The Sun.
London, England, 1839-04-18 00:00:00

TILE SUN-, LONDON, THURSDAY, APRIL is. Is3o

As to the question of finality, of which the Noble Lord had
SO often talked, he considered there was nothing so absurd
as to speak of finality and the English Constitution. What,
he would ask, was that House for, or the House of Lords,
but for the purpose of remedying abuse. He would not
now enter at large into this question, but he thought it his
duty to protest against such an absurd doctrine as the final-
ity of Reform. Ile was not for having new consti-
tutions every five or seven years, but when he
saw peat abuses existing for a series of years, be felt
bound to say it was the duty of every honest man to try to
remedy them. Ile was for moderate, timely, and constitu-
tional Reform, such as would tend to the good of the
people. He believed that the House would for ever blight
the interests of the people of Ireland, if they rejected the
resolution proposed by the Noble Lord the Secretary of
State for the Home Department, because then they would
hays' Lord Roden at.d his allies governing Ireland._
(Cheers.) No doubt that the Court of Russia would
rejoice if that resolution were rejected.--.( Hear, hear,
hear.) No doubt, if such a course were adopted,
the camp of Don Carlos would rejoice with vivas—
(Cheers)—and every despot in Europe would rejoice, but
unhappy Ireland would be led over to anarchy and confu•
sion ; property would be destroyed, and all good land-
lords, like the Duke of Leinster, would leave in disgust,
and those who remained would exclaim—
" Vat victis et vat victoribus."

Lord INGE STRIE wished to know to whom the Hon.
Member had referred in the statement ho had made relative
to a Noble Lord.
Mr. W. BARRON said that he had alluded to a re-
latve of the Noble Lvrd. Oa the estates of the Marquis
of \Vete' ford, in the county of Waterford, there were,
since the contested election in 1836 up to 1839, r.o less
than 1,200 individuals turned out of their dwellings,
and most of them had been let.
Lord INGE STINE must absolutely deny the position
the Hon. Member had taken up. Of his own knowledge,
those tenants were ejected with their own concurrence—
( Laughter)—they had left their cabins entirely with their
own consent; they were forgiven their rents, and they
actually assisted in pulling their own houses down.
He (Lord Ingestrie) thought that Hon. Members, when
they made accusations like those brought torward by the
Hon. Member opposite, should take care that they bad
all the facts connected with them in their own knowledge.
Ile was ready on any occasion when the Hon. Member
thought fit to make good his statements, to meet him, and
join issue upon them.
Mr. W. BARRON said that he had property ad-
joining that of the Noble Marquis to whom he bad re-
ferred, and he felt bound to say that some of the tenants of
that Noble Lord were at the present moment actually
residing in the houses of his tenants for charity.
Mr. VII, LIE RS STUART felt bound in justice to
the Noble Lord opposite to state that he was not aware of
the circumstances to which the Hon. Member referred.
&it R. BATE SON would not follow the example set
by the lion. Member who had just sat down, in the tone
and feeling with which he had addressed the House, be-
cause he thought on a subject like the present, all
party feeling should be thrown aside, end the wel-
fare of Ireland only considered. He must admit that
Ireland had Lnproved in a rapid manner with.
in the last twenty years, but he was astonished to hear the
Honourable Member quoted high rents as a proof of
the prosperity of the country, while a. another moment he
stated that the people were starving on account of them.
—( Hear, hear.) The statement of the Hon. Member
with respect to the landlords ol Ireland was a foul ca-
lumny upon them.—( Hear, hear. ) If there were such
guilty landlords as the Hon. Gentleman had stated, it was
his duty to state who they were, and where they resided.
As to the statements which had been made by the Hon.
Member, relative to the, opposition on that side of
the House to the plan for making railroads in
Ireland, he thought that it was a job, and that
the whole plan of it was bottomed in jobbing.
Ile knew capitalists who had been willing to advance
money in forming a railroad from Belfast to Armagh—
who bad been refused aid from the Treasury, and conse-
quently obliged to suspend their proceedings. If the Go-
vernment had brought forward a plan for assisting spirited
individuals in Ireland in forming railroads, without refe-
rence to North or South, he would support it ; but he threw
back the taunts of Honourable Gentlemen opposite, and
would not be prevented by them from opposing a waste of
money on a private job. With regard to education, it was
not what had been denominated an Orange faction that
had deprived the people of Ireland of the benefits of
united education, but it was those who substituted for the
system of the Kildare-street Society one which had been
universally admitted as a failure. It had been rejected by
the Protestants and by the Presbyterian Church of the north.
( Hear, hear, from Mr. O'Connell.) The system was
only for the Roman Catholics, and among them there was
a schism upon the subject, and large sums had been lavished
in support of that system, of which the Hon. Member for
the county of Wicklow had a short time since demon-
strated the complete failure. The Hon. Gentleman had
chosen to accuse the Tory party, as ho called them, of
having been guilty of a gross insult to all Roman Catho-
lics, because the Duke of Richmond at the Castle had
given the toast of "the glorious memory." This was the
first time he had ever heard a Catholic gentleman
say that he considered that toast an insult.—(Laughter
from the Ministerial side of the House.) He bad seen
Roman Catholics join in drinking it as a good old Whig
toast, and if there were an old Whig remaining on the
other side of the House, which be very much doubted, be
would appeal to him if such were not the fact—and no
taunts would prevent Protestants from drinking that toast.
