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

SU T, LONDON, TUESDAY ;EVENIIVG, JUNE 16, -1,44,-

Great Western Comprmy,.in order to compete with him. had
only to rely ra their passergcr trr.filc. Such a competition
could not be borne; and if the contract was not finally signed,
he called upon the Government not to allow such a monopoly
in opposition to the Great Western.
'die CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the
House must bear in mind, that in the year 1538 the contract
was offered for the purpose of establishing a communication
between this country and North America. That communica-
tion was tendered by many, and the Messrs. Cunard vi ere the
parties who took the etntract. In that contract so made in
1838, provision was made for a weekly com,nunicat ion between
Great Britain and North Arnerica. In the first instance, the
communication was to have been made fortnightly ; and when
it was found that that communication answered, it was then
ordered to be made weekly. The Government thought it their
duty to enter into the contract with those persona who had in
the first instance been engaged by them, and therefore they
had given the contract to Messrs. Cunard, and the papers re-
lative to that sobj,ct had been just moved for.
Mr. MILNER GIBSON wished to know whether those
papers would be a copy of the advertisement and the contract
itself ?

The CHANCELLOR ur the EXCHEQUER vim umler-
stood to :miser in the affirmative.

After a fe..y words from Lord J. RUSSELL, which did not
reach the gallery,

AB'. i BILL.

Mr. M. O'CONNELL said that was anxious to maks
a statement to the liousa tr,%11 reference to what had tillers
from the Noble Cord oprosite (Lord Bernard). He stas
anxious that he should appear to tat a any charge without
foundation,: but it it app.-ared th .t tie :Coble Lord could
prove a contradiction to his statement he would withdraw the
charge he ma Is. He bad stated, that when the
Aries Bill was parsed, the powers given to the
magistrates by that Act, for the purpose of de-
priving of the right to keep arms all riotous persons
were not exerted with reference to those persons con-
cerned in disturbances, but to persons of political persuasion
called repealers. Those powers were given to the magis-
trates for the purpose of suppressing disturbances, but that he
thought that they had been used to the detriment of the coun-
try. The Noble Lord had contradicted that statement, and he
(Mr. J. M. O'Connell) now asked him if he meant to say
that in that statement he had said anything contrary to or be-
yond the facts ? If he had done so, he should be quite ready
to move for all those papers which would throw light upon the
subject, in order that any mis-statement might be corrected.
Lord BERNARD said that he had denied the statement
made by the Hon. Member, and in order to make the matter
clear he would state the facts of the case. In the county of
Cork the number of persons applying for permission to keep
arms was 700, and out of that number those who were refused
amounted only to seven, and out of that number again
only four were repealers. The proceedings adopted on that
occasion were very far from any party feeling, although those
who were rejected were repeal wardens. Out of the seven who
were rejected, three were known as had characters. The
magistrates had acted on that occasion und-r no political motive,
but with the view of preserving the peace of the country. There
had been a memorial addressed to the magistrates of that dis-
trict, stating that many had been obliged to I save their homes
at night, and remained in the fields, in consequence of the ap-
prehensions they were under. He slid not mean to deny that,
at the meeting alluded to by the Hon. Member, there were very
injudicious expressions made use of by some individuals, but he
did say that the majority of the magistrates attended to their
duty with strict impartiality.
Mr. M. GIBSON asked the Right Hon. Baronet at the
head of the Government if the Government would defer the

signing of the contract with Messrs. Cunard until the papers
which had been moved for could be produced.
Sir R. PEEL, as we ul:derstood, said the Government
would accede to the request of the Hon. Member.
PROTECTION TO LIFE (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition containing 259,000
signatures. He stated that it came from the principal manu-
facturers of Englwiel against the Coercion Bill.—(The Hon.
Member then left the House immediately. )
Lord WORSLEY said that he had some observations to
offer to the House upon this Coercion Bill. It was true that
the Bill contained temporary measures, but still he thought it
would be found, whether temporarily or permanently em-
ployed, to be equally destructive in its influence. When mea-
sures of this kind had been before tried in Ireland, they had
always produced more evil than good, and had fallen as much,
if not more, upon the innocent than the guilty. Did the Go-
vernment think that the passing of this Bill, with its temporary
provision, would remedy those great and serious grievances of
which the Irish people so justly complained. It would not
even repress the evils which were the effect of
those grievances, far less would it remove the cause.

He believed that if, instead of introducing these coercion
measures, they would remedy some of the evils which at pre-
sent prevailed in Ireland, they would find that the legislation
would be attended with beneficial results.—( Hear, hear.) If
the Government of Ireland had the confidence of the people,
there wou'd be no necessity for such Acts as these, and let him
ask whether the Government did now, or had for some years
passed, possessed that confidence ? No ; they certainly had
not, and until the Government patronage was bestowed with
an impartial hand, and the Government themselves evinced
some disposition to improve the civil and religious condition of
the people, they never would. Why hew could the present
Government hope to obtain the confidence of the people, when
they had all along opposed all reforms in the Irish Church ?
Some few years ago, while the present Government was the
opposition, he remembered Lord Stanley proposed to improve
the municipal law of the country, but although the Govern-
ment had been in Oise now nearly five years, they had never
yet attempted to bring forward such a measure. Look again
at the conduct of the Government in later times. Look how
they acted with regard to the Arms' Act. and to the manner
in which they dismissed magistrate's for expressing their poli-
tical opinions. See how they allowed the monster meetings
to go on, in fact silently sanctioning them before they issued
their proclamation, and bear in mind the spirit with which they
followed up the State prosecutions, and then let the
House tell him how a Government who punished such a policy
as this could expect to possess the confidence of the people.—
( hear.) They went before their party with regard to
some measures ; nay, they outstripped those who opposed them
in one course of policy, anti yet they could not act with
liberality towards Ireland. They had come forward with a
liberal Corn Biel, but they refused to try the force of liberality
in Ireland. His opinions were decidedly opposed to this Bill,
because, in his estimation, it was only calculated to aggravate,
rather than remove, the evil ; and it was for this reason that
he should vote against the second reading. He objected to it
on principle; and feeling it unnecessary, as well as unconstitu-
tional, he should vote against it on principle.
Sir R. 11. INGLIS said the Noble Lord, not content
with entering into a lengthened review, and strongly de-
nouncing the past policy of the Government with respect to
Ireland, went so far as to censure them for allowing his Hon.
Friend the Member for Kent to place a notice on the motion-
paper, with regard to the Catholic Church of Ireland. Now,
with regard to that notice of motion, he could assure the Noble
Lord that the Government had nothing whatever to do with
that motion, nor had they power, he thought, to prevent his
Hon. Friend from bringing it forward.—( Hear, hear.) It
had been said by the Noble Lord, in the course of the debate,
in effect—for he would not be irregular, and refer to speeches
of Hon. Members (luring the present session—but he said in
effect, that those who sat ground him had made up their minds
to support the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London,
and to turn out her Majesty's Ministers, whoever they might
he. He was unwilling to revive language, but such was the
effect of the Noble Lord's words. He ( Sir II:Inglis) could not by
any means concur with such a determination ; he had adready
given her Majesty's Alinisters his confidence, and he would not
stiffer any collateral considerations to influence him against
continuing his support. If it was so that the Government had
not found time or opportunity to pass on the measure to its
present stage at any earlier period ; or if any calamity or acci-
dentghad h
eo cheeul rdr et
hd
at
to
they interruptough tt hneopt tat) gor ess
haveof
atlhl
oewmeeda saunrye
o;
tahnedr
would g.ve her Majesty's Ministers the same confidence and
t measureho u
whatever to have interrupted its progress; still he
support as lie had given on a former occasion to the Noble
Lord opposite, the Member fur Laudon, when he introduced
a measure of a similar nature, and more severe.—(Hear, hear. )
It was for the Government to provide for the safety of her
Majesty's subjects ; on them rested that care ; when, therefore,
they thought and said that any measure was necessary for that
purpose, it was not for him to oppose them, for the responsibi-
lity of the measure fell on them.—(" Hear, hear," from the
Opposition.) He had no wish to say or do anything derogatory
to the Members for Ireland who sat opposite, but he had given
her Majesty's Ministers his confidence, and he would support
them in the second reading of the measure as he had in the first.
The Hon. Baronet proceeded, in a tone seare&y audible in the
gallery, to say that there had been great delay in the pro-
gress of the measure in that House, a delay which
was even irritating.—(lronical cheers.) The measure was a
uneasnre of police, for which the Ministers were therefore re-
sponsible, and however they might taunt him with their cheers,
yet being a measure of police, he would give it his support,
leaving the whole to rest on the responsibility of the Govern-
ment. If the Government had made up their mind to press to
the second reading this measure, modified and mutilated as it
had been in the other House of Parliament, he ( Sir R. Inglis)
had come to the determination to support it, but to support it
only in the condition in which it then was.
Coterie' V ERNER was convinced that some measure was
neeessary for the protection of life and property in Ireland, and
therefore he would give the present measure his support. At
the same time he could not but regret that such delay had been
suffered to interrupt the progress of this measure, or any mea-
sure of the like importance. They had heard of the measure being
introduced by the Government at the beginning of the session,
but it had been thrown back till this late period ; he hoped
now, however, that Ministers would exert themselves with all
diligence to forward it. We understood the Hon. Gentleman
to say, that he was proud to support a measure which had been
introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her
Majesty's Government, even at the risk of being charged with
inconsistency, such as they had heard made in that House on a
late occasion, although at the same time he would not be
understood as prepared to support a bad measure merely
because it came from the same quarter. The Gallant Gentle-
man begged the House to bear with him, while he vindicated
himself against a misrepresentation cast on him by the Right
Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State. He said he had pro-
duced some extracts on a former occasion referring to the state
of Ireland; extracts, however, not very agreeable it would
seem to the Right Hon. Baronet. The Right Hon. Baronet
had not denied any of his statements, nor had he upset any of
the evidence laid before the House.—( Hear, hear.)
What then, he asked, was the charge made against
him by the Right Hon. Baronet? Why, that in November,
1845, he (Colonel Verner) had said that he thought there
would be dish ess in Ireland. The lion. Gentleman was then

