The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-27 00:00:00

ontin Mt

LONDON, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1846.

The LORD CHANcELLon took his seat on the Woolsack at
Fivt -'clock.

After the presentation of various petitions,
The Marquis of WESTMEATH asked whether a deputation_
consisting of several persons, waited upon his Excellency the
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, after the conviction, and before
the execution of BRIAN SEERY, to pray that the convict
should not be respited, or his sentence transmuted, but that
he should be executed? Secondly, whether the deputation
purported to proceed from the county of Westmeath. Thirdly,
N‘,'lle
liettler such proceeding is to be deemed "harsh harsh and unusual."
i
Noble Marquis then went into a long statement, im-
pugning the couduct of the Catholic cler of Westmeath in
re4;ard to the case of BRIAN SEERY. gy
The Earl of ST. GERMANS protesteckvry against what, if lie
would
were notdesignd afrai ofing us anunparliantenta expression, he
been made on the ate calumniouse
attack which had
a body, were distßio mirh Catholic clergy, who, as
humanity. The Nobilf thened for trheeaidr
the piety
letter a nd
of the Lcd LieutenAnt to the re Secretary (which
has already appeared) in answer question of the
Noble Marquis. He believed that the od
thetation, in making
e actuated by
the repr, sentation to the Lord Lieutenaer
ectetittwas hard,
a sense of duty. He would not say this cowneclun
but it wal unusual ; but, considering the evide
trial, and the charge of the Judge, the Lord Lie invaenn ,tb e
feel. justified in interfering to prevent the law tfrdoimd
not
takiry, its course.
The' Marquis of WESTMEATH and the Earl of Sr. GErotAxa
mutually explained.
Lord STOURTON vindicated the Roman Catholic priesAma
from the attacks which had been made upon then.
Lord BitotiGiimi thought that any such. discussion as
the one now en!ered on tended to polmin the administra-
tion of justice. He hoped that Ole Catholic priests were
worthy of the eulogium that had
been passed. on them, and
i
they would be more deserving of t if they were to give up,
at once and for ever, the abominable practice of delivering
Political addresses to their flocks. If any priest, Catholic or
rotestant, were to interfere with the administration of
justice, it would be the duty of the judge to punish him.
The County Works Presentments (Ireland) Bill was read
a second time, after a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE and
the Earl of oeST. GERMANS.

The other Bills on the table were forwarded a stage,
and their Lordships adjourned.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock, and upon
doing so called the attention of the House to a discrepancy
between the writ and the return for South Nottinghamshire,
which was amended by the Clerk of the Crown at the table,
after which Captain VYSE took the oaths and his seat for
the southern division of that county in the room of Mr.
CALViNV*IGIYY:, .1.•
Several ItiLWAttillit_ re forwarded a stage, and a great
number-of_ktitidns were resented in favour and against the
MiuisteriaLfiee4racte mere.
Petition q wero, In:Ositnted in favour of the pardon of
Frost, Viril4ams, anc Vone.q,, I
Mr. WARIi withdrew , the notice he had given to move
that th 4 petition of the Cifsegow? Kilmarnock, fuld
S 3

Ayr Railway Company, with respect to their bill, be taken
into consideration, and that the parties have leave to proceed
with their Bill.
Sir R. PEEL presented a petition from Tynemouth in
favour of the reduction of the timber duties proposed by the
Government.
A Message from the Lords brought up:several Bills, which
were read a first time and ordered to be read a second time.
Sir R. PEEL, in answer to a question, said that after the
decision of the House with regard to the corn-law question,
he proposed to go on as rapidly as possible with the other
articles of the tariff, but he intended that the House should
dispose of the corn-law question first.
Lord J. RUSSELL hoped at the same time that the subject
of Indian corn would be taken into consideration.
On the motion of Mr. O'CoNNELL, the petition from the
Middleton Poor-law Union was ordered to be printed with
the votes.
On the question for the resumption of the debate on the
corn importation measures,
Mr. ROEBUCK hoped, if another night was to be devoted to
the debate, the House would not be again occupied for two hours
and a half with such a speech as that which they had heard
the night before last. He hoped, for the honour of the
House and the protectionists, that their time would be occu-
pied by arguments, and not by personal invectives.
Sir R. 'Nous thought that the Hon. Member for Bath was
the last person who ought to be so mealy-mouthed as to
deprecate personalitid.
Mr. BRIGHT stated, without hesitation, that all that had
been said by the Honourable Member for Knaresborough
with respect to Mr. WitsoN was totally without
foundation. The starch manufacturers wished for no pro-
tection; and if they did, Mr. WlLsom would be the last
the speeches
toof wastsluieppHoortmitilemlther
t.rn a reunfortunateahe rethatuzh
in all
he
but never proved them.

