The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-24 00:00:00

•
co
rights.upon which society itself depended—the great eOO
stone of the whole social edifice in every country, as they
ever necessarily be. They constitute the line of deo° ier
which separates the savage from the civilissd state-of Weis
In the one property is safe—in the other unsafe. This
totes the difference between a governed country and
3 cethei
where anarchy prevailed. Here property is safe—there, east,
are no sacred rights of property. This constitutes the ;le
et ce between the two states of society. It was a aide /ate
ence it was a contra,t—it was a diametrical contrast be`e
the civilised and sasetge state of society. Therefore it Ole
property, having all those tights, mO4 be deemed sacred'
that reason it was that they must in all they did, inge...l°. OS,
said, and in all they meditated to do—make al spring "7,e.
as from a first principle ; and no man who desired the Peite
a reastutable being, or even a person claiming for hitetrrifite
least grain of common sense, or the smallest amount 0 ,sae
tien, can entertain a doubt upon the subjest. Nor coteraiy
person suffer a thought to cross his mind—to pass 0e°,401
mere surface of his imagination—could entertain for a 010"01
an hesitating thought—a shade or the shadow of a shiworri
the most sacred and fundamental of all principles--the
rights of property. If, then, there were speculators-Ito to
speculators—who suffered to pass across their imaginattbe jy
abstract ideas that those sacred rights of property may, tee
terfered with with impunity, and who propounded this
ference with property as one of their remedies for existilidel
who carried out the absurd principle for the purpose of
aotet
their dupes in the country, who were for the most part ig oes
persons when compared with themselves—but more tb°olo
less, more reckless than they who suffered it to be said'
go out to the world upon their authority.-and prePV
Bills in Parliament of which he had heard that night . 1/1)
first time. He could not have believed it possible in los
century, in a British House of Commons, that there eliret",
been propounded, what had been called by the gentle P_eaarsl
euphonious and eugolistic " fixity."—(Laughter and rt" errs
Meaning thereby, by an Act of Parleenent, that an/ lee
being the occupant or tenant of a piece of land, or othi'deeri
perty, was to have a personal property net of his 11°,0
estate, in the shape ot the house ter tenement, or lands, 50
he must have occupied for a limited number of eesietreOtt
which he was to become entitled to by payment of ssce
That was an interterence with, a desecration of the
rights of property, which their Lordships must strentlea ifs°
test, honestly, fairly, openly, downrightly. It waslditel
monstrosity to give the tenant property upon such eeo
sort
To pace the tenant in the landlord's place, in conselia,
his having formerly paid the rent. He could only °doss!
how it was that such a proposal was not instantly putt t'tise
the! rung arm of talent in the other House, except mato if
thought, either that the matter was of so li'sa
portaece, or else so extravagant in iiseif At
to deserve the attention of the House. Afer
events it was brought forward in the middle of 0/4
when long discussions are deprecated, and Governute° a tali
anxious for a prorogation, mentioned at the same tins
01
they intended to send over a Commission. He knees
over, that a Commission was intended long before 6.8 t
and the Commission, wnen formed, was not formed toc°ol
as to the best made of improving the sacred and 4'4160
rights of propel ty. It was not app Anted to inquire inle°oo,
ot tenure, nor the robbery of landlords for the sake of,ire
It was lamentable that there should be such a state of wcole
the United Kingdom as had grown up in the sister eV
Matters ought to be far otherwise in the matiagentete set
perty. The Noble Lord who had just spoken bad o.—Sisra
illustration. He (Lord Brougham) w uld give neje/fiat
Friend another illustration, with which he was
• s.
show him the difference between the wit countreee 000.,
would he think of an estate, the rent of which was testpsra
20,0..01. a-year, upon which there were not 80 or 10"
,asis,
but 1,3..0 or 1,400 tenants in ehiet paying rent, aniperhsitote
many more again—pi obably 3,00 u pa dthe rent dui:ier-001
none of who.o paid so much as 401. a-year. Nal:ober. psi
paid 71. and 10/., and some 10s., 125., and lbs. reter
its
es
a great mistake to say, that if the land was unaeriet./ tite
irsiand was the same as that of England; and tosa7l"
sub-tenant had paid his rent to the middle-man, and thtwo
man should fail, that the landlord could not destraia • 'nit
sub-tenant. It was a gross mistake—he collet do sot
was only an act of kindness or good feeling that he did betWe
And again in anothe, case. to which the Noble Earl se.,,A
the address tverted, which he ( Lord Brougham) horsaire
happened, that upon a lease being out, anti the OW°er g
to have his farm better cultivated, and in order to bribe° /014.
