The Sun.
London, England, 1839-04-16 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION.

the prerogative of mercy. On that ground, therefore, and the
manner in which justice and mercy ought to be exercised, I f
cannot vote in approbation of those principles that guided the
Irish Government.—(Hear, hear.) Now with respect to as-
sociations, I took down the Noble Lord's own words. I are
not speaking of Orange associations, but of those as-
sociations which have met for the purpose of preparing
the way fur changes. The Noble Lord says, " Associations
are an evil—the Govermment at horns and in Ireland have
always discountenanced those associations." He says, " the
effect of such associations is, that they give countenance to
other combinations of an illegal and dangerous character." ,
I cannot have a stronger declaration of opinion with respect
to the evil of such associations, but I cannot assent * the
Noble Lord's statement, that the Government here and in Ire-
land have done every thing in their power to discounte-
nance them.—(Cheers.) I see by the side of the Noble Lord, e
opposite (Lord Morpeth), an Hon. and Learned Gentleman
(Mr. Pigott). Ido not in the least quarrel with his conduct,
I do not quarrel with his advancement, but I do say that the •
•
Hon. Gentleman's original appointment under the circum-
stances under which it took place, does appear to be a deci-
sive contradiction of the assertion of the Noble Lord, that he
has discouraged those associations. —(Cheers.) And when the
Noble Lord challenges me upon that, I must meet it
with that denial. The Honourable and Learned Gentle.
man, I believe, was a member of what was called the
General Association—the one that preceded the Precursor As-
sociation ; and when the Hon. Gentleman was appointed to the
situation of confidential adviser at the Castle, I have.po doubt
it is truly stated he had ceased to belong to it.—(Hear, hear.)
But he had been a member of it, and not an inactive member.
He had taken the part which his activity and talents would in..
duce him to take in any association; and I appeal to
any man whether, under such circums.ances, it is pos-
sible to join the Noble Lord in his conclusion, that
the Government has done all in its power to discourage
those associations.—( Hear.) The Noble Lord assents to
my proposal. I believe that the Church in Ireland ought to
be maintained as part of the establishment.—(Hear, hear, from
Lord John Russell.) It is needless for me to remind the No-
ble Lord of all that has taken place with regard to the Irish
Church—first, the reduction of ten bishoprics, and next,
after constant discussion, we came to the settlement
of that question, as we hoped, last year, on which
great sacrifices of incomes were - made, in the hope
that agitation would cease. If the Noble Lord agrees with ine
that agitation ought not to be encouraged, that the Church
ought to be protected in its rights and privileges—if the Noble
Lord agrees with me in those seatiments ; then I c Innot re-
concile it that the Noble Lord should have allowed a Member
of her Majesty's Government and a Lieutenant of a county in
Ireland, to propose at a public meeting that which was tanta-
mount to the destruction of the Church.—( Hear.) Sir, I speak
of a Noble Lord (the Marquis of Heactfort) holding not merely
the situation of a Lord-Lieutenant, but holding a public situa-
tion in immediate connection with her Majesty's Government.
After all that has taken place on the subject of Tithes in Ire-
land, and seeing that the Noble Lord agrees with me that agi-
tation on that question ought to be deprecated, and that
the Church ought to be maintained in its rights and pri-
vileges, I say it is most unfortunate that a member of the (o.
vernment, at a public meeting, should move a resolution to this
effect—the Paper from which I read it states, " His Lordship
read the resolution, which was to the effect that it was impos-
sible to expect peace in the country while the present Church
Establishment was suffered to exist."--( Hear.) I ask any
man whether when that resolution at a public meeting is
moved by a Noble*Lord holding a situation immediately con-
nected with her Majesty's Court—whether the Noble Lord can ,
be sincere in saying he is desirous of discouraging and prevent-
ing agitation.—(Cheers.) Now, Sir, I have assigned the
ground on which I cannot concur in the Resolution. It
would be inconsistent with my course to move a vote of
censure now—it is more consistent with my course to ask the
House to suspend judgment until there shall be an inquiry
If you reject that, however, and ask me to take your
Amendment, and express my assent or dissent to it, then 1
tell you at once, for the reasons I have assigned, and with the '
qualification I have given, as to my opinion of the principles A
on which Ireland should be governed, I will•not hesitate to say
"No " to your resolution.—(Cheers.) Sir, I have now done,
and I thank the House for the patience with which they have
listened to me. I have attempted.° show that the partial decla-
ration of opinion is not justified, and that the collision• with the
House of Lords cannot be maintained ; but I hare not shrunk,
from declaring why, on Irish grounds, I dissent from your
resolution. if you, the House of Commons, think you should
pronounce judgment without inquiry, do so. If you agree
with Mr. Burke that the peculiar functions of the House ofCoin.
mons are to exercise a strict control over allexecutory andjudicial
Magistracy, you will pause before you pronounce that opinion.
