The Sun.
London, England, 1825-02-09 00:00:00

'he flonee go into any inquiry ?—although the proceedings
and character of the Orange Associations were not half so well
known to your Lordships or to the country as the proceedings
of the CaOolic Association. ido not now mean to give any
opinion upon the proceedings of the Catholic Association—of
that hereafter. I shall not now say whether these proceedings
were right or wrong; but I repeat that, in the case of the
Orange Socities, your Lordships and the Noble Lord acted
upon his sole knowledge, and in so doing 1 think he was justi-
tied. But at that period any advocate of Orange Associations,
if they had an advocate in this House, may have risen and
asked for inquiry upon the same principles upon which the
Noble Lord now demands it for the Catholic Association. But,
with respect to the Catholic Association, if the measure to be
proposed rested upon official information,—if it rested only on
the confidence that ought to be reposed in the Government,—if
it rested solely upon the responsibility of his Majesty's Minis-
ters, it may be a fair case for asking information. Even in this
case, however, the measure should be known ; but how is the
case altered hen his Majesty's Ministers can produce no in-
formation, and bring to your Lordships' knowledge no fact
which is not as well known to your Lordships as to oe Execu-
tive ? It was the peculiar boast of the Catholic Association,
and I mention neither as matter for praise nor blame, that all
their proceedings were published—that every thing was done
openly and in the face of day. I should think that, if Par-
liament shall think it fitting to adopt any measure which will
include the Catholic Association, that measure must be adopted
upon the ground of those proceedings which have been ad-
mitted, published, promulgated, and which no member of the
Association can deny. The Noble Lord's motion appears to
rue to be without any precedent ; I doubt whether there may
be any grounds whatever for adopting it at any time, but parti-
cularly at this time, when the House is not in possession of the
measure which his Majesty's Ministers are about to bring for-
ward. As to the difficulties which may occur in forming aleg,isla-
tive enactment to affect this or any other Association, I shall not
now enter upon a discussion. We should now discuss it in the
dark,anrl had better wait for the light, and not deal with the mea-
sure as if before theHouse,until the measure actually ikbefore us.
But the Noble Lord supposes, I can scarcely conceive upon what
grounds, that the measure to be proposed by his Majesty's Mi-
nisters has been founded upon the contrivance of my Noble
and Learned Friend on the Woolsack. There is nothing in
my Noble and Learned Friend's station which should lead the
Noble Lord to suppose that the measure originated with him.
him. As one of his Majesty's servants, my Noble and Learn-
ed Friend must, of course, have given his concurrence to the
measure ; but why the Noble Lord should presume that my
Noble and Learned Friend has, as it were, concocted the
measure, I repeat I know not how to conceive. If the Noble
Lord means to insinuate that the measure is my Noble and
Learned Friend's, and not the measure of the Irish Govern-
ment, I can assure him that he is entirely misinformed. It is
the measure of the Irish Government, approved of by the
English Government. It is the measure of the Irish Go-
vernment, founded upon a deep sense of its necessity, and
as the only means of maintaining the peace and tranquillity of
Ireland. I will not now be led into any discussion, either as to
the expediency of the projected measure, or its adequacy to
to effect the purpose for which it is intended. If the Bill
come up from the other House, that will be the proper period to
enter fully upon the subject. Thus much, however, 1 shall say,
which I feel,and I am sure every man in the empire must feel,
that associations like that which has been alluded to must of
necessity produce political and religious animosities, destruc-
tive of the peace of any country. The Noble Lord has said,
what assembly is there that meets for the express purpose
of discussion, in which violent and inflamatory speeches have
not been heard ? lam as little inclined to fear the effects
of inflammatory speeches as the Noble Lord ; they some-
times serve as vents by which bad feeling evaporates, that,
if it had remained pent up, might have eltimately produced
considerable evil. I agree with the Noble Lord, that when
individuals meet for discussion, professing different religions
and political opinions, it is scarcely possible to suppose that
warmth and heats will not arise, and that inflammatory
speeches will not frequently be heard. Inflammatory speeches
under such circumstances are little to be dreaded; but when
an assembly meets for the purpose of effecting the same object,
when they profess the same faith, and meet with the same
views, lam forced to look at their proceedings with feelings
something different. I admit, however, that not much weight
should rest on inflammatory speeches, except so far as they
may he constructive of acts. The measure to be proposed by
his Majesty's Ministers should be founded upon proceedings
adopted and acted upon. To say more upon the subject now
would be premature. The Noble Lord conceives that the
Ifouse has some evidence upon which the projected measure is
founded, from the prosecution of an able and powerful
member of the Association, and because a Grand Jury threw
out the bills which were 'sent before them, to support this
prosecution, I am at a loss to know why the Noble Lord
should draw such an inference from the act of the Grand
Jury. That prosecution had been instituted for words spoken
in public, and which the Law Officers of the Crown considered
libellous ; the Grand Jury ignored the bills, and of course the
case was not sent to trial. From this it was' only to be
inferred that the Grand Jury did not put the same inter-
pretation upon the words alleged to have been spoken as the
Law Officers did, and in consequence there was no finding.
Mr. O'Connell was accused of having publicly uttered certain
expressions which the Irish Law Officers considered prima
freiJ libellous; the Grand Jury thought that the expres-
sions proved before them to have been tittered were not
libellous : now how did this proceeding lead to any in-
frrence respecting the measure which his Majesty's Ministers
proposed to submit to Parliament ? In my opinion there
is no practice more dangerous to the liberty of the subject
than that of drawing conclusions from particular trials. By the
law of England, the person on trial had the benefit of any
doubts which might arise in the minds both of the Grand and
Petty Juries, and it would he a gross and most flagitious per-
version of justice, if an individual acquitted by a Jury, should
again be brought forward and subjected to a second trial upon
the same charge. I should, therefore, always bow to the deci-
sion of a Jury upon the only safe grounds upon which such a
decision should he considered as just, under the particular cir-
cumstances, though not perhaps applicable to any general case.
Having said so much with respect to the prosecution of Mr.
O'Connell, as it was alluded to by the Noble Lord, 1 may be
allowed to add, that the measure to be proposed by his Ma-
jesty's Government is not grounded on the words of indivi-
deals, but on the general acts of the whole body. It is impos-
sible to let this subject pass without remarking that if inflam-
matory speeches have been made in the Catholic Association,
as conceded by the Noble Lord. there never was a period when
stach speeches were so unjustifiable,—they were unjustifiable,
because of the prosperity of the country, and the absence of
distress, for distress it cannot be denied has a moral effect upon
the feelings of individuals. They were unjustifiable also, be-
cause of the conduct and character of the Government for I
would ask the warmest friends of the Catholics to, admit, I
would call upon those Noble Lords who were most decidedly
opposed to the system under which Ireland was formerly governed
to deny, if they can, that in any country, or at any period, justice,
equal justice, was more fairly administered to all parties than by
the present Government of Ireland. There never was a period
when Government looked with kinder and more friendly feel-

