The Sun.
London, England, 1837-02-22 00:00:00

eased only in one quarter—there, where alone we have abused
our power, and sullied our great name, as the hereditary as-
sertors of political rights and religious toleration.—( Hear.)
If in this question our constitution, still the 'elonstittitiou of an
aristocracy, should be endangered—if in this struggle that
constitution should ultimately perish, I do say it would be the
most striking instance of moral retribution which the whole
history of nations could afford.—( Hear, hear.) But, what-
ever may be the consequence, our course is clear. Of that
people we are the trustees and representatives. When we
refused to repeal the Union, when we placed the present
Administration on the ruins of the last, we pledged ourselves
to do justice to Ireland. You ask what we mean by justice.
Justice to Ireland is something your philosophy cannot com-
prehend. Why, what can it mean but this—the just applica-
tion of equal laws ? Again and again upon this and the Irish
Church question you nave told us that it is for a shadow we
contend. It may be a shadow, but it is the shadow of a gi-
gantic substance —it is reflected upon you from the largest
towns—from the most powerful constituencies—from the esta-
blished and legitimate administration of these realms—the
shadow is the principle of justice, the substance is the deter-
mination of the people.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG said there might be some truth in
the statement that the state of society in Ireland was ill
adapted for such municipal government as that granted to
England ; but though he admitted that to a certain extent he
differed with those who said there was no town in Ire-
land so fit for municipal institutions as even the smallest
towns in England.—( Hear.) It could not surely be said
that Dublin, Belfast, and Limerick were not as well or
better entitled to Corporation charters than such towns as
Caine and Godalming.—( Hear.) If those who opposed the
Bill would grant Corporations only to towns in Ireland
of equal size and trade with those in England which enjoyed
these institutions, and refuse to grant them to others of less
importance, there would be some grounds for an amendment :
but such was not the position taken. As to the Protestant
Church in Ireland, he would only say that he wished to see
that Church reformed and maintained : and he could not see
why Corporations might not be reformed and maintained at the
same time. By bringing together inhabitants of towns to
consult upon matters in which, whether they were Protestants
or Catholics, Whigs or Tories, they were equally interested, a
great step would be taken to do away with those acrimonious
feelings which had for so many centuries prevailed. For these
reasons, and not because he had any great attachment to Cor-
porations generally, he should vote against the motion of the
Noble Lord the Member for South Lancashire.
Colonel PE RCE VA L thought the course pursued by the
Noble Lord the Member for South Lancashire, to do away
with Corporations entirely, was the course of justice. The
lion Member for Lincoln's very poetical speech it was not for
him (Col. Perceval) to answer. That lion. Gentleman had
attacked the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth.
A sentence from his Right Hon. Friend would reit an extin.
guisher on him.—(A laugh.) That Hon. Gentleman had said
that whoever might sit with his Right Hon. Friend in a new
Cabinet would be fortunate if they should have in that House
half the majority (composed as it was) which sanctioned the
measures of his Majesty's present Government. He would
leave the Hon. Gentleman in full possession of all the self-
satisfaction which lie must derive from this and other poetical
fancies. But the Hon. Gentleman maintained that those must
necessarily be partial judges on the subject who had been mem-
bers of the Orange Association. lie (Colonel Perceval) had
a right to complain of the conduct of his Majesty's present
Government towards him and the other members of the Orange
Association who had come forward, and in obedience to the
wishes of their King, honestly, unequivocally, and without
mental reservation—(hear)—yielded up that Institution as far
as in them lay, and laid it at the feet of their Sovereign, and
recommended their brethren in Ireland to follow their example.
What was the conduct of the Gentlemen opposite ? He (Col.
