The Express.
London, England, 1848-07-29 00:00:00

HE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 29, 1848,

m........... 1 .0.............."--
Col. SI B i BURP declared that he would persist in moving
the adjournment ol the house when that bill was brought on,
even thougk he Might be charged*with • factious opposition.
(A Istigh.)
kfIEDICAL CHARITIES AND SANITARY
IMPROVEMENT (IRELAND) BI LL.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE, in answer to Mr. Faistecii, ex.
erased h a regret that it would be out of his power to pro-
pose any measure this session as to medical charitie s in Ireland ;
and with reamed to unitary improvement he found that the
Health of Towns Bill ot his noble friend (Lord Morpeth)
would require considerable alteration to make it applicable
to Irish purposes. It was not therefore propii.rd to 'Mend
its operation to that country ; but it W:l6 his intention to
bring in a temporary measure renewing the Fever Act of
1546. adapting A to the present CifeUMSISIllCea of the country.
lie could not say that any special mi emir° was in contem-
plation as to the apprehended attack of the cholera.
GERMANUTIES ON 13ItITISH hIAN U FACTU RES.
Lord 0. BENT'INCK said that • report had reached
this cluntry to the effect that the parliament of the German
confederation we now engaged in passing a measure for
increasing the duties charged on our cotton and woollen
manufactures—on plain goods from 30 to 65 dollars per cwt.,
and on fancy goods from 50 to 75 dolisra a cwt.; and which
would, in fact, amount to a prohibition. lie wished
anon whether the Right Hon. President of the Board of
Trade had received any information confirming this report
Mr. LABOUCHERE replied that no information ot any
such proposition had reached the Foreign-office ; and he
thought it must he at least premature, liecaum the Diet o
Frankfort had not yet !settled the basis of the e constitution,f
and they were not therefore in a position to pass mach a
measure
RBI EGISTERING OF RTHS, &c. (SCOTIAND)
BILL.
The LORD-ADVOCATE (having been appealed to by
Mr. Driseas to abandon this measure) stated that he would
not nova the second re.aling that evening, a
but the
be reprinted with a view to its being read second timebi onll
OA early evening. But ke could not consent to abandon ii
ifalsore which had already b cn well considered, and had
"lea the
et4VegECTRIC TELEGRAPH.
Mr. MACKINNON asked if it wa
vs
ent the intention of
of the
the
government to take any steps to pre by
electric telegraph the dissemination of false intelligence ?
Sir G. GREY said that if the hon. gentleman alluded to
what had whoently occurred, he will enabled to state that
the man bad actually delivered the packages to the
news agents in Liverpool, those news agents having been
thereby completely imposed upon, had been identified. He
had given a description of the person from whom he received
them, and had declared that he bad no doubt he could re-
cognise him if he per him. As for the int, ntion ofthe go-
vernment it w
kingsoly impossible to prevent frauds of that
nature from tan place. He might observe, however, that
the art of parliament under which the railway companies
I were constituted gave to the government the power, by
I wa,rant of the Secretary of State, to take posees.sion of the
wlvde machinery of the telegraph 50 as to prevent the trans-
I mission of any information except by the sanction of the
government
h bed
tl ie y shouldalready
mot adopt without sufficient reason. as they were bound to
ODUlpeTdite the companies, and it could only be iustilied by
the existing circumstances of the moment.
government.
note
. rci.,,aifi d
Butt hat
henpo w eirt
was
hue
DISEASE AMONGST SHEEP.
Stafford)
Mr. LABOUCHERE stated (in reply to Mr.
that there was much disease amongst the sheep of this
1 etiontry at present, and that he should, in consequence, feel
it his duty to intr duce a bill in the present session to Ore
the government power to prevent the importatiou in certain
cases of
foreign sheep into this country—(cheers from the
protectionists)—and to take such precautions as might be
necessary to prevent the spread of disease. (Hear, hear.)
NEW WRIT.
A new writ was ordered for Thetford, in the room of the
Right Hon. W. B Baring, who had been called to toe upper
house as Lonl Ashburton.
SAVINGS BANKS IN IRELAND.
Lord J. RUSSELL stated (in reply to Mr. Herbert) that
his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, would
gives,ndanext move, in conformity with the scr ice already
forthe nomination of the committ e to consider the
question of savings banks in Ireland, deeming that a better
emu than at once to introduce a bill on so very difficult a
=Wet.
DIPLOMATIC RELATIONSROMEBILL. WITH THE COURT
OF
Lord I. RUSSELL said (in reply to Mr. Buck) that it
was the intention of the meetgoverno proceed with this bill,
and without propreing to omit proviso adopted by the
House of Louis.
Lord PALMERSTON said (in reply to a further ques.
tion) that it would not be brought en without sufficient
notice.

the bill bill for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act
was passed in two days. The measures
the wh
alicteh hen thought
he
necessary for lulling' were, • bill or rat o
union in many respects ; a bill for altering the appropriation
of church revenues; a new grand jury bill, arid a new petit
jury till. These were measures which were justly require&
by the preople of Ireland, They also wanted a bill for the
relief of landlds under entail; a bill for the reclamation of
wad. lands ; or
• bill which would levy a tax on absentees, and
. bill to amend the poor law in many respects. Ile would
remind the government that it was the
in necessity of much
The
measures that caused the great cry of repeal Ireland.
government were now in that position that they should
scion of I
be satisfied either to held militaty posse
or to grant concessions to the peeps of that country.
As the representative of an English constituency, he felt it
his duty to urge on the house remedial measure.. for Ireland.
Every act yet pass. d was absolutely • declaration of war ;
they would have to be enforced by the sword ; and unless
an opposite courie was immediately pursued by the govern-
ment, nothing could prevent the evils he had anticipated.
Go otrnment might say they had not bad the means or the
time to puss remedial measures ; but if they had threatened
to surrender office if these m:asures were not passed the
result would hove been diffilont. I f
Ith eland e nobllet hie lornt d would
d
not carry the measures necessary for r resig
offices ; let him not be made an instrument of oppression, It
this house would not pus the necessary measures how could
the cry fur repeal be resisted ? Before goin cane toome to his
constituents he wanted to have a message of pconvey
I --Wane assurance that their grievances should he redressed.
