The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LON DON, SATURDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY lO, 1849."

dt ieoyni as
jidy
toor
cnoont ,t
rho ai.s—o cLatsmi odn
ce dh
etehr es
)e v i
Bs
ot he et
lemomeibaots,orunriocrf w.
is as
it
opposed by those Hon. Members than a
her
nNMooae ws circumstancestay sthis Government
will
e theyrui sneos e be t
eeo s s affectaastys u,
r foreed thembytmh thee
Billmeasure
h uanvidn egr.
r
da
on
wd n
pernicious Learned e n
agl Gem,itaat
ino na, ntdh
efyo und
tboeebne rleikaedlybytoilpount.
ap-
peal to the Government, they offer an, opposition,
and the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chief Se-
cretary rises and tells them the Bill is only a harm-
less measure. I do not think the House ought to
pass the measure unless it will not only put down
treason but treasonable agitation—(Cheers)—and thus
secure, I trust, the tranquillity of Ireland. This measure
will give her Majesty's Government the opportunity of
bringing forward comprehensive measures, which the
people of England feel to be necessary for the welfare
of Ireland. We will support this law only that Go-
vernment may have a fair opportunity of bringing in
such measures, and I trust her Majesty's Government
will not delay in bringing forward proper measures. I
trust it will pass the House, that Government may no
longer have any ground for delaying comprehensive
measures--for bringing forward other great questions
which are not yet brought forward. I hope that in
voting for this Bill, we shall vote for it because the Lord
Lieutenant will be able to secure the tranquillity of Ire-
land, and an opportunity be afforded to her Majesty's
Government to introduce remedial measures. Trusting
to the efficiency of these measures, I hope peace and
tranquillity will be maintained in Ireland, not only by
the expectation of what this measure will effect, but be-
cause we have confidence in that portion of the popula-
tion to whom we must not allude in this House, except
in a whisper—(Hear)—but respecting whom I trust the
time will arrive when their religion will no longer be
considered a reproach, nor their loyalty a crime.

Lord J. RUSSELL—The House seems to have so far
made up its mind as to the necessity and policy of this
measure, that I should not have thought it necessary to

address the House to-night were it not for certai❑ mis-
constructions of the measure, or of the remarks of my
Right Hon. Friend (Sir W. Somerville), and some allu-
sions to my past conduct and that of many with whom I
act, which I cannot altogether pass over. The Honour-
able Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), I think excusably
enough after the speech of the Hon. Member for Lime-
rick (Mr. J. O'Connell), supposes that certain parties are
to be allowed to conduct their agitation free from any
danger from this Bill. But such was not the declaration
of my Right Hon. Friend.—(Hear.) An Hon. Member
(Mr. Roche) said that this Bill was aimed at all constitu-
tional liscussion, that petitions could not be proposed
nor grievances complained of if it were to pass, and
that the obvious intent and object of it was to destroy
all constitutional and political discussion in Ireland; my
Right Hon. Friend, in answer, said, that such was not
the obj€ct, and such would not be the effect of the
Bill—(Hear)—that it was aimed at agitation connected
with treasonable practices, and that discussion aimed at

a redress of grievances, discussion constitutional in it-

self, with a view to seek from Parliament measures •
be-
neficial to Ireland, was not intended to be prohibited,
and could not be prohibited, under the terms of the Bill.
—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Limerick (Mr.
J. O'Connell), adroitly enough, certainly, but not with
a very fair inference from nay Right Hon. Friend's
speech, said that he understood that the association with
which he was connected could not come under the ope-
ration of this Bill—
Mr. J. O'CONNELL—The agitation.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL—The agitation, and there-

••
fore half his objections were removed. Upon that I
must say very plainly, that the Bill itself contemplates
treasonable designs and treasonable practices, but
the power to imprison persons suspected of them is to
be placed in the hands of the Lord-Lieutenant. I have
had much conversation with the Lord-Lieutenant during
the existence of the present law, as to agitation ; and I
know his mind is, that any agitation ought to be care•
fully watched— (Hear) that agitation which tends
merely to the production, the fair production of a peti-
tion, is agitation which he ought not, and has not the
power to prevent—(Hear, hear)—but that the meetings
of an association which is likely to fall very rapidly into
a club and a conspiracy—(Hear)—and tends imme-
diately to lead to treasonable practices—(Hear)—ought,
in his opinion, and I will add in my opinion, to be care-
fully watched—(Hear, hear)—and if those treasonable
practices should in his opinion be carried on, it will be
his bounden duty to secure the peace of the country by
the application of the powers of the Act.—(Much
cheering.)
Mr. J. O'CONNELL—Does the Noble Lord impute
to me treasonable practices or treasonable designs?—
(Order, order; hear, hear.) _ _ _

