The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-26 00:00:00

English good sense to stake a machine without knowing for
what? He (Mr. O'Connell) had great respect for the talents
of the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter (Sir William

Follett). It was impossible not to feel such respect. There
was a fascination about his eloquence that could be derived
only from the highest emanations of talent, and, he thought,
kindliness of disposition. He (Mr. O'Connell) did not mean
to pay any idle compliment to€ one who differed so
decidedly with him in political opinion, lrit he thought that
that Hon. and Learned Gentleman united the qualities
of a powerful advocate with judicial determination ; he would
make a good Judge, but he (Mr. O'Connell) was greatly sur-
prised to hear him speak of the beneficial interest. He (Mr.
O'Connell) retained his &d love of profession so far as to
trespass on the House to show how clear a case he had against
the opinions advanced by the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen.
The Noble Lord the Member for Northumberland (Lord Howick)
had attributed to him (Mr. O'Connell) opinions on the subject
of beneficial interest, which had not been uttered by him, and
which he wished to correct. He (Mr. O'Connell) thought
that the beneficial interest was that which it was worth to a
man after deducting his labour and cultivation. So that his
own labour was no more an ingredient in the beneficial interest
thin if he had got another man to perform that labour, He
did not Mame the Noble Lord for the statement which he had

attributed to him (Mr. O'Connell). It was no doubt owing to
mistake. He (Mr. O'Connell) stated that the freehold fran-

of 10. was first created by the Emancipation Act; by
that the franchise was, as he believed, clearly of the value of
101. He would not go on quoting what this man or that man
said on the subject.—( Hear.) It was manifest the re-
.

porters cii not Understaud what he said on the subject.
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman- then proceeded to compare
the clauses respecting franchise in the Emancipation Act and
the Reform Bi 1, and to contend that if they meant the same
they would have contained the same words, but that if they
meant differently the words would differ, which was the ease.
He was glad to get out of this subject, but he had felt it right
to vindicate the Judges against the attacks made upon them.
He would to Heaven he had suck a Judge as the Hon. ani

Learned Member for Exeter. The Learned Recorder had
- - • • • • - -

read the opinion of Judge Crampton, who had said there was
nothing but a wire-drawn and refined distinction between a
meeting of the Judges in the Court of Exchequer and a meet-
ing in a party in which a brother Judge consults. Was there
not this distinction, that in the
_one case there was a writ of

.. ---
error, and in the other no appeal ?—( Hear, hear.) It. was a
mockery—with all respect•to the Hon. and Learned Member
for Exeter—was it not a mockery to say all the Judges should
be bound by the opinion •of the majority ? The statute ha'l
given an appeal to a single Judge.; it had called for the opinion
of.a single Judge. and he was bound to give it upon oath. Itwas
not given to the twelve Judges, and why not? If they had
done so they must have gone further, and have given it to the
House of Lords. They could not leave the franchises of the
people to the Judges, neither could they give an appeal to the
House of Lords, because they could not give their franchises
to the House of Lords.—(Hear, hear.) He therefore laughed
to scorn this species of courtesy to the Judges which frittered
away the rights of the subject, and took from them the power
of appeal, and he would remind the House that the Stuarts for-
feited the Crown for meddling with the Judges.--(Hear,
hear ) And now he respectfully appealed to the House to
grant them the franchises they demanded. It was the inten-
tion of the Reform Bill to grant it, and he had the authority of
a gentleman would vote against him that it ought to be in-
creased. He had the authority of common sense and
reason, and of every principle• of justice, that they
ought to be put upon an equality with the Eng-
lish. He asked them, therefore, to give them justice.
He had shown them their grievous er.mes towards Ireland

They had been told that .the Orange party had been making
concessions for the last fifty years. But he would tell that
party that they had been for more than a century violating the
treaty of Limerick.—(The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was
here, as throughout the greater part of his speech, heard very
indistinctly, and seemed to labour under peat illness or great
emotion. Scarcely a sentence could be correctly understood
in the gallery.) America had been lost to Great Britain, be-
cause the latter had rejected all terms of conciliation. In
1792, when this country was in a state of apparent security,
the petition of the Roman Catholics for emancipation was
thrown out•upon the motion of Mr. Latouche, the Member for
Kildare. But before the year expired, the aspect of affairs was
changed, and in the November of that year an Emancipation
Act was passed.—( Hear, hear.) They talked to Catholic Ire-
land of ingratitude, but they forgot that they passed the hrst
Act of Emancipation only after they had lost America. It
was (as we understood the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen) one
of the splendid errors of Napoleon that he overlooked the con-
dition of Ireland. •It was the infidelity of Franco that secured
to Great Britain the Catholic priesthood of Ireland.—( II ear,

) And he agreed with his Hon. Friend, the Member for
Limerick, that if an invasion were to take pace to-morrow,

that priesthood would be foremost in sending their flocks in
arms to oppose the invad, rs. But let them be told that they
were demon-priesthood—(Cheers)—that they were surpliced
ruffians—( Cheers, :and some confusion)—let them see the
ant Jezabels of Liverpool sending petitions' with
27,000 signatures so rienouneing them, and let them see the
House of Commons yielding to such petitions—(Cheers,
amidst which the conclusion of the sentence was lost,) " You
tell me" (sa.'d the Hen. and Learned Gentleman) " you do
t;ot feel. Who ever heard of Englishmen feeling?—( Cheers. )
. .

