The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-04 00:00:00

THE SUN LONDON, SATU'ItDAI EVENING, APRIL 4, 1843

- --
tßruilltit.thaTt
hiterweaswaaslaandcloarsdes
rme epar us
erne ,t e was
yn oa t
ef onut
lnedme da n
ra tohs
ee
authority was unexceptionable, Mr. Nagle, a stipendiary ma-
gistrate, who described the attack masha upon a person of the
Cwlasa r kn,ot whichhere oaccv
iuertritm, i
tit
th et
hceo u
vn
itcyt
iomf Twi pas!) ear a rfya
r.
nTehre,
lnaanmd leoor (ft
who took a piece of land, which offended a party who had
previously occupied it ; and because the landlord had placed
him in it, the disaffected party took steps to wreack his ven-
geance against this poor person. He was a well-disposed
and industrious workman, yet that did not protect him from being
attacked, and the cultivation of the land was consequently sus-
pended. That part of Leland where this and similar out-
rages took place was greatly in the want of capital. But if
such a state of things was to continue, how could they expect
the surplus capital of the country to be expended there. If
capital was expended, it would, no doubt, greatly increase the
imports, aad add to the improvements of Ireland, but it would
not come while such outrages took place, and such an organiza-
tion was in existence as permitted such proceedings.—(Hear,
hear.) He would refer to another place in the county of Clare,
in which a party of armed men entered a house and discharged
a blunderbuss in the face of the p:,r-on who occupied it, besides
otherwise abusing him in a brutal manner. There were four
men parties to this attack, and it arose because seven years pre-
vious to that period one of those who committed the present out-
rage had been ejected from this piece of ground. This person was
identified by those in the cottage who had been subjected to
the attack. He (Mr. Sydney Herbert) was indebted to this
information to Mr. Bailey, the resident stipendiary magistrate
of Clare. Another case had been furnished to him k Mr. Sydney
Herbert) by one of tie head-constables of the county of
Limerick, of a person who was waylaid by five or six men at
night, when returning from the market, and abused in a very
erious manner, arising from a similar cause to that which

originated in the one he had previously referred to. What he
wanted to show was, that the pea*ants under the unhappy state
of things which at pre,ent prevailed, were liable, not only to be
attacked in their houses, but on their going backwards and for-
wards to the market. The person to which he had just re-
ferred had been placed on a plot of land by his landlord, to
whom he had been a servant, and after occupying it for some

time he gave back the land, intimating that he'dui;st not retain
it or go to work upon it. Yet the man had been a fzithful
servant, and both the landlord and tenant were Catholics.
All these cases bore on the point that this was a law for the

protection of the poor. Do not let it be said that it was a Bill
to protect the magistracy or the landlords. How rainy of the
murders committed were upon the magistrates of Ireland ?
( Hear, hear.) Very few indeed. Few in comparison to those
that happened among the poor. In the five counties where
these outrages took place to the greatest extent, this would bo

found to be the case. In looking over the returns of
crime and outrage in those counties, he found
that, while the number of mur'ers was equal,
there were 85 cases of firing at persons, 135 cases of incen-

diarism, and 1,042 cases of threatening notices, amongst the
holders of laud. Now few were the cases in which the pro
tectun of the landlords was required compared to these.
He did not deny but that the measure would afford the pro-
prietors of land come protection, hut the poorer classes would
be found to derive the greatest benefit. His Right Hon.
Friend ( Sir J. Graham) cave a case, the other night, in illus-
tration of the state of society in 1832. and the benefits de-

rived from the former measure. He (Mr. S. Herbert) would
place before them another illustration respecting the state of
society at that period. In 1832, the state of things in some

. . ,-.
counties was as bad as it now is in the five counties corn-

plained of. The illustration he would give was that furnished
by Chief Justice Bushe, in his charge to the grand jury of
Queen's County. (The Right Hon. Gentleman here read the

extract, which was to the effect that outrages prevailed to a
great extent ; that the plunder of arms was widely practised ;
that witnesses were terrified from giving evidence, and juries
deterrcd from the performance of their duty on the pain
of death.) The Lord Chief Justice further said, that
this state of things was attributable to the agrarian feelings
that prevailed, and not from the pressure of want or poverty
of those who committed the outrages. He could not recollect
an instance in which want or poverty was the instigating
cause. This was the state of society according to Chief
Justice Bthhe in 1832. The Hon. and Learned Member for

Cork (11r. 0 Connell) said that the measure was only a
revival of the old Tory system of governing Ireland, and that
the previous measure had nit succeeded in its objects. He
(Mr. Sydney Herbert) must say that as far as the experience
of the Act of 1832 went there was every reason to be satisfied

of its operation. So far from it being inefficient, it had pro-
duced the greatest good.—( Hear. ) However much the
public of Ireland disliked the measure, it was found to give
security to life and property, which did not exist before it was
renewed in 1834, and again in 1836. If they had read the ac-
. . .

counts furnished in 1834 by the inspector-c,eneral of police of
Ireland, they would see the effect of the Act had been most
salutary. It had not been rigidly applied, yet as far as
it was carried out it was entireiy successful. Mr.