Lord J. RUSSELL—The Hon. Member asks me
that question; I will answer it.—(Cheers.) My opinion
is that he would wish to carry on what he may think a
wholesome, what I may think a pernicious agitation—
(Bear, hear)—without any intention of committing trea-
son or leading to treasonable practices. But, seeing
what I saw with regard to the association of which he
was the leader last year, and in which, although he was
the leader, he was left in a very small minority—
(Laughter)—the large majority of those who acted with
him declaring that " moral force" was altogether a de-
lusion—(Mr. O'Connell—No)—and that they con-
curred with some confederation over the way—(A laugh)
—of which physical force and rebellion were the doe-

trine, and intended to be the practice—(Hear, hear).—
I should have no confidence in the safety of any asso-
ciation which the Hon. Gentleman was to set up in Dub-
lin.—(Cheers.) I acquit him personally, I acquit him
fully and sincerely of any treasonable design or prac-
tice; but I am not prepared to say that those whom he
would assemble would be equally innocent; and I do be-
lieve that any association of which ho was the head
would be very likely to become liable to the penalties of
the Act.—(Loud cries of "Hear, hear.") I have answered
his question fairly; he may now take what course he
likes with respect to this Bill; he may make, if he
pleases, the other half of bis speech—(A laugh)—but I
will not conceal from him what I think may be the effect
of this Bill.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, the Hon. Gentleman
who spoke last, following the Noble Lord (Lord C.
Hamilton), has referred to some matters of past history
which the Hon. Gentleman glided over rapidly and skil-
fully, but which the Noble Lord dwelt upon in great
detail and with remarkable inaccuracy.—(A laugh.) Is
was the charge of the Noble Lord that in 1835 I brought
forward a resolution with respect to an appropriation
clause solely and entirely with a view of displacing the
Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) from power, and that
havine, carried the resolution and displaced the Right Hon.
Gentleman, I allowed the question to slumber, and it was
never mentioned again. Now, this obliges me to
refer to what was really the history of that appropriation
clause—a history which does not at all resemble that
which the Noble Lord chose to put in its place. Being
in office with Lord Grey, having the honour to be one of
the Cabinet, concurring with him in what was called the
Coercion Act of 1833—a measure of very severe repres-
sion, I did think, in the following year, that it was right
that the Government should prepare for some measure
by which part of the revenues of the Irish Protestant
Church, not needed, in my opinion, for the members of
that church, should be made useful and conducive to the
education of all members of the community—Roman
Catholics and Presbyterians as well as members of the
Established Church. I urged that opinion upon the Cabi-
net at length. The discussions upon that subject ended in
the retirement from the Cabinet of four of its most distin-
guished members. The Cabinet, after their retirement,
proceeded to ktake the course which I thought the
wisest. A commission was appointed to ascertain the
numbers belonging to the different religious communions
in Ireland, and various measures were .discussed with a
view to carrying my proposition into effect. It pleased
his Majesty King William IV., after Lord Grey had re-
signed, and Lord Melbourne had come into his place,
upon the death of Lord Spencer, to declare that he had
no further occasion for the services of Lord Melbourne
and his colleagues, and to place the Right Hon. Baronet
(Sir R. Peel) in office. I had urged these views of mine
with respect to the Irish Church upon colleagues whom
I sincerely regarded—regarded so much that for a very
considerable time I held back my views, with which they
were perfectly acquainted, and would not press them, for
fear of that disruption of the Cabinet which took place;
but was I obliged, because I was not in office, to forego
views which I held, to sink my opinions altogether,
and to say that I was satisfied with that with which
I was so dissatisfied that I had urged upon my
colleagues to propose an alteration?—(Cries of " hear,
hear.") I brought forward then, as an independ-
ent Member, a resolution, which was carried in the
House, on which the Right Hon. Baronet, though at
the head of the Government, never, I believe, had a
majority; and the Right Hon. Gentleman took that oc-
casion of retiring from office. A measure was then
prepared, according to the views of the then Govern-
ment, and was submitted to the House of Commons once
or twice, if not three or four times; it was carried by a
small majority in this House, but lost in the other. So
untrue is it that I first invented this scheme for the pur-
pose of ousting others from office, and that, having suc-
ceeded in that object, I withdrew it.--(Hear.) But after
the measure had been several times rejected in the House
of Lords, opinion came to bo changed respecting it, and
Irish opinion became altogether indlfferent to it—
(" No, no,")—it ceased to be an object of desire in that
country—(" No, no,")—that is my belief, at least, and
in that belief I proceeded to propose a settlement of
the tithe question without insisting upon the appropri-
ation clause. Now, I may be liable to blame for the
course 1 pursued; I certainly mistook public opinion—
I mistook the power of resisting such a measure, which
seemed to me at the time to be so obviously right that I
thought it would probably be carried very triumphantly
through Parliament ; but this I must say for myself, I
was persuaded that such a measure would be of great
utility to Ireland, and I endeavoured to eatry it as long
as I thought it possible that it could be carried.—(Hear,
hear.) But there were other measures introduced at the
same time, particularly one measure for establishing
corporations in Ireland, and putting them on a popular
basis, as had previously been done in England. rhat
measure was year after year rejected by the House of
Lords ; but, ultimately, the principle was assented to by
that House, and it passed into a law; so that the views I
entertained on Irish subjects were so far successful.—