You have a perseverance in your people of which` no othei
nation can boast; and I have not the folly to think I can
terrify you. Ink I will advise.—(Cheers.) I ask you, how long
will son be at peace with France?"—(Cheers.) The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman then proceeded to refer to the returns
laid before the French Chambers to show the state of prepara-
tion for war in which: that nation had placed itself.- There
was in France an army of 500,000 men, with a reserve of
150,000. The French felt themselves humiliated, and they
were watching for the domestic dangers of this country.—
( Hear, hear.) Would it not be wise in such circumstances to
have Ireland in a state of conciliation ?—( Hear.) Trhough
the national strength of this empire, we might set the whole
world in arms at defiance, if the people of the empire were
united, with the confidence of equal rights aid equal justice.
In the kingdoms of Prussia and the Netherlands, it had been
attempted to oppress the Roman Catholic portion
of the people. In the former it had been
deemed wise to make timely concessions ; the
integrity of Prussia was unimpaired. The King of the
Netherlands had adopted an opposite course, and he conse-
quently lost Belgium.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. O'Connell)
would not threaten Hon. Members on the other side of the
House, but he would tell them they were the real Repealers.
—(Cheers.) So much so were.they considered by the people
of Ireland, that he •had been requested to make, the Noble
Lord. the Member for North Lancashire a member of
the Repeal Association.—(Cheers and laughter.) He
was sure no one ever deserved it half so well.—( Hear,
hear.) He admi.ted that it would be unwise of the people of
Ireland to have recourse to violence in their resistance to the
measure; and while he (Mr. O'Connell) had influence in
that country, and while the Catholic clergy, who were their
unpaid magistracy there, could had the people, they would
never again have the pleasure of a rebellion in Ireland.—
( Hear, hear. )i They might have outrages, but they would not
-have a rebellion. The object of the present measure was to
restore the old Orange ascendancy. They taunted the pre-
sent Government with being the slaves of -the Irish party ;
and he believed the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for
Pembroke, was kind enough to quote him la t night. He
wished the Right Hon. Baronet had quoted him more accu-
rately. He bad spoken'of the offer made to him (Mr. O'Con-
nell) of the office of Chief Baron, and said that he was
unwilling to pollute justice in his person. He did not know
'whether the Hon. Baronet used the expression, but if he had
he was .totally mistaken. Looking at the reports he found that
'there was a difference in the expressions, but that the substance
was the same. What he (Mr. O'Connell) had -said was, that-
he had refused the offer of the Justiceship because he had feared,
first, that lie would be compelled to manifest a partiality for
those who differed with him in politics, for the sake of presery •
ing the character of the Bench ; and secondly, because, lest
from an affectation of user-candour, he should not do justice to
those who were his political friends. They would have no such
refusal from Honourable and Learned Gentlemen on the
other side.—(Hear, hear, hear, and laughter.) They
would have no scruples of that kind to contend with.
For the motives he had stoted he had refused the offer
made to him, however much he might have desired to enjoy
the " otium cum dignitate." • But it appears that the people of
Ireland were now to be handed over to the Orange party—that
Orange party who would not allow a man to travel on their
roads. That was the case in civilised Ulster. He had gone to Bel-
fast—he had a right to go there ; and one Magistrate had ac-
cused the Government—because they had sent troops to protect
his life—that they were Repealers, while the windows of the room
in which he was were broken by anmob. He didnot complain of
but he wished to show the spirit which animated the Orange-
men of Ireland. He found in the Irish newspapers, that when
it had been found he had passed unknown through the-town of
Dromore, a large mob collected there, and having fired at his
(Mr. O'Connell's) effigy—he wished to know whether their
arms were registered—afterwards burned it, and, in the midst
of party cries, excited a disturbance in the town, and severely
injured a Roman Catholic who attempted to remonstrate with
them. Those were the men on whose support the party oppo-
site must rely. Need he remind the House-of the assault on a
Roman Catholic's house, some years ago, in Armagh. On
that occasion an Hon. and Gallant Member opposite—and
there did not exist any where a man of a higher charac-
ter—was a witness of the disturbance ; and yet, in that
case, the party went wholly unpunished.—( Hear, hear.)
Again, an Trish party had fired, a few years ago, on
inoffensive children at Molyash, in the county of Monaghan;
and but a !ew days ago an inoffensive individual had been
assailed at a fair at Fermatusgh, and but C.r interference he
might have been grievously injured. All that had happened
in the North, in what was called the flower of Ireland. Let
him again return to statistical details. In four counties only
in Ireland was there a majority of Protestants. In Ulster
itself there was a majority of 116,000 Roman Catholics; while
in the other province the numbers were ten to one, and in the
county of Clare there were 286,000 Roman Catholics and only
5,00013ret est ants. Could they in their endeavours to suppress the
liberties of such a population call out the militia? Could they
insult Ireland by so doing? He believed that they could not.
All that the Irish people asked was justice and equality ; but they
wouldresist to the last the attempt to extinguish their franchises.
Let English Gentlemen recollect the risk they were running,
and for what? 'Why, compared with the risk, it was for no-
thing.—(Cheers.) He should doubtless be told that he had
threatened—that he had used high language.—(Cheers.) He
had spoken in a tone and temper that became the representa-
tive of the Irish people.—(Cheers and laughter from the Op
position.) He was the representative of the great majority
of them—(Cheers)—and he was trusted by them.—(Cheers.
He should be told that lie had spoken sedition, but let them
recollect that he had spoken it to warn them of something
worse than sedition. He would be degrading himself and his
country if he were to submit to take any right of franchise
less than England.—(Cheers.) If they pasted that Bill, they
would be depriving him of a great part of his power over the
Irish people. He asked them to do so—(Cheers)—he asked
them to disarm him of his power, by doing justice to his
country—(Cheers. )—but if they refused, they would arm him
with ten-fold power, because they would arm him with right.—
( Loud cheers. )
Sir ROBERT PEEL could not accede to the justice of the
eulogium which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had passed
Upon himself, that he had spoken in a tone and temper worthy
of the representative of the Irish people. —(Loud cheers. )
Any speech delivered in a tone and temper more unworthy of
that character he had never heard. —( Vehement cheering.)
He did not complain of the high tone he had assumed, but
he di 1 complain of the apparent delight with which
lie had gloated on the history of the past animosities between
the two countries.—(Loud cheers.) He had met with no
sympathy however—k Continued cheering)—not because the
House was indifferent to the welfare of Ireland—(Cheers)—
not because.they were actuated by a desire of reviving past
disputes between England and Ireland.—(Loud cheers.) lie
would tell the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that there were
notlen men in that House who responded to his efforts to rip
up and exasperate all the old animosities.—( Load cheers.
What was the use of dwelling on the history of vast differences
—of alluding to what the Hon. Gentleman 'called the oppi es-
sip of seven centuries.,—(CheeiS:)i The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman allitcrect to a time 'when he said that a wolf's load.
waS -iafued at'the same price as the head of po Irish Catholic,
and would have it insinuated that the spirit of those days
actuated the Legislature of the piesent. And on that part of
• a •
the representation pt; the Ron. and Learned Gentleman, he
would asp; the Noble Lord oPposite, the leader of that-House,
and *the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland, if they be-
t eyed t hat that was a correct assertion. —( Vehement cheering. )
And in the allusion to the part which Ireland. might take in
case of the growing difficulties of this country, he would again
say that he believed • the 1-lon. and Learned Gentleman was
holding a language unworthy of the representative of the Irish

people.—( Loud cheers.) He believed that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman was libelling his country—( Vehement
cheering)—when lie insinuated that they would nbt assist us
in repelling the attacks of France or America; if by any un-
fortunate occurrence of circumstances a quarrel . should arise
with either of those countries. He had heard with pleasure
the mere generous, and he believed the more just representa-
tions of an Irish representative—of an Irish Roman Catholic,
who, indignant at the attacks made upon the fair fame and
character of his country last night—in the course of that night's
debate said that he did not believe that if a quarrel came his
countrymen would separate themselves from the destinies of
. .

