The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-07 00:00:00

GLASGOW, Dec. 4.

STOCK EXCHANGE.—The fluctuations in the market this
week have been very trifling, the tendency being generally
in favour of a steady rise. Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ayr
have advanced to 1041. 12s. 6d.; North British, to 781. ;
Edinburgh and Glasgow, to 95; Caledonian, 36% ; and all
rather firm at these quotations. Scottish Centrals are re-
covering from the influence of the late unexpected call of 51.
per share, and now stand at 314 p., rather buyers. A good
business has been done in Manchester and Southampton,
Great Northern, and North British Thirds. Bank Stocks
are still heavy, and there have been but few transactions in
exchange companies.

OPENING OF THE CALEDONIAN RAILWAY.--It is
stated that arrangements are in progress to open this
line from Bcattock to Edinburgh on the 20th December,
which t, ill complete the through communication between
this city to London, via Carlisle. We believe that the
branch to Glasgow will be opened for public traffic at
the same time.—Railway Times.

REMARKALE EFFECT OF TEE ELECTRIC FLUID.
—Ai a matter of interest in a scientific point of view,
it may be mentioned that the wires of the electric tele-
graph have been sometimes thrown out of order during
a thunderstorm. On one occasion, Morse's telegraph
inscribed a mass of symbols on paper by the action of
atmospheric electricity alone. The lightning sent its own
message, and recorded its own results ! Many philoso-
phers are already engaged in speculations on the pro-
babl etr,cts which a net work of electric telegraphs
may have on thunderstorms.—Medical Gazette.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, Dec. 6.
THE IRISH PRIESTHOOD.
(Continued from our Third Edition of last night.)
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE admitted that in
many chapels devoted to the worship of God the
priests had uttered language most outrageous,
most inflammatory, and most contrary to Chris-
tian morality. They had attracted the most
serious attention of the Lord-Lieutenant, who
had been in communication with his law
advisers, but he could not state what steps had
been or might be adopted in consequence.
He had caused inquiries to be made, but as yet not
one information had been sworn. The matter was a most
difficult one, but the Noble Earl was exercising his
best discretion to bring the perpetrators of such out-
rages (for outrages they were) (Hear, hear)—
to justice. The law already provided a remedy—
to excite persons to violate the law was a misde-
meanour at common law, but in Ireland an Act
was passed some years ago making it a felony to
excite persons to outrage, and punishing with death
those inciting others to the commission of murder,
and enforced in Ireland, these acts would be the
means of procuring the conviction of offenders.
An apprehension had gone forth that the Acts in ques-
tion (9 and 10 Geo. IV.) did not apply to Ireland, but
they specifically did, and he would take upon himself
to say, that they would be enforced in Ireland
wherever possible. The Lord-Lieutenant would use
every exertion to procure the requisite information,
and would enforce the penalties of the law in every
case in which prosecution should lead to conviction.
—(leos-, hear.) The Noble Lord had asked whe-
ther it was intended to seek for more powers than
were contained in the Bill then before the other
House of Parliament ? He (the Marquis of Lans-
downe) was not prepared at that moment to say
that any extra powers would be asked for; but
this he could most undoubtedly say, that the mo-
ment it should appear that the milder mea-
sures were insufficient, that moment her Majesty's
advisers would come again to the House and ask
Parliament for snore effectual measures, and he
thought that their application would not have less
force from the fact of their having in the first in-
stance tried the mildest expedient which was pos-
sible under the circumstances. lie could not con-
clude Niithout expressing his pleasure, that while the
Noble Lord had found it necessary to condemn the
language of certain Members of the Roman Catholic
priesthood, he had at the same time borne testimony
to the general Christian demeanour and exemplary
conduct of that body. As far as his experience went
he could fully corroborate the Noble Lord. He had
during a period of unexampled suffering seen the
Roman catholic clergy perform their duty in the
most noble, pious, and disinterested manner; and
if it were necessary to visit some of the order with
punishment, it became the more necessary to honour
the untiring, zealous, and Christian exertion of the
great majority.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of M A LAIESBURY said, that from one
seenodt
mof e
oIt; sos gfl ai soul
igtooat
itohne
aotthtehre
crimes there
which
ebhutwoenr
were
Bevuetryevdenay
thbiesingiodciogmomatiitotoed
wians the
esister
dc obuyn ttrye
bh.
