The Sun.
London, England, 1838-05-02 00:00:00

THE stiN,LoNDoNi WEDNEgDAY, MAY 2, IB3P.

*I4IA It IllitYLL, in opOsing the motion, was ready to admit
thii a great nnmber of petition* had been presented in favour of the Bib,
and those petitions were undonbiedly signed by many respectable persons
Who; he had no doubt, Were convinced Oat the Bill sbdiilct be a useful
hienSure ; but yet there tvei-e connected
With it, in 'eorisqlteliOe of which he felt bound to oppose it.
When the Bitt Was submitted to the Standing Orders Committed, it
kesS quite clear that the Standing Orders had not been complied with, but
the Committee consented that the Bill might go to the House on a certain
condition—namely, that a certain sum should be paid upon account of the
concern ; of course meaning that it should be paid by the parties
themselves. The sum fixed was ten per cent. on the capital sub-
Scribed.--( Hear.) Now, in all measures of this kind, if they do nut
.pay up the per ciutage, the Bill ought not to proceed, and in this parti-
cular case, which certainly had something of a fraudulent appearance,
' the Committee greatly erred in reporting that the Standing Orders had
been complied with.—( Hear, hear, hear.) As he was informed, the
eighty thousand pounds of Exchequer Bills which had been
deposited lad been advanced by a London banker—that was clearly not
such a deposit by the subscribers as was required by the Standing Orders.
Ile had stated the facts as they were represented to him—if he were
rightly informed then, lie trusted the House would agree with
him that the Bill ought not to be proceeded with. He trusted that
the Learned Attorney General, considering his situation as law officer
of the Crown, aid also the other Honourable Gentlemen who held
official situations, would give the weight of those situations to the
upholding of the Standing Orders of that House.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL believed the Hon. Bart. was acting
from the most pure motives, and that when he had heard the explanation
which he (the Attorney-General) had to give, the promoters of the Bill
would secure his vote. Ile could assure the Hon. Baronet that no mea.
sure of a local nature had ever excited half so much interest in Scot-
land. Petitions numerously and respectably signed had been presented
from almost every part, and it would be mortifying if the parties were
to be delayed upon purely technical grounds. The Bill was introduced
last Session, and passed its third reading by a large majority. It was
sent up to the house of Lords, but, like many others, it fell to the
ground, in consequence of the melancholy event which put a period to
the Session. In the meantime the Standing Orders relative
to this class of Bills hart been amended, on the motion of the
Right lion. the President of the Board of Trade; but the Stand-
ing Orders had been made to have a retrospective effect,
which was rather severe; and he (the Attorney-General) had
therefore recommended, that they should not be enforced—he made
an appeal to the House for an exception in regard to the Stenci-
ls:sr Orders in favour of the BIL The promoters of the Bill
had presented a petition. It was referred to the Sub-Committee; the
Sub-Committee reported, as they were bound to do, that the Standing
Orders had not been complied with ; that ten per cent, had not
been deposited on the amount of the capital ; there was a
reference to the Select Committee upon Standing Orders ; which
Committee was vested with a discretionary power, either to recommend
that the Standing Orders should not be enforced, or that they should
be modified. It was stated that it was impossible the Standing Order,
could be complied with, because by the constitution of the Company
they could neither have a fresh call nor a deposit, and the Standing Orders
Committee made this recommendation, " that the Edinburgh and Glass
gow Railway parties be permitted to proceed with their Bill upon proving
a deposit of 10 per cent. upon the capital."—(" Hear, hear," from Sir E.
Knatchbull). He (the Attorney-General) could explain the meaning of
those words. Undoubtedly the strict construction of the Standing Orders
was, that the subscription should be paid up by the shareholders. The
Standing Orders provided Ist., that the subscription should be paid up,
and 2ndly., that it should be deposited. Now the Standing Orders Com-
mittee dispensed with the paying up, and only required the depositing,
for the purpose of demonstrating that it was a bona fide undertaking.
They, therefore, did not require that there should be a rigid compliance
with the Standing Orders, for it would have been a mockery to have
done so, when the Committee were told that the Standing Orders
would not be complied with. All, therefore, the Committee
required was, that the deposit should be paid. That was done. The
Directors deposited 80,0001. in the Bank of England, where it now re-
mained. Upon the evidence given before the Committee, they
reported that 10 per cent. had been deposited, agreeably to the
Standing Orders. The Committee were unanimous in favour of the Bill,
and such being the case, he would ask whether it was to be defeated
by a strained construction of the Standing Orders ? He apprehended
that no evil consequence would result by the passing of the Bill.
Ile (the Attorney-General) would venture to say that there never was
a measure of the same sort undertaken by persons of greater respects.
bility. They had raised a sum of 80,0001., and they could have raised
soo,poor., if necessary.—(Hear, hear.) Great expense had been gone
to, and it would be a cruel hardship on those persons if the Bill were
not allowed to proceed. He hoped the Hon. Baronet would withdraw
his opposition.