(Hear, hear.) lie was anxious not to see the people led into
acts of violence ; and had the Irish members used their
moral force in a different way this evil might have been
averted. The landlords hillicen made tyrants and maste
over the people, who w,rea teduced to the c.ndition of slaves,rs
without having the privilege of slaves, that of being sup-
ported by their ownere. This evil was also attributable to
imperial legislation.
The question having been put,
Lord .1. RUSSELL rose and said—Sir, the hon. gentleman
has brought forward this resolution in language so deferent,
that I shall prefer following his example to introducing any-
thing into the course of the debate which can tend to pro-
duce greater asperity and warmer contention on the
interesting subject which be has brought beforecannot
say that I armor in many of the opinions which the hon. gen-
demon has expressed. In some of those opinions I do agree ;
and I am ready to state the view I take of a great portion
of the subjects to which he has called attention. In con-
sidering the conduct of this imperial parliament, as the hon.
gentleman has brought it Wore the house, I think
it is hardly just to say that certain measures nave been long
delayed,that they have been brought before this house many
years ago without being carried into law, and to attribute
this delay or refusal entirely and ulely to our uowillingness
to debate Irish eubjects, or grant a remedy for Irish griev-
ances. Whether it bit a portion of our character and temper
—whether it be owing to the complicated form of our go-
vemint—whether it be owing to the h of which
prrevnails in parliament and in the country—thethitdeba
facts that
hardly any measure of great public importance, whether re.
latieg to the United Kdom or to any purtion of it, is ever
carried without a very coniderable delay, without the vicis
situdes of being rejected at one time and triumphant at an-
other, protracted and postponed at one period, and only as-
sen to after o There are questions relat-
ing ttedo the entire kingdom, both before and after the union
took place, such as the questions of parliamentary reform
and the abolition of the slave trade, which occupied nearly
thirty years in the discusieon; and there are va-
rious other instances in which it is obvious that
trom some of the causes I have mentioned just and
fair subjects of legislation did not produce their effect in the
adoption of the measures sought, till after • long period of
time and bitter and repeated debates. (Ilear.) I say it ii
not just, therefore, when speaking of Irish measures, to say
that their delay is entirely owing to our unwillingness to
discuss Irish grief
,-nces and to apply that remedy which may
seem to a portion, end it generall seems so only to aH poro
Lion, of the Irish representatives to be required. (ear,
hear.) The hon. gentleman, like others, has described the
state in which we find Ireland at the present moment, and
I must therefore ask hie attention and that of the house to
the description which was given of the state i 1 Ireland by an
adversar d
certainly of the government ol that ay, in a -
phlet published about 1796 or 07. It is there etated pam
:—" If
the condition of the peuple be the best criterion whereby to
judge of the excellency o. their practical government, we
might conclude thas the people ot Ireland, who are worse
housed, worse clad, and worse led than the subjects
of the most inveterate despot of Europe, live under one of
thelworopractical governments in the world." That shows, at
least in the opinion of this writer, that it is not the creation
of the imperial parliament', or the government, since the
union, that the people ef Ireland are ill.housed and ill.clad.
The inheritance which the imperial parliament derived from
the parliament before the union was a people in that unfor-
tunate and miserable condition. But, it may be said, there
is one grievance, at least, which is caused entirely by the
existence of an imperial parlinment—absenteeism.the land But this
pamphlet goes on to say—" Does the produce of in
Ireland go to supply the fund for the employment of the
people ? No. Your cons, your cattle, your butter, your
flax, your yarn, all Tour superfluous produce, and much
more than would be superfluous if the people of Ireland were
furnished with the common necessaries of life, are
dlall ex-
ported without return, to pay the rents of Irish ord.,
wbo do not think the country worthy their residence ; every
particle of which is as utterly last to
lifto fund for the em
into
the of the people ot Ireland as it had been thrown
into the *ea." So far, then, these are not grievances of
oar creation, but of long endurance, rooted in the
state of society in Ireland. All that the hon. gentleman or
any one else can say of the present generation is that they
should do as much as they can, patiently and gradually, be-
cause it must be done patiently an gr idea e
lly, to remedy
that state of things. (Hear, headr.) And, lt me say—
whatever blame may be imputed to the governments or the
parliaments of former times or of this period—that after the
condition of a people has become such as it has been repre-
sented to be before the union, the habits, the w
ishises, theand
in-
clinations of the people themselves tend onaia
foster that wretched state of society which I have described.
For instance, I centrist. r it as one of the great misfortunes of
Ireland that the population has gone on increasing without a
proportionate increase in the means of subsistence and com-
fort. With a social condition much to be deplotisred, with
th a
the
early marriages of the peasantry, who are safied wi
miserable hovel and • plot of potato-ground, furnishing them
a precarious subsistence for the year, without their looking
to an increase of comfort, without their waiting for marriage
till they had accumulated a sufficiency for the sure
and comfortable subsistence of • married couple,—that
state of society has been of itself a misfortune, with which
it was very difficult, if not impossible, for any legislature to
deal. I am not saying whether originally the degradation
of the Roman Catholics of Ireland as a race—whether the
cruel and unjust penal laws to which they were
tu subjecte
ng
d
whether the laws which prevented the people from rni
their attention to trade and manufactures—whether the re-
ligious bigotry of the seventeenth century and the commer-
cial jealousy of the cighteenth—may not have contributed
in a great measure to produce the state of things to which I
have alluded., tCheers.) lam not
indicatedvidcating the proceed-
ings of those days, any more than
aume of the acts of the Norman cocquerors, who, I believe,
were as tyrannical in this country a: they were in Ireland.
