The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-17 00:00:00

raviding 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 utterance, that
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 in 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 powers, 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. He would now
lay before their Lordships the most 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 county. 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. The Noble
Lord referred to a vast qt.antity of correspondence which
he and his friends had recently received from various
parts of Ireland. in proof of his assertion that a reign of
terror, almost unexampled in atrocity, prevailed, and
that the lives of sorse of the best and most indulgent
landlords were scarcely worth a de.) 's purchase. During
the famine Sir R. G. Booth spent upwards of 20,0001.,
and yet had he recently been threatened, and his groom
attacked in mistake for him. An estimable Protestant
minister, in consequence of the manner its which his life
had been threatened, had adverti-ed for a clergyman to
undertake his duty for six months. The clergyman to
whom he alluded lisd always lived on the best terms
with his Roman Catholic to ighbours, yet within the last
two months he had received a letter, signed Molly
M`Guire, in which his life was threatened along with
several other clergymen. Another clergyman wrote that
during the last week or ten days several of his brethren
had been obliged to vacate their parishes, and to take
refuge in the city. Four had been marked for assassi-
nation, and so certainly was it expected, that the fact
was actually reported at a distance of eight miles from
their residence. Of all these he might add that they
were remarkable for their exertions during the famine.
As he had stated before, he had no wish to make a
general attack on the Roman Catholic priests, but
merely to confine himself to :he individuals who had
offended ; and he took this opportunity of testifying his
high sense of the merits of a 'Zeman Catholic dignitary,
Dr. Brown, the Bishop of Kilmore. With respect to
one of tke deeouncing priests, Mr. Hughes, he had,
since his former address to the House, received strong
corroboration of the statements then made in the letter
of a friend, on whose veracity he could place reliance.
This gentleman wrote—" The expressions attributed to
Mr. Hughes, as having been spoken at the Castlebar
meeting, were certainly uttered by him. He at length
got so violent that another priest called him to order."
He was sorry to add that since then another case of
priestly denunciation had occurred, but of it he could for
obvious reasons say no more than that all the proofs
connected with it were in the hands of the Government,
and would form, if required, quite a sufficient case to
lay before the law officers of the Crown. He would say
that, in consequence of that denunciation, one individual
had been attacked, and had narrowly escaped with his
life.—(clear, hear.) In the letter of Mr. M'Dermott
every line spoke of blood, and was calculated to inflame
rather than allay the tendency ot the peasantry to murder.
—[The Noble Lord here read an autograph memoran-
dum of some proceedings which took place at the Re-
lief Commtttee, Strokeatown, on the 28th of August,
1i147; at which both the Rev. Mr. M`Dermoft and
Major Mahon were present. Angry words ensued be-
tween them with respect to the proceedings, and the
Rev. Gentleman called him " a stupid ass," and used the
word " false" with respect to a statement he had made.
Major Mahon afterwards wrote to the Rev. Gentleman,
calling upon him to prove the aspersions he had cast
ups him at the next meeting, to which he replied :
" Sir,—Until you make atonement to my feelings as
a clergyman, for your insolent and personal attacks, I
shall attend no aseeting where you are present, either
publicly or privately. I make this reply to convince
you that I am only anxious to avoid a person whose
conduct seems so extraordinary, and who seems to dis-
regard the ordinary forms of civil society. My calling
does not allow me to resent the insults I receive, and
therefore common prudence, as well as religion, point
tout to me the necessity of withdrawing myself from the
society of persons who may be inclined to offend me.
I am, sir, your obedi,nt servant,

"MICHAEL M'DERMOTT."
It should be observed that in the letter Mr. M'Dermott
made no mention of his having denounced Major Mahon
from the altar.—(Hear, hear.) Major Mahon's tenants
owed him 30,0001. (many of them four years' rent); he
did not turn them destitute to the roads, but expended
nearly 6,0001. in sending them to a foreign land. He
would then ask their Lordships whether it was the con-
duct of Major Mahon or the language of Mr. M'Der-
mott which had excited the people to acts which showed
that their bad passions had never been moderated by
moral or religious education?
Earl FITZ WILLIAM would support the Bill as he
would have supported a more stringent measure, had
the Government proposed it. He would not even pro-
pose an amendment, lest by doing so he should disturb
the generalimanimity. He thought he might say that
the unanimity was general ; for although a few gentle-
men in the other House had opposed the Bill, he thought
it would be conceded that the opposition had been re-
duced within the narrowest limits, whether they consi-
dered the numbers or the intellect it comprised.—(Hear,
hear.) He trusted that the measure would bo executed
with prudence, but with firmness.—(Hear, hear.) He
expected that there would be no delay—indeed, if he
were to advise the Government he would say that the
search for anus should preeede the proclamation. If
they suffered one day to elapse the miscreants who had
collected the arms would find means to secrete them.
Doubts might be entertained on constitutional grounds,
but the time had gone by for twaddling about the con-
stitution. He trusted that no constitutional twaddle
would be allowed to interfere with substantial justice.