ings upon that particular class of persons, of whom the Catholic
Association was said to be the organ. In referring to this
question, your Lordships will also have to consider another,
which I adverted to in a debate a few evenings ago. I then
'stated that the Catholic Association, and those who promoted
it, were amongst the greatest enemies to Ireland. That this
Association was a check to the prosperity of Ireland, that it
alarmed persons out of Ireland, who were inclined to favour
the claims of the Catholics; above all, that it prevented the
flow of English capital and intelligence, which was just begin-
ning to direct itself towards Ireland. There can be no q• 2.stion
that it had excited those animosities, which it is the objrct of
the GoverNment to allay, and has been their constant endea-
vour to appease. It is impossible for the Irish Government to
succeed in securing the permanent tranquillity and happiness of
Ireland, unless the Catholic Association can be put down. If
this Association cannot be put down, you must permit all As-
sociations to run their course, to excite feelings of bitterness and
hostility between the several classes of his Majesty's subjects,
and destroy the peace of the country. In respect for the in-
terest of the Catholic themselves, some measure ought to be
adopted. as much for their sake as for any other ; the proceed.
ings of the Catholic Association had made it necessary. A 3 to
the motion of the Noble Lord, I believe such a motion at such
a stage was never before made. When the House knows no-
thing of the bill, when they have not heard that it is founded
upon any official. correspondence,. I can see no grounds what-
ever for the Noble Lords motion, and therefore give it my de-
cided opposition.
Earl Usii.OSVENOR said, lie would trouble the House with
a few words, in consequence of what bad fallen from the Noble
Earl (Liverpool.) It seemed to bins that the Noble Earl had
entirely misunderstood the drift of the Noble Marquis's ob-
servations. They arose out of the Speech from the Throne,
which their Lordships heard, and in the principal part of
which he (Earl Grosvenor) fully concurred. He concurred on
many topics adverted to in the King's Speech • indeed, the
only part which he considered defective wag that relating to
the Catholic Association. The Noble Earl had seemed to
take it for granted that the Catholic Association were guilty
• of many monstrous and horrible offences calculated to dis-
turb the peace of the country. The House had no evidence
that the proceedings of the Catholic Association warranted
such. an inference. The Noble Earl quoted the case of
the Orange Association, but did not seem to recollect that
on that occasion their Lordships had all agreed—on the con-
limy, they were now much divided in opinion. Some say, with
the Noble Earl, that the Association is guilty of all abornina-
.; *as—others conceive that the speeches of some of the Mein.

bers had been violent and intemperate, but that the proceed-
ings of the Association are not calculated to produce any seri-
ous evil,—whilst many state, that those proceedings have
hitherto produced no mischief, but, on the contrary, an infinite
deal of good. The Noble Earl would not find the lionse un-
animous on this question, as they had been on that of the
Orange Association. It was not to be supposed that his Ma-
jesty's Ministers had not received soni^ communication s
from the Irish Government, or that they should come down to
propose a penal enactment upon the general knowhdge attain-
able by any ordinary individual. He had heard something of
a Declaration of the Catholic Association, but he could per-
ceive nothing of a seditious nature in that document. He con-
entered the Catholic Question as of e of vital importance ; and
unless the Government set this question at rest, it would keep
Ireland for ever in a state of irritation. Was it wonderful that,
in endeavouring to obtain the opinion of the Catholic
body—considering the warm and generous character of the
Irish nation—they should sometimes speak • with less tem-
per and moderation than some Noble • Lords might de-
sire ? Was it wonderful that in their endeavours to
obtain the great end in view, the Catholics should have done
something apparently intemperate ?... A large proportion of
Protestants in Ireland joined with the Catholics, and were
anxious to promote their views. lie believed none were ac-
tually adverse to those views but the Orange faction. This
faction the Catholics charged with the spoliation of their pro-
party —with retaining a bitterness and hostility which affected
even their lives. He did not mean to say that these charges
were well founded ; but such was the opinion of the Catholics,
and was it matter of surprise that they expressed themselves
warmly and indignantly. He (Earl Grosvenor) was a Pro-
testant, attached to the Established Church, from conviction
as well as profession, yet lie would say to the Catholics perse-
vere—never relax until you have attained your object. Earl
Grosvenor concluded by supporting the motion of the Marquis
of Lansdown.

