The Sun. — London, England, 1836-02-05 00:00:00

to v th. e subject itself than to th e pl e d ge i n w hi c h it a ppea r s t o Theme in case I s h a ll assen t to t h e Add ress .—( H ear .) be l Right Hon. Baronet here read the passage in the Address relating t o M un i c i pal Reform in Ireland, and continued—Now it a ppears to m e if I assent to t h ese terms , I contract an obli gationat.oi to extend the same principles of Municipal Reform which have been recognised in the Bills relating to England a nd Scotland, to Ireland also. It might hereafter be said that the Address pledged me to nothing, but 1 desire to guard myself against being misunderstood. I will not be a party to objectept. If it is meant that I should give a pledge, I anyany consideration of the merits of the question itself. I ob tOu to because I think it unfair, o n th e no ti ce o f an course be c a ll e d upon t o p l e d ge myse lf to any part i cu l ar `?" 1 upon a question so important. I say you have no ri g" to ca ll upon me to give a pledge, by assenting t e the Address, without letting us have a notice of your inten tion. tell When the measure comes un d er discussion you might me I was too late to object not haVing done so now, and I AY it is unfair, it is unjust to call for. a pledge on so important a subject at a moment's consideration. I say it is unfair to ask us to commit ourselves to the principles of the English Munici pal Reform Bill in the consideration of that for Ire land. You have a knowledge of what it is in tended to to propose ; w e h ave no cogn i zance thereof, unfair on the occasion of our first meeting, that we t should be called upon to pledge ourselves to any par ticular principl es i n t h e course we s h ou ld f o ll ow . Thi s pl e d ge is in consistent with the course which has been followed for the by twenty years ; it is i n con s ist e nt w ith the course followed uy all former Governments and oppositions ; upon all Govern ments which f e l t i nc li ne d to avo id t h e i ntro d uct i on o f a ll t erms i c _alculated t o f orce upon t h e oppos i t i on t h e necess i ty o f mov ing an amendment to the Address. The Speech and the Address were so framed on all, former occasions, as though they re f erre d to top i cs o f t h e fi rst i mpor t once t o u? peopl e o f t hi s country, an d a l t h oug h t h ey i nt i mate d t h e ?pinion s of the Government thereon, yet did not so pledge the Hous e as to ca ll f or ally amen d ment. f rom t h ose w h o dissented from the views taken by his Majesty's Ministers. 4 .. 81 ,3' this has b een th e p rac ti ce f o r the last twenty years, 'flog which period measures of equal importance with the p r esent had b een su b m i tte d to P ar li amen t, an d a t a time when ak var iance existed in the opinions entertained respecting them; yet the add ress was always so framed as to dispense with the ecessity of moving an amendment to it. When the Catholic q ue stion in 1829 was brought under the consideration of Par t! .m• ent in th e speec h f rom t h e Th rone , t h e t erms i n w hi c h this t h os House replied to that communication, did not impose upon who w ere unfriendly to the removal of the Catholic dis abilities, any nece s sity of opposing it. At the time when the parliament Bill was brought forward, after the dissolution of although you could have carried a motion pledging the House to the principles of that measure by a large majority yet you you did n o t p ress it. I therefore have the experience of t last twenty years in my favour. All past addresses have been so framed as to dispense with the necessity of moving an 4mendrnent. I refer also in proof of the injustice of the pre thosesent ourse from the terms in which this subject is noticed. to in which others are alluded to in the address. It touches other topics, it refers to other principles, but it requires no Ple dge upon them;—it requires no pledge on the Tithe q u estion, on the Church question, or on that relative to oor Laws: on these subjects it is content with saying that w e are ready to give them an impartial consideration, while !Pon this it goes further, and it calls upon us to bind ourselves 1 -0 the adoption of similar principles with those which have been 'recognised in the measures for England and Scotland. Should 1 . 0 not m ere ly s t a t e our rea di ness to cons id er th e su bj e ct in a "'antler calculated to promote the peace and prosperity of the !Mntry ? I protest against the justice of this course—l say it 1 1 1 1 . Mfair, at a moment's notice, to be called on for a pledge l ch it would require 24 h o urs time for consideration. I itu PPeal to another authority—to the good sense, judgment, and candour of the Gallant Gentleman who moved the Address, r i ll % in speaking on this subject, said it was not the inten .°!l to require a pledge. I will not incur the risk of ex ell,ng expectations which may be disappointed, nor shall I `" fila rrass my future proceedings by a pledge which,l ought 1 ,! . 2t to g i ve. —(Cheers f rom t h e O ppos iti on .) Th e Ri g ht itillonotnable Baronet went on to express his dissent from i eowse proposed, and declared that it was his advice t nose with whom he generally acted, not to move an 1 • e ndment, if by possibility it could be avoided; but the f r 'neiples upon which it was proposed to act in the measure t t. r Corporate Reform in Ireland, were such as to render t` course he now proposed unavoidable.—(Hear, hear.) i c ri jaY be said if you propose there shall be no Reform or Mu- Corporations, are you prepared to defend the principle t nat which exists? As I said before, lam not, but I wish "ot to enter into the question now, as I shall have a future e t ie rtunity of doing so. There is only one other objection whi ch I wish to advert to, and that is—l am asked to apply th e same principle of Reform to Ireland that has been applied • cmgland._( H ear , hear.) Now, in the first place, what sa . the p r i nciple?—( Cheers.) The destruct i on o f se lf- e l ect i on l aY be a p r i nc i p l e —( Ch eers .) Can any thing be more diffi tutte lt , than t o d e fi ne w h a t is a principle ?—( Cheers.) You say . uestruction of self election is one principle, you are at liberty to define what are the principles, and there is the great L li ffieultv for you may get from me a ple d g e to a p rinci p le • 1 1 1 n e ich . Ido not - uncle r stand.—( Cheers.) I am prepare d to g ive fai important subject of Municipal Refo rm in Ireland a >h-:and dispassionate consideration, but I reserve to myself „ l2ower of approaching it perfectly unfettered. ,I admit thee.'Must be extensive alteration. I am not now entering into b e i„"lisideration of self-election, but I object on principle, t h:g Called upon to give any pledge. I reserve to myself - ,Powe r of disposing of the question unfettered. I intend %.*° look not at words, but at things.—( Hear, hear.) I elfto myself the power of considering the bearings 1 1 this question in every point of view.—( Cheers.) it is not necessary for me to attempt to vindicate self -election or exclusion of certain parties from offices; but wheel I come to consider the question, I will look after the whole state of Ireland.--( Hear, hear.) I will ask whe ther, under pretence of removing one exclusion, I am not co. - tfirming another ?—( Great cheering.) I shall look to who m power will be given.-_( Tremendous cheering.) I shall look to what object the power to be given is to be applied, and if I Conscientiously believe it will conduce to strengthen th e co nection between the two countries, and will con firm those ancient settled institutions constituting the Go vernment, which my Hon. Friend has said he is determined to • maintain, -.then I will consent to give it my support, but I will not be deceived by principles and analogies.--( Hear, hear.) I will not allow the same principle of Municipal Reform t o he applied in Ireland as in England, unless I feel 'certain that it will be for the good of that country__ (Cheers.) I shall, therefore, Sir, move an amendment the Address, which will be in precise conformity with every her paragraph, and with the usages and principles of Par 'lament. I shall propose that those words in the Address niell pledge me to adapt the same principles to Ireland as ve already been applied to England, shall be left out and 8111131stitu eing ted by the following :—" To assure his Majesty that in possession of the Report of the Commissioners, Ive will proceed without the least delay to the consideration 7 t ,Say defects in the Municipal Institutions of, Ireland as will i n sure th e • tial administration of justice."--(Cheers.) impartial T he Right Hon. Gentleman sat down by proposing the eleenchnent. „ Lord JOHN RUSSELL—Sir, I think I am consulting convenience of the House and, certainly, my own, in itnt immediately after the ' Right Honourable Baronet, oiler some remarks upon the observations which fell from 1 P- I will take these observations in the order they were - W mered by the placed on. Baronet, and I will say a few tt l a lr ds, in the first with respect to the foreign affairs of e country, and I will then go on to offer some re 'narksisk upon the state of our domestic affairs. The L. "''ght Honourable Baronet's first criticism upon the ,7 41 ,ress, or rather upon his Majesty's Speech, was with regard the intervention in Spain ; and he asks how we, who were ,;iways hostile to intervention with forei g n nations, could ad -5e his Majesty to say in his Speech what now appears in it ? V?lear.) S ure ly th e Ri g ht Hon. Baronet knows that Nit we are sincerely against all intervention in other man gles —surely, the Right Hon. Baronet, when he made th at t obs erva ti on , must h ave f o rgot tat this country was a party a treaty which the Government were bound to carry into . o 'leeuti on , We are parties to that treaty, and we say that it w as absolutely necessary to carry them into full execution.