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

sixpence. had the franchise as a burgess; hut because a man
had the mi,fertune to be born in Ireland, he must be an oc-
cupant to the value of 10/. before he .obtained the like right.
Did they think that all these things did not rankle in the
hearts of the Irish people? Let them not lay the flattering
unction to their souls; for they thought both deeply and indig-
nantly over these matters. What fell from the Learned Re-
corder only last Session ? He stated, .in the debate on the
Municipal Bill, that " the Poor-law came into useful opera-
tion—at all events, it would supply a safe criterion for the
basis of the franchise." Wby did he not whisper to the
Noble Lord, when he moved the amendment, that the Poor-
law was a safe criterion for the basis of the franchise? It
might have been useful to him, and have saved him from
falling into gross emote Again, they complained of the abolition
of the 40s. franchise. It had been often said thatwas a compact
—a bargain. He disdainfully denied that—they obtained
Emancipation withoiit any compromise. The Learned Doctor
opposite (Dr. Lefroy), and the Learned Sergeant (Jackson),
had both read part .bf the evidence given by him, and they
had made it appear as if that evidence had been given in the
year of the Emancipation. They had both misrepresented him,
and had carefully abstained from citing the page. He said,
carefully, because in the first answer the House would. have
found that he said there were two species of 40s. franchise—
one in perpetuity, as in England, and no man would have
thought of touching it.—( Hear, hear.) Then there was
the derivative francise, and he stated that the master
of the Orange Lodge in Cork, a most respectable man,
could bring 600 Catholic voters led by a Catholic Magistrate,
to vote just as he pleased. But that was in 1825. It wastaid
that they were disfranchised not for their religion but for their
dependence on their landlordi. Nothing could he more con-
trary to the fact. They were di•franchised because they were
('a.holics, and because they were independent. In 18e5 they
were driven in like live stock to the hustings ; but a great change
took pace since 1825. In that year they came over in the time
of Prosperity. Robinson, as Cobbett had so well named him, at the
time when they were sending 16,000,000 of capital to the An-
des to seek for employment. They came and carried the Bill
through that House; but it was ignominiously thrown out in
he House of Lords. Did they think the people of Ireland were
dead to all feeling? What was the consequence? The 40s.
freeholders of Ireland took up the quarrel. Dawson was re-
turned for Louth against all the power of the Fosters ; in 1826
Villiers Stuart was returned for Waterford against the united
strength of the Beresfords ,• and in 1828 the noble 40s. free-
holders of Clare returned himself to . that House. It
was the 40s. freeholders, by their independence, that won
Emancipation. and it Vas followed by their extinction, and yet
the Noble Lord had come out upon him (he was a bold man,
to be sin e). The Noble Lord pt esumed to state that it was
on account if their dependence that they were suppressed, and
not on account of their religion. He was astonished that any
man occupying the station of the Noble Lord should forget so
completely every fact of the case. The House would recollect
that 63 Catholic Noblemen and gentlemen, quite as high and
aonourahle as the Learned Recorder, who had stated that they
.vere not the very v dthiest —63 of them came to London to
ttend the progress of the 1311, and the moment the Bill was in-
troduced to disfranchise the 40s. freeholders a meeting was
.lel.l at the Thatched House Tavern, and he (Mr. O'Connell)
draw up a petition, praying the House, if they were only to be
emancipated on the terms of dis:ranchising the 40s. freeholder:,to reject the Bill rather than disfranchise them.—( Hear,
hear.) He was surprised, therefore, at the mistakes that were
made by Hon. Members, and, above all,' by the Noble Lord the
Nlember for North Lancashire, who knew well that if they
were. Protestants and dependent they would be retained, but
that, b. ing Catholics, and independent, they were disfranchiied,
and that was called a settlement of the question. It was such
a settlement as Gil Blas was offered in the cave, when he was
aled, " What will you give me if I give you your own ?"
lustice and humanity were in favour of 40s. freeholds, and the
people of Ireland felt that in their disfranchisement they had
seen outraged and insulted. In England the Reform Bill did
not act upon the the franchise as they had supposed. It was
extending it in their corporate towns, and extending it
also in counties, and why had they not granted the same
measure of justice in the L ish Reform Bill ? Because the
ame spir t prevailed th en as prevailed at present. He (Mr. O'C.)