Lord HOLLAND said, the argument upon which the Noble
Earl (Liverpool) depended, and which he urged with the
greatest force, was, that the proceeding against the Catholic
Association was not yet regularly before the House. The Noble
Earl seemed prodigiously pleased, as he recapitulated it fre-
quently in the course of his speech. In the beginning, how-
ever, he had prudently abstained from letting their Lordships
know the precise object of his Noble Friend's motion, nor had
he brought it under the consideration of the house, in re-
ference to the proceeding to be proposed by Government.—
Their Lordships were told they knew nothing of the proposed
measure; they did know something, however, through the King s
Speech, and he (Lord H.)conceived the denial of theinfonnation
moved for by his Noble Friend unprecedented, indecent, and un-
just. The Noble Ea:l had often come down with papers on
which to found laws at rideng the liberty of the subject ; he
had come down wi h abom Labia green begs, and with volumes
of papers libelling the character of the country; and yet no
man was heard to say that the bill was not before the H ouse—
that their Lordships should wait until the bill came up from
the House of Commons. The Noble Lord had never before
said, " the proceedings are not yet before you, you are called
upon to do something, upon the allegation. of a great evil, but
there is to be no inquiry." How were they, he would ask, to
know the character and extent of the evil ? how to get at the re-
medy if the information desired was withLeld ? It was impossi-
ble that their Lordshipsshould not agree to it, if they considered
the object of his Noble Friend's motion. The Noble Earl said
that the preseut proceeding had a precedent. He (Lord H.)
denied that there was any precedent. The Noble Earl was fond
of precedents. On the occasion of the measure for the suppres-
sion of Orange Societies, he (Lord 11.1 had said, "not con-
tent." He took blame to himself for not having more fully
stated his opinions at that time; but although he ad no
great predilection for the Associations at whom that measure
was aimed, he had said " not content" because he disapproves!
of the principle. It was not true, however, that the measure
was taken up without inquiry. It was urged that it was only,
the extension of a law already in force in England, and which
was found effective in that country. Lord Melville, when Mr.
Secretary Dundas, when introducing the measure, said, that
after considering the subject he had concluded, that as the mea-
sure was found to be useful in England, he thought it would
be equally so,in Ireland. He supposed it was not intended
that their Lordships should take the King's Speech into consi-
deration ; they must not speculate on any proceedings until they
should be introduced by Minsters. It appeared that the Irish
Convention Act was to be the model for tail new penal enact-
ment. He was no great admirer of that law, nor if he desired
to make a new law, would he consult the Irish Statute book for
precedents, and particularly not at the frightful epoch of 1793-
In justice to the Irish Parliament, however, he would say, that
the period to which he had adverted was one of great alarm.
It was the time of the delegates, when there was an intention
of actually calling a rival Parliament at Athlone; and, in ad-
dition to this, it was on the eve of a foreign war. He was glad
to see the Noble Earl, who still held the Privy Seals (West.
morland), in his place. That Noble Ford was not particularly
squeamish in the measures which he introduced to support
Government; nor was he particularly mealy-mouthed in ex-
pressing his indignation at the schemes of the disaffected
against the Government. But did the Noble Lord mark out
the Convention ? Did he advise in the King's Speech that it
should be put down ? He recommended conciliation and con-
cession, and the Convention Act stands on the Statute Book
immediately preceding the only act of real concession ever
granted to the Catholics. They were now advised to mark Out
the Association as a tit subject for new penal acts. But how
could their Lordships decide upon the re nedy without sufficient
information ? The King's Speech supplied them with very un-
satisfactory information on the subject. He had read the words
which alluded to the Catholic Association many times, but could
' not perceive that any case was made out by those words. The
Speech sets out with a statement of the proven• y of Ireland, and
also of its tranquillity ; it then goes on o state t tat associations
exist, and recommende Parliament to ; institute an inquiry, in
' order to apply an adequate remedy. How is the remedy to be
got at unless Parliament shall have a clear and correct view of
the extent and character of the evil ? But whet d >ex the Mini-
ster say? He says, " Good God ! it is irregular, it is unparl'a-
mentary, to inquire : you want to get information before the
Bill comes up." What is the general proceeding in such
cases ? To ask questions of the Judges. But on this par-
ticular question the House was not at liberty to ask questions
of the Judges, but was immediately to proceed to the re netly.
At all events, if a penal enactment was necess try, their Lord-
ships should not act rashly. If there were sufficient grounds,
there could be no r •asoas for extraordir ary haste ; because Ire-
land was prosperous and undisturbed, therefore their Lordships
would have sufficient time for inquiry.—('!ere Lord H. read
the consecutive passages of the King's Speech relating to Ire-
land.)—His L -trdship resumed. There was nothing of emer-
gency, no eread of immediate danger. The Speech could not
satisfy Parliament -hat any measure was necessary ; nor had the
3linister affbrded any materials for judging of the nature of
the evil. The passage which relates to Associations incompatible
with the spirit of the Constitution, might as well answer
for the Irish Cabinet, or perhaps for the English, as for
the Catholic Association. The Speech sail, " those Associa-
tions had adopted proceedings irreconcileable with the spirit
of the Constitution." Most true ; the spirit of the Con-
stitution was, that a Cabinet should act in concert, or at
least agree, on all questions of vital interest; but this Cabinet
, was formed out of disunion and a spirit of incessant counterac-
tion. It used to be the custom to take one white and one black
man. This was now carried much further; it was not applied
, to the Cabinet, but to the movers and seconders of the Ad-
dresses, and to the passages of the King's Speech. The foolish
prosecutions in Ireland were a proof of it. The Irish Crown
Lawyers called out both " Cronn-a-boo" and " Butler-a-boo."
It was said the Association would excite animosities. There
was nothing more likely than that such a diviled and distracted
Cabinet would perpetuate animosities. The spirit of disunion
pervades all their actions, even to the King's Speech. They
had set out upon the professed principle of giving no triumph
to.either party, instead of which they had given a triumph to
both. The new measure, if it was founded on the Convention
Act, would probably afford a second triumph to the party which
it was intended to affect. He ( Lord Holland) affirmed, that
when that Act was passed it was called an Act to gratify
spleen, to distort the most brilliant period of our history, and
that it would give power to seditious associations, and would
enable them to order a man to enter the House of Commons,
and bid him take the mace fr)rn the Speaker's table. The
Act enacted that none should so debate, save and except the
Knights and Burgesses to serve in the Parliament there assem-
bled ; but it did rot so save them. The Act then went on to
save and except the House of Convocation, duly and legally
assemblei. When a similar Bill is introduced, it ought to
save and except the Privy Council appointed by his Majesty to
consider of the affairs of state. Ile (Lord Holland) was sorry
to detain them longer, considering the narrow ground on which
the question rested. They had been told to proceed with care
till further evidence was before them—till the remedy came up
from the House of Commons. That would be proper enough,
if they were to take for granted, contrary to uniform usage,
that the Act itself was founded in justice. If the measure did
pass, it must be on the plea of necessity ' • but he should be loth
to believe that the necessity did exist; for it would most cer-
tainly have the effect of abridging the liberties of that part of
the kingdom where so large a portion of the subjects were al-
ready excluded from the benefits of the Constitution:; but he
conjured them, for the safety of the empire, for the sake of
their own characters, as they would go down to posterity, not
to suffer this proceeding to go forward, as it would render their
duty both painful and disgusting.
Earl BATHURST said, that from the statement of his
Noble Friend (Lord Liverpool) he did not at all wish that the
proposed measure should be proceeded in on other information
than that with which every body was amply provided- It was
on the ptsblio proceeding:of a public body that they were-called'

