The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-18 00:00:00

went, es he had done upon the Maynooth question, provided
they could convince him that this measure would prove
effectual. He did not think a measure so unconstitutional as
the present could be supported by the Members of this Home,
valets they were fully persuaded that it would prove effectual.
o..is did not think it would. It would only be carried after
Mors debate than was perhaps desired, and by
allowing great changes to be introduced into the
measure, and accompanied with measures of a more concilia-
tory character.—( Hear, hear.) The first vote he gave was in
favour of a coercion Bill, he was wrong in so doing.—( Hear,
hear.) He had too much faith in the Government at that
Erne. He did not know so much of Ireland at that time 33
he then did. He did not know bow much liberty was cherished
en this side of the water, and disregarded on the other side.—
(Hear, hear.) He did not know that that Bill was a copy of
h
a series of Bills, of which the Bill of 1764, passed in the Irish
Parliament, was the first—a Bill in which power was given to
magistrates to convict. That Bill was denounced by an emi-,
nent legal authority, Chancellor Clair, who calledi
mon-
strous attempt to establish religion by an Act ofParliament.
(The Hon. Member then proceeded to read some extracts from
" The Correspondence of Edmund Burke," describing the state
of the cnnntry in 1761 ; also from the speech of Mr. Fitzgib-
bon, in 1781. ) The Bills of 1764 and 1787 were no remedies
and the present was not a new Bill—it had been tried before.
It had never succeeded. Was that, then, a proper remedy
for the British Parliament to apply in 1846 ? Were we to say,
with the Hon. Member for the University of Dublin, that re-
bellion and misery were indigenous to the soil of It e-
land ? The Honourable Member for Dorsetshire had said
that Irishmen weredeficient in common sense—that they should
not be tried by the rules which apply to humanity in general—
that they were, in short, " wretches" unable to manage their
estates ! An eminent judge in Irish matters (Mr. Wiggins)
had said, that the Irish were only reckless when labour and
care were found to be useless.—(Hear, hear.) He thought
Irish nature the same as other natures. He did not thinkdso
that any nation could have borne so much so patiently
quietly as they had done.—( Hear, hear.) Take any
autho-
rity you please, the commissioner of the an
vaotherauthority, and you will find from all thar
i(tinsheaemde o
distress
in his workressiifth
that
country is most alarming and severe. Dr.
on " the dnstrial Resources of Ireland," alludes to the
farms
number of small farms in that country. and these small
were let at a great deal higher rent than farms in England
of a similar size. Mr. Wakefield, in 1812, stated that the
landlords exacted a larger amount of rent than in any country
in the world. There was the case of a large farmer, who stated
he never tasted a bit of bread or a bit of butter
since he was born, and that numbers were in the
me state in that country. The landlords, in order to raise
game
rents, perpetually re-value and re-let their estates, and
this has led to the worst system of cultivation possible. There
are no agreements, no leases, and where the land is improved
rents are increased. In cases where bog lands have been re-
elaimed by the industry of their families, their rents have been
more than doubled by their landlords. Now, if these circum-
stances went on, they would have every other agitation in Ire-
land merging into one against rents.—( Hear, hear.) And he
asked them how were they to deal with the evil when it reached
that magnitude ? The landlords were not alone to blame.
They were the victims of a system. Many of them were but the
nominal owners of their estates. Encumbered with all manner of
mortgages and settlements they could not improve them if they
had the will. Land was often let on leases renewable fur ever
on the payment of a small fine, and the proprietors lived by
letting and sub-letting ; but they would find that every removal
from the fee-simple ownership was for the worse. There was
no other source of employment open to the middle classes.
No gentleman would put his son to a profession ; he lived by
sub-letting. If that was the state of the farmer, what was the
elate of the labourer? Why worse, if worse could be—living
in wretched hovels, composed of the absolute refuse of the
earth—thatched with potato stocks, built of sods.—(" No"
from an Hon. Member.) Did the Hon. Gentleman mean to
deny the fact, against the evidence of so many witnesses ?—did
he mean to deny that pigs lived with them, in the same houses
—that they lay on straw, without bed-clothes to cover them ?
Could he deny these facts, vouched as they were by unimpeach-
able evidence ? In Lord Devon's report, it was stated that
they passed one half of the year dragging sorrow at
their heels. And what did Kohl, the German, say ?
That when he saw the Leois of Lithuania he conceived that
there could not be a race of men more miserable ; but now
(in Ireland) he saw a portion of the human race compared to
whom the Egyptian Fellah lived in a state of luxury. But in
the midst of all these miseries we find the same concurrent tes-
timony. As to their resignation, and cheerfulness. and sense
of religion—a woman to whom he spoke, said that those strug-
gles were hard, but that God gave them backs to bear the
hardens. And those were the people whom they were ()ailed
order to teach them respect and love for that law,
which to them was what the Obek was to the Egyp-
tian Fellah, distraioing his cattle, and serving him
with perpetual notices to quit, and coming at last with the
military and police to pull down his miserable hovel, and send
him adrift upon the world. And this Bill was to put an end
to the struggle which existed between the tenant and the
lendlord. It was a very old struggle. Go back to the be-
ginning; of the last century, and you could trace it through
every page of the criminal code. He admitted that the prin.
eipht of intimidation was extending itself in Ireland, and was
passing from land to wages. Tne steward could not do justice
to his master at present. This was a state of things which
could not be endured, and he was perfectly prepared to go with
the Government in voting for any measure which would have
for its object the introduction of a better state of things, pro-
vided they would show him that they intended to reach the
cause of the evil as well as the criminal. But what was the
