The Sun.
London, England, 1837-02-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 0, 183/.

I could trace repeatedly the Right Hon. Gentleman in the
attempt to disconnect Lord Grey and the friends of his who
form the present Government, and those who happen to think
with him.—( Hear). I had not the honour of being a member
of the cabinet of Lord Grey ; but I ha d the honour of holding
two high official situations under the Right Hon. Gentleman
and under the Noble Lord; and I had the honour of having
the office of the Irish Secretaryship handed over to me.—
( Hear). But this I Cell say, that if the Right Hon. Gentle-
man thinks to pass over us—to discredit its with some of the
followers or friends of Lord Grey who happen not to agree
with those now connected with the Government—l must tell
him this, that I have the best authority for saying that the
noble and illustrious person referred to never has accused the
Government of Lord Melbourne, and never had the right
,to
complain, that they acted in any way that he could complain of. I
do say, that we are doing nothing more nor less than this, that
we have attempted to carry on a great principle. This Ad-
ministration is but the offspring of the Reform Bill.--( Hear,
and ironical cheers from the Opposition Members.) This
Administration is but the offspring of that Bill, of which the
Right Hon. Gentleman was one of the framers, and of which
the Noble Lord opposite was one of the supporters. So far,
then, from the Right lion. Gentleman taunting us for anything
we have done, and which could justify him in attacking us—
so far from his branding this Administration with the character
he has applied to us, I am confident that when the truth
comes to be told, we will be considered to have fairly carried
out the principle upon which the Government of 1830 acted.
The Right Hon. Gentleman brought, I think, this question
to the test, and which ought to be applied to it. It is this
how is Ireland to be governed ?—(Hear, and cheers.) That
is the test.--( Hear.) I have not heard—l do not exactly
know what is—the course that the Right Hon. Gentleman
and his Colleagues mean to pursue on this occasion. They
say they will not oppose the bringing in of the Bill. They
say they do not mean to oppose, as fares I can understand, the
second reading of this Bill. Am I to understand that they
mean to take the same course that they did last Session ? Am
.I to understand that they mean to annihilate the Protestant
Corporations in Ireland, and say there are to be no Corporations
at all, for fear the Catholics should be admitted into them ?
( Hear, from Ministerial Members.) Now this is the question, and
nothing but this—( Hear)—and now let me come to a point
which Ino not understand. My Noble Friend the Secretary
for the Home Department has stated that the Government in-
tend to pass this Bill.—(Hear, and ironical cheers from Op-
position Members.) They intend to attempt passing this
Bill.—( Hear.) And when my Noble Friend says that,
certainly, as one of the Government, stand here in confirma-
tion of that statement, and take its responsibility upon me.
And I now ask the Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite, if we
do not pass the Bill, do they intend to govern Ireland upon
the other principle ?—(Hear, and; loud cheers from the Mi-
nisterial Members.) Does the Right Hen. Gentleman, sup-
posing the happy day should arrive in which we should be re-
lieved of our thankless servitude there—does he intend to
govern Ireland with Orange handkerchiefs and " the Kentish
fire"---( Long-continued cheering)—and this, too, with the
assistance of a very respectable nobleman acting as fugleman ?
(Cheers and laughter.) Does the: Right Hon. Gentleman
mean to do this ? I think that the King's Government, and
the country too, will consider they have a tight to ask the ques-
tion, and to have a decided answer to it.—( Hear, hear.) I
am here not to force an answer to my question from the
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, but think the country will
put such a question, and also expect an aus,Jer to it. The
answer they will have to give must be, whether or not they
mean to give'a Corporation bill to Ireland—whether do :you
intend to legislate for Ireland as you legislate for England and
Scotland—whether you distinguished gentlemen and powerful
party opposite mean to govern Ireland on opposite principles !
There is no medium in the two courses. The Irish people, I
tell you, s‘ ill reject your no-corporation principle.—( Hear.)