Green, a resident magistrate of Kilkenny, addressed a letter
to Lord Melbourne, showing the beneficial results that had

flowed from the measure. According to returns of outrages
furnished from the Ist April, 1832, to April, 1833, the num-
ber of cases was 1,599; from April, 1833, to the corresponding
period in 1834, there were but 331, showing a diminution of
1,259. There was one county, Queen's County, which was
more disturbed than almost any other county in Ireland, yet
after the operations c f that Act a great physical and moral im-
provement took place, and a state of general prosperity ensued.
He hoped that the House would clearly understand this, that of
the outrages committed, the greater number were outrages
committed in the humbler walks of life; and that in but few

instances, comparatively speaking, would this law be necessary
for the higher classes of society. —( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
He hoped that, in asking them to give their assent to the mea-
sure they would consider the necessity that made such excep-
tionary laws necessary, and that no: hing but the strongest con-
siderations could suffice to render such an enactment
justifiable.—( Hear.) He would ask them, with a due

, consideration of their duty, what it was best for them
to do? Was the couctry and the people to be dei.rived of all
security, and divested of the benefits which a free nation ought
to enjoy? Was not that a state of things with which it was
proper for them to interfere, where crime was committed with-

out any strong motives of provocation, and every tone and
phase of society operated to a fearful extent upon the industri-
ous tenant, as well as the proprietor of llnd. Every well-dis-
posed man was interested in an end being put to this state of
things—a system of terror and outrage which operated not in
proportion to the number of persons attacked, but to the
amount af alarm and fear that was generated and diffused. Let
them look at the erreess such a terrib'e tyranny as
this—a tyranny under which a person who goes Vut t, mutyj„..•
to be waylaid and attacked; or when sitting in his hous to
have a blunderbuss directed against his life; and which not
only operates against the individuals so assailed, but by the feel-
ings of alarm and intimPation it creates, leads to a general
derangement of society.—( Hear, hear.) Such was a state
of 'things that ought not to exist. Under such
a system, when a man goes abroad, he knows not what danger
may assail him in his progress; conscious perhaps that he has
an accuser whotfi he cannot see, yet who is judge and jury in
his case, and only seeks an opportunity when the executioner
whom he may employ shall carry his mandate into effect. It
is a dreadful state of things, when a moo knows that he is ac-
cused by an unseen party, whom he cannot confront, but whom
he knows watches his movemnnts, and against whom he is
neither safe in his journies by day, nor in the walls of his cot-
tage by night.—(Hear, hear.) He found that these outrages
were inflicted in some cases, because a person was in possession
of land from which another individual had been ejected some
seven or eight years before, and this was done, although the
present possessor had no previous knowledge of his
landlord. Surely under these circumstances, the House
would not object to a suspension of the law in
these districts. He considered it a most fortunate
circumstance that this state of society was confined to a small
area in Ireland. He was glad to find that it was confined to
Westmeath, and its neighbouring counties, but that only fur-
nished the stronger reason why Government should interfere
to restore order. He trusted that the House would look fairly
into that matter; he trusted that they would not be led away
by any specious declarations about curtailing the liberty of the
subject. Why, what they, the Government, wanted, was to
restore security to, not only the higher, but to the very hum-
blest classes in Ireland. He trusted, therefore, that the House
would not reject this Bill by ref tsing to accede to its first read-
ing. The Government asked them to grant this first reading,
but if it could be shown that those evils did not exist, it was in
the power of Hon. Members to do so. If they had exaggerated
the evil, it was in the power of Hon. Members to point out
where that exaggeration existed. If they thought that
that Bill was inapplicable to the peculiar cir-
cumstances of the case, they were bound to
show wherein the inapplicability consisted. All he
requested the House was not to mix up this question with
remedial measures for Ireland, which all parties wished to see
carried into effect, but which should be held quite distinct
from this occasion. It was universally admitted that these
outrages did not arise from a religious feeling ; it was ad-
mitted also that this was not what might be termed a religious
measure ; it was certainly not a political one, because men of
every shade of political opinion felt that there was a necessity
for its being immediately brought into practice. He hoped
that uo Hon. Member would allow himself to be carried away
by the argument that, because they could not trace these evils
to anything in the social condition of Ireland, they should post-
pone the measure until they had discovered that origin. Why,
if the House were to grant every concession, they would find a
repetition of all these evils ; unless they were to be in the
first instance checked by the strong hand, other grievances
would spring up. What they wanted at present
was to give protection and liberty, not only to
landlords, but to the poorer clares of Ireland, who did look
to Government as the source from whence they were to receive
some protection from the evils mailer which they were labour-
ing, so that they might pursue their industry—the true staple
of the country, upon which, more than upon legislative enact-
ments, the prosperity of Ireland depended.—(Cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL then rose and said—Sir, I rise with
deep anxiety, for the purpose of supporting the measure intro-
ducedr aedSecretary
ocla tnryhet
tat
