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

04A

-
-'pectioe circumstances will require a separate consideration."
--(Loud cheers from the Opposition benches.) Was this an
authority,..e in favour of similar legislation for the two countries.
the Hear, hear.) In the measure introduced with regard to
on trish Church was the principle of appropriation. Those
hisprin,! (Sir J. Graham's) side of the House objected to that
• °Pie. Now, were those who argued for similar legisla-
tion for. the. two countries, prepared to extend the appropria-
Ze principle to England ?—( Hear, lean ) How would they
de e t such a proposition, if it were made? How could they
shatY. principle upon which they were now proceeding?
twas good for England was good for Ireland, it must
nee good
follow that what was good for Ireland must be good
‘1? England. There was a point adverted to last night by
1,• .
to.c,ltightßaronet, the Member for Launceston,
at! n showed still more strongly than perhaps any other the
tk‘_te of society in Ireland. He meant the letter written by
.1(7 Hon. and Learned Gentleman, the Member for Tipperary,
!. a clergyman who demanded his tithes. That letter did the
highest honour to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. It was
fc'nepwritten in the kindest terms, and in the best and purest
ee
mtg. It showed the terms of good neighbourhood which
existed between the Hon. and Learned Gentleman and the
FillerrgYtnan to whom it was addressed ; but still, notwithstand-
t7teits friendly tone, it was pregnant with danger and alarm.
a f . "Oh. and Learned Gentleman in substance said " I am
dorele,nd, I am a neighbour, I admit that your claim is legally
out, as a friend, I appeal to you whether, under the cir-
etlTstances in which I am placed, I can pay the demand you
make without the certain loss of my seat?"—( Loud cheers. )
country
there be a more convincing proof of the state of the
-iiiintrY than this ?—(Cheers.) The Hon. and Learned
iedeniber for Dublin had also, by his open and manful acknow-
ti great of the power which he possessed, given an addi-
t,Thal proof of the state of the country. He fairly admitted
IP he possessed a great--a dangerous--power ; and that very
"u'llission of the Hon. and Learned Member proved the dis-
teased state of society in Ireland. He did not mean any offence
the Roman Catholic Members of that House, or to any per-
so
tn
8 of the Roman Catholic persuasion, in the few observa-
ills which he was about to make upon priestly influence.
e ore the Emancipation Bill passed there was much anxiety
ascertain the extent of that influence, and in 1825 the
Honourablel._ and Learned Member for Dublin was examined
refore a Committee of the House on the subject.—( Hear,
the Roman
Being questioned as
.to what the influence of
itoman Catholic Clergy was likely to be in the event of
-6e Emancipation Bill passing, the Hon. and Learned
.erltleman replied that he was convinced their influence
a.• 1d be totally at an end, and that there would follow
the result of that measure an absence of the blind sub-
servience now paid to them. Being asked whether he thought
that there was any other cause which would still survive to
preserve their influence at elections, the Hon. and Learned
dGentleman replied that there could be none. The Hon. and
ined Member for Tipperary, who had been also examined
toTre the same Committee, in reply to certain questions put
said that the priests possessed influence at elections
hY because of the withholding of Catholic Emancipation.
• other questions, such as reform of Parliament, were brought
?rWard, the priests would have no influence but on the sub-
leet Of Catholic Emancipation that Hon. and 'Learned Gentle-
-241 said, in reason, in justice, and in sound sense, the priests
vuthasessed and e4ercised an influence.—(Cheers.) These were
ea Tipperary
of the Hon. and Learned Members for Dublin
and linperary before the passing of the Catholic Relief Bill.—
R,%,,(41d cheers.) Contrast those opinions with the evidence
en
in 1832, after the passing of the Emancipation Bill by
anper, of the county of Meath, in the Committee over
den Sir Henry Parnell presided. Mr. Napper in his evi-
artee said that the conduct of the Roman Catholic priests
kittee the passing of the Reform Bill tended to promote excite-
4(IPS arid agitation. The excitement which existed when he
e• first Nap Per) came to the country had been greatly in-p
ea, and had assumed a higher degree of warmth since the
hiisaing Of the Emancipation Bill. He ( Sir J. Graham) did not
to advert to th wehich habeen de from
e akaes B ,
y Romane Catholicsermons priests, but there waslivere onenot to
r,_overlooked. It was one elicited in the evidence before the
?!,Mmittee in 1832. It was an address delivered by a Roman
elLtholie priest to a portion of the British army, in the presence
re: ritish officer, and he (Sir J. Graham) quoted it the more
afttilY because on the occasion the priest being- confronted
*hie the Officer only took exception to the word " boys,"
h was the only one he denied having used. The evidence
111 follows.—[The Right Hon. Gentleman then read the
tiO'lelcc] He would now refer to the more important qu.es-
-11, Which was the vital question in this case. This question
kr,44l,Prupounded by the Noble Lord the Secretary at War last
who said " You have created this state of things by the
..• "'essions which you have made—are you prepared to undo
ittSe concessions now ?"—( Loud cheers from the Ministerial
sselichs.) This was a fair question to put, and he would an-
toier it frankl He would say in reply that the days of
Y.