After some observations from Mr. COLQUHOUN, Dr. Bow-
atxG, and Captain Vivi.or,
Lord MORPETH read a letter to the House from
the operatives of Yorkshire, denying the statement that they
were compelled to sign petitions in favour of a repeal of the
corn-laws, and stating that the operatives were more anxious
for the carrying of that measure than their masters.
A new writ was ordered for the borough of Brid-
port, in the room of Mr. Baillie Cochrane, who since
his election had accepted the office of her Majesty's Chiltern
Hundreds.

Mr. Ross then resumed the adjourned debate on the Go-
vernment free-trade measures, which he moat warmly sup-
ported,

Mr. BECKETT DENISON was sorry the Honourable Mem-
ber for Knaresborough was not in his place, because he had
on a previous night made use of his name in a manner that
he was not entitled to do. He trusted that in future for his
own sake he would be more careful how he made use of the
names of Hon. Members without their knowledge or assent.
He denied that the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the
Government had deceived him into seconding the Address,
but he must confess that he never thought he would have
gone so far as to have proposed a total repeal of the corn-
laws. If he could be convinced •that a repeal of the corn-
laws would be beneficial to the working classes he would
vote for their repeal ; but, believing that protection to corn
was protection to the working classes, he felt bound to
give the measures of the Government his opposition. He
thought the Government ought to have given the agri-
culturists a lease of the Bill that was passed in 1842. He
believed that agriculture was in its infancy, and that it
would be able to keep pace with an increase of population.
If the measure of the Government was right, the time for
bringing it forward was wrong and ill-chosen. He had been
elected for the West Riding because he was favourable to the
protection of agriculture ; he had given no pledge to that
effect, but he felt bound in honour to uphold the professions
by which he had obtained his seat. If he had changed his
mind he should have felt bound to resign his seat, and
not state that he had done so. and with that statement to
dispose of all his speeches. He was determined to stick by
all his speeches, and be could not therefore support the
Government.

Mr. BROTHERTON supported the Government proposition,
considering it a measure of humanity and justice, if the
corn-laws were only abolished with a good grace.
Mr. CHRisToritEn gave his cordial support to the amend-
ment of the Hon. Member for the city cf Bristol, believing
that the Government measure was calculated to injure all
classes of society.
Mr. CARDWELL supported the measure of the Government.
Mr. FINED opposed the Government measure. He could
not believe in the sincerity of the conversion either of the
Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, or of the
Noble Lord, the Member for the City of London. He believed
that the majority of the population of the country were
with the protectionists, and that if free trade was put up to
auction by universal suffrage, it would be thrown at once
into the British Channel. Her Majesty's Ministers on this
question would have a nominal majority, but a bond fide
ministry. In a new Parliament there would be no less than
300 protectionists.
Mr. SEYMOUR opposed the Government measure. The
feeling of the tenant-farmers in general he believed to be in
favour of protection.
Mr. VILLIERS then addressed the House. He claimed the
Honourable Member who had spoken last as one of the
supporters of the repeal of the corn-laws, because he had
stated in Dorsetshire, that if they could not defeat the plan
of the Honourable Baronet, he would rather have a total re-
peal. He deprecated the delay. that had taken place in
the discussion of the question. The House had been for
the last three weeks hearing the arguments over and over again.
He was glad to see the concessions that had been made by
the Government to common sense and humanity. He could
not see on what ground the Right Hon. Baronet ought to
have been subject to the reproaches that bad been cast against
him. He believed that people were proud of the Right Hon.
Baronet for having courage enough to throw to the winds
the domination of a factious party. He believed that the
more opposition was given to the measure, the more
it would be endeared to the pecple. The protec-
tionists said that they did not object to the opening
of the ports: how long had they been of that opinion? Why,
only since they knew that there was no grain to come in.
They had been discussing for eleven days the system of pro-
tection, and it was quite clear, at this moment, that the House
had not a single idea of what it was. It had been said tliat the
League had got up the Goatacre meeting. He denied it,
and asserted that the League had had nothing to
do with it. Lord STANLEY, who was now the
leader of the protectionists, had told them what
protection was—that it raised the price of land and food, but
did not enhance the price of labour. The protectionists
could not get out of the fact, because if that was not the mean-
ing of the law, it had no meaning at all. The protectionists
thrived when the people were starving—was that, he would
ask, a state of things which ought to be allowed to exist any
longer? The corn-law must either be supported by force or
opinion; force bad been tried and failed, and opinion and
humanity were against it.
On the motion of Mr. G. BANKES, the debate was adjourned
till to-morrow.