All I contend for is that, such having been the case, such
being the difficulty we inherit, such being the society we
have to govern, it is not the work of a day, or a month,
of one,
h, or three years, to change that state of society,
to induce ate people to look up to a better condition, and to
put all classes into such a state of harmony with one
another that the progress of the society towards civili-
sation, wealth, and prosperity, shall be rapid and unim-
peded. With these preliminary considerations, therefore, 1
enter on same of the topics to which the hon. gentleman has
alluded. He complains of the refusal of civil and political
privileges to the Roman catholics of Ireland from the time
of the union till 1820. 1 consider that that refusal was un-
inst. I see nothing in the creed of the Roman catholics
, which should have debarred them from all the civil and
i political privileges of the other inhabitants of these islands.
From the time I had • vote in this house, 1 constantly voted
for the repeal of these disabilities ; and I consider it a great
misfortune, of which we yet feel the effects, that that mea-
sure was not made a part of the act of union. (Hear, hear.)
I heard Mr. Canning in this house relate a conversation
he bail with Mr. Pitt on this subject. The latter had re-
ceived a deepetch from Lord Cornwallis, stating, "I think I
can carry for you the =cameo of union with England ; hut
the measure for enabling Roman catholics to participate in
all the privileges of the protestants of Ireland I shall not be
able to carry." " Then," said Mr. Canning," if I were you
I would refuse both. I would not ve one without
that
the other." (Hear, hear.) Mr. Canning
hlr. Pitt, with great reason, rebuked the indiscretion and
intemperance of the young man who ventured on this
opinion; but I eery much doubt, looking at all that has
since passei, wheiher the youthful premptings of Mr Can-
ning's ingenuous mind, did nut poiet tot a oiser course than
the mature deliberation of Mr. l'itt. (ear, hear.) These
differences of political privilege were, howev oo abolished in
1829 ; and now no one can deny that any Roman catholic
in Ireland, who has a fair claim to any professional or p. li-
tical distinction, has as fair a chance of obtaining those dis-
tinctions as a protestant. On another subject, I think the
hon. gentleman hardly did justice to what has been done by
the imperial parliament and by former governments. The
question of tithes was one of the greatest grievances of Ire-
land before the union. Not only every farm
oneall r, b
the ut every
poor cottieroras obliged to pay tithes in kind vege-
tablm of his crop; and the ecclesiastical courts decided all
questions as to the amount ef those tithes. All this con-
stituted a grievance of the most acute and harassing
nature. The parliament of the United Kinedom on
the proposition of the right honourable gentleman the
member for the Univenity of Cambridge, settled a
plan for the commutation of tithes. Some years after,
in 1834, Lord Wellesley recommended a permanent and
compulsory commutation of tithes into a rent charge. That
plan was carried into effect in 1818, with a deduction of 25
per cent. from the whole amount of the tithes, leaving them
only 73 per cent. of the original charge, and fixing that
charge as a sum to be paid by the landlord, who was left to
recover it in the shape of rent. Thus was prevented the
necessity of collection, which had been the source, not only
of complaint, but almost of a servile war in some parts of the
country. (Hear, hear.) This
r moved
the grievance arising
from the nature of th y
e ne grievance of another
kind, that tithes were paid to the clergy, is a totally different
notation, on which I shall have to touch. The hon. gentl a
e-
m' an complains that the Reform Act of 1832 has been
failure ; but he should recollect that in Ireland, as in Eng
land, it gave the people great power which they had no.:
hitherto possessed. In Ireland there were many nomination
boroughs, such as Tralee, which I think was handed down
by will from one party to another, the iediridual having the
sole right of nominating the inembere. Ily the Reform Act
these boroughs were thrown open to the people, wha
thenceforward became the real electors. Though the
number of member for Ireland was not a question for the

Beam Antath" haying
yet an addition of five memben was made acute time. The been settled at the time of the union,
hon. gentleman has referred to the petty juries. 0 o that sub-
ject, I believe, the law isthe same in Ireland as in England ;
If any essential difference replainS, which Ido not think is
the cue, itcertainly ought to be rrected. With respect to
the fraechiee, an hon. c illeague of mine introduced a mea-
sure, in 1840 or 1841, for tit purpose of enlarging it. When
whichc ime into office, in 1846, it was one of the best questions to
I directed the attention of my lamented fry nd, Lord
Ressl.orough. He prepared the outline of a measure on the
subject in the autumn of ItS46, which was ready to have
been produced at the commencement of the next session.
Honourale entlemen may ask why, it was not introduced
—why were these measures delayed ? I have before given
an Sillirtr to tat questin. The great calamity which fell
upon Ireland.h the total failure of the chief article of sub-
sistence, made it so imperatively nece
overwhelming
to attend to
some means of mitigating that great nod
calamity—that it was not a time to attend to questions of the
extension of the franchise. In the present session we have
introduced a bill, founded on the principle Lord Betaborough
recommended ; and if it be not pasted until nextsession, the
only evil that can arise from the postponeme a is in the one
or two elections that may µk.: place in particular boroughs
or counties. Unless a general election were to take place,
there will b I no practical evil from carrying that measure
into effect in IS le, rather than in 1848. Tnat bill will add
considerably to the number of electors in Ireland, and will
so for remedy the grievance complained of, of the small num-
ber of electors. But let me otwerve upon this subject, that
I though the number of electors may be very few in Ireland,
and the people may fairly complain of that as a grievance,
this and many other grievances are not such we to prevent
the progressed the people, provided they exert themselves
manfully to obtain that station and condition in society, by
industry and attention to their own immediate pursuits,
which the general freedom of °T
constitutin allows. What
was the case in Scotland ? Till the Reform Bill of 1831,
the people of Scotland had altogether no more than about
3,000 electors ; and yet, by their spirit of industry, by &rail-
ing themselves of the genius of our tree constitution, withinsin
those liberties which the constitution confers on all
its limits, English, Scotch, or Irish, they did, between the
web Ilion of 1745, and the pitied of the Reform Bill, make,
in the course of those 80 years, as great and remarkable a
prestress as any people on the fare of the globe ever made.
(Hear, hear.) Therefore, sir, while I admit, with regard to
the Iranche ad other subjects, that the people of Intend
may haven justn reason for complaint, I totally deny that
grievances of this kind are any sufficient reason why they
should not make great progress—why theyemar shokable uld hot, bye,
that iotelligence which they possess in a r degre
and by fixieg their ds rather on the advantages which
they might enjoy, if they used all those advantages to the
latolimit, than on the grievances which they suth r, make
rapid pr. grew towards wealth and prosperity. Another
subject to which the hon. gentleman alluded, is one in which
he has taken a groat interest ; but on which 1 cannot come
to simi , lar conclusions the relation of landlord and enat.