proceeding to read from a speech made by Sir James Graham
in which Colonel Verner had been referred to, when he was
interrupted by cries of " Order," and
The SPEAKER intimated to the Gallant Colonel that he
was irregular.

.,
Colonel VERNER continued to say that it had been re-
ported that he (Colonel Verner) had said that a letter had been
sent to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in which an opinion was
given that a pecunjary grant should be made towards the drain-
ing of Loch Erne, with a view to relieving the distress in his
Ccolonel Verner's) neighbourhood. (The Gallant Colonel
was again called to order by the Speaker.) He had just to say
that the part of the country there referred to was not within
his neighbourhood by five and twenty Irish miles.
,llr. HORSMAN said that it had bean intimated by the
Hon, Baronet that he would vote for the second reading on the
comemeasure was t n
theone
conclusionin matters
to of
vote police.
(Mr. Horsma )e haagainstliite,
thaf House, an at once I I) . d o i osed it on the ground
others in .
ts allee
but for reasons differing from those which had been adopted by
that the repor .
ground that the
leave the nice calculation
in envfildwenincieciwite,sreanindaroccourrdaetres.
to
others;
were as well got up
as
usual,
' had noteen pushed forward with
would he oppose it because lt
ve
wiled.
He saw two mea-
-
;the speed that some would ha
the Secretary of State wass ati finenddwiiiteh
thoughtthe e
so reports t
too. Nor
tNh eoyr
d • a the same period
and liberate in its spirit, and
__one of them was largelreland
people of I
had a benevolent aspect to the
the two measures
the .other was harsh and coercive ;
;Lir-es advancing in that House uriti
WPM the workmanship of the same hands. flight
mea-
sure different so much that it might well be deubtTehdewhetherilhoeny.
Baronet wight be supposed to address himself to the one
sure with aiacrity and zeal, as agreeing with his own spirit,
but to the other he might require to be stirred and incited as
to a task opposed to his liking and his reason. He (Mr. Hors-
:man) did not vote against it for any of those reasons. Those
g rounds on which he opposed it were sat forth in better lan-
gi rage than lie could use in a document, from which he would
rei id to the House, (The 10, Gentleman then read from a

protest by the late Lord Holland,in 1525, tieriog, the Irish in-
surrectian; in which that Noble Lord said he opposed the mea-
sure because it was a suspension of the law rather than
prevention of cruse; and, secondly, because only such
measures ought to be adopted as would generally
tend to cement the union between the two countries.)
The fact was, as admitted by all who have addressed the House.
the whole of Ireland was in a state of organisation and struggle
between life and the rights of property. It might be true, and
he admitted to the fullest extent the state of outrage in that
country; but the question was, how 'were they to act? These
outrages had become almost indigenous to the soil
The people had not been treated properly by the suc-
cessive Governments of this country; they nail never
been treated as subjects. With a people thus re •
duced to tLe lowest depths of misery and destitu-
tion how were they to act? It was not possible fur
the malignity of human or inhuman beings to support a systemmore cruel and disastrous that, the presentrelatiens between land-
lord and tenant, which led to such a vast amount of crime and
misery. The Hon. Member for Cork said, if you cannot cure
the eseatey, abdicate it ; if yoa can, in God's name, let us
know the remedy. The Right Hon. Gentlemen at the bead
of the country made precisely the same speech in that House
thirty-two years ape. He hod referred to that speech, and h.
believed the one' speech might be taken for the ether.
with the exception of the names, the dotes, at.d
the places mentioned in it. During all this p• rig
net a single measure had been introduce d to remove the ertev
a11:72 of tee tenure of land—a gtievnied which the rUetit
ilsrenet. stated was the cause of these outrapes.—( Hear, hear. )
The vesmt measure was nothing mitre than a temporary
measure—it contained nothing better than the old provisions.
He gave the Gevenment credit for what they had done, and
far as far as they had gone ; they had not, however, gone far
enough. He believed that a defeat of this last expiring at-
tempt at misguided legislation would toad to support the
Right Hon. Baronet in the course which he thought he ( Sir
R. Peel) was anxious to pursue in his government of Ireland.
It was high time that a new system should be tried. The
past system of legislation had produced an intense hatred in
the minds of the people of Ireland against the Administration.
He recognised in the present Bill the old system of terrorism,
and it would not do to act upon that principle any longer.
The system was condemned by all parties. The Hen. Mem-
ber, who moved the amendment, had as little sempathy with
the murderers and assassins as any member of her Majesty's
Government. He (Sir W. Somerville) and the other Irish
Members oppo;ed this measure, because they could not reconcile
with their consciences such restrictions as their own consti-
tuency would not permit.
Mr. COLQUHOUN said that if he felt a perfect confi-
dence in the Government he could not sati-fy himself to vote
for such an unconstitutional measure as the present. If the
Noble Lord, the Member far the City of London, were to
offer him such a Bill he would say to him first prove your case
—(Hear, hear)—and thereby forward your measure with all
possible speed. The Noble Member for King's Lynn said
there was a decrease of crime, therefore the case broke down.
He could not agree with his Noble Friend ; he thought the
proofs of the Government of the existence of outrages were
overwhelming, and also the necessity of bringing forward some
measure for the suppression of these outragee. Magistrates of
all creeds and classes has stated the difficulty of obtaining
evidence and conviction of the assassin. He would say intro-
duce any measure calculated to suppress these things. Sup-
posing it, were desirable to increase the number of Irish Mem-
bers to 100, the case of the peasant and the people of Ireland
would be in an alarming condition. He thought there had
been a most culpable delay in bringing forward this
measure ever since it came into that House. He
would not enter into the details of the progress
of the Bill through the House of Lords. If the
Government hail passed the Bill through the Lords, and
proceeded with it with half the earnestness with which they
forced the Corn Bill, the Protection to Life Bill would now
have been the law of the land. He agreed with the Right
Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford, that the Bill, as it at
present stood, was perfetly inadequate to meet the exigency in
Ireland. He objected to the want of power contained in the
provisions of the Bill. He also agreed with the Hon. Member
for Belfast, that it was unwise to pass a Coercion Bill that
would not have the effect of repressing crime, or of preventing
the taking away of life. If the two clauses which alone gave
life to the Bill were struck out, he should certainly object to it.
He begged to ask the Right lion. Baronet at the head of the
Government, whether, to gratify Hon. Members opposite, it
was his intention to strike out in Committee these two clauses,
or whether he was prepared to maintain in all their integrity
the proviaisins of the Bill ? If the Right Hon. Gentleman de-
clined to answer the question, he (Mr. Colquhoun) having no
confidence in the intentions of Government, from past expe-
rience, should certainly vote against the second reading of the
Bill. The Hon. Member then alluded to the meeting at Lord
John Russell's house. in Chesham-place, which had become
notorious during the last few months for political assemblies.
Looking at the strange assortment of Hon. Members, having diffe-
rent political views, at those meetings, he must say that the Noble
Lord the Member for London would have a difficulty in deal-
ing with Ireland. 'The Noble Lord would have a strange
team to drive—such restive horses, and such kicking and cur-
vetting amongst them. He had ruled them before, and past
experience must have told him the difficulty of managing
them. If they had not had the corn measure this year they
would have had a grand educational scheme, which, like the
other popular measures, would have been filched from the
Noble Lord the Member for London. The course that the
Right Hon. Baronet had pursued was for him at the end of the
session to give some indistinct hints of the course he meant
to pursue, and he went forth to the world as the liberal
Minister, the great spirit of the age. At the beginning of the
session he promulgated his liberal opinions as a concession to
the principles of Hon. Gentlemen opposite. He wanted to
see the Noble Lord in power, not from any confidence in his
administration, but that it would give them (the Protec-
tionists) the opportunity, perhaps, of recovering themselves,
and of truly appealing to the people of England on the prin-
ciples they maintained. He should rejoice at having an oppor-
tunity of recording his vote against her Majesty's Ministers on
a want of confidence. lie required a pledge from the Govern-
ment that the Bill should be maintained unmutilated, other-
wise he should vote against the second reading.
Colonel SIBTHORP said the lion. Member re-