present remedy proposed ? Coercion. How did they treat
the tithe qneetion ? They found that it cost 12,000. to collect
some ea or On/. of rent. Well, they came down with a pro-
posal that the Church should charge itself with the burden of
Its own maintenance ; and they did this, and did not show any
cowardice in doing it, because they felt that they were law-
makers, and were bound to make law and justice harmonise.
drawing !sold Chatham's distinction. " That law was not right,
but that the principles of right were unalterable ; and when
law did not accord wish them, it was their duty to bring them
into conformity." They were law makers, and he thought that
they were to blame in arraying a long list of crimes before Par-
liament to endeavour to enlist its sympathies against the
criminals, without going back to the primary cause which led
to them. He did not believe that they could remedy them
unless they went to the root of the evil. He believed that no-
thing but a sense of grievous and persevering injustice could
band a whole people against the law ; and it could not be
denied but that a very large portion of the people in Ireland
were banded against it. He believed that the people were a
moral people in comparison to them.—( Hear, hear.) Crimes
against property are peculiar there, and crimes against persons
are almost invariably connected with land. He was quite pre-
pared to adopt strong measures against the crime, but he
wished to see the cause of it removed. They found that in
Ireland no man could live without land; a man who loses
his little holding there, loses everything. Mr. Lilo
recommended certain restrictions on the right of property
in Ireland ; he was an advocate for free trade in land, but he
considered that Ireland should be excepted. Why, he would
ask, was the north of Ireland more quiet than the south ?
Because it possessed the tenant right. He was not an advocate
of that right ; he was aware of its evils. The outgoing tenants
often exacted an enormous sum for their interest, but it had its
good effect also ; it conveyed a feeling of security. He would
force the Irish landlord to deal with his tenants as if he had
not the force of England to fall back upon. Now this Bill
would give increased power to the landlord ; it enabled every
petty magistrate, or his understrapper, to lay held of an ob-
noxious person, and to get rid of him. He believed
that if this Bill were carried, that the clearance '
system would find in it a most valuable support.
He believed that this would be the best cure for absenteeism.
The value of a resident landlord could not be overrated. He
could show that the resident landlord had metamorphosed a
whole district of country. Lord George Hill, in the county
Donegal!, had made a great amelioration in the habits of the
people with whom he resided, and ho had no doubt that if the
same system adopted by him were carried on throughout
Ireland, the same results would follow. The book of Dr.
Kane, which had been so often quoted in Conciliation Hall,
showed " that it was not the want of capital which was the
cause of Ireland's misery. Labour was capital, and intelligence
was capital, and if they were properly exercised the same re-
sults would follow as in England. The fault was not in the
country, but in themselves. They wanted industrial know-
ledge." He (Mr. Ward) agreed with Dr. Kane. Po-
litical questions were certainly of great importance.
The question of the franchise and the Church ought to be
dealt with by every stateman that wished to govern Ireland
well, but political changes could not remove the social evils of
Ireland. They must break up the monopoly of the needy
landowners, they must endeavour to adjust the relation of
landlord and tenant—then and not till then would the people
of Ireland be disposed to peace and quietude, and the necessity
for such Bills as the present he entirely removed. That was
his view of the case, and he saw no other method of dealing
with the question.
Mr. VERNON SMITH could not agree with the Hon.
Gentleman who bad just sat down. That Gentleman said that
other measures of a remedial kind should have preceded this
Bill. He did not agree with that opinion, as he thought that
both the crimes and the criminals should be suppressed before
any thing else was considered. He could not agree either with
the Right Hon. Baronet who introduced the Bill, for it
appeared from his statement that the powers of the
present Bill were to be carried out by the same juries
who, according to the Right Hon. Gentleman, were
unable to carry out the common law. He (Mr.
Smith) expected that some stronger measure would
have been proposed after that statement. He considered this
measure would have the effect of causing irritation rather than
suppressing the outrages which it was directed against. The
manner in which the measure was brought forward by the
Government, as well theos measureitself,he thought ob-
jectionable. He did not agree with the Hon. Gentleman the
Member for Cork, that an adjustment of
with the
t divide
system would be a remedy for the evils of that ,
he think that the Church had anything to do w
i
The crimes entirely arose from the occupation of lanodt.rare
Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Graham) exhibited a dis-
inclination to touch upon this question in consequence of the
excitement it was likely to produce, but to what purpose he
would ask was the landlord and tenant commission issued?
When they talked of land it should be remembered what was
mixed up with that question. No man would pretend to say—
at least no Member of that House, would pretend to say that
the owners of land could carry out their rights, even at the risk
of sacrificing life. The tenant system of Ireland was bad in
the extreme, and something should be done to alter it.—
( Hear, hear.) How differ ent from the tenant system of
this country. In England, when a tenant left his farm, the
incoming tenant paid so much to the other for the improve-
ments. This was the just mode of dealing with the tenant-
farmers. It was monstrous that something should not be of-
fered to alter the state of things in Ireland. It was a country
which had all the resources of prosperity, and why were they
not brought to bear. There was not a book or publication of
any sort but contained something regarding the resources
of that country, A few days ago he had taken up the
Report of the Tidal Harbour Commissioners, and he
did not expect to find anything regarding Ireland, but
he had not read far before he found it stated that