He would go so far as to propose restrictions on loco-
motion in Ireland. His Noble Friend on the Treasury
bench shock his head, but in his opinion there were cer-
tain persons in Ireland on whose travelling some restraint
should be placed. Ho cautioned the House against any
improper interference with the relations of landlord and
tenant, as in such interference they were stirring a ques-
tion of which none of them could see the end.—(Hear,
hear.) And let not those Noble Lords whose connexions
were exclusively English flatter themselves that such a
movement once begun would confine itself to Ireland.
They were all one community, and if they agitated for
Ireland, as was suggested by some persons whose phi-
lanthropy got the better of their reason, they might de-
pend upon it that the question would soon be raised in
Nngland. He believed there would be quite as much
distress in Ireland durinc, the coming winter as there
bad been during the past.e' Let the Parliament and peo-
ple of England be sure that after having dealt with Irish
crime they would next have to deal with Irish distress.
The Earl of ST. GERMANS said, that no man who
had beard the statement of the Noble Marquis, or who
was otherwise acquainted with the condition of Ireland,
could doubt the necsssity of arming the Government
with the fullest powers they shou:d require for the sup-
pression of crime. The Bill now before their Lordships
was essentially the same with that which, under closely
similar circumstances, he had proposed in 1846, but
which the other House had, without even taking it into
consideration, rejected. He was persuaded, howeve,
that his measure being adopted at the time would have
prevented well nigh all the monstrous crime which had
since agitated society in Ireland. He trusted that the
Government, should they find the present Bill inade-
quate to the purpose, would without delay redeem the
pledge they had given to Parliament, and apply for still.
further powers.—(Hear, hear.) The state of Ireland in-
dicated something most unsound in the social condition
of that country, and he trusted that with the earliest re-
vival of tranquillity the Government would apply them-
selves strenuously to the task of permanently removing
the perilous evil so indicated.—(flear, hear.)
The Marquis of SALISBURY, while regretting that
the Government had not at once produced a more
stringent measure, willingly gave his support to a Bill
which would at all events
t tend to repress the crime and
said
claid over Ireland.
outrage that now
Lord BEAIJMONTY
oppo-
site had once again brought that
.the Noble Lord
)dinsto certain Member of
the Roman Catholic priestX
frit
!. s
ed lrelandthem charges
a
which, if true, undoubtedly sti
chief cause of the present state
indeed, in that coun-
prTeesrtch brought
try.—(Hear, hear.) The charges,
aord
eooeuogdh,
ought
butlt
t
only against particular members of that
the were of such a nature that they must,
least to be felt by the e hole body 4s casting
upon them—a stain which would reflect dishonour stain
them until it was wiped away.—(Bear, hear.) The
hierarchy of the R :man Catholic priesthood was so inti-
mately linked together, that no imputation could be
brought upon its lowest member wnich, it not removed by
disproval, or by the punishment of the offender, did not
attach to the entire body. If those offences took p'ace,
it behoved the authorities of the. Church to degrade
the priest who could be
guilty
pulpit, mass, of denouneir g
rea ;either from the altar or the
......_.„24 etY.'ectiisn' in,_ in public
Catholic
private. If such offences were
etsinimitted- in other uatuelic countries those measures
- - would be taken to guard against their recurrence ; for
the bishop would be bound to issue a general order
7: •
~.11aVe theliittivfdiliii io offending brought before a p_ro
of
(
•-- _ pearly censititute - 'lnitial and punish[ cl,
• -
permitted to offer
upon pro( f
\ `Sdiptitti—Clicar, Up .) It he might ho .
Ne...l\2'&-suggestieteth " 'ould recommend the Roman Catholic
itelate[, stfling, as they now did, in a different po- A

sition with the Government to that which they occupied
some short time ago, and being in communication with
the Lord-Lieutenant, that they were bound to assist
the Lord-Lieutenant in bringing those persons to jus-
tice who thus disgraced; the sacred profession to which
they belonged.—(Hear, hear.) Now, so much for the
past. With respect to the future, there was one portion
of the Bill under discussion which he did not
entirely understand. The sixteenth clause enacted that
every person should do his utmost to assist in the dis-
covery and apprehension of offenders, and that every
person refusing so to do should be considered as guilty
of a misdemeanour. On this portion of the Act he
hoped the Noble Marquis (the Marquis of Lansdowne)
would offer some explanation. It occurred to him that,
as the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Farnham) had stated,
that contemplated assassinations were well known before
they took place, that the priests in the districts might
probably be made acquainted with intentions in that re-
spect, and might be able to point out the whereabouts of
tho offenders. As this was likely to be the case, it was
highly important to know whether the priests came
within the meaning of the words " every person." He
hoped the Government would explain the exact construc-
tion that was to be put upon the Act, and that, whatever
it might be, it would be carried out to the letter.