— (Hear, and cheers.) Whether the principle of intervention or n on-intervention be the wiser principle of the two, was question which the Government had not in this case an o pportunity of discussing, for his Majesty was already b ound and fettered by treaty. With respect to the mode of the in tervention, that is also regulated by treaty ; and it was, I be lieve, a matter of boast to the late Ministry. At all events, it is much to the honour of the Duke of Wellington, that while fi e• * Was in the Foreign Office, he carried into full effect the sti pulations of the treaty with Spain, and had most studiously 11 4 t°Pp any aid or supplies from being sent from this country Don Carloss. The Right Honourable Baronet next al „,'`nded to the increase of the navy, which is recommended by ts Majesty ; and he asked, at the same time, whether li 4 ." 43 intend e d to cast any reflection upon the late Government L°r their administration of the affairs of that important bran& 71 0 tir military means, though at the same time the Right Ho n. aronet said that he scarcely gave credit to the supposition , t i r , in that he wa.e right, for the Government had not the iltest intention of doing so. This is an increase which we tnink is necessary upon many grounds, which will be ex plained at the proper time—at the present moment I will only s a y th a t it appears to me to be justified upon the grotmd, that our being a great maritime power, we ought not ' to be great:ly inferior to other powers-. This, he thought, is a Wise principle—it is a principle not implying anything hostile -o any forei gn p,-nver . , but at the same time-putting ourselves z that situation, that no power will be induced to' insult this country ( Hea:')—on the ground that it is not 'II a stat e of defence; 'Therefore, instead of this being a pre- Potation for war, it is an additional security for the preserva tion of peace. (Cheers.) With respect to the observations of the Right Hon. Gentleman, relative to the unfortunate de angement between the United Stai2s and France, I am sure that every one in this country will respond to those observa tions ; and the interference of this country, while it ensures the continuance of peace, is a pledge of the stability of the .'riendly relations which exist between these two Powers an d England.—( Hear.) I shall not enter at any length into the observations of the Right Hon. Gentleman relative to the Court of Chancery; but this I will say , t h at I am s atisfied my Hon. and Learned Friend (the Solicitor-General) will be able to sh ow that these arrears have not been materially in creased by the putting of the Great Seal into Commission.— (Hear.) I may further add, that having it in contemplation, from almost the first moment when the Government was con stituted, to p; ace the administration of justice in the Court of Chancery upon a different footing,. we considered it wise and expedient to take the course of putting the Great Seal into com mission before this great office was disposed of, in order that we bo goaded to men not only of might be sure that it would THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1836. his Majesty to show that he did not acquiesce in such perfidious proceedings.—( Heal', hear.) His Majesty, in his Speech, referred with feelings of satisfaction, in which the whole coun try participated, to the existing intimate alliance between England and France. In this respect the Speech from the Throne was the echo of the Speech of the King of the French. But there was no echo to the address of the Cham- I;:n 7 OfDeWieSln favour of Poland. The preservation of the national character of that brave and unfortunate nation met with nothing but unavailing sympathy, while our credit as a nation for generosity, as well as true policy, alike re quired that we should become their vindicators. His Ma jesty had called for an augmentation of the naval force of the country, and some people could see in this the first step in a series of measures for checking the aggrandisement of Rus sia. But he should like to know more positively in 'what direction these ships, when equipped, would proceed ? What confidence had they that they were not intended for the coast of Spain, or America, or any other part of the world--in tended, perhaps, only to sail to the port of Malta, and, after a few evolutions before it, return to the dockyard ? Like the Right Honourable Baronet, he deprecated the horrors of war, but he was also sensible of the mischief that would accrue to our commerce by the extension of Russian power. Wishing to avoid the expenditure of blood and treasure which must be entailed by a warlike cotitest, when engaged in too late for easy success, he should like to see war pre vented, by being offered when such expenditure might be saved, in consequence of success being certain. He could not be content unless the Ministers of this country gave some assurance that they would repress the encroachments of Rus sia. But he perceived nothing in their conduct in any degree calculated to encourage a hope of such a course of conduct. In the Speech put into the mouth of his Majesty by his Mi nisters, in that part alluding to the foreign policy of the coun try, an opportunity might have been given for some significa tive expression on this subject. In concert witli► our allies, France and Austria, equally interested in suppressing Russi6.n encroachments, measures might be adopted equally necessary for the welfare of this country as for the general peace of Eu rope. He was unwilling to do any thing to embarrass hts Majesty's Ministers, in whose general policy he cordially con curred ; still he did not think the wishes of the people would be satisfied, unless some demonstration were made towards check ing Russian encroachment. If he did not persevere in his in tended motion of amendment, it was not from any fear that he should not meet with the support of the House, but that he would not injure the cause by embarrassing Ministers ; and in relinquishing his intention he retained his full right to call the attention of the House to the subject on an early future occa sion. With this feeling he had thought it his duty to place a notice on the books to that effect, when he trusted he might anticipate the co-operation of the Government in fixing an early day when this important subject might undergo a full and fair discussion. The Noble Lord concluded by giving-notice of motion for Tuesday, the 16th of February—" To Call the attention of the House to the effect on British interests of the position Russia has occupied and the policy she pursues." Lord PAL ME RSTON said that if his Noble Friend had abstained from putting his amendment on the grounds he had stated—if, as a person supporting the present Government, he (lid not choose to produce division among the Liberal party on that day, the first of the Session—he ( Lord Palmerston) did not think that what had passed since he entered the House, or the grounds on which the other amendment had been pro posed, would tend to alter the confidence expressed by his Noble Friend, or to change the opinions of any other Hon. Member. When he saw the House about to divide on the question, whether Ireland was to be governed in the same manner and in the same spirit as the other portion of the United Kingdom—whether those principles of constitutional freedom which had been applied with so much success to Eng land and Scotland, and which had given the people of those countries so much satisfaction, were to be withheld from Ire land—when his Noble Friend saw this, and saw the Liberal party on one side ready to advocate the measure of strict jus tice—and saw on the other every species of opposition to it —he thought he had reason to congratulate himself on the course he had taken respecting his amendment. He (Lord Palmerston) should address himself briefly to a few of the points of his Noble Friend's observations. His Noble Friend had said that in his opinion his Majesty's Ministers ought to have advised him to speak in a more decided tone, and in a manner more clear and explicit of the foreign relations of this coun try, and of the policy to be pursued by the Government in re spect to the independence of Turkey. If his Noble Friend, however, would take the trouble of glancing back at the seve ral Speeches from the Throne, on occasions similar and dis similar to the present, he would perceive at once that such a course had no precedent, and that it was by no means the one usually taken. Speeches from the Throne did not explain what course of foreign policy was in contemplation—they ad verted merely to matters past—subjects to be proposed in the commencing Session—or affairs still pending. When, there fore, his Noble Friend stated that the. Speech from the Throne should have asserted the course of foreign policy to be pur sued, and especially mentioned what it was intended to do with regard to the independence of Turkey, he (Lord Pal merston) should answer him by referring to the former Speeches from the Throne on that subject, in which it was recognised