He bad heard that the Honourable Member for
Dublin had drank it in a glass of Boyne
water—and he trusted that it would never be
considered as an insult by the Roman Catholics.
He lamented the bitterness exhibited on the opposite
side of the House, against what they called the Orange
faction. Orange and Protestant were with them synony-
mous.—( Cries of, " No, no.") He was never an Orange-
man, nor hadiever belonged to a Secret Society ; but if
the course pursued by the Government was persisted
in, the Protestants of Ireland would be compelled to be-
come Orangemen. The Orangemen had beer, maligned
and deceived, faith had been broken with them. The
Noble Secretary for the Home Department had said,
that if their Society was'dissolved other Societies should
be dissolved also, but this had not beeu the case ;
they had been made martyrs, and subjected to insults,
bodies of troops had paraded the north of Ireland on the
12th of July in consequence of drunken alehouse reports,
which had been sent up to Dublin by busy Stipendiary
Magistrates, although there had been no intention for
meeting, and although persons paraded in military
array with green flags on St. Patrick's day, no
military force had been sent down, and he con-
tended even-handed justice had not been dealt out
in the north of Ireland when this difference had
been msde in the treatment of the Orangemen professing
principles of ultra-loyalty, and the Ribbonmen who pro-
fessed rebellion. It had been stated that when Lord
Haddington came into Dublin, the Orange flag waved over
his head. If some one in the upper gallery of the theatre
waved the flag over his head, how could he help it. He
did not believe that Lord Haddington was cognizant of it.
The Hon. Member opposite had asked why Lord Nor.
manby's Court had been shunned, because he came into
Dublin as a party man, surrounded by party flags and ban-
ners, and accompanied by bands playing party tunes.
Mr. O'CONNELL—What do you call party tunes ?
Sir R. BATE ON had on one occasion heard, God
save the Queen, called a party tune, but he would mention
St. Patrick's Day, which was as much a party tune as Boyno
Water. With regard to the private character of Lord Nor-
manby, he could bear testimony to the suavity of his man-
ners. His successor Lord Fortescue he believed to be
a man of excellent private character, but from his ex-
pressions with regard to the Church of England in Ireland,
he considered his appointment a most dangerous one.
With regard to the liberation of prisoners by the Lord
Lieutenant, they had heard that when he came to Water-
ford he called a jury, and that none were pardoned without
its concurrence. He did not impugn the justice of their
decision, but the Hon. Member for Drogheda had made a
different representation, and had said how difficult it was
for gentlemen of large property to procure a commutation
of sentence. It was the power of priests who did it,
and their recommendation was more efficient than that
of judge or jury. In the year that Lord Normanby
came to Ireland two parties in Londonderry had
been convicted of outrage, the one Protestants, the other
Roman Catholics—the latter, who were the aggressors,
were sentenced to nine months' imprisonment, and the
Protestants to six. On the day that the Protestants left
gaol, the Roman Catholics likewise were liberated, and in
answer to a question which he had put in that House, it
had been stated that they were liberated on the petition of
the jury who tried them. In one week after he had re-

,urnedto Ireland, and nine out of twelve of the jurors had

offered to make oath that they had never seen or
signed such petition.—(llear.) He wished that other
lion. Members would join the Hon. Member for Meath in
his wish to drop party animosities, and so far were they
from wishing to annoy their Roman Catholic fellow sub-
jects, that he felt certain that if the Hon. Member for We-
ford came to the north of Ireland, he would find his Roman
Catholic fellow countrymen lived as happily in the midst
of the Orange faction as they would if surrounded by per-
sans of their own religion. The bane as d curse of Ireland
was, that a brave, open-hearted,. susceptible people, were
not allowed to follow the dictates of their own good
feelings, but were worked upon by interested persons
for their own base and sordid purposes, and he would tell
Hon. Gentlemen opposite that, if they would cease their
system of agitation, and devote their time to the improve-
mant of,the people by giving them a system of education
that should teach them their duty to God and to man ; and
above all, if they would cease from their endeavour to
calumniate the landlords of Ireland, the people of that un-
happy country would he in a very different position from
that in which they now were.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
There was now no security for life or property. A man
was now murdered for his religion—not for his purse or
property, but because ho worshipped his God.—( Hear,
hear.) He despaired of the peace of Ireland, until the
Catholic Clergy exercised their power for the purpose of
detecting crime. In respect to appointments, be thought
the Protestants of Ireland had great reason to complain of
partiality. The Protestants of the north of Ireland felt
that evenhanded justice had not been dealt out between
them and the Roman Catholics in the south. He
wou!d not trouble the House further, except to
state that he felt great pleasure in supporting the
amendment of his Right lion. Friend. The arguments
of the Right Hon. Baronet in his luminous, eloquent,
unanswerable, and unanswered speech, were so convincing
that to attempt to go over them would only be to weaken
them, and to waste the time of the House.—(Hear, hear,)
Mr. BARRON explained.