Ido not speak of your, so called, Protestants : but I am
speaking of the Irish people, as represented by the great mass,
as represented by the great body of the intelligence, wealth,
talent, and power of the community.—(Hear, hear.) I say
they will not be content with the annihilation of the Cor-
porations as they exist—they will not certainly be satisfied
with a middle course with which you hope to content them—
( Hear, hear, hear)—and before you make a stand at all
you must determine what is the course you will take.—
( Hear, hear.) Will you take up that position which you
retreated from before, and by retreating from which you ob-
tained so much power and popularity at the time.—(Cheers
from the Ministerial Benches.) The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman ought to be prepared to tell the country—l mean
when he and his party succeed to our places—(Laughter)---he
ought to be prepared to tell the country whether he intends
that there shall be no Corporation reform for Ireland—whe-
ther he intends to govern in spite of the majority of 86 —a
majority assembled in his own House of Commons, one as-
sembled under his own auspices, and all this, too4ecause that
proposal is supported by a majority in the House of Lords.—
(Cheers.) I tell a plain tale. The Hon. Member for Bath
complained last night that we were not sufficiently explicit. I
do not complain of his doing so, but he shall not have to com-
plain of my not being explicit enough to-night. The ques-
tion to be decided to-night is this : shall this country be go.
yenned by a majority of the House of Lords against a majority
ef the House of Commons, or shall it be governed by a majo-
rity of the House of Commons against a majority of the House
of Lords ?—( Cheers.) Does the Right Hon. Gentleman
mean to govern by a majority of the House of Lords aeainst a
majority of the House of Commons? I quote his own words:
he has said he could not. I have his recorded phrases about me.
Sir ROBERT PEEL was understood to admit the cor-
rectness of the opinion ascribed to him.

Sir J. C. HOB 0 U SE—I do not quote newspapers. The
Right Hon. Baronet said he would not do it, and he did do it
a fterwards.—( Hear, hear.) He decried the practice, and he
afterwards gave us a notable instance of his falling into it him-
self. lam quite sure that the Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir
R. Peel) is not afraid of his own words. That Right Hon.
Baronet did say that it was to a majority of this House he in-
tended to appeal. It is to that majority I appeal—to a Par-
liament collected by himself, and under his own auspices; col-
lected, I will not say under what pretences, for I do not wish
to lower any one in his own estimation, and that of others.—
(Cheers, and cries of Oh I from the Opposition Members.)
But the Parliament I appeal to is, in the common acceptation,
his own, and from that Parliament it would be hardly fair, and
I trust that if tried it would not be safe for him to appeal.--
( Hear.) Our majority upon this question is 86. Arc we to be
controlled by a majority of the other House of Parliament ?
I say no—decidedly no—(Cheers)—and unless the Right
Hun. Gentleman is prepared to accept the Government
on the terms of carrying it on by a majority of the
House of Lords, controlling the majority of the House of
Commons—controlling too that which is a popular ques-
tion, one of municipal rights, and a question with which
the House of Commons must be considered far more'conver-
sant than the other House : unless he is prepared to accept the
Government on such terms, I say that his opposition to this
measure is not wise, and is not consistent with his usual pru-
dence ; and I trust, as experience on so many other occasions
has proved, he will be shown to be also wrong on this. The
Noble Lord has introduced a Bill similar to that of last year,
one for forming Municipal Corporations in Ireland, and I must
say that I have heard nothing, unless from the Right lion.
Gentleman, which could in the least approach to any argument
against the introduction of that measure. It has been said that
the people of Ireland are unfit and disqualified for power ; that
is to say, that if power be given to them they will use it, not
for the common weal, but against it. And whereas you may
give corporations in Scotland and in England, that you may
fairly entrust to the people the selection of those who will
manage their own affairs, in Ireland you may not so entrust
them—that there, if you give them the power, they will only
select persons who will do mischief to the community.—
( Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman who has just sat down
has taken the high religious ground; he apprehends, if you
give these Corporations to Ireland, they will do something
against the Protestant religion in that country. Has, I ask, the
Protestant religion flourished under the present Corporation
system ? Certainly not. If none but Catholics had been
selected to fill offices in Corporations, surely no more mischief
could have been done than by the system hitherto pursued. I
am sure if we are to judge of Protestantism by Protestants,
we can have no other opinion.—( Hear.) Ido not think the
Recorder of Dublin is a good judge upon this subject ; he, in
reference to it, quoted rather a profane author, Homer, of
its being like a golden chain let down from Heaven, and thus
communicating divine blessings to man I We have tried the
pure Protestantism of the Right. Hon. Gentleman for some

time, and what arc we now going to try ? Something in a
spirit of fairness and impartiality. My Noble Friend, in one
part of his speech, alluded, as I have before said, to what
would be the probable result of the rejection of this Bill.