Those who adopt his opinions, and perhaps carry thetm fu
ther than he does, appear to confound two things essentially
and totally distinct. The tenant-right of the north of Ire-
land is a usage differing in various parts, the payment
amounting in some places to three or lour years, in others to
ten or twelve years' purchase ; and there are other difference,.
Be the principle good or had, it is obvious that a tenant
who has paid a sum equivalent to ten years purchase to an
outgoing tenant, with the knowledge of the landlord, is to
be considered as having a claim on the landlord tor
ou i-
salent advantage when he gives up the farm, and it wan equ ld
he a fraud to deprive him of it. I should he very sorry if
wdedn. 11
any bill sanctioned by the government should be supposed
in any way to authorise a breach of ft ith betwt en landlords
' and tenants in places where that custom prevails. But the
hou. gentleman always argues the question as though the
right could be at once and simply transferred from districts,
npkronvoi
w(
thieeeree.thea hear.) geAheads
iptrieevemaileerdietod
wtheohseie
ewhereeteetiis
that,u
the occupier of land pays his rent, he has a pepetual tight
to the occupation of the land. (Hear,
hear)har. Why, can
anything be more completely subversiv the rights of
property ? (Hear, Lear.) A man who inherits an estate
lets a portion of it, say 100 acres of improvable land, at a
very small rent, perhaps 75. or 10s. an acre, expecting that
the tenant will improve the land. This he fails to do, but
regularly pays his rent. Will you then transfer the property
of the land from the landlord to the tenant, who had net
claim to the land, who was admitted solely at the will and
pleasure of the landlord ? I own I cannot think that par-
I 'fitment can with any sort of justice !auction such a law.
would strike.) at theu root of property in the whole of the I
United Kingdom. (Hear, hear.) The government have'
introduced a bill on very different principles, with a view to
the improvement of land, sn nandegulating the relation of
landlord and tenant. It is gely agreed in Ireland that
some measure of this kind is necessary, some compulsory in-
terference between landlord and tenant; otherwise, I should
have thought that we were going too far in making the pro-
posals we have do' e. We prop se to interfere so far uto
make it necessary for the landlord to submit to certain con-
ditions with respect to the treatment of his land, to which he
had not orignally agreed, for the purpose of promoting its
cultivation. The bill was approved by a committee, consist-
ing mainly of Irish members; but it does not appear that we
shall be able further to consider that measurebe this session
,
If, during the recess, any improvements can suggested
the government will be ready to adopt them ; it being our
wish to go as far as possible towards the improvement of the
land in Ireland, without dnturbing the great principles on
which the right to property rests. (Hear.) But what we
should most kook to is a greater mutual understanding be-
tween landlords and tenants; for voluntary agreements car-
ried out for the benefit of both are, after all, better means of
proving the land thaw any legislative me aure that can
improving the land thaw sny legislative me sure that can
be proposed. (Hear, le ar.) As to the poor law of last
tear, I do not think any reproach can be
tha t cast on u
ing paused long before we introduced measure. for
Ithav-
wee
nets miry for the preservation of life and the relief of the
absolutely destitute. Attbe same time our experience in this
country taught us that any poor law was so liable to abuse,
that its tendencies were so naturally, not inevitably, to
deaden industry, and to relieve that pauperism which
without such a law might have been forced to exertion—
that such abuses were connectedtwith every.poor law—that I
cannot blame myself for having been long in introducing it
in Ireland. I believe further experience of that bill will
prove, not its absolute perfection, but the modificanons
which it may require. Still, I believe, we were right in in
troducing that bill. I think a poor law tends greatly to-
wards the civilisation of a country
—(hear, hear)—and pre-
vents those habits of mendicity, akin to robbery, which
prevail in countries where no such provision exists.
(Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman thinks it desirable that
the country should be divided into small farms, rather than
have recourse, chiefly or mainly, to emigration. lion agrho ee wwillith
him as to small farms where you have a populat w
apply their capital and industry in a continual and perse-
vering manner to the cultivation of those farms. I find that
very small farms prevail in many of the moat flourishing
countries of Europe, as in Tuscany and the Italian states,
where they are in divisions of six or seven acts. But, to
follow such a principle in Ireland a great change must take
place, which cannot be made by law. but must depend much
on the conduct of the landlords, the means of investing
small capitols, and other circumstances. (Hear, hear.) For
instance, it is not consistent with such a condition that ther
eee
should be parties having plots of ground too 1 arge
gard.n and too small for a farm. (Hear.) Such a system
would be very injurious ; an.l in the west of I reland the
occupation of plots of ground or growing potatoes has led
to much of the misery of that portion of the country. (Hear,
hear.) I think the measure to which the hon. gentlemng
an
has alluded as the only one which he has hopes of seei
parliament pass this session will lead to the division of land
into small properties, and to men of small capital getting into
possession of terms. (Hear, hear.) But, axe-pt in the way
that I have mentioned, of giving facilities for the sale of
tates, and other measures of that kind, I do not think that
qesuestion is one with which legislation Can directly deal. ( Hear.the)
The system of large farms prevailed in Northumberland
and other counties of England, and the people arc accus-
tamed to them. But the people of Ireland are accustomed I
to a different state of things ; and you must. in dealing with I
them, consult the habits of the pecple of that country. The '
hon. gentleman alluded to the bill which he introduced re-
spreting tenant right. While I cannot allow that any per-
son by mere occupation of the land, at the will and pleasure
of the landlord, or against his will and pleasurale, l
has thereby
acquired the right of occupying that land in
time!, yet I do think the dummang rivi out
process, pt
rhapsof a great number
on tea
f II
small copiers by some sry I
winter's evening, practiceleavin without the meant ot shelter
or defence, is such a p that though there may be
everything said as to the legal conduct of the land-'
lora, and though the moral conduct of the tenant
may have been faulty towards bim, it
ith shows both cruncum -
elty
and want of good Whim, and is one w which i
bent and necessary that the law should deal. (Hear, hear.)