the port and harbour of Cr)rk had been the victims of half
measures.—( Hear, hear.) Notwithstanding the evils and
sufferings of the people of that country, he was of opinion that
rrething should be done to ut down crime, as it at present
existed there. He Would not be assisting the Government in

patting down that state of things if he were to vote against the
first reading of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) He would vote for
the first reading of the measure for the purpose of putting an
end to that crime. He would, hoverer, oppose the Bill in
many of the provisions at a future stage ; and he only now
weed for it because ha thought that crime should be first put
down before the equie of that crime should be redressed.
Mr. M. GORE would vote for the measure of her Majesty's
Government. It wig not to be den ed that there appeared
something unconstitutional in such a proceeding, but on the
other hand it Was ten true ',hat they were called upon to put a
stop to crimes of the deepest dye. He considered the ab-
sence of middle men from Ireland, was a great cause of many of
its evils. He was as anxious as any one to support the supre-
macy of the law in Ireland; but he would ask, how could the
law be expected to be respected, ender the circumstances of
Government such as he had instanced. He would say that too I
long had Ireland been the scene of party politics
and party conflicts, and that until they were
put an end to, peace could not be expected there.
He
next proceeded to read extracts from a work recently
published, on the state of Ireland, in which was depicted a
description of the most harrowing misery in the county of Kit.
dare, and other adjacent counties. He also instanced cases
-where, according to the reports of certaia ;agricultural