CoL CONOLLY was present in the Committee on the Standing
Orders when it was agreed that there should be a relaxation of the
Orders in favour of the Bill. The question now was, did the 80,0001.
come bona fide from the parties in the concern. He had gone down
to the Committee favourably disposed to the measure, but he could not
help coming to the same conclusion with the Hon. Member for Kent
that the 80,000/. would not be available to the undertaking, and he
felt it his duty to oppose the Bill.
Lord EBRINGTON had been Chairman of the Standing Orders
Committee when the relaxation in this case was permitted; and he was
then convinced that it was not possible, under the circumstances,
to raise the eighty thousand pounds from the parties, as it was
shown to the Committee that a meeting could nut be called ; but it was
for the House, and not for him, to say whether the mode in which the
money had been advanced could be considered in accordance with the
Standing Orders.
Mr. PRAED would ask the Noble Lord, the Chairman of the
Standing Orders Committee, what was the meaning of the Order
of that Committee ? Did they mean that any sum, amounting
to tee per cent., coming from a quarter different from the
subscribers—that the eighty thousand pounds being paid in
in Exchequer Bills under a contract, that the same bills
should be returned immediately on the passing or withdrawal
of the Bill—was that at all analagous to the money being actually paid
by the subscribers ? It was asked what harm the passing of the Bill
would occasion. In a morning paper, dated 30th March, shortly after
the decision of the Standing Orders Committee, there appeared an adver-
tisement offering to all solicitors or agents for railway or private Bills, the
advance of the deposit of ten per cent.—(Hear, hear)—which was re-
quired by the House. Such was the sort of speculation that would be
raised if the House then recognised the principle.
Mr. WARBURTON said if the Bill were to be decided upon the
merits of the undertaking, no Member could be more solicitous for
the passing of the Bill than himself; for he thought a railway
between Glasgow and Edinburgh would be very advantageous to
the public.—(Hear, hear.) But that was net the, question. The
question was, whether the Standing Orders had been bona fide complied
with.—(Hear.) Now, what were the evils against which those Standing
Orders were intended to guard ? Why, that men of straw, for es.,
or IN. 6d. a piece, were in the habit of putting their names
to the subscription lists, for shares to the amount of thou_
sands, a certain per centage on which was paid by the parties interested,
in order that the Standing Orders might appear to be complied with,
Now the Standing Orders required that the per centage should be paid up
by the shareholders themselves, which would be an effectual preventing
of this putting up of men of straw as shareholders--(Hear, hear.)
The Learned Attorney-General argued that the Standing Order Com-
mittee intended to dispense with the paying up, and only required the
depositing, but it was a question for this House to decide whether the
Standing Orders should be so relaxed as to dispense with the paying up
by the subscribers. Either the Standing Orders ought to be altogether
dispensed with, or they ought to be maintained. If they were not ad.
hered to, we should have a repetition of those gambling transactions
which formerly took place in these Companies.—(Hear, hear.) He
thought that it was better this Company should be dissolved, and
that another should be formed, to proceed in the regular way.
Mr. GILLON rose amid loud cries of " Divide." He thought the
House ought not to strain the Standing Orders for the purpose of throw_
ing out this Bill. For his own part he felt no hesitation in saying that
in the present case the Standing Orders had been complied with.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL contended that the Standing Orders had not
been complied with.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL ssid that 10 per cent. having been
paid, the Standing Orders had been most effectually complied with.
Mr. P: THOMSON could not allow the House to go to a division
without making a few observations. He could not see that the Stand-
ing Orders had been complied with. If the House held that they had,
there would be an end of all usefulness from the Standing Order in ques_
tion.—(Cheers.) The intention of that Order distinctly was, that 10 per
cent. should be advanced bona fide by the subscribers,—(Cheers.) With
all due deference to the Standing Orders Committee, he thought they
had not taken the proper course; he would have teen disposed to have
sent the parties before the House, its order to see whether, under the
peculiar circumstances of the case, the House would have been disposed to
have put aside the Standing Orders, as it was an er post facto operation of
the law, and that if the Bill was lost, according to the deed of partnership,
the Company must be dissolved. Under these circumstances he would
have some difficulty in voting against the Bill. He would therefore
suggest a proposition of his own. He would suggest that
the Bill should he adjourned for a short time—that the Bills should
be fresh deposited upon a contract that they should not be taken out
until there had been an actual call
.paid tip of ten per, cent. upon the
capital of the Company. .
The .ATTORNEY-GENERAL was not then prepared to accede
to such a proposition. He had no doubt however that the parties would
agree to it ; and he would therefore move that the debate be adjourned
till Thursday next.
Mr. HUME said that the parties were willing to allow the 80,0001.
to remain in the bank till the whole ten per cent. was paid up.—(Cries of
" Divide, divide.")
After a short conversation across the table between the Attorney_
General, Lord G. Somerset, and Sir E. Knatchbull, the further consi.
deration of the Report was adjourned till Thursday next.