1 was a party with my right hon. friend to the bringing in a
bill on this subject, which provided that w
foo hilstan tdhe
sh lanelterd-
lord was left in possession of all his rights, d
', should he secured to the miserable outcasts, some of whom
I mht he children or women After child birth or in fever, and
for whom in such a state food and shelter were absolutely
necessary for the preservation of life. (Hear, bear.) Ido
not think see are chargeable with delay in passing that
measure. It was read a first time on the 22nd of April, be-
fore the holidays, and on the Bth of May it was read a third
time and passed this house. I tegret the view I took of the
bill was not adopted by the House of Lords. It came back to
this house with amendments to which we could not assent
becauie, as it appears to me, the bill so amended would not
make the law better, but in some respects worse than it now is.
We could not therefore agree to the amendments, and we
sent it back. I trust the House of Lords will be induced to
take the same view of the measure as this house, and that
some remedy ma be afforded by law to meet theft afflicting
eases.e (Hear, hey ar.) The hon. gentleman thinks it neces-
sary to have additional members for Ireland. (Hear, hear.)
Well, Ido not th there may not come a time when
it may be desirable that additional members should be
allowed to Ireland in place of some of those boroughs which
this house may think it right to disfranchise. (Hear.) But
the present is not the proper time for such a proposition,
and I do not find that there has Item that attendance
of the Irish members which would induce me to think
that the legnlature would gain much in talent or industry by
an addition of members from Ireland. (Hear, hear, and
laughter.) The hon. gentleman says we ought to have a
measure of regisuation, including the franchiee. We have
already' introduced a bill on that subject, and there will be no
luso( time if we proceed with that measure next cession.
The hon. gentleman referred to the corporations.reld For
several years I contended that the corporations of lan
should be placed on the same footing as those of England. I
think there was a great deal in the objection urged on the
mkt, r side that those bodies, instead of attending to municipal
mid local affairs, would becLme violent political societies, and
that, in some cases, they would rather add to any disaffection
that might, prevail in the country than control or crush
it by municipal or magisterial authority. There was

greet weight in that objection, but I was then of opinion
and lam still of opinion that municipal bodies elected by
the people are • great benefit to t. em, and that it would
produce just and well-founded discontent if we refused to
Ireland that which was just in the case of the people of Eng-
lao.d and Scotland. I would have no obection to extend to
people of Ireland the same municipalj it franchisee th. are
the
enjoyed by the people of England and Scotland. But there
aproewsoenmewphoichwer;
taehinkseeifieryb
by
doubtful corporationsth eimnselEv esng,laaandd
which I would hesitate to grant to Irish corporations. The
hon. gentkman alluded to improved strand jury laws. That
was a subject which occupied the attention of the late Lord
Bessborough and Lord Clarendon. Butsuch has been the
business in this house, that we were not ante with any chance
of carrying it to introduce a measure on the subject.
It is &subject of great importance, and I can conceive nothing
more useful to Ireland than to have good local bodies in the
country who would promote the making of roads and look
to an honest and just expenditure of the rates. (Hear.)
I think that large powers may e left to the grand juriee in
that respect. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the waste lands
scheme, I introduced a bill
iven to propri
on that subject loot
session which
gave large compulsory power.. We afterwards abandoned
that bill, but we added 500.0001., the sum ge-
tors in Ireland for the improvement and reclamation of land.
I think such • step was proter, before we introdueed any
campulsory measure, and there were other objections of an
economical nature Urgl d against any expenditure by the go-
vernment for the reclamation of waste land. The hon. gen-
tleman then alluded to assistance for the construction of
railey*S. A messure was introduced on this subject by my
noble friend (Lerd Morpeth), then Secretary tor Ireland,
but it met with very little encouragement in this house
LitecararLaWyseinprolreadd,awyhoitcehofwaamoanpepyribuvi,dyebayrtree one of
but it met with cos ide. stale oppesition. In order to intro-
, duce any measure of the, kind we ought to have • more
flourishing state of the finances than we now possess. (Hear,
and laughter.) With regard to measures for Ireland gene-
t-811y, they may be divided it to three classes—social, poli-
tical, and religious. With regard to measures of a pocial
character, we have introduced and carried an amended poor
law, by which a vast number of the people have been led
during the present year. (Hear, hear.) We have like-
wise introduced • measure for the sale of incumloered
estatis, which, though it may. not have any im-
mediate operation, will, I believe, in time be the found- ,
ation of great social changes. (Hear, hear.) I can
conceive nothing more mischievous in a country than to have
estates incumbered in such • manner that there is no real
owner to look after the permanent interest of the tenant and
the land. (Hear, hear.) With regard to political Questions,
we have introduced a measure on the subject of the franchise
which seemed to meet the wishes of many of those
who
connected with Ireland. Then there is then
w relingiousichas u
t qest-
e
lion—one of the utmost importance, and i,•
h
hon. gentleman said, I have taken a prominent part in this
house—l allude to the position of the established
ackno church in
Irclsnd, a church to which only a minori,y of the people
belong, but which has always been recognised and w-
ledged by the state since the reformation. No person can
deny that that statelof things is unsatisfactory. No person can
deny th.d the appropriation of the whole revenue which the
state has always recognised as the revenue of the established
church, by a church to which only a small portion
of the people belongs, is an anomaly and a grievance.
(Hear, hear.) But when I proceed from the acknowledeed
grievance to the remedy that ought to be adopted, I find
'great and almost iusunerable difficulties in fi
re way. (Ilear )
1 propoaed a measure that a portion of the venue of the
esuthlished church should be appropriated to the education
of the people ef every claw and creed. If that measure had
been adopted at the time I think it would have given great
satisfaction, but being rejected, and rejected more than once,
that position was entirely altered. The proof tes
the tents felt
enues
it
would he a great grievance that any portion rev
and that such se-
of the church should be separated from it,
paration would lead to the abolition of the whole church.
