The Sun.
London, England, 1837-02-21 00:00:00

der), and I really was exceedingly surprised at the Sergeant's
statement in this respect, With respect to Mr. Dillon's assis-
ting the prisoner's attorney as to the challenges he should
make, all I can say is, that I did not see him do so, and that
neither did, as I believe, Mr. Geele. Mr. Dillon belongs
to what is called the Liberal party; he is a brother-in-law of
Mr. Lalor, the late Member for the Queen's County, and
either has been called, or intends, I hear, to be called to the
bar. The Crown solicitor, acting upon the instructions he
received not to set aside individuals on account either of their
religion or their party politics, did not object to Mr. Dil-
lon being on the first jury, not being aware of there being
any other ground of objection to him. With respect to
the second statement of Jackson—that on the succeeding
trial, a convict—a man found guilty of offences of the same
class with those for which the prisoner was indicted—was
on the jury, it was discovered, after the jury had been sworn,
that a man, of the name of Fitzpatrick, (an ex-
tremely common one in Queen's County) was on it, who had
been about three or four years previously convicted of a riot.
Some doubts exist in the mind, I believe, of Mr. Gcale,
whether the juror and the convict were one and the same per-
son. There certainly was a Fitzpatrick indicted in 1813, but
his prosecutor was also indicted by the Crown for perjury.—
( Hear, hear.) At the last trial of those tried for the murder
of Mr. Carter, the next of kin, or some person professing to
act on their behalf, called on the Crown to abandon the pro-
secution and to allow them to conduct it, with a view mani-
festly to the selection of a jury. This we refused to do, and
also declined to allow an interference with the conduct of the
trial. Mr. Geale, however, stated in court to the attorney of
the next of kin, that if he would suggest to him any substan-
tial cause for setting aside any individual he would do so, but
that he would not exercise that right merely because it was al-
leged that a man eas of that or this party. Had we acceded to
the wishes of the next of kin in this case, we could not have re-
fused a similar request which was made in the eery next circuit-
town—Carlow; when it was suggested to the Crown solicitor
to hand over the prosecution in Sly's case to the next of kin,
with the view of thus exerting the Crown's right of setting
by. In this latter case, there were eleven Protestants on the
jury, and I have no hesitation in saying (although the jury
was as respectable as could be), that if strong political feelings
were to be allowed as a cause for setting by some of those
gentlemen, who were as honourable and as good jurors I firmly
believe as could be selected, might also have been objected to.
Again, in another trial, which took place in Maryborough, that
of Abbot, a Protestant, who was tried for the manslaughter of
a Roman Catholic, no juror was set by on the part of the Crown.
If, however, the next of kin had been at liberty to exercise
that privilege, a jury of Roman Catholics might have been se-
lected, and that, too, in a case in which the prisoner would not
have been alio:lel a single peremptory challenge. The prin-
ciple laid down by you was acted upon in the fairest and most
impartial manner ; and I have not the slightest difficulty in
stating my belief that it was productive of much more good
than evil. Divided and inflamed by party spirit, as many parts
of the Home Circuit were and are, it has struck me with sur-
prise how generally, notwithstanding, the juries have done
their duty. Ido not believe that a single person was set
aside on either of the two last circuits (at least not more
than two or three, if there were any), and yet you will find
that whilst the number of convictions in England, as com-
pared to the acquittals, is, I believe, about one in four, the
proportion on the home circuit hero is the reverse, there being
three or four convictions for one acquittal. During the last
two circuits we bad some party cases, arising out of tithes.
In the county..of Kildare, the jury convicted a rich farmer,
of the name of Prendergast, of having been concerned in
one of these riots. In Meath a similar conviction took
place; there were several other instances in which the juries,
even in what might be called party cases, honestly discharged
their duty. •
" In summer assizes, 1835, there were, I learn from the so-
licitor, forty-one convictions out of fifty-seven trials on the
home circuit.
" In Lent, 1836, out of one hundred and thirteen trials,
there were eighty convictions, and in three cases the juries
disagreed.

"In summer, 1836, out of sixty-seven trials, there were
forty-six convictions, end five cases in which the juries could
not agree.
