The Sun.
London, England, 1830-06-26 00:00:00

GALWAY TOWN REGULATION BILL.

Earl GREY moved that this Bill be committed,l
And the House having gone into the Committee,
The Duke of WELLINGTON rose, for the,
purpose of moving the clause of which he gavel
notice yesterday. He stated yesterday, that the
Act the 4th Geo. I. was inconsistent with the
present policy of this country, which now made no
•listinction between Catholic and Protestant asl
to their civil rights; and he would now, asl
briefly as possible, state to their Lordships the
grounds on which be thought that Act, which
the present Act sought to amend, should t)e re-
pealed altogether. The Noble Duke then proceeded
to read the preamble of that Act, which set forth
how much the success of the Protestant interest in
that part of Ireland depended on the loyalty and,
fidelity of the garrison of Galway; and also noticed
the disposition of the Corporation of Galway to
favour Popery. It then enacted tint four Magis-
trates of the county of Galway, being Protestants,
should also be magistrates for the town and county
of the town of Galway, and also that 40s. free-
holders being Protestants, should try offenders in
the town; and it likewise enacted that any Protest-
tnt artisan, or person engaged in business, residing in
the town for seven years, might claim as a matter
'lf right to be made a freeman of the town and a
• member of the corporation, having a right to vote
:"or Members of Parliament for the town upon his
eking the usual oaths. Now, he contended, that
though the policy of that Act might have been
necessary at that period, it was not necessary
it present, but was wholly inconsistent with
he spirit of the measure passed last year
—the policy of which was to give encouragement
to every man in corporate towns without religious
liatinction. It might be said-that the Bill-on the
,able was a remedy, by extending to Catholics the
iame privilege as that enjoyed by Protestants in
that town, but be contended that it would be more
just to repeal it altogether. The Act was itself a
violation of the rights of the Charter given to the
town by Charles: IL, and ought not to be continued
onger than the policy of the country required. That
policy being now wholly changed, the Act which
4rew out of it should be repealed. It would not be
Any act of injustice to Protestants at present.in the
town, because they all could claim any right to
which they were entitled under the law of Geo. I.;
!but the continuance of that law would have the ef-
'feet of throwing in 4,000 or 5,000 new electors,
which would completely destroy the rights of the
Corporation. If this Corporation had been exclu-
sively Protestant, it would be different; but the
fact was, of 800' freeholders entitled to vote for it
the majority were Roman Catholics. The Noble
Duke, after contending that the allowing the Act
of 4th Geo. I. to remain, Ni ould overturn the Cor-
poration, by letting in upon them 4,000 or 5,000 of
the lowest class of persons as electors, and observ-
ing that the repeal would be no injury to Protest-
ants, fur that since the Act passed not 100 Pro-
testants had claimed their freedom under it, and iu•
the last 15 years not one, concluded by moving a
clause repealing the Act 4th of Geo. I. altogether.
Emil GREY said it was with reluctance he found
it necessary to oppose the amendment proposed by
the Noble Duke; but he could net avoid doing so,
as the effect of the Noble Dukes clause would be`'
to convert a Bill intended to afford relief into u
nietuture of disqualification. He was far from wish-
ing to contend that the policy which dictated the;
,4th of Geo. I. was now to be acted on : that policy,
he was happy to say, had been gradually abandoned