The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-11 00:00:00

license for carrying arms. He did not think it right
that those who were innocent should be obliged to
pay the expenses of the constabulary who were sent
into the disturbed districts. They ought to be
cautious before they gave the large powers con-
tained in the Bill to the Lord-Lieutenant. Above
all, he thought that the liberal Members of that
House should pause before they consented to give
such powers to any one. He was not opposed to the
clause respecting the bearing of arms, but would resist
the other clauses. He would not, however, oppose the
motion for going into Committee.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. O'FLAHERTY did not think that this Bill

would reach the evils of Ireland, which were of too
deep a nature to be cured by a measure like the
present.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR said that if time were given
for the expression of public opinion in this country
against the abrogation of the constitution, it would be
sufficient of itself to stop the further progress of the
Bill. It was because the Bill was a violation of the
constitution that he had so much opposed the measure,
and because the Government had not produced any
remedial measures. He thought the ordinary law, if
properly and efficiently executed, would be sufficient
to put an end to crime in Ireland. He would ask
them, therefore, not to arm the 'landlords of
Ireland with such a terrible engine as this Bill would
put into their hands. He would give his determined
resistance to every clause in the Bill.
Mr. REYNOLDS said, he did not intend to
give any factious opposition to this Bill. He
opposed the measure on constitutional grounds, and
because he thought it would be perfectly useless
to effect the object it professed to have in view.
There had been already enacted thirty coercion Bills
against Ireland, and that fact alone was enough to
prove that a measure of this kind would be ineffectual.
lie believed it was admitted that there was generally
less crime in 1847 in Ireland than in previous years.
There were nineteen murders and attempts at mur-
ders, but of these no less than eleven were directed
against farmers. As a body, he could not say much
in favour of the landlords of Ireland, though there
were many most excellent men amongst them. But
they were not exclusively the oppressors. He be-
lieved that there was greater oppression exercised by
the men in frieze coats upon those who were under
them than perhaps by any others.—(Hear, hear.)
Ile was disposed to place the greatest confidence in
the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, and in the Right
lion. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland; but he
would not place in the hands of any man the un-
constitutional powers which this Bill would give
them. The Honourable Gentleman then referred
to the outbreaks in Wales, and reminded the
House that the constitution was not suspended in
order to suppress them. Why, he asked, did not
the Government try the effect of the ordinary law
and issue special commissions ? One of the effects of
the measure would be to encourage the spy system,
and those who were acquainted with Ireland must be
aware that if informers could not find guilty persons
they would bring accusations against the innocent to
fill their pockets. The fate of -the present Bill he
knew to bo inevitable, and that it would pass in all its
integrity ; but he felt that it would not disarm the
marauder and murderer, while it would disarm the
best preserver of the public peace—the farmer. He
would have no objection to vote for a Bill to enact
that no man in Ireland should be permitted to keep
arms unless he were rated to the relief of the poor.
He saw no benefit in entrusting arms to men who had
no dwellings. But he would go still farther, and
enact that no man should be permitted to carry those
arms beyond the precincts of his own farm or pro-
perty unless licensed to kill game. He would also
make it criminal for any but a privileged person to
carry arms at night. Indeed, he considered that her
_Majesty's Government had been guilty of great neglect
in not applying a legal remedy before now to the pos-
session of arms, and that if they had done so, many
of the crimes they had heard of would not have been
committed.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet,
the Secretary of State for the Home Department
referred in his statement to the attack in Wales upon
Dr. Bowring, and insinuated that the course pursued
on that occasion by the people, whereby the offenders
were so speedily brought to justice, was not such a
course as would have been pursued in Ireland
under similar circumstances, but that the offenders,
on the contrary, would be secreted and protected.
Now he (Mr. Reynolds) could mention a parallel
case. Mr Prim, a paymaster under the Board of
Works, was travelling in Kilkenny on a jaunting car,
when attacked by highway robbers, with whom he
exchanged shots, but by whom he was eventually
robbed and murdered. The authorities went imme-
diately in pursuit of the murderers, and owing to the
aid given them by the people, soon arrested them, and
they were convicted and executed. He could mention
several such cases in Ireland. He had himself travelled
through all parts of Ireland, it being known at the
time that he had large sums of money with him,
and he was never once molested. That showed
that the crimes of Ireland were exclusively agrarian,
and being so were attributable to the misgovernment
of the landlords. fie was sorry to see in that House
so strong a disposition to screen the landlord and
malign the people of Ireland, whereas, if the cases
were fairly considered, the crimes of the people
could be traced in a great degree to the conduct of
the landlords. lie would offer no factious opposi-
tion to the Bill. If it were a good Bill, the sooner
it passed the better.—(Hear, hear.) It it were a bad
Bill, the sooner it passed, the sooner would his pro-
phecy as to its ineffctive character fulfilled.
After a few words from Colonel ACTON in
support of the Bill, the House went in Committee.
On clause 1,
Mr. J. O'CONNELL moved to substitute the
words "for the prevention of crime and outrage," the
words "for the punishment and prevention of crime
and outrage in certaiu districts.' His object was to
limit the operation of the Bill to districts that were
disturbed.
Mr. It. M. FOX feared very much that the clause
would extend crime, instead of checking it, by
driving ill-disposed persons from proclaimed into un-
proclaimed districts, which their conduct would have
a tendency to disturb.