and asserted in the clearest and most explicit terms. On the 29th of August, 1833, at the close of the Session of Parliament, the King declared in his Speech from the Throne— " The hostilities which had disturbed the peace of Turkey have been terminated ; and you may be assured that my atten tion will be carefully directed to any events which may affect the present state or the future independence of that empire." And on the 4th of February,lB34, the Speech of his Majesty at the opening of the Session contained the following para graphs in reference to the subject of his (Lord Palmerston's) Noble Friend's observations : " The peace of Turkey, since the settlement that was made with Mehemet Ali, has not been interrupted, and will not, I trust, be threatened with any new danger. " It will be my object to prevent any change in the rela tions of that empire with other Powers, which might affect its future stability and independence." The Government of England had already on these two dis- tinct occasions declared its determination io watch over and guard the independence of Turkey in a manner so explicit as to render all further allusion to it unnecessary, unless events had occurred since the close of the last session of Parliament which threatened its existence or stability. No such events had, however, occurred : no necessity therefore existed, and, as it was the determination of the present Government to pursue the same same course of policy towards Turkey and its relations as had hitherto been pursued, it was perfectly con sistent, and therefore perfectly justifiable, not to allude to it in his Majesty's Speech on this occasion. With regard to Poland, he could not agree with his Noble Friend's inference, that the silence of the King's Speech on the subject was to be considered as implying any intention on the part of the, Govern ment of England to acquiesce in the infringement of trea ties respecting that kingdom, at present or hereafter. When his Noble Friend looked, therefore, at the question in that light, and when he considered the general tenor of past Speeches from the Throne, he (Viscount Palmerston) was quite sure he would not find anything in the present Speech to complain of, or any just grounds for diminish ing the confidence he felt and expressed in the exist ing Administration. As, however, his Noble Friend had said that it was his intention to bring the subject of his withheld amendment before the House on a future occasion, he (Viscount Palmerston) should not trespass on the time and patience of Hon. Members, but would reserve his further observations on it for that opportunity ; but he could not refrain from making some observations on what had fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, in the course of his speech respecting the course of foreign policy pursued by Government. In doing so, he should previously state that he had heard with great pleasure some of the Right Hon. Ba ronet's remarks on the subject. They did him great credit ; they proved his profound knowledge, and they proved every thing which could be expected from one who had filled the high station once filled by the Right Hon. Gentleman. They did him honour as an individual, and were gratifying to him ( Viscount Palmerston) as the expression of opinions of one who had held the highest office in the State, and who might be called on to hold it again.--( Hear, hear.) It was pleasant to him (Viscount Palmerston) to perceive that, however the parties into which that House was divided might differ in the main on most matters, there were still some on which all could agree, and more pleasant still to know that he had a connection with those causes. He was glad, for instance, to bear the Right lion. Baronet express his satisfaction at the intimate alliance which existed between France and this country; and he was also glad to hear him say, that the continuance of that alliance contributed -greatly to preserve the general peace of Europe. He was glad, further, to hear him say that he looked forward to that union, as the means of creating a more extended commercial intercourse with that country ; and he was particularly glad to hear him cheered by those Hon. Members around him. It had fallen to his (Viscount Palmerston's) lot to be taunted by Hon. Gentlemen on that side of the House, when he had expressed.his well grounded conviction of the importance of that alliance to this country. He had been told on those occasions that it was a truck; ling to France, that it was a derogation from the dignitY 0- the nation, and that a system of independent national policy was the only one which should be pursued, and the only one which would be found of advantage. Now, however, the Right Hon. Baronet had expressed different sentiments, and those Hon. Gentlemen bad cheered him. This he (Viscount Pal merston) held as a good omen for England, and it would prove to foreign countries that, whatever change might take place in the domestic Administration of the kingdom, the fo reign policy would be unchanged. Thus, the feuds which had long caused the separation of France and England would now be changed into lasting friendship, and peace be where there was formerly war. He concurred fully with the opinion of the Right Hon. Baronet, that the present peace of Europe was entirely founded upon the improved state of moral feeling which had recently sprung up in the world ; not on any deficiency in the pecuniary means of the several Powers. A feeling had gradually grown up, that every pacific means should be tried when differences of opinion arose between Potentates or States before recourse should be had to the last arbitration of and now, more than at any other pe riod of th e past history of Europe, were there more well founded reasons on which to ground a hope that the existing peace would be durable as well as general. This Government might fairly take to itself some degree of credit for their share in bringing about such a state of things. When they took charge of affairs in 1830, no man could predict that peace would be long preserved, such a loweiing aspect had all the external relations of the country ; still less could one be found bold enough to imagine that it would increase in stability from day to day up to the present period. Yet so it was. In these points be (Lord Palmerston) fully concurred with the obser vations of the Right Hon. Baronet ; and he had no hesitation in expressing his pleasure at the. Right Hon. Gentleman's fair approval of that part of the King's Speech. So far good. The Right Hon. Baronet had, however, found fault with the Go vernment for what he (Lord Palmerston) had supposed should great experience and reputation, but likewise men who agreed with us in opinion, that the time was come for a reform in those Courts.—( Cheers.) With respect to the separation of the political and judicial functions of the Lord Chancellor, that is a question, in our opinion of the gravest possible character, and requires the most mature consideration. I shall say no more upon it at present, as, when the plan is laid before the House, it will, I am confident, meet with the at tention the authority from which it emanates merits. I now come to that question, upon which the Right Hon. Gentleman has not contented himself with bare criticism, but has moved an amendment. It appears to me, that in the formation of that speech sufficient care was taken not to commit either House of Parliament, beyond what it might be fairly called upon to do without any sacrifice of their inde pendence.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Let us see the cautious and guarded words in which his Majesty's Mi nisters have alluded to the subject.—[The' Noble Lord here read the passage from the King's Speech relative to the Irish Muncicipal Corporation Reform.] —We merely say in the address, in answer to his Majesty's Speech, that we parti cipate in that hope. We say that the principle upon which the Municipal Reform secured to Enlgand and Scotland was founded—a principle which recognized vigilent popular controul—should be recognized in the measure to be given to Ireland. —( Cheers.) These principles, we contend, are in accordance with the British Con stitution ; and, on the other hand, the Right Hon. Gentleman says they are inapplicable to Ireland, forbids us to entertain any hope, and declares that he will never consent to be a party to it.—(Tremendous cheering.) • The principles which have been applied to England and to Scotland are equally ap plicable to Ireland—(Loud cheers)—and I hope to see them applied. I will say for myself and my colleagues, that our opinion is that the same principles may be applied to Ireland. (Tremendous cheering.) Ido not merely entertain hopes, but I entertain a conviction, that the time has come when the difference of creed will not make any difference--( The cheers drowned the conclusion of the sentence.) The Right Hon. Bart., in 1829, when the Catholic question was under discussion, in his address to the. Common Council of London, told them that the concession of the Catholic claims would do no good, unless they extended the right-hand of fellowship to the Catholics, and admitted them to all their rights and privileges without distinction.—( Loud cheers.) Had not these distinc tions prevailed in the Corporations of Ireland—( Loud cheers) —and is it not necessary that they should be done away with ?