Government
the
sy
Isßightfunn subject,
e ewe
hot Heh:
because
beginning
aßndneane rieson ngtoehktee;
Department,
withe andp n
uteh itoteh
eißtinesoi
gwwtthhhhi
totethset
iehd
oimsnhae.greathave
esbaieorsatis-
factionbeen
made e_eonltf
o
readily Hy confess that when cases are brought before us of the
ranter, committed in different counties—nnthatofwae with Ireland have taken upon
thatourselves the responsibility
Ito life on
many Crimea committed in Ireland
every legislatingd u e
protection
ttehertmi
o,ndhryeaodn fru enhi
union
t we are bound to afford
union, Such
libertye o
R n
t(h
eH etaerr,mshhefa rt.h)eof the subject on
e n
they u n -
necessy infringing on the
the burden
the
them by
h—y
were bound to bear. Now, when the
tells me that he wishes this Bill to be read a first. time—when
he says that he thinks he has stated sufficiently at length
narrative of crime to induce the House to accede to t!,e first
reading—l do, Sir, agree with him so far, that I think, also,
that the first reading of this measure may be taken; but in
saying so, I do not hold myself relieved from the responsibility
of stating, that so far as the Government measure is to be ad-
mitted, that is a question hereafter for this House to decide.
Looking to the Bill itself, there are many clauses in it which,
in my opinion, require to be rectified; and therefore, although
this House should consent to the first reading of the Bill, I
think myself bound to state that, in the further stages of the
measure, I shall have objections to offer which will go to the
foundation of some of its princpal provisions. I do not
blame the Government with that which they might
not, perhaps, be very well able to avoid 1
mean the increase of crime in Ireland. In my
views these crimes are connected with a social condition of
Ireland which has arisen from time to time—which has exhi-
bited a formidable front at several periods, ranging from eighty
years ago. Soon after the reign of George 111., crimes of this
kind first attracted the attention of the House, but the causes
eag
and
dbt
aatishi da:tn withoutd
of these crimes were so doubtful that we ourselves had never
considered what was the ;proper remedy for the disease. At
this moment every species ,of crime seems to be committed in
that unhappy country ; but when we ask what is the remedy to
be applied, I awn that the experience of all reflecting indivi-
duals seems to be that we on ght not to be satisfied with measures
merely of a coercive natur e. Sir, I think that when we con-
sider that Legislative Acts ol'this nature have been enforced from
the time of George I.—whe a measures were passed to restrain
deer stealing in the neighbo urhood of Waltham—it is impera-
tive on this House to ads ipt measures, however severe they
may seem, to restrain the sutrages which have been exhibited
to this House in such vivid colours. These outrage have gone
beyond the enactments which had already existed. Murders
have been committed, but I still think that we ought to have
satnelcrit tsrounds before wee exact the penalty. I thick
tha. we ought to have mufti eient indications of the crime. Take
, the example of persons wlso have been found with their faces
blackens and with dergactive arms in their bands; these.

combined with other circumstances which tended to show that
they were engaged in unlawful conspiracies which connected
them with the White-boys, induced the Irish Parliament to
pa's a law rendering such proceedings illegal. They ought,
surely, to have some indications which would tend to compro-
mise parties before they proceeded against them. They ought
not to take slighter indications of crime than had been taken
at former periods. When such Bills as that before them, or
Bills of a similar character had been passed fer the purpose of
restoring peace in Ireland, it was necessary that the
district so affected should be proclaimed by the Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, for many instances had occurred where
many innocent persons had been transported and imprisoned
for a length of time. But it is usual for persons, in many
districts of Ireland, to be out after sunset in winter, autumn,
and spring, for purposes that no one can blame them for. It
may be that their cattle have wandered, so that they are re-
quired to be seen after, that their fences are broken ; it
may be that they are attending a wake, or the funeral of one of
their friends or relations; and are we to punish these persons
because they, under these circumstances, are out after sunset ?
Under all these circumstances persons are very liable to be out
after sunset ; and are they to be taken up by the police, to be
brought before a magistrate, and, unless the} can show that they
have been out for a lawful purpose—are they to be committed
by the magistrate for trial ? I think that the Bill may be
amended so far that indications may be required to show that
persons found out after sunset, before they are punished, must
have meditated a crime. Sir, I wish this clause to be ex-
pressed in a totally different manner from what it is at pre-
sent. I should wish that the clause would specify
persons out under " suspicious circumstances," which
would justify the magistrate in committing them.
With respect to other parts of the Bill—with respect to those
which enable the Lord Lieutenant to impose a rate on persons
with the view of paying an increased constabulary, I think that
is a wise matter to be considered in Committee. I know that
some objections have been made to that, yet I think it is de-
sirable to have an increased constabulary in those disturbed
districts, and that it is desirable the Bill should go to the Com•
mittee for the purpose of considering that clause. Bat, now,
Sir, there is another question arises, and upon this subject I
cannot but refer to the Bill as it was originally introduced. I
hold in my hand a paper,
published in this town, giving an
account of the fire stages of this Bill, as passed by the House
of Lords. I cannot but remark, that when this Bill was first
introduced, it was of a permanent character, and contained no
clause by which its duration should be limited. Sir, it has