otireles had passed away, the sun did not go back on the dial,
(II Popular concessions once made could not be retracted.—
tatr, hear.) He was the last person who would advise or
he
lellance such an attempt. It was not with him a ques.
tp,lol. inclination—(Loud cries of " Hear," from the Minis-
Benches)—it was not a question of inclination, for the
toyleitY of the case was such that he could give but
answer to the Noble Lord—that he was not prepared
if retract what had been already conceded.—( Hear, hear.)
enate, Cheers by which he was just now saluted were in-
jthLsu to imply that he wished to recal the Catholic
clesTueination Act, he would at once say that he had no such
pro ref he rejoiced to see the Roman Catholic population re-
cettlted in that House by those in whom they thought fit to
exear",e• But there was a wide difference between the free
ehait'lo of the Parliamentary franchise without limitation of
Aleiheei is to Catholic or Protestant, and the principles of inu-
tile' government sought to be established by this Bill. But
teem not all. The Noble Lord said, " If you cannot go
tot will you do? You cannot stand still—you must
tesa(ie' ward ; that is, you must make further and further con-
dea,„lrlt.s." But was there no other danger in this ? Let him
ties re to the House one of the calamities which he was sa-
-134' Would be the first and imniediate effect of passing this
Zel) t The Hon. and Learned Member opposite (Mr. O'Con-
hlte „mati told the people of Dublin that when this Bill passed
self law, they should have a roaring mayoralty, for he him-
__.(4,oeld condescend to be the first magistrate of that city.
satisfies'', hear, hear.) This was no vain threat. He was
bseti that it was really true. Let the House imagine the
lip aFeetillo• of the Council in the Council Chamber of Dub-
tbeter this Bill had been passed. There would be the mace
srva2',„:4lle ; there would be the Hon. and Learned Member
Pre".`" 111 his own robes and chain of office, as the
ajtysltdent of the Assembly • there would be the mock solem-
Petiti debate ; the subject of discussion would probably be a
the i.°l!. for the abolition of tithes—the subject of invective
'elleersesistanee of the House of Lords—( Cheers and counter-
Arinei ,--the resistance of the House of Lords to the grand
reeniaPrle of the appropriation of ecclesiastical property to
the Purposes, to which, as appeared by the evidence of
p,„,"• and Learned Member for Tipperary, the Whigs as
the CY were pledged now and for ever ; and this would be
difkorist snecimen of the Noble Lord's normal schools for the
This, 1,11 of sound political opinions.—(Great cheering.)
