The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-09 00:00:00

include murders or homicides—for this reason, that the Hon.
an I Learned Member fur Clonmel (Mr. Figot) moved far a '
return of murders and homicides during a corresponding
period' and which was presented to the House on Monday last,
and he only regretted that it was not its his hands at that mo-
ment. He would now proceed to make a comparison between
the number of offences committed in Ireland during, he first
five months of last year and the corresponding period of the
present year; and he must admit, at the same time, that in
consequence of these papers net having reached his hands
before the previcius day, he was not able to make so accurate
and precise a comparison as be could have wished, but if Hon.
Gentlemen would hare the kindness to read them over care-
fully, he was quite sure that, with the exception of Leitrim,
the counties which had been noted for crime had not at all im-
proved with regard to their amount of crime within the last
five months.--( Hear, hear.) In the county of Leitrim he did
rejoice to say (and be congratulated the Noble Lord the Mem-
ber for that county on this fact) that there had been a con-
siderable diminution of crime during the last five months.—
( Hear, hear.) But he believed that the Noble Lord would
be able, much better than he could do, to establish to the
House good grounds with regard to the diminution of crime in
that particular county, and which in his (Lord Lincoln's) opi-
nion would tend very considerably to strengthen the arguments in
favour of this Bill rather than diminish them. And now with
regard to the comparison of crime in these five counties, as
compared with the whole of Ireland during the past flee
months. During that period there bad been, in the whole of
Ireland, of the class of crimes to which he had alluded, 2,093;
but in the five counties in question 1,185 of those crimes bad
been perpetrated, being considerably more than one-half of
the crimes committed in the wleole of Ireland. Now, withont
.
going into detail, because he had not time to do so, he would
make a brief comparison in the gross between the number of
crimes committed in the different counties in Ireland,
from the statement he thought the House would
see that thae;de
had, in fact been no diminution of crime in Irt yof Leitrim.eilatnd during the
last five months, with the exception of the
county
In Leitrim 138.
In Clare there had been 171 cases e•
In Limerick (and he begged to observe, cr
lhaet with regard to Li-
merick, the amount was very considerable in proportion to its
population), 210 cases. In Roscommon, be regretted to say,
there had been no diminutien, but a very great increase, 373.
In Tipperary, 296 ;
he before said, 1,188 cases for
the five counties in question,vaaki- as
whilst in the whole of Ireland
there had only been 2,o93.—(Hear, bear.) Now, as
he had this return in his hand, and as he remarked to
the House in a former part of his statement that these offences
were of a local nature, he would read a few particulars as to
the population of the counties now under comparison. He had
already stated that in the county of Roscommon, during the
last five months, there had been 333 offences, and the popula-
tion of that county was 253,000. He was glad to see the
Hon. Member for Kerry now in his place on the opposite
benches. Kerry eontained a much larger population than
Roscommon, the number of its people amounting to 293,000 ;
but in the county of Kerry, during the same period, there bad
been only sixteen offences, whilst in Roscommon there were
383•—( Hear, hear.) He would now refer the House to the
number of cffemeiCoaimitted in the county of Limerick ; the
population of that county amounted only to 281,000, and yet
the number of crimes was 210. Now in the county of Lei-
trim, as he before stated, the number of crimes was 138, whilst
the population of that county was 155,000 In the adjoining
county of Fermaiaagh, the population of which was 166,000,
the number of offences was only 14. In the county of Antrim,
with :60,0•90 inhabitants, the offences were only 17. In the
county of Dublin, exclusive of the city of Dublin, with a po-
pulat;on of 146,000, the amount of offences was only four.