—( Cheers.) The people of Ireland will feel a very severe disappointment of their hopes if the House adopt the amendment of the Right Hon. Baronet. If we hesitate to perform the same justice to Ireland that we have done to England and Scotland, it will be said that there is some danger which cannot be defined, but which the people of Ireland will say, is only the danger of destroying a monopoly.—( Cheers.) In adopting the same general principles, I for one am not con tent to except Ireland. I remember last year when the Right Honourable Baronet, was the Minister of the Crown. That House chose to go farther than the Address, and expressed a hope of seeing Corporation Reform, on the principle of vigi lant popular control. We only now say that we will continue to apply the principles we have formerly proposed, and there fore I think it will be the height of injustice and inconsistency if the House does not adopt the words of the Address.— (Loud and repeated cheers.) Lord STANLEY wished to say a very few words explana tory of the vote he was about to give, if he were compelled to give any vote at all. He came to the House with an earnest anxiety, which had not forsaken him, that by the mutual agreement of both parties to avoid any expression that could lead to a premature discussion, the Address of that House might go up to his Majesty without amendment or discussion. He hoped the Noble Lord (Russell) would be induced to fol low the example set by his colleagues in another place— ( Loud cheers from the Tories)—by cheerfully and willingly . adopting the amendment, which he believed was couched in precisely the same terms with the amendment in the other House. The Noble Lord then contended that the adoption of the amendment would not pledge the House not to adopt any particular measure of Reform—it only implied that it should not be adopted without farther consideration. The remedy which might be safely applied to England and Scot land might, in the different circumstances in which Ireland was placed, and the different state of society, be productive of the worst consequences. He begged again to ask, what were those principles to which they were called upon to pledge themselves ? ( Hear.) In order to participate in this hope, the House of Commons must have some well founded conviction that they will be able to carry those principles into effect ; and for his part he must say that he would support the amend ment of the Hon. Baronet, if pressed to a division. He was as anxious as any man to get rid of all the evils complained of. The abuses of the Irish Corporations were greater than those of England ; and he thought the most summary method would be the radical remedy of sweeping them away all together. There was no man who knew anything of the state of Ireland who must not admit, that in order to do justice to Ireland we must deal with it on the same principle as England. He not only did not entertain a hope of the settlement of the question, but as long as Ministers adhered to the assertion of the abstract principle of appropriation, it would be in vain and hopeless to look for a settlement of that question.—(Cheers.) The House was not, at the present moment, in possession of what were the evils complained of, or what was the state of this or that borough, or what remedies should be applied. Looking, therefore, to all these questions, and feeling convinced that he was not standing in the way of the most entire and perfect remedy of the evils complained of—if he was driven to vote at all on this question, he should vote for the amendment of the Right Hon. Baronet, because it did not pledge him either one way or the other—it only pledged him to do his ut most to remedy the grievances complained of ; and more than that could not be asked. They were ready to discuss .elie question whenever it was introduced ; but they were not ready, without discussion or argument, to bind themselves down to the adoption of the principle that was applied to the English Municipal Reform Bill. Lord HOWICK then rose and said his Noble Friend had called upon the House to give up certain words in the ad dress as it had been moved—lie must say that such advice took him by surprise.—( Cheers.) He ( Lord Howick) con tended that the words proposed to be left out were not of a trifling or insignificant nature—he thought them of the very utmost importance.—( Cheers.) In his address to the House he declared that he would endeavour to correct the proved abuses in the Corporations of Ireland, upon the same principles as it had already adopted in respect to Scotland and England. lii expunging that declaration when ithad been once moved, the House would be coming to a formal vote that they did not recognize this principle with regard to Ireland, as they had already done to the other portions of the country, it would give up the best claim to the confidence of that country. — Cheers.) The House by so doing would do more in a mo ment of indecision to weaken the Union—( Cheers) —which Gentlemen opposite profess to regard so much—it would do more to weaken that Union than anything that could be done. The principle which the House was called on to assert was that of putting an end to self-election, and introducing that of popular controul.—( Cheers.) These were the principles which they wanted to have applied to Ireland.—( Cheers. ) These principles were in :strict accordance with those of the British Constitution. The Right Hon. Gentleman had said, that even if the Address, as originally proposed, was adopted, they could not adopt the Bill introduced last year by the Attorney-General. Although the Government did not call upon the House to assent to that Bill, still there was nothing in it inconsistent with the principles laid down in the Address. The Right Hon. Baronet and the Noble Lord had both said—why not apply the same Poor-law measure to Ireland as had been adopted in England, if they meant to apply the same measure of Corporation Reform ? The difference was, that the evils to be remedied in the Poor-law Bill were widely different from those in the Municipal Corporations of Ireland. He felt great pain at the concluding observations of the Right Hon. Bart., who knew the intended measure would throw additional political power into certain hands; the house would see how much these words implied—that with respect to Ireland the British Constitution must remain a dead letter.—( Cheers, and cries of " No, no.") That was the plain, obvious, and indisputable mean ing of the Hon. Gentleman's words.—( Cheers and groans.) Let the Right Hon. Baronet come form and at once and pro pose the Repeal of the Irish Reform Bill. Let him come forward and propose the repeal of his own Emancipation Bill. Let him propose the re-enactment of the Penal Code, for anything short of this will not attain the object which it is sought to accomplish.—( Hear, hear, hear,.and loud cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet, in his allusions to the Honorable Member for Dublin (for he would not affect ignorance of his meaning), knew the vulgar cant which was likely to go down with a certain party in that House. He was far from being a friend to the Hon. Member for Dublin ; and, from the lan guage which he had used to those who were dear to him, it was impossible he could be so—( Hear, hear) — but he would ask, was it his side of the House, or that of the Hon. Baronet which had given to the Hon. Member for Dublin the power which they now complained of ? He thought it was a bad symptom of the political condition of a country, when one individual could exercise a sway so unlimited as that possessed by the Hon. and Learned Member for,Dublin ; but while they on the other side of the House hadlcreated that false condition, and had lent their aid to the establishment of that state of the public mind in Ireland which they now affected to deplore, they should, by adopting the Address, only pledge themselves to do full, fair, and impartial justice to Ire land ; and the refusal to accede to it, would be only falline back upon that fatal system which bad already produced such bad results. He called upon them, therefore, to repair their former errors by extending the same system of justice to Ireland which they did to England, and to give to that coun try the blessings of the British Constitution. Lord D. STUART expressed his regret at having to inter pose and cause a delay in the progress of the debate. He ob jected to the amendment of the Right Hon. Baronet, and ex pressed his sorrow at the Speech from the Throne containing no allusion to the balance of power in Europe. The Noble Lord then proceeded in a very indistinct tone, often rendered totally inaudible from the noise of Members leaving the House, to animadvert on the policy of Russia as exhibited in her con duct with relation to Poland and Turkey. The Noble Lord described that Power as the leviathan of the north and cast, and said that over the country, as it might be seen displayed both in provincial newspapers and weekly journals, and others of a more important character, as being conducted with greater information and judgment, the feeling prevailed of apprehen sion of the encroachments and oppressions of Russia. Should the Turkish empire be dismembered by Russian machinations, she would become in possession of the most important military posts of the empire, and we should have reason for entertain ing fears for the safety of our eastern possessions. The pro testations of Russiwii to her intentions were not worthy of being depended upoif; and in consequence of what had passed at the Congress of Toplitz, and since the speech of the Em peror Nichslas at Warsaw, it might clearly be seen that no re liance was to be placed on her protestations. To her viola tion of treaties this country became a party by not interpos ing, and he was sorry that there was nothing iu the Speech of be the last cause of an attack from that quarter. He had found fault with them for following a precedent which had been set by himself. He had attacked them because they had in the King's Speech stated that the conduct of the present Government of Spain was " prudent and vigorous," and ex pressed a hope that the Queen's " authority would soon be established in every part of her dominions." The Right lion. Baronet in doing so had adverted to the King's Speech of 1830; on which occasion the Government, of which he formed a part, had been taunted with introducing an allusion to the state of the Netherlands, and " the enlightened policy of the King of that country."