WOODSTOCK—NEW WRIT.
On the motion of Sir T. FREMANTLE, a new writ was ordered to
be issued for the borough of Woodstock, in the room of Mr. Peyton,
who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.
' ELECTION COMMITTEES.
Mr. F. KELLY asked when Mr. O'Connell would bring forward his
motionl
ns?
,upmesuperseded
Idopr
eo,e
cds
ost
cc,
At
Ni
BniEi
Lc(); thosraN
oo(i
{bin.
:At
oe dorLd.
ceEi e)i cFas t
hhßi
00.
Bt
therefore
Eef
og
ralersdsLi, spEgp
support
tFi s
that sst rib Aj eßNci ti. I h. a d
OM
In answer to a question from Lord SANDON,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was not the in-
tention of the Government to allow ale, brewed in the Isle of Man, to
be imported from that island into this country free of duty.
THE DUKE OF CUMBERLAND,
Mr. HUME then rose for the purpose of moving
for leave to bring
in a Bill to suspend the payment of the annuity of 6,000/. granted by the
46 of Geo. 3, chap. 145, and the 47 tleo. 3, chap, 39 ;
u
of 15,000/., granted by the Ist Geo. 4, chap 0
Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland, now 103 to
annuity
of
King of Hanover, so
long as his Royal Highness should continue King of Hanover. He was
quite aware that a measure like the present ought to come from the
Government; but us they seemed neglectfulfof their duty with respect to
the late Duke of York
bring
oionuntry did. It was only
forward. expenditure
It of the hlwbei
tehec onhuinhis
,r yhl,oethfet:lfteolntpop boundodsoeubt tgrantsotheb present subject
and the Duke of Clarence ; and although in that opposition the House
did not go along
necessary to say, that in the present year the Civil List was 60,0001.
more than it had been in the late reign; and it therefore became the
duty of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see what reductions might
be made in respect to grants made to members of the Royal Family.
Every one must be aware that these grants were made for the purpose of
supporting them in comfort and dignity. The message of King George
111. to the Commons in 1772, was to request them " to make a compe-
tent provision for the younger branches of the Royal
Family," and in
consequence of that a sum of 60,000/. was Voted to he divided amongst
the six sons then Using. Mr. Fox, in 1777, observed that it had
always been the policy of the country to make such provision for the dif-
ferent branches of the Royal Family, In order to render them independent
of the Ministers, whilst it bound them by interest and sentiment
to protect that Constitution under which they e,
sAJGYed their in-
comes. Now he (Mr. Hume) quite concurred in the principle laid down
by Mr. Fox. He thought the different branches of the Royal Family
should have an adequate income, in order to render them independent
of the Minister, and to ensure their attachment to the Constitution. It
was because he believed that the Duke of Cumberland, now King of
Hanover, was no longer in a position to perform the latter part of the
understanding that he was anxious to submit his motion to the House.
By the financial accounts of last year, it appeared that 21,0001. were
paid to the King of Hanover, besides a sum of 2,000/. or 3,0001. to
his son, on which latter amount he did not desire to state anything. In
bringing forward this motion he did not wish to make a single observe.'
lion, however much he might differ in politoicnael
oofpitnhieonnforyoami
Family
iKlyinogf
of Hanover, which should be offensive. He wished his remarks to be
directed purely to the King of Hanover, as
this country. Now he objected to the King of Hanover receiving
an annuity of 13,0001., Drat, because that Sovereign was not in A

situation to observe the conditions upon which It seas grrinted. He
was in such a position that he might be placed in hostility against the
very government which allovicil this annuity. The King of Hanover
was a inembk4 of the ftCrrriih Dlit ; lie hid joint in those corn_
mercial restrictions wineti had bi the VerriraiiStates
If any circumstances should hereafter arise which should (ding- the
diet to declare war against England, the King of Hanover would he
bound immeliately to Ect and join in the war, and to furnish his contin-
gent of men and munition. There were no circumstances which could
occur which would not adm:t of Parliament dealing with this annuity
in the way he proposed. If the King of Hanover should become King
of England, even then this country would not continue this allowance,
because a new arrangement altogether must be male. The King of
Hanover had become an independent potentate, and could no longer
hold fealty to the Queen of England. His situation was changed, and
with that change the payment of the money ought to be suspended.
Having dwelt on the character of the annuities whin hilt been grant,l,
the Hon. Gentleman observed that he thought these grants were of a dif-
ferent nature from that which was made to Prince Leopold,afterwardsKlng
of Belgium. The latter grant was placed on a stronger footing. The grant
was made, not with reference to any change of situation, but secured
to the Prince during the term of his natural life, if he should survive
the Princess. But his Majesty the King of Belgium had rendered it
unnecessary that any measures should be taken with regard to him. He
did not propose to take the annuity away, but to suspend it whilst the
Duke of Cumberland should continue King of Hanover. The Hon.