horror evinced at seeing such crimes encouraged y
hear.) Ile regretted that
ministers
nr
estesrt Nobles
ri of
N;,
;.leGan r°tqd s
measures(hl bade anr oi t. g i
\Wit
htheremspaeenty ht oo pe t
ho
ef
language alleged 'to have. been used in chapels, he
thought it might be possible to get at proof of its

utterance, seeing that it must have been spoken in

hearing of hundreds of persons.
Lord STANLEY said, that although there were
portions of the statement of the Noble Marquis to
which he had listened with some satisfaction, an indi-
cating on his part, and, no doubt, on the part or 010
Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, a determination, as fat
as possible, to grapple with the great evil so forcibly
brought under their Lordships' notice by his Noble
Friend ; yet he had, at the same time, to regret the
indefinite and indistinct character of the answer given
by the Noble Marquis. The questions put to the
Noble Marquis were plain, distinct, definite questions.
They brought before their Lordships in the strongest
colours, yet colours not stronger than the occasion
warranted and rendered necessary, cases in which it
was quite clear that either at public meetings, or in
the awful form of denunciations from the altar of
God, there had been put forth on the part of some of
the Roman Catholic clergy, of some individual mein-
' hers of that clergy—far be it from him to attribute
, such atrocities to the body in general—incentives to
murder, -which, in general, had been immediately
followed up by the execution of the sentence. Under
these circumstances, it was not too much for his
' Noble Friend to ask the Government whether the
facts stated had been communicated to the Lord-
; Lieutenant of Ireland; if so, whether the Lord-
Lieutenant had referred them to the law officers
of the Crown ; if so, whether it was the opinion of
those officers that the law, as it stood, was strong
enough to meet these cases; and if such was not the
opinion of those officers, whether it was the intention
of the Government to seek to amend and strengthen
the law ?—(Hear, hear.) He must say, that though
no notice of these questions hai been taken by his
Noble Friend, he was surprised to find that the
Noble Marquis was not able to state whether or no
these facts had been reported to the Lord Lieutenant.
("Hear, hear," from Lord Lansdowne.) 010
then he was to understand that they had been cow-
inunicated to Lord Clarendon. This, however, af-
forded no answer to the main question, which West
whether the cases had been submitted to the law
officers of the Crown in Ireland, and whether, in their
judgment, the facts warranted the prosecution of the
offending parties?—(Hear, hear.) To this question,
as he understood, the Noble Marquis was not able,
without communication with the Lord-Lieutenant,
to answer. Such being the fact, he hoped that his
Noble Friend would not allow the case to rest as it
stood, but would, after the lapse of another week, re"
new his questions distinctly with reference to these
particular cases, as thus :—Was it or was it not true,
a
that in the year 1836 a Roman Catholic priest wrote
to a landed proprietor in Ireland, in the most lauda-
tory terms of his charity, his benevolence, his warn'
heart, his labours of love for the surrounding poPele-
tion ? Was it or was it not true that, in August,
1847, that same priest from the altar of God denounced
that same landed proprietor as an absentee, a tyrant+
and an oppressor ? Was it or was it not true, that
this same priest denounced this same landlord es
worse than Cromwell, and asked " Does this man yet
live ? "—(Hear, hear.) Was it or was it not true
that in corning out of chapel, after that denunciation,
a respectable person who had heard it pronounced
said, "This man must be immortal if, after this
anethema he survives" ?—(Hear, hear.) Was it or
was it not true that within forty-eight hours after
this denunciation, that landlord, a most humane,
praiseworthy man in every respect—a
man belove
by all his neighbours, was cut off by the hand of 511
assassin ?—(Hear, hear.) If these things were true,
then his Noble Friend had a right to ask whether
they had been referred to the law officers of the crown
in Ireland--whether, in the opinion of those officer!,
that priest was legally, as, if the facts were as ststeci
he was morally, in the sight of God and man, guilty ?t,
the blood of the murdered Major Mahon—whether, if
such was their opinion, it was intended by the Go:
vernment to prosecute the man who had desecrated
the altar of God by fulminating from it an incentive
to murder—or whether, if such was flat their opinion,
it was intended so to amend and strengthen the law.
