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

.IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 5. On the LORD CHANCELLOR taking his seat, a few mi nutes before five o'clock, Lord KINNOUL presented a petition from the Pres bytery and Elders of Dunblane, praying for the better ob aerVance of the Sabbath. Petitions to the same effect were also presented from Sunderland and Newcastle-on-Tyne, I y the Bishop of Durham ; from Charlton, in Gloucestershire, and from a place in Dorsetshire, by the Bishop of Bristol ; from London, by Lora Lorton ; and from Worcester, by the Marquis of Worcester. Lord KING presented a petition from a political union in the county of Galway, against the adoption of coercive measures towards Ireland. Also a petition from an indi- Vidual in Dublin, - praying for poor laws for Ireland, and the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the subiect. The Marquis of WESTMEATH said that the motion he had made for returns relative to certain proceeding.s in the Courts of King's Bench and Common Pleas in Ireland had not been complied with. The LORD CHANCELLOR said it was his opi nion that the order ought to be rescinded, which was confirmed by communications he had received from the highest common law authorities in Ireland. The pa pers were kept in a chest, which was never allowed to be opened, or any copy or extract made, except in the presence of the Lord Chief Justice. The Marquis of WESTMEATH, after some observa tions, which we could not catch in the gallery, said, that notwithstanding what had been said by the Noble Lord, he must persist in his motion. The LORD CHANCELLOR said the case now as sumed a very different aspect. He would ask the Noble Marquis and the House whether it was proper or even par liamentary to move for papers for the avowed purpose of attacking an individual without first having given no tice.—(Hear.) It was a course which he bad never seen pursued ; the usual mode was to give notice that he had a charge to make against that individual, and that for the purpose of investigating that charge, it was necessary that such and such papers should be laid before the House. However, this was the first time that it had ever been intimated to him that the motion was in any way connected with a charge against any individual. lie understood that the production of the papers would he extremely irregular, and contrary to the law as it existed, and, until he had made farther inquiry, he could not consent to their production. . . After some conversation the motion was withdrawn. COERCION IN IRELAND. The Earl of RODEN wished to call their Lordships' attention to a petition which he had to present from an individual resident in the county of Wexford, relating to the state in which that county was now nlaced. He, perhaps, should not have said a word in presenting this petition but for the reports which he had beard of their Lordships being charged elsewhere with what was called the indecent haste with which they had hurried through svhat was called the Irish Coercive Bill. He thought and reit himself justified in saying, that any individual who held 'up their Lordships' House as not caring for the comfort and protection or for the liberties of the people of Ire land, when it passed that Bill, must either make that as sertion in ignorance, or from some sinister motives of their own; perhaps with a view to keep up agitation until they had passed an Act by which the Union would he virtually dissolved by the destruction of the Protestant religion and the Protestant Constitution in that country. The petitioner was a shopkeeper, residing in New Ross, in the county of Wexford, named William Strongbott Everett. The petitioner stated the circumstances under which he had taken a farm in that place, and went on to say that on the 12th of May last he received a notice threatening him with destruction if he dhl not compen sate the former tenant of the land which he held. He defied the threat, and the consequence was that, although his house was situated in a main street in a populous town, on the morning of the 4th of June it was surrounded and several shots fired into it, by which twenty nine panes in the windows were broken, and the frames perforated with shots. After this every one of the inhabitants refused to deal at his shop, and such was the intimidation practised that he was obliged to get the crew of the Pike sloop-of war to cut and carry his harvest, no resident daring to assist him in the work. Shortly after that four of his horses were houghed, and other property belonging to him destroyed and injured. The petitioner further stated that, being desirous of obtaiaing proper education for his daughter, be bad sent her to the school of a Mrs. Browne, upon whom a notice was.served that, if his daughter was not sent away, every person connected with the school should be murdered. She was consequently sent home, and he was unable to get her education attended to. He had, at the time of writing the petition, two acres of potatoes in the ground, and was unable to get any one to dig them ; and stacks of barley and other corn on his farm, which no person dared thrash, or hire him a horse and cart for their removal. Fearing that their Lordships might doubt the truth of his statement he had made an affidavit of the facts, a copy of which was set forth in the petition. The Noble Earl said that this petition was the answer he gave to the charges against the Bill which their Lordships had passed. It was called coercive, and it was coercive. It was intended to coerce the murderer and the breaker of the laws , and to give protection to industry and peace. However he might have differed from his Majesty's Government upon other points, and however he might differ from them again, he would maintain that they had acted most wisely and most judiciously in bringing forward a measure which he trusted would not only go to lay hold of the poor and deluded violator of the public peace, but also those who had secretly and covertly urged them and goaded them on to the crimes they had committed. He knew that the measure had met with the approbation of the respec table of all (fuses in Ireland, who were not content with the state of things as they now were, but desired to see protection to persons and property ; but by no class would it he more thankfully received than by those farmers who were desirous of seeing the laws obeyed, and who were on ' that account now living in a state of terror not to be con ceived or described, which indeed made the laws a dead Letter, and turned the Constitution, from being a blessing, into a curse. He did hope that the Bill would be suffered to come back to their Lordships' House pretty nearly as it left it ; and that with the least possible delay it would.be allowed to give that protection to the King's loyal subjects in Ireland to which they were so justly entitled. Viscount CLIFDEN bad it in his power to corroborate the general statement of the petitioner, as he knew him to have suffered most cruelly from the persecutions which he described. He was sorry to say, however, that he knew of cases of much worse atrocity which had occurred upon his own estates. Some of his tenants had lived sipon their farms ler many years and paid no rent whatever, when he forgave them all arrears and ejected them. He subse quently let the land to three other individuals ; and about three months ago the villains whose principle was that no landlord should be allowed to change his tenant whether he got rent or not, came to the houses of the three farmers and attempted to break in. The first resisted, but they succeeded, and instantly shot the man dead and burned his crops. They then went to the second, where