this country, but had made it his proud boast that, whatever
might be their domestic quarrels on the registration, or the
extension of the franchise, the Roman Catholic priests would
be the first to rally their flocks round the standard of England,
and forget all minor differences in their eager support of the
common cause. —( Cheers.) Hehoped the Right Hon: the Secre-
tary at War, the Right Hon. the Vice- President of the Board of
Trade: and the Hon. Member for Liskeard, the three who
had attempted by menace to extort from the House con-
cessions, even against their reason and against their
conviction, if so it might be—he hoped they had
_

listened to the speech of the Honourable and ,earned
Alernter—he hoped they had well considered what prospect
there was of those concessions being made on the same grounds,

arguments for the subsequent Menaces—he hoped flat after
the candid avowal of the Ilon. and Learned Gentleman they

would consider what further concessions the Hon and Learned

Gentleman might hereafter demand in the course, perhaps, of
next Session, as the price of the purchase of peace.—( Cheers. )
That was the only part of the speech of the Hon. Gentleman
for which he could give him credit. The Hon. and Leamcd

Gentleman said, thaY: if they granted him that conceision, it
would disarm him of much of his power. But what was the
tenor of the who'e of the first part of the speech of the Hoe.
Gentleman? Di,l he not tell them that although they had
made a sacrifice of one-fourth of the revenues of the

Established Church fur the sake of peace and conciLa-
tion that that would now be of no advantage unless
the other three-fourths were sacrificed ?—( Loud cheer-
ing.) What was the spirit of the whole of the speech of the
Honourable and Learned Gentleman? With the expres-
sions of peace and. conciliation on his lips, such a deter-
mined profession of intolerance he had never heard —(Loud
cheers.) Why he had brought it forward as a matter of grave
charge against a clergyman of the Church of England that he
had done, what ? That he had petitioned the House of Com-
mons. Why,`the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had begun
Lis own speech by readieg a petition to the Howe of Commons
from a,Vicar-General of the Roman Catholic Church. if a

Roman Catholic Vicar-General might, in s•roug and emphatic
langu ge, not immediately connected with his religious func-
- _ _

petition the HOUEC of Commons—and who que'stionel his
right to do so—surely the Hon. and Learned Gentleman

might extend the same measure of justice to a minister
of the Established Church, who, having. heard that the
sacrifice of a quarter of the revenues of that Church

had done nothing for the purchase of peace, but that the re-
mainder was required, had presented a petition to draw the at-
tenfion of Parliament. Surely the Hon. Gentleman could
not contend that that was inco-rect or unreasonable. —( Loud
cheering.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had com-
plained of attacks on the Judges. Certain of the Judges had
agreed with him in opinion, and their opinion had been com-
mented on ; and the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that
nothing could be so unwarrantable nr so unworthy as to call
the purity of the Judicial Bench in question. But five minutes
had not elapsed before the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, find-
ing that the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench (Mr. Justice
Crampton) differed with him in opinion, attacked that Learned
Judge in the molt vehement manner, forgetting all he had
said of the unworthiness of these attempts at the degradation
of the Judicial Bench.—(Cheers.) If the extension of the fran-
chise were just—if it were cons'stent with past engagements—if
it were consistent with the • great legislative Act which had
given emancipation to the Roman Catholics—if it would con-
duce to the order and social welfare of Ireland he would en-
treat the House to forget the inflammatory lanugage of the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman—to forget the spirit of his decla-

mation, which was so calculated to inju-re any cause, and to do
what was just in spate of the advocacy of the Learned Gentleman.
If, however, they were not satisfied that it was politic to dis-
turb settlements that now existed—not to disturb but to sub-
vert them—if they thought it would not procure the social
welfare of Ireland, then he would say, don't pass it in the hope
that by passing it they would secure the favour of that Hon.
and Learned Gentleman, or advance the cause of conciliation.

—(Cheers.) Why did he say this ? The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman had insinuated that the diminution, or rather the
want of an extended representation in Ireland, was a greater
injury than no representation at all. The Hon. Gentleman
had used these words, that it was not only an injury but an in-
sult to the pe Tie cf Ireland to give that country 105 Members.
The Hon. Member had also used these words which were appli-
cable to the Noble Lord oppnsite, that it was natural chat
those who were injured and Insulted should continue to hate
them. Now he ( Sir 11 Peel) was not the man who hai in-