Lord STANLEY—My Lords, I am quite sure that
my Noble Friend, who introduced the question with his
usual good feeling and great ability, was very far from
desiring to impute to a large portion of the Catholic
clergy the atrocious—for I can designate it by no other
word—conduct of which some members of that body
have been guilty.—(Hear). But, at the same time, I
cannot but concur with the Noble Lord opposite (Lord
Beaumont) that so long as the conduct of any portion of the
body—bearing in mind the close connexion between the
highest and lowest, and the weight of authority which
may be directly brought to bear— that so long as such
conduct remains unchecked and uncondemned in indivi-
dual cases—so long, in the opinion of all reflecting
persons in this country and in the world at large,
there is a stain, not indeed, of moral culpa-
bility-, but of neglect of an imperative duty, which
does attach to those who have the power of censuring
and condemning, and who do not exercise that
puwer.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord on the cross-
benches (the Earl of St. Germans) alluded to the seem-
ing inconsistency of our giving a ready sanction to
this Bill when we refused to assent to a measure intro-
duced some time before directed to a similar object. I
cermet call that measure a similar measure to this, for
its provisions were extremely different.—(Hear, hear.)
Without discus ing the merits of tho rejection of that
Bill—without stating whether it was or was not not an
error of judgment, or entering into the motives of its
rejection, the Noble Lord must permit me to point out a
remarkable difference between the two measures, which
may account for the apparent inconsistency. On this
occasion we were called together to provide a remedy
for the disturbed state of Ireland. We were called toge •
ther in November, and we do not separate, and we enter
upon no other important business until that which the
Government have deemed it to he essential fur the pre-
servation of life and property in Ireland has been passed
with the greatest rapidity through both Houses ct Par-
liament, as an immediate remedy to meet the demand o
a pressing and extraordinary emergency.—(Heine hear.)
Ors the present occasion Parliament meets in November,
and we separate in December, after having passed the
measure. In 1846 the Throne recommended the imme-
diate attention of Parliament to a state of things which
was not less alarming than that which we are now called
upon to legislate for. Now, my Lords, what was the
course pursued in 1846 ? Was the Bill aNded to by
the Noble Earl made the first measure of the session ?
Was all the public business stayed until the Bill was
passed? No. It was in February the recommendation
came from the Throne, and the measure was brought
into your Lorships' House, passed with considerable
del beration and attention, and on the 13th of March it
as sent down to the other House of Parliament.—
( Hear, hear.) But what was the course then taken ?
(dear, hear.) That was a time at which the question
of free trade was then under discussion ; but that mea
sure, important as it undoubtedly was, I venture to
think was of much less consequences than the one which
affected the security of life and property in Ireland. Yet,
my Lords, the Bill for the latter purpose, although re
commended in the Queen's Speech, snd introduced on
the 13th of March, was not submitted by the Govern
merit of that day for a second reading until the 10th of
the month of August following.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord LANSDOWNE—The month of July.
Lard STANLEY—Yes; the Arms (Ireland) Bill was
introduced in August ; but the Bill of which I was
speaking was not introduced until a considerable period
after the commencement of the session ; and it was at

the time that your Lordships' House was discussing the
repeal of the corn-law that the second reading was pro-
posed in the other House of Parliament.—(Hear.) I
think the allusion to the rejection of that Bill was unne-
cessarily introduced by the Noble Earl (the Earl of St.
Germans), and that he would have acted more discreetly,
more wisely, not to say more generously, if he had fol-
lowed the example of a Right Hon. Baronet in another
place, who referred to the same subject in a different
spirit, and condemned all recrimination, hoping that such
feelings would not be allowed now to interfere with the
passing of a Bill which all agreed was necessary to the
future peace of Ireland.—(Cheers.) With regard to
the Bill itself, I must trouble your Lordships with
a few observations, not because I do not feel all the im-
portance of the case, not because I do not feel all its
difficulty, but because, though I agree with the observa-
tion which fell from the Noble Earl opposite (Earl Fitz-
than it is a measure which should be passed
with the least possible delay—but because I think it is
desirable that upon the Government singly should rest
the sole responsibility of the sufficiency or insufficiency

of this measure.—(flear, hear.) But though, on the one
heed, I cannot give a silent vote on this Bill, I cannot, on
the other, express my readiness to assist in carrying
through this measure without, at the same lime, saying
that I believe—and I shall be as delighted as astonished
to find that I am mistaken—that this Bill is utterly in-
sufficient to meet the difficulty—(Cheers)—nor are its
provisions calculated to grapple with the principal source
of the evils it is intended to remedy.—(Renewed cheers.)