(Hear, hear.) On the other hand, there were those who
considered that the established church was a grievance, and
who when this measure was rejeetedcarried their views much
further, and would not be satisfied with less than the entire
abolition of the protestant church. Under these circum-
stances it would have been useless to attempt to carry that
measure. For my own part, I believe that the protestants
of Ireland, living in a country where church establishments
are acknowledged, have • fair claim to possess a church es-
tablishment of their own---(hear, hear)—and that it should
be recognised by the state. And Ido not believe, dimi-
nished as the property of that church has been by the
of
the aboli-
tion of church-rates, and forming about 1,000,000
population, that there is any great excess in the amount
allowed to that church. But ere there not other reasons
why we should not proceed to the abolition of that church ?
I can understand those who are in favour of the voluntary
system, who think that the principle adopted in America to
the true one, demanding the instant abolition of the esta-
blished church in Ireland • but for myself I tales other views.
I think a church establishment a wise institution for a
country. (Hear, hear.) I believe that, where it is properly
devoted to the purposes for which it is intended, it is •
bless ng to the people where it exists. (Hear, hear.) At all
events I see no advantage in doing with the rest of the
tithes that which was done with the 25 per cent. (Hear.)
Well then, having • church establishment fur the church
of the minority, the question arises whether you will have
by its side anotEver her establishment for the church of the great
majority ? y person must be of the
difficulties which beset the question. (Hear, hear.) Every
person must be aware of the difficulties which exist not only
in the feelings of the people of Englund and Scotland—which
in my opinion ought to be no ba
res the endowment of the
Roman catholic church (h hear)it were
thought desirable to adopt such a meastherure ; but
every one must also be aware that e are
practical difficulties in the way, and that those practical dif-
ficultice ought not to beencountered without seeing that the
people of Ireland generally ask for this endowment, and that
it would he readily accepted. (Hear.) Now what have we
heard in Ireland ? One of the most popular Roman catho
lie prelates in Ireland bas denounced any attempt at endow-
ing his church, as an attempt to bribe the clergy from the
cause of the people; and one of the first things I should ex-
pect to hear, if I declared myself in favour of such a proper
sition, would be—not that 1 was endeavouring to do justice
to the people. but that I was endeavouring to seduce the
clergy of the people from their flocks, and trying to bribe
them to the service of the state. (Hear.) Sir, there is this
elawitffiktucmcuhpltttoyt,:partly, ecclesiastical and partly religious, in the I
coPuint:
tdit.dg n
it,o I,
ciabsitsgoo;f Ireland,
but
tdt
deprecate
witha
te which
aty
attemptunhapp
ecomp ei .
iws
the
re,naht he iemtei
time
eh
orie poltai rlterf,ormtuhset
cpcuprepo;
arid,
the time of the union. I believe it is a difficulty with
unless the circumstances are favourable to the success of the
measure. I think the excitement of great religious
ilyatMern.
animosity, the giving occasion to attack the religion of a
great portion of the population o these islands, the giving
mica ion to excite one man against another on account of
being of a different creed, would be a serious fault, if it
would not be a crime, on the part of any government, unless
they were to see that some great ultimate benefit would be
I derived from it. (Hear hear.) The hon. gentleman has
asked us to go now into 'the consideration of these various
questions. The hon. gentleman, who spoke with great can-
dour, is mistaken if he thinks that it is any wish of ours
to
ay those measures which we think calculated
to redress the evils of Ireland. Nothing would redound
more to the praise and credit of government than to be able to
bring such measures, one after the other, under the consider-
mion of parliament. We have no such wish; but every
person who has attended to the debates this session must be
aware of the difficulties which exist in bringing any series
of measures into effect. (Hear, hear.) We have been
unable to proceed with the measure for the abolition of the
navigation laws—a subject of the highest importance to the
United Kingdom—owing to protracted debatesin this house.
And I cannot promise that any alteration of the rules of the
house will have any effect in changing the habit of long and
protracted discussions, and of interweaving subj edite with
another. (Hear, hear.) So long as that habit lreland
must take her share with the rest of the United
Kingdom indelay of measures which are of great importance.
There was r o indieposition on the part of the government, or
the majority of the house, to pails measures which may tend
to the improvement of Ireland; and once persuaded that the
Irish members were in favour of any psrticular measures,they
would be as readily considered and as speedily adopted as any
submitted to the consideration of parliament. But whatever
those measures may be, let me conclude as I began, by say-
ing that many of the grievances of Ireland are not of • recent
date ; they were not caused by any enactments, or neglect
of enactments, for the last few years. (Hear, bear.) They
are principally of a social character; but there are some
also political and religious of long standing, which cannot
easily or speedily be redressed. I trust that want of speedy
and easy redress will not be imputed to us as a fault,
er to the part of the parliament of the United KMg-
rli-
dom any more than it would be to a special paa
ment in Ireland. I believe we have sone advantages
over a parliament sitting in Ireland for the redness of
grievances particularly affecting her, because we must always
recollect that in Ireland there is not one real undisputed
path, which, in the opinion of the majority of the represen-
tatives for Ireland, would lead to her prosperity and content.
