in the navy, and was returning home. He left them to go to his house. If Juries commit these mistakes with all their inclination to do justice, and Judges anxious to assist the prisoner by every means in their power, what can be expected from the tribunals which it is now proposed to set up, consisting of five military officers, of whom three are to decide the sen tence of the criminal, to transportation—to the horrible passage by sea, and to the removal from their friends and families? It was evident therefore that there was a sufficient protection in the already existing laws for the protection of the subject. Mr. Barrington, who had directed his attention to the point for seventeen years, asserts, in his evidence, that these crimes uniformly arose from local causes. I have -now done with t he subject of witnesses. The next case to which I have to allude is one from which I cannot be shaken. It is that with respect to Juries. The assertion that jurors had been injured for the purpose of intimidating others, is most unfounded. Nothing could be a greater ca lumny. Tile crime which was alluded to was committed SO years ago, and the party was no juror. It was on account of his conduct under the Insurrection Act that he had become obnoxious. Ii his conduct as a Juror had been the objectionable part of his conduct, when acting in that capacity at the special commission, the August pre ceding, the parties to whom he had become obnoxious ha , ' opportunities of effecting their purpose before the time of the murder. As to the subject of the injury done to jurors, we have heard a story of a horse belonging to one °I them dying in a ditch ; and are these old women's tales— these foolish stories, to be considered sufficient to cause the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, of the Trial by Jury, and of Constitutional Liberty ? Am I in an Eng • elish assembly? Can I believe that it is an English as senibly who are willing to think, for one moment, of doing away with constitutional liberty in Ireland ? Am I not sure to stand triumphantly in its defence ? If it car be believed that she can ever he enslaved, or that she will ever crouch to any despot, let them send for the Dey nt Algiers, who is disengaged. I thank the Member for Leeds for the suggestion. I will give all up that I have said, if it can be shown that I am incorrect in these as sertions. Do you think that this forbearance with re• spect to Jurors was accidental? Listen to the evidence of Mr. Barrington, on the point of the discrimination which the peasantry exercise in these matters. He dis tinctly states, that he knew no instance of hostility t , Jurors on the part of the people. This is the evidence of a man who, for 17 years, hail the best opportunities of Jude ing on the subject, and the business of whose life, during that long period of it, had been to attend to these thing•. At the same time his evidence had certainly proved that persons acting under the Insurrection Act had cer tainly been attacked and suffered injury ; but there was not the slightest hostility against jurors. English Re formers, this is the evidence of a man in the confidence 0 his Majesty's Government. If he he not so, why do the y not dismiss him? Why, because all Ireland would laugh them to scorn. He is possessed of that honour and inte grity which is deserving of confidence. I do not sly so because I boast of the honour of his friendship, hut because he is known to me and to the public of Ireland in general as an intelligent and upright man. Think, Reformers, think for a moment of the extensive and atrocious mea sure, and see whether it be fitting that this should be the first Act of the first session of the Reformed Parliament— that Parliament which contains the men who struggled through good report and through evil report—who strug gled against hope in the cause of freedom—is it fitting that that Parliament should open with such a measure as this ? It depends on the spirit of the patriarchs of Reform to prevent the people of Ireland from being fettered by Ministers, on the ground of foolish, false, and he would say lying (if it were not too undignified) calumnies. Because jurors dare not, it is said, do justice in consequence of in timidation, it is proposed to abolish trial by jury. Oh tell them I shall never return to her unless a domestic legislature be established. It has been argued against that too, that a domestic Parliament would indeed restore the absentees ; but they would never equal the generous and noble-minded noblemen and gentlemen of England. Here is the occasion to show their noble-mindedness and generosity—here it is. I will not believe, I cannot credit, that this will ever become law—that they will re fuse to yield to argument—that they will allow it to be supposed that they have no inclination to redress the evils of Ireland—that they will let injustice swelter at the hearts of Irishmen. Think net that they are not intelli gent—that they are not a shrewd people. Think you they will not see that the low possesses the means of redressing wrongs or crimes committed by law, and that your msa sures are therefore uncalled for? Think you they will cot remember that you have not had Special Commissions, and therefore were not called upon to destroy the Consti tution ? Think you they will not recollect that they have no right to pretend that jurors cannot act from intimida tion ? They cannot say that justice cannot procure con victions ; for the Attorney-General himself has stated. that in 39 prosecutions which he had instituted he had p•ocured 38 convictions. I defy them to a tow an in stance of failure in obtaining justice. As to witnesses, it is known that sixty of those who had app -.red for the Crown were fed and well-cloth-d in a barrack in Dublin, one of whom, having state, teat he had gone into a shop to purchase somethinz, declared, on his cross-examinatit n, Vast he did not know who furnished him with the money. The Carrickshau:h murders (and who con doubt that these were murders?) were said to afford an instance of jurors being intimidated. He had defended one of the prisoners on that occasion. The matter was of so much importance that be could not omit that opportunity of mentioning the grounds on which he did so. He defended him, not because he considered the act to be murder, but because there was a doubt about his identification.