they could net force their way in, but they burned his crop and destroyed his cattle. The third was attacked, and it so alarmed him that he died of the fright. Thus two of his tenants were murdered, and - the other was driven out of his farm. The course he bad taken was to order that the land should not be let again, but left waste ; and so he would ever act, though his whole estate should be without a tenant. If every landlord did the same he had no doubt the evil would soon be corrected. The state of the farmers in Ireland was one whole scene of terror. He was informed that in many places they never thought of lying down in their beds. He believed that the " voluntary tribute," as it was called, was collected by terror; and that fellows stood at the chapel doors and compelled them to put in their shilling and half-crown voluntary contributions. He wondered how men could have the face, as he knew they did, to get up in the other House and declaim against the Bill, when they admitted in private that it was necessary. The Marquis of WESTMEATH denied that distress had any thing to do with the disturbances where they were worst, and believed them to originate in sheer wickedness. In Dublin there was a standing committee of mischief, which would never rest until put down by the strong hand, and the public mind would never until then be at liberty to adopt the truth. After an inaudible observation from the Marquis of SLIGO, the petition was laid on the table.—Adjourned. ROUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 5. The House having been occupied in balloting far elec tion petition committees, the gallery was not opened until a few minutes before five, when the rush of persons to obtain places was equal to that of anyproerctedi,ngeav,euniens.g during the discussion of the pending important w y Besides considerable confusion in the, gallery, there was much noise in the body of th? House,.Ourigig_ w hi e l, some Bill was brought up for second reading. Mr. COBBE1"1 . said be had beard something read to the House, but what it was he could not tell ; and h deprecated this mode of.doing business. The SPEAKER—The lion. Member must be aware that there is a security against any Bill being surrepti tiously passed, as he seemed to infer, by every Member being put in possession of a printed copy.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. COBBETT—But in the midst of such confusion, no Member could tell whether it was a Bill being read a first, a second, or a third time, or what Bill it was. Lord SANDON, being named from the Speaker's list, rose for the purpose of presenting a petition, and was in terrupted by Lord ALTHORP, who made some suggestion about the propriety of the debate on the Irish Disturbance Bill being resumed before any business, but we could not glean more than an idea of what his Lordship said. Lord SANDON was exceedingly unwilling to do any thing discourteous to the Noble Lord ; but some considera tion should be shown for the situation in which he (Lord Sandon) stood, as regarded the presentation of the petition. —( Hear, hear.) After the reading of the Committee chosen for the Car marthen election, and another, The SPEAKER said the question before the House was, whether the public petitions should be read, or the busi ness on the public paper proceeded with.—(Hear.) Mr. COBBETT was of opinion the petitions should be received first, as Members having petitions to Ares: nt, ac cording to the rule laid down, would be delayed a fortnight, if they could not present them soon. Mr. O'CONNELL observed, that he had a number of petitions—above 40—to present against the Irish Coer cive Measure, and he was unable to present them. Lord ALTHORP said, the House had had a good deal of experience last session, during the progress of the Reform Bill, when they were obliged to come to some understanding upo❑ the mode of presenting petitions. Ir was then arranged, that in presenting petitions, gentle men should refrain from making long speeches, and bringing forward discussions.—(Hear, hear.) After a few observations from Mr. WAR BURTON, Mr. WILKS hoped the House would not persist in such an arrangement as they had come to of meeting in the day time—a plan which he believed had totally failed. (Hear, hear, and No, no.) He thought it had, for they had only sat at 12 o'clock three days during the week, and only 64 petitions had been disposed of, leaving up wards of 300 names on the Speaker's list. If they proceeded in the same way, the last name would not be entitled to present a petition for upwards of six weeks. By that arrangement the pttitions of the people would be greatly delayed. He had already got a great number of petitions, and from letters that he bad recaived he expected many more; but his name stood at No. 176, and therefore it would be some time before he could have an opportunity of presenting any of them. It appeared to him that the old plan was far superior to the new one. Colonel DAVIES felt the full force of what the Hon. Member who had just sat down had asserted. He felt also the inconvenience of debating on petitions, particularly the discussions of the Hon. Member for Oldham (Mr. Cob lieu). Upon one petition respecting the observance of the Sabbath Day, that [lon. Member had brought into his speech various arguments respecting the Jews and Poland. From such causes the Speaker's list was only diminish ing 15 or 20 a day, and increasing by new petitions 50 or 60 a day. The remedy was easy and simple, it was, that gentlemen should exercise a little discretion—(Hear) —and confine themselves to the question before the Howe. Mr. WASON thought the present arrangement had been most effectual—(Hear, hear)—and it only deserved to be fairly tried. Some gentlemen, in order to get their speeches reported, however were in the habit of seizing tbe first opportunity that presented itself to address the House. Mr. COBBETT said he bad befn reproached for doing that which he had never attempted to do—namely, make speeches. He was not angry at any body for doing so, but would in return suggest a complete remedy. He would suggest that all proper petitions should be received, and read aloud, either by the Hon. Member who presented them, or by the clerk, and that no speeches should be made with respect to them. That would put an end to the labours of the select Committee, of which the people were so jealous. The people wished to have themselves heard, and not their representatives. He would have every petition printed without the interference of S;r Robert Peel or any body else. If some course of that sort was not adopted, be should continue to make speeches on the presentation of any petition. Mr. LITTLETON thought if the House adopted a resolution that Members should merely state the contents of the petitions, it would be attended with good effects. Mr. R. PALMER observed, that if gentlemen, on the presentation of petitions, were precluded from making any observations, their constituents would feel very much dissatisfied. Mr. LITTLETON brought up the report of the Select Committee on public petitions. PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS. The SPEAKER suggested the propriety of Members endeavouring to-morrow to consider some plan for facilitating the presentation of petitions. FACTORIES BILL. Lord ASHLEY obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regulate the labour of children in mills and f,c. tories. The Bill was ordered to be printed, and the discussion to take place on the first or second reading. Mr. COBBETT moved for the return of the names of all the. Justices td Peace in the counties of- England, Wales, and Scotland, stating whether they were- cierey men, naval or military officers, on full