The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-02 00:00:00

mit him to read a letter from the Hon. Member without any
comment:—
__ _

" House of Commons Prison,
" May I, 1846.
"My dear Roche,—l shall feel much obliged if you will
explain to the House, this evening, that you were under a
misconception when you stated yesterday that I complained
that no opportunity had been afforded to me of speaking in my
own defence.
440 n the contrary, I cheerfully aeknowledge that such an
opportunity was offered, and that I declined to avail myself
of it.

" I was very anxious to have spoken yesterday, because I do
not think my case was fairly stated to the House by the Chair-
man of the Committee of Selection. I referred to my let-
ters to the Committee, as stating the grounds upon which
I had refused to serve upon Committees on Scotch and English
railway Bills. If those letters had been read in ertenso I
should have been contented to abide the opinion of the House
upon them, but the Charman of the Committee of Selection
read only such portions of them as tended to produce an im-
pression on the House unfavourable to my conduct.
" I wish it also to be known, that until the closing sentence
of Mr. Estcourt's speech reached me, I did not knew what
was the nature of the motion which he intended to submit ;
so that I was unprepared to form an opinion as to the course
which it would be most advisable for me to adopt. I did not
know whether I was to be imprisoned or reprimanded, or
whether a Committee might not be appointed to take the case
into consideration before any final motion should be proposed
to the House. As mine is a new ease arising out of resolu-
tions adopted without notice, without discussion, Lot
founded on long-established practice, not supported
by any authority derived from statute or from prescr:p-
tion, it seemed to me that the appointment
of a Committee to deliberate upon the subject, was not only
the wisest and most natural mode of dealing with the case,
but also that which would have been most conformable
to former precedents. I need not say that my de-
cision with respect to the propriety of addressing the Howe
on my own behalf, or of remaining silent, might have
been affected by a knowledge of the motion which was to be
proposed to the House. Undoubtedly, if I had foreseen that
my views would have been so much misrepresented in debate as
they have been, I should not have declined to state them fully
to the House.

" In all proceedings in Parliament it is customary to give
due notice to the parties affected by such proceedings—such
notice, therefore, may be considered as a 'right' rather than
as a ' courtesy.' With reference to the preliminary motion
made on Monday night, I was left in such entire ignorance
of the terms of that motion, that I absolutely mistook the
question when put from the chair, and imagined that it was an
order to attend the House on Tuesday, whereas I afterwards
learned that it was an order to attend the Committee.
"On last Friday I stated to Air. Estcourt, in private, that I
should feel much obliged to him if he would intimate to me the
terms of the motion which he intended to make in reference to
my case, as soon a 3 his own determination was formed. I sub-
sequently received no communication from him.
" I do not wish yeu to reveal to the House what an Irish-
man thinks of such a mode of proceeding. Suffering from the
injustice of the British House of Commons, I expect nothing
from its generosity.
" I shall make no further appeal to the House. Yesterday
I was extremely anxious to have been allowed to speak on my
own behalf before my committal to prison as a culprit. I shall
not again condescend to solicit even this trifling favour.
" In concluding, I beg most anxiously and earnestly to re-
quest you to inform the House that I am no party to any
motion for my discharge.

" I remain, my dear Roche, very sincerely yours,
" WILLIAM S. O'BRIEN,

" E. B. Roche, Esq., M.P."
SOUTH NOTTINGHAMSHIRE ELECTION.
Mr. GISBORNE wished to ask the Hon. Member for
South Nottinghamshire, whether a correspondence, which had
appeared in the local and London newspapers between T. B.
Hildyard, Esq., M.P., and T. Herbert, Esq., mayor of Not-
tingham, relating to the late election in South Nottingham-
shire, was authentic ? and, in case the answer should
be in the affirmative, whether the Honourable Mem-
ber was now prepared to prove that the free
trade committee at 'Nottingham, for promoting Lord Lincoln's
election, offered 231. to two voters, who had promised their
votes to the Honourable Member, in case they would vote for
Lord Lincoln.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN rose to a point of order, He
wished to know whether it was incumbent upon his Honour-
able Friend to answer such questions?—( Hear. )
The SPEAKER replied that the Hon. Member for Not-
tinghamshire must exercise his own discretion, but according
to the practice of the House it was customary for Hon. Mem-
bers to answer questions that were continually put to them,
whether those questions related to the business of the House
or not.
Mr. GISBORNE made some observations which were
scarcely audible in the gallery. He was understood, how-
ever, to say that it was a fit subject for that House to in-
quire into, and as the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hildyard) had
made the statement in question, he thought that the House
should give him an opportunity of affirming or denying it. If
the Hen. Member would affirm it, he would move for a Select
Committee to give him an opportunity of proving the state-
ment. He thought that the Hon. Member had no reason to
complain about his being asked such a question, as he had given
two days' notice of his intention to ask it.
The subject then dropped.
MR. SMITH O'BRIEN.
Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that he would postpone his
motion relative to the discharge of Mr. Smith O'Brien from
the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms till Monday next.
CONSUMPTION OF SMOKE.
Sir. J. GRAHAM, in reply to a question from Mr. Peter
Borthwick, said that it was not the intention of the Government
to introduce any measure this session with regard to the con-
sumption of smoke. lie had entertained great apprehensions
last session as to the working of the plans which had been
adopted far that purpose, and far from these apprehensions
being now removed, they were more and more confirmed.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.
On the motion that the order of the day, the Protection to
Life (Ireland) Hill, be read,
Mr. P. SOMERS rose and proceeded to address the House,
but in consequence of the law tone in which he spoke,
and the confusion that prevailed at the bar of the
House, he was for some time utterly inaudible.
It must be evident to the Right Honourable Baronet
that it was not by such a Bill as the present the
state of Ireland was to be altered. Let the Government,
instead of persisting in this odious measure, introduce some
measure for the purpose of giving greater security to the
tenant, the improvement of waste lands, and such other remedial
measures, and they would produce more peace in Ireland than a
constabulary force ten times greater than the present could de.
The distress in Ireland had been denied. The existence of the
potato failure had been considered an exaggeration. Gentle-
mensel f-i
nothingndul g
realenc e ,
y substantialpursue
wasspe cut:
y-
ualini,dwtihtehorainse
lationcso, e;arb.vut
result. Ireland was still left to drag out a miserable existence,
through misrule. Neither he nor the Irish Members could
approve of the spirit of the measure.
Mr. M. O'CONNELL did not intend to follow the example
which had just been set of introducing matter which was quite
irrelevant to the purpose. He thought sufficient had al-
ready been said on that topic, and he believed that suffi-
cient matter already remained for another debate of
equal length with that which had already transpired. He had
certainly been much struck at the moment by the statement
of the [light Hoe. Baronet at the head of the Government,
respecting
the state of Ireland now and what it had been in
former years. The Right lion. Baronet. compared the state
of Ireland in 1843 with its present condition, and had asked
whether there were any measures taken at all for the repression
of crime during that period. Now, any one would suppose
from such an inquiry as that, that during the last two year s
the Government had done absolutely nothing. But what
had been the case with regard to Ireland since 1843? Isr
his part, he might ask whether the Government had been by
any means idle during that period ? Why, they had dismissed
as many as twenty-two magistrates, and on application from
the country, the replies from Dublin had confirmed
the replies of the authorities. This was their first step.
What had been the course of the Government during the last
few years ? Their first step was to pass that most ridiculous n:
all measures—the Arms Act, while there still existed an effective
Bill of the same kind. Their next step was to issue a prod
mation against the Clontarf meeting, then to prosecute the
leaders of the Repeal Association; next to imprison them
most unjustly, and now they were going to pass this
most obnoxious and unnecessary measure.—(Hear, hear.)
They had carried all these measures into effect, as far as they
were able to carry them, and what was the result ? By their
dismissal of the magistrates they had added numbers to the
ranks of repeal, and had taken away from the bench those pe,-
30119 in whom the people had confidence, and to whom they
would have come, and were in the habit of coming with infor-
mation, and left those persons who seemed to be opposed to the
interests of the people. By the Arms Act—as he had said--
they established the fact that there were in the hands of the
peasantry of Ireland, on the very first registry, 90,000 stand o:
arms. These arms were in part taken away, and if the number
of robberies of arms in Ireland were increased, they might
thank themselves for the increase. Having passed all these
measures, were they to be surprised that the people against
whom those measures were levelled should have some contempt
for a Government who had brought forward measures of such
inutility? Could they for a moment imagine that repeated
and reiterated failure in all these measures had not inspired
the people with the belief that the Government must continue
to tail in still more important measures? Had it not been the
same all through? They had beaten themselves on every
measure they had proposed, and, they now came for-
ward, asking far powers beyond the law.—(Hear, hear.)
What did they think would he the feeling of the people of
Ireland towards the Irish Members, if they were to agree to en-
trust with such powers a Government which hadso entirely
bungled in every measure with regard to Ireland? It was not
merely in their efforts in the cause of oppression or coercion
that they had failed, but it was in every effort which they had
been making at reconciliation. They had brought in their
Charitable Bequests Bill, to regulate the charity of Catholics in
Ireland, at the very moment when all the Courts of law and
equity had declared that the Catholics were free to exercise
their power in that respect, just as they pleased. When all the
old sytem of restriction was gone, they brought forward this
measure, restricting and confining them again. The promises
which were given in 1835, for the purpose of inducing them to
give up the repeal agitation, had never been fulfilled. From
the moment the present Government had came into office, till
the present time, nothing had been one to remove
a single grievance uric] ih h
wid c the Irish people la-
boured ; and as far
intentions, nothing aswo bee°ad be judged by their present
one. at was e state of
Ireland since the present GovernmentWh came into office, and
Y
since the Marquis of Normanb
who was justly considered one
of the best Englishmen thatievergoverned in Ireland, had
Outrages ceased to rule in that country'
had been on the in
crease, and the social condition of the more disorganised. What was the remedy eount ry was becoming
propsed for this.
state of things now ? They proposed the Coercion arsion Bill, which
had been tried- over and over a gain,but which had never yet
in any one instance succeeded in suppressing those against which it was directed. That was
theoutrages
panacea which was proposed for the
hickevil
3 w
were partly created by themselves.—(Hear, hear.)
The county of Clare was more disturbed than any county in
Ireland. He remembered the county of Clare when every
gentleman's house was a garrison. Whenever you went up to
a door you were challenged, the same as a military station.
They had shells and balls prestared, andtpiled upon the
And stonesh this
window-sills, to repel an assailant.was the case in
that county for three or four years. The cause
of the insur-
rection was the same as that of theinsurrection now—namely
the want of the potato crop. Several attempts had beenmade
to put down this disturbance, but withoutms.
He mentioned
effect, until it ,s' a
proposed that they should give up their a
r
this, because it included the case of Bryan Seery.
111auy gen.

lemon had interested themselves in this case, and an endea-
vour was made to induce the people to give up their arms.
The Lord-Lieutenant—the Marquis of Anglesey—had been
applied to, to give permission for the reception of the arms,
but he declined. The insurrectionists then stated that they
would deliver their arms if the party who had not been ex-
pressly engaged in the offence were allowed to go free. 'This
was agreed to, and what was the consequence? Why, not
le,s than 500 stand of arms was delivered up in one night to
the Hon. Member for Cork, who went down to receive them.
And how meny people did they think these arms were taken
from ? Not more than forty-five individuals, after whom, during
those three years, not less than between 5,000 and 6,000 military,
and between 2,000 and 3,000 police had been in constant pursuit.
Some of these men stated, that if the gentry had resisted
them, the disturbances would never be at an end, and he be-
lieved in the present instance that had the gentry of the dis-
turbed districts shown front against those who were organ-
ising the disturbances, instead of calling for Coercion Bills,
their counties would have been resorted to peace. Thanking
the House for the indulgence they had shewn him, he conclinled
by declaring his intention of continuing his moat decided op-
position to this measure.
Mr. COLQUHOUN wished to state in a few words the
grounds for his vote on the present occasion. He thought the
description given by the Hon. Member for Meath, of the state of
Ireland was, if there were no other, a sufficient justification f
their passing this measure. The Hon. Member described the
state of the country in a remarkably emphatic word. lie de-
scribed certain counties as being, in a state of insurrection.
Mr. MORRIS O'CONNELL—Agrarian insurrection.
Mr. COLQUHOUN—WeII, in estate of agrarian insurrec-
tion ; and how had the Hon. Member described a particular
county while on a former occasion it was in this condition ?
Why, he told them that houses had to be barricaded, and pass-
words given before a gentleman's house could be approached,
and then he went on to tell them, that in certain districts there
existed this agrarian insurrection. Now, could the Govern-
ment urge a stronger reason than this for the House passing
the Bill ?—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.) lion. Gentlemen
might say that threatening letters were nothing; but when
those letters were followed by actual deeds, some notice should
be taken of them. Let them look to a recent case, in which,
immediately on the arrival of Lord Orkney at his estate, his
steward, a man of estimable character, was shot at in open day.
This case was not solitary. A landlord could not attempt to
remove a tenant, even from one farm to another, without fear of
attack. The case of Lord Orkney's steward was a most flagrant
one. The murderous act was committed in front of the steward's
house in the broad da)light. They took out the unfortunate
man and placed him upon his knees in the presence of twenty
persons, and they tell him he must say his prayers as his days
were numbered ; and when the nonresident landlord, after
visiting his Irish estates, returned from his morning excursions
among his tenantry, whom he wished to serve, he found the
front of the house stained with the blood of the murdered man.
He found not a single individual would give evidence of the
ferocious crime, and yet Hon. Members had told him (Mr.
Colquhoun) that that was the state of the country which the
people of England and the Legislature ought to tolerate.—
( Cries of " Oh, oh.") Well, then, he was glad to here that
admission, that that state of the country was intolerable, and
which they ought to redress.—( Opposition cheers.) Yes, the
first step which they ought to take was to introduce powerful
measures, but he did not mean to say that they should be coer-
cive as these.—( Opposition cheers.) At all events Hon.
Members opposite admitted that the ordinary law was power-
less.—( Cries of " No, no.") At all events it was a con-
dition of things intolerable, and which they ought not to
overlook, and he earnestly asked for their support to some
effective measures which would put down this state of things.
Well, new, had there been any exaggeration with regard to
the statements made in support of the Bill. They had the
cases of Westmeath and Clare. He had read the papers,
and the statement to which he would refer had been credited
by the name of a most respectable individual; and the gentle-
man to whom it related, he believed it would be admitted
was a most worthy individual ; indeed his worth was proved by
the address he had recently received from his tenants, thank-
ing him for the exertion he,had made on their behalf ; and yet
this resident landlord, in the county of Westmeath, had been de-
nounced, whilst in the discharge of his duty to his tenants,
and his life was threatened, and it was in answer to that de-
nunciation that his tenantry had addressed him. He had
stated one case in Westmeath, the case of Sir Francis Hop-
kins. But wculd the House allow him to dispense with these
individual illustrations, becaus it might be said that they were
calculated to mislead the House. He would take the case of
the county of Westmeath, as a friend of his had sent a return
of the police inspectors of that county, for the last six weeks.
These returns made a full statement of the various outrages for
that period; their total number amounted to 197 cases. It was
stated that many of these outrages were owing to the severity
of the landlord upon the tenant, but he had consulted
these returns, and found that only 13 of these outrages were
on gentlemen ; 38 of them were connected with the rights of
property ; 38 were connected with land, but were directed
against farmers, and the gentlemen and stewards who usually
exercised the more severe rights of property did not interfere
at all ; and 38 of those outrages were on labourers without
any reference at all to land. He would not enter into all these
cases, but he would only state, that an attack was made en
one man, because he was generally disliked, on another be-
cause the aggressor wished to drive him from the country ; a
third was because the man told stories to his employer ; and
the remainder were various prosecutions for debt, theft, &c.
A considerable cause of these grave acts was the wish of the
farmers to tyrannise in their own districts, and to have their
' will executed implicitly—the law of wrong being
placed in defiance of the law of right.—( Hear.) What
they wished to do was to punish others who contravene and
oppose their law. If the law of the land was not sufficient to
sPturtengdthwennedthsoose
IVhat could prevent the coneocters of these crimes from meeting
ascrtionsoesv,erptohweerlasavndofpretl,Lentlatnhdosemeursitmebse.
during the day, and committing those crimes they had con-
cocted during the day ? In this Bill increased rewards were
offered for evidence, but those rewards were a perfect delusion.
—(Hear, hear.) Why, the police stations were covered with
rewards, from 10/. to 108/., for any person who would come
forward and give evidence. The only provision that could be
made to ensure the attendance of witnesses was to provide for
their safety. The remedy proposed by the Bill would, to some
extent, do good ; but he doubted whether it would be attended
with those results which were anticipated. Here was a con-
flict, delaying their discussions and retarding the progress of
the Corn Bill.—( Hear.) Now that conflict might be well
worthy of being carried on if the remedy were equal
to the evil. The measure had been limited to three years ;
now was there a man of sane mind in that House who would
tell him that in three years the peace of Ireland would be re-
stored. He thought the measure defective, because it was not
sufficiently stringent. It did not interfere with those men
who in a district were known by the police and others as dis-
turbers of the districts. Nothing was so bad as giving a blow
which provoked those desperate characters, and yet making
that blow so feebly it only gave an advantage to the criminal.
It would be proved in this ease, as in the Arms Bill, that the
remedy was slot equal to the evil.
Mr. HAWES explained that all his statistical statements
were exclusively derived from the documents which had been
laid on the table.
Mr. J. O'BRIEN objected to the measure, because he was
convinced that it would fail in the object fur which it was in-
tended. He felt sure the result of the measure would
cause life to be much more precarious than it
was at present. ( Hear, hear.) He asked what
impunity could he expected when whole families were turned
out of their holdings on to the high road, and were left to seek
shelter in the bogs or churchyards, and to die in ditches. Can
peace or tranquillity be expected while that state of things was
allowed to exist. Coercion Bills were of no use, and would
only tend to increase crime in the country. He would tell the
House an anecdote that would tend to illustrate the effects of a
measure similar to the present. He recollected the time which
was when the country was under what was called Algerine
law. A farmer held a large quantity of land, and was careful
to avoid the least opportunity of giving offence to the law. A
neighbouring clergyman, however, had a great antipathy to the
man, because he was a Roman Catholic, and sought every
means to ruin him. What did he do P Why, he brought a
sergeant's guard down to his house, under the pretence of
searching it for arms, and while there, he concealed some
powder and balls. The sergeant was then ordered to take the
farmer into custody for the supposed Whiteboy act. On the
trial, the sergeant, who was a Scotchman, in reply to the
question whether he found any ammunition in the house, re-
plied that he did not know, but his Honour who was on the
Bench knew all about it, as he saw him put the powder there.
The magistrate, when asked, admitted the charge, and said
that the man was a desperate character, and he knew no other
means of causing him to be removed from the neighbourhood.
That man was a reverend, an honourable, and a magistrate ;
he was a priest of the Established Church, and a Lord's
brother. He would not, however, mention his name, as two
to
wty, ei
a ass r years )
ya ssast
eefht
dmae
had occurred,
of
thefe<iofclearanceoc rceuh reto ce. eed ui
,vr
believeder
wem he
et
twelvemonths,
was e
t the
that
instead
e( compelled.ll rhh.
ooe fJe . O'Brien)l e
a v e men-
tionedthen
ill
l tttai Shhni
yeueeisascnehci
gbnorl
ta:ah wasreasons
that
ott.i
aotnlmit:i wayeeHeholaeelfmeasure,
ul"dl
oaets
was
disturbance,
any
having
easvonooitnce
elgocae,engrtb.oaht
been
yinslnetr
Member.
that
theoebha
utneai
Irnttfild.
first
touaßnrtvdei
uieati
ieei
fifteen.—(
:mdoe
eeotonpfrrf.serce_tioiati
bsh)t(nieeevidef,Kßeiii If
wasc u
havingri t else
dead.
iyweo ucol
nb.e
hear.t
g
) It was a dangerous and most impolitic measure. For
11.
Mr. BELLEW said he was as anxious about th'e progress of
t
in view that the Irish Members had not been to blame in de-
-1 in
aying
to it. No doubt the Corn Bill was an Irish as well as
English measure. He was satisfied that after this night the
Hon. Mernieer for Stockport would have no reason to complain
of the progress on that question. Still, he must c'aim for ilae
Irish Members the right under the circumstances of inter-
fering with its progress to the extent they had done. Ile, con-
sidering the character of the Coercion Bill, opposed the Bill
on two grounds. First, because it would not be effective in
putting down agrarian outrage ; and, second, because it was
not accompanied with remedial measures. In opposing the
Bill, ho attached little importance to the comparison of the
amount of crime in Ireland and England, as the great poin
was not the amount or crime, but the sympathy with which i

was regarded, and the efficiency of the present Bill to repress
that sympathy and put an end to that crime.—( Hear, hear. )
That the Bill would not effect this object, he must refer them
to the fact that the other day a gentleman in the town of Kil-
rush had been shot at in the middle of the day, and no one in-
terfered with the assassin. No curfew law could affect such
of P
y
crimes as these.—( Hear, hear.) Neither would the Bill be
effective in protecting witnesses and securing proper evidence
in courts of justice, of which so much had been said. In fact,
no measure of this kind could be effective in the present state
the Poliulation of Ireland. The must consider that,
unlike
—owand, seven-eights of the inhabitants of Ireland
dtehrgeym agricultural
lived on the soil. In England those on the land were but one
half. In Ireland, also, the proprietors were much smaller, and
the tenants occupied much less portions of land. One. half of
all the farms were under five acres each, and it had be n
shown that the great body of these tenants were without skill
or capital, and lived in miserable cabins. (The Hon. Alem-
uslhtuorwailngth
ber here read an extract from the evidence of a Roman Ca-
bthooylie of clergyman, miserable a state)
Suchoft the
(ogoren.a t
e
population
with regard to their condition. Now, with respect to the
evictions that had taken place. Not less than 150,000 notices
of evictions hail been served during the last five years. The
Hon. Member here read an extract from the report of Lord
Devon's Commission on this head, showing the extensive
system of eviction that had been carried out. This was the
condition of Ireland—a disgrace to England for allowing it to
continue as it was. The power and influence of England was
known throughout the world, and co-existent with it was the
knowledge of the degradation of Ireland. It might be
said there were great difficulties in meeting the case, but he
would tell the Right Hon. Baronet, no great achievement was
ever yet accomplished without encountering difficulty. Let
him set manfully and energetically to work, and success would
be certain.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet was
bound to do something to meet the state of Ireland. In appoint-
ing the Devon Commission, and in what had been done in the
Landlord ard Tenant Commission, he had given a pledge that
some steps would be taken to relieve the distress of Ireland.
In this respect the present Government differed with their pre-
decessors, for they had said they could do nothing.—( Hear,
hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet, then, was the last man who
should get up and say that the landlords of Ireland ought to
meet the case themselves. He (Mr. Buller) admitted the
landlords of Ireland had not done their duty ; still, after the
issuing of the Landlords and Tenants Commiasiots, the Right
Hon. Baronet was bound to bring forward some of the measures
which the members of that Commission had recommended.
lie maintained that it was perfectly consistent to oppose this
measure,
because no beneficial measure was connected with it,

The Irish Member endeavoured to benefit Ireland in many
ways, but they had been prevented in many ways. He would
support their Bill as cordially as any Member in that House, if
he thought it would effect the object it had in view, or was
accompanied by any other measure, but as it was, he felt it to
be his painful duty to oppose it.
The A cTORNEY-GENERAL said, that although the
present subject must be nearly worn out, yet. in the position in
which he stood, he was expected to make a few observations on
it. He had to regret the very unusual course which had been
adopted in opposing the first reading of the Bill ; but, as the
Members who opposed it, were interested for their country,
he did not blame them for their opposition, but hoped that the
future stages of the Bill, if the House should by a majority declare
itself in its favour, would be less marked by opposition. He
deeply regretted the language that had been adopted by one
Hon. Member, and hoped that the feeling which that lan-
guage conveyed was not general among his countrymen in
that House. The HOU. Member for Limerick had stated that
he felt it to be the duty of the Members for Ireland to oppose
the first reading of the Bill with all their power, and by all
means which Parliamentary usages afforded. He trusted that
such an expression was inadvertent, and if it were not, he hoped
that the Hon. Members to whom it was addressed would not
listen to or act on it, and give any unusual opposition to the
present measure at the commencement of the debate on this
question, which seemed so remote, that he could hardly believe
that it belonged to the present discussion. The Hon. Member
for the city of London had found fault with his
(the Attorney-General's) Right Hon. Friend Sir J. Graham,
for having, in the very temperate speech in which he opened
this case to the House, omitted one very important point in
the measure. He complained that in a former measure, which
had been passed, it was accompanied by remedial measures,
but in the present measure no such remedial measures were
adOpted, and that formed a grand point of objection to the
present measure. Was not the House aware that in Ireland,
where a sympathy existed in favour of the criminals, that they
were emboldened and encouraged by that sympathy, and was it
not for the Government at once to adopt such measures as
would remove such a state of things? His Hon. Friend,
the Member for Newcastle-under-Line, gave the House
a long list of outrages committed in the open day,
and stated that not one single person would come
forward to give evidence against them. Under those circum-
stances he (the Attorney-General) would like to know how
his Hon. Friend would carry into execution his plan of seizing
these men and imprisoning them, when he admitted the
existence of an evil which would prevent such a course. The
Hon. Member had also asked whether the present measure
would drive people from combination by night and combi-
nation by day—he hoped that by an extended police, and an
increased amount of vigilance, this evil would be prevented.
He was rather surprised to hear the Noble Lord the Member
for the city of London, complain of the indiscriminate nature
of this law, and still more surprised to hear him recommend
the Act called the Black Act, which was framed to punish a
series of outrages committed in Waltham Forest by persons in
disguise. The Noble Lord did not remember that the Black
Act was a measure of punishment and not of prevention, and
that in the majority of these outrages in Ire-
land, the disguise which was necessary for a con-
viction under that Act was totally wanting. In
Ireland at the present moment there were families
who were living in every sense of security, and were not con-
scious of having offended any one, exposed to the sentence of
death, which was only conveyed to them by a written message.
It was natural that endeavours should be made to prevent this
state of things, and that a restraint upon liberty should be the
consequence of measures taken for that purpose. In the dis-
tricts in which these outrages prevailed there was hardly any
thing like liberty, for all security and all freedom of action
were gone. Although the measure might have the effect of
producing some inconvenience in the proclaimed district, yet
he could not believe that the orderly, peaceable, and well dis-
posed could; have any real objection to it.—(Hear, hear.) He
could, without unnecessarily carrying back the House to dis-
tant periods, show the House that the principle of this Bill was
by no means novel, but was acknowledged by the early
statute law of the country. In the reign of
Edward the Third, the inhabitants of particular parts of the
country were made liable for lawless acts and robberies com-
mitted in their districts; and in the subsequent reign of Eliza-
beth the same principle was carried out in the Hue and Cry
Act. This was, he thought, sufficient to refute the statement
of the Hon. and Learned Member for Cork, that they were ap-
plying a new law to Ireland which had never been tried in this
country. It was objected by some Hon. Members that the
Bill was intended as a stigma upon certain classes in Ireland,
but he need only refer them, in answer to this objection, to
the statement of his Right Hon. Friend, that it was in no way
directed against any class or party, but really and truly intended
to suppress that dreadful thirst for murder and bloodshed which
unfortunately prevailed to so alarming an extent in the sister
kingdom. This being the object, then, of the measure, those
who urged this objection against it ought rather to join with
the Government in attempting to put down this terrible spirit.
—(Hear, hear.) It would have heen impossible for them
to sit quietly looking on with their arms folded
without taking some steps to put down this thirst
for murder, but nevertheless this measure was not introduced
till atter it had undergone the most careful and attentive con-
sideration.—( Hear, hear.) With every good and kindly feel-
ing for Ireland, then, he did hope most sincerely that it would
have the effect of restoring tranquillity and peace, without
which it was impossible the country could prosper, and at the
same, time prepare the people and soil for those seeds of im-
provement which Government were prepared to scatter
amongst them with a free and bountiful hand.— (Cheers.)
Mr. H. GRATTAN admitted that all outrages of a law-
less and murderous character ought to be put down, not only
in Ireland but wherever they happened to be perpetrated, but
he questioned whether the Government were taking the proper
steps for effecting this propose. The Honourable and Learned
Gentleman who had just sat down was wrong when he said
Government could not sit looking quietly on with their arms
folded during six months, while these outrages were
being perpetrated. They did not stir a step
to suppress them. And what he complained of was,
not so much of their endeavouring to restore peace
and tranquillity in Ireland, as of the delay they had allowed
to take place before making the effort to effect that object.—
( Hear, hear.) Many of the evils complained of he could
trace to the landlords themselves, and the landlord and tenant
system, which had so long disgraced'and convulsed Ireland ;
and Government might depend upon it, an improvement di-
rected that way would produce more peace and tranquillity
than a thousand Coercion Bills,— (Hear, hear.) He denied
that the Irish party had formed a compact with the protec-
tionists ; and trusted, after this denial, they would not lose a
single vote of any Hon. MeMber on their own side of the
House, in resisting what they considered an unjust and tyran-
nical measure.—(Hear, hear.) Would the House believe it
that in one of the parts of the country, that was, in not more
than three baronies, there were, he believed, 174 magistrates,
32 deputy-lieutenants, and 4 of the heads of the Government,
making an army of upwards of 220 men, and, with the assist-
ance of the police, that army was increased to 600 men. A
Noble Lord, whom Le did not then see in his place, had gone
back to the history of Ireland, to show the state of that country
in the year 1737. Now he would not go so far back as
that, he would refer to the year 1807, in which year two
coercive Acts were passed against that country. Those Acts he
remembered well. He believed that Lord Monteagle had said
in his speech in the House of Lords that those Acts were
more stringent than the Eresent measure, but he did not
agree with his Lordship. Cases occurred in the county of Tip-
perary in the year 1808, when those Acts were passed, which
were very similar to those that were now enacted in 1846.
Shepherds were abruptly discharged from their employ, and
the labourine classes combined together for the purpose of pre-
venting the intrusion of labourens from distant places ; and to
destroy the effect of that and similar combinations those coer-
cive measures were passed. He would ask, had the Ministers
followed the advice that had been given by the witnesses at
Lord Devon's Commission for the removal of the evils with
which Ireland was at present afflicted ?—( Hear, hear.) Their
system only tended to produce police spies and informers, and
the lowest characters. Instead of attending to the wants of
the people, they had created an army of 10,090 police.
The Noble Lord Donoughmore was not afraid of doing his
duty to his Irish tenants, and he had not asked for any such
Bill as the present, because he knew it would not effect its aim.
That Noble Lord was a popular character, and he believed that
he had not a shutter to his house. Himself and his family
went about the country without the slightest fear, and they
were never molested by the tenantry. And why was that so ?
Because he did not let his land at eight guineas per acre.
Because he gave something more to the poor fellow that toiled
on his estates.---( Hear, hear.) Let other landlords pursue a
similar conduct. He flung back in the teeth of the utterers
the libel that Ireland was nothing but a land of assassination.—
( Hear, hear.) If he read but a portion of the calendar of crime
that had been committed in this country within the last few
years he should completely astound them. But he would do
no such thing. He would grapple with the Bill and with
the Right Honourable Baronet opposite until the House
decided whose case was the strongest. He would ask the
Right Hon. Baronet this—how many countries were at present
in the deplorable state described by him in introducing this
Bill? It would appear that there weve only five out of thirty-
two. And did the Right Hon. Baronet mention the number
of baronies in those five counties that were in a disturbed
state? Why, there were twelve baronies in Limerick, and yet
it would appear from the reports that only three out of those
were in a state of disturbanee. In the county of Clare, there
were nine baronies and only two disturbed; in the county of
Westmeath there were but three of the baronies is
that condition ; in the county of Cavan one; and
in Meath three, which made a total of fifteen.
And would they feel themselves justified in depriving the
people of Ireland of their liberties because fifteen baronies
out of five counties happened to be in a disturbed state ? If
they did, what inducement would they give to the honest and
industrious to observe the laws of their country? Let them
adopt just measures, and hang these that talked of fear that
the peasantry would not obey the laws. He would ask the
Right Hon. Baronet how many of the gentlemen who had
been referred to in Ireland for ther opinion as to this measure,
had recommended its adoption ? A few of those gentlemen
—namely, Gen. Johnson, Gen. Egerton, Col. Burke, Major
Warburton, Major Wilcox, and others, he was well acquainted
with. These gentlemen, including Mr. Blackburn, Serg. How-
ley, the Clerks of the Peace and others had unanimously state,:
that they were not in favour of this Bill. On the contrary they
had expressed themselves as decidedly opposed to it. And first
of all he would quote the opinion of Mr. Sergeant Howley,
an individual who was beyond all cavil.---( Hear, hear. ) Ser-
geant Howley said, whilst he was in the very county of Tip-
perary, " I do believe that a large amount of the present
violence and outrage is traceable to the low physical condition
of the people."—(Hear, hear.) That was the opinion of
Sergeant Howley, when he was trying a number of unfortu-
nate individuals for the commission of offences brought
about by the harsh conduct of their landlords—
(hear, hear.) He also said that they were deprived
of the necessary amount of employment—that they lived
on a food that was the lowest in the scale of human con-
sumption, even of which they had not sufficient—that they
were ill-clad—they lived in houses that scarcely deserved the
name.—( Hear, hear.) Such being the condition of the large
amount of the population of Ireland, he asked how could it be
expected that that people could be either orderl or tranquil ?
Sergeant Howley had further delivered himself of words, the
seditious character of which had never yet been equalled by
the greatest agitators that had yet appeared on behalf of Ire-
land, not excepting even the Hon. and Learned Member for
Cork, and the Hon. Member for Limerick, whose " pale and
ineffectual fire " had been far outshone by the language of that
learned individual. And it was yet the language that had been
uttered by one of her Majesty's judges, who had said that the
lowest animals would not endure to be starved, and much less
could it be expected that man could suffer to be starved to
death. Major Wilcox, in his reply to the Right Hon. Baro-
net's inqUiries, had said that. " he was of opinion that the pea-
santry of Ireland could never be peaceable whilst they were in
a state of starvation and oppression." He had stated too that
" the present measure would sever all connexion between land-
lord and tenant." Mr. Blackwell had said that recently, in
his own neighbourhood, one landlord had ejected 40
families, another 50, another 20, another 20, another
3, another 60, another 19, another 55, and anothes

31. Tipperary also 86, 96, 95, 76, 26, and 97
several families had been severally ejected. No less than 230
families, including 1,200 individuals, had been turned out, and
those poor creatures were wandering about the country; and
to put the climax to all this, he was sorry to see that two indi-
duals who lived in his own county, Mr. and Mrs. Gerard, had
recently ejected 270 individuals from the lands, to fatten bul..
locks upon it. Would such a state of things be tolerated in
any other country than Ireland ? When the Hight Hon. Barn..
net brought forward this Bill, which had been called for by
moderate men, nobody could doubt that the Noble Lord had
committed a grievous mistake, because, when the Noble

Lord had stated that crime had increased, he must
have been ignorant of the contents of the Blue Book,
that had been placed upon the table of the House immediately
afterwards ; that within the last ten years there had been a de-
crease of no less than 10.000 in the amount of crimes. In
the year 1835 there were 36,300, and in the last year there had
been but 16,000. Now, when the Right Hon. Baronet oppo-
site attempted, on the introduction of this measure, to paint
an Irish picture, unfortunately, all the colours that he
used were dark ; and he thought that the Right Hon.
Baronet might hereafter be called the Salvator Rosa of the
Treasury bench ; nay, he even made use of all the dark
horrors of that artist, without introducing any of his
light colours.—( Hear, and lazghter.) He would now draw
attention to another important point. He saw by the return
made to Government, that in one year no less than 3,538 Bills
had been ignored by the grand juries of Ireland, and 2,089
prosecutions had been withdrawn. Would such a state of
things be permitted in England ? Would they permit 5,638 to
be unjustly charged, arrested, and imprisoned, and then let out
without trial ? And yet lion. Gentlemen stood up, and boast..
fully said that crime in Ireland had increased to such an alarm_
kg extent, as to call for the suspension of the constitution.
Government were misinformed by the police—they maligned
the people of the country, and the result was that such Bills
as these were passed by that House for Ireland. Government
ought not to leave the people of Ireland in the hands of such
persons as these. The lion. Member proceeded to refer to a
number of cases of misconduct of the police-officers and spies
of Ireland. In one instance the police had concealed some
arms in a poor woman's house; they then went to the in-
former, brought him to the spot, and they took
away the arms, and concealed them a second time,
and then had the audacity to claim the rewards
of the Government for the discovery of arms they had twice
concealed:; documents of the Ribb,.n Society had been put in
the pockets of persons, and they were then prosecuted by these
spies and perambulatory police, for the purpose of obtaining the
reward of their diabolical treachery. He hoped Government
did not allow the money, wrung so hardly from the people of
this country, to be expended in this manner. If the laws were
not properly administered let them live in a state of primeval
originalty. Leave them to themselves, and they would soon
send those assassins to the right about.— ( Hear, hear.) Never
was a more unjust charge made against any people than had
been made in the course of the debate, that the Irish people
shielded the assassin from justice. The Hon. Member for
Pomfret, who had belonged to the New England school, had
called this measure a mere police regulation. He did not
agree with his Hion. Friend's New England doctrines—he
preferred the Old England constitution, and he hoped that
the Honourable Member would soon have to leave
Pomfret, in dire disgrace, with his New England theories.
Mr. W. COLLETT considered that the infusion of capital
in Ireland would not remove the disposition to commit outrage,
and prevent crime. He would state a few facts to the House,
and in doing so he would not be accused of egos ism. In 1838,
after having visited the four quarters of the globe, he pro-
ceeded to Ireland, which he found in a very bad state. lie
thought that capital being introduced there might effect some
good, and he therefore chose that part of Ireland as the very
best adapted to prove the experiment—the wilds of Tipperary.
He employed eight hundred men in some mines there, and in-
vested 50,0001. In carrying out his projects, he had no consi-
deration for religion or polities, he employed all equally, and he
chose six gentlemen to superintend the works, three Catholics
and three Protestants ; two of whom had been murdered, and
not on any pretence of harsh usage or difference as connected
with land. The first of them was murdered in a very barbarous
manner, by having a stone thrown on his back, of which he
lingered for some time before he died. There was another, a
Roman Catholic steward, a very bold man, who said that
if they chose to attack him, let them do it in the day,
This steward was shot at and missed. He was shot at again
and struck in the side. The assassin was afterwards appre-
hended, tried, and punished for the offence, but the un-
fortunate steward has since been obliged to be under the pro-
tection of the police. These outrages proved the necessity
for such a Bill at the present. If they could only exterminate
these armed assassins—and the number of them was not very
great—peace and tranquillity would be restored. He believed
that he himself would be shot at for so small a consideration as
a bottle of whiskey.—(Cries of "Ohl oh 1") While this sys-
tem of outrage was going on he thought it high time that life
should be protected, and they were not asking too much power
in trying to pass the Bill. If this Bill were
passed he would guarantee that the system of outrage
would receive a check, and the country would be
restored to a state of tranquillity. The police in Ireland
were a fine, efficient body of men, well organised, and well
adapted, from their local knowledge, for the state of things
which existed there. For his own part, be could say that, as
far as he was concerned, he would have the satisfaction of
having done his duty to his tenants, though he might fail in
producing the results which he desired. fie wished the Bill
to be brought into operation at once, and if it was, a new state
of things would shortly arise, and Tipperary would become
—what it was not at present—a habitable country. The con-
duct of the Government throughout the State trials was such
as to excite his warmest respect, and he sincerely hoped that
the same efficiency would characterise their present and future
measures for the peace and amelioration of that unhappy
country, and that they might be able to say of it, as of the
Thames—
" Though deep yet clear; though gentle, yet not dull;
Strong without rage—without o'eriewing, full."
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD said, that in speaking on
the question before the House, he would confine himself, as
nearly as possible, to the amendments proposed by the Hon.
and Learned Member for Cork. He agreed with the Hon.
Member, that instead of outrage being put down by the Go-
vernment measure, it would but promote crime. He felt that
instead of Ireland receiving anything like justice from this
country, there was not a measure brought forward but such as
operated to the interest of the wealthier classes and to the injury
of the poor. They gave a poor-law to Ireland, hut what was
the relief afforded ? It was matter of complaint that
the relief given by the Irish poor-law was not as
liberal as in this country.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.)
He would now conclude by again repeating his assertion that
he had always opposed those Coercion Bills, even when pro-
posed by the Whigs while in office; and, therefore, he could
not be supposed to be influenced by any interested or party
motives in opposing this Bill. If the House should go into
Committee upon it, he would there also oppose it, and he
trusted he would never see it the law of the land.
Mr. FITZ MAURICE said that, as an Irish Member, he
should say that, in his opinion, many of the crimes committed
in Ireland were owing to the wholesale system of eviction of
tenants, which he should say was a system that was a disgrace
to any civilised country. The lion. Gentleman then entered
into a detail of various outrages that had occurred within his
own knowledge in Ireland. His own brother had been sub-
jected to them. His brother never visited his estate without
receiving threatening letters of the most violent character. On
one occasion ha went down to his property; and on arriving
there he found that one of his tenants was over head and ears
in debt, and had paid no rent. He forgave the man his rent,
and offered him 301. to go into another and a smaller farm,
when the man declared he was very ill used, and that on the
first time he met his landlord he would settle ac-
counts with him, and every body knew what that meant.
If Ireland wished to be glorious let her be glorious in her in-
dustry, and not notorious in her crime. He very much re-
gretted the statement of the Hon. Gentleman opposite, that
English Members were careless about the state of eland.
He did not think it fair or generous fur the Irish Members to
taunt the English people with indifference. He felt bound to
say that one man with a thousand a sear living in Ireland did
more good than another possessing ten thousand a year who re-
sided out of the country. The Hon. Gentleman concluded
by thanking the I-louse for their kind attention to his
statements.
Mr. ROCHE had no doubt whatever that what the Hon.
Gentleman opposite had stated was quite true. He had no
doubt that he was well inclined towards Ireland. In the course
of the present discussion they had not to confine themselves to
the paltry and miserable Coercion Bill—the whole state of the
Irish question was to be canvassed. The condition of the Irish
people was an undoubted stain upon the British pride and
honour.—( Hear.) It laid upon that House to do something
for the Irish nation—that was a result which had been arrived
at after a discussion of six weeks. He believed that no man
now thought that the present condition of Ireland ought to
continue. Every one admitted that Ireland required some
remedy. He must say that he had never listened with so great
a feeling of despondency as he had done to the speech of the
Right lion. Baronet opposite on a previous occasion. He did
not think that the Right Hon. Baronet had made
out a case for the Bill. He thought, however,
that he had made out a strong case for the
national party in Ireland. The year of all others in which
agrarian crime was least, and the people more peaceful and
quiet, was in 1843. That was the year in which the Govern-
ment had military possession of the country, and they (the
repealers) had the hearts of the people. It was the repeal
year, and the effects of their government was manifest in the
increased content which was spread among the people. 'I he
Right Hon. Baronet, in dealing with the question, had not
been candid with the House. He went into the statistics of
crime in 1843, 1844, and 1845, but he had not gone into
1846, and had failed in showing that there had been any ma-
terial progressive increase of crime in those years. The Right
Hon. Baronet had referred to the case of Hogan, who was
shot notwithstanding the vigilance of the police; but he
had not shown how this crime would have been
avoided had the Coercion Bill been in existence.
He had referred to other eases that were equally inopportune
to support the case. In fact he had been endeavouring to delude
the people of England, in regard to this measure. A great deal
had been said about combination and ribandism, but these he
(Mr. Roche) maintained had been introduced from England,
and could easily be met by the existing law. He said, there-
fore, there had been no case made out for coercion, or for this
illegal and unconstitutional measure. He would tell them the
Bill, as it at present stood, never should pass that House. I
they took it into Committee, on them would be the responsi
bility of bringing over the Irish Members to oppose its pro
gress ; and he was sure it never would be carried unless

was preceded by remedial measures. The sense of the people
of England, out of doors, was against it, and all Ireland, as
well as its representatives, had declared against it. 'They
talked of the work
wouldo ask,fthe agitatorswho
madeoflr theelan
Ireland, butgriev-
ances in
answer to that
he
andthehsiem hadan
? England had made these
made the agitators.—( Hear, hear.) grievances, heyliad
made
those grievances
He w
rievanees existed.ud ask, lhe wouldwho cwoenrte ;
i n loe
an agitator,agita toare.d2v(iHilee hatr, ea
govern Ireland, and howeweeerreeietn. T
they to govern
leader
overnit?ef Tthhee
v„
Ijtitinhgt
Hon.
Baronet says, by
same thing; and this was also echoed by the
Wry saysotle h
Lord
t one
the other side (Lord George Bentinck). But
the division list would show who supported coercion, and who
did not; and he would take care that tho people of Ireland
should see it. It was said that a kind of coalition existed be-
tween the Noble Lord opposite (Lord George Bentinck) and
his Hon. Friend who was in confinement—(A laugh)—but he
would tell them there could be no coalition with any one that
would vote for the coercion of Ireland. He (Mr. Roche)
complimented that Noble Lord for sentiments that were anythino.
but coercive on the evening the alleged coalition was suggested'.
Having settled that matter, he would again revert to the ques-
tion of coercion. Now, he asked the Right Hon. Baronet
why he did not introduce with this Bill some measure for re-
lieving the sufferings of Ireland ? Did he listen to the heart-
rending disclosures of the Hon. Member for Cashel? He
thought he did, for he observed that the statements of the Lion.
Member fur Cashel made a great impression upon the Right
Hon. Baronet, and he wished to know if the Right Hon.
Baronet had nothing else but paltry advice to Irish landlords
to remove this dismal, this sad and lamentable state of things ?
nut, he was asked, what could be done for removing the mise-
ries and for producing peace and tranquillity for Ireland ?
Well, he would tell them. They must make Irelar.d happy in
the same way that other countries were made happy, by letting
them be governed by their own people and their
own countrymen. That was the only means which could
restore peace and happiness to his unfortunate and misgoverned
country ; and until these means were resorted to, there would
be moral victories achieved in Ireland.—( Cheers. ) Let them,
however, do justice to that unfortunate country, and their vic-
tory would be more brilliant than any that had been achieved
on the banks of the Sutlej.
Copt. LA YARD said, representing an Irish town, he could
not give a silent vote on the present occasion. He could pre-
dict most confidently that this Bill, to which he intended to
give his decided opposition, would prove a failue. This was
the eighteenth time a coercive Bill bad been resorted to for
Ireland. It had always failed, and this instance, the House
might rely upon it, would prove no exception to the rule. If
Government wished to remove agitation and the cry for repeal
in Ireland, let them do justice to the people and the coun-
try. They had now an excellent opportunity of doing
this, sod improving the condition of the people, by

giving them employment. They had some admirab
railway schemes before them, and if three. and-a-half per cent.
were guaranteed to the proprietors they would certainly be
carried out, and afford ample employment for the people.
Now, it was quite clear these railways would ultimately become
immense
good remunerative undertakings, and, seeing the
good they would do to the country, he thought Government
could not do better than guarantee three-and.a-half per cent.
There was an opportunity now of granting a poor-law to Ire-
land, and he trusted that it would not be allowed to pass by.
Now was the time for the Government vigorously to act. it
poor-law was one of the modes of pacifying Ireland. Let the
Government not let slip the present opportunity of doing
good for Ireland. Look at the protectionists now. Five year°
ago they were offered an eight shilling duty on corn, and they
refused it. Would they not now be glad to get that eight
shilling duty. Let the Government take advantage of that
example. It was absolutely necessary that some steps should
be taken with respect to the tenant rights in Ireland. Let
the Government turn its attention to the cultivation of the
waste lands in Ireland. There were millions of acres in that
country that were not in a state of cultivation.
How could they talk of over population in Ireland
while so much land was out of cultivation ? The
Hon. and Gallant Officer had given a very strong argil'
merit for supporting the Bill, for he said that as the people of
Iceland had even at present very little liberty, this Bill, whick
would deprive them of that liberty, should have his support
He hoped that the Government would, instead of pressing this
measure, bring in some conciliatory measures fur the miserabl
people of Ireland, and withdraw this measure at once.
Major BERESFORD felt it his duty to support the Bill
connected as he was with Ireland and her people, aPhough be
considered it as an inefficient and useless Bill. —(Gres
laughter and cheers from the Opposition benches.) He askee
if the Bill met the present evils of Ireland. The great and
crying crimes of Ireland were not committed in the darkness
of night, but in the open day, in the presence of numerate
people, who laughed at the assassination of Irish landlords,
whom they felt to be obnoxious.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.")
The murderer who walked at noon-day, and having committed
the bloody deed, would not be detected by this Hear,
hoar.) The Bill was one which would bring great irritation
to the minds of the Irish people, because it was not accom-
panied with a remedial measure. He hoped, however, that
alter it had passed, the Government would immediately set
about the passing of the necessary remedial measures to which
the peasants of Ireland were fairly entitled.—( Hear, hear.)
He had no hesitation in saying that this Bill confounded the
innocent with the guilty. The Honourable Member for
Cashel had said that a clergyman of the Church of England
had privately put some gunpowder in a peasant's cottage in
Ireland, and afterwards sent a policeman to search that House.
Now, he happened to be particularly acquainted with the cases
and he could say that the statement was not based on truth.--
that( those Hon hear.) The Honourable M
who sat on the same side of
the House with him (the Ministerial side), would join with
him in voting for the first reading of the Bill.--( Cries of
" Hear, hear," and " Divide.")
Colonel RAWDON opposed the Bill, and proceeded to do'
fend the course of ccnduct pursued by the Irish Members, in
opposing the first reading of the Bill, and hoped that they
would succeed upon a second reading. ( The Hon. Member
proceeded in his remarks, and was interrupted by the cries
of " Divide, divide," from all parts of the House.)
Now much of the Irish character has been misrepresented.
The people were kind and warm. You cannot judge of their
misery. How can you judge of it when you are not able to es-
timate it ? He thought that this Bill was at variance with
the present temper of Ireland. There has been a certain sti'
mulent administered to the people by a newspaper against the
spirit of the Bill. That newspaper had found its way to the
fireside of every cottager in Ireland. He had said that the
framer of the Bill was ignorant of the temper of Ireland—its
provisions proved it, and it would not be acceptable to any aloe'
Would the law irradicate the excited feelings of the Irish...*
would it even soothe them ? He was confident then that it
would not. There was but one opinion of it in Ireland, and
that was not in its favour. He implored them then to record
their votes in favour of the amendment of the Member for
Cork. If they travelled through Ireland—if they went into
the huts and cottages of the peasantry—and if they were aware
of the misery which existed there—many of their dens au
misery, if he might be allowed to use the expression, most 0,
them only ten feet square—the abode of animals—they wool
hesitate to shut them up from sun-set to sun-rise.—( Hear.) „
Colonel SIBTHORI'E said, he would not oppose the Di".
but at the same time he could not support it. The present
Government had shown itself so weak, so vaccinated with Po'
laical cowardice, that he could not repose any trust in them, for
he did believe that they were men who would truckle to all'
thing, provided they by so doing were able to maintain their
own seats. —(Loud laughter.)
Lord INGESTRE rose, amid cries of "Divide, divide.
He denied there was ever anything like coalition between Lord
Bentinck and Mr. S. O'Brien.--(Loud cries of " Divide,
divide." A state of crime and destitution unparalleled in any
s
country prevailed in Ireland. The murderer walked abroa",
in noon day, and no one attempted to arrest him. He escape"
in fact with impunity. It was incumbent, therefore, that the
Government should interfere to put an end to such a disgraceful
state of things. He would conclude by again denying that
there was any thing like coalition referred to between the Hon'
Member for Limerick and the Hon. Member for Lynn.--"
(Loud cries of " Divide, divide.")
Lord GEORGE BEN TINCK moved for the adjournment
of the debate to enable him to have an opportunity of denying
the statement made by—
The SPEAKER interrupted the Noble Lord, and said that
it was not competent for any Member of the House, after he
had spoken on any question, either to propose the adjournme7
of the debate afterwards, or to make any observations a second
time.—(Loud cries of " Divide, divide.")
Mr. P. BORTHWICK, amid loud cries of divide, then
proposed the adjournment of the debate.
Lord G. BENTINCK seconded the motion, and embrace':
the opportunity which his doing so afforded him to deny %Id
charge which had been made, and he hoped the House wetn' ,„
though at that late period of the evening, permit him
„t;
occupy its attention for a few minutes while he did so.
enable him the more effectually to meet the case, he had sent
home for the letters which had passed relative to that state'
ment—(Laughter)—and he hoped they would arrive to enable
him to refute the charge the more effectually.—(Cries ,
"Divide, divide. ") If that correspondence were tea.
to the House, it would at once be shown that the statement Wl'
unfounded in fact—that there were not the slightest grounds for
it whatever. It had been stated by a Cabinet Minister, the
Secretary for Ireland, that the coalition was a fact. He
(Lord G. Bentinck) had not had time to consult his 11".13*
Friends upon the matter, for Hon. Members would bear hit°a
out that it wanted but twenty minutes to five o'clock
when his attention was drawn to the subject. Where then
o
was the coalition which was tried to be made such a handle
of—which was made a point of at a public hustings, by
Cabinet Minister of the Crown ?—(Cries of " Divide.")
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The House the
divided, when there appeared—
For the first reading .... 274
Against it 125 ~,
Majority in favour of first reading
On our return to the gallery, we found
Sir R. PEEL stating that he would take the second reading
of this Bill on Monday, the 25th of May.
Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that, on that occasion, .11
should move for a Select Committee to inquire into agrarift:
offences in Ireland, with a view to provide some means for
their prevention—(as we understood the Hon. and Learnt.
Member, but he spoke in so 1 ow a tone of voice, as to
scarcely audible in the gallery.)
POLLING PLACES (IRELAND) BILL. 0
The adjourned debate upon the first reading of this Bill was
resumed by
Mr. M'CARTHY, who contended that its provisions 141
very necessary. He should not press the matter further, but
leave the Bill in the hands of the House.
Mr. GROGAN opposed the Bill, and declared that no in'
convenience was experienced from the present polling systeal
in Ireland. It worked well, and he for one could see no reason
why it should be altered. It was true, in Ireland, there
was only one polling booth, but it must be remembered that the
poll was riot like it was in this country. It was kept open for
five days. This measure was a partial partisan Bill, and be
hoped the House would throw it out.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said the opposition of the Hon.
Member to this Bill was most extraordinary. It was quite ins'
possible under the present system that all bona ,fide
voters
could record their votes for the want of sufficient acconundationo
and he for one cordially approved of this Bill.
Mr. ROSS said that he knew an instance which occurred in
Belfast, in which 305 of the best men of that town were e%_':
eluded from the polling-booth at an election because th7l
happened to be a few minutes late. He would give his vote'
support of the Bill.—( Cheers. )
Mr. ROEBUCK replied to some observations which ha
fallen from thel Hon. Member for Dublin (Mr. Grogan '
He thought the Bill a necessary one, and he would there
fore

upport it.
Mr. PIGOT said that in the year 1841 he had introduced:
measure similar to the present. The present law relating to
policy in Ireland was in a most defective state. The 11°&:
Member entered into some particulars for the purpose of abort
ing the deficiency in the existing law. The proposition a°st
before the House would not, however, effect much more that 0
the present law. There were many scandalous practical
elections in Ireland against which the measure would not Of;
vide.—(Hear, hear.) If voters presented themselves at the
booths, who it was known would vote in favour of that cod;
date who was the favourite of the poll clerks, the oath
administered to them very rapidly, and every facility Wu;
given to th? reception of their votes ; if, on the contrary, tn
voters were on the opposite side, the oath was administere!
very lazily; and the effect, in oue instance with which he off
acquainted, was that one hundred votes were left unpolled ti
,c,oDnsievqiduee,ndceiviodfe.t,h,; conduct of the poll clerks.--(Cries °
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL considered that the 0/
of the Government was to afford facilities, and to allow Per'
sons to exercise their elective franchise.
Mr. O'CONNELL thought that some alterations prop(l4a
by the Solicitor-General would meet all objections to the 13:"
Lord MORPETH thought that the constituency of Duhltes
and other Irish towns should have the opportunity afford
them of returning the representative of their el- oice.
After a few words from Mr. M'CA/tTIIY,
Mr. GREGORY withdrew his amendment, and the debate
on the Bill was adjourned till Monday the next.
After a few words from Messrs. SPOONER and HAS its, the
Friendly Societies Bill was read a third time.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at a Quarter past Two o'clock.

The General Steam Navigation Company's favtfo•
mail pack( t Caledonia, Captain H. W. Gibbs, arrived at P"; of
burgh on "Monday morning last, after a beautiful passage 47 hours.
with
LETTERS OF OF THE ICINGS OF ENGLAND.— Ed,—,
Notes, by J. 0. lIALmwELL. &c.—lt is a eire;lo
stance not a little remarkable, that while so many ice
containing letters of eminent personages have been g Deo
to the world, no attempt has hitherto been made to 10; of
fore the public, in a collected form, those of the Xill'oad
E; gland, revealing as they do, the thoughts, feelingst'oreSP
habits, and recording the adventures and misadvenf the
the trials and vicissitudes, related by themselves, °,l, 030
Sovereigns who have reigned over this country, utbrorl
history of which these royal reliques also serve
only
a very considerable light. Such precious documentsisity,
be deemed records of extraordinary interest and cl!rAislr
not only by the lover of historic lore, but by every ieto
man, and the present work will doubtless find its V/3).as i&
the library of the gentleman, and the scholar, formli'od.
does, an essential companion to every History of Eng

, B/RT/IY-' ' _--
r g4t.'
On the 30th ult., at Hornscy, the lady of Henry Tr"re"
th°
of a son.
deng'
On the Ist inst., at Westbourne-terrace, Hyde-park-gor
I'Atli
wife of Charles Mare, 11,_q., of a son. the
On the Ist inst., in Charles-street,
..--'
Dahneny, of a daughter.
_________,—
Berkeley-square,

MARRIED.ore'
On the 30th ult., at St. Pancras Charcb, Sir George Duckett,
Clialle:
to Mrs. Saxe, of Gloucester Lodge, Regent's Park.
IfiriMan? t 0 f 0
On the 30th nit., at Trinity Church, Weymouth,
Metcalfe, Esq., Commander, R.N., to Helen E. 1), 11058, re"
_.....,
late William Ross, Esq., of Skeldon, Berbiee.

DIED. of
On the 30th ult., at Eshor, Surrey, 111!! France! Burdett,
the late Sir Francis Burdett, That

London: 1 I 9
..,............. ...........e. .
50.
Printed and Published by 3,11111D0 YOUNG. ~
-f ',rot-
Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, strand, in the jge,
of the savoy, in the cgtnity of Nidale§ox, Saterdto
2, 1846.