Lord J. Russzu, hoped that as the debate had lasted so
long it would be concluded to-morrow.
Mr. R. SPOONER. joined in that hope. but he could not
allow the debate to close without affording to every Member
who ventured to address the House an opportunity of doing
so. He wished to explain to the Hon. Member for Wolver-
hampton the grounds on which he intended to support the
amendment that had been proposed.
The debate was then adjourned till to-morrow, the orders
of the day disposed of, and the House adjourned.

We suspect that Mr. STAFFORD O'Brazx has got hold of a
mare's nest, in Mr. EvELvst :bFzusort's account of Lord
LINCOLN'S views on Irish Church and State affairs. First of
all, Mr. DENISON'S account is singularly vague and indistinct;
and secondly, Mr. DENISON has always been looted upon as
a very timid Irish Church reformer among his own party.
Mr. EVELYN DENISON is brother of the Bishop of SALISBURY.
When Lord STANLEY and Sir JAMES GRAHAM left
the Whig Government in 1834, on the appropria-
tioft clause, and Sir ROBERT PEEL got possession
of office for a few months in 1834-5, Mr. EVELYN
DENISON followed Lord STANLEY and Sir J. GRAHAM.
Therefore Lord LINCOLN may have satisfied Mr. E. DENISON
by his views on the Irish Church, without its being a
ser:aur that he is prepared to destroy it. But these protec'
tionists know not what they would be at. What makes them
most sore is the universal assent to what has so often been
asserted lately—the ludicrousness of the protectionists
attempting to form a Government. This it is which has
made them keep up a three weeks' debate, in which
every • middle-aged squire is bidding against the
others for the post of leader of the Commons under
the RAcmmosn Government, and every beardless scion of a
ducal souse establishing his claim to some of the loaves and
fishes which the Duke of RICHMOND expects to distribute.
On Tuesday night the Duke of RICHMOND was in the Peers'
seats in the House of Commons for a calsiderable time; he
heard: the whole of Mr. FERIIAND'S oration (we wish him
joy of his friend), and was for some time in earnest conversa-
tion with Mr. MILES and Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN. We
suppose Mr. O'BRIEN's manifesto about the Irish Church
was the fruit of this deliberation with his chief. The pro-
tectionists are determined to show them that their faculties
can embrace all the great questions of state—church as well
as corn. We still think that a Protectionist Government
will be a lusus rei publica.