accomeanied by Lieutenant Newport, waited upon the Secre-
t..ry of State for the Home Department (Lord Althorp), and
they left him with a strong impression that the Irish franchise
.vould be extended. He would do him the justice to say that
he did not commit himself. They returned to those who had
delegated them, and so strongly were they impressed with the
opinion that the Noble Lord was with them that they reported
he Noble Lord was with them. But the Noble Lord the
Member for North Lancashire, who brought in his Registration
rill—his Extinction Bill—took care to secure Lord Althorp.
l'hey were sent for to a second interview, and they found
here the Noble Lord opposite and the Noble Lord
he -Secretary for the Colonies. They were not en-
reefed, but they. were prevented from urging their claims
rincipally by the interference of that Noble Lord.
they left discomfited and defeated, and-in spite of all their best
end avours, the 40s. freeholders were disfranchised.—(Hear,
hear.) Were they not refusing the people of Ireland a proper
Reform hill now ? Ile had learned from one of the ablest
men, an-i one of the most pleasing speakers that ever addressed
a public assembly, the Hon. and Learned Member for Exeter,
.hat it seemed to him somewhat extraordinary that they should
seek to sweep away all the 101. franchises. But the Hon. and
Learned Member did not seem is recollect that if they had a
01. property they must be worth a Si. tate. They had strug-
gled. in va'n for their rights and privileges, and for an equal
share of repr seetation with England. It was what they
laime I now. He had claimed it last year, and was opposed
by the Noble Lord (Morpeth), who had been very properly
taunted with resisting it then, and yielding it now.—( Hear,
hear, hear.) But had the opposite party now yielded it? If
the Niable Lord had used a bad argument last year, and found
chat the time was come now, the Noble Lord having apparently
made a case for a registration Bill which had been carried by
,nthusiastic majorities, the Irish people had now obtained that
far play that the Bill for extending the franchise and making
it derinite and certain had been brought in, and, so far at
least, they had succeeded. But it was said they had made out
no ca,c, and the Nobie Lord, with his excellent mode of dis-
posing of any thing in the shape of objection, for nobody was
a better debater, had read from a document on the table the
state of the franchise in Ireland. The Noble Lora said—
" How can you say the franchise -is not sufficient
whin I find here -the extent of it." The Noble
Lord was not in that House a short time ago when
the Hon. Member for Belfast gave an explanation of the docu-
ment. " Now you have an ample franchise—there are 17,000
in Dublin, and I find there were 14,5110 on the register at the
last election." How many had lie (Mr. O'C. ) polled? 3,500.
His colleague had polled about a dozen less, and the Hon. Can-
didate on the other side had polled 3,400, so that there were
under 7,000 out of a registry of 14,000, and he and his colleague
were returned by a majority of on:y 80: The actual number
registered, and voting was not 7,000, and in Dublin, the con-
.atituency was better watched on both sides than any where
else.-(hrear, hear.) Why should he proceed to comment on
that ? The Noble Lord had taken a column headed
entitled t 6 register at - the date of this order."
He found.that the date of the order was the 25th of February,
30 that every man who had ever registered appeared upon that
list, the eight years not having elapsed. All that had died
come to life, and were on the list—all those whose terms had
expired—all those who had changed their residences and had
re-registered--all those who had changed their residence, and
had not re-registered, were there—all those who had lost some

lives out of their leases—all those who had parted with a por-
tion of their franchise—in short, all the dead, extinguished,
and duplicates—everything was there, and when a doubt was
thrown out that the return could not be relied on, the Noble
Lord asked why did the Government present' such a'paper ?--
(Hear, and cheers.) The Noble Lord ought to have been
there to have heard the Hon. Member for Belfast admit with
candour—and candour was not his forte—that it was a fictitious
return, and yet the Learned Recorder, although told it was
fictitious, with a power of countenance unequalled had quoted
from that document. He would remind the House that that
was not the only injustice that would be done there by the Re-
form Hill. Another crying one was, they had remodelled the
constituencies and the representation—they had added to the
county Members, he cared not for what object. How did it
happen that in every county in England, without one being
omitted, in which there were 100,000 inhabitants, they had
added two to the number of Members returned? How did it
happen that while they did so, in no county in Ireland had they
added a single representative? They were governing Ireland,
and' wanted her to join England in her battles. They wanted
her to share in her burthens to the extent that the poverty
they had created enabled her to, contribute; and what return
had they received for all that? They were told that there
was-an union, and should there not be an identification—ought
:here not to be an assimilation? And how could they come
out upon him, and tell him that there was an union
as regarded he franchise? How did they estimate
the English counties, in giving them the additional Members ?