lured or insulted them. It was the Government who passed
the Reform Bill that was responsible. --(Hear, hear.) Would
it not be wise, therefore, that they should well consider the.
whole of the question, not making any partial distinctions ; but
if they were to make concessions against their reason and con-
viction for the sake of peace, they should snake the whole con-
cession that was demanded from them, and not give to the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman that by which he would extort the
rest, without even purchasing a temporary calm.—(Cheering. )
Supposing that the foreign prospects were more cloudy next
year than now, and supposing that the Honourable Gen-
tleman should give h:s notice for !extended 'representation,
and supposing that the Honourable Gentleman had said,
If you don't give it to me I shall force it from you, would that
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary at War, tell them that
they shoeld csncede that which was asked, for the purpose of
making Irtland available as the right arm of England? The
Hon, Member fir Liskeard had seemed to dwell with much
complacency upon that state of things, when insurrection did not
break out, but when he said by the cunning device of the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman insurrection was ready to break out.— '
(Hear.) He had heard with disgust it stated that the present
was a question not of votes but of arming—(Cheers)—would,
the demand for increased representation be a question of arm-
ing and not of votes? Would the Honourable and Learned
Gentleman promise, if this concession were made, that lie
would abandon all future schemes of agitation, and de-
part from those devices by which he keeps a country
under the menaces of insurrection.—(Cheers.) He had al-
ready disturbed the peace of the country, interrupted its in-
dustry, and prevented the importation of capital into it—
(Cheers )—and would he accept the compliment of the Hon.
Member for Liskeard, that he it was who had devised an in-
strument eminently applicable for the purposes of insurrection?
If the present measure was a just one—if it was for the welfare
of Ireland, then he trusted that, notwithstanding the state-
ments of that Hon. and Learned Gentleman, the House would
show its determination to do justice to Ireland. Let those
who had public duties to pc: form claim to themselves the
privilege of dispassionately considering whether the measure
then under their consideration was a measure perfectly con-
sistent with tho best interests of Ireland, and whether
it was calculated to advance the independence of the electors,
and promote the social welfare of the country.—( Hear, hear.)
He would now consider what the real nature of the present
proposal was. Could they deny that it was a proposal to sub-
vert the present representative system in Ireland, and to give
a new representative system? By the Bill it was proposed, in
the place of the present franchise in Ireland, to have a declared
franchise, and rating to-the extent of fit In England they
had a declared franchise, independent and beyond all rent and
charges. In Ireland they proposed to attach no such condition
to the freehold—the mere rating of the freehold was sufficient
te,give a vote,--k gear, hear'.) The . freehold .it self, might' be -
worse than nothing ; there might be mortgages or other in-
cumbrances upon it absorbing altogether the profits.
In Ireland that would be no disqualification.
(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The freeholder, once rated, was not
called upon to give that- assurance which the English freeholder
must Five, that his freehold was above rents and charges. In
Ireland the freehold franchise was to be entirely free from
them. They proposed a lease freehold franchise of fourteen
years, for which they required nothing more than a rating to
the poor. Of coarse residence was not required. All that
was required was occupancy. That franchise was a more ex-
tensive one than the household franchise. It was not the old
scot and lot franchise which was abolished, becatr,o the scot
and lot voter was dependent ; far it was not necessary fur a
five pound leaseholder to pay any taxes ;it was not necessary
for him to pay the Poor-rates. Nay, it was not necessary that
the property which he held -should be liable to the Poor-rates.
Though his property was chargeable to the Poor-rate, he was
under no obligation. to pay it. Therefore, in the ca eof the
freehold franchise, as he had said before, it was free from
rents and incumbrances. In the case of the leasehold fran-
chise, it exempted the voter altogether from any obligation to
pay the rale in respect of which the franchise was acquired. In
the towns they had reduced the franchise arbitrarily from ten
pounds to five. had they assigned any reason for this ? Had
they proved that the franchise in towns was diminished?—
( Hear, hear.) -Had they any suspicion that it was so ? Nqw,
he did not intend to enter at all into the details of this ques.
tion ; not one word would he say about beneficial interest,
not one word about the solvent tenant test. When his Noble
Friend's Bill came on lie should be ready to discuss the de-
tails of it; " but I will not permit myself " (addressing
the Government benches), "to be diverted from the
consideration of the deformities of your measure by being
drawn into a discussion upon the clauses of my Noble Friend's."—
(Loud cheers.) The introduction of that Bill was the main
argument upon which this measure was made to rest.—
Nut one word had they heard from Ministers in defence of
this measure.—(Hear, hear.) They had not said one ward
to convince them that they were consulting the real interests
of the people ; they had not said a word to prove that the mea-
sure would be for the social welfare of Ireland. The single
argument which they brought forward as a justification of this
measure was, that his Noble Friend had brought forward
some other measure • for the amendment of the registration.
Now, in order that he might not. be misconstrued, he would
say at once that he admitted the evils which were so generally
complained of arising out of the uncertainty of the franchise,
and the necessity that there was for adopting some mode of de-
fining and determining it. He admitted, too, that these evils
were aggravated by the unfortunate differences which existed
in Ireland upon the subject. With whom the blame of 'that
difference rested lie would not inquire ; but he was bound to
respect the motives of the Judicial Bench. It was perfectly
unjust, however,. to object to the Bill of the Noble Lord be-
cause he had not suggested a satisfactory mode of defining the
franchise. It was not just to say, You shall not cure the ad-
mitted evils until Parliament can agree to a definition
of the franchise. Still snore monstrous and unjust
was it to say, We will not allow- you to cure the
imperfections of the Irish reistration unles you consent
to subvert the Reform Act.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Menlbr.
for the Queen's county had said yesterday that nothing
be more disgusting and demoralizing than the
of Irish registration, and those evils were admitted,
_aoni a
I set
five years were suffered to elapse without the profatosiaiirrht that
present system
t
medy. The Member for Carlow had statedo;
the franchise
the most imperfect and absurd definition
year, said the Hon.
was that adopted in the boroughs.
,eaar motion Was made
should be an
01 Baronet,yeuroawttrs eksisei gf
thetl se 3Hlei nuissete r
thati al bcheLnaecrlei benches,
instruc-
tion to the Committee before they proceeded with the Bill, to
define the franchise. Who opposed that? The Noble Lord
and Hon Gentlemen opposite. They divided against that in-
struction, and thus decided upon this ground, that the matter
required serioas consideration, that they had not sufficient evi-
dence, that they were not in a condition to define the franchise.
Now, he would ask, in what better condition were they then ?
What had been the result of their subsequent deliberation?
By the Bill they made a complete revolution in the franchise.
It destroyed the freehold franchise altogether. It was not only
imperfect, but it abolished altogether the test of profit de-
rivable from the freehold. It would work a complete subvers
sion of the franchise. It was a franchise worse than that of
tour and lot. It was more extensive than the household
suffrage,t
etnr utasenedtiht,
taleitre
et
there
eoirueelt dew ask,aastiti
Toiwemat,sri
titten nehgeoan
Catholics is,
nteenweßi
entered
with
lei
retelfide
Act?en -
nt
passed without the slightest
gltagme.ams
Cawaths olic party,no compact precluded
itlbftbtehaßtomßailnl
Ite;l,r)
C;iattolLsv
them from agitating any question of
thought proper. But a compact Was entered into that
had all the force of a public engagement,
pact was gat 'reduced to writing
or embodied in Act of although thatci o,arn-
r -
liament n yet the 'Noble Secretary
for the Colonies would not
deny thatahere were compacts made which bound public men,
and which Legislatures ought respectto if they hoped to gain
confidence in their decisions. The declarations of Lords
.Althorp and Grey, when the Reformßill was under discussion,
had already been quoted. He would therefore pass on to
what fell from the fion. Secretary for the Colonies in 1837.

EVENING EDITION.