We return to the case of BRIAN SEERY to observe that
Sir JAMES GRAHAM signally failed in his attempt to find
precedents fur his execution, after conviction by a second
jury impannelled at the same assizes, the first having been
discharged because they could not agree. In the first case
which be mentioned—the trial before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE,
in 1794—the first jury was discharged, not from being unable
to agree as to the verdict, but owing to the illness
of one of the jurors, before the judge had summed up,
and before, therefore, the jury bad begun to consider their
verdict. In this case, then, the trial had to begin de novo,
before it had gone so far as to raise any presumption in
favour of the prisoner from a difference of opinion among the
jury, or to render it possible that the administration of justice
shouldincur a suspicion of harshness by the impanelling of the
second jury. In the second case mentioned by Sir J. GRAHAM,
the second trial, as Mr. O'CoxxxcL pointed out, was not at tho
same, but at the next assives, which makes a very important
difference, i and there is a further important difference, that
the, s'lcond jury acquitted the prisoner, so that the question
:lithe propriety of execution, after one jury bad been dis-
affaeregt the
eecause unable to agree, did not and could not arise.
Sir JA.mr.s GMAIIAM said that the difference of result did not
principle involved in the case, and that the prin..
ciple consisted in the siTchond trial. But here we take leave
to differ from him, The
had
asked was (and
the question) ~ Whetdherg
in England for tho last cent
being tried for any capital fuerlyonl
jury, after the first jury was discharged by
same session or assizes, and convicted and
question which Mr. O'CoNNELL
iviehneresonahe days' notice of
instance
ofabnyyany person
a second
,x thee
ce.
toeudr t 4 at the
the carrying into effect the extreme sentence of the lita is
after the discharge of one jury, that is the gravainex‘orf
BurAii SEERY'S case. Let alone the extraordinary circurn-
stance of the second trial taking place at the same assizes,
the mode in which the first trial terminated should have
procured a commutation of the capital punishment. We are
glad to observe that Mr. O'CONNELL has given notice of a
"Bill to amend the criminal law in Ireland, by enacting that
in future no person shall be tried on any indictment fer
felony a second time at the same session or assizes, after
tit od ng e 0r.,,
assizes, having
andbeen thattried j jury a
having edsabrnyethseesjs
or me former jurybeen discharged athrge

Forcibly as the Government officials have spoken upon the
lamentable dearth in food of every description with which
the inhabitants of Ireland are afflicted, their cliaelosuree fall