Sir G. GREY said the object of this clause was to
give the Bill a general application, in order that the
Lord-Lieutenant might apply it to any part of Ire-
land in which crime and outrage occurred. The
alteration of the words would do no good, and it might
do harm.

Mr. F. O'CONNOR had said at first that this Bill
was only " a wedge," and the Right Hon. Baronet's
statement proved the truth of his position. It now
appeared that the Bill was to have a general and not
a local application.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY—Where threatening letters were
sent in a district, or where conspiracies were shown
to exist, the Lord-Lieutenant might find it necessary
to declare it disturbed. All he wanted was not to
limit the discretion of the Lord-Lieutenant.
Colonel DUNNE agreed with the Hon. Member
for Longford (Mr. Fox). He could not see why the
arms, in a district declared to be disturbed, should
not be handed over a hedge into a district not declared
to be disturbed, and where they would be safe from
seizure.

Mr. GROGAN also thought the remarks of the
Membor for Longford deserved consideration. Tf the
Ihll passed AS it. Stlo,l, an ill disposed person pas.ing
from Kilkenny-, ishicli war proclaimed, into Wex-
ford, which was not, might bring down on the peace-
able people of the latter county all the pains and the
penalties of this Act of Parliament.
Mr. REYNOLDS said that bearing in mind that
these boundaries of counties were merely imaginary
lines, it was most unjust to subject the people within
such lines to penalties for offences committed by per-
sons living out of them.
Mr. FRENCH thought that on the contrary the
tendency of the limit of penalty would have the good
effects of giving the people of a particular district a
peculiar interest in arresting an offender.—(Divide.)
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said he should press his
amendment, but
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL begged him to withdraw
it. If a Bill of this kind was to be passed at all, the
less they fettered the-powers of the Lord-Lieutenant
the better.
Mr. MUNTZ had felt some difficulty in voting
upon this Bill, becaause, although he could not re-
fuse a Bill of 'this sort, under the peculiar circum-
stances, yet he was bound to look with jealousy on all
these infringements on the liberty of the subject. On
the suject of the present amendment he must, however,
say, that he thought the powers it gave ought to be as
limited as possible.
The Committee divided—
For the amendment
Against it

.. 203
Majority . . •.• -199
Mr. F. O'CONNOR moved the insertion of the
words " On the representation of the magistrates of
the district."

Sir G. GREY opposed the amendment, which was
'Alen withdrawn and the clause agreed to.
Clauses 2 to 7 were, after a short discussion, agreed

On of ause 8, relating to the levying of the cess,
Mr. J. O'CONNELL proposed an amendment, to
the effect that the new cess should be divided between
the owner and the occupier.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR said that if the Legislature
made the whole burden fall upon the landlord, there
would not be a single crime in Ireland.—(Laughter.)
Sir G. GREY said that the object of fixing, the
occupier with an immediate burden was to supply an
additional motive for the prevention of outrage.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL ultimately withdrew his
amendment, and the clause was agreed to.
Clause 9 was agreed to without discussion.
On clause 10, relating to the delivering of arms to
the civil authorities,
Mr. F. O'CONNOR protested against this clause
as altogether unfair and unconstitutional, and dared
the Government to pass it.