The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-16 00:00:00

Minister and certain of the Bishops, as to the pro-
posed appointment of Dr. Hampden to the bishopric
of Hereford, and whether it was intended to persevere
in the appointment.
CRIME AND OUTRAGE (IRELAND) BILL.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the order I
of the day for the House resolving itself into
Committee on this Bill. The commission of
those crimes in Ireland which it was the
object of this Bill to repress was too
notorious to call upon him to go into any
lengthened details. It was one feature of these
crimes, that while the victim almost invariably fell,
the murderer almost as invariably escaped with im-
punity. He should leave felt it his duty to recite and
describe those murders to which he had al-
luded, and to comment on them in the language
they deserved, but these crimes were matters of
public notoriety, he should not, therefore, further al-
lude to the murder of Major Mahon and of other vic-
tims of these outrages, but should allude to other
crimes of less magnitude, which, in conjunction with
these murders, proved the existence of a conspiracy
against human life, against the existing state of so-
ciety, against the rights of property, and of
industry itself. In the month of November,
1335 crimes had been committed in Ireland
against 1035 committed in the preceding month.
These crimes consisted principally in the sending of
threatening letters and in robberies of arms. One of
these cases took place in Cavan. Two small farmers,
more industrious than their neighbours, had raised
crops, and had each provided himself with a gun to
defend himself from outrage. In one night the dwell-
ing of each of these persons had been broken open, and
their guns taken. In Monoghan a fishing company had
been established. Their establishment was attacked
and their property destroyed. In Limerick a man's
horse had been destroyed because he had let out the
horse to draw meal at a lower rate than these legis-
lators chose to determine. This Bill was a Bill not for
the defence of the rich man but of every poor man who
was honest and industrious, and no one could object
to it who did not desire to see the rights of property
and the rights of industry destroyed. In a recent
case Mr. Johnson, a most popular magistrate, had
been fired at, because, as a magistrate, he
had fined some persons for trespass. In
King's County a shot had been fired at Mr. George
Barlow, and another at his -on, because he had re-
fused to employ a man named Fagan. In Monoghan
an attempt had been made to shoot two far-
mers, named Blane (father and son), because the
son had presumed to discharge a servant-maid.
These cases were sufficient to show the objects and
extent of this dark and sanguinary conspiracy. He
would now describe the eharacter and provisions of
the Bill which gave the Lord-Lieutenant power to
adopt measures to put down crime and outrage in
disturbed istricts.—(The Noble Marquis then pro-
ceeded to describe in detail the provisions of the
Bill, with which the public are already acquainted.)
In alluding to the provision rendering it a misde-
meanour in persons refusing to join a hue and cry
against persons who had committed outrages, the
Noble Marquis paid a high compliment to those
among the peasantry who had nobly done their duty
by opposing, and in many instances apprehending,
persons who had been guilty of outrage. In
all these cases the parties so acting had been
sought out and rewarded by the Lord-Lieutenant.
The desire of the Government in proposing this Tnea-
sure had been to provide an effectual remedy for the
deplorable state of things existing in Ireland, but in
providing of such remedy to trespass as little
as possible upon the constitution. Up to
this moment he retained the opinion to which
he had some time since given utteranee to
the utmost reliance could be placed upon juries in
Ireland that they would do their duty. At the
Michaelmas Quarter Sessions convictions had been
obtained in almost all the Crown cases where
the prosecutors attended. The Government was,
therefore, not prepared to propose any measure
to interfere with trial by jury, but at the same time
there was no measure to which the Government would
not be prepared to resort if it should become neces-
sary to restore peace to Ireland. Although not
actually a state of civil war, there was in Ire-
land, at present existing, a sort of civil war,
of dark war and outrage—war carried on in the
dark, the victims of which were condemned unheard,
and during the continuance of which there could not
be in Ireland either peace, safety, or security for life
or industry. If additional powers should be neces-
sary, the Government would not hesitate to apply
for them.—(Cheers.)
Lord FARNHAM gave his warmest support
to the measure, not because he thought the mild-
ness of the measure would tend to its success,
but because he had the pledge of the Govern-
ment that if the measure should prove inefficient
(and inefficient he was sure it would prove) they
would come to the House for further powero, which
he was sure would be granted. Murder, he was
sorry to say, prevailed in Ireland to a greater extent
than it had ever yet prevailed. Ile would now
lay before their Lordships themost recent informa-
tion he ,had received from Ireland, setting forth
the state of the country—of course, he should
mention no names. He would, first of all, read
a communication from his own county of Cavan.
The communication stated that two murders had
been determined on, that two good shots had been
paid to undertake the job, that all persons of
property were leaving the country. Such was
the reign of terror that every man regarded his
fellow-man with distrust—that his (Lord Farnham's)
description of the state of Ireland was true to the
letter, and that no measure could be too unconstitu-
tional to meet the present exigencies.

(LIFT SITTING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
Mr. Bukelley Hughes, Mr. Monckton Milnes, and
the Hon. Mr. Villiers took the oaths and their seats.

PETITIONS.

The Sheriffs of London, in their official robes,
appeared at the bar, and presented a petition from
the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of
the City of London, praying the House to pass a law
to remove the civil disabilities imposed upon the Jews.

Mr. PACKE presented a petition against the ad-
mission of Jews into Parliament.

Sir E. FILMER presented a similar petition.
__. ___

Sir R. H. INGLIS presented a number of peti-
tions to the same effect. One of them was from the
chancellor, masters, and scholars of th'. University of
Oxford.

Mr. RUFFORD presented a similar petition from
a place in Worcestershire.
Mr. PLUMPTRE presented a petition to the same
effect.

Sir J. WALMSLEY presented a petition from
Leicester in favour of the admission of Jews into
Parliament.

Mr. SCHOLEFIELD presented a similar petition
from a place in Warwickshire.
Lord DUDLEY STUART presented a similar
petition from the borough of Marylebone.
Mr. STAFFORD presented a petition from a
place in Oxfordshire against the admission of Jews
into Parliament.

Mr. SEYBIER presented a similar petition from
Lambeth.

Mr. BANKES presented similar petitions from
Dorsetshire.

Mr. DEEDES and ➢ir. COMPTON presented similar
petitions.
Mr. SPOONER presented two petitions from
Birmingham to the same effect. . _

Mr. FLOYER presented a petition praying the
House to adopt measures to prevent Roman Catholic
priests from denouncing persons from the altar.

Mr. T. BARING presented a petition from the
inhabitants of the Mauritius' praying the House to
impose a differential duty of ld. per lb. upon sugar
other than the growth of the British colonies.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from
a place in Ireland praying the House to amend the
law of landlord and tenant.

MY. NEWDEGATE and Captain HARRIS presented
petitions against the admission of Jews into Parlia-
ment.
Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from
Leamington, praying that this country might not go
to war with any foreign nation.
Mr. C. PEARSON presented a petition from
Lambeth in favour of the claims of the Raja of
Sattara.
Mr. LABOUCRERE and Lord HARRY VANE pre-
sented a petition in favour of the removal of Jewish
disabilities.
Lord NUGENT presented a similar petition from
Aylesbury.
Lord MORPETH presented a petition from the
West Riding against the admission of Jews into
Parliament.