The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-29 00:00:00

THE SUN, _LONDON, TUESDAY,

have laws within their own administration and controul ;
and when they menacingly called for justice, when they
kept the sword of justice in their own hands, he was assured
England would certainly rue the day—for it would
became an iron rod, and a weapon used for enhan-
cing the hostility that existed between Ireland and England.
Look, when Emancipation was granted, the people of Ireland
thought those of the country as bigotted as ever. When the
Reform Bill was passed, what was thought of the Ministry that
passed it when repeal was the order of the day, the Whigs
were called to pieces. The word " Whig" was then a subject
'of execration, although at the present moment it was a
word for doing justice to Ireland : he referred with
great pride to the conduct of many of his Irish friends con-
nected with Orange Lodges in giving up some of their dearest
connections, in order to agree with the wishes of the Crown.
He knew it would be in vain to appeal to the House. He
knew it would be in vain to appeal to his Majesty's Ministers,
because although their better judgments might go with his
views, they were dependent for their daily existence upon
the support of a party whose whole and sole object was
to gain political influence,,m4 Cries of " Hear, hear, hear.")
The Honourable and Learned Member then referred to
an article that had lately appeared in the Morning Chro-
nicle, the principle of which, he stated, was to secure
the undisturbed enjoyment of the property and pursuits of in-
dustry to a numerical minority, and to leave the numerical
majority in possession of all other political power. He would
not say that this was to be depended upon as an authority, but
this journal often spoke the sentiments of his Majesty's Minis-
ters. With respect to the administration of justice, what did
the Protestant party in Ireland ask ? All they asked was, that it
should be left to the Crown, from whence they had a right to
expect equal laws, equal Government, and impartial justice.
He did not wish to raise the cry of " No Popery" in
this county; but he was still more averse to have
the cry of " No Protestantism" raised in Ireland,—(Hear,
hear-) He thanked the House for the indulgence they
had shown him, and would conclude by moving that
the bill be read a third time this day six months.
Mr. BLACKSTONE seconded the motion, and contended
that the Bill now under consideration was a most unconstitu-
tional measure.
The question having been put,
Mr. WARD was glad to find that the Hon. Members op-
posite had given up their respect for ancient charters, the in-
violability of corporate property, and the old institutions of
their ancestors for the doctrine of expediency. He was glad
of this because he was convinced that the alteration which this
Bill proposed was most expedient, and was only at a loss to
know on what principle it was opposed. He saw no principle
in the line taken by the Hon. Gentlemen opposite, unless the
principle that induced an army to spike their guns when there
was danger of their falling into the hands of the enemy, and
of being turned against them. He claimed the protection of
the House against that course. He did not regard the ques-,
tion of Irish Corporate Reform with any reference to whether
corporate functions were to be exercised by Catholics or Pro-
testants, but upon the ground that it would become a means
of the good government of the country. The whole argument
of the Hon. Gentleman opposite amounted to this, that popu-
lar controul and the dispensation of justice to all parties could
not exist together. He admitted that for the attainment of
justice it was desirable that they should regulate the machi-
nery of a measure of this nature in such a way as that it would
best answer the end for which it was intended. He consi-
dered municipal institutions as the first step to the possession
of liberty in any country. On what plea could they refuse to
Catholic Ireland that measure of justice which they had
already conceded to Protestant England and Presbyterian
Scotland ? The Hon. Member for the University of Dublin
had argued that this measure would effect the transfer of
power from one exclusive party to place it in the hands of
another party equally exclusive. But was there no difference
in the circumstances of both parties? One party consisted of
a fraction of the country, the other party comprised the entire
bulk of its people. The Hon. Member for the University of
Dublin had drawn a distinction between the small minority
and the large majority, and he contended that the majority
should not be allowed to possess full sway in the exercise of
corporate rights. Now, unless he was much mistaken, upon a
former occasion, the Hon. Member for the University of Dub-
lin had himself admitted that in all cases of corporate adminis-
tration, unless so far as it related in any way to the adminis-
tration of justice, the opinion of the majority ought to be bind-
ing.—(No, no.) They denied that doctrine now, because
the majority of the people of Ireland were Roman Catholics.
'There was no other reason. If the people of Ireland were
Presbyterians, Unitarians, Baptists, or any other description of
Dissenters, there would be no hesitation to concede those
rights • but they were refused to them because they were Ro-
man datholics.—(Cries of " No, no.") No better descrip-
tion could be given of the effect of that measure than had
been given by the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tam-
worth, who said that the object of the measure was to raise
the Roman Catholics to a perfect equality of civil rights with all
other classes of his Majesty's subjects. The Hon. Member for the
University of Dublin contended that the influence possessed
by the priest and the agitator was the reason why the whole
people of Ireland should be excluded from the possession of
these rights which had been granted to the people of Eng-
land and Scotland. They contended that so pernicious was
this influence—so much did it infect every portion of the
country, that therefore it would be unsafe to entrust the same
privileges to the Irish people as had been conceded to other
classes of the empire.' The same argument had in a precisely
similar way been urged the other night by the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman the Member for Bandon. That Hon.