Perceval) well knew at the time that the course which he and
his friends wore pursuing was gall and wormwood to those
gentlemen. The Government, and those who governed the
Government, pursued, through the Press of Dublin, a course
of taunts and insults which induced his Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for Cavan and himself to remonstrate with the Noble Lord
opposite on the subject, and to represent to him that if that
course were continued it would do away with all the ad-
vantages which he might have expected from the termination
of the Orange Societies. The Noble Lord said he would
write to Dublin on the subject, and, as far as he could, put an
end to the practice.—( Hear.) No doubt the Noble Lord
did fulfil his promise ; for in a few days a change took place'sin
the tone of the papers ho alluded to ; but that change was
made in such a manner that it had better not have taken place.
Now what was the course which his Majesty's Government
had subsequently pursued ? During the existence of the
Orange Societies they had loudly declared, and acted on the
declaration even to mere and ungrounded suspicion of the
fact, that no member of those societies (although established
for the most loyal purposes, and though constantly evincing
their attachment to their King and country and to the connec-
tion between Great Britain and Ireland) ought to hold any
office under Government. Would any one say that, after such
a declaration, it was impartial justice on their part to sanction
and encourage a political society in the heart of Ireland, in
Dublin, consisting of 2,300 and odd persons, and to select
from the most turbulent ranks of that Association, which was
avowedly , founded on opposition to the law of
.the land,
and which he had heard eminent lawyers say was illegal,
magistrates, constables, barristers, and confidential advisers
of the Crown ?—( Hear.) The High Sheriff of the county of
which he had the honour to represent was a member of that
Association. He had a great respect for that gentleman; but
he must say that his being a member of that Association ought
to have prevented his appointment. And as to the county
which he had the honour to represent, he had further reason
to complain of the conduct of his Majesty's Government re-
specting it. It was in the latter end of August, or the be-
ginning of September, that the Lord-Lieutenant paid that
county a visit, and, with a degree of clemency highly improper
and unconstitutional, ordered the liberation of no fewer than
twenty-five prisoners. The Lord Chancellor of Ireland sent
to the Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Sligo for a recom-
mendation for an individual of the name of Kelly, the son of a
bleacher, whom his Majesty's Government desired to appoint
a magistrate. The Lieutenant refused to give the recom-
mendation; but Mr. Kelly was nevertheless appointed. To
show the means that were resorted to in Ireland, by menace
or otherwise, to obtain a preponderance in power, he would
read to the House a letter which appeared in a liberal
Irish paper on the 25th of November last, signed by Mr.
Dillon Browne, the Honourable Member for the county of
Mayo. The Hon. Gentleman (Colonel Perceval) here read
the letter ; which recommended that a death's head should be
placed on the doors of such of the people as refused to regis-
ter, and that if they happened to be visited with greater afflic-
tions, they should be allowed to bear them, and which con-
cluded with thanks to Mr. O'Connell and Lord Mulgrave.
If the letter was not authentic, the Hon. Gentleman was in
the House and could disavew it. lie had himself spoken to
the Hon. Gentleman that evening, who had admitted that the
letter was genuine.
Mr. DILLON BROWNE said that the lion. and Gallant
Member misapplied the application of the letter.
Colonel PE RCE VA L, in continuation, observed that since
the appointment of the magistrate to whom he had alluded, a
rule nisi had been granted against him by the Court of King's
Bench in Ireland for vituperation on one of the assistant bar-
risters. Then again, a measure had been introduced by the
Right lion. Gentleman the Master of the Rolls in Ireland,
under the seeming fair pretext that there ought to be Crown
prosecutors for sessional purposes in every county in Ireland ;
and no less than thirty-two Crown prosecutors were accord-
ingly appointed; and of course the measure was not the less
palatable to the Ministry on account of the patronage which it
brought with it. Most earnestly did lie entreat the Noble
Lord opposite to grant a Committee, with a view to prove the
facts adduced by his lion. and Learned Friends the Members
for Bandonbridge and Dublin city. He thought that if such
Committee were granted, the Noble Lord the Secretary for
Ireland would not again venture to prime himself on the accu-
racy of his information.