The condition of 'reified has been painted by the Noble
Lords opposite, and by my Noble Friend on this side
of the House (Lord Farnham) in glowing and
appalling colours.—(Hear, hear.) We have been told
by the Noble Marquis of a general organized conspi-
racy, which prevails throughout the greater part of Ire-
laud ; and of the destruction of lives and property in
certain districts, not only of the rich but of the humble
and industrious.—(Hear, hear.) My Noble Friend near
me spoke of assassination in those districts, and he spoke
of the circumstances connected with them in a manner
which must have excited the astonishment of your Lord-
ships, as it did mine—and of money being subscribed for
the assassins. He told us of murders being committed
on individuals of the highest character, and of those
murders being celebrated in the country round by bon-
fires.—(Hear, hear.) We heard also of a murder being
committed with so universal a knowledge that it was to
be committed, that, at a particular market or fair many
miles off the intelligence of the crime preceded by three
hours the time at which it was committed. We
heard, and I am sure your Lordships did not hear it
without a shudder, of an instance of brutality without
parallel, I believe, in any country, even in those where
law and humanity are least regarded, in which, where
the murder of a father and a husband were meditated,
the atrocious assassins obtained a foretaste of their in-
fernal vengeance by threatening with this double murder
the daughter and wife of the intended victim.—(Great
sensation.) That, my Lords, is the state of Ireland ;
and the picture is drawn by the Noble Marquis
and my Honourable Friend.—(Cheers.) Let us pass
with that picture in view to consider the provisions
of this Bill.—(Hear, hear.) There are two or three
principal ones, upon the first of which the Government
must mainly rely. That gives the Lord-Lieutenant
the power, by proclamation, within a l,iven time, first
to prohibit the carrying of arms, except by certain ex.
cepted parties; and next, by a second proclamation,
after due notice, to seize upon all arms found in the
houses of the people. Supposing, however, that by
these measures you succeed in disarming the people,
and in taking from them those weapons with which, I
must say, you have recently, unwisely, and incau-
tiously suffered them to supply themselves—suppose, I
repeat, that in those given districts, you call in and
recover these arms from the people, do you think that
by the mere withdrawal of all these fire-arms, and
other specified weapons, you will succeed in putting
down crime, or its authors and suggestors, or this
general organised conspiracy ?—(Loud cries of " Hear.")
You may cripple the means of assassination, but will you
destroy the conspiracy which directs that assassination,
and change that feeling which sympathises with crime,
and celebrates its success ?—(Loud cries of " Hear,
hear.") By withdrawing the arms you do, I admit,
somewhat lessen the risks which every man runs who
attempts to carry oat the law, and to a certaia degree
diminish the danger ; but when the spirit of minder is
abroad—as it confessedly is in a great part of Ireland—
when by an organised conspiracy the victim is doomed,
and his approaching fate is known to whole parishes
and counties, and no man will or dare to give warning
of the blow, to announce the approach of the intended
assassin, or to aid in his capture when the deed of blood
is completed—when such is the state of the people it is
not the mere absence of firearms that will prevent these
dreadful crimes from being perpetrated.—(Hear, hear.)
No, every ditch and every road will furnish the means
of murder. The crime will be committed, and the
murderer and the spectators will pass on their way.
" Unguibus et pugnis, deinfustibus, atque its porvo
Pugnabant amis."
The firearms may not be there, but the hammer or the
stone will knock out the brains, as in the case of the
railway surveyor who was murdered some time
ag a the stone by which the deed of blood was
done was so deeply embedded in the fractured skull of
the victim as to defy the power of the surgeon to ex-
tract it.—(llear.) Again, shall you be able to obtain
the firearms by means of your Bill ? I think not. By
the provisions of the Act a certain notice is to be
given between the issuing of the proclamation and its
being carried into effect, and be that interval long or
short, the possessors of those arms will transfer them
to the adjoining
districts, and from them exercise the
same trade of blood and outrage.—(Cheers.) Allow me,
my Lords, to make an observation with respect to the re-
lenar
at
Earle fodtfoh
does
sp.
notas passport
appearsystem
o considerin Ireland,
necessary.—
(hear.) awr
yh h
crimes are not
t(aht:irr. ecbaNc 111.:)bhu nse opinion that the great majority of these
committed by persons resident
in or near the spot, but by strangers brought from a dis-
tance
shillings to murder solemn oaths, engaged for a
tance ; who, a:missend by
out, and of a hose identitynyshperson who
may be pointed
before they commit the crime.—(Hear, to be
persuaded
prevented the
hear.) The
t?ltrheeidnitn.oflutxhosoef
pa-sport system wou:d have
strangers into the disturbed districts
strangers
would in the immediate neighbourhood of'
distr:cts, as it was not to be supposed that
would venture into proclaimed districts, where they
would be liable to be apprehended. The advantages of

some such check was obvious, and yet I perceive in this
Bill no departure from the ordinary law in this re-
spect.---(Cheers.) I see in the provisions of this Bill,
that after the proclamation of any district, the Lord-
Lieutenant is empowered to authorise a person to grant
licenses to a certain description of persons to possess