(Hear, hear.) But the Noble Lord has said that at that
time we consented that all power and patronage should
be in the hands of the late Mr. O'Connell, and that we
merely acted iu a manner subservient to him. Now I
totally deny that charge.—(Cheers.) Lord Melbourne
advised liis Sovereign to place Lord Normanby
in the government of Ireland ; and the Noble Lord
(Lord C. Hamilton) has now called upon me to express
the remorse of the Government of that day for having
fomented agitation in Ireland. Now, so far from that, I
believe the Government of Lord Normanby was concili-
atory and wise, and obtained a period of tranquillity for
Ireland.—(Cheers.) I believe that his policy was
adapted to the wants of that period—that he retained
the authority of tho Government in his own hands, and
that, powerful as Mr. O'Connell was in Ireland,
groat as was his influence over public opinion, the

authority of Lord Normanby as the representative of
the King was paramount in that-part of the united king.
dom.—(Cheers.) I have therefore no remorse to ex-
press on the part of the Governthent of 1835. But the
Noble Lord and the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli)
spoke of our opposition to the Government of 1846, and
the Honourable Gentleman is right in saying that we
opposed the Bill of 1846, called the Pro-
tection of Life Bill. We certainly opposed especially
what was called the curfew clause in that Bill. I
declared on that occasion that I would not oppose the
Bill on the ground of having no confidence in the Go-
vernment--that I believed they would execute its pro-
visions fairly and temperately ; but that I thought it a
Bill ill adapted to the circumstances of that time.—
(Hear, hear.) I thought that the clause with respect
to shutting up persons at night who had committed no
offence was vexations, and that I entertained the opinion,
which was also the opinion of Mr. O'Connell, that while
the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act would paralyse
agitation, the nature of that Bill was to irritate.—
(Hear, hear.) I therefore voted against the Bill which
was then brought forward by the Noble Lord the Secre-
tary for Ireland. But it is said, "You are now propos-
ing a similar, if not a worse measure." That is quite true.
I am liable to the reproach; and all I say is, that I thoght
the Bill to which I have alluded not adapted to the
circumstances of the times ; whereas the various mea-
sures we have brought forward from time to time, re-
strictive of the liberties of the subject, while they have
been more restrictive than that Bill was, have been
adapted to the circumstances of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.)
Now, that I am ready to admit is entirely matter of
opinion. Those who differ from me may hold the re-
verse, and believe that the Bill of 1646 was more useful
than our measures ; but all I can say is that, following
my opinion of the several measures I have adopted,
whether in or out of office, I will oppose or pass those
measures according as I think they are suited to the cir-
cumstances of the country.—(Hear, hear.) I am sorry
Sir, to have thus detained the House in defence of
mfoyr Towyrnonceophdauset; b
thought u t
ithe
tn e
oNe
sosbale ry Lordto
cometle
i d
andoMweumbre
I speak for half an hour on this matter, making a most
t hhoausg
ihutt
rIo
dcuoeue ldd.
1 —(Hear,
o personaluw e
rl , a
hear.)
eonaiddr
oreferringThe
tt
00a
ne tk. h C topics ;m Member
other Members—especially the Hon. Member for shire, in speaking of the hepresentdml
Mont-
rose—inefoasrußreu,ckfibnlglohwamed-
speaking of the other comprehensive measures
which he believes it is the duty of the Government to
bring in. Now, it will be our duty to bring forward a
' series of measures. Some have been already given no-
tice of, and others will be brought forward; but I do
not think I should be acting fair to the House if I did
not say that any measure that we might bring forward
would be totally unproductive without those two results
of which I spoke in the speech I addressed to the House
on bringing forward my motion in 1846, viz., a spirit of
self-reliance, and a spirit of co-operation.—(Cheers.)
We would have proposed this very night—if this debate
had not lasted so long—a Bill very greatly to extend the
right of voting in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) I believe
that the right of voting is too much restricted in that
country, and ought to be extended, but I must allow
that the same use is not made of these constitutional pri-
vileges in Ireland that has been made of them in England.
The Act that passed at the time of the revolution of
1688 was sufficient for a century afterwards to enable
the people of the country not only to exert themselves in
trade, in manufactures, and in agriculture, and to cover
the country with industrious villages and with mighty
and flourishing towns, but to support the liberty that
they had obtained by the constitution which was the
result of the revolution of 1688, and which had enabled
them to make those efforts.—(Hear, hear.) But, ob.
serve, these laws, by virtue of which they did these things,
were and are laws directing and creating industry, and
wealth, and commerce, and comfort, and well-being.
They were laws that allowed men to exert their faculties
and to obtain that wealth and distinction that are the
consequences of exertion.—(Hear.) In proposing such
a measure as the present for Ireland, we shall have to at-
tempt that which in our opinion it is proper for us as a Le-
gislature to do. With respect to social questions for Ire-
land, measures have already been passed, and others will
be brought forward, but with respect to those measures
there is fully as much danger in sending the industry
of the country in a wrong direction as if we had left
undone that which we ought to have done.—(Hear.)
We believe, however, that the ultimate result of the
privileges which were granted to persons of all sexes
and persuasions 20 years ago, and the additional privi-
leges that have been granted since, will enable the peo-
ple of Ireland to take that place which they ought to
hold for their genius, and for that which I admit they
have—great powers of physical exertion and industry.—
(Hear.) But if we expect that that change can take
place immediately, as the sudden effect of a legislative
act, we shall be sure to be disappointed.—(Hear, hear.)
I will not say, therefore, that even in the interval that
may elapse during the continuance of this Act of six
months, all treasonable correspondence may be suppressed,
or that any Act that may pass through Parliament can
change the social and political state of Ireland.—(Hear.)
All I say is, that the utmost exertions will be made, and