NI real was persuaded, would be the first step towards
4%41 lzation of the Hon. and Learned Member's darling
ss?ntta"to Which, let the House do what it would, he would
'Nettle to cling—a native Parliament assembled in College-
Of 'without the nuisance, as he pronounced it to be,
there second hereditary Chamber.—(Loud cheers.) Call
sonati what they pleased—call them normal schools for
sefe,„ Political opinion—he (Sir J. Graham) on his con—
Xterro'e they believed would be nothing more nor less than
be 111 ,I,ols „
the 2 , for treason and rebellion, and that they would
Cede tk ,ast fatal symptom which would immediately pre-
the two breach so much desired in the legislative Union of
the„ had eountries.—(Tremendous cheering.) Be it so. Reason
the'io tried, and reason failing, there was only one resort to
Perars:the ultimo ratio of force. The Hon. Member for Tip-
-011 a former evening, in a speech of much eloquence
Poinreirt splendour, as usual, terminated his address with the
Illeasur remark Remember, we are seven millions, and this
tunfes e roust and shall be carried." This grated, he must
What ik extremely harshly upon his ear. It sounded some-
it 0,,11_," a threat. It was a mode of argument, if argument
ea%csio'" he called, which ought not to be introduced in the dis-
thr
dpreeate•ns of that House, and which they could not sufficiently
it a
mushy a__ , ear.) He should be . sorry to meet that
b i'Ytning that could be construed into a retort. But
, e
'gland an.,rememberedScotland
that there were Protestants not only in
rot,st_ u Scotland, but also in Ireland, and that these
kid • ants had but v
, le calor ery recently strengthened their position,
dime" to tl la9ce with the advice of that House, and in obe-
krnidies, .50 will of his Majesty, had laid aside all secret as-
tlew stood and empty pageants which attended them, and
tirKi tria,„%unned together in one body, determined firmly
estatdial;lrnue7, and in the face of day, to defend the Protestant
nseier,tio ,t as fixed by law in this country, and which in his
tni,on us opinion, had a far higher sanction than any which
Arid" a
tal
oCuortl d confer upon it.—( Cheers.) It was once our
f
• utestanti glory that we were the defence and support o
tri thn,o , sal throughout Europe, and should it be said that
ire latter
ee extaded,daanyds, when ourwas consolidated, our em-
power
tat:" Could not ourti influence commanding—that we, 1
dolletliYl smurrender our el'"rovtaensctlaunist
prieetse,
and
the fury vanquish,
brethren
eSnp
rovercome, would
and aban-
of the demaftogue the vengeance of the
catin the madness of the ;eople,?—( Loud and 1.0n5-
siobi ued cheering.)
0..,
.ev courseNo ; let them take the bolder and the
,
io"°.lestiC tsin Let_ them. secure to all classes of his 4ajcsty s
the Perfect
without distinction of sect or creed, equal
and full en_P_imteenett freedom of a representative Government,
(Vial and
.s?curity of life and of property under
`'neers firmly administered and impartially executed.—
tYran. • But let them do anything rather than submit to thz
his teal snirit of
Je...eonscion , Catholic domination.—( Loud cheers ) On
coveernernhe believed that this Bill as tendered by his Ma-
Prienal surrenrit' was neither more nor less than an uncon-
en.d was whilst the proposal of his Right Hon.
o..lllcit,s. compromise, founded on just and equal
jeh.sitatincr the-e grounds he would give his cordial and
" ers. b 1-Ipport to this resolution.—( Loud and protracted
Aftelf.,
shame" laPse of two or three minutes, in consequence of the
Si r,
\raker,
the'l3Yeu have E rore to address the House. ' I am glad,
lier laze er.iabled me to recover for a few seconds from
..4daot has
.religious eloquence with which the Right Hon.
hear,
1...1111.5t thought property overwhelm us.__( Laughter,
tree_Right 110 I shall not, on the present occasion, follow
deal, per•
ape,utlaronet through the matter of his speech ; a
t 0 I car °PPertl shall have occasion to make use of at
this and, I "V. If the House shall refuse to do justice
argun'ghtfure_an assure the Right Hon. Baronet, that he has
that ttlents foretiished me with al additional number of powerful
iZ,,!epeal of the Union.—( Cheers.) As to
Sere:art of the it Hon. Baronet's speech, in which he en uP(Ill the I
" creste task of reading the evidence of those two most
Meta). I and impartial witnesses, Mr. Carroll and Mr.
shall pay very little attention to that at present.

Bat I must take occasion to call the attention of the House
and of the Right Hon. Baronet particularly to a mistake
which he has fallen into as to my personal friend Mr. Burke.
Mr. Burke, he says, was confronted with Mr. Matson._:..
(Cries of " No, no.") I admit that that. is not the fact; they
were not so confronted; what I say is, that the Hon. Baronet
stated that they had been so confronted.—( Cries of " He did,
he did !") There is one word attributed to Mr. Burke which
I am quite sure no Catholic clergyman ever used, namely, the
word "heretic ;"—a word which I defy Mr. Matson, or any
one else, to have heard coming out of the mouth of a Catholic.
clergyman,—( Hear, hear.) Before I enter upon the discus-
sion of the important question which is this night to be decided
by us, the House will perhaps allow me to make a few obser-
vations in reference to what fell from the Hon. and Learned
Member for Bandon arid from the Hon. and Gallant Officer

(Sir Henry Hardinge) last night. The Learned Sergeant
the Member for Bandon commenced his speech by reading
some of the clauses of this Bill, and comparing them with the
enactments of the English Corporation Act. Now that being
a matter which we can better discuss when we get into Com-
mittee on the Bill, I shall not proceed to answer the
Learned Sergeant's objections upon these pOints at present.