(Hear, hear.) I believe that we, who are less mingled in
her political and religious parties, are useful in smoothing
asperities that would otherwise arise. (Hear, hear.) All,
however, that I can now do, is to ask the house not to as-
sent to the impossible task laid before us by the hon. gentle-
man, but to proceed calmly and gradually to the amendment
of any grievances that affect the people of Ireland. (Hear,
h ,ar.) I believe all to be persuaded that it is by the peace-
able method of discussion, and by parliamentary refire a that
these grievances are to be treated—(hear, hear)—that the
resor to arms and rebellion suet only tend to ag-
gravate the misfortunes of Ireland—(hear' hear)—
that the resources of Ireland, great as they are,
would speedily be squandered and dissipated in civil warfare
—(bear, hear)—and that we must look to the maintenance
of authority and law to enable the industrious and peaceable
in that country, under this free constitution, to advance to
happiness and prosperity. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. A. HERBERT said he would support the motion,
because he would not lead any. one to suppose that he was
satisfied with the progress of legislation for Ireland. (Hear,
hear.) lie begged to remicd the noble lord that the Irish
members were unsnimous with respect to the poor law, but
their application to government had been refused. With
regard to the church, he would only observe that he regret-
ted the noble lord did not carry out, as a minister, the prin-
ciple which he proclaimed in opposition in 1841, namely,
that the Roman catholic church in Ireland ought to be
placed on a footing of equality with the protestant church,
and that he would follow out that principle in all its con-
sequences. He was aware of the practical difficulties in the
way of a solution of this question, but till they had a minister
bold enough to grapple with them they would legislate
h in for
Ireland in vain. (Hear, hear.) Ile did not tk
that the evils of Ireland were entirely owing t i defective
legislation. Much of them was to be attributed tote he want
of steady industrious habits in the people and to the ystem

of agitatioa which prevailed for }earn, under which it was 2
d
impossible that any country could prosper. (Hear,
hear) I
L
Mr. FAGAN attributed the evils of Ireland to defective
and vicious legislation• into the e
Mr. MONSELL would not go question whether
the moment selected for bringing forward this metien was a
the most judicious that could have been selected—(hear)— I
but as the motion was before the t one-, with the fee ling he
looked
ini
one, p.Nonntdoitaieems et
t,ohqu.eurch batonzetwkiiicoieinhz :iod. ~0 t
hti
srt hiiemegt
had of the miserable condition of Ireland, he could not do e
I
otherwiseit.ldhouse
rThe
B.
parliament
than
sgßro s. 1
tut p.Npaete t, it,
beganl
good measures tor Ireland, and yet all it hail achieved was a
coercive hill, and another fur the suspension of the 11 .Iscas
Corpus Act. It WWI a remarkable tact, that on the very cm I
on which they were now debating,
the ui of Commix&
was engaged, 45 years ago, in suemeneling t.io if ate ea Corps,
Act in Ireland. An Hehat muchn done &trine tnese le .
years? Nothing. very feared that the peoele of
firro;nl entdhewimereperriiaglhptarwliham"enthte. they
He did not mean the Young
Ireland party, but those fairly enitled to rave 11 the I • -
People. The milk-and-water proposals af the noble lord
would never satisfy the nation. Row did it happen, aster
600 years of dominion over Ir. land, that the was sell in a state
of sueethered war ? It wee said that Irish grievances were not
remedied, because she never came before the parliament in a
proper manner. Was Ireland, then, always to be an humble
suppliant for justice ? Every concession that had been made
to Ireland had been extorted by fear. Nothing had ever
been done to arouse the gratitude of Ireland. What had
been the game of Engtand towards the Rennin mahnlies
there? In 1799 England cajoled them. In 1801 Eugland
deceived them. In 1803 they were discarded. What was
the language of the right hon. barmet the member for Tam.
worth ne 1829 ? " Samething must be done." What we'
the language of the preterit premier in 1844 ? " Ireland is
occupied and not governed." So it is now under the noble
lord. Was no' Ireland as truly occupied and net
in 1818 as in 1844 ? Re was sick and tired of such an lathe.
eile government, the end of which would seem to he either
civil war or the repeal ()tithe union. Tne noble lord (LordJ.
Russell) had, in his speech that . vening, seemed to soy that
there was only one party to whom Irelann presented an
iasuperable difficulty. Ireland was the bugbear of the right
hon. baronet, and nothing war to be done until the noble lord
was seated on the treasury bench. The Irish were led to look
upon the noble lord as &sewed St. Patrick. The poor Peeale
of Ireland had hardly expected to find the noble lord in the
situation of the " Bottle Conjuror." They expected the
noble lord to fulfil his promises. They were enraged to find
that instead of creeping into his bottle he had only crept into
office. The noble lord ejected the right hon. baronet on the
Coercion Bill, and all present would doubtless remember the
promises made by the then eninis• er in posse, and be able to
compare theta with the per:ormences of the minnter in me.
Tne people of Irelsad,however,had long memorienand they
looked for the completion ot the promise a held outhy the noble
lord. Oa the 15th June,lBl6, the noble lord taunted the right
lion. baronet with Laving brought in a coercion bill, unac-
companied by any ameliorative measures. What had been
the course dl the noble lord and his colleagues ? He had
passed twe coercive bills mo a Habeas Corpus Suspension Act
during the present session. And what did he hold out new ?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer talked of " self reliance,"
and the noble lord reeorernewled them to look forward to
tranquillity and onward progress, as the only amelioraeom
to be expected. But were the se the proper completion tf
the promises made by the present government ? The mem-
ber of the noble lord's ministry had volunteered a pledge to
place the Lists people on an equality, as between the catholic
mid the protestant churches. But this was when they were
out of office. He would not ray one word against the pro-
testant clergymen in Irelan. The reresentatives of
Ireland had been told that their apathpy was the rea-
son why nothing Lad. been done towards plat*
the Reman catholic and protestant churches in Ire-
land on a more equal footing. This question was the
cause is
of all the difficulties and dcod that preailed in
Ireland, and until the canker was cut away fromv the root
they would never cease. There never had been witneesed
in any country such a system as that which had prevailed
in Ireland with respect to the protestant crutch. There
were twelve protestant bishops kept up in that country en-
dowed with little short of 70,000/. a year,. and all the while
it wee forgotten that there was such a thing existing in Ire-
land as a population of 8,000,000 Roman cetholies. It was
true that catholic priests were allowed to otiviate as chap-
lains in gaols, but they were 'eft to wring tbe pittance neeen
eery for their support from the poorest oottiers. When the
noble lord talked at "gradual progress" in Ireland, what did
he mean to do with the church establishment there?
If he (Mr. B. Osborne) did not agree in what the
honourable member for Manchester had said, it was
because he did not think the plan was ripe for execution.
The defence made by the magnate' and bishops of the
Irieh church for their large benefices and incomes was, that
if the whole sum received by them were spread over the
church there, not a single clergyman would receive more
than 2001. a year. That was true, but the country had a
right to inquire whether protestant clergymen were wanted
in Ireland. And when the boo. member for Limerick
asserted that the people of England were not prepared to do
away with the Irish church, he would tell him that he (Mr.