been my fortune to hold a situation iu which I was to a certain
degree connected with the Government of Ireland, in which,
though I did not interfere actually in that Government,
I considered myself responsible for that Government,
and I took care to he informed of every
step that was taken with respect to it. Now, during that time
I agreed to a Bill of a similar character to the present, but I
agreed to it in the persuasion that means would be found of so
executing the law—of so administering the Government of
Ireland, that it would not he necessary to put that Bill in
operation. The Bill of 1835 is the one to which I allude. I
do not remember whether any case whatever occurred in which
that Act was put in operation during the five years which it re-
mained in the statute-book. The Right Hon. Gentleman
who spoke last said, that confidence was a plant of slow
growth on subjocts of this kind. I quite agree with the Right
Hon. Gentleman in that statement, and it was being convinced
of the soundness of that opinion that I agreed to any measure
of this kind. But during the time in which Lord Normanby
was Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—in which my Noble Friend
near me (Lord Morpeth) was Chief Secretary for Ireland, and
Sir Michael O'Loghlin, Chief Justice O'Grady, and Chief
Justice Wolfe, held distinguished situations, as law officers of
the Crown ; it was their endeavour-.- and I had the satis•-

faction of rather witnessing than superintending their
endeavours—and I had the satisfaction of witnessing
their earnest, patient, and continual endeavours, in connexion
with my lamented friend, whose memory I shall ever hold in
respect—l mean the late Mr. Drummond—and I had the satis-
faction of seeing their efforts from day to day inspire confidence
in the ordinary administration of the law—to induce the people
of Ireland to believe that if those quarrels, which they are apt
to dispose of by a bloody arbitrement, were brought into the
courts of law, they would have justice ; and that by that means
the ordinary power of the Constitution would be sufficient in
Ireland, as it was in England. I had the satisfaction of think-
ing that, in a great measure, these efforts succeeded—(Cheers)
—that although in the short period during which the attempt was
made, it did not succeed in giving that perfect confidence, and
that constant reliance on the power and impartiality of the law,
yet a great progress was made in establishing that which I
think was a stable foundation of the future welfare of Ireland.