as to enable it to reach these atrocious cases r
—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Marquis had, so the
gratified him by reciting various laws already on the
statute-book, which applied to such offences; but then
in the
came the further questions, how far was it
power of Government to enforce these laws, and 11
far was it considered expedient to do so? Ile ha
himself had the honour, or perhaps rather the mis-
fortune, to act for a considerable time as Secretary for
Ireland, and was quite aware of the difficulty of ob•
taining effectual evidence in such cases, of the diffi"
culty of prosecuting with any hope of success a
Roman Catholic priest, before a jury composed in
many instances of the lower class of Roman Catholics,
whose prejudices would range them on the side- of
their own minister—(Hear)—but he still thought
they had a full right to know whether it was the
design of Government to attempt, at least, to effect lt
prosecution of such offenders, because, however
lamentable, on the one hand, the failure of a prosecu-
tion, yet, on the other hand, its failure inconsequence
of the misconduct of a jury would go far to enlighten
the Parliament and people of this country as to the
real nature of the difficulties and the extent of the
remedy to be applied.—(Hear, hear.) Whatever the
obstacles in the way, he regarded it as the clear
duty of Government to run the risk of an un-•
just acquittal, rather than have it to he supposed
that in these and similar cases the Government
were powerless, or that, whatever the provisions
pf the statute-book, they were a dead letter, and that
there was practical impunity for offences of this de-
scription.—(Hear, hear.) He must reiterate the
hope that his Noble Friend would repeat his questions
after the lapse of an interval sufficient to enable the.
Noble Marquis to communicate with the Government
in ireland.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord CAMPBELL' said that his experience as a
law officer of the Crown told him, what the Noble
Lord's experience as a late Minister of the Cr
own.
might also have told him, that to answer such ques-
tions as those now proposed, under such circumstances,
would be in the highest degree indiscreet, the Ip.
judicial to the course of ju,tice.—(llear.) 41V1
officers of the Crown must have sufficient time
allowed them for fulfilling to the best of their judg:
ment the onerous duties imposed upon them,
..tr
must not, because they did not act with the rapioal_vi:
desired by irresponsible parties, be branded as 72_
plices in the crimes it was their task to punisna
(Hear.) To the question, whether the existing 1 s'
cald
were sufficient to meet such cases as these, he
There
distinctly reply, abundantly sufficient.
could be no doubt that any incitement to c.onicimte!
a felony rendered the party putting forth the in
such,
ment accessory before the fact, and liable as.
in Ireland as in England, to the same punisn,w, in
with the actual perpetrator of the offence ; arm
the case of murder, to undergo with the actual Inc arr.;
derer the punishment of death.—(Hear,
bran
Whether the incitement emanated from the plat.°
of a public meeting, or from the pulpit, the !ego,"
liability was, of course, the same. Could it.
all
shown that from the pulpit or the altar a priest 11 t!
said, "A.0r13 is as bad as Cromwell—does he yet
live ?" or words to that effect, this would be inat_iel.
festly strong evidence before a jury that the
el. _
nunciation was an incentive to the dagger ofotiti_,g
u
assassin.—(Hear, hear.) The existing law, he Wca
repeat, was quite strong enough to reach such
and he had every confidence that the Lord-Lieutenthas;
of Ireland wquld not hesitate or delay to carry
law into execution.
preTsehneteEdarinl ofthHeAeßarDlieWr IpCalritEorfeftehrereedvteoniangpe, tit!
ther
plaining of the bulls denouncing the Queen an
Protestant subjects as malignant heretics, and ur.
gbo
that they involved denunciations most fatal w
peace of the country. Lord'
Lord BROUGHAM observed, that as the 4ed
Lieutenant of Ireland professed himself sOhe
with the law as it stood, their Lordships, until
inadequacy of the law could be proved, could her: y.
