The Sun.
London, England, 1837-02-08 00:00:00

Catholics and nine of them Protestants—( Hear, and cheers)

3 no very unfair d'stril;,-,t certainly—and 0-mixing
no wish to promote Roman Catholics in preference to Protes-
tants; but shewing that which I think it is right to spew, that
a man, because he is a Roman Catholic, is not to
be excluded from those offices to which by a solemn
act of the Legislature, which you have sanctioned, he is
entitled to aspire. —( Loud cheers.) I have also here a list of the
appointments made by Lord Mulgrave, and stating the religion
of the different persons so appointed ; but I decline going into
it, because I think on the whole, that unless the question is
raised, it is one which it is not desirable to enter upon.—
(" Hear, hear, hear," from Sir Robert Peel.) The
Right Honourable Gentleman opposite cheered ; but I think
he is aware it is one of the charges made against our
Administration.—( Cheers. ) It is one of those charges which
are put forth amoing the public, and which are used to em-
poison the public mind.—( Loud cheers.) At the same time it
is one of those charges (of which there are many) which is not
brought forward on any occasion in either House of Parlia-
ment.—(Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, having stated generally
the conduct of Lord Mulgrave's Government—having stated
the appointments he has made the measures he has
taken—and having stated, also, some of the general
results with regard to the prevention of crime, I come now to
state, as I think I am bound to state—no notice having been
given of it—l come now to make some observations upon the
charges made against him in certain resolutions.—( Cheers.)
Sir, when Mr. Fox stated what were the concessions which he
wished to be made to the Irish, which included equality—
equal rights and equal division of emoluments—he stated at
the same time that these concessions would not give
satisfaction.—He said, " not to the Aristocracy, for I will not
call the miserable minority by so respectable a name and is
that small miserable minority to be put in the balance against
the happiness of a whole people ?"—( Cheers.) Now, Sir,
it is that miserable monopolising minority--(immense cheer-
ing)—to which that name was so justly affixed by Mr, Fox
—it is that same miserable minority which has not dared to
bring forward any charge in Parliament against the Govern-
ment of Lord Mulgrave ; but which has met and passed certain
resolutions containing charges against that Noble Lord, which
if true, ought to procure his instant dismissal.—( Loud
cheering from both sides. ) And although Parliament has
been met a week—although Members of both Houses of
Parliament were present at the meeting, at which these
resolutions were passed—( Loud cheers)—not one of them
has ventured to give notice that he will bring before Parlia-
ment the question of these high crimes and misdemeanours.—
( Cheers.) With all strangers carefully excluded—( Cheers)
—with all opposition rigidly shut out—with the Orange flag
streaming in the air—( Immense cheering)—they put and car-
ried their resolutions amidst the shouts of the multitude around
them. It may be said that in this House no one ventured to
bring forward the question, as they feared to encounter
the strength of the support which Ministers receive in this House.
This is a miserable argument, because those who have con-
ducted an opposition in this country have known and felt that
when they had a right, and a strong cause—though they might
have only sixty, or fifty, or forty, or even thirty—yet with
such support they felt bound to bring forward their opposition;
and I will ask by how many was Mr. Fox supported in his
opposition ? By 80 against 250. This therefore is not a valid
argument. But is there not another House of Parliament where
the Hon. Gentlemen opposite are strong enough?—(Tremen-
dous cheering.) What is their power in that other House of
Parliament? I have got here a pamphlet which purports to
be the 28th edition of a speech delivered by a Noble Lord, in
the other House of Parliament, at the close of the last session.
--( Hear, hear.) A Noble Lord of great ability—l do not
know whether this is his speech or not—but the pamphlet
makes that Noble Lord say that in the House of Lords
the Ministry is utterly powerless, and that its wishes have no
effect in that House.—( Loud cheers.) If this be the case, why
do these Cr.entlenien shrink from bringing their complaint before
that House ?—(lmmense cheering.) They have uttered mat-
ters impeaching and derogatory to the Lord Lieutenant of
Ireland, and yet they dare not bring his conciuct before Par-
liament —( Renewed cheering, and cries or" Hear, hear.")