Now he thought that there facts would clearly establish the
grounds which he ma ntained for the necessity of passing some
coercive measure to effect the five counties in Ireland where
crime was so rife. He admitted, with the Hon. Baronet who
moved the amendment, that it was the duty of any Govern-
ment, if introducing a measure of this nature, to prove three
things ; and in the first place they were bound to prove that an
evil existed. which ought to be met by some means or other.
he did think that if they would look to the proofs which
had been laid before the House on the former debates on this
country, that the case was made out—clearly proving the
existence of such an evil. He also thought that the pools he
had laid before the House that evening showed that there had
been not any diminution is crime within the last five months,
and he thought he might assume that the Hon. Baronet who
moved this amendment could not complain that a sufficient
case hail rot been mode out for enactments of this kind. The
Baronet stated that it was the duty of the Government
to prove that tl-sy had attempted to meet these offences by the
ordinary law, and ttiat they hod failed in so doing. He alluded
to the cans. of Westtneatb, to show that had special
cornraissione been issued, the existing state of things
might hare been prevented. In referring to that
case, the Honourable Baronet bad forgotten to tell
the House the circumstances under which that special commis-
sion was issued. Now, the circumstances which led to the
issuing of that special commission in the county of Westmeath,
were these, thaet here had previously been not only a consider-
able accumulation of officers ; but what was, of course, of
greater importance as regarded the commission, a very consider-
able accumulation of prisoners within the gaol. Under those
eircumstancsahe believed that the Lord-Lieutenant was applied
to by certain magistrates and gentry to issue a special com-
mission. '1 he Government hesitated for some time as to the
propriety of so doing. The Government doubted whether
sufficient ground existed for the issuing of the commission, and
they employed proper persons to ascertam whether such grounds
did exist ; and the result was, that the commission was issued.
Bat the Hon. Baronet asked why a special commission was not
issued for the five counties. The answer was obvious, that al-
though the state of crime was so rife, and although the number
of outrages was so great, yet the instances of detection were so
few, the committals were so rare, that there would be no
justification for the issue of a commission on those counties, for
it would in reality end in nothing. But let 'him
(the Earl of Lincoln) remind the House—when they were
Low taxed with not issuing special commissions—whey, they
were now charged by the Hon. Baronet the Member for
Drogheda, and also by the Hon. and Learned Member for
Cork, with the negligence of duty in consequence of their not
issuing special commissions—let bins remind the House that
those were not the views that had been entertained generally
by Hon. Gentlemen opposite. Unless he very greatly mis-
took, Lord Altherp in introducing the Bill of 1833, dwelt
particularly upon the total inadequacy of special commissions
to meet crimes of the kind in question.—(Hear, hear.)
That Noble Lord stated reasons which he (the Earl of Lin-
coln) thought were sound and good. Let him remind
the House also that when in 111/15 the Coercion. Bill, of a less
stringent character, was introduced, the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman for Cork deprecated the issuing of special com-
mission., and stated that the Government having declined the
attempt to diminish crime by such means, had, in his opinion,
taken a wise and prudent course. In support of this
statement he could quote Hansard, but he had no
desire to do so. He must observe at the same time
that before they could show the desirableness of issuing a spe-
cial commission, they must show that they could produce the
necessary evidenee to prosecute. Now he was encouraged to
maintain this position by reading a short extract from the evi-
dence of Mr, Cahill, given before Lord Devon. That gentle-
man was :take I whether he believed that the perpetrators of
agrarian outrages were known by • the peasantry where they
were committed, and his answer was, that he was perfectly con-
vinced that the parties knew everything of the transaction, but
that there was little disposition to give any evidence against the
yerpetratoza., He was then asked to what he attributed that
dis;3osition, and he replied that it was not attributable to any
terror, but rather a dislike to injure those of the class to which
they belonged. —( Hear, hear, from the opposition.) He stated
also that such murderers were harboured and protected, ant?, in
pint of factoweredooked upon as better men than others, be-
cause they put down what they called a tyrant. They re-
ceived the character of what they called a " good boy."—( Rem )
That showed the difficaity of obtaining evidence. Perhaps
the Hon. Baronet the Member for Cloamell was entitled at
his hands to a peculiar exelanatiest. He could give minute
information with respect to the number of offences in the five
counties he had enumerated, and the number of committals.
The total number of offences was 1,193, out of which number
there were only 54 committals. In Tipperary the number of
off,,ce, was ene, and 19 committals.- In the county of. Lime-
riek the number of offences was 210, and 12 committals. In
Leitrim there was 133- offences committed, and 8 committals.
la Clara the neraber of offences was 171, and the committals
were 7. In.-Rosscommon, where he :vas sorry that crime was
on the increase, out of the large number of offences, 383, there
hod been only &eonsmittals, in consequence of the unwilling-
ness of witnesses to come forward. The great majority of
theee effenees •+.6re committed during the night. In the
county of Tipperary between 130 and 140 of the offences were
committed at night.