—( Hear, hear.) Having gone through these objections, the
Learned Sergeant then proceeded to attack the character of
the clergyman who he alleged had said that he would refuse
to prepare for death any man who voted for the Knight of
Kerry. This was given on the evidence of a gentleman who
heard it from some one, who is not himself named, and I ask,
is this evidence on which to convict a gentleman and a clergy-
man of such an unchristian declaration ?—( Hear, hear.) Be-
sides Mr. O'Sullivan wrote letters both to the papers in Ire-
land and to the Morning Chronicle, in which he utterly denies
having used the words attributed to him. The statement was
made in the first instance without the name of the party impli-
cated being mentioned ; Mr. Croley conceiving himself to be
referred to in it, first came forward and denied that be had said
what was stated, and then he was told that he was not the per-
son alluded to ; and after that Mr. O'Sullivan came forward
and denied the charge also.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Then the
Learned Sergeant referred to the address said to have been de-
livered by the Rev. Mr. Keogh to his congregation at Leigh

lin-bridge ; but in like manner, the Learned Sergeant never
added, that that Rev. Gentleman had complained bitterly of
having such unchristian sentiments attributed to him, and had
gone down to the newspaper office for the purpose of publish-
ing a denial of having used that language—a denial to which
no answer was published.--( Hear, hear.) Under these cir-
cumstances, and with those omissions, I submit that the Learned
Sergeant ought not to have mentioned those two cases at all.
—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the course taken by the
Hon. and Gallant Officer opposite (Sir H. Hardinge), I must
say I think he acted rather unfairly in quoting the evidence of
Mr. Carter Hall, who was examined on the last day of the
Committee's sitting, and 14 hen Mr. Keogh was not in town to
hear and meet what he said.
An HON. MEMBER on the Ministerial benches, either Ser-
geant Jackson or Sir Henry Hardinge, we believe Mr. Keogh
was in town at the time.—( Another voice on the opposite side
—" He was, he was, and in the next room.")
Mr. O'CONNELL—WeII, whether he was there or not
has very little to do with it. The fact is, Mr. Keogh denied
the charge most positively in The Carlow Sentinel, and that
denial was held back. Besides, there are some remarkable
passages in Hall's cross-examination which it would have been
well to have mentioned also. Hall was asked in what dress
the clergyman was who spoke what he alleged ? He replied—
" I hardly know how to describe the dress of a Roman Ca-
tholic priest; he had on a surplice, and over that a large
cross." Now there is nobody, who knows anything about the
dress of a Catholic priest but will see how inaccurate this is.
—(Hear, hear.) He was then asked further on the same
point, and he replied, " We took off the large cross that he
had on his back, but underneath that he wore a surplice over
a coarse black gown." Now after this is there any one who
ever saw a Catholic priest who will not at once see how im-
possible it is Mr. Hall can have been where he describes.
But after all, in any case, Mr. Keogh denied the whole
statement, and that should have been enough. The next
thing the Gallant Officer proceeded to do was to accuse me of
raising an anti-Protestant spirit in Ireland ; and how did he
prove that ? He referred to a letter of Lord Kenmare's, in
which his Lordship expressed his dissent from my politics;
so, forsooth, because I happen to differ in opinions with a Ca-
tholic, that is in itself sufficient argument to show that I am
opposed to Protestantism.—(Hear, hear.) Then, in addition
to this, the Learned Member for Banden read some garbled
passages from some electioneering placards, which I am ac-
cused of having circulated. In the case of Limerick, lam
accused of having published an address in favour of two gen-
lemen, one a Protestant and the other a Catholic—( Hear,
hear, hear),—nnd with having declared that whoever would
vote against them was an enemy to his country. I will just
trouble the House with a few words from an election address
which I hold in my hand, which will show that in Carlow at
least lam not to be held responsible for all placards of the
kind. This placard runs thus:—" Mr. O'Connell has no ob-
jection to Bruen. He says he is a good fellow and a good
landlord.—( Laughter, and hear, hear.) He has no notion
of supporting Vigors—( Renewed laughter) ;—so hurrah for
Henry Bruen, Daniel O'Connell, and freedom of election."