Sir, it may be, after all, that they feel that, whatever their
majority may be in the other House of Parliament,
it is not a majority for such purposes.—(Tremendous cheer-
ing.) Sir, it may be that they feel that however they may
gain the applause of their own packed meetings, that the House
of Lords will not abet such accusations—(Renewed cheering)
—but at least they should have the frankness and the candour
to let this be known.—( Checrs.) Sir, I am inclined to think
that this is the case from one of their own resolutions. I shall
not take the trouble of reading many of them, but one
of them refers to the nomination of High Sheriffs, and com-
plains of the Government neglecting the recommendation of
the Judges. Now, Sir, I believe it happens, that in this year
no persons recommended by the Judges to fill the office of
Sheriffs have been refused; last year there were several
cases of that kind. But .let me call your attention to
what happens.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Lord Mulgrave
comes to England, and takes his seat in the House of
Lords. A question was then put on a trifling matter or two
about Gore /Ones and Mr. Lee, but nobody anoved any accu-
sation on that subject. Lord Mulgrave made his answer ;
and when he got up to speak a second time, he was obliged to
apologise to their Lordships for keeping them from dinner,
so little interest did the subject excite ; and such
was the attendance of those who now brine. forward this as
such a grave accusation.--( Loud cries of Hear, hear.")
What do they do then? Why, they shrink from the ac-
cusation when Lord Mulgrave is present, and they meet
their packed partisans in Ireland, and there they resolve that
Lord Mulgrave has acted in a manner criminal and unbecom-
ing. Sir, I have given that party, although I. dislike their in-
tolerance, though I dislike their abuses, and though I dis-
liked their conduct in a former Government, yet I have given
them credit in former days ; but I do think that such a pro-
ceeding as this is—permitting Lord Mulgrave to take his scat
in the House of Lords, and not then to repeat this accu-
sation, but afterwards, when the Session was long passed, that
Members of that very House should meet and pass resolutions
on the subject—this proceeding, I must say, does make my
belief in their candour and disinterestedness altogether dis-
appear.—(Loud cheers.) Such conduct is a convincing proof
of a want of candour, and these resolutions became in effect
accusations, when they had no proof whatever to offer in sup-
port of them. Well, Sir, as to those resolutions, there are
three or four at the beginning which are matters more for de-
rision and contempt than for serious consideration. One of
these says, " that with the exception of the years 1641 and
1687, the Protestant Church was never exposed to so
fierce a persecution."--( Laughter.) That there was a practical
penal code in operation (which was worse because it was more
undefined, and because it was not a legislative enactment)
against the Protestants of Ireland.—(Hear, and laughter.)
Sir, we know what a penal code is ; we know how the Irish
lost their estates by the effect of a penal code, which subjected
them to severe penalties ; we know that as the result of a
penal code, a Catholic in Ireland formerly could not have a
good horse without rendering it subject to be taken from him
by a Protestant.—( Hear, hear.) We know, Sir, what a penal
code is as a practical matter, but as to this undefined code I do
not know how to treat it ; it resembles the gentleman who in
a letter to the " Spectator" states that he has been reading
number of medical books, and that having read a work
asthma he imagined himself to be ill of asthma for three
weeks—( Cheers)—and he then says, that having read
a good treatise upon gout, he imagined he had got all the
symptoms of gout but the pain.—( Hear, hear, hear,
and laughter.) Now, Sir, these parties appear to me to have
read the penal code which was applied to the Catholics, and
then they imagine themselves to be subject to all the symp-
toms but the pain._( Hear.) All the symptoms but the pain
and without any of the practical sufferings, and practical griev-
ances which the Catholics had to contend with, and thus in a
country undisturbed by crime, and improving in condition, they
come before the public with their:melancholy tale of imaginary
malady. The complaints regarding the loss of executive power,
remind me of the lines of a living poet—
" Call it madness, call it folly,
You shall not chase my grief away ;
There's such a charm in melancholy,
I would not, if I could, be gay."
—(Great laughter and cheers.) In another of the resolutions
of this packed meeting, the 13th, they say that the patronage
of the Irish Government, and its prerogative of mercy, have
been abused to the furtherance of purposes injurious to
the administration of the laws. Sir, I utterly deny this.—
( Cheers.) Is there any proof of it ? I say the prerogative'
of mercy has always been used for the purpose of giving the
people confidence in the laws ; and until some proofs are
shown to the contrary, I rest on that general denial. Well, then,
they go on in a very curious straits ' • they say that partisans
have been placed in office—partisans have been placed in ° ffice
What, do the Gracchi complain of sedition ?—(Cheers
laughter.) Indeed, Sir, I could produce cases to show hand
they are that have made appointments to office for the sakewo
of partisanship.—( Hear, hear, hear.) I think, Sir, that t
could show Lord Mulgrave cases which would throw
Cheers)-_
any-
thing that is alleged against him far into the shade—
by the conduct of those who now complain of partisanship,
but
chieft
but who have themselves made partisanship theground
for appointment to office. I think that if any one had stood up
in the meeting where these resolutions were passed, and bad told
them of what those gentlemen themselves had done,_ he would
bring a blush into their faces, and they would be the first
chb
themselves to rescind their own resolutions.