desire to force a more stringent law upon the Liu
vernment. rts
Earl GREY said, that according to all the rePethe
received, juries in Ireland did not shrink froono-
nu
erformance of their duties. As long as that
ed to be the case, her Majesty's Government 'o9"er.
be indefensible, if they asked for extraordinary potir.
to set aside the administration of the existing TA,
Her Majesty's Government shrunk from no resP_Pbo
bility; but nothing would be more rash or unadvis:.....
than that they should pass opinion 3 as to What fe;
or what were not speeches inciting to crime. I!, To
where the intention was most mischievous, it
~1.4
often happened, even in this country, that NZ
t
grounds tor conviction were wantin
Ralf-Pas ! Se/
Their Lordships adjourned at
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Des 6. TT T,
CRIME AND OUTRAGE (IRELAND) 131.1"—,i
Mr. J. O'CONNELL (in continuation) proceede‘.
to say that he earnestly implored the House t°
come forward in a grac,ous spirit and assist ha
with another grant of money, in order that theZ
might provide against coming evils. With reec",
honour to themselves the present Lord-Lieutenant of
Ireland and the present Chief Secretary had ma
Ireland
strong representation to the Government on this sv,ef
of the water to furnish funds to check the spread 0,
disease. Those representations had been
by the report of the Board of Health; and what h 3,
been the answer of the Government in this country
They stated that they regretted to learn that fever
had not diminished, but they had no power under the,.
laws for making issues for that purpose after the 1"
of October. Why, then, did they not come to this
House to ask for powers to furnish means, instead
of seeking a Bill of coercion ?—(Hear, hear) 911
the subject of the poor-law, he would only 11(
support/
one word more—viz., that by throwing upon Ire-
land the support of her own poor, all classes were
suffering alike—the landlord and the farmer-- the
shopkeeper and the artizan—in short, every ell:
was partaking of the impoverishment under vilLc.
the country laboured. Many of the better co" •
0
:co vi Ay-- -

Were reduced to a condition which almost made them
fit inmates for the workhouse. The lion. Member
here read several extracts from the Irish newspapers,
to show the prevalence of distress, together with an
*Creased price of provisions. The Hon. and Learned
Issember then alluded to some of the proceedings of
• the Irish council, and said that he entirely dissented
from the proposal of extending the income-tax to Ire-
Land, which would, in effect, crush that country.
However much the Irish Members were divided on
other subjects, they concurred in thinking that no de-
pendence could be placed on the poor-law for the
salvation of life in Ireland. Their representations
Were met by the reports of Government officials, who
had a direct interest in making favourable reports,
and representing things ns better than they were.
The memorial of the Irish hierarchy to the Queen-
ought to command attention from Ministers, and
Convince them that something far different from a
coercion Bill was needed. The Irish hierarchy had
the full confidence of the people ; their representations
*ere supported by the bulk of the Irish Members, who
Were unanimous in declaring the poor-law insufficient,
and in asking for some modification of the law of
landlord and tenant. Every one knew that a great
amount of capital had been hoarded, from the inabi-
lity of the tenants to employ it in the land ; this
money had now been applied for the purposes of emi-
gration ; and its flowing out of the country could
°ply be prevented by a measure establishing tenant-
right. Let parliament, while punishing the murderer,
do justice to the innocent and protect the oppressed.
l'rery past committee and commission had ascribed
the evils of Ireland mainly to the insecurity of
tenant-right. In the digest of Lord Devon's com-
Mission the same fact was stated and deplored.
It was to be regretted that, while every pamphlet
Which maligned and misrepresented the country was
eagerly laid hold of in England, and quoted on both
sides of the house, the testimony of one disinter-
ested witness, an Englishman, Mr. Wiggins, had
been entirely overlooked. That gentleman declared
that the want of tenant -right was the monster
grievance of Ireland. The same thing had been
asserted on the bench by Chief Justice Pennefather.