Supposing that catastrophe which he_ shadowed out in no very
ambiguous phrase were to occur, all I shall say is this, that I
think we have not rendered ourselves liable to any of the im-
putations which have been cast on us. When first we under-
took the government of the country, which we did under most
difficult circumstances, we began by attempting to confer, and
we succeeded in giving free Municipal Corporations in Eng-
land.—( Hear.) In the course of the last Parliament, we
passed many Acts which. I feel certain a dispassionate poste-
rity will consider of great benefit to this country.. It is
my belief that even the Hon. Gentlemen who are now our op-
ponents, will, one day or another, confess that we deserve for
these acts the approbation of the country. If we fail in the
object we have now in view, viz—that of making Ireland par-
ticipate in the blessings we have assisted in conferring on
England, we shall at least fail honourably. We shall at least
have attempted a great object, and it is more honourable to
fail in an endeavour of magnitude than in a small undertaking.
The whole of our career, short as it has been, has been marked
with that endeavour. These observations I must be allowed
to make in justice to our own characters, in justice to our con-
stituents, in justice to that majority of the House which has
hitherto supported us, which, I have no doubt, will still con-
tinue to lend us its generous aid, and in the face of which, I
must repeat, I defy the Right Hon. Baronet to undertake;the
government of this country.—( Much cheering.)
Sir H. PEEL rose—He said, I confess I am rather sur-
prised at the singular course the debate has taken. His Ma-
jesty's Speech from the Throne at the opening of the Session
called the attention of the Legislature to the state of Ireland.
In that Speech the Commissioners were "especially com-
manded to bring under the notice of Parliament the state of
Ireland, and the wisdom of adopting all such measures as may
improve that part of the United Kingdom." It then went on
to say in the same sentence :—" His Majesty recommended
the early consideration of three great measures—the con-
stitution of the municipal corporations of that country—
the laws which regulate the collection of tithes—and
the difficult but pressing question of establishing some
legal provision for the poor." When the Noble Lord
who brought forward the present motion intimated to the
House in his notice that he did not intend to confine himself
to the abstract subject of the Municipal Corporations Bill, but
to dilate on the general subject of Ireland, I took it for
granted, I confess, that he intended. to take a comprehensive

view of the whole state of that country; and, in doing so,
that he would give at least an outline of those three great
measures. But what course did the Noble Lord take? He
fixed on a resolution of a meeting, held in Dublin—be fas-
tened the debate on that and that alone—and lie withheld
every information which was naturally expected from him
under the circumstances relating to the Irish Church and the
Irish Poor-law.—( Cheers.) He fised on the 14th resolution
passed at a meeting convened by a number of gentlemen,
who thought that they could exercise with freedom and in
safety the humble right which every British subject claims of
petitioning Parliament.--(Cheers.) The Noble Lord was
not ignorant of the usual course on such occasions. He knew
that the petition would be presented—he was well aware that
then was the proper time fur him to make any observations,
or objections to it, ; but he did not follow that course—he did
not wait till the petition was substantively before the House;
he took the opportunity of the Municipal Corporation Bill
to assail the petition and charge the petitioners with shrink-
ing from their assertions, and uttering calumnies of his Ma-
jesty's Ministers, which they were not prepared to prove
in Parliament. But the Noble Lord got an answer—( Cheers)—
such an answer as he will not soon forget.—(Cheers.) He
said, " Oh, you deal in vague declamations--you make gene-
ral charges against us. What facts have you to adduce ? Not
one. I challenge you to come forward and prove your asser-
tions; and I brand you with the disgrace of calumny if you
do not produce evidence of what you have stated." That was
what the Noble Lord said in substance. Well, what follocnd ?
Why, four hours had not quite elapsed when the discussion bo-
eame so inconvenient to him and his side of the House, that we
were told on this side that it would be infinitely better to con-
fine ourselves to the particular subject of the motion ; that the
detail of small facts was no better than the general abuse ;
and we were finally implored to return to what was the proper
object of consideration—the Municipal Corporations Bill for
Ireland.—( Hear.) The Noble Lord complained of a want
of facts in the allegations against the Irish Government in
the outset of his observations. Does he do so now ?—( Hear. )
There are facts in abundance to prove them. The Noble
Lord had asked for a Committee—a Select Committee—
to investigate the truth or falsehood of these allegations ; but
Oh," said Hon. Members on the opposite side of the House,
it is not a subject for a Select Committee, or any other
Committee. If the Irish Government has acted wrong, let
it be impeached ; move an impeachment against his Majesty's
Ministers." What is the impeachment to be about, I would
wish to ask those who urge this course ? Is it to inquire whe-
ther Lord Mulgrave, in the exercise of the Royal prerogative
of mercy, as representative of the Crown, has unjustly or ins-
properly discharged prisoners from gaol, in various parts of

land; or is it to investigate the appointment of Mr

regott
as his confidential adviser ?- Could not these be investigated by
a Select Committee, without the necessity of an impeach
mcnt ?--( Cheers.) Is there no mode of coming at a Minister
of the Crown, except by the cumbrous one of an impeach-
ment? Is Lord Melbourne to be exempt from account, until
he shall be impeached? And is he to enjoy impunity in every-
thing he does, until that tedious proceeding shall be insti-
tuted against him?—(Loud cheers.) A Select Committee
for all these purposes, would be far better than impeach-
ment. What is the object of this talk about impeachment,
and this denial of a Committee? Do you mean to resist
facts ?—(Great cheering.) Do you mean to rest on the 14th
resolution, and saying that general vituperation is not fair ?