_
The Right Hon. Gentleman, "who has just spoken, has de-
nounced, or rather protested, against all party allusion on
this subject. The Right Honourable Gentleman, and those
who act with him, did not always do so.—( Cheers.)
I was rather astonished at a speech said to have been deli-
vered by the Right Hon. Gentleman to his constituents, in
which he stated that the late Government had left Ireland in a
state of insurrection, and the endeavours of the present Go-
vernment had restored it to tranquillity. I quite acquit the
Government of having, by any act of theirs, produced a state
of crime in Ireland, yet I cannot think that the Right Hon.
Gentleman did justice to our exertions, or that those who act
with him have ever fairly represented the state of Ireland as
it was under the late Administration. And, Sir, I was in
hopes that when that Bill of 1535 expired it would not be
necessary to ask for any other Act of a similar nature. lam
sorry to find that the Government at present do say that it is
necessary. lam sorry to hear that the Right Hon. Gentle-
man likewise protest against any mixture of questions of re-
medial measures with the present Bill. Sir, I think that
there again is a serious, I had almost said a fatal, mistake. The
Government must be aware, connected as they are with a
party in Ireland which is but a small minority in that country,
that they should endeavour by every means to make
an impression in Ireland of their fairness and im-
partiality—( Hear, hear)—and they should have avoided
anything like a suspicion that they were not bringing forward
remedial measures at the same time that they bring forward
this measure. Observe this is not a Bill which they brought
forward on the first day of the session, and declared should
be passed hastily because it might be the Means of preventing
murder. It is a Bill which we cannot pass for one, two,
three months and a half, or few months from the first meeting
Parliament. Ido regret that with a measure of this kind they
were not ready to introduce a remedial measure at the same time.
Allusion has ben made to the Bill called the Coercion Act,
introduced under Lord Grey's Government, for which I, for
one, as an adviser cf the Crown, was responsible. That was
a more severe measure than the present one. It was intended
at a vary aarious and plarnitous state of things. But
•he Government that brought it forward were oy no mea..,
insensible to the necessity of remedial measures at the same
time that they introduced that measure of severity. It was
stated by the Right Hon. Gentleman that Parliament met
on the 29th of January, and the Bill was introduced
on the 2nd of February. The House will recollect that the
King's speech was not delivered until the sth of February.
lint on the 12th of February, one week after the meeting of
Parliament, Lord Althorp introduced a measure which was a
great reform of the Protestant Church of Ireland, and ex-
empting the whole of the Roman Catholic community of Ire-
land from the payment of church cess, which was a great
grievance and burden to them. On another day Lord Al-
thorp declared his intention of bringing before Parliament a
Jury Bill which had been brought into this House in a pre-
vious session, and had been allowed to drop in the House of
Lords. On the occasion of the first introduction of the
Coercion Bill it was referred to by the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman who moved the amendment, and he asked Lord
Althorp what was his intention with regard to the remedial
measures. He said he had already stated several remedial
measures, but he trusted the House had sufficient confidence in
him and would be ready to approve the measures which he
should introduce. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was not
satisfied. He asked, what expectation there was of carrying
these measures in the other House of Parliament, and
Lord Stanley at once declared that unless the remedial mea-
sures were carried, there would be an end to the Government.
That was the spirit in which Lord Stanley, as a Member of Lord
Grey's Government, acted. I cannot, therefore, approve of
the declaration of the Right Hon. Gentleman, that we are to
pass this measure, and that asremedial measures were matters of
difficulty, they should not be considered. There was another
declaration made by Lord Althorp, which some how or other
seems to have fallen into forgetfulness in those who were then
his colleagues. It was a declaration with respect to the Muni-
cipal Corporations of Ireland. Lord Althorp proposed a Com-
mittee, and said that from that Committee a Bill had been
introduced for the purpose of reforming the corporation of
Scotland, and he hoped to refer the corporation of England
and Ireland to the same Committee. He gave the reasons for
referring the matter to the same Committee, and the first rea •

son was that it was exceedingly degirable that the two countries
should be assimilated as much as possible, and as a general rule
to confer the same rights with respect to the corporate bodies
in Ireland, as those bodies possessed in England. That was
the simple and plain, but emphatic and decided declaration of
Lord Althorp. Then on the 14th, two days after, he had intro-
duced his measure for the abolition of the church cess, and eight
days before the Coercion Bill in that House. I find
that Mr. O'Connell said be knew of no greater
grievance in Ireland than the existence of the Corporations in
question, and nothing was more satisfactory to the people of
Ireland than the approaching certainty that the grievance
would be redressed. That was in the year 1833, thirteen years
ago, that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman declared his confi-
dence that the grievance was about to be redressed. There
was a commission appointed on that subject in 1836, and the
measure that was introduced was passed in this House, but
thrown out, I think, in the other House of Parliament. Three

