The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-09 00:00:00

towns, why should they not be to the towns of Ireland ?
( Ilear, hear. ) It was very well known that many of the
large towns in this country had long anxiously wished for
the advantages of such institutions, and, that being the case,
could it be for a moment doubted that the privileges which
corporations conferred were highly beneficial? He supposed,
however, that it was because Ireland was a distant colony
that she was to be refused justice ; bit! he should like to know

if this was the way to maintain the Union between the two

countries? 112 and others had been blamed by their consti-
tu3nts for preaching peace ; but if this Bill were rejected, how
was it possible for them to do so any longer? In fact, it
would render tham wholly powerless; and, their influence
being gone, all they could do would be to retire from the
country altogether. The Hon. Gentleman then referred to
passages in the speeches of the Noble Lord (Stanley) the
Member for Lancashire, to show that a change had taken place
in his political sentiments, and concluded byobsrving that, as

they allowed the Catholics of Ireland the privilege of voting for
Members of Parliament, they should not deny them the right
of taking part in the election of the officers of the municipalities
of that country.
Mr. CALLAGHAN and Mr. CLAY rose at the same time, but
the former gave way.
Mr. CL AY contended • that the arguments adduced by the
Hon. Member for Belfast against the Bill would apply with
equal effect to Corporations in general. They had admitted the
people of Ireland to the same political privileges as the people
of England by conferring upon them the Reform Bill. He
did not think that they could now stop short, and refuse to that
country the same right of self-government in the administration
of local affairs which they had conferred upon the people of
England. It was by conferring upon the people this right of self-
government that they best taught them how to respect them-
selves—to acquire habits of respect for the laws, and to com-
bine the greatest extension of personal freedom with respect for
others, and a perfect respect for the rights of property. He
was surprised that any British statesman—that any man con-
versant with history—should propose a scheme of local go-
vernment for one-third of the population of these kingdoms
different from that which wes possessed by the remainder.
_ _

(The Hon. Gentleman here referred to the work of M. de
Tocqueville upon the democracy of America, in which the be-
neficial results of self-government in the administration of
local affairs was clearly established.) It had been reserved for
the Right Hon. Baronet to prove that the Irish people were
not to have this right conferred upon them. But how did be
prove this ? By showing the fear he entertained that the
power which this measure would confer would be absorbed by
a predominant majority, who would use that power tyrannically.
But against the tyranny of a majority there was one protec-
tection, and that was in the general government of the coun-
try. If Ireland were governed by a republic, there might then
be reason to apprehend the tyranny of a majority ; but whilst
that country continued a portion of the empire, there would
always be found a sufficient corrective in that House to repress
any tyranny on the part of a majority, and to protdct the Pro-
testants of that country from any attempt at oppression on the
part of the Roman Catholics.
Sir J. GRAHAM was quite sure that the Honourable and
Learned Member for Dublin was himself so much a friend to

freedom of discussion, so long as that discussion was confined
within those rules which every Gentleman in that House was
bound.to observe, that he would be the last to complain of any
fair and frank allusions to that position connected with Ireland
which he so peculiarly occupied. He ( Sir J. Graham), there-
fore, claimed the privilege of that indulgence which he would
not intentionally abuse, namely, of alluding to the peculiar po-
sition of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, as well as
such portions of his public conduct as he conceived it necessary
to allude to, both as regarded what he had said and what he
had done.—( Hear.) Before he proceeded further, he wished
to disembarrass himself to a certain extent of some points which
had already been adverted to, and on which there now seemed
to exist very little difference of opinion. The Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth had opened his speech
upon a former night by considering the subject under three
great heads, and the same view had been subsequently taken
by the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland. The first was
the administration of justice as related to the Corporations ;
secondly, the police ; and thirdly, the administration of cor-
porate property. If he understood what had fallen from
Hon. Members at the other side of the House with respect to
that part of the Bill which related to the administration of
justice, he believed upon the points which had been urged
there existed' now no difference of opinion on either side
of the House. With regard to the danger of placing the
appointment of judicial functionaries subject to popular
election, that danger seemed now generally understood, and
the objections to that mode of appointing those who would
have to exercise judicial functions appeared to be generally
admitted. - Objections had been urged from that side of
the House against the mode provided by the present Bill
of having sheriffs chosen by popular election. He be-
lieved, however, that he was correct in stating that the Right