Gentleman concluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to suspend
the payment of the annuity of 6,0001., granted by 46 Gco. 111., c. 145,
and 47 Geo. 111. c. 39; and of the annuity of 15,0001„ granted by 1
Gco. IV. c. 108, to his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland, now
King of Hanover, so long as his Royal Highness shall continue to be
King of Hanover.
The motion having been put, and seconded by Mr. WARBURTON,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said—The Hon. Gen_
tleman had with great good taste brought forward his case without al-
luding to any topics of a political nature. The whole of the Hon. Gen-
tleman's argument amounted to this—that either there was a construe.
lion fairly to be given to the Act of Parliament which secured to his
Majesty the King of Hanover this annuity of 21,0001, which would
fairly warrant them in depriving his Majesty of his income, or else, that
there being no such power to make such construction of the Act than
that the Legislature (which he admitted to be supreme) should put a new
construction upon its own Act for the purpose of depriving the King of
Hanover of that income which had been fixed upon him for life. He
knew that the Act of Parliament gave the annuity without attaching
to it any conditions; it was not for Parliament afterwards to affix
conditions to its own former proceeding. Was there any ambi-
guity as to the intentions of the legislature at the time they were parties
to the granting these annuities absolutely during the life of the King of
Hanover P There was no intention that he could collect from the
terms of this grant to circumscribe it, as had been contended by his
Hon. Friend. He had examined the vote, as well as the Act of Par-
liament, and saw not the slightest reason to infer that any condition
even had ever been annexed to the grant. Upon general grounds he
must object to an attempt on the part of the public to resume such a
grant as this, because if they once began it was impossible to tell where
they might stop, or, rather, how far it might not go; for there was posi-
tively no ground of argument in favour of this resumption that was not
capable of being urged with equal force for the resumption of any grant
made by Parliament in favour of any other branch of the Royal
Family, or of any pensioned individual. The case of his Majesty of
Hanover was even stronger than he had yet stated it ; for it was
impossible that Parliament should not, at the time of making the grant,
have in its contemplation the possibility of the Duke of Cumberland as.
rending the throne of Hanover from the nature of the tenure of the
electorate, and subsequently the kingdom. Surely, then, if Parliament
had intended that the grant should only enure to the benefit of the do-
nee whilst he was and continued to be the Duke of Cumberland, it
was perfectly competent to make such a limitation; but it had done
no such thing. An allusion had been made to the case of the King of
Belgium by his Honourable Friend as being in point in some respects.
It was true a crown had fallen on the head of Prince Leopold and upon
that of the Duke of Cumberland. His Honourable Friend remarked
that the grant to Prince Leopold was a grant for life; yet the
prince, on ascending the throne of Belgium, had, to his high ho.
nour, given up the whole of the annuity, except so much as might
be deemed fairly to the fixed charges to which his marriage with
a princess, the heiress of the British throne, rendered it liable.
The reservation of this part of the income redounded as much to his
honour as the resignation of the whole residue to the service of the
public.—(Hear.) Tbey were not now to be told in the"r places what
was due by every country to the great principle of preserving inviolably
its engagements, but he would say, that to no country on the face of
the globe was it of so much importance that all its engagements should
be characterised by stability than to a country distinguished amongst
nations for its immense commerce and the very heavy national debt
which it had incurred entirely upon the faith of the stability of its
recorded engagements.—(Hear, hear.) With reference to the argu-
ments of his Hon. Friend, founded upon economy, he would assure
him he was by no means deaf to any suggestion of an economical nature
whenever it could be adopted with justice and propriety ; but he would
assure him, at the same time, that nothing could induce him to sacri-
fice the just claims of individuals, whether of an exalted or humble
sphere of life, for the purpose of obtaining au unenviable popularity ;
nor was there any party in the country, or in that House, however
strong or influential it might be, that he would not fearlessly oppose in
defence of justice and right. For these reasons he felt he must oppose
the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny.
Mr. WARBURTON observed that there was hardly any analogy
between the grant made to the King of Belgium and that made to the
King of Hanover. The former grant was made as a part of the mar-
riage settlement, arid with reference thereto, but the grant under dis.
cession was made to the Duke of Cumberland, to support him in his
station as a prince of the blood royal and a peer of Great Britain ; and
the latter had a reference to an equivalent in the continuance of his
services as counsellor of the throne, and in the continuance of his ser-
vices as a peer of Parliament. To overlook the reciprocity of the duty
of the Peer, as somehow connected with the grant of the annuity to the
Prince, he confessed he thought was ridiculous. Now in his Majesty's
present station, it was clear neither of these duties could be performed
by him. The Crown was deprived of his counsel as a Privy Councillor,
nor could they have his vote, even by proxy through another peer of
Parliament, in the other House.
Mr. GOULI3URN conceived theme could be no doubt in any one's
mind as to the intention of the Legislature in the case of the grant to
the King of Hanover, as son of the reigning King of England. To put
any other construction upon it than that put upon the grant by the Right
Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, was contrary to common sense.