" Now, out of the whole of these cases, I could not fix upon
a dozen in which I should have differed from the juries, nor
do I recollect half a dozen in which I thought the Crown had
any reason to complain. It appears to me, therefore, an un-
fair way of judging of the operation of a general principle, by
selecting for observation a particular case like that of Car-
ter's. Even in this latter one much might be said to justify
the view taken of it by some of the jury as to several of the
prisoners. The approver on the last trial _ committed
a very important error in identifying one person for an-
other; but granting that a conviction should have taken place,
the general result of the system should be looked at, and the
evils of it fairly balanced with its advantages.
" Believe me, dear Master of the Rolls,
" Always truly yours,
(Loud cheers.) " E. TICKELL."
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON protested that he had .not used
the expression attributed to him in reference to Mr. Dillon ;
he had said nothing of the sort.
Lord MORPETH—The expression regarding him that he
was generally believed to bo a participator in the crime.
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON said that all he said was, that a
party in question was giving his advice as to the challenging
of jurors.
Lord MORPETH continued—Let the House consider the
summary of the case of the Carters. It has been tried three
times. In the two first instances the Jury were not agreed.
The question then came before his Right Hon. and Learned
Friend whether the same parties should be tried a third time.
Evidence had transpired to attach suspicion to another party,
and the Right Hon. and Learned Judge had to say whether
the same persons should be put on their trial again, and whe-
ther, if so, the persons against whom suspicions had just arisen
should be tried with them. The three prisoners were tried
together; and on this third trial an approver committed an
error in identifying the party ; yet now, because on this third
trial the July cot l no: find the men guilty, it was stated that
justice was not done in Ireland. The Hon. and Learned
Member has quoted other cases, and into the particular circum-
stances of those cases I shall make it my business to inquire.
I was in my place during the whole Session; my Right Hon.
and Learned Friend the Master of the Rolls, then Attorney-
General, was also in his place to meet any charge that might
be made respecting this very case of Mr. Carter.—( Hear,
hear, bear.) But not one word was said of it ; neither
was one word said of Mr. Fogherty's case then. But the
Lreat secret of Mr. Fogherty's offence (said the Noble
ord) was, the decision which he formed in the case of

lodgers at Belfast. Tho great outcry raised against him
was, that he, in order to try the question, bad refused to admit
the claims of lodgers that came before him. This case was
afterwards argued before the twelve Judges, and what was the
result? Why, that the decision of Mr. Fogherty was right.
—( Loud cheers.) But with what superior purity had Ho-
nourable Gentlemen opposite valued non-resident freemen ?
( Loud Ministerial cheers.) " The point of non-residence
need not be mentioned I "—(Cheers and laughter.) And then
a law was passed, and a decision of a Committee of the House
of Commons came to enforce this virtuous mandate.—( Hear,
hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member for Belfast had
complained of the Irish Government, that they had not given
Judgeships to Mr. Warren and Mr. Brewster. With that
comulaint he (Lord Morpeth) had no right to quarrel ; nor
would he quarrel with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's ob-
jections to the appointments made to the Assistant Bar-
risterships. On both these classes of appointments the Irish
Government were willing fearlessly to rely.--( Cheers.) He
must refer to one thing which fell from his Noble Friend who
opened this discussion, but who, whatever party differ-
ences prevailed, never acted in a manner of which any one
could justly complain. The Noble Lord said that he (Lord
Morpeth) had endeavoured to fasten upon the members of a
former Government of Ireland the cause of the party feuds
and factions that disgraced Ireland. Now, he (Lord Morpeth)
should be very loath to make any charge of so grave a nature
against the Government of which his Noble Friend (Lord
Anglesey) formed so prominent a part. He wished to state
what it was that he had said. He believed his words were
—that these factious feuds in some instances met with conni-
vance from the neighbouring magistrates, and that they had
not always been met with sufficient energy with a view to their
suppression by the central Government of Ireland. That was
a widely different thing from saying that the Government of
Ireland had connived at these proceedings.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) Now with respect to the question immediately before
the House—( Hear, hear, and laughter)--to which lie begged
to invite the attention of Honourable Members. In the
first place he would observe that the course had again
been resorted to—when the force and propriety was urged
of conferring on the people of Ireland those institutions and
privileges which had already been conferred on the people
of England and of Scotland—of turning round upon the ad-
vocates of this policy, by pointing either to some enactment in
the laws already existing, or to some measure which was in
progress through the [louse, as inconsistent with that policy.