and Learned Member had in his speech on a former night
alluded—ter- The observation, which Hon_ Member for
Dublin (Mr. O'Connell) had used respecting the Knight of
Kerry at the late election of the county of Kerry, as a
reason why the people of Ireland should be excluded
from the enjoyment of the same privileges as other parts
of the empire.—(Hear, hear.) Another Hon. Gentleman
had grounded his case against the present measure on a
speech which Father Keogh had delivered to his flock from
the altar. He would not say whether the report of that
speech was correct or incorrect, because if it was incorrect,
the individual to whom it was attributed had had an oppor-
tunity to deny its accuracy, which he had not done. He did
th
hi
o.
rights
nedetrei
fninsraaeftneintsctif
iltrendth?feiul
ietymueshuhnpapet(BeolertnwHtucu
ieuactlei
teroeetd:ail.r
ssrgbdda.,
.pyiaeei:podHndpclocyi
IxoeftNteiasel
lbcrati
01l
that
tlgtyeodmtnhetneftii
Chxdueehta
admitted
eecftinsi
urdnit
orsrersttcpcetu
ahmoeuhhepr
emeatostanoatchursfithtectnraahaEeoei might have been spoken.
Ile admitted that many of the Catholic clergymen abused
hi
d
pe
Ir
di
naoTey t
hnf,snbohpegaugaweentli
chedri t
peopleots
pct:thooshmpl
conduct
oetndti
exerted
speech
political
enlyildfayi
nee,
sjggenFocoasalrdai lyanigeest
miadablri
wdttgteeated.
hryentri InntdoKrd
bad always been so zealous, exemplary, meritorious as not
only to reflect credit upon their own respectability as a class,
but had been singularly useful to that class of the community
whose spiritual interests were entrusted to their care.—( Hear,
I: ear.) But, whilst he most willingly paid this tribute to
the excellency of the Protestant clergy, he begged to ask,
was there no instance of a violent or objectionable, speech
having been delivered by a Protestant clergyman? He
held in his hand a report of a speeelt delivered on a
grave and solemn occasion, at a Conservative meeting, at-
tended (as the newspapers described it) by all the wealth, the
intelligence, the respectability and influence of the county of
Chester. The speech to which he referred was one that fur-
nished a parallel to that of Father Keogh, and which was
delivered at a public dinner in South Cheshire by the Rev.
Joshua King. It had been contended on a former night, as
an argument against this Bill, that, in an address to the elec-
tors of Limerick, the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin
had called the supporters of the unpopular candidates "de-
mons." Now the Clergymen to whom he alluded in his
speech described the Reform Bill--a measure which had the
sanetion of the Legislature—as a diabolical measttrai--(The
Hon. Member read stirtid extracts from the speech of the Rev.
Gentleman, delivered on this occasidti, id which he described
the measure of Corporation Reform as having heed fated by
the refuse of the Whig party, aided by a desperate and dciven=
turous party, whose views they were carrying into effect. The
Hon. Member commented on these passages, which he read
from the printed speech, and referred to another passage,
where the Rev. Mr. King, speaking of the House of Commons,
said that whenever any disparaging or depreciating 111usion was
made in the House of Commons to Protestant Clergymen it
Was responded to by yells that were not to be surpassed in savage-
ness by wild beasts, and that they were re-echoed and reiterated
by men who had little about diem eicePt the human form.)—
( A laugh.) Now he put it to the Hon. Member for Oxford
(Sir R. Inglis), than whom no one differed from hint Mere in
politics, but whose candour and honour no one more respected,
to say whether in the reformed House of Commons, whatever
different views they might entertain as to their rights and pri-
vileges there had ever been shown any disposition to act with
disrespect to the Protestant Clergy ? They would be as just
in making the speech of the ,Rev. Joshua King an argument
against the concession of political rights to the people of
England, as of making that of Father Keogh an argument
against the concession of political rights to the people of Ire-
land. The Hon. Member proceeded to state, on the authority
of one of the Hon. Members for Cheshire, that at the last
election the hustings were environed by exhibitions of the
death's-head and cross-bones ; that flags bearing this emblem
were paraded before the Conservative candidates, and that
the Hon. Member for Dublin was there exhibited with all his
accessories.. Now he thought it absurd that these things which
ought to be laughed at as the mere product of public excite-
ment, should be seriously urged as arguments to resist great
public principles. The very same argument had been used
since the first concession made to the Roman Catholics. In
1825, the arguments against the majority of the Roman Ca-
tholics, the circumstances in which they were placed, and the
danger of conferring on them further political privileges, were
splendidly refuted by Mr. Canning, in a speech which he deli-
vered in the course of the discussions on the Catholic Relief Bill.
He confessed that there was no Roman Catholic in Ireland
who possessed the heart and feelings of a man who ought not
to entertain the deepest gratitude towards the Hon. Member
for Dublin. The advice then given by Mr. Canning was not
soon enough followed. He would ask the Hon. Member for
Dublin himself whether, if the advice of Mr. Canning was fol-
lowed, he would now be in his present position ? By the delay
of the measure of Catholic Emancipation, the influence of the
Hon. Member for Dublin was increased, and he was invested
with a power the possession of which he (Mr. Ward) believed
to be dangerous, and a power which, in any wholesome state of
things, ought not to exist. It was because he (Mr. Ward) did
not wish that power to continue to exist that he felt anxious to
give to Ireland the full enjoyment of political rights. The
warmest advocates of the Irish corporations admitted that
in their present state they were full of abuses, which could
neither be excused nor palliated. ;The only question then
was, how they were to be improved. It was proposed on the
one hand to increase the power of the executive with reference
to the regulation and direction of the administration of cor-
porate functions. On the one hand they had centralization, and

MUNICIPAL REFORM.
