The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-24 00:00:00

c,he
Or"

rn-
; a
pit
he

wo
xd
Ley
!nt
He

011
of
lero
1 ill
t of

)-ob
Lad
)0(1

;ing

"
kti:)urabi
bthZ

'Pbecause he was confident if he had the means of show-
R the commercial statistics of Ireland since the
,yea
I:2, he would not feel himself called upon to argiiii, the
i ease further. In fact. the measure of 1825 deprive_
..th ,
, house of the most valuable information that could ossibl)
sees' upplied upon thepresent discussion ; and he hoped. that
f ong snine means would be devised for ascertaining the
li cross-channel trade and by that means the exact pro;
li Portions borne in it, by England and Ireland' He
nehxe
1 •
knumber and
' lame to show the increase which had taken place in the
i ports of Irelandtonnage of 'vessels entered inwards in the
1 ilnfor between the years 1790 and 1834. This
mat;011 would be found in the document marked No.
F, - From that Paper it appeared that the number of shipste
!Ith 'ered in
„ Wards for the triennial period terminatingonh
4,,,,, of 'January, 1790, was 7,243, and that their tonnage
;"'4°,lrited to 6-)2 013 tons. But what was the number..
' 1,„-a,," t"nage of the ships entered inwards for the triennial
V,"od terminating on the sth of January, 1834 ? Between
i,e,and 1834 no fewer than 15,189 ships, with a
etonnasagae
'i•vr0'",123,291 tons, were entered inwards.
proof of aw de-
l' eii Pt In of a failing country ; here was
Buthoawprand when had
theillintigrPresPeritY I (Hear,
hear.)ta,l( place ? Had it taken
ij %.,, cutieaseotf_
ethe tonnage
1 , '‘;-'r Crd h Irish Parliament ? No. (Hear, hear.)
Ithe, al. from its taking place under the Irish Parliament_
"e was a trifling diminution in the number of ships, if 1,. noun the
4, Period tonnage, upon the computation for the triennial
1 niter ending in 1800. (Hear.). e. number of ships
14 1790 e" Inwards within the triennial period terminatitngwains
:h ;was x,243, while for the period ending in 1800 i
otrt7i; : a trifling diminution unquestionably, but still
hi theY cif notice. ( Hear, hear.) Since the Union, both
'. 44 nuMber of ships and amount of
.tonnage an increase
ta
the ken Place. For the triennial period ending in 1810
eriod ending in
tor,:unb..er of ships entered inwards was 8,3.93, and. their
f aost '64,658 tons ; for the triennial p
, al, t,.. e number was 10,955, and tonnage 96,1,884 ;for
azia ;lennial period ending 1830 the number was 13,337,
ill Ito,''anage 1,325,079; and for the triennial period
tr, as he had already stated, the number
el,
ferelesasn,lB9g,
Itirnbee tonnage 1,523,921 tons. As far, the
erile,4,l' and tonnage of the shipping of Ireland was' con-
( Perat, the whole of the increase took place under the
Was t °t, of the Imperial Parliament, andno portion of it
Isere be attributed to the Irish Parliament. He would
411,40 a little out of his line, to remove a great delusion
r
ltibrn'' assage in the speech of the hon. memberwhich
1141(1.1d Was Calculated to create. The passage to
tho
Cti, .t`i, eons
°At i-iinwas that in which the hon. member sought to prove
umption of articles in Ireland had decreased
141-gehi'atke Union. The means by which the hon. memberstf_
heio„ tike end were ingenious, but he thouhtm
and,o after
estit's• Ile took, say the article of tobacco,o
' Irel..g that the increase of consumption
union
ntoonbawccaso in
t
ths 'ld within
lithe 20 Years previous to the i
: c4ririrate °f per cent., and in England (at the same
years)"" at the rate of 64 percent., and that within the 20
1.? kl übsequent to the union te rate of increase in
~san„ be 27 per cent., while in Ireland the con-
thatl.lr,rn decreased ed at the rate of 37 per cent., he argued
ttpe,;`"e difference between the two proportions showed the