Lord Viscount Howice and Mr. Dleime Bnowsos rose at
the same moment, amidst loud cries of " Lord Ilowick." The
Noble Lord, however, gave way to
Mr. DILLON BROWNE, who rose to explain. He had
said that if any individual could be base enough to receive a
bribe, it would not be too great a punishment to such a per-
son to have cross bones and a death's head marked on his
doors. lie thought this was a sufficient explanation of the
matter. lie could understand, however, the feeling under
which the charge had been made; he knew the slight tenure
on which the Honourable and Gallant officer held his seat fur
Sligo ; and he was proud to say that the position in which he
stood was mainly owing to his (Mr. Browne's) humble exer-
tions. Ile would not trouble the House further.

Lord Viscount HO W ICK (who rose amidst cheering) pro-
ceeded to address the House in nearly the following words :
--I deem it wiser to confine myself to this one point—a
point which has given to this debate a new and deeper
importance than it before possessed—l mean the grounds
which have been put forward for rejecting the Bill on the
other side, in consequence of its being assumed that its
adoption will cause increased danger to the Established
Church of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) I will not inquire why it
is that during the last Session this argument was not put
forward ; I will not stop to ask why it has happened
that, except in the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet the
Member for Cumberland (Sir James Graham), I do not recol-
lect any stress or weight being laid upon that argument. Is
there a wish on the part of those who hold these opinions to
excite religious dissensions, and to create religious prejudices
in England, Scotland, and Ireland, in the anticipation of the
event of a general election ? Is it for this that honourable
Members are prepared, for party purposes, to degrade and •
villify The name of religion? (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
I say, if such be the views on which such arguments are
brought forward, I trust in the good sense of the people of
England and Scotland to defeat the views of those by whom
this attempt is made, and to refuse to mix up a question with
religion which, first and last, is entirely political. My Noble
Friend (Lord Stanley) last night said that the object, or,
if not the object, the tendency of this measure was the
destruction of the Established Church in Ireland ; and he
further said, how can his Majesty's Government persist in
the course which they are pursuing, seeing they are told by
those who support them and who sit behind them, that the
certain tendency of this measure is the destruction of
the Established Church in Ireland ? and my Noble
" How can they go on, bur-
n ic nd's quest ion was,
roving on like moles, ignorant of the tendency of the
measure? " I have been too many years in this House to at-
tach much value to that argument, but I was surprised to hear
that argument used by my Noble Friend ( Lord Stanley.)
When he was sitting—l wish he had continued with us—
Cs, when
he ries s Hear,
happily tetai from the
ng wills us
of_r)) pgessieti obne
cs les ), —a
11):te
defend-
ing the Reform Bill, that, argument was treated with all the
euottnupt whiull it deserved. When we were advocating the
Reform Bill, I ask my Noble Friend whether we were nut

told by those who are now his allies, that it would lead to
universal suffrage and the overthrow of the Constitution ? Was
not that, I ask, the language of those who refused to grant
that great measure? But certainly my recollection is much
mistaken if the Noble Lord felt any difliculty in receiving the '
support of those who professed to go much further. There was
no lack of gentlemen who were ready to take up the Reform
Bill, and I think the result proved that both extremes are
wrong, and it further shows that we were right in maintaining
that the Reform Bill, in spite of these sinister predictions, was
calculated to maintain the Constitution, and not to form a
stepping-stone to universal suffrage. Can any man suppose
that if we had refused to carry the Reform Bill in 1830, though
we might now be sitting with a Constitution and with the
Members for Gatton and Old Sarum, in their places, we might
have had a revolution, accompanied by anarchy, universal suf-
frage, and a military despotism ? But I am convinced that no
man can look back and think that in such case we should still
have a House of Commons essentially forming a part of the
British Constitution. But with regard to those who took a
middle course between the violence of contending parties, is
it to be maintained that they were the tools of one party or the
other? I was the more surprised to hear this argument used
last night, because it was resisted most ably in the speech of
the Hon. Member for Liskeard, who said he would not con-
sider his aversion to the Church Establishment, that he
was its open and professed enemy, and that being so, it
was not that he trusted the granting of the Bill would
remove those objections which he had' to the Establish-
ment that he advocated it.—( Hear, hear.) What he said
in effect, moreover, was, " and therefore I rejoice that the