infinitely short of the reality. Their attention has, for very
natural and ostensible reasons, been directed mainly to an
investigation of the aggregate calamity : in the outset of their
labours an eye was judiciously kept upon the gross defi-
ciency. For all practical purposes, this was undoubtedly the
most laudable course to pursue ; it was indeed the most
rational course to pursue : for, by plunging at once
into the detailed destitution of each individual
district, much time would have bsen swallowed
up in calculations of superfluous minuteness. An
immediate knowledge of the general wants which had to be
supplied would be delayed by such over scrutiny—relief would
have been hampered by this elaboration of fact—woes would
have accumulated while the very preliminary measures were
being arranged by which that accumulation should have
been averted. What, however, the Government agents were
prevented from accomplishing by the actual responsibility of
their office, namely, disclosures of the separate privations
undergone in the hamlets of each parish, in the streets of
each hamlet, and in the cottages of each street, are now being
given by parties most competent to afford us a just insight into
the veritable condition of the Irish peasantry. The parties
of whom we thus make mention ate the respectable residents
in the different rural districts of our sister island. From
the reports which these gentlemen are severally forwarding
to the Executive authorities, the awful and growing destitu-
tion of those unhappy people are becoming each day more
and more recognisable, more and more appreciable, more
and more fearful in every possible respect. The accounts
given in those documents are, indeed, heartrending to the
very last degree. We have, in the abstract, a most rooted
antipathy to anything like a penis to serve party purposes
—such a panic, for example, as the protectionists have raised
of late respecting the " destruction of British agriculture :"
we regard any faction Which would resort to instruments so
pernicious as that of raising false alarms for the
purpose cf insuring their own advancement, as in-
finitely culpable, and infinitely worthy of reprobation.
Any man, however, who would stigmatise the pre-
sent cry about starvation in Ireland as one of this
party character, or as false and erroneous to the extent of
one single tittle, must either be entirely devoid of common
sense or cruelly callous to the suffering of his fellow. crea-
tures. Whatever statements have already been made re-
specting the lack of common nourishment among
four millions •of the Irish populace are only
glimpses, are only fragments, are only scanty
indications of the dark and agonising substratum of evil.
Far from any exaggeration having been resorted to with
he intention of exciting an undue amount of sympathy,
each packet, as it traverses St. George's Channel, is the
bearer of some new and still more harrowing description
than the one conveyed by its predecessor. Is there any
misrepresentation in our previous accounts of this national
famine? Let the "figures" given in the Cork Examiner of
the 23d instant be the rebuttal of such an insinuation. From
those figures it appears that potatoes—(the staple commodity
of the peasantry be it ever remembered)—that potatoes in
the Cork market are now of nearly double the price, and
little better than half the quantity of the corresponding
season twelve months back. In other words, that
in February 1845, there were 424 weights (each
of 201b5.), the highest price of which was five-
pence-halfpenny; while, in February, 1846, there are merely
230 weights, selling absolutely at tenpence. That brief cal-
culation is a corroboration more forcible and more indubitable
than the most impassioned language could ever be. As a
corroboration of this corroboration, however, let us
for a moment turn to the report recently forwarded
to the Commissioners of Public Works by the Com-
mittee of Relief " deputed to investigate the condition of the
people in Kilkee, County Clare." As some guarantee as to
the authenticity of this report, and as an evidence that im-
plicit reliance may be placed upon its declarations, we may
mention that the individuals who joined in this charitable
labour of investigation were the Rev. JAMES MARTIN, rector,
and the Rev. MICHAEL COMYW, parish priest. From that
most temperate and plain-spoken document, it appears that
" one hundred and sixty householders (in Kilkee), with their
families, amounting to nine hundred and seventy-two indi-
viduals are in a state of abject poverty and nearly deprived of
all earth'y means of subsistence—the present supply of
potatoes available not amounting to more than live-
hundred and sixty stone or six barrels f' And afterwards
that it is the most "solemn conviction" of those two re-
verend gentlemen that " even that residue of the potatoes was
scarcely fit for human:use, and, from its limited supply,
totally inadequate to satisfy the cravings of hunger." Besides
this, we are informed by an eye-w itness—one who
has himself visited that region of miserable desti-
tution, that the people in their their wan and hag-
gard looks give indications of the famine which
is thus divulged; that they are living testimonies of those
six barrels of potatoes for the sustenance of nine hundred and
seventy-two human beings ; that the stench of those very
vegetables is insupportable beyond description from their
diseased condition ; that the cheeks, the lips, the eyes,
the stark hands themselves of those unfortunate crea-
tures are alone vouchers for the truth of the
two clergymen ; that the livers of the fowls that
have been nourished on that dreadful fare have been found
after death quite rotten ; and that in the hovels, in the
features, in the silent despair and quiet desolation of Kilkee,
may be perceived the progress already made by dearth of
wholesome food. If such be the condition of the Clare
peasantry in February, what will it be one month, two
months, or three months hence, if no measures are adopted to
make up the deficiency: to afford labour and in recom-
pense of labour sustenance, and that sustenance moreover
cheap? That there is an absolute necessity for some ame-
liorative effort being made in behalf of Ireland is admitted
by all reasonable persons without distinction of political or
religious creed. Hence it was that his Grace the
Duke of RICHMOND expressed his readiness to for-
ward by his acquiescence any proposition for the
employment of the Irish population. Hence also
arises our principal anxiety to witness the immediate close
of the present discussion ; as until then no arrangements
adequate to the emergency can be made by Parliament to
stay the rapid and sullen advances of famine the most dire,
and disease the most contagious. With this doom threaten-
ing so many thousands of our fellow-countrymen, Govern-
ment will not assuredly be tardy in propounding some
panacea fsr the great social malady. Let the Ministry and
their supporters strive to meet the exigencies of the occa-
sion, and the temporary misery of Ireland will become in the
end the permanent happiness of the British Isles.