that it will be the object of all the measures we bring in
to secure that end; and it will be for Parliament to say
whether they are adopted or not. If they meet with
the consent of Parliament I trust we shall see that they
have accomplished our objects ; if they meet with
the censure of Parliament, then it will be for others to
propose measures that will be more successful.—(Cheers).
Lord C. HAMILTON explained, that in what he had
said he had no wish to raise a personal question. What
ho said was; that the first important vote on Irish sub-
jects at the time to which he referred was with refe-
rence to the appropriation clause, and that on a division
on that question Gentlemen opposite obtained the Go-
vernment; while for a period of six years, when they
were in office, the question had never been carried out.
He did also venture to say that the course taken by
those Honourable Gentlemen did somewhat encourage
agitation.
Sir H. PEEL—Sir, I must confess that, in voting for
the proposition of the Government, and for the second
reading of this Bill, I do it with that reluctance which
every friend of constitutional liberty must feel when
giving a vote for restricting that liberty.—(Hear.) But
my firm belief is, that there is public danger in now
permitting that Act to expire—(Hear, hear)—and that
if you do at the present time permit that Act to expire
you must look forward to a renewal of those attempts by
which the public tranquillity was disturbed in Ireland
last year.—(Hear, hear.) Not but what I think some
obligation is due to those who organized those attempts
at disturbance of the public peace, for they contrived to
cover Irish treason with ridicule.—(A laugh.) They have
done more to discourage among rational men attempts at
rebellion than all the laws that we could pass or all the
advice that the most skilful and sagacious could give.—
(Hear.) But, notwithstanding the ridicule which they
have thrown on Irish insurrection and Irish rebellion,
still there does prevail among them an animus that is
not suppressed, an avowal of intention that I will not
pay them the compliment to believe sincere.—(Hear.) I
will consent, therefore, to this measure, which has for
its object to insure for the present their good conduct.
I shall not, however,9 give my vote for the measure from
confidence in any persons by whom it will fall to be ad•
ministered—(Hear)—that is to say, I would not consent,
from confidence in any set of men, to restrict the liberties
of the people, unless I believed that restriction to be
absolutely necessary.—(Cheers.) I have great respect,
personally, for Lord Clarendon; but my respect for Lord
Clarendon does not weigh in the slightest degree with
me in the resolution I have come to. Unless I was
satisfied that the measure lavas called for necessarily, no
respect for Lord Clarendon, and no belief that the powers
entrusted to him would not be abused, would induce me
to consent to its adoption by the House. There is evil
in the precedent.—(Cheers.) There is great evil in a pre-
cedent imposing restrictions on the liberties of the people.
No Matter what may be the personal character of the
individual to whom the power is intrusted, no matter
though the power is never exercised, you cannot in these
times make a precedent for suspending the Habeas
Corpus Act, whether you exercise the power or not,
without inflicting a great public evil.—(Hear, hear.)
With respect to the confidence which ought to be reposed
in Lord Clarendon, why that is just what we have always
had for the last 25 years. I believe no Government
wishes to possess such powers as these. They never
ask for them unless they are believed to be necessary;
and it is in truth no pleasant encounter to come here and
ask for such powers.— (A laugh.) Lord Heytesbury
would not have abused such powers, Lord de Grey would
not have abused such powers, neither would any other
Lord-Lieutenant; and it is therefore childish to refer to
the characters of Lords-Lieutenant as a reason why such
powers should be conferred. Nothing can be more
painful to me than to refer to the history of past party
conflicts in Ireland. I have indeed almost laid it down
as a rule, so far as I am concerned, to abstain from mak-
ing Ireland the field of our party conflicts.—(Cheers.)
I should rather never refer to it as a question of party.
There are ample grounds for mature, dispassionate con-
sideration of what is ,necessary for the welfare of that
Tdlvihhffiei
ceuh lt unfortunatetodectoeurimitirnye, woiutrhouptarmtyakainrigitniotsitthiees.g—roNedaro.n)
Noblefor Lanoyrdohnaestoghivmevue
luissteanhedistsoorhvimanwditiht
oiustvery
thm en-
tirelyhetaaistrtdi it
taohwcuecqat
luesasi
uessslec
Noble acquiescing
Lordga
unnecessaryti n
dbt he truth of that history. But I
tsi moretfs.ourbljmethink
i yno satisfiedkf years,
the
ea e
rt
soN,
appro-
priation haveoabnl
and
that any vt
etoclai
erabatteuiestunheoi
Lord might have delivered a funeral oration over the ap-
propriation clause with some propriety. Some latitude
might have been allowed him in passing a panegyric
on the deceased, but I should have been more pleased
without its history.—(Hear, bear.) I will give the
Noble Lord the history of the appropriation clause.
My memory differs from his in some very important
particulars with reference to that measure. He states
that, in 1835, soon atter I succeeded Lord Melbourne in
the Administration, I brought forward a measure upon
the subject of Irish tithe. The Noble Lord says, 1 In
bringing forward the appropriation clause I acted in my
individual capacity. Could anybody expect that I should
abstain from putting upon record my own personal
opinions?" Now, I think that the motion which led to
the extinction of that Government was more of a party
motion than the Noble Lord is willing to admit. Ido
not regard it as a mere individual motion on the part of
the Noble Lord, but I think the Noble Lord determined
to obstruct the proposal with respect to tithe unless the
appropriation clause formed a part of it. The Noble
Lord was not content with moving an amendment during
the progress of the Bill, but, if I recollect right, he called
upon the House to put upon record this proposition—
that no adjustment of Irish tithe ever can be satisfactory
—(Cheers)—unless a portion of the revenues of the
Irish Church was appropriated to educational purposes.
I remonstrated against that proceeding. I said, "Pass
this Bill, the object of which you approve; or take the
opportuity of moving amendments in the Bill during its
progress." I also said to the Noble Lord, "Beware of
fettering your streugtli by any abstract resolution, de-
claring that at no time to come shall there be any ad-
justment of Irish tithe unless
,there be an alienation of