—( Hear, hear.) But there was no similarity between the cases—there was no analogy in the two instances.—( Hear, hear.) The " enlightened policy" of the King of the Netherlands had succeeded in effecting the separation of Belgium from Holland, therefore it was neither wise, or prudent, or vigorous—( Hear, hear.) But the policy of the Queen of Spain, which was adverted to in the present Speech, was all this, inasmuch as it had almost entirely suppressed insurrection, and would, he trusted, suc cessfully terminate the struggle. The Government of 1830 praised the policy of the King of the Netherlands as " en li,ghtened," though the effect :of it was the separation of Belgium from his Government and dominion ; and with the words still ringing in their ears they superintended a Commis sion which had for its object the perpetuation of that disunion. The existing Government, , on the contrary, praise the policy of the Spanish Government as "prudent and vigorous" alone ; and it was moreover pursuing measures in conformity with the treaties made between the two countries, and which, no doubt, the Right Hoii. Baronet would rather not see acted on. Spain should be the last country in the world se lected by the Right Hon. Baronet as an illustration of his argument. It offered no precedent by which he could support it. And if it could be shown, as it clearly was, that the line of policy pursued towards that kingdom at present was the same which had been pursued when the establishment of the Bourbons there had been opposed by England, there could be no question that the Government was doing its strict duty in perfect accordance with the precedent set by the Right Hon. Baronet, and that to do otherwise would be grossly to neglect it. The Right Hon. Baronet had said that some further explanation with respect to the proposed increase of the naval force of the country was necessary. He had said, and said truly, that in a country like England, the commerce of which depended mainly upon the strength of her naval force, if it fell below the naval force of other nations there was danger to her best interests. Now if it could be shown that such was the case—that the naval force of England was not equal at present to that of other na tions—there could be no opposition on the part of the Right Hon. Baronet to the suggestion contained in his Majesty's Speech, and no jealousy on the part of other Powers if he (Lord Palmerston) came down to the House to propose an adequate increase in that important branch of the service. The great object of every well-constituted English Govern ment should be the maintenance of peace, the upholding the honour of their country, and the increase of foreign com- coerce On these points he challenged inquiry for the pre sent Government. With regard to the maintenance of peace, every effort consistent , with honour was made by them to sustain and preserve it ; with regard to upholding the ho nour of their country, the best test that could be applied to that point was the fact that in disputes where their own honour was vitally concerned, other nations had volunta rily and spontaneously appealed to the mediation of Eng land, an occurrence not likely to take place if her honour was 'tainted or her dignity defaced, a proof that if it was not increasing there was at least no falling off. With regard to the increase of foreign commerce, what had been stated by the Hon. Member who seconded the Address was suffi cient to settle that question in their favour; it showed that the old channels in which it circulated had not been narrowed, while new ones had been opened, and disused ones widened and again brought into operation wherever a practicability of doing so existed ; and it also showed that it had been increased by every fair and allowable means. It was with great regret that he (Lord Palmerston) heard the amendment of the Right Hon. Baronet. The Right Hon. Baronet had urged as his main reason for proposing it, that it was not fair or just to ask Hon. Members to commit them selves on the first day of the Session to a question the nature of which they did not know, in reference to the subject of Municipal Corporations in Ireland; or to pledge themselves to a measure on which great difference of opinion might na turally be supposed to exist. He had said that Hon. Members should be allowed to see the Bill to be introduced, and have time afforded them to consider it in all its bearings, before they gave any specific pledge—to be, in short, free and unfettered. It was putting a forced construction and strained.interpretation on the words Of the Address to say that it pledged Honourable Members to any specific measure on the subject; and its adoption would go to preclude the application of any of that corporate controul to Ireland which was attended with such beneficial results in England and Scotland. He was not at all surprised at the support which the Hou. Baronet had from many Hon. Members of that country, nor was he unpre pared for the opposition on the other side. Doubtless it would not be at all agreeable to them to witness Ireland keeping pace with England, or the town councils of that kingdom emulating the conduct of those of England in ad dressing his Majesty, and expressing their confidence in the Government which proposed and carried Corporate Reform.— ( Hear.) It was not at all unnatural that Hon. Gentlemen who were so repugnant to these things in England should wish ti. see equal opportunities fur exciting it extended to Ireland. It had been urged against Corporate Reform for Ireland that it would place increased power in the hands of an individual ; but he would ask the House whether, when justice alone was the question, personal cdnsiderations should sway their decision ? It was not a ground for deliberation when a measure of that nature was necessary whether it would throw increased influence into the hands of this man or of that man ; but whether justice should not be done without reference to individuals, without fear, without favour, and without affection. The House should not be deterred or divested from doing justice to a great nation because in the present circumstances of that people—circumstances, too, for which the Legislature itself was in a great degree responsible —power might fall into the hands of this individual or that in dividual. The Address, as it stood, did not pledge Hon. Members to any particular form or measure ; it merely pro claimed the right of Ireland to justice, and asserted a prin ciple already recognized by the Legislature. He would wish to see any Hon. Member who could sincerely say that popular controul should not be applied to the municipal corporations of England.—( Hear, hear.) If there were any such in the House he wished him to come forward and state it broadly: then he would know how to deal with the objection.— ( Hear.) It was idle, therefore, to say that the Address pledged the House to any particular measure. There would be as much opportunity and as much power to discuss all the details of any Bill introduced on the subject as if no allusion had been made to it at all. The only pledge the House was called on to give was, that no distinction should be established between England and Ireland ; that the same confidence should be reposed in the people of Ireland as had been reposed in the people of Scotland ; that they should have some controul over the management of their own affairs ; that it should cease to treat them es a proscribed class ; and that it should consider them no longer as an exception to the rights of the British Constitution.—( Cheers.) No man who entertained a just view of the way in which the Government of a country should be carried on could oppose the Address on these grounds ; but if there was one who could, why then be would say, let him stand forward and state plainly what his fee ling is ; we shall then know how to deal with him, and we will fairly put it to the vote. He (Viscount Palmerston) could easily anticipate the result. He was one of those who thought that a Bill for extending corporate controul should be brought in for Ireland. He believed a majority of the House entertained the same opi nion. Every Honourable Member who did so would vote for the Address as it stood ; and by so doing record his conviction that injustice should be done no longer to millions of his fellow countrymen.—( Cheers. ) Mr. HARDY .denied that the question was whether Ire land should be governed justly or not--whether on principle of freedom or otherwise? There was equal law in Ire land for all parties, and there was no tyranny except that " pes tilence which walked in darkness, and in secrecy did its deeds of evil."