A few more observations, respecting the speech delivered
by Mr. Fennasto, we feel ourselves unfortunately obliged to
make ; but these observations have exclusive reference to the
other representatives in the Lower House. As to addressing
a single word of deprecation or remonstrance to the Member
for Knaresborough himself—we would as soon trouble our-
selves to reason a current of brawling ditch-water into
quietude. Our remarks are alone directed to the
Honourable Gentlemen who were on Tuesday evening
pelted with bis unwholesome and unblushing
personalities. We would express a hope that no fetling of
very natural irritability at the indignities of language, the
scurrilous inuendos, the unconstrained imputations, and in-
solent attacks with which their names were severally accom-
panied, will induce them to condescend a reply even to the
length of one syllable. They may remain perfectly assured
(as no doubt their sober senses will show them)
that such manifest bitterness of heart and such
bilious impertinence of tongue, are utterly unworthy
of a rebuttal. On a subject of such singular insignificance,
and of such painful abandonment of propriety, we can
scarcely do more than endeavour to enforce the necessity of
its being utterly disregarded (as we are fain to suppose it
must be) by those legislators whose time is forestalled by a
responsibility of most extraordinary importance—the rce
sponsibility of so far expediting the present discussion
as to afford speedy assistance to four millions of
supplicants, as well as to incorporate a just and enlightened
commercial policy for ever and for ever with the con-
stitution of Great Britain. As one of the most intolerable
amongst a vast number of intolerable impediments to the
accomplishment of this great measure, the harangue of the
Member for Knaresborough was a grievous nuisance
to the question under debate, to the House of Com-
mona, to the Speaker individually) and to the
country at large. And it was thus intolerable because of its
being nothing whatever to the purpose, because of its uncon-
scionable duration, because of its unhealthy venom) and par-
ticularly because (as already stated) of its numerous and
utterly irrelevant personalities. It was in fact built up almost
entirely of personalities, and occasionally of personalities of
the very meanest description, namely, during the absence of
the parties vilified. In this respect we may mention
his allusions to the Hon. Member for Durham. What ren-
ders each of these singular inallgnities as delivered by Mr.
FERRAND doubly impertinent and doubly contemptible is the
very baldness of his assertions. He gives utterance te a series
of the most prodigious and incredible statements—statements
so completely out of the range of credence, so improbable,
so impossible in themselves, as to have pteveiited afiy
one else from whispering them in the walls of Parliament,
And, notwithstanding their very desperate charactet) he
vouches for their truth by—what ? Why by his personal
authority ; or, to employ his Own favourite expression) he is
always "prepared to prove them." There is invariably some
fictitious evidence— (never divulged !)—in the background.
Thus Mr. FERRAND was "prepared to prove;' that all
the signatures Axed to free-trade petitinne b 7 worittain
were written on compulsion—but he didn't ! Thus Mr.
FERRAND was " prepared to prove" that in the petition,rpre-
sented by Lord MORPETiI from his edrletitiiehts in the West
Riding of Yorkshire one man had actually penned no less
than fourteen thousand autographsimit hIS didn't t Thus
Mr. F2RRAND was "prepenvvi irl pi bye that the hosiers of this
country, though protected by a duty of 20 percent., could not
successfully compete with the Saxony manufacinrere=bilt;
again, he didn't! Such
.incessant and extensive draughts
upon our credulity aro surely sufficient to ahatist all our re-
Ab s for refinelmuestnet
an
nf style
RmFbi r,
u:f,b;r
sna
er Knares-
borough sources of belief; and in the end render Our faith bankrupt.
oratorical a ialso,
Ctl let: stiEe
rough is ;
theta are so daintily selected, his language is anAuage is so
choice and delicate. He talks of ",,humbugging,"
and "thimble-rigging," and "
farmers gammoning and "putting
on their backs," and " sticking to • .
as much fluency as that with agriculture,' with
which EDMUND BURKE de-
livered his impassioned and superb
BUSFEILD FERRAND we detect somethingperrationfs. But in Mr.
CUTE school ,the anxiety ioliartilsieeciAlderm an
to appear familiarised
Tr
habits and condition of the people by einptlho3l the.g
innumerable cant phrases. But the Hon. Gentleman's self-
sufficiency is not retarded by any consideration as to the
very false and questionable position in Which he t d
s A• •