Sir, they have brought a further and a most serious charge
But,
against the Irish Government,—that gentlemen have been
appointed
ne factiousw hieh
level
iappointed to the office of Assistant Barristers
pur-
poses. This was, indeed; a grave charge
a proper ground of the impeachment of
m
theLordas
Lieutenant—( Hear, hear)—if it could be shown that
the Lord Lieutenant has in any instance appointed
office, in order that they should violate their oaths, men
nantiol
register votes illegally, and for factious purposes.--(Loud
cries of " Hear, hear.") Sir, I have only heard of one
case in which any imputation has been attempted to be
cast upon an Assistant Barrister. This arose out of a case
relating to the value of a holding. The claimant of
vote swore that his holding was of the value of 101. a yeasa
and that he had in fact been offered 101. a year for
( Hear.) But a gentleman came forward and stated
that he knew the holding was not worth 10/. a_
assistant-barrister asked him if he knew the hoginigr.? Thelle
said that he did not.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) He was
asked did he know the holdings adjoining it?
He acknow-
ledged that he did not ; but that he knew the '
gene-
rally, and could give an opinion of the value ofPtnhreshseveral
holdings.—( Laughter.) Well, Sir, the assistant-barrister
decided, and, I :think, very naturally, in favour of the claims,
which was supported by the direct testimony of those who
'.
know the holding, instead of the very vague evidence ence against
its value by the gentlemen who did not Cliow it at all. Well,
Sir, there was immediately a meeting of the
qineragsis"tes,tlheye
came to a resolution that at the next quart
would not invite the assistant-barrister to presidcesss'onlalpahr
The ground was no doubt this, that he had believed t-hers.e)
persons of mean condition, poor men worth not more than 10/.

or 151. n "ear, and se* at non ht the statoroc•otc /Ind.,- on 111"4,r,
authar: ; that wd: the kind of case, and the only One 11.41 1
know of, in which this grave charge has been brought forward.
It then goes on with a number of resolutions, and states that they
will present an Address to his Majesty, praying that his faith-
ful subjects may not continue to be exposed to the attempts
making to undermine the religion of the Established Church,
nor persecuted for their attempts to preserve Ireland for his
Majesty's Crown and his Majesty's successors. Sir, I re-
pudiate altogether the statements of this Gentleman.
I say that his Majesty may trust to his Parliament. —( Cheers.)
That he may trust to his Lord Lieutenant and to his faithful
subjects on the country—that their zeal, their affection,- and
their loyalty will preserve Ireland for his Majesty's Crown
and his Majesty's successors, even though these gentlemen
gave themselves no trouble about the matter.—( Tremendous
cheering-, which lasted for some minutes.) There is one thing
more, Sir, in these resolutions to which I shall now come.
It is connected with the state of Ireland as differing from
the state of this country.—( Hear, hear.) It is th reso-
lution in which they complain that an Association
has been held in Dublin, and carried on for the seditious pur-
pose of resisting the increase of the Established Church.--
(Cheers.) Now, Sir, I must own that if I were to hear
there was a General Association of Scotchmen met in Edin-
burgh, and that their meetings took place from week to week,
and that they collected various sums of money and entered into
various resolutions from time to time with respect to the Go-
vernment of the country, I confess that I should hear it with
great regret; but I should always ask what was the cause—.