quire(' a pledge from the Government; he required none.
He had made up his mind to the performance of his
duty, and he should fearlessly perform it. Ile was never ac-
customed to flatter any man, but he could not help recording
his admiration for the Noble Lord the Member for King's
Lynn. What was the reply of the :Right Hon. Baronet—he
would not call him his Hight Hon. Friend—to that speech ?
It was most weak and vain. It had been his painful duty to
pass much of his time in Ireland. During the whole period, he
had never received one unkind feeling or expression from any
class in the sister kingdom. He would not support a
measure which in his opinion emanated from a Whig
Government. He should feel it his duty to oppose the
measure. The policy of the Right Horn Gentleman was to
pass the Corn Bill, and then, if expedient, to appeal to the
country. Petitions had been signed by 250,000 persons against
the Bill, and their rejection of the measure ought to be attended
to. He could place conklence in neither the Hon. Gentle-
man's oppwienls, nor in the present Government, for men who
had been caught twice in a trap ought never to be allowed to
get out of it. He had no confidence in their wish for the wel-
fare of the country, and he should feel it his duty, when a mea-
sure more efficient was brought forward, to vote for it ; but to
get rid of the present Government, which was the best measure
he could promote at the present time, he should join certainly
with the Noble Lord, and vote against the second reading, of
the proposed atrocious measure.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he bad paid particular at-
tention to the mass of Parliamentary evidence which had been
laid down by his friend the Member for the city of Oxford.
The Hon. Member was of opinion that if a measure was intro-
duced on the responsibility of her Majesty's Government for the
protection of life in Ireland, that being tlw assumption on the
face of the Bill, but it did not much matter what might he the
intention cf the Bill, still it was their duty, the Bid having
been referred to that House to be deliberated on, to give their
assent to that Bill. To that doctrine he (Lord J. Russell)
could by no means assent. He could understand that upon a
motion to bring
in a Bill, or in the first bringing up of a Bill
from the House of Lords, that so much was due to her Majesty's
Government that it might be rieht to consent to the in-
troduction of the Bill, in order that it might be fully
and freely discussed, but that the law-makers of
the country were not to consider what those laws were—
that they were not to consider the effect of those measures,
but blindly consent to them—was a proposition which seemed to
him so contrary to all his notions of Parliamentary duties that
it was impossible for him to countenance that doctrine in any
way. In commencing a review of the proposed measure, he
was tempted to take the course in objecting to it which was
usually adopted by a Minister of the Crown when presenting a
Bill for their consideration. A Minister of the Crown, when
about to propose any measure of great importance, generally
ushered it in by quoting some paragraph affecting the welfare of
the country from the speech from the Throne which had been
delivered at the opening of Parliament. In the present ca,e
he did not think that her Majesty's Ministers could make a
similar application, because he thought that the Queen's speech
was a strong argument against the proposed measure. Her
Majesty, in that speech, called attention to the frequent
acts of outrage and assassination committed in Ireland.

and wished to know whether any measure could not be devised
to prevent those outrages, and to bring to justice the perpetra-
tors of them. A delay of five months, after such an announce
ment from the Throne, ensued before any measures were
taken.—(Hear, hear.) Her Majesty's Ministers had not suffi-
cient confidence in the measures they had prepared, or, as it
had been said, the press of public business had prevented them
proceeding with those measures. There were two courses
open, either of which it would have been competent for her Ma-
jesty's Ministers to have adopted, and would have been per-
tfbecattlytiocoumsep. atibolene wuoituhrsothweoudlidgnbiatyseobfetethetoGboavvenrriinmtreondtuannedd
a temporaryof foo
dm, eaansdu rael
sfoo rt
tot the
vpou pnot
rs
oe
doufs introducing
l.) ther a r yimpor-
tation
mea-
sure for the protection of life in Ireland, thus leaving the great
measure of the corn-laws in its native integrity open to the un-
fettered and dispassionate consideration of that House.
With respect to the measure, he was boursd to consider the
grounds which were urged in favour of the Bill. The amount
toof crimeconsider:
ewr 1:1 i eh
he
ww
aa
ss sbaoi
ud
ntdo
tboeutohnes
ifdo
ournin ti
w obna
to f t
ma he
nu we
ra hounds
Minis-
ters had arrived at that amount of crime ; he was bound to
consider whether the present measure did afford that remedy
which was likely to increase protection to life and property ;
and, lastly, whether measures of a different character would not
have removed the cause of the alleged insecurity of life. But
at the speechthe Noble Lord who holds the office of Secretary for Ireland
murders committed
oftbe Noble
thiln
e
intro :Weed this Bill in a speech which he owned gave bins con-
con-
siderableembarrassment. In the early period o' the session
they were told
audl murders—ofthought
that
tEhaerlopwenould day
;have given them some details of those outrages :
but the crimes the Noble Earl mentioned were of an ordinary
character, nor could he gather from the statement of the Noble
aonfddr he dreadful
Earl that they were different to, or greater in amount, than
those which bad been committed for several years past.
But the Noble Earl put it to him whether,
having supported a similar measure in 18.15, brought
forward under similar circumstances to those of the
present day, he could refuse his assent to the Bill now before
the House. He would answer that appeal at once. It was no
reason because an Hon. Member had supported a measure
which went beyond the constitution at one period of his life, he
ought to support it at another; but the Noble Lord having
made this appeal to him, he must trouble the House with a
review of his conduct with regard to measures of this descrip-
tion. Soon after he entered Parliament in 1817, indeed in
the year 1819, a measure was brought forward to suspend the
Habeas Corpus Act, and what was called the " Six Acts"
was introduced to remedy the disturbances which then pre •
vailed in the manufacturing districts. Following the opinions
of the political party to which he belonged, he voted in support
of the measure. Soon after he came into office, a disturbance
of a similar character, accompanied by declamations of the
same democratic character, broke out in the country, but after
due and careful examination he came to the conclusion
downuFl to or!.
First
that
or He o
oufsi eiteht ore
eat:srokrueefaoosrtuordaynt
ahciacint
uc
theri
ee sa:
eeßdd
gitnnit ittl
ea lion.r
pyroa
pun
odasracolounhe -et
that it was better not to make any alteration in
the constitutional law of the country, and he cause
strnitlaabd e, and with this increased force, and with the aid of pro-
secutionsunder the ordinary law, the country was restored to
o
manufacturing
adisturbance,u tiug di
s:
cam
a state of tranquillity. After the night Hon. Baronet the
First Lord o
very similar
trises—perhaps it was of a still inure alarming character—and
theßight lien. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home
Department pursued the course he had done beLre him. He
inf tihtse
nature,Treasury
occurred e
yea don an inerepecl military force to the disturbed