)0,-L°f matters in Ireland. Now that he contended was
Pr,'„-Lectly fallacious conclusion. To compare Irish with
h'l,°"sh consumption on such a basis as that used by the
4it% and learned member proved nothing whatever, and he
:',',li at once proceed to demonstrate the grounds on
h,'tn he made the assertion. He would put a case to the
i5„.44. He would suppose that he (Mr. S. Rice) con-
Wit"h!ti one hogshead of wine in a year, while another party
1,,,,:n the same time consumed ten hogsheads. Now sup-
i, two al place of one hogshead a year he was to consume
were and that the other party instead of ten hogsheads,
pro to consume fifteen, what would be the result of the
thoP°rtion ? In the first instance, namely, in the case of
nu:Taller consumer, there would. be an increased con-
, ate ton of 100 per cent., while in the other instance,
er, of the large consumer, there would be only an in-
' ore °,f 50 per cent. But which of the two increases
\l' - uo
not lore indicative of wealth and prosperity ?
b ,Idd not h
Ili the Party who added five hogsheads to his
1,
t,,4aerrYouseetnhasunrnpthtieoupahrety considered more wealthy and
thiaPtion by one single hoshead?
who only increased his
(Hear , hear. ) Now
he,‘.course was strictly applicable to the argument of the
' Petkiand learned
membery for Dublin. Everything de-
-•,,i0 on the •and looking at the cal-
''',atj point of departure,
petiau asserted that it proved nothing.
l'i-e''s of the hon. member in that point of view, he
(Hear.) But to
be. rLit to the subject of trade and navigation. It would
toutZollected by the house that in the report of the corn-
rity ;°ll the subject in 1830 it was stated, on the autho-1
ekpott Sir Charles Whitworth's tables, that the annual Lad iLrade of Ireland for the seven ears between 1823
"ha ~.—v amounted but to the sum of 2,000,0001. Now,
portt ''t,.
,°nid the house think when he told them that the
Cu‘°nient'le of Ireland to Liverpool alone at the present
. ' "aeh tit exceeded that amount to a considerable extent?
ducedas the proof of the growing poverty of Ireland ad-
,theta il„,the hon. member and his co-repealers. But to
ir SO iiit —ado a little matter whether there was a decrease.
4 14 reeta eaSe in consumption. (Cheers.) If there was
l'u'erte • se m consumption it was stated to be a proof of
rlear) i if a decrease was visible it was equally so.
!solved The fact was, the advocates of repeal were
Prove herot be poor, and it was lost time attempting to
they s,, editor hayot so'. Poverty was their deity, and
\\orsh e resolved that none other should be
(~ ' °Vt5 Of
yet the Pied in Ireland. (Laughter.) It was proved that
eased, and"n-
`sauce was Yet it had of late years considerably. i
1., was thrown out that that very circum-
ountsv. But'roof of the poverty and distress. of the
nisi' j how
had the vast increase in
.the
alto.etficeNrt trade to En land arisen ? It had arisen
Nit r IT the aphcatigon ef steam navigation to that
h. y, andther
,' trusted • e was in that mighty element apower which
the '4ler In many other respects would yet prove de-
tll,,, 6 Ire to the eatue of repeal; it would defeat repeal in
1 ''Sji, rst Place by bringing the two countries more directly in
1.
hy
~ Would make
c' I 4 ; it Idthem know each other (and they
Perb anted to know each other to become mutually pros-
rely :18); it would induce English capitalists to settle in
f
th'y!.4d, and employ their resources to the improvement. o
the ,country ; but, above all, it would prove beneficial to
11.ks`,„wo countries, by approximating their markets, and by
111,94 on a solid basis that connection, the most per-
l'' k .ut of all, be it observed, which arose out of mutual
