The Sun.
London, England, 1836-07-01 00:00:00

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

The Suir Navigation Bill with amendments, was broug
down from the Lords.

CONFERENCE.

Their Lordships requested a Conference in Committee-
room No. 5, on the subject of their -Lordships' Reasons for
not agreeing to the Amendments of the Commoni to the
Irish Municipal Bill.—(Hear' hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that this House do
agree to a Conference with the House of Lords.--Agreed
to.

'rho following Members, amongst others, were appointed
to manage the Conference :—Lord John Russell,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. P. Thomson, Sir
John Cam Hobhouse, Lord Morpetb, Mr. Cutlar Fergus-
son, and the Attorney-General for Ireland.
The Managers of the Conference having returned,

The, C HANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated
at' the Bar, that he 'had to repeat to the House, that
the Managers of the Conference on behalf of the House of
Commons had met the Lords. The Conference
on the part of their Lordships had been managed by
the Duke of Wellington and others ;—and he had to
acquaint the House that the Lords, having taken
into consideration the Reasons given by the House of
Commons, for disagreeing with the several amend-
ments made by their Lordships, do insist upon some
of the amendthents with which the House of Commons dis-
agreed, for which they have given their reasons, and do
not insist upon other amendments to which the House
of Commons had disagreed—they had agreed to some
amendments made ,by the House without amendment, but
had disagreed to others.

Lord J. RUSSELL moved that they should be read,
which was accordingly done by the Clerk of the House. The
reading of these reasons appeared to excite a considerable sen-
sation in the House. After it had somewhat subsided,
Lord J. RUSSELL said, I rise, Sir, to address the House
upon the subject of the amended Irish Corporation Bill, as
returned from the House of Lords, and I think that those
who agree with us on the original formation of that Bill will
agree with me in thinking that after hearing the reasons
given by the Lords, and what the amendments are upon which
they insist, it is not possible for us to hope to come to a satis.