—( Loud cheering.) In so far, and in so far only, was it the question whether Ireland was to be governed on princi ples of tyranny or principles of freedom?—( Hear.) If the Ad dress were permitted to stand in the language in which it was couched, it would distinctly pledge Hon. Gentlemen on his side of the House to the adoption of a principle which they were decidedly adverse to, and to which they had before shown their antipathy. The Noble Lord opposite had taken great credit to himself for the measure of Municipal Corporation Reform which he had carried ; but before the Noble Lord began to chuckle over his offspring he should see how it worked.—( Hear.) He should ascertain how far it was an improvement to substitute one form for another ; and the Honourable Member who seconded the Address might be appealed to for the purpose of ascertaining whether some of the old corporations—Sheffield, for instance—of which his father was an honoured member—were not quite as respectable and altogether as efficient as any of the new creations.—( Hear, hear, hear.) With respect to the ob servations of the Noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs, he (Mr. Hardy) felt called on to say that his observations were more calculated to injure than serve the cause he had espoused. It had been asserted that the Government did not come over to the opinion of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin; but that they had acted independently. It was a singular sort of independence, to say the least of it. They had been told long before that the Whigs now were not Whigs ; their present conduct with reference to the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin satisfactorily proved it. That Hon. and Learned Gentleman had advocated and urged the adoption of the appropriation clause in the Tithe Bill of 1834; and on that occasion the Noble Lord and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, now in the other House, had opposed it; yet in the very next Session the Noble Lord and the Government of which he formed a part came forward and proposed it themselves. If that was not going over to the policy of the Hon. and Learned M em b er for Dublin he (Mr. H.) did not know what the words " going over " meant. In 1834 they had opposed the Hon. Member for St. Alban's motion, and the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin's suggestion ; yet, in 1835, 'they adopted it, and brought forward a measure of which it formed the principal feature. Anxious as he felt for every feasible re form in the municipal corporations of Ireland, he was by no means prepared to give his support to men who exhibited so much instability and such dereliction of principle. He was resolved riot to give a premature pledge on the subject, and he should therefore vote for the amendment. If the passage in the Address which the amendment was framed to meet were expunged, that would not .prevent Ministers from having the power of i n t ro d uc i ng an y measure on the subject they chose i n t h e course of the session. In objecting t o t h e amendment they were sacrificing the substance to trio form, He would give every consideration a nd su pp ort to a ny mea sure which would have the effect of eradicating abuses in the municipal corporatious of Ireland : but he could never consent to any measure which would give greater power to the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin than that which he already possessed, or increase the tyranny he already exercised in Ireland. Mr. WARD rose amidst loud cries of " Question." He could honestly assure the House that he had not the slightest intention at the commencement of the debate to obtrude him self upon them. The tone of moderation adopted by the Right Hon. Baronet led him to hope that this discussion might terminate in an amicable manner.—( Hear, hear.) He was, however, delighted to see that it had at last assumed its proper character.—( Cheers.) He was delighted to hear the Hon. Member for Bridport put the question upon a more real and honest footing. That Hon. Member, disclaiming all those professions of moderation of which the Speech of the Right Hon. Baronet was composed, declared distinctly that to his unreasonable apprehensions of the power of one indi vidual in Ireland, he would sacrifice every thing like that of justice which was due to the Irish people.—(Opposition cries of " No" and " Question," and cheers from the Ministerial benches.) This was the question. He would not have Hon. Gentlemen who had been taunting—out of the House, where they knew they could not be met by contradiction or expo sure—those independent Members who supported the present Government with having formed an unprincipled coalition and conspiracy, and of truckling to the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, think 'that they were to avail them selves of this discussion to persuade the country that the principles which they professed here were really the prin ciples which were the rule of their conduct. (Cheers.) The Honourable Member for Bridport had put the question upon a proper footing. He denied justice to Ireland—( No, no)—because he would not establish a tyranny in the person of the Hon. and . Learned Member for Dublin—(Mr. Hardy—l did not say any such thing.) This was of a piece with the-language which had been held by the party, and by the parties themselves whenever they had had an opportu nity to express their opinions during the last six months. Never:had there been an attempt by, any political party, or by any party press to run down an individual made to such an extent as had been made by the Tories and the Tory press to run down the Hon. and Learned Member for Dub- Ministerial cheers, and Opposition cries of " No, no !") Every thing connected with the party which that Hon. and Learned Gentlemen represented, everything connected with their name and fame—things the most sacred and most holy —had been made the subjects of the most disgraceful scurri lity--( Hear, hear, hear !)—by the organs of the Tory party. The House had been told by Hon. Gentlemen opposite that they were not responsible for the language of that portion of the press which was in their interest. He trusted that no party spirit could by any possibility plant such sentiments as had been expressed by that portion of the press in the breasts of Englishmen —( Cheers.) If the parties who ap plied such language to eight millions of their Irish country men, after reading, as he had done, the Reports of the Irish Poor Law Commissioners, describing the complica tion of miseries to which thousands of them were exposed, many absolutely starving in the midst of plenty, men, their wives and children, sinking under their sufferings, and yet abstaining from all violence to the property sur rounding them, and seeking only that consolation in this world which their religion afforded—if those parties who vilified the clergy administering such consolation denied that the religion they taught was imbued, and deeply imbued, with the spirit of Christianity, then he would say those men knew not what the spirit of Christianity was.—(Cheers.) He knew not whether the pledge to is hich the Right Hon. Baronet ob jected in the Address might have been avoided—or whether a more general expression might or might not, in the first in stance, have been used; but the question was whether, having given that pledge,' and having distinctly professed that we were ready, as the representatives of England, to give Ire land the benefit of the same principle which we were enjoying in our own country, we should now as distinctly withdraw that pledge ?—( Hear, hear.) If the majority of that House was prepared, as he believed they were, to apply the same princi ple of Municipal Reform to Ireland as had been applied to England and Scotland, and which had given such unqualified satisfaction to the people—if a majority were prepared to go to that extent, he did not conceive, without stultifying them selves, that they could retrace their steps. He thought it was a question of substance, and not, as the Hon. Member for Bridport, had said, a mere matter of form. He thought if Isis Majesty's Government, who had advised his Majesty to in troduce that pledge in the Speech from the Throne, would stand forth and support the course which they had so advised, he might assure them that they might reckon upon the joint support of. every independent man in the House.—(Cheers, and loud cries of " Question ! ") • Colonel SIBTHORP considered himself as independent a Member as the Hon. Member for St. Alban's, and was guided by no party feelings.—( Laughter, and cries of "Hear.") He had as much respect for the Throne as that Hon. Member ; but he must consider that the words iatroduced into his Ma jesty's Speech were neither more nor legs than a trap to draw the House into a snare. A more miik and water, a more absurd, or a more delusive Speech, never came from any Mi nistry of this country ; and he did not think it worth consi deration.—(Laughter, and" Hear, hear.") The Noble Lord opposite and his colleagues knew that they were now paying the must abject submission to the Hon. and Learned Member for. Dublin, without whose powerful support and alliance they would be' very quickly ejected from their places.—( Hear, aear, and much laughter.) This they knew well ; for there was not half so much talent among the whole of the Adminis tration as there was in that Hon. and Learned Member.