their arms, a policy which, I rather doubt, is open to
considerableabuse.—(Bear, hear.) A person so appointed
cannot be so able to exercise a wise discretion as a person
kr.owing the district, and selected by the local magis-
trates in quarter sessions. Again, no person is to be
allowed to have arms in his or her own dwelling-house—
that is the phrase, and I truss the Noble Marquis will
not think me cavilling or hypercritical—is that clause so
worded as to limit the possession of such arms to persons
being householders?•—(Hear, hear.) That is a question
which, I appprehend, depends entirely on the construc-
tion which may be put upon the words " his or her
dwelling-house;" and I wish to know whether it ex-
cludes all who may lodge in such dwelling houses?—
(Hear, hear.) Then there is the second proclamation,
which is not to be made until the other is in force, and
that goes a step further, and compels every person
(with a list of similar exceptions) not only not to
have arms in their houses, but gives a right of search
for concealed arms; but why should not this power
be given by the first proclamation ?—(Cries of
" Hear, hear.") The Noble Lord quoted the clause
at length, and proceeded to show that the various
delays allowed by the notice, which were indispensable
in the Bill, the search would be of little use, as the
possessors of arms would be certain to convey them out
of the proclaimed districts. His Lordship then pro-
ceeded—l have no amendment to propose, but there is
another point which appears manifestly faulty, in what
I hope you will forgive me for calling the feeble inten-
tions of this Bill. The Noble Marquis states that the
effect of this Bill will be to give the power to the Lord-
Lieutenant, without formal procf that a district is dis
turbed, to proclaim that district, if he should think fit,
and that the consequence, therefore, would be, that the
Whiteboy laws would come into operation ; and that
there are also provisions attached to the Bill by which
individuals may be called upon to assist in the capture
of offenders, and if they refuse or neglect to join in
pursuit, they are to be held guilty of a mi:demeanour,
and liable to two years' imprisonment, with hard
labour. Except so far as to the misdemeanour, and the
liability to two years' imprisonment, I am inclined to
doubt whether the common law does not possess
equal powers. Any magistrate or constable has. I
believe, now the power of calling upon parties to join
in pursuit of offenders, and such parties refusing to do
so would be guilty of a breach of the common law. My
belief is that, with exception of the statutory punish-
ment attached to the clause, it confers no power what-
ever.—(Cheers.) Indeed, I think the clause worse than
useless ; for where a whole population refusele to co-
operate with the law, and is rather disposed to shield the
offi nder than to aid hi the pursuit, they would, in point
of fact, be no assilance to the law. I have heard of a
ca. e in which the people of a village rose when the
police were in hot pursuit of a criminal, and by enabl-
ing him to mix in the crowd, prevented his capture and
even his identification. I am afraid that such scenes
will too often take place ; and si hen it is otherwise the
reluctant assistant will be too slow, and an incumbrance
when the officers are on the right track, and too hot and
eager when upon a wrong one. A pursuit by such parties
must be a willing one to be successful. There is another
clause, which I believe is a valuable one—a clause which
was not included in the original Hill, but was
introduced in the other House on the motion of an inde-
pendent Member—l mean the clause which fixes a
penalty upon the accessory after the fact. I should like
to be informed what is an " accessory after the fact."—
(fleer, hear.) Suppose a murder be cerumirtd, and
earrunte are out against the elle;,e_d murderer, and some
indi,iclual supports, protects, aril enables him to escape,
is such a person punishable under this clause ?—(Hear,
hear.) Or suppese the party be tried, and ultimately—
notwithstanding the clearness of the evidence, from what
ever cause—he escapes conviction ; I want to know
whether the accessory after the fact would be punishable
hi that case?
Lord BROUGHAM—To enable such a person to
be tried, the principal must not only be taken, but
convicted.
Lord STANLEY—But the question I am putting is
this. Suppose a person is— I believe I may say, such is
the state of Ireland—known to have committed a crime,
but on being brought to trial escapes conviction, is the
accessory also to escape? If so, how much, then, is the
value cf the clause diminished?—(Cheer .) I should,
however, be glad to have an explanation of this point,
because I have ascertained for the first time this morn-
ing, that the Bill with which I was charged in 1831 to
introduce into the other House, the main object of
which was to commute the sentence of death for White-
boy offences, in reciting the Act of George 111., I know
not how it occurred that the important word "conceal"
was omitted. Therefore the bringing of the Whiteboy
Acts into force under the circumstances provided for in
the present Bill, would not meet the results of that sym-
pathy with criminals now unfortunately so common iii
Ireland.—(Hear, heat.) I will not comment fur-
ther on the details of this measure. My objection
to it as a whole is, that it falls altogether short
of the evil it was intended to meet; that it is directed
t 8 a small portion only of that evil—to a mitiga-
tion of some of the symptoms of the disease, and not to
the eradication of the disease itself.—(Cheers.) It ap-
plies only to the instrument, but leaves unscathed the
organiser of the crime and harbourer of the murderer.