or half-pay, whether in the receipt of any salary, sinecure, pensioh, or other emolument raised out of the taxes ; or whether they were the issuers of paper money commonly called Bank Notes. Lord ALTHORP'S only objection to the motion was, the enormous expense the public would be put to by it. _ . _ Mr. COBBETT trusted the Noble Lord would eon• eider the subject, and if, upon that consideration, he should still object to it, he (Mr. Cobbett) should feel himself compelled to make a specific motion on the subject, stating his reasons for doing so. Lord ALTHORP observed, that in the absence of the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Admiralty, he could not state positively whether it would be desirable to furnish the returns. He would consider the subject. SEAMEN'S HOSPITAL. Mr. HUME obtained leave to bring in a Bill to incor porate the Committee of Management of the Seamen's Hospital. . _ ROYAL NAVY. Mr. C. ROSS moved for certain returns relative to the receipt and expenditure of the Royal Navy between March, 1832, and March, 1833 ; also, an account of the receipt end expenditure of the Victualling Department during the same period; also an account of the value of the naval stores expended last year, compared with the quantity purchised. Lord ALTHORP made some opposition, which was not distinctly beard in the gallery, and Mr. C. ROSS withdrew bis motion on the under standing that the returns in some form would be furnished before any discussion took place on the navy estimates. CALL OF THE HOUSE. Mr. O'CONNELL moved that the order of the day for the call of the House be discharged. IRISH DISTURBANCES SUPPRESSION BILL. Mr. LEFROY moved the order of the day to re new the adjourned debate on this Bill. The question having been put, the Hon. Gentleman proceeded to address the House. He was anxious to address the House on this mo mentous question, although he felt the propriety of con fining himself within the smallest possible limits, consider ing the period over which it had already extended, and as the House should anxiously guard against every imputation of indecently delaying the progress of the measure, yet he trusted the Hous e would indulge him while he made a few observations, before he entered on the subject iinntediately before the House, on the topic which called him up at a late hour last night.—(Hear.) After the strange observation made by the Member for Drog heda upon one of the most respected Judges in Ireland— after the imputation which had been thrown upon him— that he was a person who, in the solemn performance of the duty of charging the Grand Jury would sacrifice a principle to an antithesis, he (Mr. Lefroy) should have felt himself unworthy of a seat in that House, and of the place in society which he occupied, if he had sat silent without adverting to eo serious, so injurious, and so offensive a charge. He had ha i the satisfaction of the acquaintance of that learned Judge during thirty years; during the most part of that time he had known him on the Bench, and he must say never did there sit on that bench a more constitution-d, a more humane, and a more upright Judge. He was at a loss to account for the charge, which was so unjust in itself, and especially as coming from the Hon. Member, himself one of the profession.—(Hear, hear.) He did not know what notions that Honourable Member could have of what belanged to the character of the Judge. What respect he had for the office, or what sense of justice he could have to the individual on whom be made such a charge. The individual against whom that imputation was cast, was one, he might say, of a fastidious and deli cate sense of honour, a gentleman and accomplished scholar, qualities which, whatever estimate the Hon. M:mber for Drogheda might form of them, would always be held, at least, he hoped, throughout the country, in the highest estinuition. The Hon. Member had thought fit to speak slightingly of that Learned Judge's knowledge of the law. On that subject he would go no further for its defence, than to state that he was the first Judge called on to propound any opinion on that most important question bow far passive resistance to the law was a legal offence, be gave firmly and boldly, and decidedly his opinion on that question, and it was to be apprehended that that was the foun dation of the disapprobation that was now expressed. Having, I trust, continued the Hon. Member, therefore, vindicated to this House and to the public the character of that respectable Judge, I shall proceed to the con sideration of the question more properly and more immediately before the House ; and I must say upon that subject, that however gentlemen upon the opposite side of the House may differ in their views of the question, there is one point upon which all must concur, and that is the great importance of it—the great importance that we should stand justified to our constituents, and lus tified to the public upon solid and substantial ground., for passing such an important measure. It is impossible for any man not to deplore the necessity of such a Bill—im possible not to tremble at the precedent of such a measure ; hut yet, persuaded as I am of its absolute necessety, I cannot reconcile it to my conscience to refuse my support to it, although I have been in all other respects the most determined opposer of his Majesty's Government. It is of great importance that this Bill should pass upon a clear and distinct ground. Tne case should, in my judgment, appear as clear as light, and evidence upon which it is rested should be beyond all possibility of suspicion; and yet, admitting these re quisites, Sir, I confess, I feel constrained even upon this principle, and applying that standard, to give support to this measure. The justification must, as I have stated, rest upon necessity. That necessity must comprise not merely the extent and nature of the crimes it is intended to check and to redress, but also the ascertained insufficiency of the ordinary laws to protect those crimes, and to redress the evils arising from tliem.—(Hear, hear, hear.) With respect to the extent of crime, very little doubt, I think, can be entertained. It seems to be agreed on all bands, that there is an extent of crime almost, if not altogether, un paralleled in amount, and nearly unparalleled in atrocity. With respect to its nature, it is im portant to observe this peculiar distinction which at tends the crime—that it is not simple confederacy to com mit offence—not a contetleracy to commit violence and out rage, but a confederacy to baffle and to defeat the law which is intended for the redress and punishment of crime. It is therefore from the nature of the conspiracy which exists, that in the first instance arises the necessity of this measure. With respect to the extent of crime, another observation may be made which meets in some way the report of a charge given at a late Assizes, that there was no crime in that part of the country to any amount.