1 ecclesiastical property."—(Hear.) I was giving friendly
advice to the Noble Lord at that time.—(Laughter.) I
could have had no other motive, according to the Noble
Lord's own account, for he says that during the three
months I remained in power I never had the good for-
tune to be in a majority._(Renewed laughter.) But
the Noble Lord was not merely content with passing
this abstract proposal, but he absolutely insisted upon
the House waiting on King William, and informing
his Majesty that no adjustment of Irish tithe' could
ever take place unless there was an alienation
of church property. (Hear, and a laugh.) The
Noble Lord says, however, that the motion he then
brought forward did not at all partake of the character
of a party motion,—(Laughter.) This shows how apt
contemporaries are to be deceived.—(A laugh.) It cer-
tainly was understood at the time that there was a
determination on the part of the Noble Lord and of his
Whig supporters, and of the Irish Members generally,
that the attempt to settle Irish tithes without alienation
was an iniquity not to be borne ' • and that that was a
time for a good party motion, which would be the best
way of turning out Sir Robert Peel.—(Laughter.) But
now the Noble Lord has returned to power, and what
account dues he give of his Irish allies ? He says, " I
came into power; I found the House of Lords against
me ; the English public were not very well disposed
towards me, but my Irish friends relieved me from any
difficulty about the appropriation clause, and I found
among the people of Ireland complete indifference on the
subject."—(A laugh.) This is the account we have of the
against the thneevaebromweinualdtiohneofptehaeeelriwshhiClehutrhcat
church remained in possession of her revenues—(Hear,
h
Irish party, who for five or six years before were
formed in November, 1834, could not be per-
mitted to exist, when it was attempting to remedy some
of the evils accompanying the tithe system, without con-
senting to an alienation of church property.—(Hear, and
laughter.) What a picture the Noble Lord draws of his
Irish allies when he says that the moment the personnel
of the Government was changed their clamour on this
subject ceased !
Lord J. RUSSELL—No ;it was three years after-
wards.—(A laugh.)
Sir R. PEEL—WeII, it took the Noble Lord three
years to make them cool.---(Laughter.) I appeal to any
man whether it would have been decent to make such a
change at an earlier period. They got habituated
to Parliament; it is no imputation upon them whatever
to say that under a Whig Government, they gut their
fair share of official patronage__(.
Hear," and a laugh)
—and about two or three years afterwards their hos-
tility to the Established Church abated, and they told
thatif
fptphoeryt
it
nh the
n attempt NobleLor
tod they
divert could oi ut
sl d
revenues,give him no
I trust cordial s
again press the Noble Lord upon any : 1
particthar measure
he will ask them to pause, that he will remind them of
the Irish Church, that he will tell them to wait two or
three years longer, and he will then find whether, in
the interval, their zeal will abate or not.—(Laughter.)
I certainly think that, with respect to these measures of
coercion, it does make a very material difference who
are the persons who occupy that (pointing to the Trea-
sury) bench. I have not the slightest doubt that the Noble
Lord has received from the Irish representatives a much
more cordial support than would have heen accorded to
me if I had proposed precisely the same measure.
So much, then, for 1835. I asked the Noble Lord not
to encumber himself with any such restraint as the ab-
stract resolution to which I have referred. That reso-
lution was resisted on the part of the House of Lords.
I said to the Noble Lord, " You shall hear no reproach
—no taunt from me; but you had better settle the tithe
question without the Irish appropriation clause." He
took my advice, and there let the matter remain. Now,
with regard to what occurred in 1846. lam sure I en-
tertain no ill-will to the Noble Lord—l entertain no ill-
will towards anybody—(Loud and continued cheering)
—for the course that was taken in 1846. I, and those
who took the same views on the subject of the corn-laws
felt the alienation of the party with which we had acted.
But the Noble Lord will give me leave to remind him
that he is not quite accurate in the account he has given
of the events of 1846. Several shocking murders were
committed in Ireland, and we proposed a measure for the
purpose of giving security to life and property in that
country. Perhaps the Noble Lord remembers the way in
which that measure was encountered. The application
for leave to introduce the Bill was opposed, and on—l
believe—the second reading we were defeated. I made
an appeal to the Noble Lord to allow us to put the Bill
into Committee. I said, "Do not reject this measure,
intended for the protection of life, and the prevention of
assassination, on the second reading. You object to the
curfew clause; strike it out in Committee; but do not
give agitators a triumph in Ireland, by refusing to give a
second reading to a measure which has such objects in
view." The Noble Lord said he thought particular
clauses were not calculated to attain the professed objects
of the Bill; but why not omit such clauses in Committee?
Why not permit a fair deliberation? "But," says the
Noble Lord, " you intended to commit the enormity of
confining people to their houses at night." It is a hard
necessity that induces men to propose such measures;
and I find that the Noble Lord intends by this
Bill to give the power of committing to prison by night
as well as by day persons who are justly subject to sus-
picion.—(Hear, hear.) I cannot admit the correctness
of the Noble Lord's statement, that our Bill was rejected
because it was unsuitable to the end for which it was
designed. In my opinion the Noble Lord could not
question the necessity of the measure, and it would
have been more consistent if he had permitted the Bill to
be read a second time, and had excepted in Committee
to any clauses to which he might feel au objection.
This is all I have to observe with reference to the
history of 1835 and 1846. I certainly shall not attach
to my support of this Bill even that condition whish
the Noble Lord suggested when opposing the Bill of
1846—that comprehensive measures of a healing nature
ought to precede measures of coercion. I know the
extreme difficulty of proposing measures of a healing
nature. I believe we are all deeply convinced that the one
great evil of this kingdom is the condition of Ireland. I
believe there is an universal desire to administer reme-
dies; but I know perfectly well that no Government can
propose any measure which could have any immediate
tendency to improve the social condition of Ireland. It
is rather by the slow and healing process that we are to
hope to overcome these difficulties—not by great mea-
sures which everybody calls for but few choose to shadow
out.—(Hear, hear.) What are to be those great mea-
sures which are to restore peace? I believe one of the
greatest evils in Ireland at present is connected with
the administration of the poor-law.—(Hear, hear.)
That subject you are about to consider in Committee;
and most gratified shall I be in from that Committee
there comes forth any beneficial measure calculated
to improve the condition of the poor.—(Hears. hear.)
I shall give my support to this measure, because I
believe it to be called for by regard for public peace. I
believe that the Government—and I believe that others
also—have a sincere desire to improve the condition of
Ireland; but I will not weaken or qualify my support of
this necessary measure of coercion, by insisting, as a sti-
pulation, that before I assent to it I will know what
remedial measures are contemplated. I will give my
entire and cordial support to this Bill for the vindica-
tion of the law, and for the upholding the authority
of the Crown.—(Loud cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to say, that he
had not meant to state that the motion he brought for-
ward in 1835 was not a party motion. What he said
was, that he had brought it forward in opposition to the
views of some of his own friends, but believing the
proposal to be founded on sound principles he had felt it
his duty to press it upon the House,
Mr. G. IL MOORE called the attention of the House
to several passages in a speech delivered by the Noble
Lord at the head of the Government in opposition to
the Coercion Bill of 1846, and in which the Noble Lord
expressed his opinion that measures of coercion should
have been accompanied by measures for affording the
Irish peasant the means of subsistence and employment.
He therefore entreated the Noble Lord to suspend the
present measure until he had time to introduce other
measures without which any enactment of this nature
would be altogether unjustifiable.
The House then divided, when there appeared
For the second reading 275
Against it ... „ ...,
... ... 33

