The Express.
London, England, 1867-02-22 00:00:00

CONTINUANCE BILL.

Lord NAAS, in moving the second reading of the above
bill, redeemed the promise he made on the previous day ,
to state in detail the circumstances which, in the judg-
ment of the government, rendered the measure necessary.
He justified the insertion in the Queen's sre. ch of the
paragraph announcing the intention of the executive not
to ask for a renewal of these exceptional powers on the
expiration of the act of last year, by the fact that Fe.
ninth= in Ireland was then, to all appearances, extinct ;
but the truth was, that the leaden in the move-
ment had carried on their plots in foreign countries.
and everywhere except in Ireland itself. Conse-
quently, it had been impossible to obtain any
certain information relative to their designs. Late events,
with which the public were familiar, however, had shown
that the conspiracy had again reared its head, and that the
&Inger had not diminished. He owned that it was with
reluctance that he undertook the disagreeable duty of pro-
posing the suspension of the ordinary law. That reluct-
ance was not decreased when he found himself called upon
to enforce the powers which the act conferred. And it
was with equal reluctance, if not loathing, that he had
now to perform the irksome duty of proposing a
continuance of those powers. He then described
the proceedings of the Fenian agents and their recruits,
and gave the history of the events which culminated in
the recent foolish rising in Kerry. So far as he could
learn, he was happy to say that there was no sympathy
on the part of the rural population with a conspiracy
which sonic persons had represented as being very wide
spread. He did not mean to say there was not a great
deal of discontent in Ireland, hut it was a noteworthy
fact that of the 752 persons arrested under the Lord
Lieutenant's warrant in 1m66 for participation in the
Fenian movement only 35 were farmers and 20 farmers'
sons, whilst there were 29 national schoolmasters. The
government did not require a renewal of their present
powers for a period longer than was absolutely necessary ;
and in order that parliament might during this session
have an opportunity of deciding whether their further
continuance was advisable, the bill proposed that the act
should be renewed for three months only.
Sir G. GREY seconded the motion. At the present mo-
ment he did not think it would promote the peace of the
country that government should be without the power
which they now asked for.
Mr. BAGWELL said he did not rise to oppose the bill,
but to complain that the persons who have been arrested
were kept in solitary confinement.
Mr. BLAKE also disclaimed any intention to oppose
the bill, but he hoped that the government would bring in
measures to promote the prosperity of the country. He
did not think that the Land Bill would do any good.
. . .

Major KNOX was surprised to hear the bon. member
opposite request that the ruffians in custodif he might
so call them—should be treated better than— insolvent
debtors. He trusted, however, that that application would
not be listened to. He regretted that the government had
not proposed the bill fora year, instead of three months—
(oh, ohj—for he felt sure that all right-minded people in
Ireland regarded it not as an insult, but as a protection. He
had lately read that the hoe. member for Birmingham had
called a meeting—he (Major Knox) would nut say of what—
, and had proposed at that meeting that the country should
I buy up estates and resell them to the tenant-farmers ; but
be was met by a number of people, who said that they
would rather have it for nothing. After that, be
trusted the hon. member would not go roving about Ire-
land, raising expectations which could never be fulfilled.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT—I had no intention of saying a word in
this discussion. I can assure the hon. gentleman who
has just spoken, and who, I presume, is a member from
Ireland, that I shall say nothing to him as to any opinion
he may entertain about me, or about what I may have said
or done. I rise for the purpose of expressing my astonish-
ment that there should be one member in this house who
defends the course which has been condemned by the hon.
member for ClonmeL You arrest men under the existing
act merely on suspicion—merely as a precautionary mea-
sure, at a time when suspicions are common, and when
evidence is often very little to be depended upon—and the
men who are so arrested are treated, if not with the harsh-
ness, with the severity which is only shown to criminals
who have been convicted. (Cheers.) It appears to me
that parliament could never have intended that that treat-
ment should be applied to persons arrested under the act.
(Cheers.) They are not to be punished. The act does not
intend that they should be punished. They have not been
tried, and it is not the custom in England, it is not tote de-
fended under the English constitution, that men who have
never been tried, and who cannot, therefore, have been
convicted or sentenced, shall suffer the severity which
seems to commend itself to the feeling and the sense of
justice of the hon. gentleman who has just spoken.
(Cheers.) After that I am not surprised that the hon.
gentleman should complain of the noble lord for not having
recommended the house to pars this bill for more than
three months. Why, if there be one thing more than
another that has given satisfaction on this sad occasion
it is that the noble lord was able to say it was better
that the bill should only pass for three months, and
that he hoped after that time to be able to assure the
house that the act was no longer necessary. (Cheers.)
The hon. gentleman comes here from the country which
has suffered all this mischief, and which I sup-
pose during the lifetime of the oldest member of
this house has been periodically before it in the
position in which we now find it, complaining—rightly
or wrongly—complaining always of injustice, and sub-
jected always to coercive measures. I certainly had
hoped that there would not have been a member from
Ireland that would stand up before the parliament of Eng-
land—before the imperial parliament—and express what
I was about to call, and what if I was out of this house I
would call, such atrocious sentiments. (C beers and laughter.)
Mr. O'BEIRNE did not intend on this occasion to op-
pose the proposition of the noble lord, but he regretted t.,
say that the measure recently introduced by the noble lord
was considered by hon. members around him as neither
more nor less than a delusion. He was glad the noble
lord had recognised the services of the Roman catholic
bishops and clergy, and he trusted that he would re-
member those services in the cause of law and order
by repealing that degrading statute the Ecclesiastical
Titles Act. (Cheers.)

Mr. KENNEDY said there were many things in Ireland
that were galling to the feelings of the people, but that
did not, like the land question, touch their pockets. The
peat desideratum was au effective measure on that sub-
fect—a description which he did not think would apply to
the bill of the noble lord. What was absolutely necessary
was that there should be something in the nature of
security of tenure. (Hear, hear.)
The bill was then read a second time.

THE METROPOLITAN POOR BILL.
The second reading of Mr. Hardy's Metropolitan Poor
Bill was preceded by a long conversation, in the course of
which Lord Enfield expressed a wann approval of the bill,
and indicated several points on which he thought it
capable of improvement ; and various details were criti-
cised by Mr. Locke, Mr. Alderman Lawrence, Mr. Cham-
bers, Mr. H. Lewis, Mr. Scourfield, Mr. Hibbert, Mr.
Alderman Morrow, and Mr. Villiers in a spirit of general
approval.
Mr. HARDY promised to take into consideration the
numerous suggestions made, and, in replying in detail to
various criticisms, he allowed that the consolidated
orders of the Board constituted a valuable code fur the
management of the poor ; but pointed out that the
Board needed greater power to enforce them, not so
much that guardians openly resisted them, but too many
were in the habit of defeating them by dilatory and
shuffling evasions. In answer to Mr. Villiers'. objection
that the principle of enlarging the area of rating was
not carried far enough, he said he had been actuated by
practical considerations alone, with • full foreknowledge
that if he had proposed to equalise the rates throughout
the whole metropolis, the bill would have been met by •
strenuous opposition, which would have been fatal to it.
He intimated that he had in preparation a bill for the
more equitable assessment of the metropolis, which he
would introduce if Mr. Hunt's general bill for that pur-
pow met with • favourable reception.
The bill was then read • second time, and ordered to
be committed this day fortnight.
The Shipping (Load Dues) Bill was read • second time.
The house went into committee, and agreed to formal
resolutions on which bills are to be founded upon the sub-
jects of Trades Unions (Expenses of Witnesses) and