factory settlement of this.. Merit important question under any
such circumstances. —( Loud dwell, An'iong the minor
ameadonentS., therc is. one .Of n 6 slight importlnce—naincly,
that by which the vthorc of the Corporate property is trans-
ferredto the Commissione;'s Y., to a Geo; I V:, where such
subsist. I cannot omit to note that tl:!9 ie art amendment
of some importance ; but, Sir, the Lords have jialed, and
in their reasons have very strongly supported that static tent,
that there is one Vi'l.tieltA of the AM in which they have not
been able to concur. Midi 1.:! ? Sir, that one
principle of the Bill is the very princiP.l.: gr:e it vigour
arid vitality—( Loud cheers)—that principle wattli rtlpl,lo it
consistent with the constitutional fre:alorn of these realms—
( Renewed cheers)— that principle, from the operation
of which we expected to give content to the people of
the towns of Ireland—( Loud checrs)—and when that
one principle is refused and denied to us, and when it is so
elearly stated that no concession will be made on this point,
I can, only submit that it is unnecessary fur Its to take spy
further time for consideration,--( Vehement cheering,) That
principle we have long anti deeply considered upon that prin-
ciple we have over and over again declared our opinion, in de-
bate and 'on division, from the very first day upon which the
House was first addressed upon the subject, in the speolt of
his Majesty from the throne, and I cannot for an instant sup.
pose that now, upon the last day of June, wt.', the House of
Commons, are prepared to surrender the principle uptia
we have so solemnly decided.—( Cheers.) I think, there-
fore, that as there can be but one opinion upon the subject
among those who formed the large majority upon the last oc-
casion on which the House decided upon this question, it
will be quite unnecessary for me to enter now into any length-
ened statement of the reasons upon which our opinions arc
founded—to enter now into a description of the advantages of
local and popular municipal government, or to endeavour to
expose or to confute any reasons by which the adverse view of
things is sustained. But, Sir, I cannot help calling the at-
tention of this House to some words in the reasons of the him-Ise
of Lords which induce me to take a less dark and less despair-
ing view of this greatqucstion than I have hitherto done. It
has long been my opinion, that whatever the Government you
wish to establish in Ireland, you should endeavour to make it
rest on stable principles, and that there was nothing so dan-
gerous as to be adopting from day to day, and in one part of
the Government and another part of the Government, diffe-
rent principles with regard to the rule and Government of
that country. I had been strongly confirmed in that opinion
by the differences which I saw prevail so many years on these
benches—when, on a subject deeply involving the interests of
Ireland, exciting all the pAssions, provoking all those religious
feelings which it was desirable tc keep tranquil—when I saw
the members of the same Government on these benches differ-
ing and disputing as much as any ministry and any opposition
were ever seen to differ and dispute._( Hear, hear.) I think
my Noble Friend the Member for North Lancashire, who now
sits opposite, must have imbibed the same opinion as myself on
this subject, because he must be aware of the difficulties which
arose with respect to the great Irish question, when the mem-
bers of the Government were expressing each his different
opinions, and voting in the divisions of the House, some on one
side and some on the other. I do not believe his seriously ex-
pressed opinion could be, that it would be for the advantage of
this country that such a difference should exist ; I believe that
both parties concurred in this, that one principle or the other
ought to prevail with respect to the Government of Ireland.
But if that be admitted, I think I may assume it to be im-
portant in an equal degree, that the two Houses of Parliament
should not entertain, unalterably, opinions totally discordant
as to the system of government which ought to be pursued.
And I can conceive no question on which it could be
more dangerous, on which it could be more calamitous,
that the Houses of Parliament should differ than on the
paramount principles on which the Government of Ireland
should be conducted.—( Cheers.) I will say, further, that I
cannot conceive, and I do not think, the Lords in their reasons
wish it to be imagined that this is a question of a different na-
ture. But in the prospect and in the immediate view of that
calamity, I think I can gather some hope from the words used
in the reasons of the Lords, and I will repeat the whole of
those words, that the House may judge of them.—[The
Noble Lord here read the passage, which was to the effect
that the Lords still entertained the hope that the two Houses
would continue to maintain the good understanding which
had happily hitherto subsisted between them, and that,
in the zealous discharge of their duty, there might at
no distant period be devised such a measure for the ad-
ministration of the local affairs of the cities and towns of
Ireland as would effect a real improvement, and tend
to the promotion of peace in that country.) Now, know-
ing the principles which we have maintained, knowing
the principles to which we have adhered, I think the
Lords would hardly have expressed such a hope unless they
expected that at no distant period they might agree to the
measure, on the principles on which the present Bill is
founded. —(Hear, hear.) If that be the view that is taken, I
much lament that the House of Lords did not take the present
time for acting on it.—(Cheers.) I exceedingly lament that,
disregarding the advice of some of the greatest, and wisest, and
most experienced among them, they did not feel that, if the
question were to be settled--if they looked to an end to the
differences existing between the two Houses—they did not
take the present moment for terminating it, when the content-
ment they would give to Ireland would be pure and unalloyed,
instead of postponing it to distant times, when it may be mixed
with other elements.—(Much cheering.) I trust that every
possible means will be resorted to—l can hardly say in the
words of the House of Lords, to maintain the good understand-