English Establishment in Ireland has this additional odium, of
' being an obstacle to the attainment of civil rights and privi-
leges." He said_" You will find by rejecting the Bill on
the grounds which have been put forward, you will show the
Irish people not only that they are to have no national endow-
ment—that they arc not only to be excluded from the advan-
tages of a national endowment ; but you also teach them that
to bolster up the Church Establishment, you are determined
to shut them out from the rights of British subjects." I ap-
peal to the House whether this was or was not the argument
of the Hon. Member for Liskeard ?—( Cheers.) And this,
Sir, brings me to the consideration I wish more particularly
to advert to—l mean as to whether the tendency of the mea-
sure is to be fatal to the Established Church in Ireland or
not. If it is, let me ask how is the danger to the Establish-
ment to arise ? You do not apprehend a display of acteal force
—you do not suppose that the Town-councils will take up
arms and resist the Church ?—( Hear, hear.) No, but
you are afraid that, inasmuch' as the municipal councils
. will have the power of discussion, of petitioning the
Parliament, where, as representing the wishes and feel-
ings of the great body of the inhabitants of the towns
they will wield a moral force, that force which will be added
to their enmity to the Established Church. Do those gentle-
men who use the argument to which I refer consider what it
is that they really assume ? Do they mean to tell me that
the Church Establishment of Ireland is so obnoxious to the
whole population of Ireland, that it is so hated and detested
by the great body of the people, that any increase of their
political power, or any means which may be afforded them of
increasing that political power, will contribute to the fall of
the Established Church ? I confess, if that be what is meant
to, be asserted by the strong friends of the Established
Church, it is, from those who profess to support it, the most
inconsistent argument I ever heard made use of. But what
will be the effect of a denial of this Bill? Is it possible that
it will not be what was last night hinted at by the Honour-
able Member for Liskeard ?—( hear, hear, hear.) Will it
not be felt by the people of Ireland that the Church
Establishment is the great obstacle to the , attainment
of their civil rights ? And if that feeling be created,
with a political power alluded to, do you think you will have
improved your position by the refusal to grant them Muni-
cipal Corporations ? But, Sir, there is one ground upon
which I can understand the character of this argument.
Perhaps there may be Honourable Gentlemen on the other
side who mean to put forward this position—that if the
Church of Ireland be ever so odious, if the feelings of the
people be against the Church, and our authority as hostile as
it may be, we are, nevertheless, still determined to maintain
both by means of our superior power ! If this, I say, be their
position—if they mean to say that they know the Church of
Ireland is odious, that for the sake, nevertheless, of maintain-
ing that Church, and on account of it, they refuse to grant mu-
nicipal corporations, and thus defeat that system of government
which they necessarily produce, their power in Ireland shall
be maintained by force of arms—we then might understand
their argument. Then, indeed, I should say you act consist-
ently by striking out all those clauses that give civil privileges
to the people of Ireland ; I say that you are right to legislate
as you would for aliens anxious to shake off the yoke. But
before we come to this question of policy let us consider all it
involves and implies. Remember you will have, not the vo-
luntary, but the forced obedience of the people, if you rest your
Government upon coercion and not the affections of the people.
They must carry out a principle to the greatest extent. What
then have you to do ? Have you not commenced the very strug-
gle you had in the case of Catholic Emancipation. Yes, the
very pages might be transferred from " The Mirror of Parlia-
ment." I could quote from that work the very sentiments
then uttered by honourable and right honourable gentlemen
opposite. If, then, I say this be the same struggle, let us
look back to the period I refer to, because it affords a most
instructive lesson to us. I will go back no further than 1825,
-when, it will be remembered, that a 13111 for emancipating
the Roman Catholics Was passed by this House and sent up
to the other House of Parliament, where, unfortunately, it
was defeated by a considerable majority, led on by those who
were then the colleagues in office of the Right Hon. Baronet
(Sir R. Peel) opposite. Two years afterwards, in 1527, a
new Parliament was assembled,and then, for the last time, this
House decided by a bare majority against Catholic emancipa-
tion. In the following year the decision of the House was re-
versed ; but again a majority of the other Hoose, acting, as I
before said, with those immediately connected in office with
the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), stopped the progress
of improvement, and defeated the measure.—( Hear, hear.)