or four years were taken in the discussion of the measure, and it
is yet incomplete. After all the promises made to the people
of Ireland at the Union and afterwards have been brcken, it is
now only in the year Ite46, that the Right Hon. Baronet has
promised that the Corporations of Ireland shall be placed on the
same footing as those of England. I say that
_that does
show very great tardiness to do justice
which etitlh is exhibited,l a
when
you declare y eur wish to
Ireland. Does it
in a great degree justify the mistrustleeisate for the good of I eland._
when you declare that you are as anxious for the good of Ire-
land as the Irish themselves, and that the pri-
vilegesyou are ready to communi-
cate of En glshmsubejne
subjects on the other side the Channel.
s. to
Sir, there ouri fellows
anotheri
important question, on which, perhaps,
I should hardly have alluded, if the Government had not be-
come debtors to Ireland upon it. The Government appointed
Commissiona to inquire into the tenure of land in Ireland.
That Commission took journeys through Ireland, and evidence
was obtained, and it was known that recommendations were to
be made, and I believe that every person expected some
remedy would be given to the existin; relations of landlord
and tenant. That any Bill that Parliament can pass can so
regulate these relations that there will not be much to be left
—the greater part to be left—to the justice and tense of fair-
ness, and mod: ration and goed sense of the landlords in the
first instance, and partly of the tenant, no man can deny.
Why, this state of things makes it absolutely necessary that
the Legislature should do all they can. It is necessary, in the
first place, that where remedies can be given by legislation,
that legislation should be given. Then all that you can do in
the way of prevention of crime, and taking away the cause of
crime by any power Parliament possesses, should be done
on the proposition of the Government, and by
Bills laid with their consent, and framed under
the direction, of the Houses of Parliament.—( Hear, hear.)
I say, I trust, Sir, that before the second reading of this Bill is
proposed, a Bill will be laid upon the table of this House with
respect to the law of landlord and tenant, from which we
shall be enabled to gather what are the intentions of the Go-
vernment upon this subject. In asking this, I think lam ask-
ing no more than Lord Althorp anti Lord Stanley were ready
to propose when they rendered themselves responsible for the
severe Coercion Bill of 1e35. I was not then disposed to
shrink from the responsibility of a Coercion Bill, as I thoueht at
the time it was necessary for the purpose of preventing murder.
I had no other feeling in acceding to the provisions of that
measure, but. I am not convinced that it is necessary that you
should have similar provisions in the Bill to be proposed at the
present time. I think that the Bill, with other provisions more
resembling those Acts which have passed with respect to the
crimes of this nature, both in England and Ireland, would be
more effectual for the purpose, and would be less liable to ex-
cite irritation and discontent, which are the very things they
ought to avoid. Let us recollect that in legislating upon this
we agree with the Right Hon. Baronet,
suh
thbe ject—aSecretarlthoug y of State for the Home Department, and the
Right Hon. Gentleman who last addressed the House, that
there can be no more serious evil to the poor, as well as to the
rich, than the prevalence of the organized bands, who take the
ca a of every man, rich and poor, into their decisions, and
before whose secret tribunals cases are not weighed in the
scale of justice, but dashed down and decided by the hand of
the assassin—while we agree that there can be no greater evil
not forget thet
than this, yet in legislating for Ireland we mus.