standing that now prevails between the two Houses—but to
bring about a better understanding than now prevails. I am
disposed, then, to rely on the hopeheld out to me in this para-
graph. I do say, in conformity with what has been in former
times the course of the House of Lords, in conformity with
what I think ought to be the course of the House of Lords, if,
in a great measure of this kind, the majority of the House of
Commons remain firm to their principles—if that majority, so
remaining firm to their principles, are supported by public
opinion—(Loud cheers)—l maintain the hope, I anxiously
cherish the hope, that the time may come—perhaps
within a feiv:months—when the settlement of this question
may be effected, and when the prevalence of the rea-
sons which have given rise to this disagreement may yield
to the general opinion of the House of Commons and the
people.—( Cheers.) I am sure if did not entertain that
hope, I should despair of the British. Constitution.—( Great
cheering.) I can conceive no Constiution mote inconvenient
than one in which the House of Coemoes and the people
whom they represent being of one opnion, another House of
Parliament is determinately, perseveringly, and unyieldingly
of the contrary opinion.—(Renewed cheers.) The Lords
have stated it as a matter of sincere rerret with them that the
more important amendments which thy made have not been
acceded to by this House. Thus they admit that the more
important of their amendments this 'louse has certainly not
been disposed to adopt ; and that I think will be a sufficient
justification to us, if, at all events, as retards the more impor-
tant principle we should not be disposedlo give way. I should
probably close my observations with tlb hope which I have
ventured to express, and with a declaraion of the determina-
tion which I am resolved to adhere o by every possible
means, to infuse into the Government of Ireland and the le-
gislation for that country the principles -.)f equity and justice,
if it were not that complaints have been hack greatly affecting
my conduct, and which have been so nterwoven with the
question, that I consider it my duty not altogether to pass
them over.--( Hear, hear.) Sir, it is easy in this House,
without committing any breach of the prisileges of this House,
to refer to matters which have passed in conversation, or in
another place; and no person can say, 'eat of all can you, Sir,
say, that the speaker is then alluding to that which took place
in another House of Parliament. Undou)sedly to allude to
what passes in another House of Parliament is an irregularity,
but, on special occasions, when Gentlemen have found them-
selves compelled to do so, they have always been able to avoid
the use of words that would bring them within the orders of
this House. I have repeatedly heard such allusions.—( Hear,
hear.) I remember that when Lord Castlereagh made a
statement in this House with respect to the conduct of Lord
Lansdowne during his administration, Lord Lansdowne again
stated the whole matter in the House of Lords, and went
into his defence in that House.—( Hear, hear.) I re-
member this instance, which is not a little remarkable,
because it bears certainly on sonic of the words which I
used, and on the matter in which I am supposed to have
been the cause. The words to which I am referring were
used in the great debate on the Catholic queaion, when Lord
Canterbury sat in the chair of this House. Mr. Canning said
on that occasion, " However a man may alloy,, himself to be
engrossed by the quarto, he generally contrive; to peruse the
diurnal sheet of reports. And must not every man who reads
know what passes? Nay, I myself have listened, in another
place, hisce auribus, to what was meant to be the most taunt-
ing language, as applied to the Roman Catholics. It was
said, if you give them relief, do it largely, do it effectively,
&c." And so he went on, and stated the arguments which
he had heard in another place. Mr. Caning said be
heard them "hisce auribus," and as regards the words to
which I referred, I say I have with my own ems heard them
A laugh, and cries of " Hear, hear I") But he stated that
he had heard them in another place. Lord Canterbury was
then in the chair—that zealous and dignified maintainer of the
order of this House, and he did not think proper to interrupt
the speaker, or call on him to explain his words. Though
the circumstance, however, may have been passed over by
Lord Canterbury, there was one person prcselt on whom
that speech must have made an impression, becaisc it was a
speech which did convey one of the most vigorous and one of
the most successful replies I ever heard to the mistaken views
and the unfounded attacks of the then Master of tile Rolls.—
( Great laughter and cheering.) Well, then, it is lot without
example that allusions of the kind have been made; it is not
even beyond the recollection of those who are now living, and
sitting in this and the other House of Parliament.—( Hear. )
Having passed by the matter of form, I will now come to the
matter of courtesy, and it seems I am said to have repeated
words used by a Learned Lord without giving him notice of
my attack. What I intended to do was not to make an attack
on that Learned Lord ; but if I omitted any matter of courtesy
I am sorry for it. When, however, it is said that if I had
given notice of my intention, some of the friends of the Noble
and Learned Lord might have been here to defend hits conduct,
I cannot forget I stated those words at the beginning of a de-
bate which lasted two nights--( Loud cries of Hear, hear")
and I spoke in the presence of the friends of the Noble and
Learned Lord.—(Hear.) I spoke also in the presence of his
former colleagues. Further, with regard to the use of those
expressions which were remarkable enough in them-
selves, a Learned Gentleman, the Member for Tipperary,
took care to repeat them on the second night of the debate,
and to call the particular attention of the late colleagues of
the Noble and Learned Lord to the subject; and though there
had been full time, from the appearance of the reports in the
morning, to arm any of the colleagues of that Noble and
Learned Lord with any answer that might be given, the Right
flon. Baronet, wisely, as I think, but certainly, in fact,
avoided all mention and allusion to the words--(Cries of