—(Hear, hear.) The first Crown wit ness did not identify him. In that case he could speak from his own knowledge that no intimidation took place ; and the Jury, who acquitted the man, consisted of seven Protestants and five Catholics. The Hon. and Learned Member then proceeded to state a number of other cases, to show that the Juries had not been intimidated. It is an old wife's dream. John Ryan was put upon his trial on the sth July; 35 of the Jurymen were challenged b) the Government. The trial came on ; a beggar-boy was put forward, dressed not as a beggar-boy, but in such a style that be looked like a little gentleman from Merion square. He was interrogated as to the nature of an oath, and found to be so ignorant that he was put down. A man named Ross was indicted ; he was proved to be a kind- hearted man, and one quite incapable of committing such an offence as that which was charged against him. He was acquitted, though 132 Jurors bad been put by by the Crown, 45 of whom were Protestant gentlemen. Ross was again indicted, and again acquitted. Was an) one of those an improper acquittal? Is there a gentleman now present who will say that any one of them was? There is not the least ground for saying that there has been a failure of justice. You do not show that any of the witnesses have been injured, nor any of the Jurors— nor that there has been a failure of justice. Why, then, do you claim these extraordinary powers? Instead of look ing to special commissions, which would quiet the country, what have they been doing since August last? What, but enforcing your new Tithe Act, go ing from parish to parish with horse, foot, and artillery, to collect tithes, and turning the Lord Lieutenant of the country into a Proctor-General. You say you have not fabricated these insurrections, nor the evidence of them. I believe you incapable of doing it; but if it was your in tention to fabricate evidence, you could not have acted more completely for such a purpose than you have done. You want to get up a case to put his Majesty's subjects in Ireland at your disposal ; and what do you do ? You avoid the means of putting down the disturbances, and at the same time you stimulate us in what you know is our most sensitive point. That is what you have done— without the intention, perhaps, of exciting us—but seeing what you have done, are you surprised at the result ? You may well be surprised that it is not more than it is. You have done your best to make it more. You have done all that it is possible to do. I should like to know, when you talk of these murders by the people, how many of the people have been shot by the police in this tithe campaign ; I know that the number is extraordinarily great. It was great in Mayo. I should like to have the accounts from Mayo. It is great in the Queen's County. Many have been shot in Kilkenny—many in Waterford-- and in Cork multitudes. Four of the last verdicts I knew of before I left Ireland were against police or marines for wilful murder. To show the system of provocation with regard to tithes, I will state the case of Wallstown.— (Hear.) There is a statute of 7th Georg:, 111., c. 21, by which the people were enabled to serve notices on the etergyman that they would sever his tithes by a particular day, in order that he might come and draw them off—(Hear)—end that statute made it necessary for them to leave the tithes on the land, secured and protected as long as they left their own crop on the ground. A trick was resorted to by the peo ple. They did preserve the tithes as long as their own crop was on the ground ; but they availed themselves of the absence of the clergyman ; they kept off his tithe proc tors, and having removed their own crops, they destroyed the tithes. A proceeding of this sort was met by the 27th George 111., which made it penal in any one to obstruct the clergyman or his tithe proctor. The clergyman acting on that statute, or without it—for what does he care for statutes ?—had been in the habit of geing upon the land to value the growing crops. That was an act of trespass; any lawyer will say it is so. The clergyman had no right there—he had no right to the tithes till they were severed. Some tithe proctors who had done this were attacked by the people as they were going to market. Major Fitzge rald, a physician, who had been turned into a stipendiary magistrate, bearing that the people bad attacked Archdea con Cotton's men, applied to the Castle for advice about calling out the military. The case was laid before the Crown lawyers, and their opinion was, that the question w was so the policedouttt fu to othat protect they the ou valuators u n e o t t n rs authorize und r em ploythhiemnitroeutn.. stances I have here stated. This is the evidence of Mr. on the 18th January, 1832 . He stated that the thing oc curred in August, 1831. Notwithstanding that opinion of the Crown lawyers, the Irish Government sent h o rse, foot, and artillery.