Upon that occasion he said that, having forwarded the Reform
Bill, he telt himself bound, by the engagements then entered
into, and that although the people were not precluded from
requiring a reconstruction of the representation-( Hear, hejr)
--yet he would be guilty of a breach of ' faith
and honour towards those with whom lie thus acted, if he
caunteaenced such demands. He quoted that for the purpose
of demonstrating, that, although it might be competent for
Parliament to revoke and repeal a solemn act like the Reform
Bill, aithoasth there was no written p'edge given, yet there
might be circumstances in which public men, having engaged
the consent of large masses of the people, having made con-
cessions on one ride and compromises on the other-there
might be circumstances wherein, for the public interests, it was
necessary to adhere to the promises and the declarations
then made. Now, what were the circumstances under which
be brought forward the Emancipate ;n Bid. History was now
asserting its rights, and it was hardly necessary for
him to preserve that delicacy which must be main-
tained by a Minister of the Crown on recent
events. It was perfectly well known that in bringing that Bill
forward they had to contend with the scruples of the Sovereign.
It was brought forward in 1829, and in the preceding year the
House of Lords, by majority of 44, refused to entertain the
question of relief at ale He brought fog ward that measure,
and it was perfectly well understood that before it passed the
constituent body in Ireland should, if possible, be made inde-
pendent-that the 40s. freeholders should be abolished, and a
10/. franchise substituted. lie had no doubt it was upon the
faith of that condition that the Bill received the assent of many
-it was upon that assurance that many gave it a re-
luctant assent. The Noble Secretory for the Colonies
would not deny that, fir, only a few nights ago, he admitted
that that formed part of the contract. Even the Noble Secre-
tary fee Ireland acted upon a different impression from that
which actuated him now.- He refused leave even to the Hon.
and Learned Member fur Dublin to bring in a Bill for the alto-
ration of the franchise ; he rested his refusal upon the double
ground that the measure thee proposed was a measure that
would subvert the settlement made by the passing of the Catho-
lic Relief Bill of 1829, and that made by the Reform Bill in 1832.
Now he had said last year, and with perfect sincerity, that he
was for the fulfilment, on the spirit in which it was brought for-
ward, of the Reform Bill. He adhered to that declaration, and
he thought they were bound to say that the spirit in which it
was brought forward should le fulfilled on each side, and that el.'
the conditions attached to it should be performed. So far
from wishing to restrict the bona fide franchise in Ireland
by any measure of registratiOn, he confessed he should see with
great pain (he was sure his Noble Friend entertained the same
sentiments), any great diminution of the franchise in Ireland
inconsistent with the spirit either of the Relief or the Reform
Bill. He should suspend his judgment until he saw the evi-
dence. He should know the extent to which it prevailed-
first he should learn the fact ascertained, next the extent, and
next the causes that had led to it. He should see whether it
was attributable to the reluctance of the landlot d to grant leases,
or whether it did not arise from the unwillingness of the unfortu-
nate freeholder to be placed in such a position between his
landlord and his priest.-(Hear.) • He must know all these
things before lie could form his judgment as to whether the
remedy was'necessary ; and, above all, before he framed a judg-
ment of the nature of the remedy to be applied. He should
inquire whether the restriction of the franchise arose from the
nue illingriess or refusal of the landlord to grant taxes, and if
that were to be the Alin, there was no remedy whatever. The
new franchise in counties depended on the grant of leases,
and it might be defeated by the refusal of the landlord. How
could he decide upon so important a question, and advise a.
remedy, for the evil 'alleged-to exist, when, for aught he
knew, that remedy might be perfectly insuiliciere?- -t, Hear. ),
He had said it was made a condition for the Relief Bill thaw
the 40s. freeholders should be • abolished. Their object was to
establish, if possible, an independent constituency in Ireland-
a constituency not independent merely of their landlords, but
their intention was to establal, if possible, a constituency
that shoUld be free - from the influence of the p: Test as well
as the undue and unjust influence of the landlord. -(Cheers.)
Had they abolished the 40s. freeholder on wanton and arbi-
trary grounds-was it a mere sacrifice to the caprice of any
party that required it? Why there was the most irrefragablw
proof from the Roman Catholics themselves, that they were a
curse to Ireland.-(Renewed cheers.) The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman denied that he had given such evidence. Let
him look at pages 163, IES, and 167 of the Lords'
Report.-(Hear, hear.) It was upon the evidence of
Roman Catholics that they had abolished the 40s. freeholders_
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in his evidence, had marine
a reservation in favour of fee-simple freeholders It was quite,
true Inc had. but he (Sir R. Peel) wad like to know hews
many bona fide fee-simple 40s. freeholders there were then-ex-
isting? The Hon. and Learned Member's language was, " The
system of 40s. freeholders in Ireland was essentially different
from that in England. There were, however, some who had a
fee-simple estate, and these nobody would meddle with. As re-
ga'ded those who load a derivative interest there was an immense
accumulation of perjury from the mueiplicity of oaths,
and they were part se the live stock of the estate."-(Choirs. )
lie was risked, Da you think you would avoid the evil ofe
patens; by raising the franchise?"-and his answer w-ee,
" I do."-(Cheirs.) " A man who had the 101. fratwerese,
would be known among his neighbours ; he would have a
character to preserve." "Do you think the raising of the
qualith ation would be productive of great benefit to Ireland ?"
-" I think it would."-(Cheers ) In my humble judg-
ment, it would he no small benefit, if we got rid of any por-
tion of the perjury, and it is the commencement of what we want,
much in Ireland, a substantial yeomanry."-(Loud cheers. ),
Now, let the Hon. and Learned Member aces:tent for the fees.:
dence and the denial.-(Renewed cheers.) Yes, it wee ow
y
evidence of the Hon. and Learned Member, and of th 4 Rm..
and Learned Membn• for Tipperary-they were the men weee
had sacrificed the 40s. freelialders.-( Loud cheers,) They
had given the evidence that had tended to conv;inee the public
mine that, as it existed the franchise we.:l b. mockery of in-,
dependence. One instance was given, when a gentleman treat
ma le 2,001) electors in his estate in Tipperary. The Hon. and:
Learned Member now argued that, because parties were
poor, they were not the less entitled to the franchise, anal that it
was an insult to Ireland to withhold the frauchisc front !the poor.
That was the Gentleman who held that langusgo in the year
1825, " 'there were heart-rending scenes following elections,
and after al political feelings, it was difficult to reconcile one-
self to those miseries." Hs (Mr. O'Connell) was asked s'ele
following question :-" Did not that system give a direct. ere_