Last year the Constabulary Bill was referred to as of consider-
able service in this way. Indeed it was felt by Hon. Members
opposite to be of such use to show that the Constabulary Bill
was an efficient measure for Ireland, while it justified a de-
parture from a similarity of legislation for the two countries,
that it was passed with a prodigality of confidence in Ministers
through the House, without censure ; but it was found neces-
sary afterwards to send it up from the other House for curtail-
ment. Well, to-night, of all things, the Poor-law Bill had been
put forth as a satisfactory reason for any Corporation Bill, but as
it struck him with still more infelicity. It was urged that a per-
fect identity of legislation was not observed with respect to the
Poor-law Bill. The Right Hon. Member for Tamworth had
adopted this argument on a late occasion, and asked, " 1)o
you mean to apply the same principles to Ireland with
respect to the poor-laws ? It is the law of England and
the principle of the English poor-laws, that every person who
is lame or blind, or old or impotent, has a right to demand pe-
cuniary relief. That is the principle of the law of England,
and do you mean to adopt that principle in its full extent in
Ireland ? I know many who clamoured for identity of legis-
lation, and assailed us with the charge of insult, ImA shrunk
from it when the poor-laws came into consideration." Now,
what was the principle which his Majesty's Government pro-
posed to establish with respect to a Poor-law Bill for
Ireland ? If this point were carefully looked into, lie
(Lord Morpeth) thought that the principle of that Bill
would be found to bear considerable analogy to the principle
of the Municipal Bill then under discussion.—( Hear, hear.)
The Poor-law Bill professed to establish a large electoral
body, occupying tenements of the annual value of 51. by
whom a select representative body should be chosen for the
purpose of administering the law discreetly and with equity,
and to manage the local funds for the benefit of the general
body. Now, the Corporate Reform Bill proposed also to
establish a large electoral body possessing the same identical
annual qualification of five pounds, by whom a select repre-
sentative body was to be chosen for the purpose of adminis-

•
tering the local and general fund discreetly and economically
for the benefit of the general body. Thus far, in detail end
mode, the provisions of the two measures ran very nearly all
fours. But, granting that there was some variety in the
enactments of the poor-law system already established in Eng-
land and those which were contemplated for Ireland_ and he
owned that the surprise to him was that any Bill could be con-
templated for Ireland which contained so little difference from
the law of England—(Cheers)—but granting that some diffe-
rence did exist, the House must not forget that in dealing with
a poor-law they were dealing withewhat hadiong been the sub-
ject of law in one country, but which had never been the subject
of law in the other; while in dealing with Corporations they
were not dealing with what had been long familiar to one
country and utterly unknown to the other, but they were
dealing with what had been long standing. institutions in both
countries; and that they were now only seeking to apply
similar principles to those institutions in Ireland which had
al ready been applied to the Corporate institutions in England,
by removing the corruptions which had crept into them, and
purifying them from analogous but far more exaggerated
abuses.--( Cheers.) To do this seemed to him natural, rea-
sonable, and just; to refuse to do it seemed to him to be
most unjust, and especially when that refusal was grounded
upon the pretext of inferiority and inability.—(-Loud cheers.)
.6uch a course was so inconsistent with justice that it seemed
to him almost to amount to phrenzy.—(Great cheering.)
There was one mode of objection which, whether prominently
put forward in speeches on the other side, or running through
them in a stealthy under-current, would be found still to
pervade and colour them all, which he could not in the
slightest degree comprehend ;—that was, that if the House
should take this or that course they would be contribut-
ing to the influence and preponderance of Roman Catholic
religion over the Irish nation.—(Loud cries of " hear, bear.")
Now he would not say that the great bulk of the property, but
certainly the great majority of the humbler and middle classes
of the people of Ireland were Roman Catholics ; and those
classes were ascending in the scale of preponderance every
year. They were going on, one class above another, in a gra-
dual progression of improvement. It was for this that he
would kindly strive to elevate the Catholics in the social scale
of citizenship rather than persecute them. This was the whole
staple of the argument of the Hon. Member for Cavan's speech ;
to much of which he (Lord Morpeth) gave his entire concur-
rence. Catholic influence had found its way in all those de-
partments of industry in which the humbler and middling
classes more especially were wont to move. Hence it was
that Catholic schools and Catholic Chapels were raising up in
every corner of the land. And could the House grudge these
people this rapid advancement, or, finding,them making it, could
they refuse them a participation in the offices of their local Go-
vernment ? In England the official functions were mostly in the
hands of members of the Established Church, because the most
wealthy, the most prominent, and; numerically; the greatest
portion of the community were of that persuasion.—( Hear.)
