The Sun.
London, England, 1836-02-05 00:00:00

great experience and reputation, but likewise men who agreed
with us in opinion, that the time was come for a reform in
those Courts.—( Cheers.) With respect to the separation of
the political and judicial functions of the Lord Chancellor, that
is a question, in our opinion of the gravest possible character,
and requires the most mature consideration. I shall say no
more upon it at present, as, when the plan is laid before
the House, it will, I am confident, meet with the at-
tention the authority from which it emanates merits.
I now come to that question, upon which the Right Hon.
Gentleman has not contented himself with bare criticism, but
has moved an amendment. It appears to me, that in the
formation of that speech sufficient care was taken not to
commit either House of Parliament, beyond what it might be
fairly called upon to do without any sacrifice of their inde-
pendence.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Let us see the
cautious and guarded words in which his Majesty's Mi-
nisters have alluded to the subject.—[The' Noble Lord
here read the passage from the King's Speech relative to the
Irish Muncicipal Corporation Reform.]—We merely say in
the address, in answer to his Majesty's Speech, that we parti-
cipate in that hope. We say that the principle upon
which the Municipal Reform secured to Enlgand and
Scotland was founded—a principle which recognized
vigilent popular controul—should be recognized in the
measure to be given to Ireland. —( Cheers.) These
principles, we contend, are in accordance with the British Con-
stitution ; and, on the other hand, the Right Hon. Gentleman
says they are inapplicable to Ireland, forbids us to entertain
any hope, and declares that he will never consent to be a party
to it.—(Tremendous cheering.) • The principles which have
been applied to England and to Scotland are equally ap
plicable to Ireland—(Loud cheers)—and I hope to see them
applied. I will say for myself and my colleagues, that our
opinion is that the same principles may be applied to Ireland.
(Tremendous cheering.) Ido not merely entertain hopes,
but I entertain a conviction, that the time has come when the
difference of creed will not make any difference--( The cheers
drowned the conclusion of the sentence.) The Right Hon.
Bart., in 1829, when the Catholic question was under discussion,
in his address to the. Common Council of London, told them
that the concession of the Catholic claims would do no good,
unless they extended the right-hand of fellowship to the
Catholics, and admitted them to all their rights and privileges
without distinction.—( Loud cheers.) Had not these distinc-
tions prevailed in the Corporations of Ireland—( Loud cheers)
—and is it not necessary that they should be done away
with ?—( Cheers.) The people of Ireland will feel a very
severe disappointment of their hopes if the House adopt
the amendment of the Right Hon. Baronet. If we hesitate
to perform the same justice to Ireland that we have done to
England and Scotland, it will be said that there is some danger
which cannot be defined, but which the people of Ireland will
say, is only the danger of destroying a monopoly.—( Cheers.)
In adopting the same general principles, I for one am not con-
tent to except Ireland. I remember last year when the Right
Honourable Baronet, was the Minister of the Crown. That
House chose to go farther than the Address, and expressed a
hope of seeing Corporation Reform, on the principle of vigi-
lant popular control. We only now say that we will continue
to apply the principles we have formerly proposed, and there-
fore I think it will be the height of injustice and inconsistency
if the House does not adopt the words of the Address.—
(Loud and repeated cheers.)
Lord STANLEY wished to say a very few words explana-
tory of the vote he was about to give, if he were compelled to
give any vote at all. He came to the House with an earnest
anxiety, which had not forsaken him, that by the mutual
agreement of both parties to avoid any expression that could
lead to a premature discussion, the Address of that House might
go up to his Majesty without amendment or discussion.
He hoped the Noble Lord (Russell) would be induced to fol-
low the example set by his colleagues in another place—
( Loud cheers from the Tories)—by cheerfully and willingly
.adopting the amendment, which he believed was couched in
precisely the same terms with the amendment in the other
House. The Noble Lord then contended that the adoption
of the amendment would not pledge the House not to adopt
any particular measure of Reform—it only implied that it
should not be adopted without farther consideration. The
remedy which might be safely applied to England and Scot-
land might, in the different circumstances in which Ireland was
placed, and the different state of society, be productive of the
worst consequences. He begged again to ask, what were those
principles to which they were called upon to pledge themselves ?
( Hear.) In order to participate in this hope, the House
of Commons must have some well founded conviction that
they will be able to carry those principles into effect ;
and for his part he must say that he would support the amend-
ment of the Hon. Baronet, if pressed to a division. He was
as anxious as any man to get rid of all the evils complained
of. The abuses of the Irish Corporations were greater than those
of England ; and he thought the most summary method would
be the radical remedy of sweeping them away all together.
There was no man who knew anything of the state of Ireland
who must not admit, that in order to do justice to Ireland we
must deal with it on the same principle as England.
He not only did not entertain a hope of the settlement of the
question, but as long as Ministers adhered to the assertion of
the abstract principle of appropriation, it would be in vain and
hopeless to look for a settlement of that question.—(Cheers.)
The House was not, at the present moment, in possession
of what were the evils complained of, or what was the
state of this or that borough, or what remedies should be applied.