.‘ Hear")—and the only r!ference made to them was made by
the Noble Lord the Member for Lancashire, who alluded to
them, pithily enough, by saying that they were words which
he did not mean to justify or agree with.—(Cheerin,*.) Now
such being the facts of that passed on the second night of
this debate, let it not be slid, or let it not it not he believed at
least by the Members of this House, that if I had given notice
of my intention there vrotld have been a triumphant reply by
some of the friends of the Noble and Learned Lord..—
( Cheers. ) Well, then, as to the matter itself, Ido not wise
—I do not tiiNs; there is any occasion for me to explain the
statement that I to:rde, because, as far as I can I earn
not from a
..,1nY,14 m any observations wade on the subject, do find
that the ;'';'3'r.49 in themselves !iave been in the least altered or
retracted. -( AO elleerilig.) it appears to me, that what-
ever force they had as Ut?Fi,-,ally deliA:3red, they still retain.—
( Cheers.) If those word! were right words to use, they re-
tain their original propriety ; if they were' wrong7if they
were insulting words to use—which i neve,' said they were
—they yetaio their origins' offence.—(Colitint,o cheering.)
What I did say was, that those words were evicts:nee of the
motives, the grounds, the reasons on which the amendments
were carried.—( Hear.) I think I have not been misv,Aken
in that view.—(Hear, hear.) And it appears to me, I noy
say, that the clear and powerful mind of the person who used
the words prompted him to give what was not a just, but
what, !.f it had been just would have been a sufficient redson
for those amendments, because what I thought was want-
ing--.1-fliat I considered to be defective in all the arguments
I heard from the other' side of the House—was not a sufficient
justification of a measure I"Or depriving the people of Ireland of
municipal government. If the statement contained in those
words was correct, it was a just au:! sufficient ground for the
course adopted. But I thought, besit!es, that in stating that
I supposed to have been the grounds of ;lie
the Lords I was somewhat justified by their own practice.
I may have been deceived. I know it was thd custom for
the public journals of former times to give under foreign
names, and dated from Rome and Athens, reports of the
debates that occurred in the Houses of Parliament ; and
the public papers of the present day may have reversed that
amer drneuts
of
practice : they perhaps have given real names, and the
speeches themselves . may have been entirely drawn front
fiction. I suggest the possibility of this, because I cannot
conceive any such observation as I have mentioned to have
been made by any Member accustomed to go to any assem-
bly where, as the persons who write these narratives tell us,
there is hardly a measure with respect to Ireland which is not
rejected, and the grounds for the rejection of which are not
some words that have been used by an Hon. Member of this
House.—( Much cheering and laughter.) Not only last year
was that the ease, but in the present year some words fell front
the Hon. and Learned Member on the first night of the Ses-
sion. Ido not wish certainly to take on myself the respon-
sibility of expressions to which the Hon. and Learned Member
affixes his own meaning, those expressions being to the effect
that the Corporations would be " normal schools for peaceful
agitation." I think lam right in saying " peaceful" agitation
--( Hear, hear, from Mr. O'Connell)—those words, with an
alteration not trifling in substance—( Hear, hear)—those words,
so used in this House, if we are to believe those false and
feigning reporters, were made elsewhere the very ground
work of opposition to measures for the benefit of Ireland.--
(Cheers.) I will own that I have been led into error—that
had these diurnal reports—that I read them with a good
deal of belief—that I now consider them unfounded, and that
their object vvas to give occasion to censure the House of
Lords ; they have put into the mouths of Noble and
Learned Members reasons founded on words used in this
House, but which never have been actually uttered. I
must admit all this, for I cannot conceive that I have been
made the subject of attack for doing that which is con-
stantly practised in that House. With respect to that