and so I say with respect to Ireland. Sir, I very much regree
that in Dublin, as I would in Edinburgh, that an Association
should exist of the nature alluded to • but lam obliged to in-
quire into its causes; and when I look to those causes, I find,
as the forcible phrase of Lord Mulgrave states it, that it is the
spawn of your own wrong.—( Cheers.) Sir, the Government of
Ireland has been throughout the whole of its connection with
this couttry a painful :übject for an English politician to con-
template. The glories of Elizabeth—the vigilant protection of
the Cromwellian Government—the deliverance of our liberties
by William lll.,—have been attended in Ireland with
cruel wars—with the massacre of the people—with the
enactment of penal laws, and with the violation of the treaty
of Limerick. This was a painful subject, but it was hoped
that a time would come when we could look upon them only
as matters of history, and when we could say that the spirit,
which in other times led to such treatment of Ireland, would
be changed into one of mutual conciliation, of indulgence for
each others' religious faith, and into a determination of the
common defence of the rights and liberties of the entire
people of the United Kingdom..--( Cheers.) Sir, I am sorry
that it is not so, and that what the historian Hume has stated
in noticing the reign of Elizabeth concerning Ireland, betrays
a spirit which is not extinct even at the present time. He
says that the English Commissioners, instead of inviting the
Irish to adopt the more civilized customs of their Governors,
they even refused, although earnestly solicited, to corn-
' municate the privileges of the law, and marked them
out as aliens and enemies.—(Loud and reiterated cheering.)
Mr. Hume with that sound and philosophical spirit which be-
longs to everything he wrote, goes on to say, that thrown out
of the protection of the ark, the Irish had recourse to the
fastnesses, and instead of learning the civilized tone of their
conquerors, they remained barbarous and savage.' Centuries
elapsed after that, and I will give you an instance of a very
different kind in the time of an ancestor of my own, who was
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. You had been divided:in religion—
in the succession to the Crown ; but about the middle of the
last century it would appear as if the time was come when
those bonds might be relaxed, when religion might cease to
be a reason for persecution, and when attachment to a fallen
dynasty might be forgotten in the security of the house of
Brunswick. Sir, the Duke of Bedford in 1753 was of opinion
and of a very strong opinion, that it might be permitted for
Irish Roman Catholic priests to register their names, and then
be allowed to perform the rites of their religion, and be placed
on a footing with others of his Majesty's subjects. For that
proposition he was thanked by the Deputies of the Roman Ca-.
tholic bodies, and his name mentioned with honour by the
Roman Catholic Prelates. —( Loud cheering.) But when.
he came to the Council, it was a different matter. —( Hear,
hear.) Ile said that persecution for religious opinions
only added strength to the persecuted party—that the Crown
would be stronger, and the country better enabled to carry on
the war then waging with France, by having the assistance of
such as were loyal of the King's Irish Roman Catholic sub-
jects The Council were opposed to any such modification,
as they thought they would be repugnant to the British
laws.—( Hear, hear.) Sir, that was the spirit which pre-
vailed in the Councils of Ireland up to 1752 ; it was a
spirit produced—which could not fail to producedistrust of
the rulers both in England and Ireland—and distrust, if not
hatred, of the laws, which the attempt to enforce sbnwed the
people that it .vas not intended that they should have equal
benefits to Ireland. Such was the indubitable effect of the
severe and persecuting laws. Well, Sir, the time at length
came when even those who had held these maxims—when
those who thought it right to persecute and oppress the
Roman Catholics—saw matters in a different light; but let me
tell you—for I want you to see not only the
effect of the policy of Government, when it was oppressive,
and degrading, but also the policy of the Government, when
such policy was to relieve the country—l will pass over other
instances, and come to that one which made Lord Grenville
say that it was seldom that justice was conceded to Ireland
without such concession being made to fear. I will pass over
other instances, and come to the law which admitted Roman
Catholics to the elective franchise in the year 1793, and the
law relative to them which passed in the year 1829; and
I think that you will certainly see from these instances,
that if on the one hand the Irish have been an object
of terror, in whom you could place no confidence, that by the
penal laws they were taught that it was better for them to
put themselves in an attitude of strength before their prayers
would be listened to. In 1792, an humble petition from the
Roman Catholics was presented to the Irish House of Commons.
Was it suffered to lie on the table, and ordered to be taken into.
consideration ? By no means. It was scornfully and contemp-
tuously rejected. But the very next year, when we were in
apprehension of a French invasion, and when a French war bad
taken place, it was thought necessary to make some step
towards conciliation. They took the step which they denied
the year before, and it had not the appearance even of saying,
" these Roman Catholics are good and loyal subjects, let us
admit them to the privileges they seek." But they said, "wd
cannot afford to throw away the strength of Ireland, and there-
fore wo must admit them." And now, Sir, with respect to
the concession of 1829, I will read a passage which contains
the sentiments of an eminent person in the other House of
Parliament, and also the declaration made at that time by an
Hon. Member of this House. In 1828 Lord Lyndhurst in
reference to a speech which appeared to have been spoken by
Mr. O'Connell, that the Roman Catholics of Ireland wanted
to extort from the Legislature, by intimidation, the redress
of their supposed grievances; but it was true the sword was
not drawn openly—but it was ready to be drawn—
if their Lordships were disposed to refuse to admit Roman Co-
tholics within what was called the pale of the Constitutions.
