The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-15 00:00:00

THE

Friend to reconsider that portion of the Bill. It was,
however, moat unfair to call the Bill a gagging Bill, or
coercion Bill, or a Bill or pains and penalties, or to
throw anything like aspersions upon her Masjesty's
Government. The measure was one of a mitigatory
character in all its phases, except in that portion which
did not harmonize with the constitutional character and
institutions of the country.
Mr. MUNTZ was of opinion that a large portion of
the people of this country considered this to be nothing
more nor less than a gagging Bill. After the differ-
ences of opinion which prevailed among members of the
legal profession as to the effect of this measure, it was
hardly to be supposed that simple-minded laymen like
himself and other Hon. Members should be able to un-
derstand its effects. A great deal had been said about
Mr. Fox and his opinions. The people of this country
were of the opinion that the Foxites had forgotten all
the principles and opinions of Mr. Fox. Now what
had this Government done for the country? Their
first measure was an Irish coercion Bill, their second
the appointment of a one-sided Committee to inquire
into the distress of the country, and their third and last
was the present gagging Bill. He was most decidedly
in favour of assimilating the law of treason between the
two countries, but he warned the Government that
if they passed the Bill in its present shape,
they would not long continue to hold the
reins of Government. If this Bill had been in force
from the year 1832 and up to the present time, he should
have been, with the very best intentions, transported as
a common felon. He certainly never would give his
support to any clause which would give power to a Go-
vernment to transport any person for speaking his mind
openly and honestly, upon the evidence of persons who
could easily be bribed, and whose testimony might be
i
bought or purchased, if they would only pay them well
enough. There was great distress in the country, and
it was his most decided opinion that where there were
persons able and willing to work, and
were
tof the notable to
obtain it, it was the fault of the Government
ocountry, e and
causeif ot hf e t present t
rGe
eoev, etrbnen iseonoto
ecro ut
bl de
ynroet t
idr di-
cover
from the position they occupied the better it would be

tor themselves and the country.
Mr. H. GRAT LAN did not believe that if the present
Bill were passed it would have the effect of giving any
greater security to the Crown and Government than was
now afforded by the existing laws. He was sure that
this measure would fail, but if it did not, he was cer-
tain it would have the effect of revolutionizing Ireland
against England. The Irish were not, he was happy to
say, traitors or rebels, but they were agitators for the
purpose of improving their condition.—(Hear, hear.)
What was that condition ? why, starvation and misery..
He believed the law, as it at present existed, was quite.
strong enough to secure peace and good order, and he
could not see any necessity for so stringent a measure
as the present Bill. He thought that the Irish people
had great cause to complain of the way in which they,
had been treated; everything that had been done b)
the Government was done after an English fashion:
Englishmen had been preferred for every appointment;
in Ireland, and Irishmen overlooked.—(Hear, hear 4
Such being the case it was useless to attempt to unite Eng-.
-lishmen and Irishmen as long as they were severed by the.
law and the constitution.—(Hear, bear.) He recollected
ownel
Marquisl
wuhpi upon
foolcvn
ceae
sl oli
eocscnlae
yhi.oenwuhshei,andvsingtan i nterview
memorableo
fwwlirtoehridastnh—de,
Lord-Lieutenanthes
e " The system in Ireland must be changed, or the time
will come when Ireland must be governed either by the
military or the mob."—(Hear.) He trusted the time
was far distant when such an event would take place.
Mr. MOWATT wished to know from the Attorney-
General whether it was the intention of the Government
to retain the 36th of George 111., so far as related to
that part of it relating to the compassing the life of the
Sovereign, which required the evidence of an overt act ;
and whether they intended also to retain that part of the
57th of George 111. which made it high treason to
imagine or compass the death of the Sovereign which did
not require the proof of an overt act ?
The ATTORNEY GENERAL said it was proposed
by the Act to mitigate the punishment of high treason,
and to preserve the enactment that had been referred to.
There was no intention by the Act to jeopardise the

liberty of the subject.
Mr. WAKLEY thought this Bill was a most atrocious
libel upon the people of England He could not see
how the Government could, after the people had acted
as they had done within the last few days, endeavour
to shorten their liberties by the Bill. He warned the
Government from trusting the support they got on the
Measure from the other side of the House.—(Hear.)
They might say what they pleased, but if ever there was
a gagging Bill, this was one. Out of doors the middle
classes were astonished at the acts of what was called
a Liberal Government. The Government were adopt-
ing harsher measures than ever were adopted in the worst
of times. If these things were persisted in, it would be
the Government that was undermining the constitution
of the country, and not those who were asking for
reform. It was proposed by this Bill to punish the
people of England and Scotland for the sufferings
of Ireland.—(Hear.) If a Tory Government were to
adopt the course of the present Ministers it would not be
tolerated for a moment by the people, and it was only
tolerated now because the present Government had
come into power under false colours. He trusted that
Honourable Members would not allow the objection-
able words in this clause to be continued in it, for
although they might be in a minority on that point,
there was a course warranted by the forms of the
House which would enable them to compel Members to
allow the words to be expunged.—(Hear, hear.) He
hoped the Government, ere it was too late, would con-
sent to the erasure of the objectionable words in the
clause; if they did not, he would offer every opposition
in his power to the Bill, let that opposition be designated
however it might.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. AGLIONBY appealed to the Government
whether, after the discussion that had taken place and
the opinions that had been expressed against them, they
would still persevere in retaining these words in the