Mr. WIGNEY presented. petitions from Brighton against
the 27th clause in the Municipal Reform Act, commonly called
the rate-paying clauses: also another in favour of vote by ballot.
Ile thought it right to state tlietviben these petitions were sent
to him from the post-offico, they were charged five guineas
postage ; and when a pers on went to the post-office on the
subject the money was returned, and he was informed that it
was merely a matter of form., and a polite letter was sent to him
explaining the cause. It 'gas desirable that Members should
know what sort of petitions they might receive—how sent, and
what weight they should be to come free of charge.
NAVIGATION LAWS.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG presented a petition from certain
master seamen of merchant vessels, praying that some regula-
tions might be adopted to prevent the waste of human life oc-
casioned by the untieaworthiness of vessels ; also that measures
should be adopted whereby the qualification of persons under-
taking the management of s'aips might be ascertained, as many
shipwrecks had been oecrisioned in consequence of the unfit-
ness of persons appointed to the command of vessels.—
The Honourable Merribin also presented a petition from the
Master Mariners of Teignmouth, praying that in any
alteration which might be, made respecting light-houses, the
pensions now granted b,y the Corporation of Trinity-house
should not be interfere?, with.
AN INFERNAL MACHINE.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES presented a petition from a
native of Switze-cland, complaining of a breach of contract on
the part of or.r Government, in respect to a new machine,
invented 131, the petitioner, to be used in war. The ma-
chine vas capable of discharging thirty-six bullets in a mi-
nute, and the petitioner had agreed for the sum of 10,0001. to
increase its power to 96 bullets a minute. The sum agreed upon
between petitioner and the representative of our Govern-
ment was 10,0001., but on the day appointed for the trial
of the machine he, by the advice of a mutual friend,
caused it to explode, in order to prevent it from
falling into the hands of the Russian Government.
It appeared further that Mr. Bligh, the British Minister, en-
tered into a contract with the petitioner, and paid him a sum
of 3,3001. (as we understood the Hon. Member), and he now
•,irayed that the British Government would ratify the contract
made by its Minister. There were various other allegations
in the petition which he did not think it necessary to refer to ;
bui he further stated that the Russian Government, finding that
the petitioner did not perfect his contract, had caused him to
be thrown into gaol, where he remained twelve months. On
his arrival in England, he had gone to the Foreign Office,
where he had received 501.
Mr. GISBORNE—That is not in the petition. '
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES admitted it was not, but he
wislied the case should be fully stated.
Mr. GISBORNE would not detain the House many mo-
ments, while making a few observations on the very unintelli-
gible petition that had just been presented. The petitioner
stated that the British Minister, Mr. Bligh, had entered into
a contract with him for the sale of what a Morning Paper
called " An Infernal Machine." That was not the fact.
No expectations whatever were held out that the British Go-
vernment would ever purchase such a machine.—( Hear, hear. )
The first statement in the petition was, that on the 30th of
September, 1834, he signed an agreement by which possession
of the machine was to be had by that Government alone for
the consideration of 10,0001. This agreement was simply
entered into, and the party proposed that Mr. Bligh should
propose to the British Government to purchase the machine.
Mr. Bligh refused to do so. Within six months the party
again came to Mr. Bligh, and he advanced him 3,0001.
and odd for the purpose of transporting the machine
to England. It was attempted to be seized by the Govern-
ment of Russia, on account of the demands they had upon it ;
but they did not succeed. 1-fe was sorry that the petition had
been presented in the absence of the Noble Secretary for Fo-
reign Affairs;. but he trusted it would meet with the approba-
tion of the House.
The petition was then ordered to lie on the table.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS BILL'
Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from two hundred
persons, resident in the city of Worcester, stating that the
11unicipal Corporations Amendment Bill would subject them
o Poor-rates for the small cottages they occupied, and pray-
ng the House not to pass the Bill with such provisions.
LICENSED VICTUALLERS.
Mr. HOPE presented a petition from the licensed vic-
uallers of Gloucester, against any additional duty on spirit
licenses.

BIRMINGHAM AND GLOUCESTER RAILWAY
BILL.
The order of the day was then moved for the further consi-
deration of the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway Bill.
Mr. RICHARDS stated that he had an amendment to
propose. The line had been originally proposed to pass in
front of the mansion house of Mr. Spurrier, a most respect
able gentleman in Birmingham. He objected to this line going
hefoae his house, and requested the committee to carry it along at
the back of his house. A clause had been inserted, specifying dis-
tinctly that the line was to pass behind, bnt afterwards in the
7th page, another clause had been introduced, autho-
rising the company to deviate from the plan so agreed
upon, not exceeding a distance of one hundred yards.