„
tricts, ordered prosecutions before the ordinary tribunals, and
the country was restored to a state of tranquillity. Now, with
regard to the outrages in Ireland, those the Nobe. Lord had
mentioned to them were by no means of an unusual or extra-
ordinary nature. In the year 1832, being then in office, he
had to consider the propriety of introducing a very severe C
' o-
ercien Bill for Ireland • but he confessed that
he did
not
agree with all the measures releting
to Ireland, which were agreed to by the then Government.
Indeed, at one time, he was on the point of retiring from office,
but finding that his, late lamented Friend ( Earl Spencer) had
mouse to the conclusion that remedial and conciliatory measures
were not sufficient to meet the circumstances of the day, lie
consented to remain one of the Government. Accordingly a
very harsh measure was introduced for the protection of life
and property in Ireland, and for getting rid of the prevalent
listurbancea, amounting almost to a civil war, which had bloke
with
thein initiated
i 1835 a
general approhation
out in that country, upon the subject of the tithes. Murders
measure
rie,o
And assassinations were then daily taking place, and Parlia-
Ovialusee, andr
ment sanctioned the passing of the Bill ; but in the year 1834
iiaat su nrese wasstt
!if the I louse— indeed it scarcely suet with any oppesit ion ; but
i,e must state that in the previous year of 1833 his Noble Friend
Ler.: Altborp introduced aeveral in:Past/re; of ecincWatiini. Ile
Aitroduced is measure for the abolition of Church Cs'-is -a mea-
i
care for the mpreyeeiere ct jut nteanues for assimilative;
tie rerorations of Ireland.- arid, in 1835, Covernment di-
elated their intention of eiedjine principles so Ireland which
were nainv. coriviial to the and affections of t.lt.r great
body of the I eool e. Phe e,,rilequenee was, confidence trite re-
posed in the Mlnistry, and the pursuit of a mitigated Coercion
Bill tier, intrusted in their hands. That confidence, lie be-
lieved, vas not violated, for, from a communication which lie
had received from his Noble Friend the Marquis of Nermanbv
he fouild that the Bill was never put, into c peration. lie had
asked his Ni ble Friend whether the knowledge of such a power
heist; in the hands of the Gevernment had had the effect of de-
terring crime ; and his Noble Friend had told him that he thought
it had not, for the existence of the power was soon forgotten in
IreLnd. The Bill continued in force from 1835 to IF4O,
when Government determined it should not be continued. It
was said with regard to this Bill, that placing such a power
as that which the present Bill gave in the hands of the Go-
vernment, would have the effect of preventing crime, but if the
Bill possessed any advantage of this sort, it was lost by the
de'ay which had taken place. Now, with regard to the state
of crime in Ireland, he thought in comparing crime with
crime, it was well to take the whole crime of Ireland
and compare one year with another. The number
of homicides in 1832, before the introduction' of
what was called the Coercion Bill, was 242
in 1837, 230; in 1840, 125; and in 1842, two years after the
Act had expired, ISO. The number of charges for firing
houses in 1832 was 328 ; in 1637, 91 ; in 1842, 74 ; in 1845,
78. The number relating to the crime ot attacking houses
was, in 1832, 723 ; in 1837, 606 ; in 1840, 229 ; in 1842,
337 ; in 1845, 482. The conspiracies to murder were, in
1842, 24 ; in 1845, 8. With regard to assaults with intent to
murder, in 1842, 3 ; in 1845, 2. He thought it was plain
from this, that there had been no very great increase in crime
in Ireland between the years 1842 and 1845 ; but the Right
Hon. Bart. the Secretary for the Home Department men-
tioned five counties where he said there had been a great in-
ereasa in er:rne dur;ng the past year, as compared with former
years. Now the Right Hon. Bart. the First Minister of the
Crown made an admission on this part of the subject which
told greatly against the Bill. The Right Hon. Gentleman stated
thrt crime had increased in Tipperary, Limerick, Clare,
and Roscommon ; but with regard to Leitrim,
it hail decieased. The total number of crimes bens.-
in 1815, 804 ; and for the first five months in 1846,"
only 105. The Right Honourable Baronet attributed this
falling off to increased vigilance of the constabulary force, and
the stipendiary magistrates, and to the fact that an overwhelm-
ing military force was stationed in that country. Why, here
was a complete answer to the whole case of the Government,
an answer which fully showed that a remedy could be found in
the existing and ordinary law of the country.—(Hear, hear.)
But, he said, he had inquired into the operation of this law,
had made inquiries amongst persons familiar with its opera-
tion, and he had asked in what manner this law, when a
district was proclaimed, was put in force in any county of Ire-
land. He was told that constables took many persons who were
out at night, that these persons were put upon their
trial, that their excuse was not taken, and their friends had no
weight as witnesses. If these persons had previously borne a
good charact r, they were not subjected to punishment, but if
they belonged to a suspected class, sentence of imprisonment
was passed upon them. But then it might have been trans-
portation. The House would observe what a discretion thty
allowed.—( Hear. hear.) In one of the cases which he had
mentioned, the offence as created by law, was one of the most
ordinary acts of men—the offence was nothing more than tra-
velling on the Queen's highway ; yet for this offence a yr an
might be brought into the presence of a judge and jury, and
if circumstances appeared suspicious, sentence of transportation
might be passed upon him. He said that to such a measure
Parliament would rightly refuse to give its sanction.—( Hear,
hear.) But there were other considerations in connexion with
this Bill which very much demanded the attention of the
Homo. Whenever Bills of this kind were brought before
the House, it had been always thought right to con-
sider what were the grievances of Ireland, and in
what manner these grievances might have been the
cause of these offences.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, the
late Secretary for Ireland (Earl St. Germans), in proposing
this Bill, denied that the majority of these offences were con-
nected with agrarian considerations. But be (Lord John
Russell), after having consulted all the evidence laid before the
House, and the report made by Lord Devon's Commission, was
convinced that the majority of these outrages were agrarian,
and connected with land, arising out of the social habits of the
people in reference to land. The Noble Lord then quoted the
opinions of Mr. Barrington, Major Shaw Kennedy, and Cap-
tain Warburton, that the majority ot the outrages in Ireland
were agrarian. Here then, he said, were magistrates and .
farmers, and who had been so in that country for many years,
who had given it as their opinion that alterations of the farms
•iffeeted the cilstence, and brought on starvation upon the pea-
santry ; and, therefore, he considered that eviction from land
was the cause of the outrages in Ireland. He said then, that
on these grounds, if it was right to introduce met sores of re-
pression beyond he ordinary powers of the law, it would have
been right, at the same time, to introduce other measures, by
which the means of existence would have been in-
creased, and brought within the reach of the peasant.
He knew that the Noble Lord (Earl of Lincoln) had intro-
duced measures of an important character, within these three
days, but he thought that these measures ought to have been
introduced at the same time with this measure. After hearing
only the Noble Lord's annunciation of the Bill, it might, per-
haps, be difficult to say whether they would be fit for the pur-
pose. Another measure, it was true, had been proposed for
[reland by an Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Poulett Scrope), but he
(Lord J. Russell) confessed that he did not expect that measure
would remedy the ills of Ireland, but instead would tend to
fix them deeper in their place. Another measure proposed for
the amelioration of Ireland was the cultivation of waste
lands. He thought that the cultivation of waste
and outlying lands would certainly abate the competition for
land, and would in so much tend to abate the crimes which
were being committed. Now,he had already stated, in giving
his consent to the second reading of this Bill, that he had ob-
jections to it. Ile objected to that clause which made it cri-
minal for a man to be out between sunset and sunrise. But if
this clause were taken out of the Bill, he did not see but that
it would cease to exist—it would cease to be a Coercion Bill for