mium to mismanagement?" Answer, " certainly didear
were complaints made even to the clergy of wrote'.
JCS being
compelled to swear that they were forty shilling .d there
frecheldere
when they could not conscientious'y have given teat oath." If
he (Sir It. Peel) supported in a liberal stern
mere letter, the constituency which it' , and not in the
V
establish -if he asked the ten , r een' was intended to
semi freehold to be
constituted at• it was by
he was to be told that that was +ea Emancipation Act,
en insult to Ireland. Because
he would not add to the se
emu which was proved in the year
1825 to have exhibiteed "heart rending scetaes-to ruin the
freeholder NN 110 vetees against his landlord-to expose wretches
to perjury, or F.,,rearinl6..
that they were forty shilling freeholders
when they really were ,not"-he was told that he insulted the
people Of Ireland, Did he insult them when he sought to
establish that " respectable yeomanry" which had been men-
tioned. lie (Sir R. Peel) wanted to show Hon. Members
that the sacrifice of the 40s. freeholders was not an arbitrary
act of theirs-that the abolition of that system was for the social
welfare of Ireland as shown from the evidence that they had
read, Anti that they should not now turned upon with a
motion for the re-establishment of the 40s. freeholders ; that it
should 'not now be said that they intended to injure and insult,
Ireland, when they only desired to adhere to the compact which
had been made-when they Wished 'to peevent that mockery of
independence which the 405. freeholders exhibited.-(Opposi-
tints cheers.) He would take the evidence of a Roman Catholic
priest, the Rev. Mr. Tighe ; and that clergyman was asked
what would be the effect of making a 10/. freehold as the basis
of the franchise? He replied that he thought it would establish
an order of freeholders that, in his opinion; from their intelli-
gence, would go an moral agents to vote.-( Hear, hear,
hear.) The majority of tat House-such was the
effusion into it--did net well remember the 40s. freehold
system. They who were some twenty years in Parliament
understood that system. He would give a detail of it to those
who did not understand the syastem. He took it from high
authority-from the evidence of county Members, who were
not prejudiced in favour of the Conservative interest., as was
made clear by Her Majesty's Government-the evidence which
he would quote was that of Mr. Dominick Browne, the then
Member for Mayo. Here then was a short detail of the 40s.
freehold system. That Gentleman said, " Suppose a farm of
100 acres Wee to be let out, it would be subdivided into 20 or
25 portions-it would be let at a greater rent than the
grazier could afford for it, and those persons who
occupied the land would register es 405. freeholders out of
these separate holdings, for which they paid a rack rent. lie
knew upwards of sixty persons on one lease who were joint
tenants, and paid a rent of 70!. a year, which he believed to be
a rack rent, and every one of them registered." Sixty persons
paying a rack rent of 701. a year, and each person registering
as er 40s. freeholder ! The gentleman before quoted (Mr.
Browne) knew a place where sixty-six persons were 'Mile
upon Bishop's land, which in Ireland did not create afreehold.
The object l' the landlord was to create a freehoid for the men
living on the Bishop's land, and for that purpose he
let them a barren mountain-part of his estate-at
124 a year in a joint tenantry, and every one of these
sixty-six registered. Hb also knew of a good num-
ber of tenants who had taken leases in 1814, when land
was exceedingly dear. These persons had been two years re-
gistered as 40s. freeholders by virtue of their leases ; they
thought the
received a reduction from their landlords of 50 per
cent to enable them to vote ; but still he trheonte.
But
landlaid was entitled to enforce the whioletn
which the
there were further details of the
hmeanvonteer..
The landlord
landlords secured the dependence off tune(
a 40s. freehold,
attached to a small p
himself, and, in doing so
over the tenant,
secured
40s. freeholder. Now, it was
secured the dependence of t
t was to prevent such abuses,
ds as these--it which freehold, by the ope-riaSoetnooof the control that he had
upon such giouti f conciliating the Roman Ca-
tholics,
e o
that°swhich could contribute to the
veolfutd'tn:teiTf-"rvierresn) consider whether the Iran-
and not merely for the purP
Irelasnod,mtuheaht theeoyaltaprloauingehdt
of. forwardpia
aoeialimbpurot
the
oppositled (now introduce would be liable to just
measure which
perversion to is tic 1' the 40s. freehold
system w as?
the same for a short time, all undue influence of
the
Let them put aside,.
fran-
chise Noble
whi Lordeh h e
1 the
and inquire mac t icrfranchise proposed may not
parte,
landlord
him
perverted to the worst purposes, and to obstruct the
oe
hb Noble
der Lord t
opr
No.optoes,e d
btyh that
givingvery
be .Ireland of see al
rogress in e improvement.- ( Hear, hear,
would
of land or tenements to he rated at 5/. provided he had held it
over fourteen years. Now it was admitted there was great
political excitement inlreland; a great desire to command poli-
ticalqueaalrfy) aThleiouNs
influence through the means of votes. The objection to
his Noble Friend's Bill was, that it would operate a; a restric-
tion of the franchise ; the boast of the Noble Lord's Bill was,
that it would extend the franchise. Could he (Sir It. Peel)
have a more conclusive proof that there was in Ireland a natu-
ral di,position by the use of land to increase political influence_
Now where would be the difficulty of procuring float influence
which the 40s. freeholds gave by means of the Noble Lord's Bill ?
By means of the Noble Lord's Bill any man whet chose to divide
his estate might qualify a certain number of persons and secure
their dependence actually by the same means as secured the
dependence of the 40s. freeholders. There might he a house. '
and a vote attached to it moire valuable than the House itself.
The lease need be of no value.-(Cheers.) Let lion. Gen-
tlemen observe the influence operating upon the landlords ; the
double influence of gain and political power because it clearly
appeared from the report of their °t Se en
largeiminissio ath
neri.satthaat small
holdings let at much higher rentsth
07 quantity a land than for
a large quantity. ones, there
was greater competition for a
a small
evidence that the rent paid yet
in the county of Armagh, w
There
whe ntest of ait came to the
the rate, was rated at a quarter or one-fifth that being paid.
This, then, was a meat eat inducement to divide property into
small iweeings, the landlord gaining a great increase ;
but superadded to that, was another motive-that of political
influence. Now, who were the parties who acquired political
power by the old system of 40s. freeholders?-The Right
Hon. Baronet then quoted the evidence of Mr. Justice Day, as
to the effect of the 40s. freehold suffrage, but no more of the,
quotation reached us than that it was " a sort of un:see
versal suffrage.") Mr. Dominick Browne was asked, ee'
it was not the etstom for attorneys to Inv, small esteeis-
(Cheers)-and 'the answer was, " 'Yes; it is a very crewmen
custom." Another was asked whether 'hien 'did not eain con- •
sideration and influence With the Grand Juries by making
40s. freeholders, and he -said'" Yes." Another said it was
a recommendation to the Magistrates to make them.
So they would see that under the 40s. freehold system there
was great temptation to abut. Now, he wished to know f