to adopt this measure. ft had been said in the course of the
evening by a Noble Lord (Grosvenor) that in this measure they
could not reckon on his support, and they did not wish it if he
did not grant it when it wouhl be shewn that it was necessary
for the tranquillity of Ireland that the Association should be
put down. His Noble Friend (Lord Liverpool) had said that
he would not be drawn into a discussion of a question relating
to the Association, till the proper time ; for it was not then the
time to take into consideration what measures were to be
adopted. The Noble Baron had said it was an Irish measure.
Lord HOLLAND begged to say that it must be a misappre-
hension on the part of the Noble Earl, for lie had not said any
such thing.
Earl BATHURST said, that the facts of the case were, that
the individual who brought this Bill forward was the Secretary
for Ireland ; this he stated, that it might not be considered as a
measure of the Noble Lord to whom it had been imputed (the
Lord Chancellor). If their Lordships thought further informa-
tion was necessary, they would wait till they saw whether this
measure really did encroach on the liberty of the subject.
Lord GitosvExon. and Lord HOLLAND explained.
The Eati of CARNIRVON said, that the Noble Earl had
talked of statements, but he (Lord Carnarvon) had heard
nothing stated. He thought the Noble Earl would, as upon
other occasions, have produced some documents on reasons of
his own to justify the strong recommendation which had been
put into the mouth of his Majesty. He, however, did no
such thing, whilst another Noble Lord actually apologized
for the little he was going to say upon the subject. Be-
tween
both, in what a condition were their Lordships placed ?
In the Royal Speech, which no doubt was composed by all the
members of the Cabinet, each composing a part in his turn,
the House was called upon 'o impose new laws upon the liberty
of the subject. The Address which followed was, as usual.,
nothing more than an echo of it. He did not enter his dis-
sent from that Address, because it did sot pledge them
to adopt such measures. But it pledged them to take into
coasideratlon that with which they were not acquainted.—
Well, when they came to ask for information on the subject,
what were they told ? That they had the King's Speech !
The Noble Earl (Liverpool) said, " What, will you proceed
in the dark ?" and at the same time he left them in the dark.
How were they to receive the light which he promised them
hereafter ? Were they to legislate on the preamble of the Bill
to be introduced on a future day upon a measure which might
lift necessary—for necessary it certainly might be for all he
knew, kept as he was in the dark. Were they to say" content"
or" not content" on an Bill which the House of Commons
might send up, without having any information to guide them,
and that upon a Bill which might be of the most vital interest
to the welfare and safety of the country ? Were they to proceed
in this way upon such a measure as this, when they would re-
quire evidence before them in support of the most unimportant
private Bill. The Noble Earl said, that all the information
was to be derived from the newspapers, and in the same breath
he stated that the proposed measure was to be founded on the
dispatches received from the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and
not on the notoriety of the circumstance which called for it.
The Ministers said to the House, " We act on dispatches;
the newspapers are enough for you." if the members
of this Association wished for rebellion, they knew that
Captain Rock was in the field ; they also knew there
would be enough of green bags and insurrection acts here.
They adopted legal measures, and so disconcerted his Majesty's
Ministers, who were therefore contented to give the Hous.
cns or two sentences on the subject, contradicting each other,
and then fly from argument as well as from inquiry. The
Noble Earl at the head of the law department, notwithstanding
his legal ingenuity, would find it impossible to frame any bill
capable of meeting the case ; and therefore they refused all in.
formation on the subject, on the supposition, that if their Lord.
ships waited for the decision of the House of Commons, it
would be unnecessary to proceed further with the measure in
this House. However, as lie (Lord C.) did not know what
might be the degree of despair which this bill, if introduced,
might occasion hereafter, and as he was totally in the dark upon
the ,übject' lie felt he should be wanting in his duty to his
ctuntry if he did not ask Ministers for the necessary informa-
tion to guide his judgment respecting so important aproceeding.
The H 'use then divided, when there were—
Contents . . 20
Not Contents 43
_