Ireland. There was an Act passed by the ether House of
Parliament, imposing fines on cei tain classes of the people ;
and the Whiteboys' Act contained the same clauses.
Some such clauses might perhaps have been intro-
duced into this Bill, but certainly not such as he
had seen in the Act passed by the other House of Parliament.
If they should proceed to make the people pay for the out-
rages done in the country, if they set about collecting in the
small sums of money for such a purpose, they would most likely
raise such an opposition that they would require to send out
the military to exact the two-pences and three-pences from the
people, to pay for the outrages that had burst out. But he
might be asked, why, if he objected to the Bill, he had con-
sented to the first reading. He said, if he had stated .his ob-
jections to the Bill, and said that he would not consent to the
first reading of the Bill, it would have been said that it was a
most violent opposition, that he should not allow a Bill
to come into that Mose for the protection of life in Ireland.
No, he had not done so, but he had stated
his objections to the Bill—objections which went to the foun-
dation of the Bill. On the first day when it was fixed to
come on with the orders of the day, he had Mated that he
would oppose it. Other grounds of opposition had been
taken. It was said by the Noble Lord (Lord G. Bentinck) on
a former night, and it had been reiterated by an Hon. Gen-
tleman to-night, that they had no confidence in the Govern-
vernment, and could not give their support to an unconstitu-
tional measure. This was a Parliamentary ground for op-
pwition. But, he confessed that, had he thour.ht this Bill
calculated to meet the necessities of the case, and that these ne-

cessities required such a Bill, he had no want of confidence
in her Majesty's Ministers and in their own measures, in re-
spect to Ireland, and therefore he would not have opposed it.
He said it would be no novelty if he had no confidence in her
Majesty's Government ; for several years he bad thought
for himself, and bad brought out his own independent mea-
sures. The practical working of the policy which had been
employed on either side showed results, and were practical
commentaries, proving that her Majesty's Government were
mistaken, and they were right.—( Cheers, and counter cheers.)
These results showed that the course which they had pur-
sued and the Government had now partly adopted was
right, notwithstanding what had been said of that course
when her Majesty's present Ministers were out of office.
He attempted on the ground of great i—nßc.ri,lhelae,steshoeieniatplopulation to
relax the restrictive measures. Upon all these measures the
Ministers had changed their course. They had adopted their
measures. They had gone far beyond what they proposed in
the admission of foreign corn. He gave them every credit for
the motives upon which they had acted. It was with some
regret that Hon. Members doing their duty should have been
so long the objects of slander and calumny as they had been.
The Secretary of State for the Home Department accused
them when going out of being like pirates who set fire to the
ship.—(Cheers.) It appeared that now, having got possession
of the ship, they had lived upon the stores which they had
left them—( Cheers)—guarded themselves by the charity which
they deposited in the cabin—steering by the compass they had
left on the deck. It would hardly have been too much if they
had expressed some regret that they have been exposed
to such charges before the country, with promoting a ten-
dency to set up a Popish Government in the country, and
promoting measures tending to destroy the agricultural in-
terests of the country. He had felt the poignancy of these
charges. It would have been little more than justice to have
said that they were not deserving of these attacks.urnTehdeseHroionu.s
Member for Newcastle spoke of measures, which he said, he
(Lord John Russell) was happy to promote. He thought
he was mistaken as to the character of the
grmieeireess.
To preserve the institutions of the country, the
stheherosituoguo
thought
course to
innovation. troasp rash
rt pursue was
Was
Manchester, tot
sroe reform. m
Leeds,l.
Would
so
ueTheuld lt
iiavtHna
dton)inno.
not have
all Gentleman
l egbm,
great
seeaeannat
bettertevn s, t
o shouldhav have carried
cbaer r
irepresentedthese
measures?
in
otithowtha.
act
oot
snecsuoentr conservative
consider,
thebify, insteadsgortnieeva
suouefeehs
measurecarryinguf
Ireland—the
l tahuidas
and securing the lives and property of the people? If this
eras the case, then was riot always the most conservative otreteol
cleansem easur
them
eomf coercion,daengdr
edelaye from
rweissohr tt
ot o
000 n wishedutl
hd e noto
et
htper:eoshteearnv
hand could
ther
e,tath led p‘r.institutionsoetseenft o f e measurescountsthery o f reform.
abuses.
dehe should
confidence in her Majesty's Ministers. Some Hon
regard to Ireland, the Noble Lord, the Member fso.r Lynn
had an overwhelming confidence in the commercial
ormtheacsunare;asubreec,aubseec. al I
because
soeli hadet-yh neo Membersyof,
the Minister. What was the state of the ease ? There was a
large party in Ireland who thought nothing but a native Par-
liament could provide proper measures for the redress of their
grievances--a party which excited to violence, looks to violence,
as its means, and separation as its end. If, said the Noble
Lord, )ou pass this Bill because it was for the benefit of
Ireland, and that
out for the measure, you can say to Ireland, we have endea-
voured to legislate according to our consciences, but if you say
any thing else to them —yifouyoucsoanyswi case was made
deertehdougaht it a bad measure,
nevertheless we allowed it to pass because there were measures
along with it. What
more for the benefit of England, going
an effect will this have upon the people of Leland. They will
say, " You have oppressed us by your laws to such an extent
that if we are found looking after a stray cow, or visiting an
afflicted parent a few miles off, after the hour of sunset, we are
liable to punishment." And you who vote for this measure be-
cause other measures of a commercial nature go along with it,