that result, found it necessary o reduce the leotpielte„re
tenants, in order that he might apply that skill and elide"
rn a somber of small tenants were not able to cornaulasdese
not able therefore to improve the condition of the, wesete
considered it a great hardship that the landlord cotliesig
cise the powers granted him by law of disluiPla
small men, and consolidating the farms as had ,beeotii;se
Scotland some years awe To consolidate these tafeatoly
Ise necessary that a number ot these small men shoulebso
It was a consisterable hardship that a man should Oetptelotil '
I.ower to act, as he thought for the good manage-0/ ,
estate. He would be loath to believe that the esalof sp
fie)
by his Noble Friend had been much followed. h'r of
from his statement that a vast number of persons Ifteseetgefr,
the moment the lease kilns. It was undoub esll92.Zegirtri
landlord to do that it he thought it was for the,riitejo
estate, and it was nothing more than an act of a'!;t00°.;111
neither more nor less, on the part of the landlord too#
tenantry if it was nut done Inure frequently, and teat self
made by the strung arm ef the law to understand tea, et
his right; and if be should choose to stand urn bit ibeitei
had no right to oppose, or resist, or thwart hirer &ool*,
law of the land ; and property woule be 111 sob
no longer worth having or cultivating if bola
were repealed. The landlord had an indisse et ftl
to de as he wished with his own estate-
eso9,
sidered that by passing the late coercion illrighli)i
putting down outrages, that they had begun at toe ate ifitO
He rejoiced to see it. They had armed Goverituita IVA
compulsory power, and the first lesson to be tatsht
people was, that hey must obey the law; that 'Woo /10
mit themselves to the law, and that their settst sto49,
c unse loss, be they hymen or priests, shall in lairteoler
tit ge open them to resist the law, or persist in the •
qty;
of outrages; and they should know, and must kOolty,t
they do so rests.. and perstst, they must suffer the
Vj
condign punishment of .crinurtais. So carefully di"nr•
or,lo !
Earl abstain from telling them what he wished t°, releitY
reined) the grievances of Leland, that it was On4pb, ty 0,
alluded to the irtsh church, at the end ot his speed
(Lord Brougham) cup d know what tangible reniew ire• eitel
view. The wide of collecting the tithe was, it Oleo,/
master grievance. But since 1532, when his Noble.tesi
posite, with himseif, mad • the chiller its thriittlie
was na such tong to be found in It-slams ° selSti,
sr To use the wds of Lord Plunkett, he was as rsr-ttees
as an ostrich In the year 1523 he presented a Poe 1,1-sa set
other House of Parliament, complaining of the so o'4
tuition of ju.tice, and he had ucca.ton then to u'
ot trol,
tiotis on that suojeet which lie regretted were 00,4
Souse of the jtidges who then ex-coted the le' bee'
la t
"Union judges." " Post hoc as propter hoc es
as it so happ,n,rl that they nwed heir origin to..:0,0004
were actuated by a strong politicai bias ever aitere tbei
looed e over the statement a few days ago which l'ootir 7
and he could say that no such grievance now rbenchslor
might be said that political men now sat on thebeivas_.s
question, however. was out what a judge via,
eeft
poinment, but what he had been since. Had th'sy'
stanch with faction ? \Vete they political by
was said that such appointments were not like' r/ Peoforo
ot Ire.and. He could say that one-half Of
and al
ia!ol
might disapprove of the appo ntment, but a half e/
proved of them.—(Great laughter. No dal._ be
Judges were appointed, who were said tut ete,i,
judges ;but were they the only political jtelge*oolitili6
Government had made appointments equally 101 "
they had a lackson, and a Lefroy, and a Smith, mete Ale
an O'Loughlin, a Perrin, a Ball, a 13radytabeer4
Cometon—every one of them politicians. It res.; irl,r4
necessity of the
.case. All the political bar oeti
tinged with politic-, and such would be the Togi. WYO.
party arose and introduced a different state or
e° of '00,4
as there were two great parties at the bar, ° deg 09
barristers would be politicians. He thought it h" est lieeie
te• ' so /
these observations. One word as to the cat est?