Maim-ay against the Motion . -22
The House adjourned at a quarter past Eight o'Clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Leave was granted to Lord STANLEY to bring in a bill to
establish a rail-road between Liverpool and Manchester; and
to Colonel DAY rs, to bring in the equitable loan bank bill.
Mr. DUNDAS presented a petition from the Chamber of
Commerce in Edinburgh, against the high tate of duties pay-
able on losurances against fire.. _ _ _

Sir J. N W PORT presented a petition from the Chamber of
Commerce in Waterford, praying for easier communication
with England.
Sir E. KNATCH BULL presented a petition from the town
or Deal, agni:lat the duties on sea-borne coals.
C lonel PALMERpresented two petitions from parishes in
lath, against the inhabited house-tax.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL presented a petition from
he parish of St. Peter in the East, Oxford, against the house
i.nd windo tax.
USURY LAWS.

M-. Serj -ant ONSLO %V rose, pursuant to his notice, to bring
in a bill to repeal the usury laws. Ila did not feel himself call-
ed upon to say any thing in defence of it, since the House had
shown their approbation of it in a division during the last Set-
s on, when there appeared 120 for it, and only 23 against
hit Bill was ultimately defeated, lie had not heard
during Vie last session any solid objection to the principle of
it. lie had, indeed, heard several predictions of the evil conse-
quence which might arise from it; but in legislating for the
country, Viey ought not to consider whether some inconve-
niences might not accrue from it, whether the advantages
it was c.dculated to produce were not far superior to any
temporary inconvenience it might create. The state of the
money-ma •ket was at present such as to obviate many of the in-
convenien •es which were formerly anticipated from his bill,
and theref 're he trusted that those gentlemen who had formerly
opposed it would now withdraw their opposition. The Learned
Sergeant, after taking a brief review of the arguments used by
the oppone Its of his bill, which were nearly inaudible in the
gallery, moied for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal the laws
p -chib ting the taking interest for money, or limiting the rate
tt e Tot.

.11r. DAVENPORT declared his intention of opposing the
motion, as he considered the Learned Sergeant's Bill to be
preg ant with ruin to the landed interest. . .

Sir. JOHN SMITH was sorry to observe in the Hon.
Meinber opposite a disposition to oppose the introduction of this
Bill. It was certainly in the Hon. Member's power to do so,
ough the practice 7as now extremely rare. Indeed, he
1 oked upon this species of opposition as a triumphant proof of
the excAlence of his Learned Friend's Bill, which had been
supporte I by arguments which he had never heard answered.
He trusted that his Learned Friend would not pursue the course
which he did last year. That course, he spoke it without the
slightest in'ention to blame his Hon. and Learned Friend—
that course had led to the ultimate defeat of his Bill. His
Learned Fiiend had deterred his measure, not once or twice,
but a dozen times at least, to meet the convenience of the Gen-
tlernrn who opposed it; and the result of his conciliatory con-
duct had been, that they had assembled one night, when no
discussion was expected, in numbers sufficient to throw it out.
He hoped that if his Learned Friend carried his motion to-
night, he would bring forward the second reading of his Bill
on a very early night, when there was certain to be a full at-
tendance of Members. He was convinced that the opposi-
tion which some Gentlemen made to this Bill arose entirely
from mistake.

Mr. C WOVEN would hold by the old laws, and would even
propose t.) enact them, if they did not exist, in consequence of
the numerous speculations now abroad, which were such as
even to stagger credibility. If he was rightly informed, these
speculations would require a capital of 160,000,0001. to carry
them into effect.

Mr. S'crjeant ONSLOW considered the argument just ad-
vanced by the Hon. Member for Cumberland, to be the most
extraordinary of all he had ever heard in support of the usury
laws. If the Hon. Member for Cheshire thought fit to take
the sense of the House upon his motion, it was, though not
very courteous, certainly parliamentary for him to do so.
The House then divided, when there appeared.—
For the motion, 52 I Against it, 45. I Majority, 7.
SMALL DEBTS' BILL.
_ _ „

Lord ALTHORP rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill
to facilitate the recovery of small debts in England and Wales,
and observed that it would be unnecessary for him to go into
detail upon this measure, as he had during the last Session
fully expli.in•d his object, when a similar Bill was rejected
elsewhere, in c3nsequence of his refusal to allow compensation
for certain sinecure offices which It was said would be affected.
He now consented to introduce a clause for the purpose of al.
lowing such compensations, although he retained his former
opinion that the Bill would be better without such clause, yet
he yielded to the wishes of others, and was anxious even at this
expence to carry forward the measure. After the second read.
ing of the Bill, to which he understood In its new form there
would be no objection, took place, he should move for the ap-
pointment of a Committee to consider of the sinecure claims,
which he believed would be found smaller than he had at first
apprehended. The Noble Lord then obtained leave, and
broughtin this Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered
for a second reading on Friday nest, and to be printed.
BANISHMENTS FROM INDIA.
Mr. HUME postponed, 'mil Iruesday next, his motion for
a return -of the muuber of British subjects mho 4tave been

banished from British India, without trial, since the year 1813,
for the purpose of enabling the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite
to consider what part of so extended a motion he could consist-
ently concede.
STATE OF IRELAND.

Lord ALTHORP wished to know when his Majesty's Go-
vernment meant to propose a renewal of the Committee of In-
quiry into the State of Ireland ?
Mr. NVYNN replied, that the Secretary for Ireland intended
on Tuesday next to move for a renewal of that Committee.
IRISH MARRIAGE ACT.