—(Loud laughter.) Another assertion of the Honourable
and Gallant Member, to which I must allude, is one which
he said he made upon the authority of Lord Hatherton ;
namely, that the clause disfranchisiug the forty shilling free-
holders was written in my own handwriting. Now I declare
that Lord Hatherton said no such thing.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) What then was my conduct at the time of passing
the Emancipation Act ? Why I it was who, with other gentle-
men of the same views, prepared and signed a petition, pray-
ing the House not to pass the Bill at all if it were to be given
upon the terms of destroying the forty-shilling freeholders.—
(Hear, hear.) It was at a subsequent period to this, that
when the clause relating to the forty-shilling freeholders was
submitted to me, I recommended an alteration by which the
franchise should be taken away in cases where it was assigned
for life only, and not where it was in fee or perpetual inheri-
tance.—( Hear, hear.) I wish now to nail the attention of the
House to the real state of the question before it, what the
principle involved in it is, and what the result of it may pro-
bably be. Now this is a question which I will reply to nega-
tively. The question then is not whether we shall put an end
to the Irish Corporations ; that is a point upon which every
one is agreed, every body has given them up entirely ; and
declared them to be corrupt and profligate to the last degree,
influencing and at the same time polluting the sources of public
justice.—( Hear, hear.) Of all the Members who have ad-
dressed the House upon the subject, they are all so honourable,
there is not one to defend these Corporations, not one to stand
up for them I There is the Noble Lord the Member for North
Lancashire, and the Noble Lord for South Lancashire, two
Noble Lords North and South ; then there is the Hon. and
Gallant Officer, and the Hon. and Learned Sergeant the
Member fur Bandon, and the Hon. and Learned Recorder
—whose face is just brightened up by a smile, but who wore a
countenance not two minutes ago very fit for an undertaker—
(Laugliter)—even the Hon. and Learned Recorder had not a
word to say for the poor corporators.—( Hear, hear.) They
all agreed to throw them quietly overboard. Amongst so
many speeches one hardly knows how to select one above an-
other ; but upon the whole I think I must give the preference
to the speech of the Noble Lora for North Lancashire ; there
is a cordiality about all he said which is ,quite delightful.—
( Laughter.) But as to blaminc, the corporations, all I want
to know is, when did these Noble Lords and Hon. and Learned

Gentlemen first find out that these corporations were so very
bad ?—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") When did this new
light shine upon this galaxy of talented rulers on Irish affairs?
—(Hear, bear.) All I can say is, that I think it very cruel
of the Hon. Gentlemen to find it out at the precise time they
do, and consent to abolish all at once these venerable corpora-
tions—

" Abandon'd in their utmost need,
By those their former bounty fed"
( Loud laughter.) Now here is, first, one specimen of the
wisdom of our ancestors, the beauty of these Corporations.
There was a document of 1816, " Resolved unanimously, that
Robert Peel, Esq. deserves our warmest thanki, and those of
all loyal subjects, for his true Protestant principles, and par-
ticularly fur his heroic opposition to that public, nuisance—.
(Laughter)—who designated our constitutional body a beg-
garly Corporation ; and that the Orange Peel with the Orange
Lily shall henceforward be the combined emblem of true
loyalty." Oh ! little did the poor Dublin corporators think
how blighting would the contact eventually prove of what
they considered substances of a congenial nature.—( Continued
laughter.)
Sir H. H AR DING E—When was that resolution passed?
Mr. O'CONNE L L—lt was in 1816, shortly before the
picture was voted to the Right Hon. Baronet, which he got
leave to pay for himsslf—( Shouts of laughter)—but what can
you think of the situation of those persons who are subject
to the government of such a body as this corrupt Corpora-
tion, by which justice is poisoned to the source, by which
partisanship is practised by sheriffs and sub-sheriffs, by
grand juries and petty juries—all admitted abuses now, but
all existing when the Right Honourable Gentlemen and
the Noble Lords who at various times filled the office of
Secretary to Ireland were in power..—( Cheers.) I hurl these
abuses which they never even attempted to remove when they
were, from the nature of their office, called upon to do so—in
the name of my country, I hurl these abuses at them now.