There was no condition annexed to the grant.
Mr. HUME, in reply, stated that nothing had fallen from the lips of
the Right Hon. Gentleman, to change the view he had taken of the sub.
ject. The King of Hanover had ceased to be a subjeet of the realm.
He was not under allegiance. He had died a civil death.—(Laughter.)
As respected this country, he was dead in law.—(lmmoderate laughter.)
Any allegation, that the resumption of the grant would be against pub-
lic faith, was absurd.
The House then divided, when the numbers were—
For the motion
... 62
Against it
97
Majority
Mr. P. THOMSON moved that there be appointed a Select Committee
upon the subject of the Management of the Private Bushiest in that
House; which was agreed to, after a few words front Mr. HUME.
PILOTAGE.
The Ittcrir Hots. GENTLLMAN also obtained leave to bring in a Bill
for the regulation of the Pilotage of the United Kingdom, having pre-
viously explained that the object of the Bill was to place the whole esta-
blishment, with the appointments, under the sole controul of the Trinity
House.

Captain PECHELL concurred in the proprietyof Government taking
up the subject.
Mr. HUME moved for a return of the names of the persons now form-
ing the Society, incorporated on the 7th Feb. 1662, by King Charles the
Second, by the name of the Company for the Propagation of the Gospel
in New England, and the parts adjacent in America, together with an
account of the several lands, whether freehold, copyhold, or leasehold,
and distinguishing the same. Also, the tithes now held and enjoyed by
the said Company, stating the annual value of the lands, and in what
parish or parishes of England, such lands are situated Also an ac.
count of all other stocks, funds, or property, belonging to the said Com.
pany, or held in trust for its use, or purposes; and a copy of the annual
accounts, as made up for 1837 or 1836.
Mr. GIBSON opposed the motion.
Mr. HARVEY cordially supported the motion.
The SOLICITOIt.GENER AL deprecated the practice of bringing
before that House matters such as this—of a strictly private nature, and
which m;ght be brought under the cognisance of the Courts of Law. He
could not, therefore, give his assent to the motion.
Mr. W A RBU R TON supported the motion.
After a few words from Mr. HUME in reply, the House divided, when
the numbers were—
For the 'notion
Against it

Majority --29
OUTRAGES IN IRELAND.
Mr. COLQUHOUN rose to move for a return of all outrages and
assaults committed on the person, property, or place of worship of Pro-
testant ministers of all denominations in Ireland—also a return of all
outrages and assaults committed on persons engaged in communicating
religious instruction to the people of Ireland from June 1835, to the
present time. It had been argued that the outrages which took place
in Ireland were owing to the irritation created by the existence of
tithes; but the cases which he should cite would show that they arose
from an animosity directed against the Protestant ministers and Church,
unconnected with the subject of tithes. The first case he should refeil
to was that of a curate in the county of Leitrim, the Rev. Mr. /fart/
who had no connection with tithes, but had distinguished himself by
his zeal for religion, and the instruction of the people by building a
school-house, and other works of benevolence. rhere came a denun.
elation against hint front a certain quarter, and in Nov. 1836 his school_
house having been previously set fire to, his own house was set on fire, and
when escaping from the conflagration he was fired at, and nearly assasi.
noted. The Rev. Mr. Benson, a curate in King's county, was fired at on the
18th of May, 1836, for no other reason than because he had estab.
lished an evening service amongst his Roman Catholic neighbours,
and it was only to the bad quality of the fire-arms employed that he
owed his escase. He might quote numerous other cases of a similar
kind if he were not unwilling to weary the House. Lord Mulgrave, in
a publication sanctioned by him, had declared that, since lie had been
(Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, no clergyman had been murdered, and no
murdcrous attacks had been made upon any. Now what would the
House think when he assured it that, within one month after the Noble
Lord's appointment, the Rev. Mr. Dawson, in the county of Limerick,
was murdered in broad daylight ? What was the state of the dio-
cese of Cashel, and Enley, in the county of Tipperary, which had
recently been declared by a Learned Judge to be in a state of
perfect tranquillity ? In September, 1836, the Rev. Mr. Good
was fired at, the Rev. Mr. Herbert was violently attacked, the Rev.