Dr. LUSHINGTON rose, in pursuance of the notic,e which
ho had given, to move for a copy of the committal of \Wiliam
Quigley, Cockayne, and Ann and Martha Lowten, to the
gaol of the county and city of Londonderry in the month of
November last. He would shortly state the facts upon which
he grounded this motion, and he had every reason to believe
that the information which he had received upon this subject
was perfectly correct. In the course of the last year, two per-
sons professing the Roman Catholic religion were married
by a Catholic priest to two persons professing the religion
of-the Church of Scotland. It subsequently appeared that
some information respecting this marriage had been laid before
some Magistrates of Londonderry, who declared the marriage
illegal under the statute law of Ireland. It further appeared,
that on the Magistrates receiving this information, they or-
dered the parties who were so married before them, and ulti-
mately committed them to separate places of confinement, where
they were detained and kept apart for several weeks. The war-
rants for their commitment set forth that they were so dealt
with, because of their refusal to give the necessary evidence re-
quired by the statute against the priest, which refusal subjected
them to three years' imprisonment, without bail or mainprise :
and for the act the priest was liable to capital punishment as
a felon. The persons so committed had afterwards given some
of the requisite information, and were, he believed, released
from custody by an order from the Irish Government. These
were shortly the facts of the case. This proceeding was founded
upon a melancholy example of Irish statute law, well calculated
to keep alive in that unfortunate country a constant source of ex-
citement and irritation among the Catholic population. It was
a statute pregnant with injustice, and which struck at the root of
all moral feeling : it wAs, besides, a violation of every sound
principle of reason and law—a stimulus to disaffection and dis-
turbance; and ought,. he thought, to be no longer permitted to
operate.—(Hear, hear !)—The Hon. and Learned Gentleman
then took a review of the Statute law of Ireland respecting this
class of marriages. By the act of Queen Anne, it was provid-
ed, that any Popish priest who should marry a Protestant
should be subject to heavy penalties therein specified. Year
after year, however, these penalties were increased, and by
another act, in the 13th of Queen Anne. the priest so marry-
ing a Protestant was made guilty, not of a transportable of-
fence as before, but of a capital felony, punishable by death.
This was not all—it was expressly stipulated that if the party
were known to be a Protestant at the time of the marriage, "it
should be presumed, allowed, and concluded, to all intents and
purposes" that the said priest himself knew the fact to have
been so, and upon that assumption proof was to pass against
him.—(Hear, hear !)—A mong all the absurd and oppressive
enactments, he never met such another as this : it was impos-
e sible to find one in which the first principle of reason and jus-
tice, that a man should be deemed innocent until the contrary
were proved in due course of law, was so entirely abrogated.—
(Hear !)—ln the 12th of Geo. I. c. 3, the preamble ran thus :
Whereas clandestine marriages are mostly celebrated by
Popish, priests, to the manifest ruin of several families, who
are exposed to much inconvenience thereby, &c." not that it
was absolutely necessary for the gene;ll security to do such a
thing, but to prevent " inconvenience" to " several families."
This was the basis of the new Law, and it went to
enact, that it should be lawful for any two Justices
of Peace to summon before them such persons as were—what ?
—" suspected of being married by any Popish Priest;" and
on the appearance of the said persons, " to examine them
upon oath," that is, to compel them to iclose the name of the
Clergyman who had so married them, and to whom they must
themselves have necessarily applied to have their marriage ce-
lebrated—to betray the individual they had themselves in-
duced to commit the act for their own purposes ; and if either
of the parties so summoned, refused to be bound over in a spe-
cial recognizance to prosecute the clergyman who had married
them, they should be committed to the county gaol where the
offence was committed, for the term of three years, without
hail or mainprise.—( Hear, hear !)--There were six or seven
other acts relating to these marriages : by some of them
the marriages were rendered null and void, and the priest ex-
posed to a penalty of 300/. Now, it did not appear that the act
which inflicted the pecuniary penalty repealed the capital felony
of the previous acts ; so that, as the law was represented to stand,
the Priest wasliable to be hanged first, and then fined 5001.
(A was the bountiful and merciful intention of the
Legislature in these statutes.—(Hear, hear !)—He knew that
some differences of opinion prevailed among lawyers, whether
the pecuniary penalty was not intended by the legislature as
a substitute for the capital felony, and he thought it time that
the matter should be set at rest by a clear and explanatory re-
vision of the whole law on this subject. Ile wished to persuade
the house of the propriety of revoking all such unjustifiable
provisions of the Irish marriage law as were repugnant to true
morality and justice, and so full of enormity, as some of those
which he had quoted.—(Hear, hear !)—lt was true, that some
alteration should be made in statutes which had no other effect
than to keep alive animosity and irritation among the Catholic
population of Ireland, to aggravate religious differences, and
which were absolutely nugatory even for working the bad pur-
poses intended by their enactments. Ile cordially trusted that
the house would go with him in clearing away such excres-
cences, which touched and afflicted the sacred and religious in-
stitution of marriage--an institution so nearly allied to the
warmest instincts of the heart of man, and which surely ought
not to be subject to revolting conditions of so exasperating, ex-
citing, and unjustifiable a description as he had already de-
tailed to the house. lie concluded by repeating his motion for
a copy of the commital of these parties.—(Hear, hear !)
Sir JOHN NEWPORT seconded the motion.