—(hear, hear.) Since August last, ae while you have avoided special comm i ss i ons , you nave employedemployed the police and military, and at Walls town, no less than four persons were shot. Are you surprised at insurrections after this? Let me be answered on tht: and 1 shell be able to reply. I have been of necessity longer than 1 anticipated in making these observations ; and yet I have nut gout through a part of the case which most interests myself, or I would do so, if I could feel an interest stronger in what related to my self than in what concerned my country. 1 care not fOr personal attacks. If I had not the consolation of know ng that my intentions toe pure an 1 di.int, rested, and that I am anxious only for peace, good order, and freedom —if I had not e comfort of my own feelings in this re pect—if my conscience did not approve, not of eve-v xpression perhaps, but of my motives—if I did not feel bat my motives were only those for the increase of human irpiness and liberty, wherever the slave is oppressed or t e ppressor can be found—if I had not these things to c , nsole , nt-, I feel the attacks that have been mad, upon me ; but having them, I care not for the taunts of those who ‘, See all things are clear With fifteen hundred pounds a year," and who might see otherwise with a different income, or if that income was taken away. But, Sir, the wrongs of my country have been mixed up with attacks nit die l Why not banish me for a year and a halt? I tell yoo what—l will consent to it. You shall banish me—but do not thus oppress my country.—(Hear, hear.) Whet is this Reformed Parliament, the Representative of the great arid generous people of England —whet is it doing? Dis ,uise it as you will, you are legislating against a single individual. I really pity you. You do this b cause my name is made to rhyme with a line of a miserable ballad. Oh it was excellent Wit-it was superabundant cause of merriment.—(Hear.) You may delude yourselves with his, but you will not delude the sensible people of Ire land, of England. They will see that this atrocious of Pains and Penalties is passe , / agains- me. There ate many men existing who think—l 3111 one who say—that it you cannot do without such a measure. you ought to nh dicate. If you cannot govern Ireland without it, it it most necessary that you should abdicate. The advseetage of England calls for your abdication. What will hero;?,- of your national debt and its interest if you oppress us till you drive us into a servile war? Do you think you can preserve Ireland in the teeth of this injustice? You comet for these measures—you do not tell us of what effsct they: will be after you get them. I have shown you that toils: ness may be produced by the special cetnmissions. It advise you, it will be said I threaten—if I prophecy, I shall be taunted with provoking what I prophecy: Sueh is the miserable condition I am in that I cannot tell yeti of your danger without having it said that I am creatiti. that danger. I abandon giving you advice—l know what is its value—but I avoid giving it. I will say nothing inure of the consequences of this measure—sof what will be its effect—for take notice you must, that it is not sufficient far you to hare shown what you have in order• to put down the Constitution. If the special commissions etti to be at an end—if murder is still going on, still you are not warranted in trampling on the Constitution ; you must show that by doing it you can cure the evil. You must not pass such a measure merely to gratify your own idleness, to enable yourselves to sleep on ram beds of down. You must show that what you propos e is a cure for the evils you have been talking of. You aunt show it. The measures may produce temporaty tranquillity, but it will be followed by greater rancour-es; there will be greater cause for rancour. Now poverty struggling to maintain a miserable existence—then both judgment and reason will enter into the contest, and for tify the despair of distress. Labour has no certainty not any reward. It does not get a bounty of 6 ;., no, nor `lido Asday, out of lands producing U. an acre on green lands, and sometimes 81. an acre for potaoie lands, and yet this is all that the miserable wretch who culrivetes them has to subsist on. These are the evils ; and then the tithes. Did not one Noble Lord tell you, that unless you ahceished tithes this measure would not be sufficient? There is not an individual of more honour or honesty than the Noble Lord, the Member fir Nottingham.—( Hear.) I know teat he is opposed to opinions that I hold to b most true s but he does it conscientiously—he is a man of high minds He is a M amber, too, of the Government; and what does he say?—That you must abolish tithes. The Right Hon. Gentleman ooes not agree with those opinions; he would flog not high but low. Toe Noble Lord tells bon, th it till you change the distinction of tithes, till yet tike them from a supernumerary and unnecessary clergys you gain nothing.