The Sun.
London, England, 1870-03-23 00:00:00

CAPITAL SENTENCES.

Sir GEORGE JENEINSON, who had given notice of his
intention to move for leave to bring in a bill—respecting
the reviai9 and commutation of Capital Sentolces, prO.
tested agamst such remaTlf.s as had been made by the
Hofne Secretary. .' bqk;

Mr. BRUCE said that he did n?t intend,
!to fax as 04
Government was concerned, to ofiOr 9,ny objection,
POLITICAL PWSONERS.

•
Mr. CALLAN had given notice of a motion with rote''-
,
ence to the appointment of a select committee to inquir
into the rules affecting, and the actual treatment of,
political prisoners, with power to send for papers and per-
sons, and to examine notices.

Mr. BRUCE appealed to Mr. Callan not to press his
motion, which was deferred until an early day.

THE PEACE PRESERVATION BILL (IRELAND).
The debate on this bill was resumed by
Mr. M'CARTHY DOWNING, who said that no case had
been made out by the Government for introducing a
coercive act more aggravated in its form than any for-
merly introduced when crime was rife in Ireland. He
said the character of the Irish people wss misrepresented
by the untrue reports that had appealed in the news-
papers, and in support of the assertion he might poitit
to the account that appeared with respect to wha
was called an attempt at murder at Kantuk. It went on
to state that a Mr. Smith had been fired at and
sent a threatening notice, but he was in a posi-
tion to say that the gentleman mentioned had
never been sent a threatening letter, neither
had ever been shot at. (Hear, hear.) Then it was said
that Tipperary was the worst spot in Ireland with respect
to crime and outrage, which he strongly denied,
and he knew that where it had been necessary
to serve a writ in that county, it had
been done openly and without the aid of the police. He
should like to know whether England was in a position to
throw stones at Ireland with respect to crime. The police
in Ireland was far more active than that of England,
as he found in looking over a tabular statement
that had been drawn up, which shewed that the appre-
hension.; by the Irish police were at the rate of 63,
whilst the police in England only came up to 58. He
was certain that the horrible murders that were
committed in England far exceeded in barbarity
anything perpetrated in Ireland. In that country
there were no cases •of battering wives brains out, and
massacreing infants as was unfortunately the case in
England. He felt that crime in England was far in excess
of that in Ireland. Having listened to all that had
been said, he came to the conclusion that no case
had been made out for the present bill. The misery of
Ireland arose from oppression. Remove that, and the con-
dition of the country would immediately improve.
He contended that the Bill was an invasion of these
constitutional principles of which England had been so
proud. With regard to the press clauses, he asserted that
under the provisions of the measure an editor of a news-
japer would stand no chance against the Government.
So far from the Bill pacifying Ireland, it would be looked
apon as an invasion of the rights of the people of that
country.
Lord JOHN MANNERS, whilst he did not shrink from
giving the measure his most hearty support, claimed the
right to criticise the past conduct of the Government,
and the period they had selected for the introduction of
the Bill. He referred to the manner in which he had on
several occasions felt it his duty to bring under the notice
of her Majesty's Government the condition of Ireland in
respect to agrarian crime, and the efforts made by inde-
Pendent members of the House to stir the Government to
action, in the suppression of the class of crime in question.
He could not say that her Majesty's Government were
entirely free from responsibility as to the 'language
which they had used with .reference to Ireland. The
noble Lord said that he had expressed it as his opinion
teat the Government had . been guilty of a
lack of energy in bringing forward the bill, but
the measure having been submitted to Parliament, he
should give it his support, but he doubted whether
it would answer the expectation of those who brought it
Forward. The bill ought to have four objects, which were
ill important, and those four objects were the prevention
of crime,the detection of crime, the punishment of crime,and
the repression and suppression of the incendiary press. The
measure promised well. That he was bound to say, but it was
very doubtful whether the suspension of the Habeas Cor-
pus Actwould not have been better in some parts of Ireland,
is it would enable the paymasters of the assassins to be
apprehended by the police, as it was well known that the
police, had they the power to apprehend certain people
lould at any moment put their hand on the
)ieads of the Ribbon conspiracy. The power given by the
bill to search for arms was a wise provision, and
doubtless, would work satisfactorily. The pro-
vision to apprehend absconding witnesses would
Also be of great assistance in punishing those
who had brought about the present alarming state of
things. The Bill he thought would be effective for the
detection of crime, but he doubted whether it would be as
affieacious for its punishment as it was not strong enough
In its provision, for it appeared to him that something
more than changing the venue was required. It was his
Aesire to see Ireland prosperous and contented, and there-
fore, he hoped that the passing of the present bill would
In some measure at least tend to bring that desirable
result about. But before resuming his seat, he must say
that the bill seemed to him to shew some distrust of the
magistracy, which he hought would be viewed in anything
but a favourable light by those whose duty it was to ad-
minister the law in Ireland.
Mr. C. FORTESCUE noticed several of the observations
made by the last speaker with reference to the conduct of
the Government in relation to Ireland. The noble lord
had implied in the course of his speech that by the bill the
Government shewed a want of confidence in the magis-
trates of Ireland; but that was really opposed to the fact
of the case. The hon. member then proceeded to deny
that the Government insulted the magistrates by
requiring the presence of a stipendiary magistrate
in cases of summary dealing with offenders. The
bill gave the magistrates their proper place in local
jurisdiction in dealing with small offences in which the
peace of their districts was involved. It was the intention
of anitarnment to introdueskin_eninrnitteelLasinieie-tba.