Majority ... ... -• 242
The Bill was then read a second time,
and ordered to
be committed.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER inti-
mated that he should ask the House to go into Commit-
tee on the Bill on Monday.
Mr. GOULBURN asked whether it was intended
that the debate on the navigation-laws should come on
after that ?

Lord J. RUSSELL was understood to suggest whether
it would not be convenient for Members to have the reso-
lutions in their hands for some days previous to the dis-
cussion taking place; and whether, therefore, they would
not be disposed to allow the resolutions to be passed and
the Bill introduced on Monday without opposition, and
take the discussion on the subsequent stages?
Mr. HERRIES, without knowing the terms of the re-
solutions, would not undertake to say that there would
be no debate on the introduction of the Bill.
_ _

`Zr. J. YCONNELL (referring to the debate on t:fle
Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill) asked the Secretary for
Ireland whether he was disposed to adhere to the vords
which he had uttered himself; or to the direct contradic-
tion given by the Noble Lord?
EdEe arER, in reply
that the present
Sir W. SOMERVILLE denied that there bad been
any contradiction on the part of the Noble Lard.
INLAND REVENUE BILL.
The House then went into Committee OR this Bill.
to The CHANCELLOR
fromr. .rjoufmthee X
, stated
number of commissioners was 12, and it was intended to
reduce them to 7; that the present araount of saving by
the consolidation of the boards would be 16,0001., and
ultimately 80,0001. or 90,0001.
The several clauses were then agreed to, the House
resumed, the report was received, and ordered to be
considered on Monday.
SUPPLY.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee of
Supply, and a vote of 17,786,700/. was moved by the
CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER to ply ex-
change of Exchequer-bills charged on the aids of 1849.
Mr. HUME asked if the vote was the same as last
year?
The CHANCELLOR of EXCHEQUER replied, it
was less.

