The Sun.
London, England, 1825-05-10 00:00:00

votes and none other. He hoped the House would let the Bill
go into a Committee.'

„ - .. .....—.
Mr. L. FOSTER fetid, that the principle of the Bill was
just what he had always supposed. All he wished was.to an-
nihilate fraudulent franchises. He was only anxious to reforni,
and not to destroy. But the details of the .11i11 were imperfect,
and if it passed a new kind'Of fraud would be generated. There
was a class of persons in Ireland who would be -glad to increase
their influence—no -matter. by what means—and this measure
would afford them thg• opportunity of doing it in a fraudulent
way. lie wished to strike out of the Bill those words which
limited it to leasehold franchise. The 40s. freeholders of Ire-
land was exactly the same as a 40s. freebolder.in Kngland.- •It
wasjust as prejudicial, in a constitutional point of view, to an-
nihilate the Irish as to destroy the English freeholder. The
measure required -great correction. He did' not know whether
he should vote against it or not, but he hoped that it would be
considerably altered in the. Committee. .• '
Sir .l. NEWPORT looped that the discussion - might _end, '.
and that the Bill. Might go into the. Committee.--( Hear !) • -. • '
Sir J. WitOTTESLEY made some general observations in'
.favour of the measure of Emancipation, and 'against the parti-'
cular Bill fof disfrariehisitie nearly '200;000 persons.
Mr. 0. R. DAWSON said he thought the question scarcely
less important than that of Catholic Entancipation. It was
improperly Mixed up with that other Measure. The two ques-
tions were so connected as to stand or fall together. If he sup-
ported this BilJ, leeesheuld give an indirect support to the Ca-
tholic Relief Bill; apd. if he did not, he should not gain for
.
Ireland the adiadtages "which' would ensue from the Catholic
Clergy Bill. Thus he was obliged; in order to support the lat-
ter measure, to-vote agairitit 'hie opinion for the present Bill.—
Wear!)—He Would however esintintte th vote for the Bill if it
remained just as it steiiisl at The whole system of the
elective franchise in-lit-laid required alteration. lie would be
glad• to see the esualificatioo raised to 20!. It would tend to
create a substantial` yeomanry: If the law were altered, he
shouia be O-latite see the Catholic Gentry returned to Pariia- '
thene. ..Still the question ought to be considered by itself sepa-
-1 rate froin the Cath6lic question. Under such circumstances,
he lope's] his, Hon. Friend' the 'Member for Stafford would at-
. tend:to:the 'singsfehtions of those persons, snore particularly by
property and Family connected with the interests of that coun-
try, and whosehele object' must naturally be to render the Bill
palateable to the people of Ireland., and a safe experiment in
the eyes of the Protestants of that country.
• Lord- ErtitiNwictm supported the Motion.
• Lord CORRY said that he voted for the second reading, but
'he 'should oppose its going into a Committee now, in conse-
quence of the amendment which had been introduced. • '
- Airee. WILSON argued against the lill. He looked with
horror at a proposition for taking away one of the noblest and
Most sacred rights of his 'fellow subjects. This was only a se-
eondary
_. measure, and depended upon the other; and 'he •
would_ not consent to legislate upon a contingent step which
might-never be taken. If this measure were a good one in it-
self; lie still should not-oppose-it on account of his hostility to
the. other if it came before him upon its own merits. The Hon.
•Member then' 'made- a few -observations in vindication 'of a
-Noble Landowner in the North, who had been attacked by an
.Hon. and Learned Member on a previous night.
Mr. HUME said—” I rise, Sir, to express an opinion dif-
ferent from that of the .Hen. Gentleman, or any other Hon.
Member-who preceded him." (Laughter.) The Hon. AI-ember
then- declared his unwillingness-to consent to this innovation
upon a great principle which lie so deeply -respected; Ile la-
• mented that this measure had been connected with Catholic
Emancipaticin, for he could .conceive nothing so calculated to
injure that great question, if it could be capable of injury.—
' Nothing could change his anxious desire es see that question
carried ;- but if the present measure had been introduced as a
clause in the Catholic Relief Bill, he should have been corn-
, pelled to rote against it. The Hon. Member referred to the
1 opinion of Dr. Doyle in the letters signed J. K. L. against
stripping the Irish peasant of the Elective Franchise, which
would make him the essence of a slave, while, bad as he was
at present, he exhibited the image of a freeman. There was,
in short, no evidence-before the House on which it ought to
proceed. His (Mr. Hume) object was to obtain information
on this subject before any decisive steps'were taken,' and for
that purpose 'he should conclude by moving for a Select Com-
mittee to investigate the state of the Elective Franchise in
Ireland._ When the'Borough of-Grampound was disfranchised,
a long time *as spent _in investigation, although the aim was
not in reality to limit but to extend the right of voting. If ;thy
Measure of this kind were necessary, it ought to be gem rel,
and applied to the same species of franchise in England, as
in the Sister Island. It' electors abused their privilege, let them
be punished for it by depriving them of its exercise ; but where
was the evidence that the Irish 40s. freeholders had so abused
that right as to forfeit it 1 The people of Ireland, on the con-
trary, were silent, because they were led to expect, the one
party Emancipation, and the other party the destruction-of the.