Ireland, which was divided into seven millions of
to
jo
one minion of Piotestants. He contended that religicleirtr
had no right to.complain of the alienation of ter iiorr
perty in Ireland, as the property was grauteeaeprOort je
uses, and Pa liament had a perfect right to skboter,% tro
thos.a purposes, and to the elate religion. The "'see ersitlifsel#
of Ireland was, that these seven millions reeel
ment for their own religion. That was a grea,,bilil, 0
admitted—so difficult as to amount to an itnP°, tethstite -
people, he considered, should nut be subjectso iret
of paying for their own religious instructionseae
said that the clergy would not take an ender' oiglitkroir
on it they would take it —( Laughter.) Theio
_her es/
it the first quarter, but they would the ne ,„r 0,0
that Catholics were challenged on juries
gion. They were ehallenged for other I! yro6,
would have equally aiplied bad they bee. °of
If a question should arise as to the elig eneteliel
would be one not at all connected with religiotabei ety
full review of the whole statement of the it`.,o sPfsie
(Lord Brougham) del not believe that this "lie byte}
which could be de •It with by legislative enactoieto ere thy:
determination of the Government not to Palle 'let° Vol/
with agitators. be they priests or laymen. s I,o' I_l'l°4o
with his Noble Frient that the processes of ; bevel
should be made more facile and less expenlAss to cyV
should not be forgotten that the law in EDO° obis leitffise
more expensise. He felt great pain ill beitige, resist.,/''
many observations that he had made; but of eeiipg
House should not lend itself to the malpraetti be
ce
ties ; and if they did, he did think they 19'00'1 be b e
selves to those agitators in Ireland to who shai,ceeeolle
attributable much of the agrarian eutrafle,.oo° 004
cemmttted. lie had read speeches made a`baeginges ale
by priests anti ethers, who spoke of property isotliv'to
as well as its rights, and he believed that the ) OA,
e land had ob:erveo that maxim.— ( Hear, hetrb laveAP
00.0
not agree with his Noble Friend that the r t' estiete°
not exercise that right as they thought prePeriesatOoree,
Earl FITZ WILLIAM did think that the eeet fteelwee,
indebted to his Noble Friend for having br77,f
motion, inasmuch as it would have the effiec coop° 10:lo
state of Irelane before this House and this lisht°sea to of
Ireland was a country not understood by E°finglishi°oll es
because she was a sort of mirror in which tt
coaiteoeljes
like to toil, for it did not reflect anything d esdat 12;
Government of England. His Noble Frieeeserebil erse
the difficulty of dealing with the monster' fart_noitehosif td•i,
the Irish Church ; and the Noble Duke °r- P Is°
platter -,fer ,r
would be impossible to do so ; but that the,. epeeeg
be a sort of disinheritance of tots House t).esPet tcliistre
lating for Ireland, or of removing the grind reteeo enoSe
enactment. He had heard a great deal ploy?
spent of the Catholic clergy ; but if he tee% „, 141/: dress'
he would never consent to such a regulat (,),--par! oil ter
did nut deal with this question justly anc:ol;9 °ley eiserD
upon it they would have to deal with quest robe fir.o
difficulty in reference to the rights r eb,
11,. or,
country. This was a matter in whichn leoid 03,
interested as a proprietor of land ;la Ire tetesesie
was a time when certain villains efe,
• • to the Lord Chancellor // liter ts',l
propositions
rates hY sbst 00. j
though these fellows held their es
bred
,ie
tenure ; yet such a state of things was Pbe .417
became firm legal holders of those wom te
what was said here went abroad s y mean° sedetelt?figier
approve of ; but he -poke to their Lordships' b, astit tees
not to inquire too nicely into the the tenure, be sisioisSo
was held in Ireland, for the result would ref
be 01°4. vie
as they might expect. The Noble Earl_ eederees4e
state of Scotland, and the circurnstan
ceo sbesr.oollif
Presbsterian religion had been establishedetibevettrt°oo
asked why the people of Ireland should nutsboted burp"
to have tbe Roman Catholic religion este.,ol is,;,retio
of
gion as the people of Scotland had to estshl 01 SC°, steles;
The episcopacy of some of the aristocraeYr was
ttbasi,"iii
al
reason for its being established thereeensfie,mittose strb
because the aristocracy of Ireland were it
_of cb se
tinny should be exclusively established tia r',„f gerieto- .41101
the property belonged to the Chure:f t
sieser`otiosli
wished to know what was the contiguity _ 0° /Cite
of England ?" Was it an ancient terueinuteh °vendee?
ato the ‘' eher is iss.a•
deed, that the property belongeo ; level— it - se-0
he denied thatit belonged by originalicrl3bucreb. hi3O!
of England or to the Roman Cat ho
the -hure Irstds
,t
longed by Act of Parliament to
worst feator-teeir. tiol
and here he came to the - fiss 100 ti
erce
nexion between the two countries. , Ire , ososeres
beers so universally right towards For IshliotiotreS
should be right. in that instance is
of thep:et
would not consent that any port!,3
should be diverted from its legituo r