cieties, it appeared that a strong desire existed amongst the
tenantry to improve their condition, if they were only en-
couraged by the landlords. He should only speak in favour of
the Irishmen who had been engaged in the late battles of the
Sutlej, in which Irish soldiers had subscribed liberally to the
fund made up for the relief of the wounded soldiers in those
engagements.—( Hear, hear.) Under all the circumstances
he did hope yet to see Ireland made the inde-
pendent nation she deserved to be.---( Hear, hear. )
They ought to treat the poor man with kindness. They would
find the hearts of the people to expand, and there would be no
difficulty in governing them? Still, he supported the principle
of the present Bill, as he was anxious to maintain the su-
' premaey of the law. But, at the same time, he would support
any measures that might be devised, calculated to relieve the
distresses of the people.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that whatever dispute might
exist about the necessity of the Bill, it could not be denied that
the Bill would suspend the constitution, in one part of the
empire at least. He was opposed to the first reading of the
Bill, and therefore, that he might not be misrepresented, he
would give a few reasons why h
the
present Bill, they should,
ls
in tbe fie didrsto' In proposing
place,s prove
exclusive
el
• tence of the crimes alleged ; second, that
third,
at tthheatortdhienaßriyulawwass
were not sufficient to meet them , and,
the
existed,stateo fhethdienpglserceodmtphleaiirned
cthhewyewreerseo
olfristilitois,eeecprleim
cWalicthularteegdartdo tpouttheancaeLedsttohat
aiten to the true character crimes which
exist-
ence and extent,
especially
ofso thee
limited to a few districts, though they proved a great demo-
ralization to exist, and evidenced a state of things such as he
deplored as much as any Member in that House. They were
such, that he thought might have been met by the
ordinaryhw
oceovuerrs; of the law. The Government might have ap-
pointed a Special Commission to sit upon such crimes in the dis-
turbed districts. Such a course had been attended with the best
effects elsewl.ere. Better would it hare been to appoint such
a Commission, and to allow it to sit permanently, if necessary,
than to pass a Bill like the present. If the Right Honourable
Baronet thought the Bill was calculated to suppress crime, he
was justified in pressing it forward night after night; but that
would not be the case he (Sir William Somerville) was fully
convinced.--( Hear, he..r.) The commission of the crime so
much complained of—the common crime of assassination—
would not be put a stop to by any regulation for keeping parties
in their houses from sunset to sunrise. Those bent on such
crimes would still find means to commit the crimes. He could
not consent, from such slender expectancy of success, to arm
the Lord Lieutenant with such extraordinary powers. The
watching and surveillance would be most vexatious and ex-
pensive, and it was to be saddled on the poorer classes. The
Government might advance the expenses out of the Consoli-
dated Fund, but they would never get it back again.—( Hear,
hear.) The people would be neither able nor willing to pay
it; and if soldiers or police were employed to enforce the pay-
ment, it would tend to make those forces still more unpopular
than now, and keep alive bad feeling and irritation. —( Hear.)
They would disgust all their police—all their officers, and for
nothing. Well, what would come then ? Harraasing and
vexatious questions, the final effect of which would be the
further disgusting of their Agents, without having effected a
single thing. Having only harrassed the innocent and taken up
the men who were only out at night, and made them prove their
innocence—their innocence of what? And could they wonder
that the population was bandied together to resist those laws.
What had been the conduct of Government on another ee.ca-
sion ? How did they deal with the Rebecca riots ? Did they
then suspend the Constitution. In Caermarthen, workhouses
were attacked, and peaceable people were obliged to fly the
country ; the people were armed and drilled at night. But
they made no such law. What did they do? They issued a
Commission to inquire, and when they had found oat what
grievances the people complained of, they remedied them and
the riots ceased. the effect of any legislation they had adopted
had been the immediate removal of ascertained grievances, by
means of the most efficient measures in their power. He con-
sidered that the conduct of the Government in this particular
was wrong. They ought not to have lost a moment in endea-
vouring to carry into effect some of the recommen-
dations of their Commissioners. The proposal would
he a good one, if it was to one point only,
namely to redress the grievances of the Irish farmer ; but the
principal grievances they had to deal with in Ireland were
masses of horror and destitution, not amongst the farmers, but
amongst the labouring classes. He would take this opportunity
of saying that he did hope, and hoped sincerely, that the mea-
sures would be framed to regulate a system of landlord and
tenant in Ireland; and that the Government would not be led
away from the wants of the labouring and the working classes.
These wants were the first great grievances in that country,
and were the cause of the agitation. The people of Ireland
were surrounded with grievances, and there was not a people
on the face of the earth who suffered the same amount of
misery, and endured it with the same amount of patience
is the people of Ireland. They were steeped in misery,
wretehedness, and distress, and they attributed those evils to
the effect of the laws and the institution under which they lived.
He believed that the people of Ireland were riot entirely averse
to the exercise of the law—on the contrary, they would be
most anxious to avail themselves of it; and as a proof of that,
he appealed to the stern manlier in which these unfortunate
people obeyed the laws which they themselves framed. He
wished the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down could be
convinced how necessary was some alteration of the law in
Ireland. When he sat on the other side of the House, he had
often warned them of the state things would come to if they
proceeded as they then did. Ireland was made the scene of
party warfare ; every Irish question was made a question, not
as to the merit it bad with reference to the wants of Ireland,
but a question with regard to the existence of one party and
another. The question of the Church had been treated
in a similar way. What was the case with regard to
the Municipal question? When her Majesty in that
House desired that the municipal rights of Ireland
.hould be placed on an equal footing with those of England,
the Right Hon. Gentleman had acquiesced, but he had since
said that the municipal rights of Ireland should not be placed
as those of England. Let them look at the conduct of Go-
vernment with regard to the Irish registration. The Govern-
ment would not wait a week with this measure, as perjury and
falsehood were said to be so rife in that country. They now
allowed perjury to continue in the manner which they did
formerly, and yet there was no registration Bill. Did they
think that that sort of thing made no impression in Ire-
land ? Did they think that this sort of political
action could be perpetrated, and make no impression
on the people ? For, if they did, :hey were mistaken.
He would beg for one moment to consider the consequences of
this Bill. Let them do all that they could, still such was the
state of that country, they could not relieve it without some
radical measure. He begged pardon of the House for the length
of the time that he had detained them—(Cheers)—but he
could not conscientiously fulfil his duty without stating these
opinions, and he should feel obliged to oppose this Bill in all its
stages.
Mr. J. COLLETT wag obliged to differ from the Hon.
Baronet who had just preceded him, and it was to a certain ex-
, tent. In doing so he was assured that this most atrocious Go-
vernment Bill would only end in disappointment and regret.
In doing so he was only doing his duty, for so long as the
Union Bill existed, he could only join his Hon. Friend in be-
lieving that no relief could be afforded to the Irish people con-
sistent with law, equity, and justice. He bad hitherto opposed
any repeal of the Union, but he was now led to believe that it
was only in giving a domestic Legislature, that any relief to the
miseries of It eland could be accomplished.—( Cheers.)
Mr. J. O'CONNELL would wish to move the adjournment
of the debate, but was met by loud cries for a continuance of the
debate, and obeying the impulse, he was bound to say that this
was the most outrageous, injurious, and insulting Bill by
which Ireland had been threatened.--(Laughter from the Minis-
terial benches.) During this debate they had had a fair sample
of the manner in which the Irish people were to be treated, and
he conceived that no better example could have been afforded
of the way in which Ireland was to be treated. It had been
shown that the attendance of the Irish Members was a mere
nullity, and it was an assurance that the Irish people had lost
all confidence in this Parliament. It was indeed degrading to
the Irish Members to attend there, and the only relief was to
be obtained from the establishment of a domestic Legislature.
He had seen the commonest matter, the treatment of a common
parish matter, bring up a debate of a warmer character than
this, while, when an Irish question arose it had not provoked
even the respect of a reply. He would, therefore, call upon
the Irish Members to second him in the endeavour to obtain a
domestic Parliament, for it was evident that it was only in an
Irish Parliament that any hope of redress was to he sought.--
( Cheers.) Such being the case, he anticipated but little good
from the present discussions, and with the impression that such
alone was likely to prove to be advantageous to the country, he
should move ler the adjournment of the present debate.
Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN considered that the course taken
by his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny perfectly justi-
fiable. During the three nights of the debate upon this ques-
tion only two Gentlemen connected with the Government had
thought the arguments of those who had spoken against the
measure worthy of reply. ( Hear, hear,) This Bill had been
opposed by every representative of the districts of Ireland
sought to be outlawed, and several of the representatives of
England had also entered their protests against it, and yet the
Government persisted in pressing the measure forward.—
( Hear, hear.) In common courtesy to the Irish representa-
tives, the Members of the Government and those who sup-
ported them ought to have replied to their arguments. How-
ever, it only furnished one more argument to the words of his
Hun. Friend the Alenaber for Kilkenny to the people of Ire-
land for the repeal of the Legislative Union.—( Hear, hear. )
Sir R. PEEL said he must leave it to the House to judge
how far the accusation made by the Honourable Gentleman
who had moved the adjournment was just or not.
—( Cheers.) He knew of no debate in that
House in which there was more respectful attention
paid by Hon„llembers than had been paid to the
. _ . _

arguments advanced by the Irish Members.—( Hear, hear.)
The debate had now only been on four hours, for the greater
portion of the evening had been occupied in a discussion upon
the scarcity at present prevailing in Ireland, and during that
discussion three Cabinet Ministers, viz., his Right Hon.
Friends the Secretary of State for the Home Department,
and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and himself, had risen
for the purpose of replying to the arguments of the Irish
Members. He believed, too, that ever Cabinet Minister
was
(with the exception of one,Y
who prevented by indis-
position) was present in council when the subject of the
her 'Majesty's
present distress in Ireland was brought bef
Government. He therefore left it to the 1-lOiret
her Majesty's Government had treated th:*lrlsrAlitte
with any want of courtesy or any want of sympathy
for the wants of the Irish people.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.")
He left it to the House to say whether the Govern
merit had treated the Irish representatives with -dis-
respect, when in the course of four hours two Members of the
Government had risen for the purpose of meeting the ari,n-
dHebeawteotuhldatahhsadkadHtae
bmeert:tswwhehtiheherththeeyyhardecoadllvecantzdan?y
beenn pA LT ne
in that House, in which greater attention
to the Speakers, or whether they had ever heard finer or
paid r wi
generous sentiments than those which had been expressedobrye
Hon. Members who supported the measure?—(Hear, hear. )
Was it then just to say that during the course of that debate
they treated the Irish people or their representatives
with the slightest disrespect. The English Members
had listened with the deepeet interest to the social condi-
tion of Ireland, and whatever might be their
political differences, he ventured to say that they all enter-
tained most sincere wishes to have the misfortunes of Ireland
removed. He left it, therefore, to the Hon. Gentleman to say
whether he would still persist in his motion for an adjournment.
Mr JOHN O'CONNELL said that he had not charged
the Members of the Government with want of courtesy to-
wards the Irish Members. What he did complain of was,
that those Hoe. Members who generally supported the Go-
vernment had not thought it worth their while to say anything
in reply to the arguments of his Hon. Friends the representa-
tives of Ireland, and they appeared anxious only to urge for-
ward the present coercion.
Mr. ELLICE could not help expressing his hope and
prayer to the Hon. Gentlemen on that side of the House, who
represented the interest of Ireland, to reflect a little upon the
injury inflicted upon the whole country if they persisted in the
present course, inasmuch as it would impede the progress of
that measure which was of vital importance to the people of
the United Kingdom.—( Hear, hear.) In making that appeal
to Hon. Gentlemen, he hoped that he might not be considered
the wants
had
sat atnhtisrtyanydeanrse,ceascsidtiehseodfidlrenlaontdt.hinHethere
d
Housestaottirneatthalitght
ly t
f
was any one occasion during that period upon which Irish inte-
rests came into discussion, when he failed to support what
was called a liberal policy
towards that country. He, as well as
'
many Hon. Gentlemen on that side of the House, who repre-
sented large English constituencies, had united their best en.
deavours to promote the best interests of Ireland, and he
hoped, that when he now entreated the Irish Mend)ers to per-