This fatal cause had been long in operation, and
Would continue so, until Ireland was plunged in chaos
and blood. In allusion to the unhappy victims of the
recent murders in Ireland, he was bound to state,
after the attempts that had been made to blacken the
character of the peasantry, by representing the vic-
tims as men of the most humane and unimpeachable
character, that in several of those unhappy cases there
had been harsh treatment of the tenantry. The late
kr. Roe was stated to have broken his word to a
tenant. In proof of this the Hon. Member read a
letter from a Mr. W. Loghlin ; also an extract from
an Irish paper, charging ttie bailiff Hill with making
an untimely distraint on a tenant named Quayle. The
Right Hon. the Home Secretary having, in a speech
of three hours, raked up everything he could to
blacken the character of the peasantry, and to exhibit
the crimes of those in low estate, he was bound to
expose the crimes of those in a higher position.—
(Rear.) The Hon. Member then read some further
extracts, reflecting on landlords generally in severe
terms, and stated that he had several others
in his possession which he should refrain from reading,
because his correspondent had stated that some
Parts were perhaps too highly coloured. Government
Ought to pass a coercion Bill, not for the peasantry,
but for the landlords, for the sake of teaching them
their real interests. In Ulster, where tenant-right
Prevailed, the landlord was sure of his rent, and the
Ulant was prosperous. The only objection to this
Vatern was, that it prevented the consolidation of
'mall holdings ; but that was a light evil, as weighed
against the great good which resulted from the sys-
enl. He advocated no theory, but was confident
that a recognition of tenant-right would effectually
atop the murderous proceedings that had recently
taken place. To the present coercion Bill he objected
in tote, because it was unaccompanied by measures of
relief. As to its details, he objected to them because
they made the Lord-Lieutenant a dictator, and gave
",;111 a power above the constitution. The Right Hon.
Baronet who introduced the Bill had described it as
elle of merely local application ; but the Lord-Lieu-
enant, if he chose, might enforce it in every county
in Ireland. True, he was a good and humane man,
but it was not prudent to invest him with powers
so arbitrary and unlimited. Another objection
Was that the Bill embraced the penalties of the White-
n's' Act, and made them applicable even where there
teas no proof of outrage and murder, as required by
the, Whiteboys' Act. The power_ of search was a
dangerous power, although given by this Bill only in
%Mitigated form. As to the power to call upon the
country to go in search of the murderer, he believed
it would be utterly inefficient and inoperative. If the
Bill did reach a Committee, which lie hoped it would
11cat, he should have tobattle the several clauses which
't contained there, and he would not, therefore, at
this state go further into detail. He called upon the
Government to relieve the distress of Ireland—to be
just to her—and thus to avoid the necessity of such
tills. Ireland could not be crushed down into utter
Misery without this country suffering also—nothing
could prevent the poor of Ireland from seekin g refuge
in England, and they would bring fever into this coun-
try, and throw the burden of their maintenance on its
people. Again, he would ask what would be the
state of Ireland in the event of this country being at
War—how could rebellion be prevented there if justice
Were denied ? Notwithstanding the wrongs of Ire-
land, the English people advocated this Bill—all the
Papers of this country, with the exception of the
Morning Chronicle, were hounding on the Govern-
ment to coercion ; but that paper, to its credit, was
advocating a settlement of the differences between
landlord and tenant. The Hon. Gentleman proceeded
to defend the Irish priests from the charges which had
been, made against them, and declared that but for
their exertions society would long ere this have been
the
an end in Ireland. Ever since the connexion of
'Be two countries Ireland had been oppressed, and
Whenever, relief was given it was meagre and tardy.