If you look at the increase of crime—if you look, above all,
at those most discreditable topics, the reports of the inspectors
of prisoners, anfl of the clerks of the peace—if with these before
you, you think it fitting to vote that the administration of the
law has been effectually provided for, or that the due execution
of it has been advanced, do so ; but with documents whicle
relate to the same offences and the same periods, which show
absolutely a difference as to the amount of crime, Ida not
see hew you can. In the account of crime in Ireland, the
same description of crime, given by the inspectors of
the prisons, and the Clerks of the Peace, excluding
the Petty Sessions, not taking different years, the in-
spectors declare that in 1837 there were 14,804 ,
persons committed for trial for criminal offences, and the clerks,
of the peace say 27,340, being a difference of 12,000 upon the
same returns. Will the House of Commons undertake to pro-
nounce an opinion on the administration of the law with the
discrepancy before it.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord may talk fi
of the character of the House and the dignity of the House ;
but it is inconsistent with either the character of the House or
the dignity of the House to make a declaration with respect to
crime upon such a data as this.—( Cheers.) With respect to
the collision with the House of Lords, I ask, looking
to the state of this House—looking at the position of our afiesiea
abroad-1 ask you whether there ever was a period when it was of
more importance to maintain, so long as it can be maintained, har-
mony between the two Houses.—(Cheers,) Do you think with
the proceedings in the North of England you are promoting the-
cause of tranquillity, and the public interests, by holding up the
House of Commons and the House of Lords as at unnecessary
variance ? Above all, if these considerations do not move you,
I implore you earnestly, but respectfully, to consider what is
due to your own honour and character.--(Cheers.) I itceoare
you not to enter into a contest, not to make a deelesialion of
opinion, an abstract declaration of opinion, upon the partial
branches of a policy, unless you ho (=tided of snecess.___
(Cheers.) Above all, I ask you nut to enter into collision with
the House of Lords, unless you feel justified that there is a case
for collision, and unless you have well considered the probable
issue. That great poet, to whom I bofore alluded, whose I
writings are fuel of more lessons of viettetieal wisdom than the i
writings elf any uninspired writer, has given advice with respect
to the entry into a quarrel, which, although given to an indi-
vidual, may be equally profited by public bodies,
" Beware of entrance to a quarrel,
But being in, so bear it that your opposer
You are Maus beware of
alhoutcom commit 'a' double violation of that pre-
and hastily
cept—you arc about to enter into a
and unwarily—and you provetht4htautilroeu are about to conduct
the thresholdnre neither terror nor
of that quarrel, and
yourselves in it in a n.a7ennz
entreat you, as you
respect. While you
can still recede, I entreat you to do so—
i
iiieving in my
, and that
value the Pharacter of the House of Commoenns
eonseience that you have no superfluous authority,
desiring
that you may maintain every privilege
ever the people may be intact—with these feelings
luthority
you to reserve the manifestation of your displeasure for sonieonjUree
occasion, when, cheered by the sympathies of the people,
and
when confident in the righteousness of your cause, you may
enabled to assume a course and to speak in accents better suited
than that resolution I; to the offended dignity of the House of
Commons, The Right Hon. Baronet concluded amidst load
aheeeing,bymoving as an amendment the following resolution •
Resolved—That on the 13th day of March last, a motion ;as
made in this House for the production of various documents con-
nected with the state of Ireland in respect to crime and out-
rage, including communications made to the Irish Government
*elating to offences connected with Ribhonism, and all memo-
riols, resolutions, and addresses forwarded to the Irish Govern-
ment by Magistrates, or other official persons, in respect of
crimes and outrages committed in Ireland, and the
anso ers thereto. That the period included within
the returns so called for extends from the commence-
merit of the year 183.5 to the present time ; and that
the motion made for the production of them was assented to
by this House, no opposition to it having been offered on the
part of her Majesty's overnment. That, on the 21st day of
March last, the House of Lords appointed a Select Committee
ic to inquire into the state of Ireland since the year 1835, in