The gentlemen asked for no more than to have the agreement
entered into in the Committee carried into effect. Eminent
lawyers had been consulted upon the clause, and they had
given it as their opinion that, as the clause stood, the Company
'lad the right to go through the manor-house of the petitioner.
He hoped the Noble Lord (the Chairman of the Committee)
would agree to expunge the clause, otherwise he would feel it
his duty to divide the House upon it.
Aißft-&RT NSTACI Very ox, io us _tha
-ironer should be relieved, but a; he had been heard before
the Committee in the most full manner, he must object to the
clause being introduced on the bringing up of the report. He
therefore called upon the House to resist the motion of the
lion. Member.
Mr. TOOKE thought the clause was sufficiently explicit
for the protection of the individual.
Mr. O'C.ONNELL—What harm can there be in having it
specified particularly in the bill ? •
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said that it appeared to him that
all partlus ware agreed in the same object--namely, the pro-
teeth:in of the petitioner. He suggested that they should
meet pnd agree-upon the manner in which that could best be
done.

Lord G. SOMERSET wished to know if it was the opi-
nion of the House that clauses should be at that stage intro-
duced, and not as they used to be in Committee.
Mr. GO ULBURN hoped, after the expression of the opi-
nion of the House, the Noble Lord would not persevere.
Mr. RICHARDS was willing to withdraw the clause, oil
the understanding, that if the parties did not agree in the
mean time, he was to be at liberty to bring it on again.
In reply to a question from Mr. POTTER,
An HoN. MEMBER said that the Committee had come to a
resolution that no railway should pass a high road on a level.
HULL AND SELBY RAILWAY.
CoIoneI,SIBTHORPE gave notice that he would take the
sense of the House on the third reading of this Bill, on which
occasion he would move that it be read that day six months.
Mr. BETHEL complained that the Hon. Member had not
given this notice before the parties had incurred so much
expense.
Mr. RAIKE 8 presented a petition against the Bill.
BIRMINGHAM AND DERBY RAILWAY BILL.
The Birmingham and Derby Junction Railway Bill was re-
ported with amendment after sonic observations from Mr.
Potter, Mr. P. Thompson, and Sir Oswald Moseley.
Mr. P. THOMPSON wished to ask the Hon. Gentleman
who had the charge of this bill, whether, with regard to ques-
tion No. o, ma tetpect to the assents and dissents, the
numbers *ere with reference to the new line, or the whole
line taken together.
Mr. CHARLES RUSSELL (as ore understood) stated
that it applied only to the new Flue.
APPOINTMENT 010 MAMSTRATES.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved for a copy of any circular
letter sent teem iht Under Secretary of the Home Department
in or about the month of October last to the Mayor of any lio-
rotip,h, relating to the Municipal Corporations Act.
Sir R. PEEL believed the Noble. Lord had made this mo-
tion partly with a 'view that he (Sir Robert) might solicit from
the Noble Lord those explanations with respect to the ap-
pointment of corporate magistrates of which he bad given no-
tice, and as be did it upon a motion of the Noble Lord, and
in consequence of the intimation of his wish that he should put
the question to him, he trusted he should not be thought by
those Gentlemen who had notices preceding his, that
he was then improperly interfering in bringing the
subject forward at that particular time. The point upon which
he wished for explanation from the Noble Lord referred exclu-
sively to the appointment of Justices of the Peace under the
Actof Parliament which had passed in the last Session for the
reform of Municipal Corporations.
He believed it would be admitted by the Noble Lord, and by
all those who took a part in the discussion on the Municipal
Reform Bill, that there was a clear distinction between the
ordinary duties of Corporations, and those connected with the
administration of justice. He believed that was distinctly ad.
17.ritted by all parties, and by no Hon. Gentleman more
clearly then the Noble Lord bimsellf, that while political
opinions ought to have some weight in the election for
Town-councillors, that while the constituent body might
allow those feelings naturally to interfere with their choice
in this respect, yet that political opinions ought not to inter-
fere with the appointment of magistrates, and the administration
of justice,—( Hear, hear, hear.) That distinction was fully
and justly recognised in the Report of the Commissioners
on which the Municipal Reform Bill was founded, and they
expressed their opinion of the evil fully in the documents
which they submitted to that House. They said it was to be
regretted that party spirit had extended itself to the adminis-
tration of justice. That the Magistrates were generally se-
lected by the Aldermen, and the Aldermen wore gonerally
considered to be political partizans.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

-.---------------------------'
and the rit
on the other hand popular rights and privileges. But he other side, but he would maintain that the objects
asked why should they refuse to Ireland a system of Corporate tention of that oath, which was purely restrictive,
saight en-
Reform which they had adopted in Scotland ? Would they, elude Catholics from voting on any question that i . Hetir,
in doing so, be acting in the spirit of equal justice ? He might danger the safety of Protestantism in Ireland.-(
nt ig el
perhaps from the effect of personarattachment, be supposed to hear," from the Opposition.) The object of the prese
Po
'its
was to ex=
exaggerate any observations he might make with respect to was to create a dominant Catholic party in Ireland! 't3ery.
the present Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, but it was simple tendency would be to establish the supremacy f
r olie K mg'
justice to him to say, that in one single year of his administra- there, and with this to destroy the supremacy os t
ri 1 7r(14-
tion he had done more to assuage the violence of party feeling If these attacks were continued, they would force o .