'Mr. Galway was fired at, the Rev. Mr. Barron was nearly murdered
In his own yard, the Rev. Mr. Scott was three times attacked,
and escaped by the timely information of a man who had
an insurance upon his life; the Rev. Mr. Bagnall, the Rector
of Ballinternple, was also attacked ; so that in the short period of Lord
Mulgrave's vigorous and beneficent administration six cases had oc.
curred in that diocese of clergymen who had narrowly escaped with
their lives. In 1834 a missionary, of the name of Nagle, went to the
island of Achill, where he was received with kindness by the inhabi-
tants ; and the resident priest, O'Mara, not being found a fit instrument
by those who had resolved upon his destruction, he was removed, and
another priest (Connolly) substituted for him. Priest Connolly de..
flounced the missionary, but could not prevail upon the inhabitants tart
turn their hands against him until the autumn of 1835, a period sig.+
nalised by the procession of Lord Mulgrave to the western parts of Ire-
land. At that period Dr. l'Cl'Hale, a Roman Catholic _Archbishop, visited the island of Achill, with twelve priests, and in their presence,
sermons were delivered in which the people were enjoined to hold
no communication with the missionaries, who were cursed of God
and ilis Church, and ought to be abhorred—that, if they spoke to
them in the fields, the people should knock them down with spades
or stab them with pitchforks. In consequence of these dentin'.
ciations the missionaries were afterwards brutally wounded and their
children attacked, and it was with great difficulty they escaped. He
might mention the case of the Rev. Mr. Storey, who, because he thought
proper to enter into a controversy with Priest Hughes, was attacked
upon the highway. He could mention numerous cases of the ill-
treatment experienced by Roman Catholics who ventured to read or
promulgate the Scriptures. They were called Scripture-readers. Over
six counties of Ireland in the last year the altars rung with curses
against those Scripture-readers. The form of one of those curses war
" a hundred thousand curses against any man who shall take a Bible
from a Protestant." Now he said, if by public denunciations the
Roman Catholic priests of Ireland had power to place human life in
jeopardy, the law of the country should interpose its protection if the
Government did not. He could show that attempts were made by
violent assaults to put down Protestant places of worship in Ireland.

In September, MO; in 'Puede a mob interrupted the Protestant service-
and oisliged the Minister to desist. In November, 1837, the same thing
happened in Waterfotri and in Limerick; an independent minister was
forcibly interrupted end obliged to discoritinue. In Ballyshennon, in
1637, a Wesleyen congregation vies twice assailed, and obliged to pro-
cure the assistance of the police, and plaee guards at the doors. In the
chtlrehyerel of Cello's+, the Rev. Mr. Emerson, whert reeding the service
for the dead, Wee Inteerupted, add an attempt made to throw him into
the grave, from which he itele resetled by the police. The Dean of
Cashel (Doctor Adams) was similarly atteclied in 1836, and prevented
from continuing the service. No less than thirteen thousand pounds
had been offered as rewards for the protection of life ; and hose much of
that had been paid ? Three hundred and twenty pounds. That ie to
say,that out of every forty.one flagrant offences (for there were thou-
sands which never reached the Castle), forty remained unpunished. He
now begged to move for the returns of which he had given notice.
The qu 2stion haying been Mit,
Lord MORPETH, with respect to all the cases into which the
Hon. Gentleman had entered, he was not sure that he could follow,
but he would ficit Shrink from grappling With him with respect to the
inferences which lie lied deduced from them, The Hon. Gentleman
had entered into many details which coed not fail to excite any other
feelings than those of deep ConCeril and miqualiffed disapprobation.
There was scarcely a more bitter ingredient in the cup of human woe
than that which religious rancour had cast into If, and he regretted
to say that that evil was too long peculiar to Ireland he did not
mean to argue that the conduct of one party should be an apology for
that of the other, or be a warrant for retaliation; but sad experience in
the history of Irish annals sufficient testifies! the desire of all sects in
turn to trample one upon the other, and in turn to make reprisals.—
(Hear, hear.) Were there not instances in the tumultuous proceed-
ings on the part of the Protestants of Ulster with respect to the un-
offending schools established under the national system of educa-
tion ? He would read to the house an extract from a Communication
on the subject. Biel Leidship then read the communication in question.
Another outrage of a similar naletre, though perhaps to some it might
appear ludicrous, occurred in Armagh, Where a calf's head was placed
upon the altar of the Roman Catholic Church. The Hon. Gentleman
had quoted the proclamations in the Dublin Gazette, but he made no
allusion to the case of Hughes, who was severely beaten in Artneelt fie.
cause he would not consent to utter expressions which appeared to hint
to be profane, and to the other cases which appeared in the Dublin
Gazette, and which he should read to the House. They were as fol-
lows :—From the Dublin Gazette, March 31, 1837:—" On the 17th
inst. a number of men (amongst whom was one John Shannon) sworn
to belong to the Orange Lodge, No. 115, met at the house of J. Lind-
say, publican, of Tanderagee, in the county of Armagh, and severely
beat a man named John Hughes, for refusing to utter profane party ex-
pressions ; and on the following night, in consequence of the said
Hughes having lodged informations for the assault, a large party broke
into the house where he was sleeping, and, pushing him on the fire, held
him there until he was seriously burned." Another case was recorded,
at which humanity must shudder :—" On the eve of St. Peter and Paul
(June 28, 1837), at Mullyash Mountain, county of Monaghan, a number
of children were amusing themselves round a bonfire which had been
kindled in honour of the festival (a Catholic observance), when settle
men from a higher position on the nioUntein fired a volley, killing two,
and wounding two others, all children of an hottest and inoffensive Ca.
tholic farmer. It is denied that the murderers were Protestants, be-
cause they have not been detected. Neither have the murdereelf of Mr.