Men.
111

EVENING EDITION.

he proposed system was •not liable to the same temptations?
Would it be just ire for instance, in the case of the landowner
neglecting the general improvement of Ireland, he chose to
sacrifice his estate for the purpose of making votes ?
Was it fait that political influence should be attached to such
improper and corrupt use of land? —(Cheers.) It would be
so at first. A man would make freeholds, who found by so
doing he could exercise great power in the country. This
measure had a tendency in an evil direction—namely, to the
subdivision of the land, and to arrest the progress of improve-
ment. He spoke not merely of the moral evil of it, of the
unjust influence they. were conferring upon attorneys and
grand juries.—(llear, hear.) . He looked to the effect in
another direction. Ife, asked whether they thought • they
were advancing the social improvement of Ireland, by giving
a new stimulus to the subdivision of land? He asked-theist to
read the Report of their own Commissioners before they, de-
terrnined upon the subdivision of the land. They had the Re-
port of the Commissioners on the subject of the Poor-laws,
who had advised them not the plan. The Government
sent over Mr. Nicholls, and had such confidence in his judg-
ment that they overruled the recommendation of the Commis-
sioner, and determined to act on his recommendation. Now
What evidence did Mr. Nicholls give upon the subject? He
begged the Noble Lord's attention to it. Could he deny the,
tendency of this measure to stimulate the • subdivision
.of land for the purpose of increasing votes ? If
not, let him see what would be the results. Mr.
Nicholls said, " Small holdings and minute subdivision of
hid prevailed in the county of Donegel to a greater extent
than in any other part, and the consequent growth of the eoeu-
lation was so great as to diminish the productive power of the
soil, and the condition of the people to the lowest point in the
social scale, exposing them in the colvingency of a bad season,
or the failure of the pota'oe crop, to the most dreadful priivation."
No material or lasting improvement of the land could take
place while such a system of sub-division existed;
.and there
was no check to the division, except the dread or the actual oc-
currence of famine. Under the present system the possession ,
of land was not the means of advancing the individual, but of
degrading the whole population." Such were the words of
Mr. Nicholls.—(Hear, hear.) But with all those facts before
them, Ministers were superadeling to the gain of the landlords
by the small division of land, the additional temptation of
political influence.—(Bear, hear.) He had attempted to
show that this extension of the franchise—this creation of
something worse than the forty-shilling freeholders, was not
compatible with a fair interpretation of the compact
entered into upon the Emancipation of the Roman Catholics,
and not compatible with the social improvement of Ire and.—
( Hear, hear.) He would now ask, whether if this extension
of the franchise were granted to Ireland they would refuse the
application of the same princ,ple to England ? (Cheers.) Let
the Ministers suppose, that when the same demands were made
upon them in this country, the party opposed to the Govern-
ment had coalesced with the Chartists, and had said—" The
horizon is clouded, and you had better purchase peace by eon-
cession."—(Cheers.) But they did not say so. Aided by
them ("the Conservatives) the Ministers had been able to resist
the Chartists so long as they said that the Re-
form Bill was final. (Cheers.) When they
made such concessions in Ireland as this, upon such evidence,
and with such motives, would they be able to resist the demand
that would be made for the extension of similar institutions to
Englend ?—( Cheers. ) If it were right that without any elle-
- . gation the franchise in the towns in Ireland should be reduced
from ten pounds to five, would they be able to soy to those who
demanded a similar reduction in England, would they be
ab,e to say that Earl Grey and Lord Althorp had declased the
' Reform Bill to be a final settlement, and that it was dange-
rous to disturb it? The Hon.- Gentleman, the Member for
Kilkenny, had been indiscreet enough to say that he was in
• favour of the Bill because it would lead to an extension in
England—
Mr. HUME—No, Sir, I did not,
. . Sir ROBER'r PEEL-L-.The Honourable Gentleman
had said, however, that if the definition of the franchise was
necessary, why was it not settled in England ?—( Hear,
tear.) 'fhe Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies,
said that in the present state of parties in Englaud, it
was impossible to define the franchise more exactly than,
it stood expressed in the Reform Bill. Yet the Noble
Lord proceeded with a Bill to amend the registration
but his Noble Friend, the Member for North Lancashiee, was
loaded with every species of calumny because he advanced a
Registration Bill, without defining the franchise. —( Cheers.) "
The Noble Lord (John Russell) had placed the finality of the
Irish Reform Bill—and he did not speak of technical finality,
but of the principle—on the same ground as in the English and
Scotch Bills ; yet on such allegations'as were made in support
of the Bill nosy befo -e the ' House, the Noble Lord was pre-
pared not only to disturb but to destroy the system established
in Ireland by the Reform Bill. He hoped the Noble Lord would
be prepared to-night to make a declare ion of his intentions.
Ile, fsr one—not' from any party considerations—but with a
view to the peace and tranquillity of those countries, knowing
the demands which would soon be made upon the Noble Lord
when that precedent would have been established, he did regret
the course which the Noble Lord, as a Minister of the Ci own,
had thought proper to pirsue.— ( Loud cheers from
the - Opposition benches.) He had understood from the
Noble. Lord that he had meant steadily to adhere to the
principles of the Reform Act—that on the miner de-
tails he might consent to improvement to remove restrictioes
and vex itious accompaniments on the claim to the-franchise ;
but he hod understood from the Noble Lord that he taught that
a constantly. recurring agitation as to the principles of rrpre-
sentation was fraught with perils and with evils to the country. 1
—(Ctecers.) He recollected that the Noble Lard Lad made
that declaration, and had reprinted it in the letter which he
addressed to the electors of Stroud. The Noble Lord might
have reason for holding a different opinion now. The
Noble Lord might have found it necessary for the
purpoai of conciliating lukewarm supporters--( Hear,
hear, hear)—and propping up a falling power to pursue
the course he had adopted ; but if in the hope of gaining the
accession of those who wero unsatisfied with the declarations of
1837, and to demand from the Noble Lord, if not an actual
performance, at least an indefinite promise as to the progress
of Reform, the Noble Lord did not Readily refuse to encou-
rage all.change, he (Sir R. Peel) trusted he would resolve
on refusing it now. But he was afraid the power of the Noble
Lord to refuse it would be weakened by the precedent
he had established. (Hear, hear, hear, and cheers.)
In the year 1834, the Noble Lord was party to a declaration,
by which he, discountenanced, in the most formal manner, any
effort to obtain a repeal of the Legislative Union. In the
• year 1834, the Noble Lord was a party to placing in the mouth
of his Sovereign, this emphatic consideration of the mischievous