Do you mean to turn round on us, and state that nothing but
impeachment will do for you ? Do you mean to tell us, " Oh,
we are too exalted for a Committee, and nothing but impeach-
ment will satisfy us ?"—( Hear.) Instead of attacking this
resolution prematurely, why did not the Noble Lord take the
more prudent, as well as the more statesman-like, course of
entering on the subject of the whole state of Ireland, as lie
had intimated his intention of doing? But it might be said
that he had entered on the state of Ireland--Oh, yes, he did
so; but it was a view of the subject which altogether left
out tithes and the poor laws for that country.--( Hear.) It
was an improvement on the proceeding of the provincial ma-
nsger respecting the tragedy of Hamlet, for the Noble Lord
had played the piece, omitting not only the part of Hamlet, I
suppose by particular desire, but that of Ophelia also, I
presume by particular desire too.-_( Cheers and laughter.) Let
us now see what the Noble Lord says in support of his pre-
sent measure for municipal institutions for Ireland. You tell us
that when we refuse to apply the same municipal institutions
to Ireland as we have to England, we are inflicting insult
as well as injury on the people of that country. I ask those
who tell us so, do they apply the same rule to all other mea-
sures in which the two countries are concerned? Do you mean
to say that, having passed au Act of Parliament, incorporat-
ing the Church of Ireland with the Church of England, we
are to apply that rule for the production of identity in our
legislation ? If you do not, on what rule do you refuse it ?
Is it not that different circumstances exist in Ireland, which war-
rant the application of a different principle from that which
should be applied to England ? If the same circumstances
exist in other branches requiring legislation, and if the same
results ensued, should it be taken for granted that an insult
was intended when the application was made? Do you mean
to apply the principle of identity to the poor laws for Ireland ?
That is an important subject, affecting the interests, the sym-
pathies, and feelings of as great a number of human beings as
the Municipal Corporation Reform, or almost any other politi-
cal question which could be mooted. This is the law of England.
Every person born in the kingdom, who is old, blind, or
maimed, or otherwise impotent, is entitled to relief from hiS
parish. Do you mean to apply that law to Ireland—you, who
talk so loudly of identity of legislation ?—(Cheers.) I fear
you do not. I know many among those who clamour the
loudest about justice and equal laws are the most forward to
charge us with insulting the people of Ireland, and the most
active in crying out for redress—who shrink within themselves
when poor laws for Ireland are the subject of discussion.—
( Cheers.) Poverty and impotence are not entitled in their
eyes, it would seem, to the same description of identity of
legislation as political partisans are. Then they show them-
selves in their true colours, and the principle of identity, as
far as the right of the poor to relief is concerned, is denomi-
nated by no more soothing appellation than " a great hum-
bug."—( Cheers.) With respect to poor laws for Ireland, see
for a moment what the operation would be on this measure. In
England the right of voting depends not on the value of the
house in which the voter lives, but on the payments of his
rates—in which arc included, of course, the poor rate. Now,
before you offer us the Municipal Corporation Bill for Ire-
land, do you refuse to give us any explanation on the subject
of the connection of rating with the right of voting in Ire-
land? Do you mean to say that those who are rated to the
poor rate alone shall have the right to vote, or that that
right shall be derived .solely from the value of the tene-
ment occupied by the claimant to the franchise ?—( Hear,
hear.) In either case do you mean to submit the Bill
to the Committee before you give any explanation of your
views on this most important-question? The country longs
for an answer. The two main questions, however, are, whe-
ther the patronage vested in the Irish Government has been
properly exercised, and whether the Royal prerogative of
mercy, placed in the hands of the Lord-Lieutenant of Ire-
land, has been rightly applied. By far the greatest matter
connected with the former was the appointment of Mr. Pigott
to the situation of confidential adviser at the Castle. Mr.