Mr. G ROTE said that in the course of this debate they
had heard several speeches principally, if not entirely,
from Irish Members ; those speeches of course entered
very largely into the detail of Irish Societies and Irish Ad-
ministrations, and he trusted that if be declined to follow
them into those
grounds it would not be ascribed to
any want of interest in Irish matters, but that it would be
ascribed to a befitting deference to their acquaintance
with the fact 3. The facts and details fromone side of the
House and another, impressed him with a deep sense of its
being incumbent on the Legislature to discharge its duty,

no less than with a conviction that hitherto tlie Legisla- I
turn had not discharged its duty towards Ireland.—( Hear,
hear.) The few remarks he should make would be prin-
cipally in explanation of the vote he should give. If he
looked at the terms in which the Noble Lord's resolution
was proposed, they seemed to bear exclusively on the Irish
administration of late years. The resolution pronounced
an opinion as to the good principles that had been ob.
served during recent years in the Irish Executive
Administration, and as to the propriety of persevering
in such coursa for the future,—(Hear.) It touched on
no other point, nor did it condemn or approve of any other
branch of the Ministerial policy.—( Hear, hear.) if the
matter put in issue related exclusively to the Irish Adminis
tration, he should have had no hesitation about his vote,
nor should he have thought it necessary to trouble the
House with any observations. He approved, most cor-
dially, of those principles which had guided the Marquis of
Normanby in his administration of Irish affairs.—( Hear,
hear.) He had pronounced that opinion publicly on more
than one occasion. He believed the principles acted on
by the Marquis of Normanby had been, to a remarkable
degree, equitable and beneficial to the entire nation and
conciliatory in a high degree towards the feelings of the
Catholic majority—( Hear, hear)—but he could not help
feeling that on this occasion the proceedings of the Irish
Executive Administration were not really put in issue by
themselves. He could not conceal from himself that there
lay wrapped up in this resolution another issue, indirect
and collateral indeed, but yet of very considerable impor-
tance. They had been told that the vote of the House of
Lords, directing an inquiry into the administration of the
Marquis of Normanby in Ireland, was tantamount
to a vote of censure on the present Administration.
The present vote of the House of Commons by the
Ministers invoked was intended as a negation of
that vote of censure, and therefore more or less implying
general approbation and confidence in the Ministry, and
he was quite satisfied that when this division should have
taken place, the partizans of the present Government
would be anxious to proclaim the lofty estimation in which
the Ministry was held by the House of Commons. Aware
as he was of the construction that might be put on this
vote, it had been with him a matter of great consideration
whether he could take any part in it not. On the whole,
he had come to the conclusion, that, agreeing as he did in
the specific and direct import of the resolution, it was his
duty to vote in its favour.—(Lotid cheers, and cries of
'• Hear hear, hear.") But he certainly would not do so
without explaining what his vote was intended to imply—
( Hear, hear)—nor without guarding his vote against such
collateral inference as might naturally be deduced from a
silent support of the Noble Lord's resolution. His vote
was intended to imply nothing more than an approbation,
and a very sincere approbation, of the principles which had
governed Lord Normanby's Administration in Ireland.
Others might connect with that opinion in favour of Lord
Normanby's Administration, a feeling of general concur-
rence and esteem of the policy of the present Minis-
ters. lie entertained no such feeling, nor would
his vote imply it. lie had no wish to see Lord
Melbourne continue in office, nor would he support a mo-
tion to that effect, if it were submitted to the House.—
( Hear, hear.) He would vote for this resolution as he
would for a resolution commending the principles on which
the Catholic Emancipation Act was passed, without mean-
ing to imply any concurrence in the views of the Right
Honourable Baronet, the Member for Tam worth, by whom
that Act was passed.—( Hear, bur.) Whatever Ministry
might come to the helm of affairs, it was his wish that the
principles which guided Lord Normanby's administration
should be persevered in.—( Hear.) He must say that the
administration of Irish affairs, stood in remarkable con-
trast with the other proceedings of the Government.
The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, and
the Hon. Member for Wakefield ( Mr. Lascelles) did not
by any means join in the attack on Lord Normanby's Go-
vernment. What woes the reason that the Fabian tactics of
the Right lion. Baronet had been set aside and broken
through, and what was the reason that the Noble Lord
the Member for Stroud had taken the remarkable step
of invoking a resolution in favour of Lord Normanby's
Administration? It was because that Administration had
been conducted on equitable and liberal principles
( Hear, hear.) It was that which had drawn on him so
many attacks from the opposite side, and
,it was
that which induced him (Mr. Grote) to concur
in a vote in his defence.---( Hear, hear.) He
had been asked whether they should upset the coach. He
must say there was much about the coach that needed a
most complete and extensive repair.--( Hear.) As to any
further measures of improvement, either administrative or
legislative, he concurred with the lion. Gentleman who
wrote that letter to him, that their chance of obtaining any
such measures was not a whit greater under the present
Ministry than it would be under a Ministry of the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth, and he be-
lieved that a large proportion of those who were attached to
a steady course of progression and Reform were rapidly
verging towards that opinion. What was this doctrine
about the finality or the sufficiency of the Reform Bill?
Because, though the word finality was now repudiated,
the thing was carefully maintained—( Hear, hear)—what
was that doctrine except an absolute negation of all
Reform ? What was it except the Conservative prin.
ciple announced in all its plenitude and vigour ?
—( Hear, hear, hear.) It could be no secret to
any man that as the Representative system was at present
established no Reform could be obtained except such as it
should please the Right Hon. Gent. the Member for
Tamwortn to consent to. They had the Conservative
principles now predominant, but he was opposed to a Con-
servative •Government -ana to a:Finality Government, by
whomsoever it might be carried on. But it the country
was fated to experience the vexation and disappoint-
ments it had lately experienced, it was a matter of
indifference to him whether the Premier was Lord Mel-
bourne or the Right Hon. Bart. the Member for Tam-
worth.—( Hear, hear.) If they could not have an efficient
Liberal Ministrv,:the next best thing was an efficient Liberal
Opposition—(Hear, hear)—as matters now stood, for the
first time in English history, there was neither a Liberal
Ministry nor a Liberal Opposition.—( Cheers.) They had
a Ministry which, though it once professed Liberal princi-
ples, yet now neither manifested the will nor possessed the
power to accomplish anything but Conservative purposes.