_,,.
-to improve the condition of the Irish people-more to re- testants a re-consideration of the whole Catholic questi y 0
move the recollection of wrong, and to revive and create the The Hon. Member for Dublin made frequent allusion to • 'lli
hope of redress, than any Lord Lieutenant who had preceded exertions of the Scotch, and to their drawing the sword 1 "115
him. Yet with all this he would regret to see such additional the Lord and of Gideon against episcdpacy, holding t
responsibility imposed on him. He contended that these con- example for the destruction of Protestantism
rever
porations would be the safety-valves for the public feeling, and Hut the Learned Gentleman ought to know, what c y
if this measure were refused, and Ireland placed on a different school-boy knew, that the Scotch objected to ePise.°Pa a
footing from the other parts of the empire, he feared the con- from its too near approximation to Poperee-( Cheers, mingle i
sequences.-( Cheers.) with some laughter.) The question before the House ig trre.. il.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS commenced by vindicating the was, the establishment of Popery under its old form
Governof 11
in out
3,
consistency of the course pursued by Hon. Members in oppos- gious and political despotism in Ireland.
ing the Bill before the House. The amendment of the Noble merit say so or not ? Mr. O'Connell, the real' lender h.fa.hno. ,
Lord the Menaber for South Lancashire assumed that those House-( Cheers and laughter)-did fairly allow th at ta t
e nues-
Corporations had been already swept away, and proposed to lie ascendancy was at the bottom of the question. I e. -low,
substitute a different system in their stead. The expression tion was one of vital importance to the social, the re; le?
not
17011 thet, ;
he believed of the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland was, and political condition of the Sister Kingdom, and coulee,e'e'sa
that the Bill swept away that system which had been the fail to infuse its effects into Great Britain, and to the h e`ea
source of so much mischief. Presuming then that the old sense of the enlightened people of the empire at large ei
corporations were to be put an end to, it because their duty, to would not fear to leave its decision.-( Hear, hear.)
substitute in their stead some system in which they could place Mr. VERNON SMITH said that the Hon. Gentlema tt
1 confidence. They did not wish to see erected on the ruins of was very liberal of his entreaties to the Government,
but hi et
those institutions a structure of democracy, which would be would beg of him to forbear accompanying these entreatien
the source of great political evil. They wished that those in- with insults. It was too late for him, after having allowed
stitutions should be succeeded by a monarchical institution, the Catholics to get into Parliament, to come forward now
instead of by a democratic system-( Bear, hear.) He had with his complaints that the Catholics would destroy Protes
supported the amendment proposed by the Noble Lord, but taut ascendancy in Ireland. The object of the present
he would would much rather have opposed the Bill altogether. He sition, it appeared, was to allow such Members as the Hon.
for one would have been anxious to maintain institutions which Member for Bristol, the uncompromising opponents of all
had for their object the establishment and support of a Pro- corporate reform, to vote on the present division.
He (gr.
testant ascendancy. He would prefer the legitimate influence Smith) admired the general consistency and character of th
in-
of monarchy to the illegitimate influence of democracy. He Hon. Member for Oxford, but his conduct in the present e
wished that the present system should be succeeded by a system stance showed a marked deviation from his usual consistencom-
op-
y.
in which they could place confidence. In the plan proposed He began with a reference to the instruction to the
C
by the present Bill he had no confidence.-( Cheers.) He mittee. But if he objected to all retorm, why did he not
11
.s:
to
would appeal to Hon. Members who sat near him at the time, pose the second reading? Why did he allow a similar 1:3
that when the question that the Bill be read a second time pass the Commons last year ?-( Hear, hear, from the Win
was put, he distinctly cried out, " No, no. e_.( Hear.) Per- terial side.) How, he would ask, could any gentleman °l'
haps they might not be successful in their opposition to the the other side who voted for the instructions
now vote for t
n lie
measure then, but if they were fated to be in a minority, he amendment on the third reading ? The Right Hon. Bar
o' le
would have the satisfaction of going into the lobby with as (Sir R. Peel) the leader of the party, acted in a true sports- •
large a minority as any that that House had yet seen.- man style finding be could not destroy the Bill on the
(Loud cheers.) The speech of the Hon. Member for St. tion for the instruction, he changes his position turns round,
Alban's, who had last addressed the House, consisted, to a and attempts to knock it down on the third reading.--
great extent, of quotations from speeches and arguments that ( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial side.) But the real
had been been used on a former debate. It had, however, happened ject was to parade to the country a larger minority
that the memory of the Hon. Gentleman had not supplied third reading.-( Hear, hear.) The Gentlemen opposite
him correctly with those extracts and arguments of which he did not object to a cure in the case of the English Corpora-
had so fully availed himself. He (Sir R. Inglis) regretted tions, which they admitted required remedy-yet they
that the Hon. Member for Dublin's yawns were not so audible refused the principle of open voting in the Irish Corporations,
as they were at present whilst his Hon. Friend had been ad- which were notoriously more corrupt. In England there was
dressing the House. The manner which that Hon. and Learned a transference of power from one party to another, but in Ire-
on the
Member had adopted during the session in his interruptions of land it would be a transference from the minority to the melee
of those in whose views he differed, was as little orderly rity.-(Hear, hear.) This principle of transference they
as any of those interruptions described in the speech of could not depart from. Why should any one say that The
the Rev. Gentleman in South Cheshire, from whom such jority of the Irish people were unfit for power? It was
large quotations had been made. The Hon. Member for St. maintained that this course was dangerous in England. e
Alban's had quoted largely from the speech of the Rev. Mr. Irish Catholics were not to be told that they were fit to
ownsen
King of Cheshire, and had used it as a set-off against the representatives to Parliament, but unfit to elect
speech of Father Keogh ; but he asked, was there no dif- municipal officers. The notion was preposterous. This vi
ference between a speech delivered after dinner, under the a last attempt to retain Protestant ascendancy and all its con_t.