Witty or of Mr. Ferguson." There were other cases which were cal.
culated to produce the same excitement. It was with extreme re-
luctance that he was compelled to bring forward these cases, but he
found himself driven to it by the course which the Hon. Gentleman
had pursued. He could truly say, non sponte sequor, —(Hear, hear,
and laughter)—but when the cases were given all on one side,
it became necessary to show what was the provocation which led
to results, at which humanity must shudder. Why was not the fault
which was common to all fairly attributable to all ? Why should the
whole weight be thrown upon one party, political and religious ? The
Hon. Gentleman had referred to the disproportion between the amount
of the rewards offered, and the sums paid, for the detection of crimes ;
but if the Hon. Gentleman had referred to past periods, he would have
found that it never had been the practice to claim the reward. The ars
gument deduced from such a fact might show the want of confidence of
the people with respect to the administration of justice in Ireland, but
it could not be urged as an argunient against the Administration of Lord
Mulgrave. He, and those with whom he acted, would never be found
hostile to the principles of the Protestant religion, nor would they ever
consent to gag the dissemination of the Gospel. The Hon. Gentle-
man said that he would omit all arguments founded on outrages arising
from tithes, because it was obvious that those were not the real sources
of hostility—that the hostility was to Protestantism itself—to its clergy,
its teachers, and propounders; and that that hostility, if not con-
nived at, was at least inadequately repressed by Government. Now,
with respect to this accusation, all he (Lord Morpeth) could say was;
that he was most ready to grant the returns, and the House would then
be able to decide whether in any case where violence bad been used, the
Government had not done all in its power to detect, to restrain, and to
punish the offenders.—(Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman had alluded to a
speech of Lord Mulgrave in another place, in which that Noble Lord
had stated that no Protestant clergyman had been murdered during his
government of Ireland, and mentioned the case of the Rev. Mr. Dawson.
It was true that that case did occur, but it occurred during the first
month of Lord Mulgrave's Viceroyalty. The proper way to judge of
Lord Mulgrave's Government was by the comparative frequency and
number of such occurrences. If this were made the test he would claim
for the Government of Lord Mulgrave an advantageous comparison with
that which had preceded it. During the three years of that Noble-
man's Government the life of a single clergyman had not been
lost. The same could not be said for a similar period of any of
those whom Lord Mulgrave was forsooth so unworthy to replace.
Surely it was too bad to charge Lord Mulgrave's Government with
deaths which had taken place in 1829.—(Hear.) With respect to the
outrage alleged to have taken place in the Cathedral of Derry, it had
already been discussed in Parliament, and the House appeared to be
perfectly satisfied with the result. With respect to what had taken
place in the Waterford Cathedral, Government had done all in its
power to bring the parties to justice. At Achill it would not be denied
that outrages had taken place which rendered it necessary to adopt
measures for the preservation of the public peace ; but as one side of a
statement hail already been given he would read to the House another.
statement given by a highly respectable man, a chief constable of police,.
given in answer to inquiries which Government thought it necessary to.
make in consequence of the conflicting statements which had appeared.
This officer was a Protestant, who because of his excellent conduct was'
hold in high estimation. (His answer to the documents which had been
forwarded to him was then read by the Noble Lord.) The Hon. Mem-
ber had referred to the case of Captain Duff, who was one of the most
active and efficient officers that the Government possessed. He (Lord
Morpeth) was ready to acknowledge that his interference with Mr.
Delany was unjust, and the Government had accordingly ordered Isis
release, and reprimanded the officer. In extenuation of the conduct
of Captain Duff he must, however, say that his conduct appeared to
have arisen from a desire of taking the best steps for the preservation of
public peace. The Honorable Gentleman had quoted some instances of
the violent language that was sometimes employed by the Catholic
Clergy when speaking of Protestents. No one could reprobate the
language more than he (Lord Morpeth), but he would ask on that score
was the.offence all on one aide ? Was the violence of language confined
to the Catholic Clergy ? On that point he must call up the name of
Delany,. On one occasion when that gentleman had commenced preach-
ing, nothing but the' presence of the troops restrained the people from
open violence, and the police were obliged to be drawn up on one side
of the way to produce the desired effect ; and in order to show that in
this state of popular excitement the Roman Catholics had some reason.
able grounds for dissatisfaction, he would quote the words used by Mr.
Delany on that occasion. The words alluded to were—" Now, as to the
sacrament, mind, my hearers, the Scriptures tell you, not one bone of our
Saviour is to be broken, though the priest give you 50 pieces ofbread, and
tell you them by breaking 50 little Jesuses, and that they first mit into the
chalice, and mix it with the wine, take a drink, and then have a belly.
ful of little Christs." On this expression loud and general laughter
took place, Mr. Delany being the first to lead in it, by sneeringly
remarking, " He had not yet lost the knack of doing business," Now
when such language was used by one whom he (Lord Morpeth) would
not call a divine, upon so sacred a rite—when language that appeared
to him to be the mast vulgar ribaldry, but to those in whose hearing
it was uttered must have appeared the grossest impiety and a desecra-
tion of the most solemn rite of their Church, was used, could the Hon.