How can they account for having- suffered these nuisances—not
to remain undisturbed—but to become still more offensive ?
What reason can they give for allowing the pure waters of
justice to be made a mephitic pool, which, instead of their dif-
fusing gladness, and health, and vigour, spreads pestilence and
death around them ?—( Cheers.) Now I am told that the
state of Ireland is diseased. Need I, after the topic to which
I have just adverted, and which can't be questioned—need I
ask you who has made it so?—(Loud cheers.) You (pointing
to the Opposition side) have committed the crime, and with
singular consistency you desire to inflict on us the punishment.
___(Loud cheers.) The Noble Lord ( Stanley) is, I see dip-
ping pen in ink. He may dip it in gall if he chooses, but he
cannot weaken the position which I have laid down.—( Hear,
hear.) Now let the House consider the question before it.
The Noble Lord (Egerton) who made the motion, consider-
ing the kind of job that was put upon him, spoke with as much
moderation as possible, and dipped his fingers as little as the
matter which he had to deal with would permit, in the bitter
sources from which the topics of his speech were supplied.
But still his speech conveyed a gross insult to the people of
Ireland, for which he is, perhaps, to be excused, as he
could not avoid, in the position which he took up, offering
it. But let me again remind the House, that after centuries of
suffering on the part of the people—after the grossest bigotry
and partisanship being displayed by the bodies who had the
appointment of those who were constituted the arbiters of
property and life, we have at last arrived at the unanimous
conclusion that this corporate system is to be abolished;
and having resolved on that, the second question is, what
system is to be substituted in the place of that which
must be extinguished ? 'Tis agreed on all hands that clear
off must go sheriffs and sub-sheriffs, town clerks and re-

corders, all at " one fell swoop," must be cut off.—(Laughter
ind cheers.) Who arc to be put in their places? I ask—
I demand, Sir, in the name of my constituency, the substitu-
tion of a body identical, not in its details, but identical in its
principle, with that which has been given to Scotland and
England. —( Loud cheers.) .That is my demand—nothingshort
of that will satisfy me.—( Continued cheers.) The Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth says my plan is to make
ill the inhabitants of Ireland equal, and that is what the
Catholics themselves desired. Sir, it is true that all the Ca-
tholics ever asked, though it was insinuated they desired
more, was equality, and equality they have..—( Cheers.)
How? By destroying institutions whose natural founda-
tions are the principles of freedom, and because Protestants
can no longer monopolise privileges and rights intended for
the whole of the people—by suffering no civil rights to apper-
tain to any portion of the inhabitants of that country
deny, Sir, that that is an equality which can be beneficial to
any people having the least pretence to the enjoyment of
freedom.—( Cheers.) It is an equality which may be boasted
of by the most despotic monarch and enslaved people on the
earth ; but it is an equality which the people of Ireland have
no desire to share in common with them—( Loud cheers.)
Sir, I have always said that my principle of equality, as ap_
plied to Ireland, was not to pull down the Protestants to my
level, but to raise the Catholic to the level of the Protestant.
—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) It is no base compromise in
order to subvert the institutions from which Catholics are ex-
cluded, and to make all equally slaves.—(Loud cheers.)
I will never consent to that.—( Loud cheers, with some
ironical cries of " Hear, hear !" from the Opposition,
amidst which that of Mr. Emerson Tennent might be distin-
guished.) I hear the voice calling itself the representative
of Belfast. Now, why should that Hon. Member, in a speech
(which might, perhaps, have been written before it was
spoken) which he delivered on introducing, to the notice of
the House the petition from Belfast, attempt to place the
question with reference to that city at least on religious
grounds, when it was notorious that there were 22,000 of the
inhabitants who were Roman Catholics, they belonging, too,
to the poorer classes, and 58,000 of the richer classes, who
were Protestants ? Now on what religious ground could he
rest the question, or upon what principle could it be refused
to the 22,000 that they should be suffered to share the privi-
leges of the 53,000 Protestants? This is a fact which shows
the disposition of those opposed to giving the Irish people a
just participation in equal rights : is is a family feature, which
enables one to discover the true principles of his party, that the
Hon. and Learned Member for Belfast should come down
here, and, in a well arranged speech, rest upon this difference
in religious opinion in favour of Protestantism, not as a reason
for making Belfast free, but for the purpose of preventing that
town from enjoying the benefits of Municipal Reform. Having
alluded to the Corporation of Belfast, I may as well state that
the corporators there belonged to the genuine sort. There were
13 of them. They had control over charitable funds to the
amount of 5,0001. There are 3,0001. now forthcoming; the other
2,000/. have disappeared. It was charity money, and the Belfast
corporators, in order to demonstrate how anxious they were to
comply with the adage " charity ought to begin at home,"
retained amongst five or six of themselves 2,0001. of the money
left to them in trust for the benefit of others.—( Loud laugh-
ter and cheers.) Well, to come back to the quest:oa before
Well, we are to get rid of the Corporations. That is
admitted on all hands. And again, I repeat my demand re-
spectfull:-, but firmly, for the same measure of municipal re-
form in Ireland as you have granted to Scotland and England.