In the following year, within only two years of the time when
the Right lion. Baronet had separated himself from the Go-
vernment of Mr. Canning, lest his assumption of the lead in
that Government should give some remote assistance to the ad-
vancement of Catholic emancipation—( Cheers)—within two
years from that time, the Right Hon. Baronet was compelled
himself to come forward, to confess that his previous policy bad
been wrong—that his former opposition had been unfortunate
—and to call upon this House to pass a measure of Roman
Catholic Emancipation.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon.
Baronet on that occasion was arguing on precisely the same
question as that which I maintain is now before us, namely,
" Can you or can you not carry on the Government of Ireland
by a system of coercion ? Can you or can you not go on per-
manently resisting that which the people of Ireland are deter-
mined to obtain ?"—( Hear, hear.) And these are the words
used by the Right Hon. Baronet :—" I say you would then
be commencing a Government with nearly the whole con-
stituent and representative body against you, and it would
be practically impossible to conduct the internal Govern-
ment of Ireland. Separated as that country necessarily is
from England, it would be impossible to carry on an in-
ternal Government in opposition to the feelings of the re-
presentative and constituent bodies. There would be a
moral influence opposed to you which would render it
hopeless to conduct the business of Government."—( Hear.)
Let me ask, would that difficulty be diminished now? An
Hon. Member, who last night sat immediately behind
the Right Honourable Baronet, told you distinctly that the
Roman Catholics were daily increasing in wealth and influ-
ence, and that in a very short space of time they would have
seventy or eighty representatives in the House.—( Cheers.)
Those representatives would be arrayed against the lion.
Gentlemen opposite : because, let the Right I-ion. Baronet
remember, that this question of Municipal Reform, which
originally only interested the cities and towns of Ireland, has
been, in consequence of the course taken by the Opposition, a
question deeply interesting to the feelings of every Roman
Catholic.—( Cheers.) My Noble Friend (Stanley) stated
last night distinctly, " it is because they are Roman Catho-
lics—it is not because they are Irishmen, but because they arc
Roman Catholics, and because being Roman Catholics, they
would be opposed to the Established Church, that I refuse to
grant them the privileges proposed in this Bill."—( Cheering. )
Why, these are precisely the grounds on which, for so many
Mars, the measure of Roman Catholic Emancipation was re-
sisted ; and I tell you that the difficulties with which you will
have to contend in resisting this measure, will he of pre-
cisely the same character as those with ishich you had to
contend on the question of Catholic Emancipation, and by
which you were ultimately defeated—( Loud cheering.)
But I continue my quotation from the speech of the Right
lion. Baronet in 1829. The Right Hon. Baronet goes on to
say : Again, then, I ask, Sir, what is to be the remedy ? Is
it to retrace our steps? I would warn you that finding the
powers, you have already conferred so great that you can no
longer struggle with them, you should be cautious how
jou struggle with them ; you should be cautious haw you
trifle with- them, or encounter a collision which may en-
danger the welfare of the State ; for I firmly believ,e that
the commencement of a system of recalling civil pri-
vileges already bestowed, without an attempt to settle the
question, and a declaration that nothing is to he conceded,
would be attended with consequences the most disastrous--
It would cause a re-action, which would of necessity lead to
a struggle ; and that struggle, if pursued to its legitimate
consequences, would end in a result little short of the re-
enactment of the penal laws. But, Sir, can the penvl laws
be applied to Ireland as it at present exists? Reflect upon
the difficulties that would attend such a project. Can we
force back the great spirit that we have let loose by lifting
the seal from the vessel, and inclose him again within his
narrow ? Looking, therefore, to the different
considerations which bear upon the subject, I would
ask the most determined enemy to concession, in what mode
the internal Government of Ireland is to be conducted ?"