Gentleman he surprised if a Christian minister so forgot the sacred cha-
racter he assumed, that a Catholic population should forget the respect
due to the sacred edifice in which such impiety was uttered, and should
remember only that God was greater than his temple ? Now when it was
considered how diligently the Hon. Member had hunted for grievances
—had suggested complaints—had written to the clergy to know
on what terms they were with their Roman Catholic parishioners_
if they could trace any outrage to the influence of the priests—he
must own that he less wondered that the Hon. Member had produced
such a list of grievances than that he had not been able to make up a
;more imposing budget. In conclusion, lie would meet the Honourable
Member on his own terms, and accede to his motion, in the hope that,
though the inquiries of the Honourable Gentleman had hitherto been
so unfortunate, he might yet be able to drop his hints to more credulous
ears. In the result of the inquiry he had no doubt that it would be
found that the Irish Government had done all that in them lay to the
preservation of the public peace and of individual safety.
Mr. LANGDALE begged to be set right by the Honourable Member
if lie were mistaken, but he believed the Honourable Member had before
this made representations against the Roman Catholics of Scotland, and
in such terms as to incline the Protestants to come forward and deny
the justice or application of the charge to their Catholic fellow-
subjects. He believed also that the Honourable Member had after-
wards acknowledged that he had misrepresented the Catholics of
Glasgow. The Honourable Member had alluded to the interference
of the Catholic Clergy in the elections, and had observed that such in
terference was opposed to the practice of the English Bishops who had
ro vetes—but he (Mr. Langdale) must observe, in reply, neither
had the Peers, but lie could say from his own knowledge, that no-
where were more active partisans to be found than among the Protestant
Clergy.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the Honour.
able Gentleman opposite could not more earnestly desire to see the prin-
ciples of the Reforzration making ground in Ireland than himself, and if
any class of persons threw obstacles in the way of its progress it was
those who poisoned that Christian charity in which consisted the main
feature of each religion, by adding political rancours to religious differ-
ences, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) must say, that most of
the ill-feeling that now existed was owing to the mischief-making
of meddling Scotchmen, who, seeing but a part, fancied them-
selves in possession of the whole—who had imported into the
country their own views, and contributed more to awaken re.
ligious animosities than any other cause that could be named.
He did not speak as one inattentive to the
question, for he
hail anxiously watched both the opinions and actors to whose
agency he attributed so much evil. The foundation of the
Kildare-street Society was one step taken against religious tolera-
tion ; but the flame was not sufficiently excited for those who were
not so anxious for the advancement of Christian charity as for the pro-
mulgation of their own particular views. What was then done ? A
misl.ion, composed of Mr. Gordon and others, came, and, in the mag-
nitude of their power, thought that by calling together assemblies in the
market places for the purpose of religious controversy they were making
themselves Apostles, and that they would at once determine in their
large assemblages those points on which some of the wisest and best of
mankind had differed. Had it not been for these political and religious
mountebanks, who defied the Priests to polemical debates, the Pro-
testant religion would now have stood on a different and a better basis.
The Honourable Gentleman had created evidence against himself
by the questions he had put to his Protestant correspondent, and
he was sorry to hear those questions cheered by Honourable Gen-
tlemen opposite.—(Cheers from the Opposition Benches.) What would
be the effect if a similar series of questions were asked of a Diss luting
Minister by a Scotch seeker of grievances ?—(Laughter, and cries of
" Oh, oh, oh f") If these questions had been so put to a clergyman of
the Established Church, how would they have been dealt with by the
Hon. Member? The Hon. Gentleman was in fact about to establish
an inquisition. It was in Venice that accusations against individuals
were cast into a lion's mouth ; now, the Honourable Gentleman was no
lion, but in opening his mouth and cars to such information as that he
had showed that there were other beings on earth who were equally
susceptible.—(A laugh.) yet,
after all, the Honourable Gentleman's
charges were Falstaff's halfpenny worth of bread, the truth, to the six
gallons of sack, the falsehood. The flonourabte Gentleman judged like
a partisan who saw only through one distorted medium. He judged on
information, derived from a few weeks' personal experience of Ire-
land.—(Hear.)

Mr. GOULBURN said that the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman
was the most singular one it had ever been his good fortune to hear in
that House. He had begun it by inculcating Christian charity, and he
had continued and ended it by casting every term of unchristian and un-
charitable reproach which his vocabulary could furnish upon his Hon.
Friend. Nay, not content with that, lie had eigrnatized the country to
which he belonged in the same spirit of headlong ze?'• Now he (Mr.
GoulPurp) did not think the Right Honourable Gentleman's practice