There will be more failures than now, but murders
there will be, and the stone, the hammer, and the block
of wood may become hereafter as fatal as the gun.—
(Hear, hear.) The worst part of the present social
evils of Ireland—the monster evil—is not attempted to
bo grappled with. The Noble Marquis says he has
great confidence in juries, and that they have performed
their duty manfully ; but I hope this opinion is well
founded.— (Hear, hear.) There are districts in Ire-
land, no doubt, where prosecutors can appear,
where witnesses can be brought into court, and where
juries do their duty. I think the Noble Marquis
mentioned the country of Cork, and the number of con-
victions in that county; but I am not aware that in that
district the present system of outrage has been carried
on, and I am still more ignorant of the nature and cha-
racter of the crimes of the persons brought before those
juries. The Noble Marquis, however, has himself fur-
nished a significant comment on his statement by adding
that convictions have been obtained " where the prose-
cutor has made his appearance."—(Cheers.) But I
must ask, if the juries do their duty, will the prosecutors,
will the witnesses do theirs ?—(Cheers.) And if not,
and the Noble Marquis states himself that whole coun-
ties, whole districts, nay, whole provinces, of Ireland
have been the scene of attempted and actual assassina-
tions and crimes of the deepest die, anticipated often by
friendly or threatening letters, and announcements
that the head money of the victim was ready. These
thing are notorious before they happen. The name
of the actual murderer and all the circumstances pre-
ceding the murder, are well known and discussed at
markets and fairs, in the cabin and in the field,
at the fireside, and by parties of labourers at the
public works. And what is still more remarkable, the
shooting of the victim is not only discussed, but the
causes why he is shot.—(Hear, hear.) It must have
struck your Lordships with surprise, that not only the
facts of the case, but the causes which are assigned for
the murder, are well known. Yet what state of society
is this, when the facts are palpable and notorious even
before the deed is done, no one, high or low, rich or
poor, dare to appear against or denounce the murderers,
still less the promoters of these crimes.—(Hear, hear.)
And how much, or rather how little, of these evils and
outrages will this Bill allay ? It gives no protection to
persons obtaining information, no provisions to protect
juries or witnesses, no means of enforcing the law.—
(Hear, hear,) I rejoice, however, to hear, that if this
measure fails her Majesty's Government are prepared to
adopt stronger measures ; and I am also pleased to hear
that the Noble Lord at the head of the Government of
Ireland has, according to the Noble Zelarquis, expressed
himself satisfied with the provisions of this Bill. If this
Bill should fail, the Noble Marquis and the Govern-
ment may rely upon this and the other House of Parlia-
ment to give the strongest measure they can introduce
as cordial and unanimous a support—and for my own
part I shall give it a more cordial assent, because I
should think it more likely to be effective—as to this
Bill, which, I must repeat, I think a very inefficient
measure for meeting the present exigency.—(The Noble
Lord resumed his seat amidst reiterated cheering.)
Earl GREY said after the very general assent that
had been given to this measure, he felt it necessary to
say but a very few words on some of those provisions
of the Bill which had been referred to by Noble Lords
who had spoken in the ceurse of the present discussion.
His Noble Friend opposite had said that the disease of
Ireland was in tho mind of the people, and that their
sympathy was with the perpetrators of crimes and
offences rather than with their victims. He regretted
that he could not say he differed with his Noble Friend
in that opinion.—(Hear.) The disease, indeed, was too
deeply seated to be remedied by mere measures of
coercion; and he feared that, until the people of Ireland
could be made friendly to the administration of the law
—until such a state of things as had been described by
his Noble Friend could be remedied—but little could be
done in the way of benefit or amelioration for thatunhappy
country. It was not the aim of this Bill to effect more
than it professed ; and all it professed to accomplish
was, to repress the outward manifestation of that evil
mind which his Noble Friend had adverted to, and to
secure the punishment of offenders against the law. But
to win back the affections of the people to the law—to
claim their support of the law instead of their conniv-
ance at its infringement—this, he felt, could only be the
work of time; for this they must look to the gradual
improvement of the country, He did not hesitate at the
same time, from expressing his belief, that even by a Bill
of this description—by increasing the power of the Exe-
cutive Government to repress crime, and making the
means of punishing offenders more effectual—they would
be encouraging that portion of the Irish population that '
might be termed sound, and well-disposed to assist and
support the law ; for it could not be doubted that one of
the greatest evils with which Ireland was afflicted con-
sisted in the system of intimidation that prevailed in that
portion of the empire.—(Hear, hear.) By strengthen-
ing, therefore, the hands of the Executive Government,
they would, be trusted, be inducing the well af-
fected to come forward more boldly—(Hear)—and by
maintaining order by rigorous measures they would
render those who opposed the law more peaceable and
orderly. He fully concurred with his Noble Friend near
him (Earl Fitzwilliam), that it was absolutely necessary
to keep separate the two questions of coercive and of re-
medial measures, as well as that the first object that
ought to be obtained was the restoration of security—!
of the security of life and property—the want of which
security was utterly fatal to the hope of any investment
of capital in Ireland—(Hear, hear)—and to the general
improvement of the country. After having listened to
all that had been advanced in the course of this long dis-
cussion, he had heard nothing pointed oust to their Lord-
ships by which the measure before them could be ren-

dered moro effectual than it appeared to him to be. It
could not be doubted, too, that the moral effect of the
Bill much depended—as had been stated on a former oc-
casion--on the manner in which it should be passed
by Parliament. With reference, for instance, to
what had been said in the clauses relating to
proclamations, the object of those clauses was, at
first, that it was illegal to carry arms at all. This
power the Lord Lieutenant, however, would be enabled
to apply to much more extensive districts than those
now disturbed, and especially to those districts imme-
diately adjoining them. But, in the actually disturbed
districts, and where the disturbances were serious, the
Lord Lieutenant could require all those who were not
authorised to retain arms to deliver them up by a cer-
tain day. Some fault bad been found with this provision;
but he must say he thought it would be absolutely un-
just to make the possession of arms a crime, without
first giving people notice to give them up.—(Hear,
hear.) The real object of that part of the Bill was, to
prevent the carrying of arms. But that which he
thought would have a still greater effect in tending to
the preservation of the peace was, the power that was
given to the Lord-Lieutenant to increase the police to
any extent that might be requisite—(Hear, hear)—and
to make the disturbed districts in which such in-
creased force might be required at once chargeable
with the expense attending it.—(Hear, hear.) Thus, the
consequences of allowing crime to exist in a district
would at once be brought home to its inhabitants by the
cost of the police employed to suppress disturbance.