Catholic power. Now if there was any principle which he (Mr.
Ilume) considered sacred, it was the extension of the Elective
Franchise, and yet this Bill went to disqualify the whole po-
pular class of voters in Ireland. Honesty and purity, in' his
opinion, were not - confined to the higher classes, bur; on the
contrary, he believed ihe lowest classes of the country were in
all 'respects the least corm pt.—( Hear is —He theretbre never
should consent to disfranchise half a million of Irbh electors
without any just ground for doing so.. If there were abuses, let
them be proved and corrected; but while the House was with-
out a tittle of evidence to guide them, he must think the pre-
sent measure uncalled for. To Bills of regulation lie had no
objection ; where perjury prevailed, let perjury be punished
and prevented. He would next- ask, could any true friend of
Reform, in common consistency, support this- questihn ?
(Hear, hear!)—Those cheers must have one of two meanings,
and Hon. Gentlemen might choose which they pleased. He
should continue to hold that a great principle ought never to be
sacrificed to temporary expediency, nor could he consider it lets
than a dereliction of principle to rob half a million of the people
.of Ireland of their rights.—(Hear, hear !)—H e ought, perhaps,
to have said," take away ;" but whatever phrase he used ap-
peared to him of minor importance. After a few observations
in conclusion,' the Hon. Member sat down by moving as an
amendment—" That a Select CoMmittee be appointed to in-
quire what frauds and abuses exist in the exercise of the Elec-
tive Franchise in Ireland, and what measures it would be most
advisable to adopt to prevent a recurrence of such evils."
Colonel Jon N3TON seconded the amendment.
Mr. R. MARTI N, upon constitutional principles, could not
support this measure, but still, as a means of promoting Eman-
cipation, it should have his vote. He had heard that there was
a meeting of 20 or 30 Irish Members to consider of this subject ;
but Irish Members were the last persons in the world that ought
to be listened to on such a question.—(Cheers.)—Nay; lie him.
self was the last, or at least as little to be consulted as any other
Irish Representative.—(Cheers and laughter.)—He repeated,
they were an in such a case incompetent witnesses—(Cheers.)—
The object of those Gentlemen was only to save themselves
trouble and expence by reducing the number of their consti-
tuents. The Iton. Member for Louth (Mr. L. Foster) said the
elective franchise stood upon the same footing in England anti
Ireland. If so, why not make this new law apply to both coun-
tries, particularly when the state of property in England fa-
voured the experiment. He was at the same time willing that
the Hill should go into Committee ; because he believed the
Irish Roman Catholice, to obtain Emancipation,. would immo-
late a part of the rights they now enjoyed • and in that case,
though reluctantly, officiate during the sacrifice as a Priest at
the altar. - The manner, . indeed, in which the House was pro-
ceeding on
.the question of Catholic relief, reminded him of
an anecdote which he had heard of a certain Quack Doctor at
Paris, who professed to cure persons effectually of the tooth-
ache. An individual accordingly, who suffered severely from
the painful complaint, applied to the Quack, and having feed
him liberally, received his nostrum in return, and applied
it diligently as directed for some time.' The consequence
was, that the person's teeth all fell out, and he very naturally
brought an action against the Quack, not only for fraud,
' but for the injury he had sustained. When the case came
to be tried before (he believed) the Tt ibwial de Cos:anon, and
the Judge "recapitulated the charge. the • Quack denied that
he was culpable. " I did nut," said he to the complaisant,
" undertake to preserve your teeth, but .to cure you of the
tooth-ache,
partand is.
ofn ytohuer
contract."—(laughter.)—The
a es showing,
uas g
hyt
eoru.
)._... haveT h
en now
anneei -r
ther front nor back teeth, there is no possibility of your
ever having the tooth-ache again, so that' I have faithfully per-
formed
in which (continued Mr. Martin) Emancipation is at present
proposed, if carried, was something like the manner in which
this quack cured the tooth-ache. While the Catholics are
granted their rights, they are deprived of the means of exercis-
ing them. lie regretted this the more, because he could state
instances of independence on the part of the Irish 40s. free-
holders, which he defied lion. Gentlemen to match on the face
of the globe. The lion. Member then proceeded to state in
some contested erectioh for the county of Galway,
, in which he
was a candidate as well as a relative cf his present Hon. colleague
(Mr. D, al7), a compact ways entered into, that his Hon. colleague
should remain neuter not allowing his-. tenants to vote on
either side under the stipulation that for every one of th.m
which first voted on one side, two should vote as a com-
pensation on -the - Opposite side.—[The - Honourable .Mem-
ber went on to explain, that in Ireland when forty voters have
not polled in one day, in this booth -for any particular barony,
that booth must henceforth remain'
closed.)-1t so happened
that one of his (Mr. Martin's) booths had arrived at that point
when, from want of a sufficient Member of voters, it was about
to be shut; but at that moment five of his lion. Colleague's
tenants broke loose and - notwithstanding every endeavour
which his Hon. Coll'eague•could use to prevent it, voted for
him (Mr. Martin) and kept the booth open. According to
agreement, his Hon:Coll le said, "then for those five voice,
•the opposite shall have ten." But -then ten also broke loose,
and, as we tinderstoOd-the Hon- Member, WO for him like-