Vote agreed to.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then
moved the re-appointment of the Select Committee on
the Army and Ordnance.—Agreed to.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at a Quarter past Twelve
o'clock.

Dispatches were sent off yesterday evening, fl ()to the
Colonial-office, for the Governor of Canada, and also for
the
.Governors of the other North American provinces.

PARLIAMEN TARY BUSINESS.
(From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.)
FRIDAY, FEB. 9.
The following Railway petitions were presented, and the
Bills ordered to be brought in :
Birmingham and Oxford Junction (Purchase of the Strat-
ford-upon-Avon Canal Navigation).
North Staffordshire (Amendment of Acts.)
Llynvi Valley Railways.
Caledonian and Edinburgh and Glasgow (Lease of Scottish
Midland Junction).
Caledonian and Edinburgh and Glasgow (Lease of Dundee
and Perth and Aberdeen Junction, and the Dundee and
Arbroath, and the Dundee and Newtyle Railways).
Stirling and Dunfermline ( Deviation of Branch to Alloa
Harbour • Diversion of certain Works; Extension of Time
for completing Line and taking Land; and Amendment of
Acts.)

Caledonian (Lease or Purchase of the Glasgow, Barrhead,
and Neilston Direct).
The undernamed Railway Bills were read a first, and
ordered to be read a second time:—
York, Newcastle, and Berwick (Newcastle-npon•Tyne and
Carlisle Railway Lease and Amalgamation).
Edinburgh and Northern (Additional Capital and Amend-
ment of Acts).
Eastern Counties Company and Newmarket Company
Amalgamation.

Redding, Guildford, and Reigate (Branch to London and
South-Western Railway—No. 2).
Caledonian (Purchase or Lease of Wishaw and Coltness
Railway).

GlastieW, Kilmarnock, and Ardrossan Railway, and Ar-
drossan Harbour Acts Amendment.
London and South-Western (Extension of Time for the
Purchase of Lands and Completion of Works on the Basing-
stoke and Salisbury, and Farnham and Alton Lines).

of Knighthood upon Elkanah Armitage, Esq. late
Mayor of Manchester.

FOREIGN-OFFICE, FEB. 9.
The Queen has been pleased to appoint Sir Edmund
Lyons, Bart., G.C.8., now her Majesty's Minister Pleni-
potentiary to his Majesty the King of Greece, to be her
Majesty's Minister Plenipotentiary to the Confederated
States of the Swiss Cantons.
The Queen has also been pleased to appoint Thomas
Wyse, Esq., to be her Majesty's Minister Plenipoten-
tiary to his Majesty the King of Greece.
DOWNING-STREET, FEB. 9.
The Queen has been pleased to appoint George Wil-
liam Anderson, Esq., to be Governor and Commander-
in-Chief in and over the island of Mauritius and its de-
pendencies.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, FEB. 8.
This Court will hold a sitting on Saturday, the 24th
day of February inst., at twelve o'clock at noon, for the
purpose of giving 'judgment in cases previously argued.
This Court will not hold a sitting on the Ist of March
next, as previously announced.

BY THE COURT.
CROWN-OFFICE, FEB 8.

MEZBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THE PRESENT PAR-

LIAMENT.

Borough of Portsmouth—The Right Hon. Sir Francis
Thornhill, Baring, Bart., First Lord of the Admiralty.
Town of Kingston-upon-Hull—Matthew Talbot
Baines, Esq., First Commissioner for administering the
Poor-law in England.
Borough of Leominster—Frederick Peel, of Drayton
Manor, in the county of Stafford, Esq., in the room of
Henry Barkly, Esq., who has accepted the office of
Governor of British Guiana.

WAR-OFFICE, FEB. 9.
3d Light Dragoons—Curnet James Macqueen to be
Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Rathwell, deceased,
Oct. 31, 1848; Ensign Augustus Barton White, from the
10th Foot, to be Cornet, vice Macqueen, Feb. 9.
7th Light Dragoons—David Philip Brown, Gent.
(Ridingmaster), to be Cornet, by purchase, vice ilarbord,
promoted, Feb. 9.
12th Light Dragoons—George Charles Selwyn Du-
rant, Gent., to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Arden, pro-
moted, Feb. 9.

14th Light Dragoons—Major Henry Edward Do-
herty to be Lieutenant-Colonel, without purchase, vice
Havelock, killed in action; Captain William Clarke to
be Major, vice Doherty, Nov. 3, 1848.
To be Captains without purchase—Lieutenant James
Chambre, vice Clarke, promoted; Lieutenant John Au-
gustus Todd, vice Fitz Gerald, died of his wounds,
Nov. 27, 184 g.