They had a most powerful Opposition that now was and
always had been essentially Conservative. How long this
state of the political world, alike inglorious and unpromis-
ing would last he did not know ; but no change or combi-
nation of parties could be more adverse than the present
to the success of Liberal principles, and to the accom-
plishment of substantial reforms throughout our institutions.
He would have been well pleased to have been spared
that explanation, because he was perfectly certain that it
would give satisfaction to neither party, but he had thought
it his duty to define the motives which induced him to vote
in favour of the Executive Government of Lord Normanby,
at the same time he would give his vote for the amend-
ment of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, because he felt
that no Government could do justice to the people either
of England or of Ireland, unless they agreed to that mo-
tion.—( Cheers.)
Mr. GIBSON approved of several of the senti-
ments embodied in the amendment which had
been moved by the Right Honourable Baronet
the Member for Tamworth, and he was very sin-
cerely rejoiced to hear from that Right Hon. Baronet that
if he were called upon to govern this country, religious
opinions should form neither a qualification nor a disquali-
fication for any office which he had to bestow. He re-
joiced that the Right Hon. Baronet had given expression
to such sentiments, because it had been over and over
again asserted that if the Right lion. Baronet acceded to
power, he would act upon different principles than those
dictated by the spirit of the Catholic Relief Bill. He re-
gretted that the Right Honourable Baronet had not
gone the full length of saying that he would con-
fer his patronage upon merit—upon those who,
whatever their religious opinions might be, were qualified
for the office, in place of stating that he would confer that
patronage upon political partisans of any description.—
(Cheers.) At the same time, he knew that it was an ac-
knowledged principle upon both sides of the House, that
partisans only should be advanced to place; but he for one
could not agree in that principle.—( Cheers. ) Everything
now was carried on by Associations—whether an alteration
was wanted in the Beer-laws, in the Corn. laws, or in any
other laws, all now was done by Associations. An Associa-
tion was a very powerful instrument, whether for good or for
evil ; but now that they had become so common, it became a
very grave question whether it was proper to put any Member
of an Association under a ban, and so deprive him of offi-
cial patronage. He concurred in every sentiment which
had fallen from the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth,
regarding party processions, which, of course, must be
wounding to the feelings of some party. He hoped that
all parties would take that discouragement as applicable to
themselves. He hoped that the Protestant Association
which was shortly to assemble at Exeter Hall, in order to
hear the Protestant agitators, Sullivan and M'Ghee,
would consider that the Right Hon. Bart., the leader of a
great political party, had positively denounced such pro-
ceedings as they intended to carry on. ( Loud
cheers.) The question, as he understood it, was
whether the Government had a right to ask the House
of Commons for an approval of their policy in Ireland.
Respecting that question, a very great deal depended
upon whether the vote of the House of Lords was actually a
vote of censure or not. If it was a vote of censure, the
Ministry had a right to come to that House and demand to
see how far the Representatives of the people would sup-
port them in their policy. As for waiting for any informa-
tion that was to be collected by a Committee of the House
of Lords, he rejected that idea at once. As a Member of
the House of Commons, he felt that he was not bound to
take his opinions from any Committee out of that House.
—(Loud cheers.) The Right Hon. Member for Tam_
worth said it was not a vote of censure. The Hon Mem-
ber for Wakefield (Mr. Lascelles) said that the vote went
a long way towards it. Another Hon. Member said
that:it was an implied vote of censure. The Duke of
Wellington in the House of Lords—(Cries of " Order, or-
der")—an illustrious Duke in another place—( Laughter)-
-also said that it was not a vote of censure, but her Ma-
jesty's Ministers all said that it was so. His experience in
Parliament did not give him the opportunity of knowing
whether it was so or not, and therefore he would give no
vote at all upon the occasion.—(Cheers.) In his opinion,
however, the Ministry would not have acted properly, if
they had taken a vote of censure upon their policy from
:he House of Lords, and not have come to that House and
asked it to give an opinion upon the same subject.
Sir E. L. BIM WE R said the Hon. Member who had
just sat down, did not know whether there had been a
vote of censure upon the Government or not. At all events,
the vote complained of had established a Committee that
was to take into their consideration the whole Executive
policy towards Ireland during the last three years.—
(Cheers.) Of course, considering the nature of things,
that Committee was composed of persons desirous of esta-
blishing their own views.—(Cheers.) Look at any Irish
newspaper, and they would find that this Committee was
viewed in no other light, than as an inquisition, appointed
to inquire into the liberties of Ireland, and as a Court of
Appeal upon the Royal prerogative of mercy.—( Cheers. )
That Committee having been appointed, what course
could the Government take, otherwise than to come to that
House and ask whether the representatives of the people
would support their policy or not.—(Cheers.) The
amendment, which had been moved, was honourable

to the Right Honourable Baronet, the IVieraber
for Tamworth, in so far as it laid no traps for
Honourable Members of that side of the House. —( Cheers.)
The Right Hon. Baronet complained that the Government
had not asked for a vote of confidence on their general po-
licy. The reason ie as obvious; they only asked for a par-
tial vote of confidence, because that only one part of their
policy had been called in question. The Right Hon.
Baronet, in making out his first proposition, said that the
Government were not justified in asking for any declaration
of opinion from that House without inquiry, but it appeared
to him (Sir E. L. B.) that that was the most cutting de-
claration against the House of Lords, for they had declared
that there was no safety for either life or property in Ireland,
while at the same time they were appointing a Committee
to inquire into the fact--(Cheers)—appointing a Commit-
tee, the evidence before which might show that their opi-
nions were altogether erroneous.—(Cheers.) The Com-
mittee interfered with the whole executive policy towards
Ireland—it was appointed at very moment when
a new Lord Lieutenant was entering upon his duties,
and evidently with a view to paralyse the whole measures
which he might think it his duty to pursue. The Right
Hon. Baronet had said that they ought to avoid any col-
lision with the House of Lords ; but might it not be more
properly said that the House of Lords had courted the col-
lision—that they had called into question the highest pre-
rogative of the Crown. Was that House then not justi-
fied in calling into question that conduct.—( Cheers.) If
there was no censure in the appointment of the Committee,
then there could be no collision in a vote of approval.
(Cheers. ) Was not a Government the best judge of what
was a vote of censure, and what was not ?—( Hear, hear. )
If it was a vote of censure, fifty collisions would not bring
the House of Lords into such contempt as the taking no
notice of their conduct by that House. It appeared to hint
that no case whatever had been made out for any Com-
mittee of Inquiry upon the motion of the Hon. Recorder of
Dublin, no English statesman had taken any part during two
nights' debate, and upon the third night, the questionwas not
of such consequence as to command the attendance of forty
members, and the motion in the House ofLot ds had been car-
ried by a mere majority of five. The Hon. Member for
Belfast had resented the taunt of the Hon. and Learned
Member for Dublin—that he and others who sat with him
upon the opposite side of the House had no affection for
their native country. He ( Sir E. L. B.) must say that he
had heard many Members of that House belonging to Ire-
land take such a course as tended to show that the great
majority of their country were cut-throats and blood-suckers.
If they wished to show that property was insecure, they
must show a diminution in the value of land, but
land had considerably increased in point of value.—( Hear,
hear.) And during this time of hope and comfort to the
C ohne population, the Protestant minority had lost no
substantial benefit. —( Hear, hear.) Had they not under
the Administration of Lord Normanby, obtained that by
the Bill which they could never obtain under any other ?
It might be a reproach to the administration to have passed
it without the appropriation clause, but that reproach could
not come from Hon. Gentlemen opposite--( Hear, hear)--
for if they had been in office, if lord Normanby had not
by mild and conciliatory government disarmed hostility--
that Bill would have been resisted from one end of Ireland
to the other. —( Hear, hear.) The benefit of a concilia-
tory Government was as much for the minority as for the
majority.--( Hear, hear.) He wished to ask Hon. Gen.
tlemen opposite one question—Were they prepared on the
subject of Irish policy to expel the present Government
and take on themselves the reseonsibility of office ? The
Right Hon. Baronet had alluded to affairs abroad, but
when it was so unpopular to talk of increasing the military
force, how could he expect to keep up the tithe war and
Orange domhiation.—( Cheers.) With respect to the
more general question which had been touched on by the
Hon. Member for London, this was not a vote of general
confidence in the Ministers ; if it were, he should ask the
Hon. Member for London, before he called on any Re-
former to take measures for the rejection of the present
Administration, to show in the history of the coun-
try any Government, with the exception of Lord
Grey's, which was more clearly identified with
great and imperishable amelioration.—( Loud cheers. )
It was impossible to have a stationary Government with a
progressive people.—( Hear, hear.) The great mass of
the middle classes were not prepared to demand a new
Reform Bill, but they were prepared to demand that
greater effect should be given to the Reform Bill which
they now possessed. He spoke the sentiments of the
people when he stated that they were desirous of a shorter
duration of Parliament—( Hear, hear)—and of giving
their votes without being subject to intimidation under
influence and the sacred ties, and loss of trade and custom
—( Cheers)—he did not think these changes extravagant,
and certainly when the people saw the Government oppos-
ing them they considered that they were opposing princi-
ples that they had formerly supported.—( Cheers.) This
was not a question of the fate of a Government, but the
fate of a once independent nation, which hall been de-
prived of a crown, whose priesthood had been humbled,
whose senate had been silenced, and who now sought this
country to take her children under the letter of our own
laws.—( Cheers.)
Mr. LITTON said they were all agreed that crime
existed in Ireland, and why should they attempt to stifle
inquiry by agreeing to the resolution which had been pro-
posed by the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) Whether the
resolution of the House of Lords implied censure or not,
he should not stop to inquire. If it did not it should not
have been proposed to the House to elicit a vote fa-
vourable to the present Government, because a vote had been
carried by a small majority, on an isolated portion of their
policy. What could be the object of the Ministers in this
House by endeavouring to stifle information? 11 what
the Ministers of the Crown stated were true, why not
have that truth proclaimed in the face of the nation on the
evidence to be produced by the House of Lords? Why
seek to cushion that which should be their canopy, their
shield and their justification if their assertions were true ?
--(Hear, hear.) And if the allegations on the opposite
side were true, why refuse the opportunity of arriving
at the real state of the facts. They (the Opposition) al-
leged that the state of crime in Ireland was owing to the
misgovernment of Lord Normanby, and circumstances con-
nected with his government. On the other hand, it was
alleged that the misfortunes of Ireland were owing to the
want of attention to their duties by the landlords, to tithes,
and other matters. They (the Opposition) asserted that
Lord Normanby, by not consulting the judges before open-
ing the gaols to criminals, bad injured the administration of
the law. On the other hand it was asserted that this was done
in the exercise of the prerogative of mercy, and had
done no harm to the administration of justice. Here was
another issue for inquiry ; they (the Opposition) again
asserted that the law had in truth been opposed by the Irish
Government this assertion was contradicted by the other
side of the House, and there was another issue to be tried.
He was desirous that every British Member of Parliament
should form his judgment after a deliberate investigation
and comparison of full evidence, so that in future they
need have no doubt respecting the degree in which they
should support or oppose the Irish Government. His
(Mr. L's) own opinion was, that the Irish Government
had. shown the greatest possible partiality in distinguish-
ing between religions, and had done infinite mischief by
holding communications with the agitators of the strintry.
The Hon. Gentlemen opposite, among whom were many
Hon. and Learned Friends of his, hadsaid that the present
system of government had done great good to the country
instead of great evil, and that the confidence of the agi-
tators proved that they looked up to it as to a parental
Administration. Here, again, both sides joined issue. He
therefore asked for inquiry, in order that men of all po-
litics, and men of no politics at all, should be enabled to
judge for themselves which side was
right and which
wrong. A British House of Commons ought to insist on
full details; whilst he felt confident that the Report of the
Committee would superinduce, up on the present Govern-
ment, the disapprobation of the Members of this House,
and
of the British people in general, the Hon. Gelemenpe.
site asserted that the result would be in their favour. ?
W
Ifitthhaint
then were their conviction, why object to inquiry
fifty years, the landlords and the tenants
of Ireland were
united by ties similar to those that bound the patrons and
clients in the old Roman history. It was so even within
his own memory. But instead of that happy relation,
those ties were now severed, the peasantry were alienated,
and the landlords were expatriated in alarming numbers,
and British capital had never been so effectually excluded,
while the population was under the almost entire
' sway of the agitators. 'tie appealed to the Honourable
Gentlemen opposte, whether those were not the facts, and
then he asked them why in the name of heaven,
they resisted an i nquiry which promised to disclose the
the causes of that calamitous state of things, and to sug-
gest a remedy for them ? As for the threat that had been
thrown out that the acrsession of a Conservative Govern-
ment would excite a rebellion in Ireland, he treated it as
highly ridiculous in the last degree. He believed in his
soul that the Irish peasantry pined for a steady Govern-
ment that would relieve them from the tyranny of the
agitators—would protect their industry—would encourage
manufactures and the introduction of British capital. As
for the petitions presented in support of the Ministry
the mode of their getting up was well explained last night
by the lion. Member for Monaghan. It was an undeni.
able fact that the mass of those who possess a stake in Ire-
land, and were truly interested in her welfare, were opposed
to her Majesty's Government generally, but especially to
its Irish Administratiot 1. He would now briefly refer to
the petition presented :last night by the Hon. and Learned
Member-for Dublin, from a meeting held in support of her
Majesty's Ministers in that city on the 11th inst. He
(Mr. Litton) would :not deny that the petition was
' very interesting, and f bat it was numerously signed by
men of the highest respectability, but it did not con-
vey the unanimous feelings of the city of Dublin. He
appealed to the Noble Lord opposite (Morpoth) whether
9- lOths of the influential! and respectable citizens of Dub-
lin would not, if called upon, dissent from the language of
that petition ? lie bad t i high respect for that Noble Lord,
and he should be alwriys ready to bear testimony to his
kindness and gentlemanlike forbearance, and he had no
doubt that his Lordship would corroborate his assertion.._
(Laughter, and o Hear.") Nay, the petition did not even
convey the unanimous revsent of those who were present at
that meeting. He had received letters which enabled him to
assert that Alderman Atcher, formerly a Lord Mayor of
Dublin (than whom there was not a more respectable
citizen in any country) had attended for the purpose of
moving " that an humtele and dutiful address be presented
to her Majesty, detailit. g the evils of a general course of
policy pursued by her Majesty's Ministers and praying her
Majesty to dismiss them. from her Councils."—( Laughter,
and Hear, hear.) Mr. Smith was to have seconded the
resolution—the resolution was presented to the Duke
of Leinster (the Chairman), and he believed his Grace
would have put it, if ho had not been prevented ; and the
worthy Alderman and his friend were assured that, if they
persevered in their motion, they would be kicked out of
the house. (Hear, and laughter.)
Mr. GRATTAN said he was on the platform of the
meeting, and heard no such threat.