—(Hear, hear.) What will your Bill do without this ? It will make the breach more wide ; it will make men cry out for justice, and mike the old exclaim, that manly vigour is gone, and the country is no longer able to vindicate its rights. Do not deal with us thus—for your own sake I would im press it on you—it is for your own benefit that I give this advice. What were the grievances of America when she left you ? You had not dared to trample on them as you have trampled on us, yet you did enough to make them separate themselves, you spurned their" petitions, you t unted their messenger, Franklin. I will not venture to compare myself with him. You accused him of being the forger of a letter, which was as genuine as the heart of the man was true. You sent him from your House with insult ; and what was the result? Yet there was no party in that country, as in Ireland, clinging to some measure of egregious despotism, and supporting you in it, with a view to ruin your character and to give them strength. By whom, I ask you, will you execute this measure ? By the Orange party ? By that Magistracy which every Ministry has promised to reform and to cor rect? By that Magistracy whom the Right Hon. Gen. tleman instructed Lord Manners to revise, and who would have been reformed, but that by the influence of some Member of the Government, the bad men were restored ag tin to power ? This is the effect of the evidence of General But ke. They are in fact the instruments named in this Bill. They will be the agents, the hosts, the en tertainers, of those who are to execute this offspring of the spirit of their party. Lord Cloncurry—what does he say of them? He says he had known the debtor magis rate transport his creditor 1 There is the adtninistration of justice in Ireland. He had not heard it—it was no vain rumour—be bad known it ; he had known too of the ad mirer of female beauty transporting the father or the bro ther of the female. These are not the only instances of abuses under the Insurrection Act. Are these the men to whom you will again give such power ? Is that the intention of this Reformed Parliament ? If you do not give them the power, but suppress the Orange Lodges, as you will suppress the Political Unions—if, in truth you act impartially, Ireland will be against you to a man. You must bring them to your bosoms, or this will be the con sequence. I know that others know it—one especially, who, though he differs from me in opinion, I respect most sincerely for his honesty of opinion and for his talents. If you will not rule by them, they will not act with you. --(Hear.) You may execute your measure, and what will it produce? The tranquillity of the grave—a death like silence and a dreary repose; but not peace—not quiet —not confidence. You may bury ashes, but they will burn again. You may sow dragon's teeth—take care they do not rise armed men.—( Hear, hear.) I say, that, in the first place, you have not made out a sufficient case to justify you in calling for this measure. In the second, you have not shown that this is the proper remedy for the evils of which you complain. In the third, you have given co. thing like legal evidence for the measure. Fourth, you have not shown that one witness or one juror has been injured since the special commission in the Queen's County. As to the danger to the witnesses, the county of Clare was quieted by two special commissions. Wit nesses were examined before the Judges—where arc those witnesses ? In thatched cottages in the very district it-elf. One of them, on whose evidence five men were convicted, lives in such a cottage in a dreary part of the country.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He has re sided there ever since. A Catholic clergyman wrote to me the fact, in order that I might state it to the Govern tuent, to let them know where the man was, and to per suade hint not to tempt his fate.—(Hear, hear.) He was an informer ; on his evidence five men had been executed on charges of murder. If any man can be supposed to be in danger from giving evidence, that man is. If the pre caution to protect witnesses is not superfluous, protect him. If it is, this measure is not wanted ; but because I suggest the possibility that such precaution would be ad visable in his case, I am to be met with a taunt and a laugh. The man has resided there for two years. I show you that your witnesses are safe; that no juryman has been injured; that Special Commissions have not been resorted to; and having shown this, I say that I have established the absence of the necessity for this measure. I say that till you have tried others, you bare no right to introduce this, and that this House ought not to adopt it till then. I know it is said that if the powers thus given are abused, the Ministers will be responsible to a Reform, d Parliament. But who will complain here or elsewhere ? You stop all complaint—you step even p e ti t i on i ng, and that in the most efficacious way, and then you mock us with scorn, and talk of responsibility. I now come to another part of the subject. You say that this measure is necessary against predial and political agitation. How do you show the connection between them? Has there been any direct allegation of their connection ? Is not the offence already provided for with a punishment of transportation for life ? If that is not enough, you have the general law of con spiracy to meet every case. When there were public meet ings, which you deemed improper at the end of last year. you put them down by those Acts ; you prosecuted, and you never failed of a conviction. But I deny, with t h e most indignant scorn, that political agitation is in You n tohe slightest degree connect e d with predial agi"nioni cannot deny us inquiry on this point. Separate Cent_ naittee this measure into two Bills, and let us have an in quiry. Let us not be tried on scraps of newspapers, con.. tuning, one of them, at least, a gross fa l se h ood —taut 0 d —that Nvi,l,l, Attributed to me the creating of Arbitration Courts, and holding up to thehatred of the public those who would not attend them. The fact is, that political agitation is cal.