This was the opinion of the Right lion. Baronet in 1829.
Will the difficulty of carrying on the Government in Ireland
upon the principle that Catholics, as Catholics, ought to be
denied the advantages which are to be extended to England
be less now than they were in 1629 ?—( Cheers.) [An allu-
sion was here made by an Hon. 'Member, as we understood, to
the General Association, but we did not hear the terms of the
observation. ] I admit the real danger of it ; far am I from
undervaluing the importance of it as the symptom of a dis-
turbed and diseased state of society.—(Hear, hear. ) But
what, I
ask the Right- lion. Baronet, is this—will he find the
present Association loss formidable than that to which be
yielded in 1;.+251?_—( Cheers.) Is it easier now to deftsnd your
ground when you have given up every commanding position
that you then occupied ? when all the aids to resistance you
then possessed have since been completely abandoned ?--
( Cheers. ) When you have given such an extensive political
power to the Roman Catholics of Ireland, is there any safety,
nay, is there any thing but the greatest madness in ebruptly
pensing and refusing to go further ?-e-( Cheers.) In ;.125
Mr. Canning said, and although I had not then tht honour of

a seat in Parliament, I happened to be present on the
occasion, and had the pleasure of hearing him, and his word.:
made a great impression on my mind—Mr. Canning said;
speaking of the former system of government, " The rack is
a horrible engine, but a beautiful piece of mechanism—so, the
penal laws arc dreadfulabut admirably adapted to the purpose
for which they were originally intended a" and he went on to
show that, by trampling down and brutalising the whole people
of Ireland, you might chance to carry on the Government for
a time, but that the very first concession that was made would
carry with it, of necessity, all those other concessions which
have since gradually followed.—( Hear, hear.) Unfortunately
the Right Hon. Baronet would not take the warning which
Mr. Canning then gave him.—( Hear, hear.) A few evenings
ago the Right Hon. Baronet felt it necessary to enter into a
defence of his change of opinion upon the subject of Catholic
Emancipation in 1824. But lam sure that those by whom he
was then most condemned can now hardly resist the conviction
that in 1829 the Right Honourable Baronet acted in the
manner that best became. him.—(hear, hear.) But if the
Right Honourable Baronet were right in 1829, I ask him
was he right in 1825 and 1827 ?—( Hear, hear.) I impute
no motives to him for his change of opinion in 1829. lam
convinced that he was sincerely anxious to do that which was
best.--( Hear, hear.) It was reserved for some of those who -
have now joined his ranks to impute to the Right Honourable
Baronet unworthy motives for his conduct.—( Cheers.) —(Sir
James Graham half rose from his scat and seemed to address
an observation across the table.) Ido not in the least allude
to the Right Hon. Baronet thel Member for Cumberland.—
(Laughter and cheers.) I am alluding to some of the speeches
made in 1829 by some of the Hon. Gentlemen who have
since taken their seats on the same side of the House with
the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel).--(Hear, hear, hear.)
Did not Mr. Canning—did not Lord Plunket, and many
other distinguished persons, the associates in office of the
Right Honourable Baronet, describe to him in language
which might now be quoted as historical of the event, al-
though it was then used only prophetically—did they not
point out, in language exactly conforming with the event,
the certain and obvious tendency of the course lie was pur-
suing ?—( Hear, hear.) Did they not repeatedly call upon
him to say, whether he could permanently maintain the line
of policy he had adopted ? Did they not repeatedly ask,
whether it was possible that the existing state of things
could go. on from year to year without at least coming to a
fatal result? And did not the Right, Hon. Baronet refuse
to listen to their . warning voices, and blindly perse-
vere in his mistaken career, until at length the fatal result
so long predicted actually happened; and which I am afraid
did not verify the assertion made by my Hon. Friend last night,
that they would " refuse to clamour what they would not
deny to justice?"—( Hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet in
1825 and 1827 made use of very much the same language as
at present in speaking of the danger of the Association in
Ireland—of the danger to the Established Church—of the im-
possibility of placing confidence in giving political power to
the Roman Catholics. And why was it that he at last con-
sented to give them power? Was it because the Association
had been less urgent in its demands, or less menacing in its
attitude ?—( Hear, hear.) Was it because the Church was in
less danger?—(Hear, hear.) No ; the reasons were those
stated by the Right Hon. Baronet himself—that the means of
further carrying on the struggle had altogether failed him.—
( Hear, hear, hear, and cheers.) With this experience—with
this reason—with this dearly-purchased experience 'before
us, shall we again commit the same mistake ?—( Hear.) Shall
we once more commit ourselves to a system of Government to
which the great body of the Irish people and the Irish Repre-
sentatives . are and will be the determined opponents ?