matter itself—with respect to any justiheation of the words,
it may be said, perhaps it will be said, that those who
sought to excite the people of Ireland, and who placed
themselves_ at their head to demand the repeal of the
Union, made the difference between the two nations the
ground on which the demand was made. When a large
portion of the people of Ireland sent in their petitions to this
House, and said, " You are unfit to legislate for us, you do not
share in our feelings, you do not belong to the same religion
as ourselves, and we ask you to let us legislate for ourselves,"
what was your answer ? "We will not consent.—( Hear,
hear.) That repeal of the legislative union would lead to the
dismemberment of the empire.—( Hear, hear.) We will not
repeal the Union, but we will listen to your just complaints ;
we will show you that for your portion of the empire we feel
as much interest as for any other portion ; in proof of our
good disposition towards you, we will give you the same mea-
sure of justice as we gave to England and Scotland, why then
will you entertain the unreasonable and restless jealousy
which arises from your thinking that we will legislate for you
in any other spirit ?"—( Cheers.) That is the answer which
you have given to the numerous petitions which have been
presented to this House. Then comes an instance. You
found a measure of Municipal Reform on sound principles,
and you give it to Scotland. You found another
measure of Municipal Reform, not quite the same, but on
similar principles, and you give it to England. You have
before you another measure of Municipal Reform, founded
on the same principles, but likewise differing in some respects,
and you would give it to Ireland. And then, when the
people came by petition, not to ask for repeal of the Union,
but for this measure, are they to be told, " No, we cannot
legislate for you as we do for the other parts of the em-
pire. You are alien from us •in blood, alien in religion,
and hostile to us in feeling, therefore, for you a different
measure of legislation must be provided?" Why, there is so
obvious and so glaring an injustice in this--(Repeated cheers).
—that I consent With confidsnce, though with reluctance, to a
delay of the question. lam persuaded the people of England
will feel that after being absolutely and totally denied any
e.?tholie
approach to a repeal of the Union, it is not just to say to the
people of Ireland they shall not be dealt with as if they formed
a part and parcel of the empire. And on this question there
may be, but there cannot so well be, any degree of religious
difference. I well know on the Roman question
and latterly on the Church question, that the feeling which
was endeavoured to be instilled among the pecpio of Eng-
land was that the object of the promoters of these mea-
sures was to compel the people of England to give t their
own Church and their own religion.—( Hear, hear.) / leave
been addressed by many a freeholder whose vote I asked laj"
the reproach that I was myself a Roman Catholic—(A laugh)
---and that I wished to pass a measure which would have the
effect of preventing the Protestants from going to their own
places of worship.—( Hear, hear.) This feeling has prevailed,
I assure Hon. Gentlemen, to a great extent.—( Hear, hear.)
But this cannot so easily be made a ground of objection in a
will not be allowed, by a
question of municipal reform. I have been told to-clay (only
a few minutes ago) that the people of the north of Scotland
are indignant at the notion that they
Bill now in Parliament, to have a provost in their towns. The
question is a similar one as regards Ireland—it is Whether a
mayor and council shall be allowed in the towns there, This
is no question involving an alteration of. the religion of the
people, or the subversion of the Churclee-(..ear, hear.) It
is a simple question whether the inhabitants of the cities of
Ireland shall be allowed to have a mayor and council of their
own. The Lords say they cannot consent to the ri
—orporations
being confined to twelve cities and towns ; perhaps
they are
right, and we may hereafter extend them to a greater number.
could not
—( Much cheering.) I think certainly that they‘ th
Demise
be confined to twelve cities and towns—(C,heellil—but I made
to some un-
I thought it