will say to them; you are punished, not for the security of life,
lint because other Government measures were passing through
Parliament at the same time ; and for the sake of these
measures it is that these restrictions arc placed upon you.
In answer to this, the people of Ireland will turn round and, in
-a tone of- triumph, exclaim, ts Tell u', is the Parliament com-
posed of English and of Scotch Members fit to legislate for
Ireland ?" Will they (continued the Noble Lord) not seek
for a domestic Legislature? Will they not
.use their utmost ;
eudeavoers to obtain a repeal of the union? What answer
would there be to such an appeal ? The unanimous voice of a
generous country would join in the declaration, that we have
not justice, that we are determined to obtain justice, and,
as it is now proved to us that that justice iv not to be obtained
from an English Parliament, we are determined to have a
Legislature which will represent our feelings and our interests.
Beware (said the Noble Lord) in giving such arguments as
these, if ycu wish, as I do most heartily, to maintain and to
improve the union, anti make it a source of happiness and bles-
sing to the people of Ireland, as well as a source of inci eased
strength to the ties of kindness and good feeling to Ireland,
beware, lest you in any way weaken the link which
hind the two countries.—(Hear, hear.) Do not set
so far apert the governors and the governed. Do not let the
people of Ireland believe that you have no sympathy with
their feelings, and no care for their wants, that you are intent
only uprn other measures in which they have no part. I say,
if you are persua,led that this measure is right pass its second
reading, and pass it through Committee ; but if you are not so
persuaded give no sanetien to it. Let it at once be rejected;
let it not be said that such was your conduct, and such your
maxim with reference to this measure. The consequence of
passing such a measure would not be temporary, it would not
be repaired in a year, or five years, or ten years. It would be
an irrevocable loss.—( Loud cheering.)
Mr. B. DISRAELI—If the Noble Lord had felt keenly
the unjust attack of those who supplanted him in power, the
Noble Lord had at least this consolation—he had received a noble
revenge.—( Cheers.) And he was sure that each time his
pupils rose before him, before that red box—(Laughter)—to
Liaughter)—to
whose authority they succeeded, the
Lord, he
was sure, must have telt, although they had not yet received
that expression of spontaneous feeling which his
generous
sympathising character expected— ( Cheers)—the Noble
e
Lord must have been receiving from those Right Hon.
Gentlemen and Noble Lords opposite ample compensation for.
the injustice which he is nationally and universally acknow-
ledged to have suffered from their hands.—(Cheers ) The
Noble Lord had treated them that night with the eloquence
that was habitual to him whenever he touched upon the
affairs of Ireland. He (Mr. Disraeli) was one of those who
regretted, and would not refrain from the expression of his
regret, that the fate of Ministers should be supposed to de-
pend, after all that had occurred this session, upon an Irish
subject. It was not, however, to any Honourable Gentle-
man who sat on the benctes near him that this circum-
stance had occurred. They had shown themselves ready
upon the earliest occasion to discuss the question ; and he
thought that whatever might have bees the policy of the Go-
vernment upon other questions—however irritating he might •
say that it had been to the outraged feelings of many Hon.
Members upon that side of the House, still he thought that,
from the first and earliest occasion, they had been ready to dis-
cuss the matter. It was impossible for the House to forget the
circumstances under which this measure had been brought
forward. It was an unconstitutional measure, framed for a
country which required to be treated with consideration and
delicacy. He would remind the House of the manner in
which the subject was first brought before their considera-
tion. The measure was then brought before the
consideration of Hon. Members—it was recommended to them .
on account of its temporary character—on account of the exigen •
cies which called it into being, and then studiouslyconcealed from
their notice till it was at length almost forgotten. He had no
wish to speak of h s own feelings upon the subject more than
was actually necessary, in order to defend his individual vote
which he should give upon this measure. If he saw the present
measure recommended by Irish Members, or a majority upon
whatever side of the House they might nit, he should come to
the consideration of the question with feelings different to
those which he should have embraced when he found all the
Irish Members denouncing the measure as futile.—(Hear.)
This was not the first measure of the sort which had been
forced upon Ireland. He was not, however, prepared to say
that occasions might not yet arrive when extraordinary powers
would be required by the Legislature of the United Kingdom.
If it be true with reference to the state of Ireland—as he be-
lieved it was admitted to be true by all parties with reference
to the state of England, namely, that while they had been dis-
cussing the principal and political measures of England—the
Constitution of the people of Ireland had been neglected.
He would not weary the House with the memoranda which he
could in a moment give to them. This Coercion Bill was pro-
posed on the 2'2d of January ; it was ordered to be printed on
the 16th of March ; it was read a first time on the Ist of May, I
and ordered to be read a second time in June. This was the
temporary measure which the Government seemed to make
eternal. Let them look at the early adjournments of the House
while this measure was under discussion, and they would see
the importance attached to this measure. On the 20th of
April there was no House, and on other days other measures
were taken before the Coercion Bill, although it was first on the
order of the day. It was evident that there had not been an
earnest, even if there were a serious, intention on the part of
Government to bring forward this measure. He could call the
statistics in this measure the statistics of shuffiing.—(Hear,
hear.) It was net his intention to enter into the merits of the
Bill itself, although he could point out many details ; but one
circumstance was very remarkable, viz., that the Bill of her
Majesty's Ministers did not apply—(Hear, hear)—to the dis-
turbances which had been brought forward by the Secretary for
the Home Department. It was very satisfactory to find at the
present moment that there were any circumstances of a kindly
feeling in Ireland, even in the wilds of Munster, though it
was only with regard to the introduction of Indian maize. It
was unfortunate that this intelligence, which was communicated
through a very influential organ—which was generally favour-
able to her Majesty's Ministers,although not personally favourable
to her Majesty's Ministers themselves—he meant the Times,
was at the same time accompanied by a report in the same
journal of a mutiny in Limerick gaol in consequence of the
substitution of Indian Maize for their ordinary food.—(Hear,
hear, and laughter.) There never was any individual who had
acted more fairly to any Government than the Noble Lord
near him (Lord G. Bentinck). There never was any indivi-
dual who had given a more full and fair intimation of the
course which he and his friends intended to pursue than the
Noble Lord, and he could not therefore admit that any argu-
ment against the consistency of the Noble Lord was proved,
for no person could deny that the Noble Lord had fulfilled his
engagement in a just and complete spirit. He was not pre-
pared to admit that the accusation brought forward against the
Nob he Lord with regard to the Factory Bill was at all better
founded. Two years ago, when that measure was brought for-
ward, the Noble Lord had voted for time Govem rment measure,
but did that preclude the Noble Lord from voting for the mea-
sure of another after that lapse of time? This was called
by her Majesty's Government inconsistency.—(Laughter.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman said—l have changed
my policy, but are you, the Member for Lynn, the person to
reproach me ? You, who changed on a Coercion Bill—who
voted for a first reading, when you did not intend to vote for a
second; and who have changed your opinion on the Factory
Bill. The Noble Lord had violated no confidence, nor betrayed
any trust.—(Hear, hear.) It could not be said that the Noble
Lord got into Parliament by promising to vote differently for
the Factory Bill. It could not be said that the Noble Lord,
with practised duplicity, supplanted a candidate on the hust-
ings, by professing opinions, which he meant to oppose when
he got into Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had
not turned the Noble Lord (the Member for London) and his
Friends out of office, for attempting to carry a measure, which
they were now themselves promoting.—(Hear, hear.) This
was the charge they brought against her Majesty's Ministers.
They were not to be met when they made these charge!, by the
taunt of having changed their opinion on the Factory Bill. The
quarrel is great and national, not a miserable individual squabble
between individual Members of Parliament ; and they were not
to be answered by a Secretary of State or a First Lord of the
Treasury saying, " Don't remind us of our pledges, we have
discarded them long ago; the electors who sent us to Parlia-
ment, and by their confidence made us Ministers of the Crown,
we can lead and direct just as we please." But he (Mr.
Disraeli) would tell the Right Hon. Baronet—
" Tu oblitus es, sed meminentur omnes,
Meminit fides."