( Cheers.) Will the Imperial Parliament once more commit
itself in a struggle of that kind ?—( Hear.) Is the Right
Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) now prepared to face those self-
same dangers which in 1829 he most wisely shrunk from
encountering—(Cheers)—or will he again come down to the
House and advise us to retrace our steps ?—( Hear.) Having
denied what was asked in justice, will he tell us to give it up
to clamour, when the power opposed to you no longer thanks
you for the concession, but boldly tells you you dare not refuse
it ?—( Cheers.) I ask the House whether they are prepared
to risk the peace of the country, the existence of the empire,
upon so desperate a chance as this ?—( Hear.) Will they embark
in this career? If not, I say let them lose no time in adopting
those measures of conciliation which the present circumstances
require, and which experience tells us cannot be permanently
resisted.—( Cheers.) We have already, fatally in my opinion,
lost the best and the wisest occasion for conceding with grace.
—(Cheers.) Already, if lam not greatly mistaken, the effect
of the boon, even though granted upon the instant, would be
infinitely less than if it had been yielded in the last Session of
Parliament.--( Hear. )
Sir F. POLLOCK sincerely entertained the alarm which
the Noble Lord who last addressed the House appeared to
sneer at. He did think that the granting of Municipal Cor-
porations to Ireland would have a tendency to degrade reli-
gion.—( Loud cries of " Oh !" from the Ministerial side ;
cheers from the Opposition)—and he did think it safer for the
Protestant religion, as established in the united empire, that
the resolution of the Noble Lord (F. Egerton) should be
agreed to rather than that the Bill should be carried in the
shape in which it then stood.—( Hear, from the Opposition.)
He would refer presently to the arguments advanced by the
Noble Lord (Howick), but he begged first to allude to a
speech made, he believed, by the Hon. Member for Limerick,
who stated that the only' arguments on the opposition side of
the House were, that Municipal Corporations in Ireland were
not necessary, and that they might be mischievousaa--( Hear,
hear, hear.) He begged to ask whether those arguments
were not well founded ? If it were said that Municipal Cor-
porations were necessary, let him ask what had been their
experience of such bodies in England ? By the English
Corporation Bill his Majesty was empowered to grant a
charter of incorporation to any twin in any part of the king-
dom, where, such a charter should be required. What was
the result ? There had not been a single application for
such a charter since the Bill passed.—( Hear.) Experience
showed them that Corporate rights were not much valued in
England, and certainly were not considered necessary where
they had not formerly existed. As regarded the existing
corporations of Ireland, it was notorious 'that the greater por-
tion of them had been created for the 'single purpose of main-
taining the Protestant religion in that country ; and down to
a recent period all Roman Catholics were carefully excluded
from any participation in them., This was one of the reasons
why he dreaded the adoption of the present measure; because
where' theie had been a system of exclusion on one side, the
result of the proposed change would in all probability be to es-
tablish a system of exclusion on the other. He contended, in
opposition to the Noble Lord who had just addressed the
House, that these corporations would be the means of foster-
ing political agitation in Ireland. He entertained the greatest
respect for the people of Ireland, and he protested against being
supposed to be a 'party to any insult to .that nation, or to any
gentleman from it, by opposing the extension of such muni-
cipal rights to Ireland as were proposed in thii Bill ; he did
not conceive that he could be charged with any such inten-
tion, but he was only anxious that the towns of Ireland should
be governed as Westminster, Mary-la-bonne, and Manchester
now were.—( Hear, hear.)