— ( Cheers, and laughter.) Loud cries of " Question." Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the doors were closed for a division; but the gallery was acsain opened, and on our return we found Mr. O'C (NNE LL, addressing the House, and observing that he had been so distinctly alluded to during the debate, that that alone would excuse him for protracting the discus sion ; but he did not want that excuse, bedause he had another and a better: the question before them was one interesting in the highest degree to the people of Ireland. It was a ques tion whether you were really doing injustice to that country— whether you were disposed to continue that injustice, or whether you would express a hope of treating Ireland as England and Scotland had been treated ? That was the ques tion. He knew right well that there were many and many who, out of Ireland, though they would not dare to declare that they would refuse to do her justice, though they were ashamed to say they would perpetuate the injustice now done to her, yet were ready enough to consummate the effect. —( Hear, hear, hear.) England had never done justice to Ireland !—( Oh, oh ! from the Opposition.) Never—( Minis terial cheers, and cries of " Ob, oh l" front the Opposition.) Ireland had obtained concessions from England—nay, she had extorted some recent measures of justice from her, measures which bad been refused by men upon principle, and afterwards conceded by them against their own avowed prin ciples. The Right Hon. Baronet had talked to-night about not exactly understanding what was meant by principle. Why, he believed him.—( Loud cheers.) That Right Hon, Gentleman had for years been the advocate upon a Christian principle of that policy of exclusion which was so long directed against Roman Catholics, but he yielded to us when we were strong enough to make it prudent that he should do so.—(Loud cheers.) Concessions to the Roman Catholics of Ireland were never made till their demand became irresistible, and here was he now again calling for justice to Ireland.— ( Cheers.) There was a coalition to-night—not a base or un principled one, God forbid but an exceedingly natural coali tion between the Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel) and the Noble Lord; the Member for South Lancashire—( A voice, " North Lancashire")—well, North Lancashire, he cared not.—(Laughter.) It was a perfectly natural, but it was an impromptu coalition.—( Laughter. ) The Noble Lord had not the least notion of taking a part in this debate when he came down to-night, or of seating himself where lie now sat.— (Cheers.) [Lord Stanley was sitting next to Sir R. Peel on the front seat of the Opposition Benches.] He (Mr. O'Con nell) knew the Noble Lord's candour and fair dealing, and having told the House of the sudden inspiration which induced him to take a part against Ireland, be (Mr. O'Connell) most potently believed him, because he well knew that the Noble Lord required no preparation to induce him to vote against the interests of Ireland.—(" Oh, oh," from the Opposition benches.) He thanked them for that groan, it was just of a piece.—( Hear, hear.) He regretted that he had been drawn at once into arguing upon the principle of the question, for he could hare wished to dwell upon that Speech which had been graciously delivered from the Throne this day. He should like to have gone into details, and to have pointed to the many excellent amendments in the institutions of the country which that Speech hinted at.—( Cheers.) Last Session, in deed, they were told that many reforms were intended for Ireland. They had them in, words, and nothing mere. But the Speech specified distinctly many excellent practical mea sures ; and if the Speech should be worked out fairly and honestly, in detail, he was thoroughly convinced that this country would not require any further ameliorations in its in stitutions, but would become, in reality, the envy and admira tion of the world.—(Cheers.) He therefore hailed that Speech. It was rot, as it was said King's Speeches generally were—a multiplicity of words to conceal a paucity of things— that Speech had more things than words.—( Cheers.) It pointed out many great principles which only required to be adopted in practice to be most salutary, not only to this nation, but to the whole world. He would not detain the House by any lengthened remarks upon that Speech : but he would gust remind them, that while rejoicing in the cordial eonlioetion that existed between France and this country, his Majesty's Ministers clearly and distinctly abstained from esteiting the slightest supposition that they approved of any Ministry pro pounding an alteration of the law for tho suppression of public liberty— (Cheers) —and for putting an end to public discussion—which as individuals they might reprobate, and which he did reprobate, but which as Statesmen they had properly abstained from introducing into that Speech.— (Cheers.) He wanted to know whether there was any States man who would get up in that House and would express his approval of that act of the Government of France ?—(Loud cheers.) It might be done out of that House—(l-lessr, hear)—but the Government had wisely abstained from doing anything of that kind, and had contented themsc ) :ves with expressing their exultation that France and Eitglar to gether for the maintenance of those principle& n a stood sen tial to national independence and pu'.;lie lib ......at ( w c e h re eer e s s . - ) The Speech then alluded to Spain„We the Queen of Spain. Don Cs sdos were the allies of but bo':ind by inclin on __( amongst us—(hear, hear, ';,ear)—not na'ottimi-7-i° r, had some allies otiund by treaty—no— against treaty., ls were thon a.tex .'use aW h y, allies e ph of rs t e he in pu a,r:mdhos7r. Who) commonsom s ct hi l r y ei 11 . d not mean to apply offensively, most bitter Prote ‘tv s li ta sict n rh t i this House were allied with Don Carlos, who had re-esta blished the inquisiti on , an d who was most observant of th e ceremonies waa be n l c :e wagngtion_the established religion of Sp ain, and who war against his own count r y .— (Hear, hear, hoar.) This war ought to be put an end to. Two. or three B r iti s h b atta li ons wou ld s oon put an end to it. —(Opposition laucrhter and cheers from the o Ministerial benches.) Yes, their appearance would put an end to it.— (Renewed laughter from the Opposition, and Ministerial cheers.) Let them be placed under their able and. gallant leader—(loud cheers)—and be disciplined by him, and they would soon be able to destroy the tyrannical power of Don Carlos in that country. lie knew that parties prevailed there —that one party cried out for liberty, and another for reli gion; and that each party, by their acts, disgraced the cause which they espoused. Legalized murders were perpetrated on the one side, and massacres on the other; and he equally deprecated the horrible cruelties of the One party, and detested the spirit of despotism and tyranny of the other, by which they each endeavoured to carry their purposes into effect. Another part of the Speech he delighted to read. It related to the Protestant Dissenters. It told them that they were about to get real and subtantial relief; and that in their marriages, their burials, or their baptisms, no clergyman of the Estab lished Church was to interfere; and it held out to them the hope of relief from pecuniary exactions. He would not dwell any longer upon these topics. He had said enough to show that the principle of that Speech was the principle of civil and religious liberty ; and he came again to the question of Ire land. He had met large bodies of men in that country who were anxious to secure again to Ireland a distinct Legisla ture. You, in your strength here, might mock at the Irish spirit that cherishes at its heart's core the desire for a national Legislature. You know not the feelings of others ; you who boast, as you ought to do, in the name of English men, and who would rather die than receive law from ancther people, oh, give us, Irishmen, the privilege of loving our native land ! The desire for a national Legislature lived hod breathed in Ireland ; and here he was who animated it as far as he could. And why ? Because he saw there was no hope of justice to Ireland ; because twenty-nine years after the Union Ireland was not a province, but a pitiful co lony of the empire. Hardly forty Members of ,the United Kingdom could be kept together to pass the routine business of Ireland. Yes, we did feel that you did not do us justice. We looked back to the pages of history, and we found that you never did do us justice. The English Government encou raged factions. When the religion was the same, there were Englishmen by birth against Englishmen born in Ireland— Irishmen within the pale and without the pale. " Ipsis Hibernis Hiberniores." Afterwards came the Reformation, and you raised the stan dard of God ; you raised the sword of the Lord and of Gi deon ; you passed your Shibboleth—you deluged Ireland in blood, and devastated it till the land became a wilderness. Then came the Treaty of Limerick. A more honourable con vention never was entered into—a more dishonourable viola tion of it never yet recorded. Emancipation at length came. We stood disenthralled ; and to that extent we stood upon an equality with you. What had been done since? You have reformed your own boroughs ; but the Noble Lord (Stanley) stood between us and the same measure of reform for Ireland. Ile restricted it as much as possible, and be urged as a reason, that it would increase the power of " individuals." Well, did he diminish the power of these individuals ? No, he augmented it considerably. He was the author of that power. Things would have gone on in the constitutional channels, and that power would have been absorbed ; but the constitutional channels were dammed up, the natural course was turned, and therefore the country rallied around an ungifted and untalented individual. Why ? Because he represented their wants, their wishes, and their sufferings, and was the perpetual foe of their oppressors. That was the secret of his power. You have augmented it in Ireland take care you do net augment it elsewhere than in Ireland. _—(Cheers.) He had hall Scotchmen shouting around him—. he had had thousands of them cheering him within the last forty-eight hours. In Birmingham be had also been cheered ; and remember, the gown of Birmingham corned the Reform Bill.