—(Hear, hear.) This Bill does not assume that all Ireland is affected by disturbance, but the words of the preamble show that it only premises that some parts were affected. But the crimes are of a tendency to injure and demoralize other parts of the counzry ; therefore, there is in the nature and extent of the crime a necessity and a justification for tee measure. I will now beg to call the attention of the House to the commissions which have been issued in the last nine months, and what have been their results, and I will then compare the pre sent state of crime with the state at the commencement of those commissions, by which we shall satisfactorily see whether the existing laws have been sufficient to check those crimes. The first of those commissions issued for the Spring Assizes, in March, 1832, and there were then five capital convictions, and 26 transportations, in addition to the capital cases which were commuted into transporta tion for life. Did that produce pease ? On the contrary, in two months afterwards, it became necessary to speed another Commission, upon which occasion the Chief Jus tice of the King's Bench, who presided, in addressing the Grand Jury, said that only two months had elapsed since the previous gaol delivery, the trials with a view to which lasted from the 15th to the 27th of March ; and yet it again became necessary that a fresh Commission should be sped for the trial of offences not arising from the ordinary frailties of our nature, but for crimes of an insurrectionary character-300 outrages, from burglary downwards, hav ing been committed in the interval, these consisting chiefly in the administration of illegal oaths, an extensive system of plunder for arms, the destruction also of hou-es, barns, crops, plantations, meadows, and cattle. It had been shown beyond all possibility of question or cavil that the juries would not do their duty. In two months from the special commission, the Summer Assizes took place, and the men who stood charged with the murder of fourte.ti policemen in the open day, in the presence of thousands, were put upon their trial, and, after two or three unsuccessful attempts to procure a con viction, they escaped from justice. The events of December, in which the next commission issued, were attended with as little success. The next objection, and one of the most serious that bad been made to the present Bill was, that offences were to be tried before a military tribunel, in stead of before the ordinary ones. It would be impossible to doubt of the impropriety of making use of military tribunals, since even the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, in his eloquent speech upon the address to the Throne, had put it beyond their reach to use any other. That Hon. and Learned Gentleman then stated that the people of Ireland looked with a jealous eye upon the Judges and Magistrates of the country—that they looked upon them as the oppressors of the Irish people, and that, therefore, the GovernMent could not rely upon them, since they had completely lust the confidence of the people. That body had been most shamefully calumniated. Those charges had alienated the people from the Magistracy—had pre judiced them against that body—and never could Irel a nd be governed like this country until those prejudices were done away with. The next objection to the Bill was that it did without witnesses. Now he had had some experience of the administration of justice in Ireland, and could con fidently say that the failure of justice in that country ought to be chiefly attributed to•the way in which witnesses were tampered with during the intermediate time between their being called upon to give testimony and the trial. He considered that their total absence would better further the ends of justice than their presence. There was another objection made to the present Bill, namely, that it did away with the right of petitioning. He contended that it did no such thing ; all it was meant to do was to prevent large multitudes from assembling under the pretext of petitioning the L-gislature. The Hon. and Learned Gen• tleman concluded by declaring, that the question of tithes was not the cause of the distur bances. In districts where the composition bad been entered into, the people were in a more disturbed state than in the districts where there had been no composition. As soon as the Hon. and Learned Gentleman sat down, several Members rose on the Opposition side of the House, but the Speaker declared in favour of— Mr. RUTHVEN—Seeing the state of impatience in which the House was, he would not address them at any extraordinary length.—(A laugh.) He complained, how ever of the way in which a measure of such importance to Ireland was hurried through the House.—(Loud laugh ter.) He admitted the outrages committed by the White feet, but thought that it was not by totally annihilating the Constitution they should endeavour to repress those injuries. He complained of the manner in which tt , e 'lrish magistrates performed their duties, and attri buted many of the evils of which the people had to com plain to that cause. As an instance of their neglect of duty, he stated that out of 9,000 persons committed for trial in one year in Ireland, only 5,000 had been convicted ; and he would ask the House if magistrates could be said to do their duty who committed 4,000 innocent persons to prison ? The Hon. Member went into the details of a ease of great hardship and oppression which took place in September last, at Loughrea, in Galway, in which a cler• gyman, named Dwyer, ill-treated and used the grossest language to a poor widow, who owed him some arrear of tithe. The Hon. Member was going on with the details of the case, and read from a paper which he held in his hand some of the offensive expressions used when— Colonel PERCEVAL rose and said, he was surprised that the Hon. Gentleman should bring forward charges against a clergyman couched in such gross language, in that informal manner. He (Colonel Perceval) thought, if the charges were founded in truth, it would have been more regular to inform the House before be made them. Mr. RUTHVEN hoped he was not out of order. The Hon. Member was proceeding to relate how the clergy man used the widow while he had her in his clutches, when— The SPEAKER rose and said, that though the Hon. Member was only stating facts, yet, in stating facts, it was always necessary to use Parliamentary language. No language could be orderly in a quotation, which would be disorderly if spoken. Mr. AUTIiNTEN would not say one word more upon the subject, which could be considered out of order. He did not think, however, that it was disorderly to state that Mr. Dwyer, the clergyman, was fined ten pounds by the Assistant-Barrister, tor his conduct to the widow. --(Hear, bear.) The Hon. Member then went on to argue, that special commissions would have all the good effects anticipated from this Bill. They had been found to answer formerly in Clare and Galway, which counties were reduced by them to a state of perfect tranquillity. He was of opinion, that this measure would drive Ireland to resist to the death. He was not one of those who wished for the repeal of the Union without discussion. He wished to have it calmly argued, and to decide ac cording to the issue of that argument. There was a great outcry about the Unions in Ireland : the Hon. House seemed to forget that there were Unions in England, and the Member for Birmingham could tell them what sort of Unions these were. His Majesty's Ministers, too, well knew what these Unions were; for it was these Unions alone which had kept them in office, and car ried the Reform Bill.—(No, no ; Hear ; Question.) Yes ; when the Ministers began to be aware of certain little tremulous flutterings in their hearts as to whether they should be able to remain in office, and as to what was to be done, then it was that they bad been triumphantly carried through every difficulty by the people—by the Po litical Unions of England.—("No, no," from the Ministe rial Benches.) Hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side were now very loud in their vociferations of No, no !