- agitation of a repeal of the Union. The King said, in kis speech to
Parliament, " I have seen, with feelings of deep regret and just
indignation the continuance of an attempt to excite the people
of Ireland to demand a Repeal of the Legislative Union. To
the practices which have been used to produce disaffection in
the State, and mutual distrust and animosity between the two
countries, are chiefly to be attributed the spirit of insubordina-
tion, which though for the present controlled by the powers of
the law, has been but too perceptible in many instances." That
was the language addressed in the year 1834 to the agitators
for repeal. In the year 1837, at the period when the Noble
Lord addressed his letter to his constituents at Stroud, this
was the language which he addressed to the eager advocates
fur an extended franchise. He said—" That after this decla-
ration, any Member of Lord Grey's Cabinet was to propose to
begin the whole question anew, the obvious remarks would be,
you have either so egregiously deceived us, that we cannot trust
to your public engagements, or you have so blindly deceived
yourselves that we cannot believe in the solidity of your as-
surances." The Noble Lord said—" The excitement of 'new
changes, passions again rising, the House of Commons again
in a furnace to be meltedin a new mould, and the people again
in a temper which burst out in flames at Nottingham and
Bristol, would go far to shake the stability if 'pro-
perty, and make the law the servant of popular
passions; the happy consummation of the wishes .of
the labouring classes would be again removed far off;
and the security to be enjoyed in Switzerland and in Ger--
many would remove capital from . this country, and transport
• it there. The deluded might then be roused from their dream,
but too late." These were manly sentiments.—(Loud cheere.)
The very delivery of which, from a place of high authority,
gave streugth to the person from whose lips they proceeded.
The Noble Lord might have since found the new pressure upon
him to be such that he could not maintain his adherence Ito
those manly declarations. The Noble Lord might have re-
ceived significant hints at the commencement of this Session
that the foreign policy of the Government did not meet with
the cordial apptobatiou of his supporters.—( Hear, hea. )
The Noole Lord mighthavefound it necessary
-to use less strong
language in denouncing the effort to promote a repeal by agi-
tation. He (sir R. P. ) regretted it—he deeply regretted its
for the interests of the country., The Noble Lord might have
found in the return from Sorrey—be might have found a strong •
indication that the confidence of this country was lost, and he
might have found it necessary to seek compensation for that
loss of confidence by renewing the alliance with those in that
'House who before appeared ready to withhold from him their
support. He might purchase, .by concession on that point; a.
temporary support ; but he (Sir R. • Peel) could not help
thinking, when he called to mind the declarations of 1834 and
1837, that it would abate something of the feeling of-
satisfaction with which he contemplated his tempordry
triumph over the pressure of the hour—that he should abite
something of the satisfaction with which he might reflect
on the small majority which he might call to his aid that"
night.—( Hear, hear.) It would he thought cast a gloom over
the festivity with which perhaps he might celebrate the new-
compact and alliance, if the reflection did cross him that he
had gamed that support by receding from the position which
enabled him to arrest the progress of democratic claims by ob-
structing the progress of social improvement in Ireland, by
exciting hopes in that country, by raising passions and ereat-
ing expectations which_ the Noble Lord could not realise with-
out peril, and which he could_ not_ gratify without being the
• fora 3ntor of convulsion. (The Right Hon. Baronet resumed
. his seat amidst loud and lof contrinefaduetydhecthoßemeirgeihnettg
Hon. Gentlhe-
s,
the objectio
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was
the accusations, and the
iin
warnings
man—(Loud cheers)—and ordero to do so it would be neces-
sary for him to rhea' hadalluded, to the year
the attention of the House to the period
to which the Right Hon. Gentleman
.
compact, which
whichw h theieb
1809, to show the House the circumstances
Right Honourable Baronet formed_ .
compact he admitted had been made, a. nitd._to(Ldnencldarce
House his reasons for the fulfilment of heterts.ke)
For that purpose it would not be necessary for him
mtotndroe,fewrbiwat
the Right Hon. Baronet had thought proper .to
communications which had passed between his Sovereigntnplicel
himself; it would 'be only necessary for him to refer , ,
and notorious facts, and to place himself on that groundlF
(Hear, hear.) Engagements had then made to those /10,
felt scruples, pre)judices, and fears, which scruples, prejudices,
and fears, he had, however, always considered to be unfoundeid•
• as to the admission of the Roman Catholics to power. It was
tight to keep the n gagements then entered into with t.hein,
but, at the same time,e the engagements entered into with the
people of Ireland ought not to be wantonly violated, which tile
Noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire had attempted
to do. The circumstances were these :—for a long time the
Catholic Question had been matter of debate • men of the
highest talent had taken part hi it in that House on' both sides,
• but with regard to Ireland so strong had the conflict of opinien
become on the subject that at length in that country nosu'ph
thing as Government existed.—(Cheers.) The other day fie
had been reading a statement of what had passed in the House
of Lords at the time on the occasion of the appointment of a
Secretary for Ireland. ' One of the Ministers of the Crown
' had stated that the appointment of the Chief Secretary for
Ireland had been given away without his knowledge and with-
out consulting him on the subject. The person so anointed
was the present Lord Glenelg, and it was obvioutly
an appointment made for the purpose of keeping
hp that balance of opinion in Ireland which it had
been their policy to keep up. The circumstances of
that time appeared most alarming. Any one who would read
an Act of that time would see that there was a vast Association
in existence enacting laws for its own government, havin a
treasury of its own,: over which it possessed control, giving di-
rections to its own executive, which directions were obeyel,
holding large meetings, having processions, attended by vast
numbers, who marched, preceded by their banners. All-these
were circumstances calculated to excite the greatest alarm.
The sthtement of the Duke of Wellington in the debate on the
Catholic Question was, that their metings existed in such a
enanner, although they did not present any features of Mega-
..., lity, yet they wehreuco_f a
a-a' tot a civil War.
of thhe o formidable a nature that they might lead
4." ,- Governmput, was
aa theh circumstances under which the
f '.‘'eTt 1 ,Catlilttiteiee Y ad proposed the -repeal. of the
Pfie: ranting of thal
4//aire ghe - , 'we"' He had a
se ai ..e. that
thought that that ar-
s 4..,:.
~._
~ „, i
.If, the most unfnlorteasunuartee was, most
mcoeustldjubset
leatte:r
Id on that subject repeat the statement
sti,n,.t, ,
_,,
_.,.._ le Lord at that time, whose statements were
V'kteL Y-- ' .401,
‘.s.
''); e-
.. • : - the greatest attention. Lord Mansfield, in

‘4r_'