Pigott, from all I have heard, is a respectable man ; but I
contend that his appointment was bad. Do you think that
I object to it because he is a Roman Catholic ? No, far
be it from me to do so. I object to it becaase it shows
the animus which actuates the Government, and because
it is a direct encouragement and sanction to the Association
now sitting in Dublin, that gentleman being an active member
of the body. The Right Honourable Gentleman (Sir J. C.
Hobhouse) opposite asks me what course I shall pursue when I
I receive that appointment of which I had not even the
slightest expectation until he spoke.—( Hear, and laughter.)
To this I answer that, as I doubt very much his authority to
confer that appointment on me, I also doubt to the same de-
gree his right to catechise me on the results of' a contingency
which, until this night, I thought of all other things was the
most remote.—( Cheers and laughter.) And now, what be-
tween the funeral speech of the Right Honourable Gentleman
—the song of the dying swan—( Loud cheers and laughter)._
and the declaration volunteered by him, that it would be mad-
ness in me to hope to conduct the Government at all, I am
left in doubt as to the actual position in which I stand. lam
told by Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House that the
greater part Of my support in the House is derived from the adhe-
rence of Orangemen to me and the influence of Orangemen in
my favour. Now, I appeal to my Hon. Friends behind me,
many of whom were then members of Orange Societies, whe-
ther any man could be more anxious to persuade them than I
was at the time his Majesty's commands for their suppression
was issued to acquiesce in it ?—( Hear, hear)—or whether any
man could have been more studious to change and divest
those portions of the spirit that pervaded them which might
have been dangerous to the peace and tranquillity of the
country ?—( Cheers.) In those endeavours I was aided by the
Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Department, who, on
that occasion, spoke the sentiments of the Government. Will
he now take the same course with regard to the National As-
sociation ?—( Hear, hear.) Ho cannot depart from his prin-
ciples of identity in legislation, although it be the National
Association. When the suppression of the Orange societies
was in question the Noble Lord came down to the House, and
stated that he had consulted the law officers of the Crown—
the Attorney and Solicitor-General—and that there existed
doubts in his mind as to the illegality of these societies. He
threw himself therefore on their loyalty, and he said he felt
himself compelled to rely on their good sense. That was the
appeal he made to them—will he try a similar one with the
loyalty of the National Association ?—( Cheers.) The Noble
Lord on that occasion also said, in allusion to the magistracy,
that no man should be appointed who belonged to any political
society, because the Bench should be free from all suspicion,
and the magistrate should have the character of impartiality
with all classes of society which he was called on to deal with.
Has he applied that rule to the recent appointments to the
magistracy of Ireland ? Have no members of the National
Association been made magistrates since their connection with
it? I know that a distinction may be drawn by a technical
mind between the nature of the two classes of Associations. I
know that it might be urged that ono was secret and exclusive,
composed alone of Protestants, and holding its meetings in pri-
vate, while the other is open to the public, and free to all con-
ditions and creeds to enter, into. But let us examine for a mo-
ment this distinction. Tho Noble Lord declared that secrecy
was not illegal ; and it appears that the only penalty which it
could incur would be the Hon. Gentlemen's disapprobation
on the other side of the House. But, even supposing it were,
it is not in secrecy alone that danger consists. The Jacobin
Club of Paris was not a secret club ; its sittings were open to
all comers. Yet.what mischief did it not do? That Club,
which has ramifications all over the country—which has paci-
ficators in every placewhich collects money—which inter-
feres with the administration of justice, and the due execution
of the law—that is the dangcrons Club. Such an one is the
National Association. It is said that it is a consequence of
bad legislation. So much the worse is it likely to be: Why,
then, encourage it—why sanction its proceedings ?—( Cheers.)

I You, who conclude all your speeches respecting Ireland with
a cry for impartial justice as well as equal laws, why, I ask
yet, do you place in offices of power and responsibility men
who belong to an Association which could pass this resolution
and act on it. also ?.
" Resolved—That it be recommended to all rarisbes
throughout Ireland to hold public meetings on the same day
in every part of the kingdom."
What is the object of that' resolution, let me ask you, except
it be to show the physical force which they command, and so
to compel acquiescence in their wishes ? The resolution
concludes—
" To petition in favour of Corporate Reform, Vote by
Ballot, the total Abolition of Tithes, and to appoint Pacifi-
caters."