They enjoyed those offices without, as far as he was aware,
giving ground of any real umbrage to others. He hoped
that nothing now remained to prevent their dissenting brethren
from taking their appropriate share of those offices and honours.
Cheers.) So in Scotland the great majority of offices was
in the hands of Presbyterians. Now Ireland was, he would
not quarrel as to what degree, but in a considerable degree,
Catholic; therefore, if they remained in their natural, and
because natural, their most healthy state, the Catholics would
still be found in greater abundance in all those departments
which were open to Catholic energy and enterprise, and attain-
able by habits ee activity and of business.—(Cheers.) Whe-
ther the Roman Catholic faith and doctrine, as such, were to
lose or gain ground was it question dependent upon higher ar-
bitrement than that of human legislation.--( Cheers. ) It only
depended upon them to do juotly and fairly by all.—( Cheers. )
There was one striking and startling argument, indeed, which
he owned very much surprised him, and still more so as
coming from the Hon. and Learned Member for Tarnworth—
(Laughter)--and which had been confirmed by his Noble
Friend who had moved the amendment. He meant the
ground, now for the first time taken, or at least for the first
time set forth, whereon to rest the denial of corporate govern-
ment and privileges to the people of Ireland, that it might be
found prejudicial to, and affect the interests of, the Established
Church.—(Cheers.) And, exclaimed the Noble Lord, is
this from the friends of the Church ?—(lmmense cheering)—
from the champions of the Establishment ? (Renewed
cheers.) Is the Church strong enough, is she deeply-rooted
enough, in the veneration of the Irish people—is she conge-
nial enough to the Irish people--is she so clear from all ground
of offence, that you can afford to make her the scapegoat
against every charge, the bulwark against every attack?—
( Tremendous cheers.) Is her structure so sound, or her
fabric so firm and so impregnable, that you can call together
all the scattered elements of enmity to select her omit as a
mark, and to assail her port-holes?—(Continued cheering.)
What (continued the Noble Lord) was the state of the case ?
The bulk of the Irish people, whether with right reason or
not, considered the denial of corporate government and pri-
vileges to their, after they had been conceded to England
and Scotland, as a grievous injury; and they were in a
most excited and inflamed state at the mode in which they
conceived that grievance was inflicted on them, and at the
ground on which they conceived it to rest. What, on the
other hand, was the state of the Church? On totally distinct
grounds it had already become obnoxious and unpopular, and
he must admit that it was, and to a great degree, threatened
and exposed, harassed and impoverished. Her revenues were
but scantily paid, and her ministers in many instances most
painfully destitute. And what in this case did the Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite propose to do to help to raise her head—
( Cheers)—to restore her, by increased forbearance, to favour ?
Why, they
_virtually told the Irish people, " Most probably it
would have been thought right to give you Municipal Corpo-
rations. The natural presumption (said the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet) would have been to confer on you what has already been
conferred upon the people of England and Scotland. There
is considerable presumption in favour of a municipal law for
Ireland, on account of the antiquity and simplicity of the in-
stitution." But after admitting this natural presumption, to
exist, the Right Hon. Baronet stepped in and said—" This
must not be carried into effect, because the interests of the
Church might be implicated and prejudiced, and the .