To be Lieutenants—Cornet William Dundas Boyd,
vice Chambre; Cornet Honourable Richard Walter
Chetwynd, vice Todd, Nov. 27, 1848.
To bo Cornet—Regimental Sergeant Major John
Holliday, vice Chetwynd, Nov. 27, 1848.
4th Regiment of Foot—Hadder RoJerts, Gent. to be
Ensign, by purchase, Feb. 9.

Bth FoOtLieutenant Richard Wilson Hartley to be
Captain, without purchase, vice Brown, deceased; En-
sign William Waidegrave Pogson to be Lieutenant, vice
Hartley; Herbert Vernon Lillicrap, Gent., to be Ensign,
vice Pogson, Feb. 9.
10th Foot—Ensign Richard linenlloch Peard, from
the 73d Foot, to be Ensign, vice White, appointed to the
3d Light Dragoons, Feb. 9.
12th Foot—Lieutenant Thomas Dundas to be Adju-
tant, vice Crof ton, who resigns the Adjutantcy only,
Feb. 9.

18th Foot—Ensign Robert Halahan to be Lieutenant,
without purchase, vice Burrell, deceased. Jan. 1; Thomas
Hardwick Smith, Gent., to be Ensign, vice Halahan,
Feb. 9.

21st Foot—Captain John Ramsay Stuart to be Major,
by purchase, vice Sutherland, who retires ; Lieutenant
Thomas William Prevost to be Captain, by purchase,
vice Stuart; Second Lieutenant Charles Beevor Daveney
to be First Lieutenant by purchase, vice Prevost; the
Hon. William George Boyle to be Second Lieutenant,
by purchase, vice Daveney, Feb. 9.
25th Foot—Ensign William Trail Arnold to be Lieu-
tenant, without purchase, vice Johnston, deceased, Nov.
2, 1848.

26th Foot—Ensign Augustus Frederick Thistle-
thwayte, from the 85th Foot, to be Ensign, vice Young,
who exchanges, Feb. 9.
30th Foot—Frederic Alfred Carrington, Gent., to be
Ensign, by purchase, vice Anderson who retires, Feb. 9.
72d Foot—William Henry Urquhart, Gent., to be
Ensign, by purchase, vice Smith, promoted in 68th Foot.
Feb. 9,

73d Foot—John Cox Gawler, Gent., to be Ensign,
without purchase, vice Peard, appointed to the loth
Foot, Feb. 9.

74th Foot—Captain Edward Francis French, from
half-pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice Brevet Major
Charles Hugh Lyle Tinling, who exchanges, receiving
the difference ; Lieutenant Denis Godley to be
Captain, by purchase, vice French, who retires; En-
sign Charles Thomas Lindow to be Lieutenant,
by purchase, vice Godley ; William Henry Addison
Gent., to be Ensign by purchase, vice Lindon, Feb. 9.
76th Foot—Ensign John Dunlop to be Quartermaster,
vice John William Preston, who retires upon half-pay ;
George Reynell Gresson,'Gent•, to be Ensign by pur-
chase, vice Dunlop, appointed Quartermaster, Feb. 9.
85th Foot—Ensign James Brown Young, from the
26th Foot, to be Ensign, vice Thistlethwayte, who ex-
changes, Feb. 9.
88th Foot—Lieutenant William Belfield, from the
17th Foot, to be Paymaster, vice David Cahill, who
retires upon half-pay; Henry Thompson, Gent., to be
Ensign, by purchase, vice Daunt, appointed to the 9th
Foot, Feb. 9.

2d West India Regiment—Ensign George Ellis to be
Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Wedderburn, de-
ceased, Oct. 29, 1848; Lloyd Richter Creak Drouet,
Gent., to be Ensign, vice Ellis, Feb. 9.
Royal Canadian Rifle Regiment—Major Robert
Muter to be Lieutenant-Colonel, by purchase, vice New-
ton, who retires; Captain Patrick Leonard M'Dougall to
be Major, by purchase, vice Muter ; Lieutenant
George Deere to be Captain, by purchase, vice M'Dou-
gall; Ensign Robert Berney Ficklin to be Lieutenant,
by purchase, vice Deere; Alfred John Lane, Gent., to
be Ensign, by purchase, vice Ficklin, Feb. 9.
BREVET.—Captain Edward Francis French, of the
74th Foot, to be Major in the Army, Jan. 10, 1837.
ERRATUM in the Gazette of the 15th December, 1848.
Royal Monmouth Militia—Richard Arthur Laurence,
Gent., to be Lieutenant, vice Benjamin Hogsflesh, re-
signed, and not vice J. Steuart M'Gregor, whose com-
mission remains uncancelled.

Commission signed by the Lord-Lieutenant of Glouces

tershire.

The Royal Gloucestershire Regiment of Hussar Yeo-
manry—Edward Colston, Gent., to be Lieutenant, vice
Austin, who retires, Feb. 6.
WHITEHALL, JAN. 25.
The Lord Chamberlain has appointed John Banfield,
of St. Mary's, Scilly, in the county of Cornwall, Gent.,
to be a Master Extraordinary iu the High Court of
Chancery.

WHITEHALL, JAN. 27.
The Lord Chancellor has appointed Joseph Wright,
of Doncaster, in the county of York, Gent., to be a
Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery.