The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-16 00:00:00

~--S

.L •
• -2;
protest by the late Lord Holland,in 1825, during the :1 tine_
surrectien, in which that Noble Lord said he opposed th mins>i's4, f-) I -
sure because it was a suspension of the law rathe th_rtjte*;
prevention of crime ; and, secondly, because onl?t
measures ought to be adopted as would get A'irlyi ti
tgh'heerfabcotlewoasf jeaesiaatiddmwitatesdinbya
tend to cement the union between the two coun.tries. "
allst state
eh oefhearvgeaandi
id;
tei sne da
ntdh
stHe u
go I:ls,iee,
between life and the rights of property. It might be true, ant.'
he admitted to the fullest extent the state of outrage in that:
country; but the question was, how were they to act? These
outrages had become almost indigenous to the soil..
The people had not been fretted properly by the suc-
cessive Governments of this country;
they had never
been treated as subjects. With a
people ths re-
duced to the lowest depths of misery and
destitu-
tion how were they to act? It was not possible for
morecruel
tenant,
and
v,.hieh
the malignity et human or inhuman beings to support a system
disastrousthanled to to sthueehpraeseviasittreamlatoiounnstbeoftw
crimeeen anlandi
lorci andmisery. The Hon. Member for Cork said, if cannot cure:
the country, abdicate it ; if you can, in GodYson ame, letur7
know the remedy. The Right Hon. Gentlemen at the head
of the country made precisely the same speech in that House
thirty-two years ago. He had referred to that speech, and he
believed the one speech might be taken for the' other,
with the exception of the names, the dates, and
the places mentioned in it. During all this period
not a single measure had been introduced to remove the griev-
ance of the tenure of land—a grievance which the Right Hon.
Baronet stated was the cause of these outrages.—( Hear, hear.)
The present measure was nothing more than a temporary
measure—it contained nothing better than the old provisions.
He gave the Govenment credit for what they had done, and
for as far as they had gone; they had not, however, gone far
enough. He believed that a defeat of this last expiring at-
tempt at misguided legislation would tend to support the
Right Hon. Baronet in the course which he thought he (Sir
R. Peel) was anxious to pursue in his government of Ireland.
It was high time that a new system should be tried. The
past system of legislation had produced an intense hatred in
the minds of the people of Ireland against the &dministration.
He recognised in the present Bill the old system of terrorism,
and it would not do to act upon that principle any longer.
The system was condemned by all patties. The Hen. Mem-
ber, who moved the amendment, had as little sympathy. with
the murderers and assassins as any member of her Majesty's
Government. He (Sir W. Somerville) and the other Irish
Members opposed this measure, because they could not reconcile
with their con sciences such restrictions as their own consti-
tuency, would not permit.
Mr. COLQUHOUN said that
if he felt a perfect
confi-
dence in the Government he could not satisfy himself to vote
for such an unconstitutional measure as the present. If the
Noble Lord, the Member far the City
offer him such a Bill he would say to him fi of
measure
London, were to
—( Hear, hear)—and thereby forward yourrst prove your case
possible speed. The Noble Member forKingeasusl.ey nn with
acid
there was a decrease of crime, therefore the case broke down.s'
He could not agree with his Noble Friend ; he thought the
proofs of the Government of the existence of outrages were
overwhelming, and also the necessity of bringing forward some
measure for the suppression of these outrages. Magistrates a
all creeds and classes had stated the 'difficulty of obtaining
evidence and conviction of the assassin. He would say intro-
duce any measure calculated to suppress these things. Sup-
posing it were desirable to increase the number of Irish Diem -
hers to 100, the case of the peasant and the people of Ireland
would be in an alarming condition. He thought there bad
been a most culpable delay in bringing forward this
measure ever since it came into that House. He
would not enter into the details of the progress
of the Bill through the House of Lords. If the
Government had passed the Bill through the Lords, and
proceeded with it with half the earnestness with which they
forced the Corn Bill, the Protection to Life Bill would now
have been the law of the land. He agreed with the Right
Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford, that the Bill, as it at
present stood, was perfetly inadequate to meet the exigency in
Ireland. He objected to the want of power contained in the
provisions of the Bill. He also agreed with the Hon. Member
for Belfast, that it was unwise to pass a Coercion Bill that
would not have the effect of repressing crime, or of preventing
the taking away of life. If the two clauses which alone gave
life to the Bill were struck out, he should certainly object to it.
He begged to ask the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the
Government, whether, to gratify Hon. Members opposite, it,
was his intention to strike out in Committee these two clauses,
or whether he was prepared to maintain in all their integrity
the provisions of the Bill ? If the Right Hon Gentleman de-
clined to answer the question, he (Mr. Colquboun) having no
confidence in the intentions of Government, from past expe-
rience, should certainly vote against the second reading of the
Bill. The Hon. Member then alluded to the meeting at Lord
John Russell's house, in Chesham-place, which had become
notorious during the last few months for political assemblies.
Looking at the strange assortment of Hon. Nlembers, having diffe•
rent political views, at those meetings,:he must say that the Noble
Lord the Member for London would have a difficulty in deal-
ing with Ireland. The Noble Lord would have a strange
team to drive—such restive horses, and such kicking and cur-
vetting amongst them. He had ruled them before, and past
experience must have told him the difficulty of managing
them. If they had not had the corn measure this year they
would have had a grand educational scheme, which, like the
other popular measures, would have been filched from the
Noble Lord the Member for London. The course that the
Right Hon. Baronet had pursued was for him at the end of the
session to give some indistinct hints of the course he meant
to pursue, and he went forth to the world as the liberal
Minister, the great spirit of the age. At the beginning of the
session he promulgated his liberal opinions as a concession to
the principles of Hon. Gentlemen opposite. He wanted to
see the Noble Lord in power, nor from any confidence in his
administration, but that it would give them (the Protec-
tionists) the opportunity, perhaps, of recovering themselves,
and of truly appealing to the people of England on the prin-
ciples they maintained. He should rejoice at having an oppor-
tunity of recording his vote against her Majesty's Ministers on
a want of confidence. He required a pledge from the Govern-
ment that the Bill should be maintained unmutilated, other-
wise he should vote against the second reading.
Colonel SIBT H 0 RP said the Hon. Member re-
quired a pledge from the Government ; he required none.
He had made up his mind to the performance of his
duty, and he should fearlessly perform it. He was never ac-
customed to flatter any man, but lie could not help recording
his admiration for the Noble Lord the Member for King's
Lynn. What was the reply of the 'Right Hon. Baronet—ha
would not call him his Right Hon.-Friend—to that speech ?
It was niost weak and vain. It had been his painful duty to
pass much of his time in Ireland. During the whole period, he
had never received one unkind feeling or expression from any
class in the sister kingdom. He would not support a
measure which in his opinion emanated from a Whig
Government. He should feel it his duty to oppose the
measure. The policy of the Right Horn Gentleman was to
pass the Corn Bill, and then, if expedient, to appeal to the
country. Petitions bad been signed by 250,000 persons against
the Bill, and their rejection of the measure ought to be attended
to. He could place confidence in neither the Hon. Gentle-
man's opponents, nor in the present Government, for men who
had been caught twice in a trap ought never to be allowed to
get out of it. He bad no confidence in their wish for the wel-
fare of the country, and he should feel it his duty, when a mea-
-1 sure more efficient was brought forward, to vote for it ; but to
get rid of the present Government, which was the best measure
he could promote at the present time, he should join certainly
with the Noble Lord, and vote against the second reading; of
the proposed atrocious measure.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he had paid particular at-
tention to the mass of Parliamentary evidence which had been
laid down by his friend the member for the City of Oxford.