Several Hon. Members rose to address the House ; among
others, Mr. T. Fowcll Buxton, Mr. Roebuck, Mr Callaghan,
Dr. Lushington, Mr. Grattan, and other gentlemen.
Mr. ROE BUCK having been loudly called for, proceeded
to address the House as follows:—I am happy that I have the
satisfaction of rising after some Hon. Gentlemen who have
spoken more immediately to the question before the House.
I believe that we have here met to determine whether the po-
pulation of Ireland should have a municipal system for the
government of their own internal affairs, without rendering it
necessary to dwell on the proceedings of certain Orange lodges,
or on the registration of Sligo, or any petty grievance as to the
Executive Government in Ireland.—( Hear.) Supposing that
the Executive Government of Ireland'is unworthy of the con-
fidence of the House. is that an argument, or would it ope-
rate as a-sufficient reason with the representatives of Great
Britain and Scotland to refuse to the people of Ireland the
means of obtaining a system of self-government, which was
found so efficient in its operation in Great Britain and Scot-
land? My object at present is to state, as briefly and
clearly as I am able, the grounds of my assent to the second
reading of this Bill, and, if possible, to answer some of
the objections urged as to th 3 policy, as well as justice,. of
the- measure contemplated by big Majesty's Government. It
has been admitted by the Right lion. Gentleman, the. Mem-
ber for Tamworth, that there is a strong prima facie case in
favour of this Bill, and he has acknowledged that on them who
(*pose it devolves the necessity of. proving, by special reasons
and peculiar circumstances, the wisdom of denying to the
Irish people those rights which by this Bill we seek to con-
fer on them ; and ray immediate purpose is to show, how fee-
ble to this end are the circumstances stated by the Right
Hon. Gentleman—how inconclusive is the argumentation by
which he has attempted to support his proposition.—( Hear,
hear.) It seems, as far as I was able to ascertain the opinion
of the Right Hon. Baronet, that lie believed, that as Ireland
and England was now one nation, said to be under one
Government, and as we bad seen reason to give to the
people of England municipal governments, that there was
a presumption at once in favour of extending the same
measure to Ireland. I desire, however, to go one step
farther into this inquiry. I wish to know why it was thought
necessary to confer these rights on the people of England,
for when we have clearly est.'s rtained the nature or the tic-_
cessity for creating municipalities iti England, we shall be
better prepared to determine whether there be any difference
in the two cases of England and Ireland, and whether the
necessity which was so potent in one case exists in Ire-
land, and whether there be anything in the peculiar condition
of the latter country to counterbalance the need which is found
to be similar in both countries.—( Hear. ) Now I suppose it
will be allowed that the principle on which we created muni-
cipal governments in England was this, viz., all communities
of men in towns have, from the very fact of their neighbour-
hood and society, certain interests and concerns peculiarly
their own—interests which they have special reason to watch
over with care, and to guard and forward with prudence and
assiduity. While these societies have these peculiar or local
interests, they have also general ones—that is, interests which
arc general to the greater community of the nation. Now,
here in England, we have determined that while the general
government watches over the more wide or general interests
of all, the neighbourhoods which have local interests shall
watch over and protect those more narrow and peculiar mat-
. ters of concern.—( Hear, hear.) lee in the same manner
we have also determined that each individual has matters and
interests peculiar to himself and family, which are left to
11's own individual goxernment.—
then, in England and Scotland we have divided every
parate (gasses—personal or in-
man's interest info three se
dividual ; local, or those of his peculiar neighbourhood ; and
thirdly, general or national. The first set are under his own
immediate and singular control; the second lie governs in
conjunction nith his neighbours ; the third he sitrerinterid;
in common with the whole nation.—( Hear, hear.) Such is
the view we have taken with regard to the people of England