--they had changed their note lately ; there was a motion for the sup pression of these Political Unions, set down in the list for the 6th of May. But would this motion ever be brought forward ? No. There was another motion set down for the same day, for the abolition of sinecures. Flow would those Hon. Members vote on this question ? He would not at present go through his objections to the different provi sions of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to state the case of an Irish soldier, who had been most brutally •treated by his officer, having a bridle thrust into his mouth, which he was compelled to wear. This case of tyranny occurred in the regiment of Sir Watkins Wynn. That HoN. BARONET started up, and amidst the great est uproar and shouts of laughter, vehemently denied, as we understood him, that his regiment had ever been in Ireland. Mr. RUTHVEN—Yes, it was ; I saw it ; it was in the county of Down. I can bring the most incontestible -eridence of the truth of what I say. The SPEAKER suggest , d that, as the lion. Baronet whose name had been mentioned had so unhesitatingly de nied the circumstance, it would be more in order in Mr. Ruthven not to persevere. Mr. RUTHVEN had indisputable proof of the correct ness of his statements. The SPEAKER was sure there was no gentleman in the House but would see that the manner, the topic, and the persevering of the Hon. Member, were all disorderly. Mr. RUTHVEN apologized. He bad not conceived that the endeavour to substantiate statements was disor derly. What he had said with respect to personal obser vation referred to the presence of Sir W. Wynn's regi ment in Ireland, not to the affair of the bridle. How ever, without mentioning names, he would say, that this dreadful punishment, worse than any other, could be proved.—(No, no.) He begged leave to cite an opinion expressed by Mr. Stanley in 1824, in which he himself (Mr. Ruthven) fully concurred, nor coal conceive how an alteration of opinion had been brought about in thirt Right Hon. Secretary, and other gentlemen on that side of the House. The opinion of the Hon. Gentleman at the period mentioned, was " that the worst affliction under which Ireland laboured was the en tire ignorance of those who legislated for her, of the real evils she was suffering under." It was, therefore, incumbent upon Ireland to let these evils he fully known to those Legislators. But the real question before the House was not a mere question about Ireland, but a question of English liberty—of the British Constitution —of general Reform ; it was to see whether the present Reform Ministry were to tyrannize worse than any Tory Ministry had ever done. He would not detain the House much longer.—(Hear.) He would only quote some pas sages from a speech of Lord Althorp's in 1824, to show how that Noble Lord had been spoilt by the company he had got into—(A laugh)—for in his (Mr. Ruthven's) opinion, never had any man set out with a more kind and benevolent feeling towards Ireland ; and he had the highest respect for that Noble Lord's character. The paragraphs stated the opinion of the Noble Lord, " that the mishchief was, that while the evils of the Union were clear and undoubted, the advantages were entirely disendent upon the good sense and good feeling of the Administration." He would call upon that Noble Lord, if he had not changed this opinion, to show the excellence of the present Administration by the extent of the advantages it would bestow upon Ireland. The Noble Lord on that occasion had also alluded to the enormous expense incurred by the machinery of tit- Insurrection Acts and the Commissions in Ireland, and had declared his opinion, "that there was such a contamination in arbitrary measures—that if they were enforced in one part of the State, they would have an equal influence over the other portion." Let the Noble Lord bar this in mind, and not act in dirset opposition to these his declared opinions. Lord ACHESON said he would support the Bill. He wished to say a few words, for the purpose of effacing au impression which appeared to exist, that the operations of this Bill would extend indiscriminately to the whole of Ireland. This was most erroneous. Had this been the ease--bad the operations of the Bill tended to implicate the innocent in the punishment of the guilty—it would never have had his support; but, on the contrary, his firm op position. On the contrary, it would tend to relieve the many who now laboured under that worst of slavery— the slavery of intimidation—from their bonds, and would restore them to the full enjoyment of the benefits of the Constitution ; and this was his reason for supporting it. Some of the Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House, indeed, had appeared to arrogate to themselves the representation of all Ireland. He could tell them that their opinions were by no means those of all Ireland. The present measure was, he admitted, arbitrary and tyranni cal ; but he wished to ask what tyranny could equal that of prescribing the opinions and conduct of other men, of making loyal men disloyal, and of forcing them, -for their own security, to violate those laws which, in their hearts, they were disposed to respect and obey ? However, the Bill itself would not remedy the grievances of Ireland : and he Doped that the Ministers would persevere in that course of remedying the grievances of Ireland upon which they had entered. The people laboured under, too many grievances to be at rest; and Ireland, until the causes of the agitation were removed, never wou'd be tranquil. Sir CHARLES COOTE rose out of a sense of duty to his country and constituents to defend the magistrates and the gentry of Queen's County from the attacks which had been made on them. He could take upon him to say that those magistrates had done their duty. He had been a Member of the Committee which sat last year to inquire into the state of Queen's County. He had attended every sitting of the Committee, and approved of its report. He knew that the Special Commission had done good, and that subsequent to that the condition of the county was improved, and therefore he approved of that part of the report. -But three weeks after his re. turn to his own county, while he was on a _visit to his brother, a gentleman of the name of Hutchinson (we be lieve) was dogged and fired at as he was getting over a style. He was shot through the lungs. He was then at tacked with swords, and cut and hacked, and kicked, and much disfigured. He was almost cut to pieces, and the only question he asked when he expected to die, the only thing he wished to know was, how he had given any offence.—( Hear.) Three days afterwards another man was shot. Nobody could go abroad without arms, and those gentlemen who kept up large establishments took their servants and their arms with them even to church to protect them. This was the state of the county soon after the Parliament was prorogued. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin said some few nights ago, that Queen's County was now tranquil. He wished it was, but he had letters in his pocket which contradicted that assertion. One was from a Magistrate who resided in a well-peopled part of the county, where the people had more employment than in any other part of it, and less excuse, therefore, for committing outrages and crimes. "On Tuesday last," this Magistrate informed him, " four armed men came to his quarry, where six of his men were at work ; they placed them on their knees, and swore them not to work at the elate-house the writer was building. They then proceeded to the houses of several labourers, tenants of his, beat some of them most severely, and gave them similar orders not to work at building the slate-houses. This oc curred between four and five o'clock in the day, and the people were so intimidated that they did not dare to inform him of what was going forward. The men who were at work in the quarry, said that they did not dare disobey the orders to remain in the quarry for one hour after the armed party went away. Since that outrage, these stone masons had received threatening letters, ordering them not to work any longer, and they obeyed." He could not, therefore, get any masons to work for him, add was obliged to send to Dublin, or some distant place, to procure them. He was obliged to keep six armed men about to protect the workmen by day, and to have police patrols at night, for their safety. The houses he was attempting to build were not placed on land from which he had turned people off, but on land that had been in the possession of his family for 70 years. Other outrages had been committed on Sunday at noon day by armed men. Under these circum stances, continued the Hon. Member, he felt happy to give his support to the Bill. On the Hon. Member resuming his seat, there were loud calls for Mr. O'Connell, but— Mr. DAUNT (as we understood) obtained possession of the House. Ministers, he declared, had made out no case against Ireland to justify putting her out of the pale of the Constitution. They liUve raked together all the Newgate Calendars of Ireland, and by them they thought to frighten the House of Commons into suspending the Habeas Corpus Act.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Secretary might as well have read the gaol deliveries and police reports and records of the Old Bailey, and have proposed to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act and establish martial law in England.—(oh, oh.) The Right Hon. Gentle man had recited a ballad most pathetically to influence the passions of the House; to have made the thing complete, instead of reciting it, he should have sung it.—(Laughter and cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet, too, bad hor rified the House by the detail of a murder which took place 14 years ago; but that showed what great diffi culties they met with in justifying this atrocious Bill, when they were obliged to ransack the records of crime 14 years ago.—(Hear, bear.) If they were fond of looking back to find pretexts for cruel laws, might they not find them in English history? The Right Hon. Baronet had only to carry back his researches, and he might find a justification for applying martial law to England on the murder of Thomas a Becket.—(oll, oh, and laughter.) He did not know what Ministers wanted ; but if they had sought to devise a plan to put down anti tithe agitation, they could not have found a better than this Bill. The tithes were the evil of Ireland. He put it to the English gentlemen to make the case Ire land their own. If it were, would not excitement prevail in England ? How would they like that a Roman Catholic priesthood should lord it over Engl end ? How would they like to pay tithes to such a priesthood ? He put it to them honestly and sincerely, to answer honestly and sincerely, and on a Olin principle of justice, they would, he believed, refuse, and justly refuse, because, where no value is given, nothing ought to be paid.—(Cheers.) There was another circumstance to which he would al lude, which had been already alluded to by the Noble Lord the Member for Donegal—that was, that much of the agitation concerning tithes was caused by the promise of the Right Hon. Secretary, that tithes should be extinguished.—(Hear, bear, hear.) The Right Hon. Secretary was no doubt sick of that promise, he had been reminded so often of it—nevertheless he would take care to remind him of it till it was fulfilled. The Hon. Mem ber here made some allusion to the Bill, the force of which we did not catch, and said (touching his head) that he would rather lay that head upon the block than submit to it.—(Leughter.) They might laugh. That laughter showed him that Ireland could not look for sympathy in that House.—(No, no.) It was only to be attended to when it app-aled through the Viceroy, and could only hope for pates nal legislation, when it had a domestic Legis lature. Ii they apolied such a Bill to England, could they hope to pass it ? He would remind them that men owed allegiance in return for good government, and that coerci to and misgovernment did not merit allegiance.—(Hear.) He was sure that the question of repeal would acquire irresistible strength by this measure. It would be wiser to relieve the distresses of Ireland. Absenteeism was a great curse to Ireland. He should not do his duty to his country if he did not, to the.utmost of his power, oppose the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) On the Hon. Member sitting down, there were again loud calls for Mr. O'Connell ; and, after a shot t pause the Hon. and Learned Member rose, and addressed the House very slowly and emphatically. He spoke to the following effect : M. O'CONNELL—I only wish to remind gentlemen that the question will be put on the amendment. The question on which the. House will decide is, whether the word " now" shall stand part of the question : that is, whether the Bill shall now be read a first titne or not. A good deal of speaking might hive been spared. A good many observations have been made which do not go to de cide the question whether the Bill shall now be read a first time. lam bound to say that the amendment is ex tremely well calculated to elicit the real nature of the measure, which goes to destroy the Constitution of Ire land, and to which it is most certainly felt that one fort night's delay would be fatal.—(Hear.) With these preli minary observations, I shall proceed to call the attention of the House to the real question it has to decide. The Legislature is now to decide if this sort of law shall he up plied to both parts of the British empire. It is one which relates to the mode of governing Ireland. Are we now to follow the former precedents of the British Govern ment ? Are we to continue the old system, or are we to make Ireland a part of the British empire ? What was implied in the consideration of that question ? Had Ire land ever benefitted by the connection with England ? What benefit had Ireland ever derived from the connec tion ? if she were totally separated, could she be worse off ?—(Hear, bear.) It was assumed by all who bad spoken that she could not.--(No, no.) Poverty, distress, want, and crime, prevailed. How could she be worse ? And these things were stated on both sides.—(Hear.) He asked them what had England done for Ireland?—(Hear. ) Nothing. If they asked what crimes England had committed, the black catalogue was most abundant.— (Hear.) Let them take up any period of history, and they would find acts of the meat atrocious cruelty— of the deepest treachery—of the most wanton guilt that ever stained the annals of any country. I formerly spe cified the leading character of each century, but what did I get but to be sneered at ?—(Hear, bear.) Have I not been taunted because I alluded to the oppressions of the Henries, the Edwards, the Ellzabeth ? But what was my reason for adopting that line of argument ? Because you practise the very enormities of their day, and dis guise them under no more than the flimsy cloak of a -dif ferent name.