11r. DENISON—Not offences against
Lord LINCOLN resumed. Between 130 and 140 were
committed ateight, and on the average between 60 and 70 in
the day time, The same proportion prevailed in the '
other counties. The principles which were intended to be
embodied " in this measure were similar i i effect
to those Which were already extended to districts in England
when cases of rebellion or rioting occurred. In every case of
riot the district was mulcted for the offences committed within
its range. There was another provision which was essentially
different from the Act of 1835, and that was to give power to
the Lord LiekitYnant to proclaim any district instead of vesting
the Power it, the hands of the grand jnry and gentlemen of the
He astonished that an • objection was made to
that's p;ovision. He believed that'in 16.333
te Minister, in his
pbltaacasisinwelarea4irletylamoennetailth although he admitted that military tri-
bunals
still they were preferable to
the graretiussee 11; irTabdie'aey7esrae
said
constituted.
he Ilenonsrableeteminu fee er
present ass Oppbytuttity for Cork
rt. had id that there was at
de-
cision of parties to traverse from the de-
ot,inwtitt
the
there would be no means
of traversing from the
floumseoTeseti,aeasercheck upbon the
red Lieutenant. But,
he would ask, would not that
tt.t.i,onrerersufilyeitehoet
manifestation of any extraerdinai
Cheere.) VAS net
Lord-Lieutenant'?—(
to restrain any Lord-Lieutenant from improperly abesihg the
with which ha might be vested. The penalty in ees powers
Bill was certainly more severe than itnhatthethefoNrmoebrleßLl2r.a He
had understood on the first reading,
he was surprised that the
Member for the city of London intended to move an amend..te
:tient on this clause in Committee, and
Noble Lord should now turn round so soon, and make
this clause a nelson for throwing out the
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I propose to whole Bill.
omit the clause
altogether.
Lord LINCOLN understood that it was his intention to
move an amendment in Committee, and he should be glad to
hear ii he opposed the Bill on principle, at what period it was
since the year 1835 that his opinions had changed upon the
subject of coercive measures. It hart been stated that the
Government adopted coercive measures and had neglected
conciliatory measures. He would ask whether the Charitable
Bequests Bill was not a proof of the good spirit in which they
had conductel the Government of the country? Did not the
Government introduce a measure foe the endowment of May-
nooth, which gave conshlerable offence to their frienth? Another
measure was calculated to extend the system of national edu-
cation. There azain, with r forence to the landlord and
tenant question. The Hon. Member, who complained of the
Government not bringing in a Bill founded on the report of the
Devon Commissien, could not have looked very attentively on
the paper or he would !hive. seen that he had given notice at a
date not later than Friday next, of his intenfon to move for
leave to introduce three Bills founded ms these measures. And
then with ref. rence to the measures wlarh the Government had
adopted to relieve .11e distress in Ireland, their oppcncnts had
given them c.edit for their endeavour?. Thry had
provided, to a large extent, food and employment
for the people of Ireland. They had had to entluto the
reproach of former friends, v.hich they felt they did
not deserve; they had to bear reproach in Parliamentwhich he. was sure they would tot have received out of the
House—opprobrium which had only been. vast up on them for
party purposes. They had voted considerable sums for the
promotion of public work; ; they had also distributed large
glare hies of India:t meal among the people of Ireland, and I
they would lock bark in after years ti:-on what had been done
in the present day by the Government as a proof of the good !
feeling of the Government towards them. They had sane-
tioned the expenditure of 120,000/. for the promotion of public
works, mhich, when completed, would involve an outlay on
the part of individual proprietors of half a million of money,
and would, of course, give both food and employment for a
considerable time to the people in the districts %here the works
were constructed, and would also provide a valuable return for
the i
capital nveted. He considered that although the Govern-
ment had done much ,a -eatdeal could yet be done by private in-
dividuals, but so long'
as the country remained in its present
disturbed state it could
not
be expected that the landlords would
invest their capital. If Hon. Members opposite wished to deprive
the landlords
passs lieußill.
anyexcuse fornot remaining in the country
;aey presentHe% felt himself bound tc