The Scotch Corporations were in the same situation with the
Irish ; they were self-elected—they were corrupt : there was
no identity of feeling between them and the population of the
towns. No man stood up to defend the old Corporations of
Scotland, every one threw them overboard ; but did any man
dare to raise his voice in that House for the purpose of propo-
sing the extinction of the Scotch Corporations.—( Cheers.)
If any one had the temerity to do so, how would the proposi-
tion be received here, or how would it be treated by the inha-
bitants of Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Paisley ? I tell you that
it would not be submitted to, and the Scotch would be what
they have never been, cowards and traitors to their native
land, if they consented to such a !degradation. Well, Scot-
land has profited by the change, and much good may it do her.
No man in Scotland rejoices more heartily than I do at the
use which she has made of it. Next came England, when
your Corporations were corrupt, and profligate, and bigoted—
where Dissenters were excluded, first by law, and next by un-
just trammels.—(Hear, hear.) You destroyed the old sys-
tem, but was it proposed to annihilate the Corporations
altogether ? No man dreamed of such a proposal.
Scotland got a new system—England has got it, not of the
same value as that conferred on Scotland, but that is not the '
fault of the House of Commons. England has, at all events,
acquired the principles of popular control and publicity of
i
proceedings. As I said before, Scotland has got t ; England
has got it; will you tell me that Ireland is not to get it.—
What I talk to my friend Mr. .Sheil of having threatened that
Ireland would right herself, if ultimately wronged, without
hope and prospect of redress.—( Hear, hear.) God forbid,
Sir, that I should ever be guilty of the sin of despairing—
( Cheers)—with respect to my country. Talk not to me of
compromise. I'll enter into no compromise with you.—( Re-
peated cheers.) I will have the principles of vigilant popu-
lar control and publicity of proceedings carried into operation
with regard to the Corporations of Ireland.—( Cheers.) The
Right Hon. Baronet proposes a different plan for us—a royal
commission, forsooth The people of Ireland have not sense
enough to manage their own affairs, and a commission of lu-
nacy must be issued against them. That is your mode of
governing the country—( Loud cheers)--that is the Right
Hon. Baronet's splendid plan. But then it is said there
is a question of religious supremacy mixed up with this ques-
tion of Municipal Reform. And here I must do the Noble
Lord (Egerton) the justice to admit that he abstained as
much as possible from any bigoted views of the measure
before us. That credit must be given to the Noble Lord
(Stanley) and the Right Honourable Baronet (Graham),
his fellow rider in the Dilly, who show extreme purity of
conscience in doing injustice to a nation, and prove their zeal
in the cause of piety, by sanctioning the continuance of reli-
gious persecution.—( Loud cheers.) They have placed this
question on religious grounds, and are terrified at the idea of
the reform in Irish Corporations, lest the Protestants should
be converted to Catholicity. Why these bodies have been
preaching and practising piety and Protestantism these 300
years, and how is it that they never could manage to convert
even a solitary Catholic during that perisd.—( Hear, hear,
and laughter.) I fancy I can sec the Hon. Member far Sligo
falling on his knees, uplifting his eyes, and giving way to a
burst of solemn supplication against the horrors of Popery, at
die contemplation of those bodies, as soon as they are con-
verted into a propaganda for the promotion of the Catholic re-
ligion. —( Much laughter.) Sir, the scene now enacted in
this House—the scene which Ireland now presents, is the same
that it has exhibited for 700 years.—( Cheers. ) Sir John
Davies, 220 years ago, published a tract discussing the reason
why Ireland never was conquered. He has been in his grave
for 200 years; from his tomb he shall address a speech to those
who would exclude the Irish from the benefit of good govern-
ment.—( Hear.) In 1614 Sir John Davies says, " This then I
note as a great defect in the civil policy of this kingdom, in that
for a space of 350 years after the conquest of Ireland has been
attempted, English laws have not been communicated to the
Irish for their benefit and protection, though they have
earnestly desired and sought the same. "—( Cheers.) Is not that
applicable to our present condition? Here am I now desir-
ing the protection and benefit of the English laws.—(Cheers.)