The Noble Earl then referred to the subject of licenses
to carry arms. The Noble Lord opposite seemed to
think that the Bill in this respect was an injudicious
change from the former law, by taking the paver of
licensing from the quarter sessions, and giving it to per-
sons appointed for that purpose. But this Bill contem-
plated that, in the most disturbed districts, licensing
should be the exception, and not the rule; and, with that
view, he thought it did appear far more advisable that
this power of licensing to carry arms should only be en-
trusted to the county inspector, or some high officer of
the constabulary. With respect to the clause relat-
ing to accessories after the fact, the object of the clause
on that subject was to place them on the same footing
as accessories before the fact; and he confessed he
did not see how, consistently with justice, the law
could be carried further than this in respect of that
part of the measure. As to what had been said
regarding the performance of their duty by juries,
he had much confidence that, with the facilities
that would be given to bring offenders to justice, and
the security afforded to , witnesses in giving evidence,
juries would be found to do their duty; and he did not
think that any further steps would, be,necessary to secure
so desirable a result, His Noble Friend (Lord Beau-
mont) had asked whether, under the clause that would
compel people to give evidence, priests would be called
upon to state matters that came under their cognizance
at the confessieeal? He did not think that the clause
referred to could bear any such construction.— (Hear,
hear.) It had been suggested by a Noble Lord that a
system of passports should be established in disturbed
districts in Ireland; but he believed that such a system
would be found as ineffectual as he, understood it had
proved to be in Belgium, where, practically, it was now
abolished. With respect to the omission of the curfew
clause, to such a provision he could only say he had
the same objection as he had when it was proposed
in 1846.
Lord BROUGHAM said he ,agreed that it was
de;,ilable that a measure' of thiS kind should go forth to
the country sanctioned, as far_, aa poseible, by the unani-
mous opinion of Parliament.' ,Altheegh he entertained
but alfeeble opinion of the efficaqy of this Bill, yet he was
one of those who was prepared toPbt.en 19 the argument
which was to be derived from the value of unanimity in
Parliament on such a subject.—(Hear.) His Noble
Friends near him disapproved of the measure—(Hear,
hear)—but they were willing to leave it to the responsi-
bility ofthe_gesernment, Tbey seem content merely
to record their opinion,-(Hear.).. Ile differed with the
Noble told (Farnhans)ns na the expo diency of insti-
tuting prosecutions-egainet eertaiataTareat. criminals--he
(Lord ;.Brougham)meapa those "she, abusing
their sacred office; T had,, excited aosalsters to the
commission of' the most heinous_ crimes by de-
nouncing from the altar persons to be murdered.
Could he blame the Government for not having put these
crimintaltson their, trial). When he asked this, another
questionsirosearcti_wbe4,4l, eOnviction.of,ahese parties
would Ifitiesits,leAii:Weete,_ netTtbat,aaunishment might
tend to 10.1kitclhcmipagyr§;.and to, exci.tetin their favour
the sy.. itues of itiet Whale ef st)l4,6cicly.ef which they
were at, afsciit;tlies,744:disgrtoo44 hear)—but
the qultien w`as,. what evi6alaswae .procured ?
(Hear.) How was the Government to get evidence ?
. Were they likely to be more successful in the case of
a priest than of a layman? If a short-hand writer
were brought forward to depose to the precise words,
would not some of the flock come forward on the other
side? Would there not be a great difficulty to get a jury
composed partly of Roman Catholics to convict a priest ?