The House then divided, when there appeared—
For going into Committeee
Against it
Majority for going into Committee —254
The House then went int* Committee.
Mr. HUME wished to know whether Government
had any objection to adjourn for an hour.—(No, no.)
Sir G. GREY said, the Hon. Member for Nottingham
having given up his motion, he proposed that the House
should sit on till they got through this Bill.—(Cheers.)
On the question that " open and advised speaking"
stand part of the Bill,
Mr. MOWATT rose to oppose it. He said he had
no sympathy with the fools and madmen who spouted
sedition either in Dublin or at the so-called National
Convention, but he did not think that their insane
ravings were any justification for the passing of such a
clause as this.—(Hear, hear.) He admitted, with the
Noble Lord who introduced this Bill, that they lived in
extraordinary times, but he could see nothing in them
to justify this retrograde policy.--(Hear, hear.) In
1792, ' when the French Revolution had had the
effect of almost overturning the institutions of the
country, and when the life of the Sovereign was openly
threatened, Mr. Pitt introduced a similar clause, but
Parliament even then refused to pass it.—(Hear, hear.)
Wny, then, should they at this advanced period ce
enlightenment attempt to inflict upon the public such a
measure? The law as it at present stood was amply
sufficient to meet all cases, and he for one never would
consent to the creation of this new offence.—(Hear.)
He thought the Government was perfectly justified in
pressing this Bill in order to put a stop to the seditious
proceedings of certain persons in Ireland. He objected
to the clause before the House, because it merely had
reference to the deposition of the title of the Queen, and
not, to the regal state and dignity of the Crown. Why,
after this Act, it a man, at a public meeting or at his
own dinner-table, stated that he thought the time had
arrived when the union with the sister country should
be put an end to, and that consequently the
Queen should no longer reign over it, he would
render himself liable to punishment for felony.
The Government might depend upon it that so soon as
the reaction of public opinion set in upon this question,
the) would most grievously repent their indecent hurry
in Pressing forward this measure. The two main consti
violateth
tau:a the nts of the British Constitution were freedom of speech
far,e2e dfoumn d
at' e theprinciples press,
would
t o
show to the Ho • use
.the dangerous effect which this
13111 would have in
of the people in fexetie; the sympathies of one portion
resseadviso' favour
of
those who would be most
grievously oppressed
hoped that the Government would not press forward the
The Marquis of GRANBY
to be a wide distinction kept thought that there ought
should sit down and advisedlytlp between the person who
person who in the excitemer.owf rite sedition, and the
make utie of expressioes tendine• to Public speaking might
It was also to be borne in mindthe came result.
%
vast power which eloquence had over the'h:tumwas the
He thought for the reasons he had stated thatan mind.
necessary that the words " open and advised speaki it
was
should remain part of the clause. While he
et- ng"
stated that
he regretted that Ministers should not hay •
econtinuedtheir
confidence in the loyalty of the people, instead of rely-
ing
it on their forbearance in bringing forward the pre-
sent measure.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. CLAY agreed in the general provisions of the Bill
because he thought a measure like it was required for the
and safetycf the country; but he never could con-
sentpence
of the words in the third clause of
open to the retaining
speaking." He did not think it • f
open and advised
• h felony two offences that wise
weretotally
to brand wit
different, that of writing and speaking. He could
not believe that it was wise
orjudicious in them to leer©
a hole in the law for a courtof law to fill up, and he
ectionable words in the
therefore thought these ojV
Clause ought to
In his opinion,
be struck out.
impossible for
be utterly
however, it would
a court of law or a jury to decide whether words
premeditated, and every
spoken had previously been a clause
friend of humanity was called upon to oppose injustice.
doubt and
which was calculated to lead to much
iie hoped Government would not content themselves
R with the precautionar power proposed to be given . _
them
by this clause, but, for God's sake, that they would
Werewhichncalculated to remove the discontent which prevailed i
amongst the working 'this country.—(Hear.) 1
Mx. elevArT claws of
necessity for ref really
t i did not think there was any
should thereforep,al,n." the objectionable words, and he
amendment for th'etit of justice to the people, support the )
gest that the etauserexpulsion.—alear.) He would sug-.
of the words ~
putilischould be amended by the insertion
not be prosecuted foraPe4keing and that a man should
uttered, unless he had r- sentiments he might have
He objected to the punishmentrather see imprisonment in
Government to expunge tiseeise* ment. tie recommended
and advised." By doing _o3eetionable words " open
a they would do an act