Sir T. BATEsorr said the "message of peace" to Ireland
of the present Government 'had been a "sword." They
had "let loose the dogs of war." Never in his memory had
that coun,try been is so disorganised a state as at this mo-
ment, and their coercion bill was the most stinging of satires
upon their Irish policy.
The debate was continued by Mr Kavanagh, Mr. Sergeant
Sherlock, Mr. Murphy, Lord 0. J. Hamilton, Mr. Agar Ellis,
Ur. Conolly.
Mr. WHITE and Colonel WHITE agreed in condemning the
details of the measure, and in approving the motives of the
Government for introducing it, but hero they diverged, the
latter supporting the second reading and the former declining
to vote at all.

Mr. GLADSTONE replied first to the criticisms on the bill,
and admitting the stringency of the Press Clauses, he
argued that the present law was utterly insufficient in prac-
tice, and that it would be useless to ask for any change which
would not only enable the Government to punish the sedi-
tious writers, but to stop the seditious writings. Replying
to Mr. Downing's statistics, he distinguished between
crimes involving moral guilt and those leading to
social danger, and pointed out that labourers, and even
women, were victims to_these outrages in larger numbers
than the owners of property. Next he replied to the gene-
ral charges against the conduct of the Government, calling
on Sir Thomas Bateson and Lord C. J. Hamilton to furnish
chapter and verse for the inflammatory speeches of which
they accused him, protesting that he was oblivious of
them, particularly of the phrase tkat Ireland was to be
governed " according to Irish ideas." As to the charge of
unreasonable delay in the introduction of the bill, he urged
that no nicer question could come before a Cabinet than the
exact moment at which such a measure should be
.brought
forward. Commenting on Dr. Ball's speech, he ad-
mitted that though the Irish Executive was strong
in power it was weak in moral influence over
the population ; and the whole object of legislation
should be to increase that moral influence by draw-
ing off from the 'criminal classes those who did not commit
offences, but sympathised with them. This process would
be interrupted by temporary measures of coercion ; but he
had the most profound confidence that their permanent
remedial measures would ultimately succeed in this object.
On a division the second reading was carried by a majority
of 412-423 to 13.

Several other bills were forwarded a stage, and the House
adjourned at five minutes to one o'clock.

THE PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND)

BILL.

The preamble of the Peace Preservation Bill states
simply that "it is expedient to make further and better
provision for the protection of life and property in Ire-
land." The first part of the bill relates to the amendment
of the Peace Preservation Act of 1856. and chiefly refers to