whole history of that country. I will not now occupy that
length of time which even a glance at some of the principal
topics would require, but I wish to keep in mind the main con-
sideration. The attachment and affection of the people of Ire-
land ought to be preserved, by your showing the utmost care—
that you are not disposed to neglect their interest—that you are
not disposed to punish crime in that country by a different mea-
sure from what you would punish it in England, and that you are
willing to take into your serious consideration the many
grievances of the Irish people; and here, although I do not
wish to enter into a party discussion, I cannot but express my
regret at the course of the present Government. Even when
they had the best intentions, it had not been such as to inspire
in Ireland confidence in your justice and respect to your policy.
The time when tranquillity prevailed had been allowed to go
by. When the present Government came into office, they
found contentment and tranquillity prevailing in Ireland, but
they waited until agitation arose—until complaints and remon-
strances were made to them, before they proposed to redress
some of the grievances which pressed upon that country. But
I hope, throwing aside the desire to conciliate the Catholic
clergy on the one I and, or to terminate agitation on the other,
they will seriously consider what were the promises made
by this and the ether Houses of Parliament at the
time of the union adopted by Mr. Pitt, and acquiesced
in by both Houses of Parliament ; that they will look to and
see wherever these promises have been kept, and if they have
not been kept, fulfil them at once, not in the way of coaces-
sions, but simply as the fulfilment of an act of justice.
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT spoke a few words across the
table in explanation, which did not reach the gallery.
Mr. H. BRIDGEMAN contradicted the statement thathad
been made with respect to a Mr. Wilson.
Mr. KELLY said he could not give a silent vote against a
measure which cast so much indignity upon his native land.
Within the last few nights he had heard from Hon. Members
on the other side of the House expressions of sympathy and con-
dolence with the state of their native country, canted by the
diseaee, he might say almost by the total decay, of that root
which constituted the food of the majority of his fellow-coun-
trymen. He had heard so many speeches from all sides
of the House, but more particularly from the Right
Honourable Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home
Department, and the Right Hon. Gentleman the First Lord
of the Treasury, advocating the necessity of giving employ-
ment to his suffering fellow-countrymen, that he had been in-
duced to put a question to himself, and to ask, can the charge
which he had so frequently heard, that these parties were im-
bued with a hostile spirit towards his country, be true? Could
this be the House of Commons which he had so frequently
heard charged with a total inattention to Irish interests and
Irish measures? Could if is be that portion of the Imperial
Legislature which he bad heard was deaf to the cry of suffer-
ing humanity? Surely, he said to himself, the individuals who
made these charges must have been labouring under some mis-
take. But when the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary
of State, introducecd this Bill, he found that he had not been
deceived by his informers. It would have been better had the
Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home De-
partment, aad the Right Honourable Gentleman the First
Lord of the Treasury, delayed expressing their sympathy
and condolence with Ireland till after the first read-
ing of this Bill, which insulted and branded this
country with the charge of being assassins and murderers.
He found that in exchange for the abundant supply of corn
and other agricultural produce which England received from
Ireland, the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for
the Home Department was about to give the people of his
native country muskets, carbines, and cartridges—(Hear,
hear)—and that he was also about to give them an armed
soldiery, a licentious and insolent police force.—( Hear, hear.)
Those were the means by which the Right Hon. Baronet
was anxious to promote confidence between the two countries.
—( Hear, bear.) This measure was one of those by which
that Right Hon. Gentleman expected to prop up that totter-
ing fabric the legislative Act of Union—( Hear, hear)—but
be would tell that Right Hon. Gentleman that be was very
much mistaken—( Hear, hear)—and that this measure would
only have the effect of destroying that ruinous fabric at a
more speedy rate.—; Hear, hear.) He must say that he was
very much surprised that when this measure was first introduced
the whole of the English Members did not rise up in a body
and protest against it--( Hear, hear)—as being calculated to
militate against their sense of justice, and their notion of free
institutions.—(Herr, hear)—He objected to this Bill, because
if it were carried into a law it would completely subvert and
destroy all constitutional law in Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) He
also objected to it because, in his opinion—and he was sure in
the opinion of every man who surrounded him—the Right Hon.
Baronet had not made out a sufficient case to authorise that
House to pass such an unconstitutional measure.—( Hear.)
He objected to it on the same ground that Hon. Gentlemen
would do to a similar Bill introduced by the Right
lion. Baronet for the purpose of outlawing the people of
England.—(Hear, hear.) But he would not bring forward
such a measure for England on such grounds as he had adduced
on the introduction for this oppressive measure towards Ireland,
because the Hon. Members of that House would meet it with
one shout of execration—(Cheers)—and be knew very well
that the Irish Members would be amongst the first to join in
that shout.—( Cheers.) He objected to this measure because
it had not been sufficiently proved by the Right Hon. Baronet
or his colleagues that the laws at present in force in Ireland,
if carried out with justice, were not sufficient to meet the
present emergency.—( Hear, hear.) He regr stted that he
was obliged to admit some of the statements that had been made
as to the present state of crime in Ireland were something like
the truth, but the great majority of the statements had been
greatly exaggerated.—(Hear, hear.) What would the Right
Hon. Baronet or the House say of that law which permitted
the late dreadful tragedy at Mullingar? An individual was
put upon his trial ; the jury on that trial disagreed
and what was the course pursued by the Government? Why,
that unfortunate individual, after having been once discharged,
was again put upon his trial for the same offence, under the
same commission.—( Hear, hear.) In empannelling the jury
who tried that unfortunate individual, thus put upon his second
trial, the officers of the Crown challenged and struck off three
of the most respectable men in that district.—(Cheers.) One
of them, he would fearlessly say, was the most respectable
man in that part of the country.—(Hear, hear.) And what
objection had the officers of the Crown against the three gen-
tlemen whom they had thus struck off the jury list ? Merely
this, that they were Members of the Roman Catholic religion.
—(Hear, hear.) Gracious God ! Were they living in the
nineteenth century, or in the bloody days of Elizabeth and