a proposal to that effect to the House, •
our duty, by every means in our power, to come
derstanding on this great question, and even yield
some
of
our opinions, that it might never be said it was on our sides
that the want of forbearance was exhibited.-7( heers.) We
have obtained the object we had in view so 'ar.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) That which we thought necessary to re °Feet to our
ue i moderation own principle we have insisted on with as m as
possible—we have confined it to as narrow. a
teicii.rnpess
as we
could, consistently with the principle whic ~ 13 House was
bound to maintain. I regret that the attemPc: at Conciliation
re that
has not proved successful ; but I never caneraen the at-
Ce an
tempt has been between Forll-.3uses, Iti harmony,
for a cordial agreement the two 6 ant ready ue
con ne
sacrifice much—to alter many opinions, to views which
done th•
might be further enlarged; but having e with Is, and the
House having done me the honour to ogre
fe their c
proposed to them, I should be betrayin,,iil h confidence—l
should be exhibitiog a pusillanimity', wheel d the °Pc the House
of Commons never will exhibit—if I ask
ion t
vi,ll. L-0 take into
their consideration any further calicos in „hictu a view to
their swerving from the great principles •" is involved
ssential f
the' future peace of Ireland, which are e .O the •
on whi , main-
tenance
of the character of this HOUSC, end
-g.
d Ith " I believe
the proud situation of this country depen
_...., , ere lore move,
Sir, that these amendments be taken into emisuseratin_
e on this
rine%)
day three months.—( Protracted Owe gon,
The SPEAKER having put ther.rn•°d had stater!
Mr. HUMS thought the Noble -`-',e.,'t he must - very fairly
his views on the present occasion,oo"
c which
,bosaY that they
were much more moderate than tli_svoice
of trei entertained.
They had in this instance the united
estion for theid demand-
ing justice front this House. The qui
y whether ,eensidera-.
firm of the House of Lords, was simPii-eland ? Cere should
be inefficient or good government they had don, f:the Lords
continued to oppose themselves, a 3
cn
~,j, the n-"o good go- •
vernment, the day would come .: the areoPle would
consider the propriety of sweepigoeuse
of way.__(Hear,
hear.) Could it be supposed that the Lords was se
.1 themselve
institution constituted for the Lororr
ley
I 'were 3 ? No they
had a higher object to accomplish.
co position alPointed as
one branch of the Government."-
,r( Putunici e eel's.) S°
were the royal boroughs appointed toroub
nil s bee government,
yet they had swept away the royal bor .
eir
ow n
....se they were
supported by men who consulted Y
onl th , h ine,,.
...,_s
t. rotten hOr 1,,„--'"tg. wu
there any difference between toe
of Lords?°-ws hi Eag-
,r,
laud and Scotland and the 11°11% jg to do g. "CY were,
asked, would they not allow the !, r . t b 11-
they liked .
ted it 114 "%tie , • a
He would say no. Ile repeaa luestio
e the Legislate
whether this second branch 0' . e should he
~ nd nen ernme„
allowed to stand in the way 01 gO-
- Use Df Ler -."
A•Ho rduSt
say that the manner in which the -no
exhibited" had met the
}lolls ,_
moderate proceedings of this Noble Lora ,very ungra-
cious return.—( Hear, hear.) The ..
d f 11ad noticed
A recene or r,,,
the rap on the knuckles be ha“ - ,ors and '-'eposine, that
only twelve boroughs should have ma) . towu. 0 tis ;
and nee. say thn counci
that was an act of injustice, an Palle consider waY in which
ed
his concessions were appreciated.
the tlover; that it was
n I
the duty of his Majesty to carry 0
roPerlY 'fin-a.nlent of the
country peaceably. He would not p
thing '"e high situ.'
any . undonn,b ..,.
ation which he occupied if he left hes of L- io promo.. .
that harmony between the two branF .
his the Legislature
It dt,,
which was necessary. He considered .
---7 at a tint('
)ntiOn rom “
like this, boldly to state that in
his
°ll an org -n; 'no. House of f
Lords nothing was to be expecte,. t,
me it i-,--lij,Chan e
a bad
taken place.—(Hear, and No.) coftutionslsoh-rt and when
it did come, it might sweep away ins .10
1 wouldv -e" they were t
now anxious to preserve. The peop been acted net for et the /
" shilly-shally" policy which had
i
years of reform, er,?
ten years ; they had lust tsko - ' vv,
..,

)

're )be