mit the first reading of this Bill, he would not be acting incon:
consistently.—( Hear, hear. )
Mr. D. BRONV N said, that he could not see how the
Irish Members could be blamed, for the performance of their
duties to the Irish people, for opposing this measure. They
were most anxious to see the Corn Bill progress as rapidly as
possible, but he could not conceive that for the purpose of
faciliting the progress of that measure, they should be called
upon to forsake their duties to the Irish people. When the
people of Ireland read the report of this debate, they would
come to the conclusion, that Ministers had not deemed it
worth their while to enter as fully as became them,
into the present condition of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.)
He thought the Irish Members had introduced much matter,
indeed, much valuable matter in that debate, and it was noto-
rious that her Majesty's Government had not answered it.—
, (Hear, hear.) There was not a single newspaper in Ireland
but had said that her Majesty's Government had not answered
one of the arguments advanced by the Irish Members on this
question. The Right Hon. Baronet told them that he had
obliged them by introducing this measure before Easter. He
(Mr. D Brown) thanked him for such an obligation, but
what was it ? They have obliged them with the Coercion Bill.
He thanked him for nothing.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.)
The Right Hon. Baronet told them that they ought to be
obliged to them for giving them this Bill.
Sir R. PEEL—I never said any such thing.
Mr. DILLON BROWN—The Right Hon. Baronet had
said it, if not in words in effect; and surely if it was an obliga-
tion conferred upon Ireland, it was not too much for him to
thank the Right Hon. Gentleman for so much kindness and
generosity. He was, however, of a different opinion, and he
would, therefore, move the adjournment of the House.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
For the adjournment ... 2O

Against it

Majority. ......... 57
On our return to the gallery—
Mr. DILLON BROWN said he would new move the ad•
journment of the House.