—(Cheers.) I will dwell but shortly on this part of the subject, and merely to illustrate my views. Every Irishman then found within the pale was executed as a traitor and enemy. What does the memorial addressed by Captain Lee to the Brisish Government soon after this period state ? I will read an extract to the House : " When notable traitors, who had been in arms against your Majesty's Government, at length, of their own ac cord, offered ample securities for their good behaviour, promised to perfolm great services, and to surrender at the assiz ai and sessions, if promise of pardon were given them ; and when they had so surrendered themselves, yet secret commissions were issued to the Sheriffs of Shires, and these men some of them were accordingly killed, and others escaped. These latter men did, however, submit to the law, upon which they were tried and acquitted." This was the spirit—the treacherous, cruel, and faithless spirit, with which the Irish were then treated. The Government never dreamed of legislating honestly foi the people. It preferred the party of the Pale at first, but when a reli gion, which was not the religion of the people, was intro duced, it attempted to form a new party, still in opposition to the nation. When did this system end ? Up to 1800 it had not ceased. To prove that, I will read a passage from a writer whose name shall be presently mentioned. He said, " The uniform conduct of the British Government towards Ireland had been a continued violation of all law, a total sub version of the usages of civilized nations. Had there been a war with a foreign country, the inhabitants would have retained their possessions and properties, and even in a conquered province those would be respected. But the British Government squandered the power and wealth of the nation on three sets of English adventurers, and the common title of property became confiscation." These were the words of Lord Chancellor Fitzgibbon in 1800 ; he was then, indeed, promising halcyon days to Ireland ; but the system of confiscation, rapine, injustice, and blood remained notwithstanding his professions. What are you now legislating for? To repair injustice, bind up the wounds of the country, and communicate to it the ble.s ings of the British Constitution? Oh ! no. You give this Act of Parliament—you heal all evils and discontents with it, and have the effrontery to propose it in the face of the British Constitution.—(Cheers.) But why taunt them with the crimes of others where there is so much matter for their individual accusation? In those periods there were great men. It will not do the Hon. Gentlemen opposite -any discredit to be compared with Raleigh or Essex; but the greatest men at certain periods may be guilty of acts of atrocity and cruelty, and it may happen that little men may envy them that unfortunate distinction. I stand on the threshold of the British Constitution—l stand up to defend my country from the fatal legislation that would turn loose upon her every bad passion of the human heart, and give one man the power of trampling at his pleasure every inhabitant into a dungeon.---(Cheers.) This is the question. I ask the first Reformed Parlia ment, would they wish to protect freedom in England ? Will they not do the same in Ireland ?—for surely if there has been some national exaggeration, it ought not to be scanned with too jealous an eye, and some allowance ought to be made for a people standing on the brink of a dungeon—not because they have committed any crime, but because somebody chooses to put them there.—(Hear.) It will be said to me that the Act is not before the House. But have we not been " talking about it and about it ?" Has it not passed the other House 2—has it not received the sanction of the present Government ?—has it not come warm to us from the praises of those mighty lawyers and statesmen who are distinguished through the world by the steadiness of their affection for freedom, and their unde viating regard for the great interests of humanity ?—does it not, in short, come stamped with the approbation of the " hereditary wisdom" of the nation ? I will not detain the House by proving how inconsistent the present con. duct of some of those individuals is with their former declarations ; that may be of some consequence to themselves—it may be desirable for them to show to foreign states and the world that they hold the same place in principle and public estimation, and are s till t h e advocates of liberty ; but I care not in what words they wrap their purposes, while they violate the substance of freedom, nor shall I stoop . to expose the fallacy. Let them proceed to apply to their consciences the balm of self hpelance,itit abolishes e t s ak tr es ial awayby jury. Did gratulation, and hide their inconsistency from themselves ; I will proceed to explain to the House the nature and tape. ration of this precious—this humane—this protecting estalalish s: trial by jury to enable guilt to from innoce nc e ;it renounces all the safeguards placed by d ofin t : h they not, o man, this , tje e n u r:thetycofnotrrary, innocenceinstitute s totally t a l l e l s y t as far as human precautions could go, should a o pun n hp l oe s n ec i rs i e ittntspuolitrteisir 100 I wish that I possessed the eloquence of t . n iai n igb) .„„h ei for Leeds, wiliout his inconsistency--teat A ( by PO! I might trace the venerable antiquity of t ean , .. ri of prove that it is antecedent to prerogativ writers s tie s ta w k e e p s t ,, a w w ay ay ti b ,e y the Act. Tofhetitrsint ofeoaeteularbte...te h_elai.e,isteitflef, alike. But wh e t? Have not speculative wri ' . 1 1_1041 theory of the British Censtitution declared thattilsd Civil List was voted—the taxes raised --the ar see 'T ied Of maintainel, and both Houses of Parliamenpt a .n o s t ; j or t no other purpose than that twelve In-s s _ si d be 0 1 ; box, with a judge to preside over them, q uu: esiion s 0 lowed perfect liberty to adjudicate life and property ?—( Hear, therefore, is at an end, for this Act utter y poi o r he Nob l e f 110 trial by Jury. I can never believe that t tive o s ews ) " T o l n ie l Ce r a i n st o j i t hl i°° o o posits (Aiding)), so long the confidenceßepreserA od pepular Nobi:ity, and the little of erstwhile sil: 1 gird between them and the people--whose u , ;„ , oi sile , plicity of heart and manners endears him to ': __ s ive° • of rola. L ~,, sheds a grace even upon his high dignity _ oto t 0 w cheers.) 1 will never believe that he has con se 0 ,0 1 , assassination of the Constitution.—(Cheeriug.lo, woes' evil of the Bill is that it takes away the rightl:, r reee ko freedom. If this Act pass, I assert that persoeal: of t. bt in Ireland is at an end. Some, from the loos o. e s .se Olt phraseology, are perplexed on various poinatt! J ed ;„, , Now, what a learned, acute, and well-iln T i nt, o , s itUl would be required to decide upon them ! " , ct p al*! that consideration, I assert, that, dare - die liberty in Ireland is at an end. No man will to ifelS please a powerful neighbour—no woman will dare,,o it theft" - ii Weise him.—(Loud cheering.) Let me eats - t over - of the. House to another fact. It is a suffieien r tbe 1 1 0 1 an application for a Habeas Corpus to thatshow it o f under this Act. Its next great feature Wes , of psrl , away the right of comp! iint. If two non in 3 40 VP 6 , Ireland talked tos,ether of their misfortunes, S _ ode! meeting, and the Lord Lieutenant could seize 0.0"04000 the Bill. What right of complaint a:mild there be be o re was so fettered and manacled ? A man migbta :lot Was built twit complain to himself—that was no offence; the use of complaint unless you could pour it 1 ern stl te b et t of another ? But if you attempted that, Y°n, mere a if this es. mercy of the Lord Lieutenant. The B il ” an riSti" sr . away the trial by jury, personal freedom, tusts,olrs, complaint ;it does more—it annihilates the lib° r es t er press. Let me see the person who will dare tosp id 0 _ the truth in a newspaper. If, for instance , be she s u e pule on the question of tithes, by the Whiteboy Ac4cotoPir*ctit licatiou tending to excite a combination ore iris against the collection of tithes sesects th - us O i l; prosecution for a transportable felony or ser l° ooo 3 . t u h i e a r t e . . , tneanor. But by this Act there is left 1 1 ° in sd.., °. the Member inference. The appearance of a newseePer „burs t "' turbed disti ict is conclusive evidence of its P,,b s 10 ° 1 !evenly decided that dropping a letter into theqot tb i at Dsrby was evidence of its publication there? pe strell Act left no room for construction, because the g o t s" i y e 'o n ti ibe n e ot fo a e cq vv ua e i s n tt t n ed ins ve te i e ti , i the case or . _ sa , e r of the paper was proof of its publication. f r i t h s olf t .s ,l feature of the Bill was, that it took away the M ess 0 , 'll titian—that rights which had always ranked 1 1. as pe°V portance to trial by jury. Why had the Er: 4 ii '",ttits ° ?