B. Osborne) was ready to go to the hustings on th it questime
quite sure that the electors of Middlesex could nut turn hem
out upon it. The noble lord at the bead of the Woods and
Forests, when secretary for Ireland, had defined the mese
tent church there to he a mass of livings without muted
souls, and a large amount of pay without any work, and the
hon. member for Manchester had only borrowed the noble
lord's thunder in saying what he did. on a former evening
ow this subject. How had the Roman catholics been
trusted by the government in respect to grants of public
money ? By a return which he held in his hand, he hued
that irons the year 1800 to 1812, the protestant chinch in
Ireland had received from the public purse, the sum of
2,075,4601. The protestant dissenters in Ireland bad to.
ceived 1,019,0001. during that periol ; whilst the Roam
catholic' had received 30.1,6111. And this was what they
called. putting all religious creeds on an equality. It was
idle to talk of protestant ascendancy having been put down
in Ireland. The shadow was removed; the substance still
remained. By the same return he found that there were 41
protestant benefices in ,Ireland in which not a protestant
was to be found ; there were 99 in which there were lea this
20 protestants iii eace ; and there were 124 benefices is
which the number of protestants ranged from 20 to
50, but did. not exceed the latter amou chnt. It su a
state of things had been observed by the people of
England tar prevail in any other nation of Europe there
woul. have been only one opinion as to its injustice sad
impolicy ; hut they were familiarised to its existence in Ire
land and forgot its wickedness. He might he asked whet hs
proposed to substitute for the present state of the Irish
church. He woued answer, that if the government desired
to work a cure, and do real good in Ireland. th-y would
alter the present territorial system of the protestant church
to the congregational system. The ter:iteni .1 test/mem-
celled out the whole bind in districts, acd gave cl. maim
and bishops to them, whether they contained any protestant'
or none. Such a system might be very applicable to a
country where there was only one prevailing religion; Wit
could not be Girl), enforced amongst a people retiree reliette
was opposed to that so ma arced. The congregetioeal system
that paid each clergyman according to the wants ot the die
trict, was the only proper mode of maintaining the Pee
teatant religion in Ireland. Strange to say, that systen
had been proposed by a member of the reflll
honourable baronet's (Sir R. Peens) former govern
moat. When the noble lord below him (elorreth)
proposed in the year 1835 to sequester all the livings in Ire
land where there were not fifty protestants to be found'
Mr. Biaghara Baring, the present Lord Ashburton, Ple
posed to have recourse to the congregation) evsteco, and
that propo.itien was received by the hon, member for Moe
trete with satisfaction, and by the noble lord (J. Rasa
with praise ; only, said the noble lord. " the time has not 111
arrived for it to be carried into practice." Well, they was
now arrived at the year 1811, and yet, ace ring to fto
noble lord, the time had not arrived. But he (Mr. .
Bier
B. OP
borne) would tell the noble lord that bMr
ad
bun Baring's plan been put in practice in 1835, die"
would have been perfect contentment existing throughod
Ireland on this subject at the present time. He would pee
pose also, that the ecclesiastical tenths, together with all mire
nog rent-charges in Ireland, should be disposed of, reset se
life interests, and the proceeds invested in the funds, to td.'
etitute the sources of endowment of the ministers of the
protestant church there. The glebes he would c need he
money in tee same way, and the lands of the bishop sae,
archbishops he would also sell, reserving all existing 0
interests, and invest the preceeds in the funds, as ahead,
stated. He saw no difficulty whatever in carrying tie
this plan, whatever the noble lord might say tot the contqu ri
ate
There was one thing more wanted to effect pefect en
between the Roman catholic and the protestant—that ell
the removal of the Irish bishmies from the House of Leel
A change in this respect would not only lie ueefel as me,
to during equality, but it would afford an opportunity e
reducing the incomes of the Irish episcopal Ind litarey. (
The surplus revenues of the Irish church he would spree
priate as Lord Melbaurne proposed in 1835,
ich would vizta.,
swans,
psy tha,,
over to the consolidated fund, whke
ground for jealousy. Certain it was that until this qua*
of the Irish church urn settled they could. not hope tor pee
manent tranquillity lreland. This was the opicionne.
pressed by 29 members of the present government, incled9e.
eight cabinet's nisters, ex reposed by their votes or spell
on Mr. Wardmotion, in 1843 and 1844. (Bestir;
present state of the University of Dublin was another ,e.
ot complaint. There could be no equality in Irelan nen!
Roman catholic were excluded from fellows and the Ott
honourssettlement of
of
that universityatthelridi c church
.. ,
ch(Rear.).
tranquillised, he uid not mean to say that that alone 1.,01!
Encumbered sufficient. No patchwork system of leg..slation wooee :
at countr It IFILS no use coming down line!:
Estates Bill, which as now altered woieteen
question Ail
Although
work, and expect that the difficulties of governing
would be solved. (Rear.) Such patchwork legisiatenien
merely furnishing an argument for repeal. Anuther subll
of great importance was that referred to in the tad ,
1845—the improvement of the condition of the i er;
classes, and the development of the resources Viandflelaee
this time one-third of the population of Ire ye" Tie
lutely paupers. He admitted the y had had peee,
for Ireland, and he lamented such a law
.20,;',7,i
passed a century ago ; but there was one p Ant shotef;7l,,
been thought of, viz., the capacity of the coortrY2, 0
tion to its property, to bear a poor law : er_eadi
caw.lithdosoiut;
how far the property of the country could bear tee 7„-,e
of its poverty i Leokiner at the whole rateabisseel'd
Ireland, and comparing it with the poverty, it.w___°,?l,,n,
that a poor-law and nothing lee 11._ WWI mere petelweo;o74
lotion. What were they to do with 2,soenee of 9.°... _a or
people out of work, out of a population ot 5,000,00, ...,,
majority of the young men of the middle and uepeenT,
without professions ? The only way of meetill l ig,
by some such plan as that advoCated by
o wn.
_'..,,,0.
Idoletworth a systematic scheme ol