Sir GEORGE HILL warmly defended the conduct of the
magistrates alluded to in this transaction, who were the most
respectable and honourable individuals in that part of the coun-
try where they had resided, and than whom there were none more
incapable of commit irg any unworthy or oppressive act, in either
their magisterial or their private characters.—(Hear !f—He had
with justice to complain, that this case had been already brought
before another tribunal—a tribunal which presumed to sit in
judgment in Ireland upon every man who discharged his pub-
lic duties in a conscientious manner. These respectable magis-
trates had been already dragged before the Catholic Association,
where their conduct had been arraigned, reproached, abused,
and overcharged with every term of animadversion; they were
held up as men incapable of any confidence or respect, and
this Popish Parliament, atter visiting them with contumely and
abuse, had ordered a prosecution to be instituted against them
for their act. Ile wished to take this opportunity, after so much
prima facie misrepresentation, to set the matter at rest in the
mind of that House. The facts were these :—ln the last sum-
mer there was a Popish priest at Londonderry, who was re-
markable for celebrating marriages of Catholic males with Pro-
testant females, and this had led to extraordinary uneasiness in
the neighbourhood.—(Hear, and a laugh from the Opposition
benches.)—He begged not to be understood as expressing his
own opinion, but that of others on this occasion ; it did certainly
give uneasiness to many parents, and the Presbytery felt bound
to notice the fact ; they remonstrated with Mr. O'Flaherty, the
priest, upon the illegality of his conduct, he pleaded ignorance
of the law, and thought that it only applied to Protestant, not
Presbyterian marriages; he entreated forgiveness for the past,
and promised that he would not again transgress in this respect,
and there the matter with him ended. In the course of the last
autumn, however, this priest had a curate, named O'Hagan,
who celebrated similar marriages. On the 4th, sth, or 6th of
last November, whilst the magistrates alluded to were sitting
at petty sessions, a complaint against O'Hagan was formally
laid before them : they felt that the subject of complaint was
unusual, and as the parents who complained had brought an
attorney with them, it was necessary to proceed legally and
' refer to the Statute-book, where it was found that in this parti-
' cular infringement of the law the Magistrates were not invested
with any discretion—that the enactment was imperative, and
the proceeding explicitly defined in the Statute-book. The
Magistrates, therefore, had only obeyed an imperative law,
and there was no power but that of the Government which
could interfere to mitigate the penalty; and that interference
was speedily had in this business. Such was the case which
had brought down upon some of the most respectable Magis-
trates in the country the vengeance of the Catholic Association,
which sat for the purpose of interfering with the constituted
authorities of the land.—(llear !)—" Bless me, Mr. Speaker,"
continued the Right Hon. Bart. " is this self-constituted body to '
sit in judgment upon and try whom they please, and hold people
up to the animosity of the Catholic part of the population ?"
He hoped that such proceedings would no longer be tolerated
by the Legislature—( Hear !)—and concluded by repeating his
vindication of the particular 31agistrates whose conduct had
been so unjustly stiginatized.—(Hear !)
Mr. JOHN 83I1TH wished that the Right Hon. Baronet
would explain what he meant when he charged the Catholic
Association with having excited the vengeance of the Catholic
population against particular individuals. What act had they
committed, what language had they used, to excite such hos-
tility ? because he apprehended that others had as well as him-
self read the reports of the proceedings of the Catholic Associa-
tion, and his recollections did not furnish him with any fact to
justify so harsh an imputation.—(Hear!),—They were, he
knew, disposed to apply a part of the Catholic rent to some ob-
jects of prosecution for a redress of individual grievances—an
application of it which he thought was not only right, but most
excellent; for he could not conceive a better mode of disposing
,of public money in Ireland, than in fairly enabling individuals