- superseded one family, and introduced another to t f ioitie ° Was it not to secure the trial by jury and righ t a ~ed ? i s ; Why are we assembled here? Why has a R e for li w to ii i t liament been called into existence with so ins, c , ° 00 0 difficulty ? Was it not because the fornie r •` ll o r a fr o' g ti o were supposed not to listen to the prayers, a° oil le--,,, rupt regard to their own individual interests, to neat w: . , , petitions of the people? This Reformed Par l ' a O F ) was constituted to attend to the petitions °f tl .. f (che rst A , will its first Act be to annihilate the very right ? arc seer r re I No doubt, if meetings are hell to laud the rh so irsr,' demeanour of young officers, to hold them up a i , p orr of discretion, justice, patience, or for any ° tile s 0 06 1 pleasing to the Lord Lieutenant and the "S a ot arer s t permission will readily be granted for such; v.,,,soer j i the man who presumes to ask for redress of g il n orsir s Whet absurdity, to give the very man wia' sn 'e plasi° 4 4o is most liable to become the subject of ° ii i ell, ci isl right to quash all complaint ! Wel l, - the Sit in which It w o os , Bill destroys trial by jury—personal freedoss":e rig ht of complaint—the liberty of the press, and be ' r oil petition ; all this is done by it. I hope th at e s befal,o i tleman, as he would be able to clear his consort be P7l constituents, will weigh this fearful catalugu e ' s „d • I° 4 t abApß e buue n subtf a u: n tirtsoc t .of . Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stanley) shakes his u` in g ' cAl l .,si repeat it, and defy contradiction, that no o ° l n — id I r o o' ogreone Reformers meeting, o e aus fttspirt England,ei : at tt n iost ! op petitionoe. t W liret eic h oethn y t ao,nwwadi is n h nd a ddos t epbcyc t re n lhag o ffusr d esei e ipt_rt ih r st e deoii r o:gugi coffee-house, i .. ate 110 : 0 " ~..: 1;0: e: i T. ‘.6lr S eo t ; di he:d in Ireland without the permission of th e ss - to° 0 Is it i g n u t e h st a i t on ma as en k e e r d in l t s hi n s ot Ho y u o , u e e ?— firs ls t j e'r cfrho .l : olll:: signed ? But some one gets up and says, " 1 . . -t bSil 'of but it is a hole-and-corner-petition." AG 0 t 11 "; . kl i tit ture in the Bill was, that it expressly cut notbee profit, of actual discussion and deliberation—it did s Wa il s ' , meeting, because the professed object was Boise; os ti At i terent front the real—that poor defence it , b B O pre v 4;' open declaration was, th a t it was designed -sd Pis meetings for the bone fide object of real petition ` o 0 0 . ,,, plaint. Woe to the man who should ask leale t°, b e! ' tl° meeting, the objects of which w e re not aePr eve° , a 0 0 4 Lord Lieutenant! I have now briefly toll ° A l o ost r ot general features of the Bill ; it bas been a t'.- 110 11 LO phaseswmeh:gol:ale: some, unpleasant duty ; but I was bound t l oc . Reformed Parliament know what law it is 0 1 , of ss f, to pass. In the first place, then, the langoss - r set' , r eft cruel, ensnaring Act is exceedinly loose; 1 l' eve s ,ssee l : i so utterly untechnical and indefinite in its P b B oo b Seflri From the high opinion I entertain of his profoo°oloo4 ledee and legal accuracy, I feel a perfect c° l 4 s o ;SI though I admit grounded on nothing more * 0 05 opinian—that the Hon. and Learned GentletOs° 01 0'''d (as we understood, the Solicitor-General) nev er oft ° Act. Ido not know; but if he has seen it, 1 "" or pris i os ; astonishment. The looseness of the language i s° ; si r P e i/ herein n y tried aftee by mentioned!co ur ts m a r ti in the 14th suction it is directed that " e r ' s ione. charged with any of the offences hereinafter le e ,"be, ..o: n s referred to, may be, and such persons shal t ' 0 6 s o N a V i. h " at a An s y petge st ; d eS i s iill A: dangerous a statute! The same vagueness P,",i,11 5 ? the 17th section ; but I come to the 27th, s f " . be sr al away personal liberty, by which any persons D A t be of rested, committed, or detained in custody, ' l° ' 00 4 return to a writ of Habeas Corpus is, that tbe op e it done under the Bill. This section further ° der) the prisoner to be confined wheresoever hi s .! s pri°2 keeper pleases. What ! the man is not to be 1- ory in the King's gaols, where sheriffs, magistrat e°, j ol ble officers, may see him. He may be flu n g f A t'", - J/ black-hole of a barrack, or into its filth-hole.e s ' s oej from some Hon. Members.) You smile; b u ss t one r ? deny the fact? He might have protection, if vigor /0 an ordinary gaol. The sheriff is a responsible 700"/, relations would have access to him ; but, by ', bi , sal' and tyranfiical Bill, any place in Ireland, elh' ° 7;eo:it delegated by authority chooses, may be his gw o , ,sfry hear.) Can Ibe blamed if my temper does ° , 01 . 1° 1 4 exhibit perfect equanimity, when such law s ta ted ss ") ) enacted for Ireland? But is it possible that a re; 10; 0 0 liament will grant the power of dragging s Pi ' l bie; :el the esr certainly means required, for discriminatet o t p h o e :: ::js. ::: ,:yo home, to be imprisoned wherever and h o weee o oo 6 . ,,ei mighty :vghSon cultivatedul ieu re s l i y iwf ea this provision, this admirable . g y 11",01 pceed from no other than, a distinguished 41100'0. studies that purify and soften the heart, ers'" B uil t =/ innocence, and securing the latter from opP res' , s aini, tellect could have invented such a section. to '; 0 0 1 Member said be would prefer living in Alg ierg s 'the r _ s c a l in Kilkenny. But this Act came frog °:). - o rien t / dian than that of Algiers. There are sse u s they i i I have mentioned in Algiers ; in Engla°" have never before heard of. If it be necessarY to i f Or te vere Bill enforced, what mischief would it doted to / gaols were employed ? How does this clause 9 , r o o fi Clown crime ? Th e p resen t l a w g ives the eigeoos4l moving a prisoner from one gaol to another. _ Le Orli sufficient without giving a military subaltern Lu d I ' o oy imprisoning the man where he chooses? a re tbi., i terms of the Act—Any person authorized uoosita,i whether justice, constable, peace-officer , all C WO P O officers in command of any portion of his APO!, 0050 or any person whom the Lord-Lieutenant may eV to empower—can exercise this terrible rights 3 1 ..) '/ r be a ie i the prisoner wheresoever he pleases.--(bee ' eo O r b , Bill is the great triumph of the Tories over_s u w ai s o), (Cheering.) When did they bring i° 1 , 4 01 e. P ;o I When dad they dream of it? I bore aP: 00 tlr o sil once to the Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel ) an d d 1 sc i ‘o, deepened into personal ; but I was wrongn,iins"osity,:ol) ledged it in person : in my Poiiti nal a I Wil l 13 i begin to see cause for regret, when such °n 0 the , V diabolical measures—for words are wasted 0, bli a . ,/ if such a 131" ofe introduced by the Whigs. But - 0,0 se° is brought in by the Tories, what flaming orstoloi they of the present Ministers deliver against it--h _, s he P protest against imprisoning the meanest %s e pr e 4 „ subjects. They would declare themselves ' pch r e of the people, and the Chancellor of th dIIIA with the honest dignity of his nature, wOUI