-raighteen months had passed since the last coercion
1411 was proposed in that House, and not one measure
Of justice had been adopted—not one single act of
substantial kindness had been shown to Ireland, and
110 W they found the very men who had so nobly op-
Posed coercion coming forward as its friends and
axlvocates.—(Hear, hear.)
larli\ir• POWER condemned a coercion Bill for Ire-
, (I, unaccompanied by remedial measures. He
Wishedll to see crime put down by the strong arm of
e law, but he thought the existing law was amply
sufficient for the purpose. If extraordinary powers
Were
to be created for the purpose, he implored the
overnment to look at the character of the men who
tWould have to carry those powers into effect. Were
eY not the Irish landlords and magistrates, who ge-
i;erallY had been taught to look upon their Celtic
~rethren as an inferior race ? Surely they were
"(a ngerous persons to be entrusted with such autho-
-43r• The Hon. Gentleman then defended the Irish
Vests from the calumnies which he said had been
heaped upon them, and declared that they were active
"1 their endeavour to prevent crime, rather than to
Roman
it. He proceeded to contend that the
constitutional
Catholic religion was not incompatible with
'institutional liberty, instancing Spain, Portugal, a
Part of the United States of America, and, finally,
the efforts of Pius IX. to give freedom to Italy, in
Proof of the assertion.
Mr. GRATTAN said he would support the mea-
sure of Government, because he thought the time
had come when humanity required support in Ire-
and•—(Hear, hear.) He would support the Bill for
the honour of the Irish nation, which was tarnished
by cowardly murders.—(Hear, hear.) His Hon.
Friend the Member for Limerick introduced a great
deal that was irrelevant into the discussion. He
talked of the want 'of assistance on the part of the
Government to relieve the distress and misery of Ire-
land. That was all very right, but the present was-
not the time for that question.—(Hear, hear.) The
f.kuestion of distress had nothing to do with the ques-
tell of outrage and crime. A man starving would
Conte to ask for bread, but not to take away life.—
(lear, ,hear.) If a man wanted to go to a relief
rlutnittee, he did not go with a pistol or a blunder-
buss, but with a can for his soup. He thought that
"Is Ron. Friend had taken away from himself all
ground
for opposition to the measure, because he did
Oot %support the amendment proposed in the Address,
the ground that the Right Hon. Gentleman, the
seer ground
for the Home Department, and the Right
dnourable Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland,
iioiared that the people would be kept from starve-
He saw very little coercion in the present
Bill._ hear.) When compared with the
toeasures of 1814, 1822, and 1835, it seemed to him
abbea mitigated and a wretched—he would not
use the Bill he was going to support—(Laughter)
--but he was surprised that his Hon. Friend did not
tZ tne almost invisibility of the coercion it con-
This•wone,, could not be called an arms Bill, for it
%hell' Only affect those who would be likely to use
it
11.11 for the destruction of human life. He thought
when a murder was committed, that the
~,,01,1e should pursue the guilty parties. But he
the "id. go further than the Bill, for he would maks
rnrich man go out in pursuit as well as the poor
hear.) If a man had property he
arlitt tollear,
defend it, as was done by Lord de Freyne
pe'se.nir• Grace, who armed their tenants for that pur-
•h
Hon. Friend alluded to many points
nlent, deserved the serious attention of the Govern-
of th especially that which related to an amendment
the hee.landlord and tenant law. The Noble Lord at
A .1 au of the Government declared, on the 2d of
Were
arrtet
0,
1;
s 8 46 , that no person could contend that the
between landlord and tenant in Ireland
in a satisfactory state, and that such of the
3 °f the law as could be remedied by legislation
O to '
thp, oe so remedied without delay, for, by so doing,
*°lll n Irela Iremove one of the great causes of crime
Which
ought to (H
beeaser, t
at res
That was a
u LordtNoble

T~~L

(lid not redeem his pledge, he would be prepared to
join his Hon. Friend in a vote of censure on the Go-
vernment. He thought the appointment of the Devon
Commission was most mischievous if the measures and
recommendations it held forth were not realised.—
(Hear, hear.) The lion. Gentleman then referred
to the accusations which had been made against the
Roman Catholic clergy, which lie pronounced to be
unfounded and calumnious. He knew of instances
where the clergymen of that church were most active
in dissuading from crime ; and he could show some
threatening notices which had been sent to Roman
Catholic priests and even to Roman Catholic bishops.
He hoped that the Lord-Lieutenant would not wait
t'or the present measure, but that he would pour po-
lice into the disturbed districts, which he had the
power of doing at present. The farmers of Ireland
were themselves most anxious for this Bill.—(hear,
hear.) He was prepared to meet those cowardly
assassins, not by an order to prime and load, hut to
present and fire.—(Laughter.) Those were the orders
lie had given, and which enabled him to be there.