He would give the House an instance from the speech
of the Right Honourable Gentleman of the con-
spiracy practising against the Parliament of England,
and if he or any of his friends could explain them, he would
not only be glad, but surprised. It was used when the Right
Hon. Gentleman was vindicating himself and his principles, in
that high-flying tone which he so well knew how to assume
when occasion required—(Laughter.) He wanted that an•
swered—he asked it before, he asked it again and again, and
the Right Hon. Gentleman called it bandying personality.—
( Hear, hear, and cheers.) But a few weeks afterwards, how-
ever, the Right Hon. Gentleman informed the House that he
was going to explain the whole circumstance. He (Mr.
Disraeli) was sitting opposite to him, and was listening atten-
tively to every syllable that fell from his lips—be could have
said nothing that could have escaped his observation. Twice
he told them, and dazzled the eyes and ears of all, that he was
about to give an explanation. Instead, however, of doing so
he read some confidential communication, which had no refe-
rence to the subject in question. That explanation he had
never given, and that they required.—( Hear, and cheers.)
Why he (Mr. Disraeli) reminded the House of this was
in consequence of the observation made a few nights ago at the
conclusion of the Right Hon. Gentleman's speech, when he
said that "the accusation of his (Sir R. Peel) wishing to oust
the Noble Lord (J. Russell) from settling that question, was
the foulest calumny which the most vindictive imagination
ever dictated to a virulent tongue."—(Tremendous cheers.)
He who described this as the most vindictive calumny, was
describing the conduct which he himself practised.—( Great
sheering.) He ventured to allude to this, in order to explain
the attack which he made on the Noble Lord with regard to
his political consistency.— (Cheers ) As for consistency he
(Mr. Disraeli) thought that the Noble Lord might be ready
at any time to put it against that of the Right Hon. Gentle-
men.—(Tremendous cheers.) But he (Mr. Disraeli)
did not wish the constitutional principles of the
country to be left to political squabbles.—(Cheers.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman, in order to put an end to the am-
bition of the Noble Lord, made another attack upon hint. Ile
said that the Noble Lord had assumed a license in debate
which exceeded its legitimate bounds ; and the Secretary-at-
War also admonished the Noble Lord, and reminded the House
that they had been addressed by him in language which had
never been used to them before, and which, he trusted, would
never be used to them asrain. It appeared that the Noble
Lord used strong language, and his having addressed them as
Janissaries had excited their strong indignation. He (Mr.
Disraeli) saw that the Speaker did not interfere on that occa-
sion ; and when h
time, had also usedestoanw thatl men,.thehmostemineiriiet owf. their
not
4.onng.uafeenitlemn t
ant House,
surprised that the Right Hon. did interfere.
He had to regret that the gentleman of this new generation
did rot appear to know the history of their time. He would
take the liberty, however, of quoting a passage from Trott: sroercd,
of a Gentleman, who was much admired by
°meal -mouthed
the Member for London ; and as these w
times, it would be well to know how Minefseters andy the op-
ponents
expressed themselves, The
of Ministers occasionally
Hon. Gent. here read an extract from a speech of Mr. Fox on
the Indian Bill, in which that gentleman implored them, " for
God's sake, not to triumph by
an infamous string of bed-chamber
Janissaries;" and again, inanother passage, in reference to
the opposition of },isopponents, he designated it as the
"work of the Pretortan Guards." Burke also made use of the
strongest language in reference to his opponents. On one
occasion he said that " the whole compass of language did not
afford terms sufficiently adequate to describe the contempt
with which he regarded them." in another place he said that
their conduct " reduced them to the level of the meanest
and basest of the species." And then came the Secretary- at-
War, and told them of language that had never been used in
Parliament before, and which he hoped would never be used
again. He (Mr. D.) would stronly recommend him to get
Fox's speeches, and to study them day and night, and he would
promise him that if he did his knowledge of Parliamentary lan-
guage would be improved, and he would find that his nervous
and masculine eloquence would not suffer by the perusal.
He confessed that it was one to which he could not allude
without unaffected pain.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) It was
very possible for Gentlemen to treat with derision the memory
of a great man ; but he confessed that whatever might be his
feelings on the conduct of any individual who had been a dis-
tinguished citizen in this country, and particularly an illuitinus
Member of that Senate—if he had left them for ever he could
not have received an allusion to the subjeet with the miserable
derision which he bad just experienced.—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.) It seemed that after his Noble Frieud the other

rilght hail used that language, which though nitllarAntiqa
and authorised. by the greatest authorities, appeared to astoslo;ip
their minds, and to astound the Secretary-at- M'ar, being 7-
pelted by no common warmth, made another allusion which
touched a secret sore. 'f he Noble Lord the Member for Lynn
—he said so in his presence because he knew bins to be
superior tip any petty offence on the subject—the Noble
Member for Lynn, if he hatlan v characteristic more than anotistr,
it was the total absence of affectation and pretence. The Noble
Lind had never forced himself there into the place which he
occupied. Ile was thrnst against his will into the position
which he -occupied. Ile had always said that he had not
much skill—that he was not a statesman, and asked them why
he could not get somebody else—that he was bred a soldier
and never aspired to more than the reputation of being a high
spirited man and a gentleman. That was the character of the
Noble Lord, and he believed that he had obtained his
limited wish. lie did not know his own powers—he (Mr.
Disraeli) thought he had great abilities. There were dozens
of such men, but the fact was that the Noble Lord had no am-
bition. Any one that knew him intimately, knew that the
idea of raising, himself with the State had never entered into
his head.—(Hear, hear.) It was once the happiness of the
Noble Lord, and it was still his pride, to have tilted the
humblest station of the political career near a great Minister ;
and from that period -lie had not wished to occapy any
office however exalted, and even the Right Pouburable Ba-
ronet admitted, that au regarded the Noble Lord, he
Was a consistent, but a pure and disinterested supporter. The
Noble Lord might have expressed himself with unusual warmth
and vigour, for, without any pretention to oratory, he spoke
from the heart. He was not sure that the racy vigour of
his brave honesty