—(Hear.) It was impossible for any one to exaggerate
the deep-rooted influence which the priest in Ire-
land exercised over his flock. It must not be supposed
that he was for an instant bringing a general
charge against the whole Catholic clergy of
Ireland. If he said so he should not only be
guilty of a want of charity, but of the grossest
ignorance ; for he believed that those priests were
generally men of reputable lives and character, and
their conduct generally was an honour to the cloth to
which they belonged. But he must be permitted to say
that this opinion would undergo a great change—a great
modification—if these murderous addresses from the
altar, these denunciations were allowed to continue, and
if no steps whatever were taken to bring, he would not
say to condign punishment, but to suspension, the
guilty parties who had so outraged the common feelings
of our nature, and so disgraced the body to which they
belonged.—(Cheers.) The stain which otherwise might
have been confined to those individuals would extend
much more largely, and rest upon the whole body itself-
-(Hear.) So long as the desire for land prevailed so
exclusively in Ireland, it was in vain to expect that Acts
of Parliament could do much for the permanent improve-
ment of, that country. Years and years ago similar con-
spiracies against life and property prevailed in Ireland;
and he must be permitted to say that he somewhat con-
nected those conspiracies with the priestly influence
which existed there. The more he saw of confession,
the more convinced be was that it had a tendency hurt-
ful to the morals of the people. The confessional
afforded to every guilty mind a relief, with the certainty
that the guilt would never be disclosed by the ear that
heard it. The power of absolution was, he believed,
wholly unknown to every other religion that ever
existed, and the priest exercised it, not only as the
servant, but in the presence of the Deity itself. He did
not wish the House to pass a measure interfering with
confession or absolution. He knew what the Emperor
Napoleon did. He curbed the power of his priests,
first by preventing them from receiving any legacies
from their flocks, and, !secondly, no prison door was
ever opened to a priest after the prisoner was arrested.
—(Hear, hear.) There was no confession, no absolution
'—none of what were called the consolations of religion,
during the trial, or after the trial, or previous to execu-
tion. He wished to ask should the 'lrish priests be
much longer paid by, and left dependent upon, the
priests were allowed to levy their
so long would the bad influ-
ence ee—s
fsroo lmo ntgh
ea sptehoep e
of the former continue. He also thought
those laws should be repealed which prevented
a direct communication with the Holy See.
He knew from the examination of some of the Irish
Bishops, in reference to marriage, in that House, that
they had an objection that that ceremony should be so-
lemnised in their chapel. One of those Bishops said that
priests should solemnise in private. These marriages
were not performed in the canonical hours, but in
the convivial hours.—(Loud laughter.) They first
considered that as long as they
t
and then made their
enjoyed
collection,
and h nvi
evare dependent, so long will the present state of things be
complained of in Ireland. He also considered that it
would be very beneficial to the state of Ireland that
this Government should communicate with the see of
Rome, not as a temporal prince, but as one having
co
a spiritual influence over six millions of the
people of Ireland. He thought that if England
acted as Prussia had, much good would be effected
for the peace of Ireland and the integrity of this
empire. He did not think that the curfew clause
would be inoperative, as had been represented by the
Noble Lord (Earl Grey), because crimes are perpetrated
in the noonday. He knew well that there was a con-
spiracy in Dublin, and if such were not immediately
suppressed no peace could be expected in that country.
They should not look to what was constitutional in the
case of life. Ho thought that the Habeas Corpus Act
should be suspended. Lord Anglesey caused the Act
of 1833 to be fully efficient, . and then court-martials sat
without interruption, and to, the satisfaction of the Go-
verment.
Their Lordships then went into Committee on the
Bill, the several clauses of which being agreed to, the
House resumed.

RAILWAYS BILL.
This Bill went. through Committee, and was
ordered to be read a third time to-morrow-
PUBLIC WORKS (IRELAND) BILL.
The Earl of DEVON moved the second reading of the
Public Works (Ireland) Bill.
Lord MONTEAGLE opposed the motion,. on the
ground that the House should have been afforded on op-
portunity of discussing its merits.
Earl ST. GERMANS having
made a few observations
in support of the Bill, in the passing of which he sub-
mitted that no time should be lost,
The Bill was read a second time anti ordered to be
committed.
Their Lordships then adjourned at a Quarter before
Eleven o'clock.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.
Aedlthwoausgah not
altogether
TATTERSALL'S. --•YESTERDAY.
teh2leare
unworthytlya blankof
danyo,titchee. business trans-
act

[ADVERTIBEMENT.]—CABBIAGE FllßE.—Families
residing in the country are supplied with Teas and
Coffees at the lowest wholesale price, in quantities not
less than six pounds, delivered carriage free to any part
of England. Orders must be accompanied by a remit-
tance, or if a reference be made in London, payment
Isla suffice on receipt and approval of the goods. A list
of prices and samples free, on application to G. T. Man-
sell and Co., wholesale tea-dealers, 2, Bucklersbury,
Cheapside.
rADVEHTISEMENT.J.--TER . EAitt "thr ALPBOROUGH
AND HOLLOWAY'S PILLS.—An astounding 'cure by this miraculous
medicine, after every other means had failed. • See extract from his
Lordship's letter, dated " Villa Messina,
Holloway—Sir ; I beg Leghorn, Feb. 21, 1845.
Professor Holloway—Sir
to acquaint you that your pills have
effected a cure of a disorder in my liver and stomach all the most
eminent of the faculty, at home and all over the continent, had not
been able to effect; nay, not evep OA
waters.Of Carlsbad or Ma-
rienbad. (Signed) •` Alnsortotion." ThesaAvondorful pills will
cure any -.limas. of the liver or stotifich2---Wd ' (-also Holloway's
Ointm.ut) at Professor Holloway's Establishment, 244, Strand, and
hr ‘ll medicine vendors throughout the civilised world.