Did they estimate property? No such thin", they took popu-
lation.—( Loud cheers.) He would show that they had taken
it in more instances than one. The Noble Lord and the
Learned Recorder had alluded to their having four millions in
a state of destitution and pauperism, but they had made no
estimate of wealth or property in England in granting the fran-
chise a they had based it entire y on population.—( Hear.) And
did they think there was not common sense enough in Ireland
to appreciate the insults to the country and the injustice
that had been done her ?—(Hear, • hear, hear.) He
would put it to the good sense of the people of England,
who, notwithstanding the prejudice against the people of Ire-
land, had, he would say, much good sense; would not the
people of Ireland feel that state of things ? Notwithstanding
the miserable confusion of the speech delivered by the Hon.
Member for Wakefield (Mr. Las.elles), he would tell them
that Cumberland, with 1•26,680 inhabitants, had got, on the
passing of the Reform Bill, two additional Members, and now
possessed four. Cork, with 713,716 inhabitants, had two
Members before the Reform Bill, and had not got one in
addition. They took it by population! Here was their
population for them. Northumberland, with 179,176 in-
habitants, got two additional Members ; and -Down, with
337,871 inhabitants, had two Members before the Reform Bill.
and had not got one in addition by that measure. The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman proceeded at some length to detail
the differences of population in various • counties in England,
Scotland, and Ireland, and to show that population was the
basis of the franchise, and not property ; and proceeded to say
that they might tell him there was a union between these
countries, but he would ask th, m, was it such a union as he,
a lover of liberty, insisting on an equality of rights with them,
ought to be content and satisfied with ? And'il he had a right
to be dissatisfied with it, would they throw another poisonous
ingredient' into the cup of discontent, by refusing an extension
of the franchise? The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said he
had proceeded to show the injustice done. to Ireland by the
Reform Bill, in a comparison of the popUlations of Wales and
the county of Cork, which latter, lie contended, from 'its
population, was entitled to as many representatives as
Wales. He really felt some gratitude to the Noble
Lord (Lord Stanley) opposite, not for his intention—not
for his motives, but for his not having left the franchise to ex-
tinguish itself, or rather for net having suffered the landlords
to put it out. But for him the people of Ireland might not
have so successfully resisted the extinction of the franchise. It
WEIS he (Lord Stanley) who summoned them to the field. He
would not detain -the House long by going through all those
documents to which he had alluded. Those which he had read
might serve as specimens of the whole. • They would show the
anormous population of their counties—the enormous extent of
their then franchise—they would show the enormous population
of the Mei counties, and the miserable deficiency that existed
in the franchise of these coun, ies. But it was property that
was wade the test of the right to vote forro;th ! Upon what
princip c, he- would ask, did they disfranchise the boroughs ?
Upon what principle, hut on that of population alone. Upon
what principle did they enfranchise the boroughs. It was on the
prinai ple of populat ion al ane. They used the same principle to dig-
franchise and to enfranchise the boroughs. 'I hey used the principle
of population wherever and whenever it suit ed their purpose ; and
they now took the people cf Ireland and said to them " You
are poor, and, iherefore, ytu shall not posers the franchise."
NI by that was the very raasim that. they ought the more to
posses it. Was it not the poor, man that most wanted every
assis, ante that he could get. l'orty-one years had the Union now
lasted, and their excuse, in the present the forty-first year of
the Uniqn, for not giving Or juStieti was, that they were too
ppm:. -4Hear, }leaf, flow at bencheS:) He de-
sired Hqnsehold Suffrage. Were lie asked whether he would
extend that Bill to England,* lie would say that readily and
heartily would he use every exertion of his to extend it to
England, because he would claim no sight for himself that he
would 1.14 extpud tct oilibrz,--:(lllinisliliuir cheers, ) Having
something more to say, he disldted entering into the discuslion
*of the question how the franchise should be rated. The Noble
Lord (Stanley) brought in a Bill to regulate the franchise, and
did not venture to tell them what the franchise was. Was