An HON. MEMBER (on the Opposition aide of the House)—
Yes ; the racy vigour suits the stable mind.—(Laughter.)
Mr. DISRAELI—Yes; he was not cure that this brave
honesty is not worth all that modern eloquence with which we
are so often favoured—all that pompous plausibility and solemn
adroitness—( A laugh)—all that damnable iteration of
stale sophistries—(oh, oh)—and cold common-place which
arc held out to us as models of eloquence.—
' (Oh, oh, and loud laughter.) The Noble Lord,
speaking with earnestness, and remembering his position—the
only position in public life he ever aspired to—the humble
position which a political career could offer to
a great Minister and bound to him by the
nearest and dearest ties, the Noble Lord said the Right Hon.
Gentleman had hunted to death Mr. Canning. The Noble
Lord said that, in 1829 the Right Hon. Gentleman admitted.
or rather had announced, that in 1825 he had informed Lord
Liverpool what was his opinion with regard to the Catholic
question. He (the Right Hon. Gentleman) had said it sins
no longer possible to resist their claims, and even if they could
shaecserifittcleedtobsh•
ihmisselelfa.vinTglioeffiNeeob;l eh eLowrada
othnal);
ning, and remembering the effect eomfatult,
conduct of that Right lion. Gentl in remembering prepared to mee
lion. Gentleman on the career and
t onto? ttAhhieer.lßiCfeiagnho-tf
that statesman, and taking the positionlaid down by
the Right Honourable Gentleman himself that "
base in a Minister to Conceal }). it was
him how it was in 1825, when he changed hisOpomprnnio'n on the
Catholic question in the year 1827, having announced that
change at so late a period after he had formed his opinions.
The reason of that change was given by the explanation with
regard to the cause of severance with Mr. Canning, and never
would be forgotten in that House. The Right Honourable
Gentleman bad made an answer which he would not reca-
pitulate—not from any desire of being unfair, but because it
was fresh in the recollection of every one who listened to it.
. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that, in the year 1825, he did
of course, deny his communication with Lord Liverpool ; and
he had said that, in 1829, when he announced that communi-
cation, he announced nothing more than he announced in 1827,
in the presence of Mr. Canning himself. It was a remarkable
circumstance, as the House would recollect. The Noble Lord
had accused the Right Honourable Baronet of having.
in 18f:9 acknowledged, or rather announced, the
change of his opinion on the Catholic question
in 1825, that announcement being made. in a speech of 1829.
The Right Hon. Gentleman never read that speech—the Right
Hon. Gentleman had read the speech which he made in 1827,
in the presence of Mr. Canning. It was remarkable that the
Right Hon. Gentleman never referred to the speech on which
the Noble Lord alleged the great accusation then before the
House. The position of the Right Hon. Gentleman was that
in 1829 he only stated in that House what in 1827 be stated he
had urged in his communication to Lord Liverpool,
in the presence of Mr. Canning. He would wish
to read to the House that speech of 1829, where the
allegation of this great omission was contained. The
Right Hon. Baronet referred Hon. Gentlemen to the speech
of 1829, but he never read it, and, therefore, he (Mr. Dis-
raeli) would read to the House what took place in 1827. It
was but due to the Right Hon. Gentleman to open that pas-
sage in Hansard, as the qbestion was too interesting and too
important to be passed in silence. The Right Hon. Gentleman
said, " As far as my own course in this question is concerned."
Mr. R. YORKE—Which Right Hon. Gentleman ?--
(Loud cries of " Order.")
Mr. DISRAELI proceeded to quote :—" As far as my owe
course is concerned, it is the same which I have always held
in my mind since 1825, when he was principal Minister, rand •
found myself in a minor ity on this question. When I saw the
number arrayed against me, I found my own position unten-
able. When I found I was left in a minority on this noes-
tion, I wished to be relieved from the responsibilities and the
duties of office, and in consequence of the decision given against
me in that House, I wished to be relieved from that office."
He was ready to admit that it appeared that the Right Hon.
Gentleman used the same language in 1827, nor did the Right
Honourable Gentleman say anything which he did not say
in 1827, in the presence of Mr. Canning. There was no con-
tradiction to that by any of the intimate friends of Canning,
or those most intimate with the conduct of public men in this
country. And what was the impression of the House at that
time, when that speech of 1829, an extract from which he had
just read, was written? He made no charge against the Right
Hon. Baronet, but he said that this was a garbled and muti-
lated report ; or, to use the softer language of that House, it
was a correct report of what was said. Now, it really
amounted to this, whether or not that important statement
was made by the Right Hon. Baronet? That was really the
great question.—(Hear.) It so happened that there were
two reports of that speech. There was not only that of Han-
sard, which appeared after after a long interval, but there was
that which appeared in the " Mirror of Parliament," and
which paper was reported by men of education, talent: and
of the greatest intelligence. The speech of the Right
Hon. Baronet was taken down in short-hand by verbatim
reporters. When this speech was made, a great question then
agitated the public mind, and the course pursued by the Right
Hon. Baronet was that which suggested itself to his mind at
the time as the only one which he could adopt under the-cis.
cumstances. It was a most important question to the. country,
and related to the great Catholic question.—( Hear, hear.)
The Right lion. Gentleman then felt that the time was
come when something respecting the Catholic claims should be
done. He stated to Lord Liverpool that something should
be done with respect to the Catholic question. There
was such a thing as a version of a speech—a speech for the
House, and a speech for posterity.—(Hear, hear.) It so hap-
pened that the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet was both
ways; and now they read both, and compared the speech of
the hour with the speech of posterity.—(Cheers.) It hap..
pened that at that time a very eminent gentleman. who watt
at the head of a great Protestant party in that House, re-
marked that if there was a time for consenting to the Catholic
question, the Right Honourable Baronet—in justice to his
own character—in justice to his friends—and in jus-
tice to Mr. Canning ought to have consented
before. If, said the Honourable Member, the question
was not found necessary in 1825, when brought forward by
Mr. Canning, why did he again vote against it in 11327,
when Mr. Canning was in office, and then advise it in 1829
(Great cheering.) These were the remarks in au Hon. Mem-
ber's—in the speech of Sir Edward Knatchbull—(Hear, hcar. )
—and it was well-remembered by all who listened tor: the •
speaker, that it brought an answer from the Right" Won.
Baronet. He did not answer that speech in the langoane
which he quoted from Hansard, as the speech of the Right
Hon. Baronet. His answer was the speech of Hansard, but
not the speech of the Mirror of Parliament. It has no
doubt a revised speech, a corrected speech. It was marked
in Hansard as the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet—and
there was this most remarkable note appended to it—" printed
with sanction, and by the authority of Mr. Secretary Peel."
(Hear, hear. and cheers from the Protection benches.) Now,
with respect to the spOch in the Mirror of Parliament, he
had inquired who it was that reported it, and ho
learned it was reported by Mr. Barrow, a gen-
tleman who was one of the first short-hand writers
as well as one of the first scholars of the day, they would not
doubt the ability and correctness of Mr. Barrow, but if :hey
did, he fancied that that speech had also been reported in the
wherein the Right Hon. Baronet
was Tim's a a newspaperde sav that f thiBe2Pi e was coins when something must
be done with the Catholic question. He did not bring those
statements forward without wishing that the Right Hon.
Gentleman should have the opportunity of answering them.
He had quoted them from anonymous works, but it should be
remembered that anonymous works, at times, were written by
those who were high in office, and who were above writing any.
thing contrary to fact, at least wilfully. He found it stated in
a work of great reputation, that Sir Robert Peel had a
letter in his writing-desk, which he had written to
Lord Liverpool, stating that it was high time that something
should be done with respect to Catholic claims. This was
stated in the Edinburgh Rau w, and it was signed anonymously ;
but it should be remembered that that work was read in the
highest circles, and quoted as a great authority ; and for the
best of all reasons, that its contriebuso Hon.
d G
topirrosowue r, et
he
n aGentleman
l mentehmeo
afßn
Right
tghhhte
Hrcabonanrks:
and of great attainments. It was within eight and forty hours-
r.
t he
to Right
raafteetrerholfr.whicil Canninghe
appeared
Baronet commenced that opposition, which was considered at
the time, and had been considered ever since, to have outraged
all decency. It was agreed upon, at a party f
gentlemen, held
in—he would not say in what great house, though
he had been told—where they were dining. It was
enough
for him to know that they came down to that House, and the
Right Hon. Gentleman was amongst them. It was a party
favourable to the shipping interest, and the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman delivered himself of a speech which contained
e character
role
h
language far more vehement,: far more exciting, and far
more passionate than any they heard in modern tim_es.-4 Hear,
hear.) On the third day afterte
he
Righthad e
for candour, and sincerity,rHeoneiv.Gedenhtils
and delivered one of the most violent and passionate speeches
that had ever been made in that House, which called for the
ways ready
t the attack of an open and honourable enemy, but he
celebrated reply from Mr. Canning, that he was al
: resmpi ee
despised the sneaking insinuation of a lurking foe in the garb
of a friend. Now, he would not enter into any details as
to whether the Right Hon. Baronet hunted down Mr. Can-
ning, because that was the poetical phrase, used meta-
phorically, to describe the feelings of the friends, and
relatives of Mr. Canning, with regard to the transactions with
which they were familiar, and because if he were to do so lie
must go into secret councils, and quote secret correspondence,
read passages from newspapers, set up and maintained for a
particular purpose.—(Hear hear.) He must ge into details
of matters which the Right 'Hon. Gentleman addressed to the
new generation who have entered Parliament since these events
had occurred, and in vindication of his own character ; but let
him remind the House that it was not a vindication made on
the spur of the moment, although the Right Hou. Baronet
might have had an imperfect knowledge of the
details of what occurred nineteen years ago, for the Right
Hon. Gentleman took three or four days to get up his case.
which was to make an impression upon the rising generation.
He thought, however, he had proved from the extracts which
he had read that the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman
in vindication of his own character was garbled.--
( Hear.) He had brought them evidence—unintentional evi-
dence—confirmatory of the impression left upon the minds at
those who witnessed the occurrence of these events, and whc
were cognisant of the unenviable avowal before the House.
nineteen years ago.—(Cheers.) But a complaint was
made against his Noble Friend that he had called
the Right Honourable Gentleman " his Right Honourable.
friend." The Right Hon. Baronet asked if the Noble Lorc:
believed that he hunted Mr. Canning to death, bow was 11E
justified in calling him his Right Hon. Friend ? and as far as
he possibly could do he would deal with that question. He
remembered when the Right lion. Baronet was at the head of
a phrasaical confederacy, called the " Conservative party."—..
( Hear and laughter.) He remembered then the Right Hou.
Gentleman had more than 300 Hon. firiends—( Hear, and
laughter)—many of whom he did not know byname—(Laugh.
I ter)—many of whom he certainly could not recognisei.and yea
most of whom called him their Right Honourable Priers&
I In that time the Right lion. Baronet seemed to think-that be
• was the solo Minister of England, and he elm to lite.tabla