excitement of political feeling, in the presence of ersons be- comitant power in Ireland. When, however, they could 11°___
fore whom the speaker stood merely in a civil ands ocial rola- retain the Corporations in Ireland they adopted the stratager
tion, and a speech delivered under circumstances in which of sweeping them off, just as an adjournment of the House w.ss'te.
spiritual influence was powerfully superadded to personal and moved to get rid of a debate. The Noble Lord PP°9l
political influence ? The difference was striking and evident. (Lord Stanley) said he viewed the question as a religious one
their
ei,
But whilst they had been able to quote observations which It might be so taken-he himself would not take it so. But
they were anxious to hold up:as being excessively intempe- it was now too late to take a religious position on this titles;
rate from the speech of only Catholic Clergymen, he would tion. It was known that when men got legitimate power .41
ask any one who had read the evidence taken before the never sought illigitimate power. It would be so in Irelaii
Committee whether the speech of Father Keogh was only and the rejection of the Bill would urge the people to acquif,
one out of many similar ?-( Hear.) Father Walsh, at Borris illegitimate power. He thought the argument that the 13;:i
chapel, told the congregation that any one who voted for would give Mr. O'Connell additional power, which he wen%
Bruen and Kavanagh would be refused all religious rights, and use badly, a fallacious one. It would give him no power, bte.
would thus incur the risk of everlasting punishment. Let its rejection would. His piesent power resulted from tlie
them compare that declaration, .delivered under such solemn tardy and reluctant concession of Emancipation and Refornilie •
circumstances, with the speeel delivered after dinner-( A He thought those who voted on former stages of the /31,1;
laugh)-without consideration and under circumstances essen- should not vote on the third reading.--( Cries of " Question,
tially different. In the county of Kerry Father John O'Sul- and " Divide.")
liven declared that arty one who would vote for the Knight Sir W. FOLLETT said, it was put forward on the oplt3o-
of Kerry, he would let him die like a beast, neither would site, as if a valid charge, that those who did not object tohe
the.
the
he baptise his children. principle of the English Corporation Bill could not oppose
Mr. O'CONNELL-He has denied that. present Bill. Now, he did not object to the principle of
Sir R. INGLIS-That is an interruption which I consider English Bill, but he did object, and most strongly, to tlic
perfectly fair, for I was not aware of the contradiction. present Bill, and should state the
grounds of his objection:
ore
Mr. O'CONNEL L-He contradicted the statement dig- It was not necessary for him to inquire into the origin of c
tinctly in two letters, which were published in the Morning porations in England. In many of them it was lost in
th
for the,
Chronicle. darkness of time. They were intrusted with property
Sir R. INGLIS felt bound to admit the contradiction, and general benefit of the citizens, without exclusion or distill!.
as it had been given was willing to suppose that the statement tion; and the misappropriation of this trust by the corperti;
had not been made. But they had many other instances. In functionaries may be one argument for their removal, and ero
Kerry all the Catholic Priests in the county except three substitution of others. But in Ireland all corporations we
used their most active exertions over their flocks to effect founded in a spirit of exclusion, whether they were tit
8.„.
the defeat of the Knight of Kerry.-(Hear, hear.) Would founded in remote times for personal defence against bari?.or.
any one deny that they would use that influence in the rian hordes, or those of a later period, the time of James, 1,0
corporations, and effect the total exclusion of the Pro- the defence and maintenance of the Protestant inter°st.
were
testant inhabitants ? The original institution of these cor- the foimer class of Corporations pose-er and emolument !ey
porations was for the maintenance of the Protestant interest. confined to those of English blood ; in the latter class
cloy
The first object of both combined was the maintenance were confined exclusively to Protestants. This was esPeelear,
of English interests in that country. This some persons the case in the Corporations of Ulster. It was quite
eche,
might call an abuse, but he called it a great blessing. He therefore, that they were founded upon a principle of e'other
indeed regretted most sincerely that any portion of those sion. Not only so, but they were intended to answer an re..
interests-4.4- ever been compromic•d. lie felt teal tire purpose, namely, that of maintaining political power by la
present measure would be destructive to the best interests of turning Members to serve in Parliament. But we are t°
the empire, and he for one would to the last most strenuously that these institutions are contrary to the spirit of the tintes2
resist it. and therefore this Bill is introduced professedly for their tie;
Mr. WILLIAM ROCHE supported the third reading of struction.-(lronical cheers from the Mieiateriai teeiel'°,4"
the Bill, He felt satisfied that nothing short of the measure He used the words advisedly-the Bill was intro profe:.