When the downcast clergy of the Established Church in Ire-
land are seen daily struggling for the maintenance of their
legal rights—but daily drawn down also by famine and priva-
tions of every description, because they could not get what
was their right by law—when the Noble Lord opposite tells
us that that country is in a state of perfect quietude, and offers
these injured men a verse of a modern song as an only conso-
lation, while the more eloquent prose of the insurance offices
informs them pithily that Moir lives cannot be insured—when
such men as Mr. Pigott are put into offices of high trust with-
out relinquishing their connection with an association which
cries aloud for the abolition of the " blood-stained impost,
tithes," then is all confidence in the integrity of the Govern-
ment destroyed, and it behoves every honest man to see to
himself. That is the state of Ireland at present. With respect
to the exercise of the royal prerogative of mercy by the Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, the Noble Lord opposite admits that
sev:ral prisoners were discharged by that nobleman on his visita-
tion of the kingdom—some of them according to the regular
forms usted in such cases, others on the contrary. When the
subject was first mooted if was said to us, " Oh, you object to
clemency—you Jack mercy." We answer that we do not ob-
ject to clemency, and we hope that we do not lack mercy.
We do not object to clemency, but we do to its in-
jurious exercise.—(Hear, bear.) I recollect I bad the
honour of accompanying his late Majesty on his visit
to Scotland—a visit of peculiar interest, as it was the
first occasion on which that portion of the empire had been vi-
sited by a Prince of the House of Hanover as the Sovereign of
the country. Now I doubt very much that, on that occasion,
any person confined on a criminal charge was liberated, to do
honour to the visit of the Chief Governor—( Cheers)—and I
think I do recollect thet some persons confined for breaches of
the Excise jaws were discharged from prison ; but even this
was not done until the cases had been referred to the
Excise office, and a selection euade of the cases that were most
deserving of the Royal clemency. This is the only instance
that I know of in which mercy was extended to persons con-
fined for offences against the law on the visit of a Chief Go-
vernor. Oh ! yes, there is one other inetereee that occurs to
my mind, but it is of a poetical nature. It 13 recorded in a
farce--( Cheers and laughter)—_a farce known, J believe, by
the name of Tom Thumb.—(lmmense laughter., If I re-
collect right, and Prefer to the classical authority of the Hon.
Gentleman opposite, the King and Lord Grizzle appear upon
the stage.—( Roars of Laughter.) The King says, " Rebellion
is dead—l'll go to breakfast."—( Cheers and great laughter.)
And to illustrate the fact he says further—" Open the prisons
—turn the captives out—( Cheers and laughter)—and let our
treasurer advance one guinea to pay their several debts."—
( Cheers and tremendous laughter.) These are the only two
instances of mercy extended to prisoners on the visits of Chief
Governors to particular towns with which I am acquainted—
one in real life, and the other taken from fiction. In the ad-
dress of the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) to the House he
said that because Englishmen inhabited England, and Scotch-
men inhabited Scotland, they were considered deserving of
Municipal Government, but because Irishmen inhabited Ire-
land, that country was not considered to be entitled to the
same advantage; and we are told that because we withhold
these privileges we offer an insult to the Irish people. Now,
Sir, I utterly disclaim intending any insult to the Irish people.
It is not because they arc Irishmen that I do not think it po-
litic to extend to them the same corporate rights that England
and Scotland enjoy. No, Sir, it is on far different grounds.
It is because I entertain great doubts of the goodness of that
policy which would destroy one set sof corporate bodies, and
establish another description of corporate bodies in their stead,
which would be liable to the same objection as the old.—
(Cheers.) It is not the principle of self-government that is
at allinvolved in this question, but whether or no corporate
institutions shall be continued in Ireland.—(Cheers.) I know
we are accused of entertaining a prejudiced and bigotted feel-
ing against the Roman Catholics. For myself, I can only meet
such an accusation with the most direct and positive denial.
No such feeliag exists with me. The Right Honourable
Gentleman opposite asks me what I mean to do with the
municipal question in Ireland when I come into office.-
-( Hear, hear.) Now he is in office, and let me ask him, in
return, what he means to do with the Church question in Ireland?