He hart received notices, and this was the way lie
would meet them. It was due to the honour of the
country—it was their duty as men, as citizens, and
as Christians, to support the present Bill.—(llear.)
Sir G. GREY said he was glad he had given an
oppartunity to the Hon. Member for Meath (who
had risen at the same time with himself) to address
the House, for his address had confirmed the opinion
he (Sir G. Grey) entertained, namely, that it was
almost unnecessary to appeal to the House to reject
the motion of the Hon. Member for Kilkenny. Ile
felt a conviction that not only the majority of the
House, but the majority of the Irish Members, would
not lend themselves, he would not say to obstruct
this Bill, but to obstruct the Government in reading
this Bill a second time, in order that its provisions
might be fully and promptly considered. He had
risen only to express his earnest hope that gen-
tlemen would feel the importance of entering- upon
a consideration of this measure with promptitude,
and that they would not be led away by the speeches
of the Honourable Member for Kilkenny and of
the Honourable Member who seconded his motion
into the wide field of discussion which they had
opened; and to state now, that it was not because he
did not feel the importance of the questions raised by
the Honourable Member for Kilkenny—for he agreed
with the Honourable Member for Meath, that many
of those questions did deserve the consideration of the
House—but because he thought they might be more
conveniently considered upon other occasions—(Hear,
hear)—that he asked the House to postpone the dis-
cussion of them now, and to allow the order of the
day to be read, that the Bill might be discussed, in
which stage of the proceedings he should be in a
situation to address to the House a few observations
in explanation of some of the provisions of the Bill,
respecting which he had been misunderstood, and to
remove some objections which had been made to the
Bill. This, however, was not the stage in which he
could enter into those explanations, and he should be
only obstructing the business of the House if he were
to lend himself to the discussion introduced by the
Honourable Member for Kilkenny and accept his
invitation. As to any feeling in this House or in
this country against Ireland, he utterly denied it.
—(Hear.) It was the wish of every Englishman
that Ireland should be rich, happy, prosperous, and
contented.—(Hear.) In England, indeed, there was
a strong feeling against the unchecked progress of
crime and assassination—a feeling entertained on
both sides of the House ; and there was, he hoped, a
readiness to give the Government and the Lord-Lieu-
tenant of Ireland the means of checking a dastardly
system of secret assassination, which was a disgrace
to any Christian country.—(Hear, hear.) He should
not attempt to go into the proceedings of the last
Parliament with reference to this subject. The Hon.
Member had brought a serious charge against the last
Government and the last Parliament—that party con-
siderations had prevented a due consideration of the
affairs and the condition of Ireland. He (Sir G.
Grey) would not enumerate the acts of benevolence
done by the last Parliament, the acts of generosity
arid of justice towards Ireland—for they were not
only acts of generosity and benevolence, but of justice
—he would not refer to the days, and weeks, and
months which had been devoted to measures to miti-
gate the distress, and destitution, and permanently
relieving the state of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) This
was not, however, the occasion to defend the conduct
of the Government towards that country ; if the
llon. Member believed that the conduct of the Go-
vernment had been culpable, let him bring forward a
motion fairly, and he (Sir G. Grey) would meet him
in the same spirit; but let not a question as to the
conduct of the Government towards Ireland in
past times stand in the way of a measure
necessary to meet a pressing evil, for at all events
a measure was necessary to check the progress

of crime and assassination. For this reason he
should not say a word more now, but to entreat
the House to proceed to the second reading of the
13i11.—(Hear, hear.)
The question was then put; when,
Mr. O'CONNOR rose and said, if he had the
slightest notion that the adopting the proposition of
the Right Hon. Baronet would lead to the restora-
tion of peace and tranquillity in Ireland, he should be
the last Member in the House to postpone the object
he had in view for one moment. But he was of
.pinion that the Right Hon. Baronet would not find
himself the better for the aid of the lion. Member for
Meath. It was an old saying—" Defend Inc from
my friends.". It had been the misfortune of Ireland
that there never had been unanimity in her councils.