Looking, therefore, to all these questions, and feeling convinced
that he was not standing in the way of the most entire and
perfect remedy of the evils complained of—if he was driven to
vote at all on this question, he should vote for the amendment
of the Right Hon. Baronet, because it did not pledge him
either one way or the other—it only pledged him to do his ut-
most to remedy the grievances complained of ; and more than
that could not be asked. They were ready to discuss .elie
question whenever it was introduced ; but they were not ready,
without discussion or argument, to bind themselves down to
the adoption of the principle that was applied to the English
Municipal Reform Bill.
Lord HOWICK then rose and said his Noble Friend had
called upon the House to give up certain words in the ad-
dress as it had been moved—lie must say that such advice
took him by surprise.—( Cheers.) He ( Lord Howick) con-
tended that the words proposed to be left out were not of
a trifling or insignificant nature—he thought them of the very
utmost importance.—( Cheers.) In his address to the House he
declared that he would endeavour to correct the proved abuses
in the Corporations of Ireland, upon the same principles as it
had already adopted in respect to Scotland and England. lii
expunging that declaration when ithad been once moved, the
House would be coming to a formal vote that they did not
recognize this principle with regard to Ireland, as they had
already done to the other portions of the country, it would
give up the best claim to the confidence of that country.—
Cheers.) The House by so doing would do more in a mo-
ment of indecision to weaken the Union—( Cheers)—which
Gentlemen opposite profess to regard so much—it would do
more to weaken that Union than anything that could be done.
The principle which the House was called on to assert was
that of putting an end to self-election, and introducing that of
popular controul.—( Cheers.) These were the principles
which they wanted to have applied to Ireland.—( Cheers. )
These principles were in :strict accordance with those of the
British Constitution. The Right Hon. Gentleman had said,
that even if the Address, as originally proposed, was adopted,
they could not adopt the Bill introduced last year by the
Attorney-General. Although the Government did not call
upon the House to assent to that Bill, still there was nothing
in it inconsistent with the principles laid down in the Address.
The Right Hon. Baronet and the Noble Lord had both
said—why not apply the same Poor-law measure to Ireland as
had been adopted in England, if they meant to apply the same
measure of Corporation Reform ? The difference was, that the
evils to be remedied in the Poor-law Bill were widely different
from those in the Municipal Corporations of Ireland. He felt
great pain at the concluding observations of the Right Hon.
Bart., who knew the intended measure would throw additional
political power into certain hands; the house would see how much
these words implied—that with respect to Ireland the British
Constitution must remain a dead letter.—( Cheers, and cries of
" No, no.") That was the plain, obvious, and indisputable mean-
ing of the Hon. Gentleman's words.—( Cheers and groans.)
Let the Right Hon. Baronet come form and at once and pro-
pose the Repeal of the Irish Reform Bill. Let him come
forward and propose the repeal of his own Emancipation Bill.
Let him propose the re-enactment of the Penal Code, for
anything short of this will not attain the object which it is
sought to accomplish.—( Hear, hear, hear,.and loud cheers.)
The Right Hon. Baronet, in his allusions to the Honorable
Member for Dublin (for he would not affect ignorance of his
meaning), knew the vulgar cant which was likely to go down
with a certain party in that House. He was far from being a
friend to the Hon. Member for Dublin ; and, from the lan-
guage which he had used to those who were dear to
him, it was impossible he could be so—( Hear, hear)—
but he would ask, was it his side of the House, or that
of the Hon. Baronet which had given to the Hon. Member for
Dublin the power which they now complained of ? He thought
it was a bad symptom of the political condition of a country,
when one individual could exercise a sway so unlimited as
that possessed by the Hon. and Learned Member for,Dublin ;
but while they on the other side of the House hadlcreated that
false condition, and had lent their aid to the establishment of
that state of the public mind in Ireland which they now
affected to deplore, they should, by adopting the Address, only
pledge themselves to do full, fair, and impartial justice to Ire-
land ; and the refusal to accede to it, would be only falline
back upon that fatal system which bad already produced such
bad results. He called upon them, therefore, to repair their
former errors by extending the same system of justice to
Ireland which they did to England, and to give to that coun-
try the blessings of the British Constitution.
Lord D. STUART expressed his regret at having to inter-
pose and cause a delay in the progress of the debate. He ob-
jected to the amendment of the Right Hon. Baronet, and ex-
pressed his sorrow at the Speech from the Throne containing
no allusion to the balance of power in Europe. The Noble
Lord then proceeded in a very indistinct tone, often rendered
totally inaudible from the noise of Members leaving the House,
to animadvert on the policy of Russia as exhibited in her con-
duct with relation to Poland and Turkey. The Noble Lord
described that Power as the leviathan of the north and cast,
and said that over the country, as it might be seen displayed
both in provincial newspapers and weekly journals, and others
of a more important character, as being conducted with greater
information and judgment, the feeling prevailed of apprehen-
sion of the encroachments and oppressions of Russia. Should
the Turkish empire be dismembered by Russian machinations,
she would become in possession of the most important military
posts of the empire, and we should have reason for entertain-
ing fears for the safety of our eastern possessions. The pro-
testations of Russiwii to her intentions were not worthy of
being depended upoif; and in consequence of what had passed
at the Congress of Toplitz, and since the speech of the Em
peror Nichslas at Warsaw, it might clearly be seen that no re-
liance was to be placed on her protestations. To her viola-
tion of treaties this country became a party by not interpos-
ing, and he was sorry that there was nothing iu the Speech of