The Hon. Member was of opinion that if a measure was intro-
duced on the responsibility of her Majesty's Government for the
protection of life in Ireland, that being the assumption on the
face of the Bill, but it did not much matter what might he the
intention of the Bill, still it was their duty, the Bill having
been referred to that House to be deliberated on, to give their
assent to that Bill. To that doctrine he (Lord J. Russell)
could by no means assent. He could understand that upon a
motion to bring in a Bill, or in the first bringing ap of a Bill
from the House of Lords, that so much was due to her Majesty's
Government that it might- be right to e'snsent to the in-
troduction of the Bill, in order that it might be fully
and freely discussed, but that the law-makers of
the country were not to consider what those laws were—
that they were not to consider the effect of those measures,
but blindly consent to them—was a proposition which seemed to
him so contrary to all his notions of Parliamentary duties that
it was impossible for him to countenance that doctrine in any
way. In commencing a review of the proposed
it which
was tempted to take the course in objecting
hteon it a
usually adopted by a Minister of the
.Crown
thew presentingrown,when
Bill for their consideration. A Minister. of
of great importance, generally
about to propose any measure
th ushered it in by quoting some paragraphe throne which had been affecting the welfare of
the country from the .peecli from
In the present case
delivered at the opening of Parliament.l
he did not think that her Majesty's Ministers could make a
similar application, because he thought that the Queen's speech
was a strong argument against the proposed measure. Her
speech, Majest in that
called attention to the frequent
y,
acts assassination committed in Ireland,
and of outrage and
wished to knew whether any measure could not be devised
to prevent those
outrages, and to bring to justice the perpetra-
tors of them. A delay of five months, after such an announce-
ment from the Throne, ensued before any measures were
taken.—(Hear, hear.) Iler Majesty's Ministers bad not suffi-
cient confidence in the measures they had prepared, or, as it
bad been said, the press of public business h prevented them
proceeding with those measures. There were two courses
open, either of which it would have been competent for her Ma-
jesty's Ministers to have adopted, and would have been per-
fectly compatible with the dignity of the Government and
that House. One course would have been to have introduced
a temporary measure for the purpose of introducing the impor-
tation of food, and also to have introduced a temporary mea-
sure for the protection of life in Ireland, thus leaving the great
measure of the corn-laws in its native integrity
open to the un-
fettered and dispassionate consideration of that House.
With respect to the measure he was bound to consider the
grounds which were urged in'favour of the Bill. The amoouunnt
of crime which was said to be the foundation of it
be
was
b d
to consider: he was bound to consider in what
manne
bound to
ters had arrived at that amount of crime ; he was
measure did afford that remedy
consider whet her the present nietsection to life
and
property;
and, lastly, whether measures
which was likely to increase p r
of a different character would not
have removed the cause of te
alleged insecurity of life. But
the Noble Lord who holds the office of Secretary for Ireland
introduced this Bill in a speech which he owned gave him con-
siderable embarrassment. In the early period of the session
they were told of dreadful murders—of murders committed in
the open day; and he had thought that the speech of the Noble
Earl would have given them some details of those outrages
but the crimes the Noble Earl mentioned were of an ordinary
character, nor could he gather from the statement of the Noble
Earl that they were different to, or greater in amount, than
those which had been committed for several years past.
But the Noble Earl put it to him whether,
having supported a similar measure in 1848, brought
forward under similar circumstances to those of the
present day, he could refuse his assent to the Bill now before
the House. He would answer that appeal at once. It was no
reason because an Hon. Member had supported a measure
which went beyond the constitution at one period of his life, he
ought to support it at another:; but the Noble Lord having
made this appeal to him, he must trouble the House with a
review of his conduct with regard to measures of this descrip-
tion. Soon after he entered Parliament in I Sl7, indeed in
the year 1819, a measure was brought forward to suspend the
Habeas Corpus Act, and what was called the " Six Acts"
was introduced to remedy the disturbances which then pre-
vailed in the manufacturing districts. Following the opinions
of the political party to which he belonged, he voted in support
of the measure. Soon after:he came into office, a disturbance
of a similar character, accompanied by declamations of the
same democratic character, broke out in the country, but after
due and careful examination he came to the conclusion
that it was better not to make any alteration in
the constitutional law of the country, and he came
down to that House to ask for an increased military and con-
stabulary force. He recollected that the Right Hon. Baronet
the First Lord of the Treasury acquiesced in the proposal he
made, and with this increased force, and with the aid of pro-
secutions under the ordinary law, the country was restored to
a state of tranquillity. After the Right Hon. Baronet the
First Lord of the Treasury came into office, a disturbance,
very similar in its nature, occurred in the manufacturing dis-
tricts—perhaps it was of a still more alarming character—and
theßight Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the House
Department pursued the course he had done before him. He
sent down an increased military force to the disturbed des.