I am bound to say, that when I see an association established
in Ireland arrayed against the Established Church, and I am
told that the Association will be continued while the Church
is suffered to exist--when I know the power which the re-
establishment of Municipal Corporations would give to that
Association —can I doubt that the Church would be endan-
gered by their existence, when the main object and efforts of
the Association to which I allude are -avowed to be the de-
struction of the Established Church in Ireland ? When we are
told that we on this side of the House are influenced by hos-
tility to the Roman Catholics in our opposition to this measure,
have we not something to complain of? Have we not some
right to entertain a feeling of jealousy ? In 1829 we passed
the Bill for the relief of the Roman Catholics. I never took
any praise to myself for the part I had in passing that Bill,
because I own it was forced upon me. I leave to others the
sole credit of having passed it ; but to charge me with having
joined in passing it for the purpose of retaining office, is alto-
gether unjust and groundless. The fact is, although it may
net be known, that I was out of office the very night before I
proposed the Bill to the House.—(Cheers.) When we hear it
declared that while the Church Establishment exists in Ireland
agitation will never cease, do we offer an insult if we refuse to
strengthen the means for this agitation ?—( Cheers.) Do we
see no other reason than offering an insult from the course we
pursue ? What was the language of Lord Plunket, the most
powerful and able advocate the Catholics ever had ? He told.
you his opinion, and it was much stronger than mine. Lord
Plunket said—" If I could agree in believing that no step
could be taken towards the Emancipation of the Roman Ca-
tholics without destroying the Protestant Church in Ireland,
I, who ,have supported these claims from my earliest life,
would at once abandon them. I would change sides, and be.
come as strenuously their opponent as I have been their con-
scientious advocate."—( Cheers.) Lord Plunket said this, and
he said more. He said, " I look upon the Protestant Church
Establishment in Ireland as settled at the Union, and to talk
of shaking it without shaking the whole empire is idle.
The Protestant Church Establishment is the cement of the
Union, and is interwoven with the institutions of both coun-
tries, and, if destroyed, all public security must be shaken, the
connection between the two countries destroyed, and the ruin
of private property must follow the ruin of the property of the
Church." When was this opinion given by ,Lord Plunket ?
Not in 1825 but in 1828, the very year before the Catholic
Relief Bill passed. If those opinions were sound, I appeal to
the people of England, who are so constantly invoked—(Loud
cheers from the Ministerial benches)—if I understand those
cheers the Hon. Gentlemen opposite mistake me : I do not
mean the English people exclusively; but I say I do appeal
to the people of this empire, who must ultimately be the
judges, if the opinions of Lord Plunket have been verified.
The Noble Lord knows that it is avowed that nothing will
content the persons who keep up the spirit of agitation in Ire-
land while the Established Church exists. And if the Noble
Lord adheres to the principle he lies laid down ho gives a
complete sanction to this continued agitation until the whole
Church shall be subverted. I confess I have heard the de-
claration which the Noble Lord has made with regret, and I
greatly fear the consequences to which it may lead. Ido
think these institutions will be calculated to destroy the ad-
ministration of justice also; but I will not now enter upon
that, although the most important, branch of the subject, al.
though I have strong grounds for doing so. There will be
the appointment of Sheriffs, amidst the heat of agitation, until
all the other questions are settled; and this must tend to
shake all confidence in the administration ofjustice.—( Cheers.)
Mr. Fox had said that those who mistook paper regulations
for practical 'government would find great difficulty in a country
distracted by religious dissensions ; and under the pretence of
equal laws they would not give equal justice, which it was
their duty to secure to the minority as well as the majority.--
(The Right Hon. Baronet sat down amidst cheers.)
Mr. N. FITZ SIMON said a few words in denial of an as-
sertion that had been made, that he had presided at an anti-
tithe meeting in Ireland.'