would satisfy the great majority of the Irish people. sedly for their destruction. And how did it proceed e Wbyirort
Mr. EWA RT contended that the Hon. Member for the the entire destruction of every Royal Charters--(
University of Oxford had not answered the observations of the Ministerial benches.) Yes, by their Gentleman,
the lion. Member for St. Alban's. He regretted that the tion. And he would ask the Hon. and Learned d
the
in teoduce
Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth was not in the Attorney-General for Ireland, who had single
the House. That Right Hon. Gentleman was the sponsor of Bill with so much ability, to put his finger
(111
a were told
the present measure, when he consented to what was its clause having a contrary tendency. And yet they iThey
natural forerunner, namely, Catholic Emancipation. How that the Bill was founded on Conservative principlesd
to 0°
edresstruc-
could that Right Hon. Gentleman, reconcile it with consis- were told that the pruning-knife was to beellaPtCiPriehiee .iistitu-
tency to create the cause and yet refuse to support the ine- rotten branches, but net the axe to the roots of he ila ask-
vitable effect? There certainly was no consistency in granting tious.-(Cheers from the Opposition.) Why, he evouss, not
the beginning of a series of events and refusing their cone the Hon. and Learned Gentleman himself if this w7stieg
summation, It was the duty of every Liberal English Mem: mere trifling ? The axe was put to the root. The °Apa
ber to endeaVetie to procure for Ireland every measure cal- corporations were destroyed without an exception- e thee
were . 0.
culated to promote lite interest and freedom. they were told of the rights of the freemen. Whert oistoira
Mr. FINCH would yield to no one in his desire to benefit to form any part of the new corporations ? Vl° orations'
Ireland ; but, before legislating upon any question, he was rights of the freemen, like the charters of the Cel
created pre
bound to consider the condition of the country. It was a were destroyed. He cared little whether they pre-
country divided by faction, and between it and Bngland there freemen or whether they did not create' them, unless Verteese
was no analogy to fit them for the same institutions. In this served the rights of those existing. But still, with
'ail whom
opinion he was borne out by what the Right Hon. the Chan- objections, be did consent, in common with those Irishtsu core
cellor of the Exchequer had said upon the, subject of the repeal he had the honour to act, to the destruction of the ber side'
of the Union. That Right Hon. Gentleman had stated it as porations. They were asked, however, from the oti s.
st, -as
his opinion that if there were to be a domestic legislature in when this new light broke in upon them? Be, at.
With ite-
Ireland, the war between the two great parties in that country too young a Member of that House to be charged, wee bee
would be a war of extermination. Now, how much greater consistency for advocating such principles ; but hea„ uae, the
would be the contention if it carried itself into every town and in the House from an earlier period he should say
ration °(
altoer ,athsic
borough of that country ? How would it increase the agita- existing state of the law called for that
tion.-(fear? hear.) Agitation was at present confined to opinion. When, in 1828, they passed the Act f 411-'0 there
Roman Catholics, who were organized for the purpose. If Emancipation they were- called upon to do soi_Lopeen
.c.a-
this measure passed it would also extend to the Protestants, should no longer remain any existing difference eetd see etc-
who, of course, would also organise..-( Hear, hear.) The tholic and Protestant. When, in e 832, they passe her,,,,...43effect of this measure would certainly be a tendency to weaken form Bill they took away all politica.l power from
less Li. IrHe
the power of the Monarchy. He was not opposed in the ab- rations, and they were thus rendered eaorse than tiee for Ca-
street either to the Democratic, the Republican, the Monarchi- for one had been anxious for the passing._ of the Bill a soften
cal, or the Aristocratic principles. On the contrary, be wished tholic Ernancipalion, in hopes that it woul i alleviate went that
to see them all blended in a mixed and limited Government. the rancorous spirit of religious animosity, and grasee toile
He witilied to find each operating' as a check upon the others, equality of rights so loudly demanded. Those were sewiitiog
and the result of such a combination would, in his opinion, ciples upon which that Bill was founded, and be. was the°
that -
produce liberty. to admit that there should be no civil institutioel- fully e°
Mr. M. BELLEW said that this Bill would, next to the should be no subject of the King but who shouletir present
tithe grievance, remove the greatest source of complaint which titled-not in theory but in practice-to all that .Pie 'Feint'
ee
gees teen:tined in Ireland. Constitution could offer. Bart then, again, came te estion.)