th'
who were oppressed to obtain justice in due course of iaW,syliie
out incurring private ruin by the expence.—(ilear, hear to
repeated his call upon the Right lion. Baronet for any fac`ga
Justify his imputation that the Catholic Association had encato
raged private vengeance against those who were opposed
them.
i%lr. DAIVSON defended the magistrates whose conduct bacivt
been alluded to, and arraigned the Roman Catholic Parliament
who had impugned them through the mouth of one of its VW%
furious demagogues. The reports of the speeches of that a;
sembly had been circulated throughout the country in oniii3
thentic shape, and been productive of infinite mischief ill or
and many other instances. There were not in the countlaot
magistrates more able, more respectable, intelligent, active, f,
entitled to the thanks of their country. than those who o",e ,
thus held up to the taunts of the Catholic population of Ire,
land.—(Hear, hear, hear !)—Their characters, indeed, had bee
previously well' known, and admired by their Catholic felwej
countrymen, until the moment when they were arrair.
by O'Connell, Shiel, and other demagogues, at the Catlo,
Association, and then they were viewed with' distrust And nj
content. This Association was the came of much mischief a
!great distrust in Ireland : it created dissatisfaction and discos'
,e,
' tent throughout the country. He did not wish to provoke °.„
bate by going into the many instances which he could offer!,
proof of this opinion ; but on a future occasion he should gi/lit,
full account of the violent conduct of that most illegal assec„e"
tion. He thanked the Hon. and Learned Doctor for the teased
manner in which he had introduced this subject to the noted,
of the House, and particularly for his considerate and conimear
able delicacy in withholding the names of the particular lllts,,
trates, a feeling which was properly contrasted with that of the ltit
tholic Association, who had held them up to public notice, !ion
every term of invidious reproach. He entirely coincided in OPP is
with the Hon. and Learned Doctor, that the marriage-13%0
Ireland ought to be made clear and conclusive, and was ace
that there were some differences of opinion among the Irishl°,,,
yens, whether or no the Act of the 33d George lIL had tics
pealed all the previous statutes, and substituted for them,.
penalty of 5001. With respect to the particular case at 1-0;;,
donderry, he could state that O'Hagan knew of O'Flaherto
promise. not to repeat the offence, and was so consciouB or
own misconduct when lie married one of these young violll4l
that he actually bound her over by a solemn pledge of seer
not to mention the occurrence. The parties did afterwards wit!
the evidence which led to their release from imprisonment, s",
O'Hagan fled the country, like a man who knew he had to a°
ewer for a criminal offence. of
Mr. NORTH could not refrain from alluding to the cheers
reprobation, as he thought, with which some gentlemen °Pre
site had met a part of his Right lion. Friend's (Sir 6°4
Hill's) spetch, when he spoke of the uneasiness which
marriages had caused in the country. Was not that Illle7,
ness perfectly natural ? These marriages were not, he regretol
uncommon in Ireland ; there were Ilene, however, which ealbi
worse consequences in their train; they were null and void r,
law, and the progeny of them bastardized—their ultimate can,
sequences in nine out of every ten cases was the desertion, silo
donment, and destitution of the unfortunate women who Oh,
the victims of t)tem.—(Hear !)—On the subject of the law, 00
denied that there was the difference of opinion which had b
alluded to. The Hon. and Learned Gent. (Dr. Lushingt?ne
o,
had joked upon the Irish statute law, and said that it firsqo
flicted in these cases the punishment of death, and then 32,;,0
of 5001. The joke was, however, rather stale, and had
imported from the Catholic Association, for the amusement,
supposed, of the faculty of Doctors'-Commons.—(A latiel•Lia
But lie could assure the Hon. and Learned Doctor, that it
perfectly unde stood by the profession in Ireland, that the iy,
of the late King had repeated the previous statutahle lont of
which rmde the crime a captial felony. Upon the po''''',/ed
these statutes he did not mean to give any opinion, but reset ht
to himself hereafter the right of considering what penalty oat'of
to a tsc:i to an offence certainly most injurious to interesla,be
society. Neither would lie give any opinion now uponliit
conduct of the Catholic Association, although he thought lip
in this particular instance, it was quite of a piece with all
he had heard of their other conduct. vii
Mr. GRATTAN defended the Catholic Association, the
denied that they had excited popular prejudice against eat
Magistracy : on the contrary, he believed they had done, gime
good to the country, which had never been more tranquil take
since their interference. Was it fair, he would ask, to Ip," to
personal attacks upon individuals who could not be preserl'oi
defend themselves, and who were men of as much honour 0 to
' worth as any in the kingdom ? He begged particularlio,
speak of Mr. Shiel, who, as well as Mr. O'Connell, did not
serve such personal reflections.—(Hear !g
Dr. LUSH INGTON, in reply, said,) that notwithstanajo
what had been said of the general understanding of the Isleial
Ireland, he knew that strange practice prevailed there, not 1,11
in civil but in criminal cases, where he knew that statutes
20,
in the administration of justice been disposed of by whole!oaP
and the common law resorted to in particular prosecut,lof
With respect to the particular case before them, could
thing be inure intolerable than to compel the party to give
deuce against his own act?—{Hear !)—As to the mag.s," re;
and their conduct, he could not help making this single, or
mark—that there never was a case in which the act of 011;et•
that hotly was impugned, without their being at once 0 the
whelined with the weight of the eulogiums flung upon It
mag!stracy for the possession of every virtue.—((iheers.r..,,te4
was singular eneugh, that in this case, where the mailistqhiS
. were represented to be popular with the Catholics before,i,,,
act, they became the reverse afterwards, which was a con; vo
elusive proof of the impolicy of the statute that could lestilga
such a spirit of animosity.—(licar !)—The motion was
agreed to.

SUPPLY.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the
QUER, the House resolved itself into a Committee of SuP.ral
when a resolution was agreed to, that in pursuance of a POO,
in the King's Speech, a supply shoald be granted to his
jesty.—The House then resumed.
LI
CATOC A S SOC IA TIN
rroie'
Mr. SPRING RICE gave notice of a motOion. for to.mo rof
f r copies or extracts from all the dispatches from the Vice
of Ireland relative to the Catholic Association.
ASSESSED TAXES. (al
Mr. MABERLY gave notice, that on Thursday, the °—
March, ke would move for a repeal of the assessed taxelL p.
Mr. HART DAVIS presented a petition from the parisPitioit
ers of St. Thomas's, Bristol, against the Catholic Amiocil-oa
In Ireland. The p: titioners, professing much liberality °co
toleration in religious affairs, could not but look with thelrojf
serious a'arrn on the proceedings of a body of men, whose 01, to
being unler a bond of implicit and superstitious obedienc`ci%
their priests, were engaged, not in tho attainment of enriltbe
pation, bit in bringing about Parliamentary, reform, which
petitioners considered as only another name for revolutior.
Mr. HUME complained of the time in which this Petro
was put forward (the House was almost cleared), when tPiej
were no Members present who might meet the petition view
explanatory statements. He himself could give an instant
nial to most of the allegations in it. lie denied that the Pcti
40,
tioners were either liberal or tolerant, or that die Catholic As„se
ciation entertained any revolutionary designs. He merely rui,
for the purpose of protesting against the introduction of 120
tions touching upon matters of such momentous interest, W
the House was almost empty.
Mr. BRIGHT defended the petitioners, who had only s--„st
their participation in a feeling very generally prevalent, agar."
the existence aid transactions of the Catholic As4ociation.
Mr. H. DAVIS excused himself for not bringing on the
tition earlier in the evening, for which purpose he had been f'ti
ticularly early in his attendance, but could get no opportun,lbe
before. He had felt somewhat less earnest, however, froin
re
knowledge that there were 30 or 40 petitions of the same nat't,
coming up from the other parishes and corporations of Brist°
non
which would furnish opportunities enough for remarking Ur
them.

Mr. BRIGHT had been the more easy upon the time of Pilo{
senting the petition, and the thinnes of the House, because
the other petitions which were forwarding from every part of the
country.
The petition was ordered to be printed. fo
Mr. ITEnittEs brought up accounts of the public income
the country, which were ordered to be printed.
111 r. HERMES brought in a Bill to repeal the Usury
which was read a first tune.—Ordered to be read a second tur•
on Monday next.—Adjourned.