Mr. LITTON would at once believe the Hon. Gentleman,
but his not hearing the threat was no proof that it had
not been uttered. The fact was, the house in which the
meeting was held was filled with the creatures and sup-
porters of the Irish Government. Ho repelled the chaege
that the Irish Members on his side o? the 1-I,we w:re nal
Irishmen, or that they had attacked their countrymen—
they had only exerted themselves to save their credulous

felloi-countrymen from being withdrawn from their proper
occupations and being made the tools and,stepping- stones
of designing agitators.—(Hear, hear.) Vie 1-;tten)
had never belonged to the Orange Society, nor to any se-
cret body, but it was only justice to the Orangemen to say
that they had at once yielded to the wish of their Sovereign
that they should disband. He had voted against the se-
cond reading of the Irish Corporation Bill, because he be-
lieved that the effect of the Government measure would
be to establish so many schools of politcal agitation, and
that agitation had greatly injured Ireland. He begged to
say that neither himself nor any other member of his party
were ever driven to vote against their own judgment.
that they were independent in the votes they gave—and
that though they might sometimes differ upon particular
measures, they were but taking different roads to the same
point; and the guiding star of their political course was
the preservation of the Church, and the maintenance of
Protestantism in the empire—and, therefore, never let it
be supposed that because, on some occasions, certain in-
dividuals in that party voted differently from their leaders,
that therefore there was division in the camp. ( Hear. )
The Noble Lord opposite, at the conclusion of his speech
on Monday, had spoken of his Ministry as falling; he ( Mr.
Litton) believed that when that Ministry fell it would not
fall, as the Noble Lord had said, in an endeavour to knit
together the hearts of her Majesty's subjects, but because it
had forfeited public confidence, and was a feeble, imbecile,
and inconsistent Government from whose fall he (Mr. L.)
anticipated the greatest benefits to the empire. —(Opposi-
tion cheers.)
Mr. PIGOTT (the Solicitor-General for Ireland) then
rose and said, it was not his intention to enter into a discus-
sion of any of those irrelevant topics which had been
alluded to by his Hon. Friend who had just sat down, and
who had certainly thrown a new light upon the resolution
of the House of Lords, which it would now seem was not
directed to inquire into the causes of crime in Ireland,
but to enter into transactions which had been often dis-
cussed in both Houses—to inquire, for instance, whether
with respect to writs of rebellion, the Government had
afforded enough or too little assistance to the legal autho-
rities.—( Hear, hear.) He would call the attention of the
House to matters more connected with the subject of de-
bate. He had watched with some anxiety for arguments
as to the administration of the law in Ireland, which had
been over and over again touched upon in former discussions,
and he had heard facts stated, and opinions expressed on this
subject which had caused him the greatest astonishment. The
Hon. Member for Belfast (Mr. E. 'Pennant) had, in a
speech betraying no little care in its composition—( Hear,
hear, and laughter)—stated charges against the Irish Go-
vernment with regard to the administration of the law,
which were, in point of fact, totally unfounded, and he had
expressed opinions which had no authority in the law of
the country. With regard to the Special Commission
in Tipperary the Honourable Member appeared desirous
of contrasting that commission with what ordinarily took
place at the assizes in Ireland ; that the juries were differ-
ently constituted, and that, therefore, convictions were ob-
tained. But the jury bad been selected in the ordinary
manner, and he ( Mr. P.) could state that so satisfied
were the prisoners with the constitution of the tribunal that
several of their challenges were inexhausted—( Hear)—
and they were tried by a Jury composed of 9 Roman Ca-
tholics and 3 Protestants. —( Hear.) The Hon. Member had
repeated a charge which had been often advanced, that the
Irish Government had abandoned the right of challenging
jurors. The practice of challenging by the Crown had
formerly been exercised without any limitation• In 1835
the present Judge Perrin, then Attorney-General for Ire-
lan 1, had directed that no juror should be objected to on
the ground either of religion or politics_( Loud cries
of " Hear, hear")—and that jurors were to be ob.
jected to on the part of the Crown only for some just and
reasonable cause, and then the objection was to be
made by the Crown Solicitor, an officer who should be re_
sponsible for the exercise of his discretion.--( Hear.) To
say that the practice had been abandoned altogether was
totally incorrect, but the Irish Government had felt that
nothing could so injure the administration of justice as al-
lowing the public prosecutor to pack the juries--( Hear,
hear)—seeing that all such unfair practices tended to en-
list public sympathy with the culprit.—( Hear, hear.)
And instead of referring to this as an offence on the part
of the Government, he (Mr. P.) considered it as one of
their greatest glories.— (Cheers.) He was amazed at
another charge which had been brought forward by the
Hon. Member for Belfast, that the Crown Counsel had
abandoned the right of reply in prosecutions. Nothing
could ba more unfounded, and he could refer to a recent
case in which, on the prosecution of a Roman Ca
tholic priest, the Roman Catholic Counsel for
the prosecution had spoken to evidence.—( Hear, hear.)
Then, as to the dispensation of patronage at the bar in
Ireland, squally amazed had he been to hear the Hon.
Member actually assert that during Lord Normanby's Ad-
ministration not one single person had obtained the honour
of a silk gown at the Irish bar, who did not belong to a
particular clique in religion, or a particular party in poli-
tics. Surely the Honourable Member must recollect
the names of Messrs. Collins, Miller, Brooks, and others,
who bad received that advancement in their profession
which was due not only to them but to their clients---( Hear)
—and who were not of the Government politics.—( Hear.)