Lord J. RUSSELL having been loudly called for, rose to
reply. He said that although he felt very great difficulty in
addressing the House at the conclusion of so protracted a debate
yet, if they would grant him the indulgence of a few minutes,
he would abstain from all those topics which could be more
properly discussed on the second reading of tho Bill, and con-
fine himself to those topics which belonged to this pecu-
liar part of the debate. The Right Hon. Gentleman had
complained that in his opening address to the House he gave
no explanations on the Municipal question, the Church ques-
tion, or that which related to the poor laws. Now, he did not
think that he should have done his duty if he had mixed up
those subjects with a question of this kind. He felt it to be
expedient to lay before the House, as he had done, the whole
statement of Lord Mul"rave's Government since he had been
in Ireland. He owned he did not expect that the Right
Hon. Gentleman ( Sir Robert Peel) would have joined in the
insinuation that he ( Lord John Russell) had sanctioned the
interruption of the Hon. Member for Batb, because he did
not wish to hear his observations. He thought the course
which the Hon. Member for Bath had pursued on the first day
of the session would have protected him against all suspicion
of having prompted that Hon. Member. With respect to the
resolutions Which had been passed at the Mansion House in
Dublin, he did not see by them that any petition was intended
to be presented to the House of Commons. He saw that
there was an address to the Crown, and a petition to the House
of Lords, but he saw no mention of a petition to the House
of Commons, or if he had he should certainly have waited until
its presentation. The Hon. Gentlemen opposite who complained
so strongly of the Administration of Lord Mulgrave, could, if
they pleased, moved for a select committee to inquire into his
conduct, or if there was ground for inquiry there might be
ground for impeachment, and if for impeachment there would
be ground for his removal from the Government. But, for
Isis own part,, lie could not see that any blame was shown to
rest on the Lord-Lieutenant, and as to any impression which
the charges made against him in that House might be calcu-
lated to make, he was sure that they must have been entirely
removed by the speech of his Noble Friend who spoke that
night. The principal charge against the Government of Ire-
land was the appointment of Mr. Pigott to a confidential and
important offic,‘, at the same time that he was a member of the
General Association. Now, it appeared to him that there was

S 1.1 N
At
'
\.;-,fr,
2 1 *:---.-1,:..:44-'l7i---: .1
;'---% t ''''.27'. •Stq
• • ' --• if,. .". d
a great difference between an Asso ' '4" "4- ---- cf
those of a secret nature; like Orange
ask the Right lion. Baronet (Sir R. cceitiatcsii
been very studious in excluding from his Government, when it
' was formed, all persons who belonged to Associations. Was
not the Hon. and Gallant Member for Sligo, and others who
belonged to Orange Societies, appointed to offices under the
Government of the Right Hon. Baronet ?__(Cheers from
the Ministerial benches.) Mr. Pigott was admitted, even by
those who differed from him in politics, to be a gentleman of
great abilities, ;of integrity and honour. Now was the Lord
Lieutenant to exclude him from this appointment merely on
the ground that he had belonged to the General Association ?
He must deny that the appointment of this gentleman as law
adviser of the Crown did at all connect the Government with
the General Association. It was not to be supposed that he
would continue any longer in connection with that Association;
but was he to be put as!de because, in a moment of exaspera-
tion, he was one among wally other excellent men who became
members of the Association ? ' He did not see how the exis-
tence of Municipal Corporations in Ireland could be productive
of increased danger to the Church of Ireland. Ou the con.
trary, had the Bill proposed last Session been passed into a .
law, and had Municipal Corporations been established, they
should not have heard of the General Association, which was
now looked upon as fraught with so much danger to the
Church': The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) dwelt at
some length upon the subject of the Church of Ireland. He
was quite ready to admit that it was his wish and intention to
maintain that Church L but he must at the same time observe
that it was the Right Hon. Baronet, and those that acted with
him, who brought that Church into its present danger. Had
the Bill proposed the year before last been pissed; it would,
ere this, have become the "cheap defence" of the Church of
Ireland. That Bill, however, was rejected, and all he could
now say was, that he viewed with great pain the condition
into which the Church of Ireland had been brought in con-
sequence of that rejection, so far as regarded those to whom
the revenues were applicable. It would be, hereafter,_ his
earnest study, as it was now his earnest wish, to induce Par-
liament to come to some decision upon the subject. He
should be ready to make great sacrifices, for the purpose of
putting an end to the painful events that were now passing in
Ireland. They could not, however, expect to meet with a
ready acceptance of the same terms which were rejected be-
fore.---( Hear, hear.) The people of 'relent], as regarded
this question of the Church, were in an anomalous condition.
He lately read a pamphlet by the Bishop of Exeter, in which
he spoke of the advantages which the poor derived from
the Established Church. He fully admitted the justice of
his observations as regarded England, but no person
would say that these observations could fairly apply
to Ireland. It would be a matter of great difficulty to point
out any way in which the Church of Ireland could he main-
tained, in all its present relations, connected particularly as it
was with the property of the country. ft was a subject re-
quiring the most deliberate consideration. He would not wish
to see any tithe measure brought in, unless there was a fair
chance of its passing with some degree of satisfaction. He
did not therefore wish, or expect to be able, to propose any
weasure upon the subject early in the semion.. However, no
perconal feeling of his should stand in the way of a settlement
of film: or of any ether question.
LeaVe was then given to bring in the Bill, which was read
a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Friday
week.