Sir John proceeds, " In a word, if the English could not go-
vern Ireland by the sword, or root the population out of the
soil, they must remain as brambles in their eye, and thorns
in their side, and see their conquest never come."—( Loud
cheers.) If the laws of England had been established,' and
impartially administered—if, in the reigns of Henry, John, and
Richard, the country had been divided into counties, justices
sent half yearly to punish malefactors—if their fairs and mar-
kets had been assimilated to the English, and corporate
towns originated—assuredly Ireland would have been reduced
by the salutary effects of equal laws and good government—
( Loud cheers.) There would have been a perfect union be.
tween the nation—(Cheers again)—and consequently a per-
feet conquest of Ireland ; for the conquest never could be
perfected, nor the two "countries enter into concord, until
they are subjected to one King, one allegiance, and one
law."—(Tremendous cheering followed the reading of this
extract.) This was 221 years ago ; and here am I now, a
descendant of that people thus described, debating the same
question which this historian dwelt upon, and telling you not
to dare to insult us any longer, by admitting that Scotland and
England have obtained municipal franchises, and yet, under a
paltry pretext, calling upon us to bow down in obedience to
your will, while we are denied the privilege which you have
gained.-( Cheers.) I tell you that, ,as we are " subjected
to one King and one allegiance," there shall and there must be
but " one law."—( Loud cheers.) The Union, indeed I h
there a union between the countries? There is a parchment
union. But I ask you now if the Government of this country
was carried on in Ireland, and that a measure for Irish Corpo-
rate Reform was passed by a Parliament sitting there, and yet
thatia similar measure of. relief was denied to the English,
what in that case would you do with the parchment union?
Tear it in pieces, of course.—( Cheers.) Or, what is much
more likely, break with your good broad swords the head of
the man who presumed to offer such an affront to your country.
—( Loud cheers.) So England, so Scotland in accordance
with her brave conduct at Bannockburn, would act under such
circumstances. And do you mean to say that what you would
not dare to tell England or Scotland, you are at liberty to call
on Ireland to submit to ?—( Cheers.) The men of Ireland arc
men who may shrink from peril and love not liberty ? I deny it.
—( Cheers.) I, as one of them, may seem to shrink from
danger in order to avoid a violation of conscience, which, rather
than commit, lam ready to bear with any taunt ; but I mistake
much those who sent me here, and the whole Irish nation, if
the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Baronet, or any other of
the pious and pure protectors of corporate abuses, can, if equal
civic privileges and rights are denied to the Irish people, pre-
vent the repeal of the union, if not the ultimate separation of
the two countries ; for while we live and move we will never
despair of achieving for ourselves the liberty which you deny
us.—( Loud and long continued cheers.). But we are told again
and again that the concession of just claims will end in !he
triumph of Catholics over Protestants. Now, let me remind
the Noble Lord, who ()tight to have read the history of the
country over which lie was appointed to legislate, that since the
Reformation the Catholics have obtained power three times,
and never in the slightest degree abused it. But it is mere
trifling with the question to suppose that the Catholics would
use their power in a big* manner. Why, I have a return
to prove that the efficient control over the Corporations will
be vested, for the greater part, in the hands of' Protestant?.
In Belfast the Protestants far exceed the Catholics ; in
Dublin the Catholics arc in the proportion of two to one, and
in the other towns of three to one ; but let this be recollected,
that almost every Protestant will be a voter, from their being
the most wealthy class, while there will be proportionably few
Catholic electors. There are thirty Catholic Members in this
House for Ireland ; that as the Catholics, who are 7-Bthi of