He would fearlessly contrast the conduct of the Governs
ment in this respect with that of former Governreasts ;
and he would mention this one fact, that the present
Judge Perrin, who had been at the bead of the common
law bar in Ireland, had yet been allowed to pass
the greater part of his professional life without that
silk-gown which he saw bestowed upon his juniors in
years and standing, and which he did not at last procure till
the Judges remonstrated with the Government.—( Loud
cries of " Hear, hear.") The same system of exclusion
had been carried on in Scotland and in England.—
(Ironical cheers from the Opposition.) Well, if that
were denied, would it be said that in England and in
Scotland an impartial system had been adopted,
and that it was only in Ireland that injustice had been per-
petrated ?—( Loud cheers.) With regard to promotion to
the Bench by the present Government in Ireland, he would
only name Judge Perrin, Sir M. O'Loghlen, and Chief
Baron Wolfe, and leave the House to decide whether they
were not admirable appointments.—(Loud cheers.) Tha
[lon. Member for Belfast had said that he thought this fact
enough that there were 27,000 criminals in one
year in Ireland. He would now describe to the House
what had been done in Ireland with respect to the Admi-
nistration of the law, and if he were asked what effects ho
should look for in order to prove that an improvement had
taken place in the administration of the law, he should be
inclined to say that he would expect to find a diminution
in the more grave offences—secondly, an apparently
greater amount of minor offences, testing the vigi-
lance of those whose duty it was to carry the law
into effect—farther, he should expect to find that the
proportion of committals to convictions should be reduced,
and he would now read to the House the result of his in-
quiries, which would not be a mere collection of figures,
and he begged their earnest attention to it. In the first
place, the Hon. Member who spoke last but one was per-
fectly correct in saying that in those graver offences
there was a marked diminution of the number. He
was quoting from the police returns, and it appeared
that from 1834 to 1838 homicides had diminished 13
per cent., firing at the person 15 per cent., in-
cendiary fires 17 per cent., burglaries 58 per cent.,
stealing cattle 46 per cent., killing and maiming cattle
12 per cent., administration of unlawful oaths 66 per cent.
—(Loud cheers)—illegal notices 41 per cent., attacks on
houses 63 per cent., illegal meetings 70 per cent.,
and levelling houses 65 per cent. On the subject
of convictions, in proportion to committals, corn.
paring the years 1823, 1824, and 1825, with 1836,
1837, and 1838, he found that the convictions were
increased in proportion to the committals, from 28
per cent, to 43 per cent., and that the non-prosecutions
had diminished from 34 per cent. to 21 per cent.—
( Hear, hear, hear.) Comparing 1832, 1833, and
1834, with 1836, 1837, and 1838, he found that
the non-prosecutions had diminished from 39:t0 20 per cent.
and comparing the year 1834 with 1838, there appeared
this remarkable result, that the convictions had increased
from 40 per cent to 47, and the failures had diminished
from 36 per cent. to 15 per cent.—( Hear, hear.) These
results were all taken from printed documents—they were
not taken from the records of the Clerks of the Peace or
the Clerks of the Crown, but from the reports of those
who checked their returns with the actual goal books,—
namely, the Inspectors of Prisons. Honourable Members
did not appear to know the simple machinery by
which these returns were prepared—the local inspectors of
prisons were almost all clergymen of the Established
Church--they were in constant correspondence with the
inspectors, and finding glaring errors in the returns of the
clerks of the peace, and crown, who acted without salary,
and without responsibility, they had been in the habit of
inspecting the books of the goal, and thereby checking the
multiplication of cases, and preventing any being in-
cluded, excepting the individuals actually in cus-
tody. These were transmitted from time to time to the
Inspector-General of prisons. The Right Hon. Gentle-
man (Mr. Shaw) shook his head, but he challenged him
to disprove these statements. It was impossible that jus-
tice could be done to the Government, or the people over
whom it presided, until the matter was fully investigated.
The Clerk of the Peace for the county of Tipperary gave
of persons
.dpea‘e t
inrhyse
oee person
committals. had
r i)dsnocnnlHou
These
imeh,
eni
nlnsddlto,
.0i h
indicted
rtl ascer-
tainingeyedd tfffithe
,eer.the following account of the mode in which the annual re-
as
turns u r r
statement
s et
hr ee madeaocftutahl oe
numberu t
r.
threere nt b i 111
ds offfo
r e n t indictment,offe
returns from which the Hon. Member for Belfast took
his 27,000.—(Renewed cheering.) These were the
returns which had deluded an illustrious Duke in an_
other place.._ (A laugh, and great cheering.) He
was justified in saying deluded, when_ statements were
h i
thech were
o b e notp uwellke founded.took
the
re-
turn made
that which
It was from that
statement of 700 mur-
ders in one • year.—<, If any person was indicted for three
different offences—for instance, riot, rescue, and assault—
in the annual return it would appear as three if
persons;
the party was respited, the party would appear again as
three persons ; consequently the number of persons was
considerably increased in these returns." He would now
read for the House an extract of a letter from an inspector
of prisons for a northern county ( Donegal), who stated
that " he was often with the Clerk of the Peace
when he prepared his returns, and he had
strictly
charged him to return the name of any person more than
once. If the returns for 1835 and 1836 were examined
these errors would be discovered, and even in 1838 there
would be found twenty-nine instances in which the same
persons for the same offences were returned twice, and one
three times."—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The
Hon. and Learned Member then read an extract from the
return, and observed that it wculd appear from that that
ten persons counted for twenty, and four persons counted
eight. He would now read to the House the mode
adopted to prevent similar errors occurring in the
report of the Inspector General of Prisons. The Ho-
nourable Member then proceeded to describe the course
numberells and He said
soa
adopted by the Inspectors of Prisons upon the spot, stating
that he would leave it to the House to decide which party
was capable of making the best return.—(Hear, hear.)
The calculations lie had referred to were taken from
unt!Lnitic printed document, v‘bich were open to every
Member, and for the fidelity of which he could answer.
The House had already been put in possession of the