--(Great cheering.) He told them in Birmingham that he came here with a wish to see whether he could obtain jus tice for Ireland. He met congregated thousands in that coun try, and asked them would they give up repeal if he could get justice ? He was met with a unanimous shout, " Get us jus tice from England, and never think of repeal more." He came with that announcement to the British Legislature ; he an nounced it with ,no affectation of humility; he dill not re present any town, city, or bortiugh ; he represented millions, - and had the confidence of millions. Do justice to Ireland, and they had nothing to apprehend from the further agitation of repeal, nothing to apprehend from Ireland, but every thing to hope. Henceforward separation was at an end. Do them justice, and they were ready to become a party to the empire; refuse it at your peril.—( Hear, heat, from the Opposition.) When he said " at your peril," he did not mean to threaten Englishmen.—( Cheers.) He liked that cheer; he would not threaten, but he appealed upon these grounds for justice.— ( Cheers.) Was he to be met by the holy coalition between the Right Hon. Baronet and the Noble Lord ? Was it that. there were no evils in Ireland ? The Right Hon. Gentleman,. who knew it well, did not attempt to say that. The Corporse Lion of Dublin, with 28,000/. a-year, expended3o,ooo/. They had no means of rewarding meritorious Statesmen for services performed. They had pictures' to be sure in their ball, 'out they left the country to pay for it.—( Laughter.) But the Noble Lord had said lie was willing to do justice for Ire'iand. —( Hear, bear.) There was a frankness and rendiness about liim.—( Loud laughter.) He let out his entire opinion, and sometimes, perhaps, a little more. The Noble Lord said he did not quarrel at all with the Report. He did not point out any error or false statement in it. Nay, he was more candid and more conceding still, for he gave this description :—He said the corporations of Ireland had two especial faults; the first, profliroacy with respect to public property—in one word, peculation ; and, secondly, exclusiveness in point of religion, or, in one word, bigotry. So that with all the faults in the Corporation Report un denied, the Noble Lord resisted this motion, while adenit ting that the chief faults were peculation and bribery.— ( Loud cheers.) These were the corporations of Ire :land, over which the Noble Lord threw his shield to-night ; ffor we were not to be deluded by words.—( Loud cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet had spoken of plausible analogi es, but like every thing plausible they went to the subsea ince, as I n e d 13 0 ; r a w i voice t b it did his amendment, though introduced with less cal en!-,, than he usually displayed. It seemed to him (Mr. Ole - n e enell) that the Right Hon. Baronet was waiting fan. I ns pi rat i on raoinme —then froma b came above.—(Cheers t — h e ( a n C p h o e at e vt rteasr attack k and aboo nv e l a i_ u r g teih h ac t laughter.) hurrah t, S -. 1 %.-.Alnister' ia l cheersudur;n and cries of " No, no.") Why did not the - Right Hon. Baronet candidly say he would not apply the same prin ciple to Ireland as to Engl an d an d Scotlated -› No ; he would not say it, but he is doing it.—(Cher. : rs) Did the Right Hon. Baronet think he could delude s the people of Ireland ? You might accuse them of crimp., of superstition, but could not say that they were not shrewd people. What is it this question narrowed itself into ? The peeeh proposed that the evils of the Corporations in Ireland should be removed by the same principle as that applied in England. Whv not give us the hope ? The Right Hon. Gentlemant said he did not understand the question. Why not? It was expressed by the majority of the House last year, and ems partly the means of removing the then Ministry from prover. The principle was, that there should be popular control over the administration of the funds, and of justice in corporate towns. But the principle was understood, because it had not been attempted to be impugned, 'Neither the Right Hon. Baronet nor the Noble Lord, lead pointed at anything objec tionable to that principle taing applied to Ireland; that would •not be equally objectionable to its application in England. Let the House divide upon this question.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) That was a hearty cheer. Would any men who did not imagine themselves in a majority, make such a cheer ? But perhaps they would find themselves mistaken. —(Ministerial cheers.) Let the House divide upon this question, whether they exulted in the hope of legislating for Ireland upon the same principle as for England and Scot land.—( Loud cheers.) Reject the motion, and he would go back upon repeal.—( Hear, hear.) They might put an end to one agitator; they might crush one, but they would at the same time create thousands in fa' - our of repeal.—( Hear, hear.) Did they . wish to make him a repealer again? He saw by their countenances, and by their cheers he knew their hearts, and was deluded by the hypocrisy of what fell from their lips. He would judge them by their votes, and cared no more for their pretences than did the idle wind for the faded leaf that fell before it.—( Cheers.) No ' - that was the question—would they declare to the people of Ireland— ( Hear, hear)—that they refused to legislate fur them upon the same principle as for England ? Let them not put it off with a skulking pretence.—(Cheers.) He called upon them to come forward like Englishmen and say at once that they would not give Ireland any hope of legislating for her upon the same principles as they legislated for Scotland and for England. That was really the question upon which they ha& to decide—( Hear, hear)—and from that question they sbouldi not shrink on any poor pretence ; nor should they evade it. by any paltry phraseology that would do discredit to an attorney's clerk. Would not Irishmen know that they had given corpo rate reform to Scotland ? NN , ould they• not know that the principle of control was introduced into the municipal govern ment of that country ?—( Hear.) Would they not know that England had, in spite of another place, received a consider able instalment of corporate reform ?—( Hear, and " Oh I ") Ay--and right well had th e y used it.—( Cheers.) Those who were oreposed to the grenting of corporate reform to Ireland hae, no doubt reason to dread its operation, from the effect it 'lead produced in England. They already felt the sword—the festering of the wound that had been inflicted upon the old._ corporate system of England. He could tell Hon. Members. that there was not one of those corporate towns that wou'esl not be converted into a Normal school for teaching 'she science of peaceful political agitation.--( Hear.) He did not wonder, then, that there should be an unwillingness areongst a certain party to extend this principle to Ireland. Suit the people of that country would know, and would reflect up ton he fact, that co. porate reform, upon a liberal principle fad been they granted to England and, Scotland ; and would sure of justice not— ought they not to ereect that a similar mea be told, " Oh, would be dealt oun to them ? Were they to Wh what no ! we cannot r cant it now—we must consider. y,. such a subject ? Ought not consideration was necessary upon . Hon. Meni!oer's minds to be madeupon so simple a question as that cei doing justice to Ireland up ( Hear, hear.) Had not ' to read the Corporation Re port ? And did he not the sight Hon. Baronet op p that the Irish Corporation Bill know must have been one of thefirst , measures of the sessio ns -- (No, no.) No 1 Impossible. lie must have kn own i t . H e (Mr. O'Connell) wo uld defy him y f to contradict it. Of th ose who sat about h im there was not one who did not k now i t . And were they then to come down to that House and refuse even to hold out a hope to Ireland that they would legislate for her on the same principle as for England and Scotland ? ( Hear, bear.) He put it to every honest man in that House — to every independent man, he meant—who cared not for the triumph of party, h w-ose oleieet, was not to render Toryism as rampant as in former days, but who, at the same time, did not object to see the democratic principle of liberty replace the mockery of representation—whether it was not but simple justice, as well as sound policy, to extend to Ireland the bene fit of those ameliorations which had been introduced iota