Hon. Gentleman opposite had virtually, if not totally, aban-
doned the opinions they had heretofore entertained on that part
of the subject. The report of the Commissioners went to
point distinctly to the proposition made by the Right Hon.
Member for Tamworth ; namely that the appointment of she-
riffs should be in the hands of the Crown. The words were,
" Whether a better system may not be adopted by the re-
moval of the prominent defects of the corporate institutions,
and placing this branch of the general administration of the
law in hands more directly responsible for its faithful exercise,
we submit to the consideration of your Majesty." It was
quite evident that the commissioners did not concur in the
propriety of making the sheriffs appointed by popular election.
It was clear that, by suggesting that the appointment should
be placed in responsible hands, they must have directly al-
luded to the appointment by the Crown. He would not de-
sire words more stringent or conclusive than the language
employed by the Commissioners, and as he thought that there
would now be found very little difference on that part of the
subject, he supposed that they might now consider this a point
settled.—( Hear, hear.) The next part of the question, then,
that they came to oonsider was, with relation to the elec-
tion of magistrates. As he understood the opinions that had
fallen in the course of the present discussion from his Noble
Friend the Secretary at War, he believed that the Noble
Lord was distinctly of opinion that those magistrates
ought not to be appointed by popular election—that there
were great objections to this mode of appointing the local
magistracy. It had been stated on the other side that there
were only fifty-four towns in Ireland to which the provisions
of this Bill would apply, and where these elections would
take place ; but he contended that there were 154 towns
which would be affected by the Bill. The Bill expressly pro-
vided that if any inhabitant householders of any town in Ire-
land shall petition his Majesty to grant them a charter of
incorporation, it shall be lawful for his Majesty by any such
Charter, if he shall think fit to grant the same, to ex-
tend to the inhabitants of any such town, &c., all or any
of the provisions contained in this Act, &c. Now, in every
one of these towns which might receive a charter of
incorporation there should be it mayor, and he, of course,
would also exercise the functions of a magistrate.—
( Hear.) The Honourable and Learned Sergeant who
had addressed the House for the first time last night, and
with so much ability, urged that the power of the magistrate
was very limited, that it did not extend beyond the power of
fine and imprisonment; and that the mayor, if he did not pro-
perly discharge his duties, was subject to be made answerable
for his conduct, if necessary, by sending- up informations against
him to the Court of King's Bench. Now he ( Sir J. Graham)
was not aware of the extent to which this remedy would be
available. It should be recollected that this officer was elected
but for a single year, and that his functions terminated at the
expiration of that pet iod. Now, suppose a mayor or magistrate
misconducted himself during his year of office, he did not
think that the remedy could reach him during his continuance
in office. He (Sir J. Graham) did not know the exact rapi-
dity with which proceedings before the Court of*King's Bench
in Ireland might be carried on ; but he certainly thought that
they must be rapid if they afforded a remedy against the mis-
conduct of the mayor before the termination of his) car of office.
The same objections which applied to the election of sheriffs
equally: Oplied to the election of magistrates; and he was of
opinion that. the appointment of these magistrates should also
be placed under the direction of a controlling power, respon-
sible for the due exercise of their functions. He considered
that these appointments ought to be fully placed in the hands
of the Crown. He would, then, suppose for a moment that
his Majesty's Ministers would be disposed to give way on these
points. He would then ask why, if they were convinced that
the state of Ireland was such as to allow them to legislate for
it on the same principles and in the same way as they had
legislated for England and Scotland—why, then, he would
csk, did they not stand by that conviction to the fullest ex-
tent 2—( Loud cheers.) Why did they flinch from giving full
effect to their own principles in Ireland—to the same princi-
ples on which they legislated for both countries—if their con-
viction of the identical condition and circumstances of Ireland
was so strong upon their mind ?—( Loud cheers.) The Right
lion. Baronet proceeded to refer to some portions of the dis-
cussion that bore upon this subject, and contended that there
,vas no argument which applied to the evil of making the mi-
nisters of justice elective that did not equally apply to the
election of the magistrates. He referred to the dis-
cussions last year upon the English Municipal Bill
with respect to the election of magistrates. The Right
Honourable Baronet then proceeded to enforce his argu-
ment, and urged upon the House that, if they made the
appoiutment of the magistrates dependent upon 'elections, all
the evils pointed out so ably by the Right Hon. Member for
Tamworth would prevail. The administration of justice would
be tainted at its source. He would now remark upon some
of the minor details of the Bill. The change in the qualifi-
cation was remarkahle, as far as it contrasted with the state of
the qualifications in England and Scotland. The Hon. Mem-
ber for the Tower Hamlets in the course of his speech had
referred to the able work of M. De Tocqueville on the de-
mocracy of America. In that work there was a chapter upon
the franchise which, considering the character of the writer,
he considered important. As he quoted from memory, he did
not recollect precisely the observations made by this writer
upon the franchise as enjoyed in America, but he believed
the effect was, that in a State where the democratic prin-
ciple prevailed if the Legislature once commenced by
lowering the franchise, all the popular feeling moving in that
direction, and the force of the public mind being directed to
that point, they must continue to descend lower and lower
until (as we understood the Right Hon. Baronet, who was
sometimes very imperfectly heard) they arrived at univer-
sal suffrage. They had talked of proceeding with regard to
Ireland on the same principle as they did fdr England and
Scotland.—( We understood some person to intimate to the
Right Hon. Baronet that the measure for England and Scot-
land had been distinct.) He was quite aware that there were
differences between the measures of Municipal Reform which
had been granted to Scotland and to England. But, if they
wished to act on similar principles, they must proceed in Ireland
either as they had done in England or as they had done in
Scotland. Now, what was the qualification for the corporate
elector in England ? It was a residence of two years and a