Mary ?—( Hear, hear.) Was the Right Hon. Baronet and
his colleagues about to renew the dismal scenes of religious
tyranny and persecution ?—( Cheers.) If this Bill were passed
into a law, he would not be in the slightest degree surprised if
the Riebt Hon. Beranek and his colleagues were to have posted
on every jury box in Ireland such a placard as had been posted
on the gates of Bandon—" Turk, Jew, or Atheist may enter
here, but not a Papist."—( Hear, hear.) He objected to this
Bill, because there had not been sufficient proofs adduced by
the Right Hon. Baronet of the alleged crime iu Ireland to
justify such an unconstitutional measure. If proper commis-
sions had been instituted in the counties that were disturbed,
they would have been sufficient to suppress crime to a great
degree. To justify the Right-Hon. Baronet in bringing for-
ward such a measure, he ought to have made out a stronger
case. He objected to this measure, because it had been
brought forward without any accompanying remedial mea-
sures.—( Hear, hear.) It would alto give an arbitrary power
to the underlings of the Government. The Right Hon.
Baronet had come forward, and stated a long list of crimes and
outrages which had occurred in Ireland, but the conduct of the
Government on previous occasions had afforded an evil example
to the people of Ireland. The Government themselves had,
on a recent memorable occasion, themselves violated the law,
and how could they expect the people to be punctual in the
observance of them ? Yes, in spite of what had been
said by the Right Honourable Baronet in reference
to the Law Lords, every honest man must say that the lion.
and Learned Member for Cork had not had a fair trial.—
( Cheers.) Why did not the Right Hon. Baronet, instead of
bringing forward the present measure, restore to the commis
sion of the peace those magistrates whom he had superseded,
merely because they made themselves conspicuous in the agita-
tion for the repeal of a certain Act of Parliament ?—( Hear,
hear.) The Irish Members should oppose the measure, be-
eause it would destroy even the little tranquillity that yet re-
mained in Ireland. Those Hon. Members who opposed this
measure were, of course, quite as anxious as the Right Hon.
Baronet could be to preserve the peace of Ireland.—( Hear,
bear.) Their affections, their families, their properties, and
their nearest and dearest ties were connected with the green
isle.—( Cheers.) And they, of course, could not for their own
interests' sake be the men to oppose any measure that might
have a tendency to further the peace and prosperity of their
native land.--( Hear, hear.) Under all these circumstances he
would most cheerfully support the amendment of the Hon. and
Learned Member for Cork.—( Cheers. )
Mr. K. SEYMOUR challenged the Hon. Member who bed
just sat down, to quote a county in England were murders were
committed in the noonday as they were in Ireland ; and if he
could do so, he 01r. Seymour) would not have the slightest
objection to a Bill being introduced for the better protection of
life in England.—( Hear, hear.) 0 f 180 persons that had
been charged with the horrid crime of murder in Ireland
during the last year, only eight suffered the extreme penalty
of the law, which showed that there must be something wrong
in the carrying out of the law relating to murder in Ireland.
The great difficulties in Ireland- are the large amount
of crime, and the indisposition of juries to convict. He
thought it might be as well to suspend the trial by jury in
the disturbed districts. The Hon. Member then referred to
the case of Bryan Seerf, and commented upon the conduct
of a certain Roman Catholic clergyman, who had sent a letter
to one of the Irish papers, to the effect that he was
Innocent. Ho then proceeded to read an account
of the burial of Bryan Seery, which appeared
in the Freeman's Journal—a journal edited by Dr. Gray, and
headed the " Mullingar Tragedy." lie considered that the
conduct of the repealers was a strange anomaly. Their society
was called a " ley al" one—their hall, a "Conciliation Hall ;"
and it was in this hall that the orators of the loyal association
harangued the people into a state of discontent and hostility,
and then deputed an officer, called the " Head Pacificator," to
allay the disturbances. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by
expressing a hope that he had not been offensive to any gentle.
man in giving utterance to his opinions.
Mr. P. S. BUTLER said that he should occupy the atten-
tion of the House but a very few moments, whilst he would
lay before them a few observations which occurred to him
during the course of th4s debate, and he should endeavour to
adhere to the sound principles of common sense, which he
had ever found to have some influence with a British audience,
and he would say that any opposition which he would feel
himself called upon to give the present Bill, would not be
grounded on the fact that the proposed measure was opposed
to tis<l first principles of the constitution, and was unfriendly to
those principles of liberty to which they were all attached.—
( Hear, hear.) He had no hesitation in declaring that if it
was proposed to suspend the habeas corpus Act, and institute
domiciliary visits—that, if he considered such a violation
of the constitution likely to produce a diminution of
crime, such a proposition would have his cordial support.
He would relate an anecdote to the House which would illus-
trate the treatment which the peasantry often received. There
was a Nobleman, whom it was not necessary to name, who had
a large property in the county of Kilkenny. That property
fell out of lease, and the lease was dependent on a single life,
after which the property reverted to a nephew. The tenants
were comfortable and happy—occupying a station muck higher
there, and being of a superior class to those whose case was
brought under the notice of the House by the Hon. Member
for Limerick. The tenants were resolved to go over
to London to see their landlord, who was then residing
there, but an agent residing in the neighbourhood
desired them to entrust their case with him. He
went over got the lease for himself came home and
turned out the tenantry. That gentleman was murdered
soon after as he was returning home one night.
Six men were found guilty, and were executed for that mur-
der. Now, what was the result of that grand display ? Within
three month, of that occasion, the nephew of that person was
murdered within a quarter of a mile of the place of execution.
He (Mr. B.) found that the Secretary of State for the Home
Department, in a speech very different in its tone from what
was usually made by any member of the Government
with regard to Ireland, said that the. measure
was brought forward with the best possible intentions. The
Right Hon. Gentleman also alluded to some former measures—
to the Maynooth grant, to the Anus Bill, to the Colleges Bill,
and other measures—but when detailing these, he totally forgot
the other side of the question. He forgot to mention what the
Government had omitted to do. He forgot to mention that 74
magistrates had been dismissed from the commission of thepeace,
the most popular, the most efficient, and the most able of the
magistracy of Ireland. He (Mr. Butler) himself was among
the number, and he regretted this summary and unconsti-
tutional proceeding, for to the want of their efficient exertions,
'ant of confidence in the administration of justice