respect to crime and outrage, which have rendered life and
property insecure in that part of the empire." That, in eon
so-
quence of the appointment of such Committee by the House of
Lords, it has been proposed that this House should resolve,
" That it is the opinion of this House that it is expedient to
persevere in those principles which have guided the Executive
Government of Ireland of late years, and which have tended
to the effectual administration of the law, and the general im
provemement of that part of the United Kingdom." Re-
solved—That it appears to this House, that the appointment o-
a Committee of inquiry by the House of Lords, under the einsf
cumstances and for the purpose above mentioned, does not jus-
tify her Majesty's Ministers in calling upon this House,
without previous inquiry, or even the production of
the information which this House has required, to
make a declaration of opinion with respect to cue
branch of the public policy of the Executive Government, still
less a declaration of opinion which is neither explicit as to the
principles which it professes to approve, nor definite as to the
period to which it refers; and that it is not fitting that this
House idiould adopt a proceeding which has the appearance of
palling in question the undoubted right of the House of Lords
to inquire into the state of Ireland in respect to crime and out-
rage, more especially when the exercise of that right by the
House of Lords does not interfere with any previous; proceed_
ing or Resolution of the House of Commons, nor with the '
progress of any legislative measure assented to by the House of
Commons, or a; present under its consideration.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then rose,
but was at first very imperfectly heard, in consequence of the
noise occasioned by Members leaving the House. He said he
wished to reply to some of the observations of the Right Hon.
Baronet, who, if he had not specifically excluded, had so lightly
touched on that which was the essence of the whole question,
and had dwelt so lightly on another part of the_c:se,zhic&awii: ,
only of secondary importance, that when he
chellor of the Exchequer) brought the b
two branches
the
under the consideration of House, he could not fail
to remove the impression which had been made. One
t f h It. ht. o t e ig Hon.
would think, from the amendment
n e ouse of Lords was a
Baronet that the motion passed
i*
into crime, analogous to that
mere ordinary motion for inquiry in
of the Right Hon. •
passed by this House on the suggestionr
1 Shaw)—and the argu-
Member for Dublin University .
nient of the Right Hon. Bart. was, that because the Government
had acquiesced in the proposition made to the House of Com-
mons, and subsequently to that had opposed osed a similar motion in
the Government was the House of Lords,—that therefore
Butthe
two
seek-
ing a collision • • between the two Houses.proposi-
tionsf/ear.) The motion proposed by
were very different.—(
the Right Hon. and Learned
member (Mr. Shaw) ',vas
for the ordinary accounts, 11,011
he (the Chancellor o;
the Exchequer) had never cc
n :
lown refused, when then
to which the Right MU
Gentleman had consented.
were accompanied by the
Whatlimit?Alnsowas
pr
the nature of the
If ever there was a case' in
ceeding in the House of Lords?
deliberative a bl
prejudiced by a ssem y, it
which a question was
use of Lords. The House
was in the case of the Ho
inquiry, that •b•
of Lords had resolved, without inq v,
has! been awitlnthe
last four years—from 1835—there
by state. of
insecure, and
things rendering life and
;„I—.l property
tto be inferred that giving
that date clearly wished G such a
to the present overnment.—( Hsu
state of things was owing
Baronet indeed •
hear.) The Right honourablemad that
what had thus by the House been done of Lords had
f mer years, and had been submitted to b
been done in or v other
offence being taken Wh a
Governments without any c wasp
tte
first case . 9 In 1824 a Committee was appointed by the House
of Lords on the state of crime • but that
P; as not levelled
against the Government; on the contrary, it was in conjune-
tion with the Government. The other case was that of AU;
but that also was with the perfect assent of the Government%
Was there any analogy between these cases and the present,
which was substantially a vote of censure on the Government?
Now, undoubtedly, it was irregular to refer to the delsates in
the other House of Parliament, and especially to attempt to
draw inferences from them as to the character or motives of
particular individual. But he (the Chancellor ofi the Ex-
chequer) was surpriied to hear that charge from the other
side, when I.e t•e,cleeted, that often:the' whole characwr of a
measurz was altered in the opinion of the opposite Pars,.