Major C. BritlCE eulogized in the highestterinsthe speeches This Bill was exclusive -- Lo d cheers from the Oppo• al MO
of the Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire and the , Professing to take away' ascendancy,(u it took it only frt
.01/
Right Hon. Baronet the 'Weather for Cumberland, on a pre- party to give it to another.-(Loud He eiciu Gesl:
vious occasion. Notwithstanding the worn-out jokes of the answer the challenge from the opposite side, of tbeHenereiena
Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, and the quotation from tlernan who had just sat down. He talked of ;riving teetih Olt
his new drama of " Where is he now ?" of the Hon. and better municipal government, and asked if we ageeed t ieeego°l
coryerect to
Learned Member for Tipperary, they had proved most con- for English municipal reform why we should refuse to g
oratiolie
timing to the public, and set the true merits of the question local government, and quiet government, to the
in the clearest point of view. Nothing but the most consciena of Ireland. But this debate, in his opinion, with 1
.orceedea
tious apprehension of danger to our best religious and politi- this argument, and it was extremely important, had L,,,e fro°
dal institutions could have induced the Noble Lord and the all along on a mistake ; for the Bill transfer the be
joist
Right Hon. Baronet to take that course. It was the fashion existing exclusive bodies, to bodies which would. be eleeh 1301
on the other side of the House to taunt the Opposition with This was not the case in England, nor did the Eng': sa tlw
what was called the strange conjunction which had taken place tend as this Bill did, to centralise and invest all pose!' eras a
between the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Baronet the hands of the Government. He apprehended
tie
"noel-
Member for Tamworth. Why had these two eminent persons great distinction. The English Corporations had 0110re/ere
to P core
opposed themselves to the measures of those with whom they of electing their chief magistrate. In totens t sberiti:S:
were formerly associated, but because they were convinced towns and counties of themselves they appointed the
reside '-
that those measures were pernicious? Why bad they re- and in many cases they selected the judges
nounced place, but because they could not conscientiously the local courts. They talked of depriving
hold it on those terms ?-( Hear, hear.) Hon. Gentlemen rations of power. Why, what had they ? He judg:t no°g-
opposite had indeed clung to place, but they had not clung by the Report of the Commissioners-and he foneero stet
to power. There was a wide difference between place and The Hon. and Learned Member then said he felt sure were
power which they did not seem to be aware of ; but which Hon. Gentlemen in that House would be satisfied,wes as 11
they would hereafter discover. They might carry the measure Government without being torn by religious disseneei°,;ast, anue
through this House, but there was another tribunal to which the authority of the report had been the case of "BS be'
it must be submitted.-(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial without being inflicted with the machinery of this
the Irisb d
ody
Dint their 'iilt;
benches.) He did not mean te House of Lords, though he Bill allowed no power. Did Corporations aPP wet .a
did not doubt but that House would, as it always had done, nisters of justice ? No. Nor were they allovved, eell di
The se' nee
perform its duty conscientiously, uprightly, and firmly ; but two or three cases, to elect their sheriffs. With resr ett
he alluded to the great majority of the enlightened and re- not alter the qualification necessary for jurors. he thog ,
fleeting people of the empire. The delusion of spurious and to the appointment of the principal magistrates, :e nite..,
falsely so called liberality was fast passing away. The it more mischievous than the system prevailing. in de,");
people were beginning to be thoroughly alive to the restless land, and on which subject he had thought it
„ to divluor
character of the Catholic party, which seemed as though it when the English Municipal Bill was e
would be satisfied with in progre ciliation 1
nothin less than domination, and the House against the clause rendering. the aPPr roe e e
were resolved that the supremacy with the elPeresord
of the Protestant character the Home Office necessary to the appens. fence
our institutions, connected as it was with the most perfect periment had since been tried; and,
toleration, and the maintenance of the best interests of the they had of its operation, he should think thee
right in_lad
empire, should be preserved. Hon. Members on the other must consider that the Legislature were quit.. 12 he eweet
side accused his friends of raising a" No Popery" cry, where- tempting to expunge that clause; for, alt°_egentions, r'yor to
as it was they themselves who raised it, by the introduction of admit that there were many honourable ex Ajointro had,
such measures as this. If there were no other grounds for the great majority of the magistrates vshole ilf;sselniiticat
his resistance to this Bill than the declaration of the Hon. had been ratified by the Noble Lord (: ,ei, on P° loot
Gentleman opposite, that this Bill was to be an instalment of been placed on the list by those who acwd elem.' so aPPaseere
houghs gern bis
the debt due to the Catholics of Ireland, by which, of course, grounds.-( Loud cheering.) Nay, be
was meant repeal of the mews, and the utter subversion of , was this, that it had produced some effect on
oeeeeing e jell ;
Protestantism in that
country_( Cheers from the Opposition) on the other side of the House, who, et_ ag the all/1,150er
-if it were brought forward against him as an accusation, to principle at the time, had voted against taueber for the to bi
draw a distinction between the toleration of the Pretestant but now-and he alluded to the Hon. Mreendi wateriellYt he lia
religion and the intolerance of the Catholic, he would plead Hamlets in particular (Mr. Clay)--aPPea He theughhat Olt-
guilty to the charge.-( Hear, hear.) He would next refer to changed their opinions.-(Loud cheers.)
..s
-_for wee, b°dy.
the path taken by Catholics in that House. The interpretation a right to ask his Majesty's Government tele eethis n relitiesi
Y°llforcPr °a:P(3'6Bs3°V° tb
el
of an oath was a matter between a man and his own con- pose-with what object in view-do
science.-( Cries of "Question" from the Ministerial side.) in. Ireland ? Theyjdid not want them Wes 1
; them.
The subject might not be palatable to some gentlemen on the freedom, for they did not give 3 -

• <I
• t
7' ,f