Mr. ROCHE said that he would second the motion.
He considered it right that this question should not be hurried
through the House.
Mr. CALEB POWELL was of opinion that the debate
should not be disposed of that night. It was too bad of her
Majesty's Ministers to put an end to the debate by bringing for-
ward their majority.
The SPEAKER—The Hon. Member had not stated upon
what he now addressed the House.

Mr. CALEB POWELL said he was speaking to the mo-
tion for the adjournment of the House, which was moved by
the Hon. Member, who had preceded him. He really thought
it too bad that the Government should strangle the opinions
of the Irish Members by a division ; and for that reason he
would support the motion of his Hon. Friend.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought the
course about to be pursued by Hon. Members at the other side
of the House would cause much difficulty. That was a course
that would greatly retard most important measures for the
benefit of Ireland. He felt confident that no one could charge
him with not having listened with great attention to the argu-
ments advanced by Hon. Members differing on this question of
her Majesty's Ministers.
Mr. FITZGERALD supported the adjournment. He did
not think that the Irish Members were under any obligation to
the Right Honourable Baronet for the short holidays he had
given them. He had also to observe that during the debates
on this question the benches on the other side were but very
thinly occupied.
Sir R. PEFL hoped the Hon. Gentleman, who had just
sat down, would not be angry if he did not reply to the speech
he had just made.—(Laughter.) He thought that more
tolerance and good feeling should be exhibited towards one
another. For his own part he could say that had he consi-
dered the debate would have come to a close on that night, he
would have thought it due to the House and due to the subject,
to have spoken on the question. After what had taken place,
however, he hoped the House would consent to the proposal
he would now make that the debate be adjourned to Monday
next.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. D. BROWN felt deeply gratified at what had fallen
from the Right Hon. Baronet, and expressed the misappre-
hension
which he entertained as to the intentions of the Go-
vernment with respect to this Bill.

Air. J. O'CONisIELL withdrew the remarks he had made,
in reference to what he supposed to be the designs of the
Government.

The debate was then adjourned till Monday next.
RAILWAY DEPOSITS BILL.
Sir G. CLERK brought up the report on the Railway De.
posits Bill.—Ordered to lie on the table.
COMMONS INCLOSURE BILL.

On the motion of Sir J. GRAHAM, this Bill was read a
second time.

The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'clock.

LAW 11'TE LLIGEN CE,

ROLL'S COURT, April 17.
Lord Langdale sat to-day at ten o'clock.
RAVEN V. TATI.OI..

The cross-petition in this case, which was part heard, was
resumed to-day.

Messrs. Turner and Harding replied on the part of the
petitioners.
Lord LANs DALE said this case had occupied a consider.
able portion of time at various Periods, and yet
he could not make any adjudication on the case.
He sould only say what should be done with reference
to the costs. He did not know whether any snit
would be instituted in this cause, and he was extremely de-
sirous of not expressing any opinion on the cause, which
might become the subject of litigation. He certainly had
expressed his dissent from some of the arguments which had
been used. That opinion, however, would not be of any im-
portance in future proceedings. The case appeared to be
simply this :—There was a creditor, who admini.tered to
an estate, which it was considered desirable to
sell, and a portion of the money to be given
to Mr. and Mrs. Ashwell for their lives, and the residue for
their children's use. A petition had been brought forward in
the cause, which, however, did not comprise all that was ne-
cessary, and another petition was presented by Mr. Ashwell,
complaining of gross misconduct with respect to the trustees.
It did, however, appear, from sill the circumstances set
forth, that Mr. Ashwell had cause to complain. Having re-
gard to the cross-petition, he could not give that relief which
was sought. Under all the circumstances, he could not do
better than order that there should be no costs on either side.
ISLE OF ELY, WISBEACH, AND LINCOLN JUNCTION RAILWAY.