current of equal legislation, if applied to the corpora-
tions of Ireland, might be found in some collateral
manner, to affect the full and fair, and round ae•cpor-
tions of the Church Establishment—( Great cheering)—and
therefore the people of Ireland must not have Municipnl
Corporations." They were not to choose their own chief
magistrates; their Town_councils were not to meet to discuss
and legislate for their own minute local affairs; not because
these bodies, as far as he (Lord Morpeth) was aware, could -
directly affect the interest of a single clergyman, much less
of the Church itself, but because the Right Hon. Baronet
feared the moral contagion of that very principle of equal law,
and responsibility, and self-government, which could call those
municipal bodies into being, would weaken the foundations of
that other great corporate body—the Church--to the rotten-
ness of which he and his friends were thus adducing the fore-
most and most formidable testimony, and to the hostility to
which they were themselves administering the most natural,
reasonable, and, under the circumstances, he would almost say
justifiable, and even inevitable feelings.—( Cheers.) He
(Lord Morpeth) and his friends had been reproached -with
being the enemies of the Church ; but they had never carried
their enmity to that fatal pitch, as to hold out that to save
the Church they must demolish the Corporations of Ireland.—
( Immense cheering.) That the only tenure of her prolonged
existence was to make her rear her naked front over the raised,
and stark, and denuded tenantry; and the only ground of her
security was the denial of equal rights and the destruction of
free institutions.—(The Noble Lord resumed his scat amidst
the most vehement cheering.)
Lord STANLEY rose, but the cries of " Divide" for some
time prevented him from proceeding. On their subsiding lie
said it bad been his intention undoubtedly not to have offered
any observations to the House in the course of that evening;
feeling, in the first place, that the general impression on the
part of the House was that this debate must necessarily be
prolonged; and secondly, that the course of the details, so far
as he had been witness of it, was one of inquiry into details
and minute particulars by lion. Gentlemen on one side of the
House and the other ; and the speech of his Noble Friend
himself—till indeed they heard that extraordinary conclusion
to which he came--( Opposition cheers)—was rather a reply
to what had been detailed, or to a small portion of the detail
brought forward in the hearing of his Majesty's Government
by his Hon. Friend the Learned Sergeant
,behind him. But
towards the conclusion of his Noble Friend's speech he rested
the case on broader, on better, on more intelligible grounds,
and on those grounds connected with the maintenance and se-
curity of the Protestant -religion in Ireland. Fearless
of the scorn and fearless of the eontumely with which
the very name of Protestant appeared to be met on that
side of the house—( Great cheering from the Opposition
benches, with groans and reiterated cries of " No," from the
Ministerial side)—he would say—(Renewed cries of "No !"
and groans, which several times interrupted the Noble Lord
when he attempted to proceed)—he would say, that fearless
of any such reflection, and notwithstanding the taunts directed
by his Noble Friend against those who dared to rest their ob-
servations on such grounds, he must assert one intelligible ob-
jection to this measure, which was, that it was intended and
calculated to be the destruction of the Protestant Establish-
ment in Ireland.—( Opposition cheers.) His Majesty'sGe-
vernment had put it forth indeed that thy were the friends
of the Church—( A laugh)—that they desired toosuup paotrittntisey
her
influence—that they desiremdotroeeixntdeinsdsolhuebrlyherpower—that
foundations
ndo
desired to lay deeper and
and his Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland, in the begin-
ning of his speech—he a Minister of the Crown—said it
was unnecessary for him to enter on the broad question, be-
cause he subscribed so entirely to those doctrines which had
been propounded even by his Hon. and Learned Friend, the
Member for Liskeard ( Mr. C. Buller).—( illuelt Opposition
cheering.)
Lord MORPE TII—I said not one word about subscribing
to Isis doctrines.—(Ministerial cheers.)
Lord STANLEY resumed. He hoped then that he did
misrepresent the opinions of Iris Noble Friend; but when he
found his Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland commencing
his speech by stating that the main question it was uncecessary
for him to enter into, after the comprehensive view taken of it
by his Hon. and Learned Friend die Member for Liskeard,
he did not think it exhibited an extraordinary want of penetra-
tion—he did not think it betrayed a remarkable dullness of
perception—if that expression did convey to his mind, and to
the House, an accordance of sentiments between the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman who took that comprehensive view and his
Noble Friend the Secretary for Ireland, who stated that his
lion. Friend having taken it, it was unnecessary for him to go
into the subject ; but if his Noble Friend did not take that
view, he would turn to the conclusion of his Noble Friend's
speech. What was the topic at the end of his speech ? The
rottenness of the Church of Ireland.—( Loud cries of "
oh I" from the Ministerial side.) Why, really, it was very dif-
ficult to understand what was meant ; and his Noble Friend
seemed to share with the rest of his Majesty's Government