—(hear, hear.) Those who had undertaken to re-
present the distress, the grievances, and the situation
of Ireland, never could agree amongst themselves as
to the remedies.—(Hear, hear.) The Irish people,
however, were more fortunate now than upon former
occasions, for they had a more patient hearing.—
(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Member for Meath
had defended this Bill, but he had given only a poor
and equivocal support to her Majesty's Government.
The opponents of the Bill had at all events the de-
Aaration of the Honourable Gentleman that he ex-
pected remedial measures before coercion.—(Hear.)
The Hon. Gentleman's speech contained the strongest
arguments against coercion The history of the world
offered no example like that of Ireland, where a mil-
lion of suffering people had been prematurely con-
signed to the cold grave, and all this was borne with
patience. Until those measures were tried which had
been effectual in the cases cited by the Hon. Member
fur Meath, and until the Government had tried the
stringency of the ordinary law, this measure—he
would not call it, with the Hon. Member for Meath,
a poor, pitiful, and dirty measure, and no measure at
all—ought not to be had recourse to. This measure
would bring the ordinary law into disrepute ; he
would show that this was the invariable result in all
countries where the ordinary law was not exerted,
and coercion was introduced ; and he would show
that the Government and the Lord Lieutenant had
not strained the ordinary law, nor even pushed it to
its ordinary limits. The Attorney-General had been
asked whether the Government could change the
venue in Ireland • he (Mr. O'Connor) could tell the
[lon. and Learned Gentleman that the Government
could change the venue. The Lord-Lieutenant had,
moreover, the power of ordering a special com-
mission; he had the power of selecting his judges (a
great power in England), and of appointing juries,
and he had the power of resorting to the written
evidence of the police when other evidence broke
down; and all this by the ordinary law. It was the
landlords of Ireland who were looking for this mea-
sure. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
'Famworth had said, the other night, that he would
hold no terms with assassins and murderers; that he
would first establish tranquillity in Ireland. Whence
were the seeds of these crimes ? The Right Hon.
Baronet had himself indicated them, when he stated
that he had bestowed 2,0001. in rewards upon men
who gave evidence against offenders. Money thus
given would have the effect of suborning evidence.
Let the landlords of Ireland do their duty ; let them
not suppose that they had only the property of their
lands, and that there were no duties attached to those
lands. A comparison had been made between Irish
and English landlords, but they could not be com-
pared as a body ; good landlords were the exception
in Ireland, whilst there was scarcely a bad landlord
in :England. In Ireland the tenant was sub-
jected to the lolly, the impertinence, and the insolence
of his landlord; whereas in England, even if the
estate were sold, the tenant's rights were preserved.
That was the reason why coercion was not required
in England, and was required in Ireland. But as
long as coercion Bills were obtained remedial mea-
sures would never be had. All crimes in Ireland
were perpetuated by the had system prevailing there,
whilst in England there was no inducement to agra-
rian crime. His only surprise was that Ireland was
so quiet, so calm. Let the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir
George Grey) prefer his indictment against Ireland ;
but they. had not heard how the people of Ireland
were mixed up with financial details. It appeared
that the solicitor of the Provincial Bank of Ireland
had put on the file this term no less than 800 declara-
tions on behalf of the bank. It was not because he
thought the Bill too stringent, or that he dal not de-
sire to arrest the hand of the assassin, that he opposed
this Bill ; he resisted it as a lawyer, upon principle
and authority. The Hon. Member then read a long
extract from the work of Beccaria on crimes and
punishments, showing that disproportionate punish-
ments tended to make a people hard and insensible.
After reading various passages from Montesquieu on the
Spirit of Laws, and from Blackstone and Bentham,
with a similar object, the Hon. Gentleman quoted an
opinion of similar import from the work of Lord
John Russell on the government and constitution of
England, and then asked whether it was possible to
• produce stronger proofs than these of the bad effects
of even straining, much less setting aside, the ordi-
nary law ? He asked whether this was a time, when
Ireland was likely to be a petitioner at their doors
fir alms instead of bullets, and just after the people