Such was the declaration of ibis proud and eminent statesman
to the House of Commons. He said you must not yield to
threats—you must not yield to intimidation—( Hear, bear,
hear)—but when the intimidation was made more plain
the threat was made a little longer.—(Hear, hear.) And
what was then the conduct of those who said they would not
yield ? Why, the very unqualified and unconditional limitation
which they had used induced them to yield the very year after.
If that Statesman had been in the condition of the traveller in
the fable, if the wind had not succeeded in taking off his cloak
by the first gust, it would have been found that it would only
have blown a little longer and a little stronger when he would
havebeen deprived of his cloak; but he would not have had
that easy victory which the traveller in the fable had. Well,
hut what is the lesson that has been taught? What is she
lesson that has been read to Ireland ? Are these things
passed without mark ? What happened in the last year, and
in the year before ? We heard nothing of Associations as
long as this Municipal Corporation Bill which I shall move
to-night was passing through the House of Commons,—
( Hear, hear, hear.) Ireland confided in the justice
of the Legislature.—(Great cheering. )—There was no at-
tempt then to intimidate.—(Cheers)—There was no general
meeting on the subject. It was only after Parliament is
concluded—it is after their prayers have been rejected, and
rejected not only with calm reasoning, but rejected with
insult—( Loud and continued cheering)—l say it is
only after the prayers of the people of Ireland have
been rejected with insult that this General Association is
founded, and has its existence.—( Renewed cheers.) Sir, can
I wonder at such a thing ?—( Hear, hear)—can I wonder,
when it has been successful on former occasions, that it
should be resorted to on this ?—(Cheers.) Can I suggest
a remedy ? What would be a remedy, think you, that this
Association, composed of several Peers of the realm, of
many Members of the House of Commons, and, as I have
heard, of a fourth, but the Hen. Gentleman near me says,
of a third of Protestants ? What, I say, would be a remedy ?
Your remedy is to treat Ireland as you have treated Eng-
land and Scotland, as you have no Associations in Lon-
don or in Edinburgh. No, Sir, depend upon it that when
fair equality is found to be the rule by which you intend to
govern them, the people of Ireland will rely with confidence
upon the deliberations of the supreme Legislature, and will
take no other method of expressing their complaints.—( Hear.)
I therefore say, Sir, that whilst I regret the existence of the
Association, I cannot say that there was not a plausible motives
for its formation—l cannot say that it is easy to suppress it.....
(Loud cries of Hear.) There is, however, an easy wad of
suppressing it, although I should deceive you if I told. you
that the Corporation Bill was all in all—that it would act as
a panacea for all the evils of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.)
Many and manifold are those evils, and many and manifold
must be the remedies which the legislature, the executive,
the magistrates, and the people of property in that country
must apply to them---( Hear)—but I tell you this—if you pass
this Corporation Bill largely and liberally—if you pass it in
that manner, it will be taken as evidence of the spirit in
which you are determined to legislate for Ireland,
and there will be less difficulty, and no repugnance
to future legislation.—( Cries of Hear, hear, hear.) It is a
measure the principles of which are known—by it you apply a
remedy which has been already tried—you give rights to mens
whom you have no pretence for distrusting.--( Hear, hear.)
I think, Sir, it was said of a great character of antiquity;.
" that I hemktocles proposed what was profitable to Atheinsr
but what was unjust."--( Hear, hear.) Now I propose to
a measure which will be profitable, as giving you the'
hearts and the affections of the people.—( Hear, hear.))
It will be profitable to you in promoting riches and welfare:
in others; it will he profitable to you in tending to prodeset
greater order, better administration, and a more general evel-
fidenee in your Government.—( Hear, hear.) But while it, }as
all these effects of profit—while it has all these motives ex-
pediency—l especially recommend it to the House—l reeom-
mend it to Parliament—on this ground—that, I Beeteve
IT TO BE JVS T. [The Noble Lord uttered the last six