41g114---, Ole'ar, hear.) The trade of Ireland was improv-
t'e ',,ludlY under its influence, and there was every reason
thals'ordt that that improvement was fixed on a permanent
Irreetli;basis' He would here take the opportunity of
'subject e
' of ‘ti,
Ir. p 1'1„,,,a stAternent which the hon. member for Cork
Ale member
Connor) was reported to have made on
which he the of Limerick, the county of Ireland
more immediately connected. That
was reported to have stated--(he
r !I°t whether correctly or otherwise, but, unlike someb
ht°l(2olllividuals Whom he could name, the hon. member
goer goetWasroott,ever Made observations out of the house which
this it aaarbeePared to repeat within its walls, and th
Iti44,' or ether_
.. easy to ascertain whether the report was
p,(ls ) to tanlcl ise)---that it was very easy for him (Mr. S.
4tieeritv, b cd. the imports of Ireland as indicative. of
liso its 'st, but that if he looked to his native
city he would
041'11 to breets covered with grass. Now he was most
)r d toerir.totlbtsable to relieve the hon. gentleman. from
that'. 11 °Pon the condition of the city of Li-
to hear
1,411' s° st'''out
would be glad, fet sure,it
was
ra_
teriY,,anti etteu.°M that city being grass-grown,
er o' Ns oadvancing in prosperity.. Biit the pros-
Nitrity 15' he was happy to.say,.contined to Limerick.
aeail,s4}., atiaa:s making rapid strides in every district of the
absent ' hint „if the gentlemen whom he now. saw arrayed
Itti bless•o"ctuld only allow its people to enjoy the I.onge-
Nv: °f t" ill of a little tranquillity (Loud cheers) h
%%le „,s° cps
in the world more likely to assume an
1" . 'l' t "81ti°4 and rank. (Renewed cheers.) (here
ki‘O learsrad, ,! Which had made rapid strides within the last
et, telate'd that was the trade in porter. A few yearest
ttaclt4''leree • has an importing country in that articlet
atir %sUPpiv 7.14 at the present moment not only did e
'Ater' eon I the wants of the Irish people, but there was
rif ti,6llly ,-S.'derable export to England and the Colonies.
hay
ce-,,lshed for their own sakes, as well as for the sake
~nat..4ielves'lltritr that certain . individuals would confine
"et '°e• of more to the brewing of porter and less to the
(1114 In% Political scenes, which, in the end,. must turn
ittoN. hear, for themselves as for their country.
ded. li'a rh-4' hear ) But he might be asked, supposing
Ntitlitiß "`, as he" alleged it was, that Ireland, instead oi
atc Vaiq was advancing in prosperity, whence arose the
ec4tat iorQr.,,the peopre ? He confessed he could note
'els' and I, ".11 of them (Hear. ) For some of them
~Niail,,,°f, thZthought saiisfactorily, but not for all of them.
ncti log '" arose from the alteration in. the mode ol
,keei7,4°, of `:'l-ornercial business in Ireland since the intro-
'llc'cl '444.arn navigation. Formerly merchants used to
t ac-
NiZisitir,st°res in the .different ports. of Ireland for
S-5 as -6 of merchandise until required ; bu. ,
at .
wilie i the English markets became approxim they
uia.s.'"hed ibutrodection of steam navigation,
_-
Pk - the .I"se stores, and only sent for goods accord
4i4ht, whey requir..,
to t'cL them. That was one cause of coni-
,4ecjetting fa„. mot others wre of a similar character, on;
I,ne ~,1 than ~e from a change in the constitution o
"44°°vern,,,' 'Nil any particular defect in the system. bed
tottedrelteit
tote-4aftent of the country. The topic to which.
ite
tih h th acute
Was one of considerable importance.
tiPouehnione stag of the manufactures of Ireland previousd
that
if -I
the.,., 'his was a topic which was much pressed
tot ,f
to.the 7,:°cates of repe-al, their constant cry being
-v° -'llllf 4 Were repealed an imlse would be given Pres`e„not o,a,ctures of I' land.Novw he was prepared to
tli,, •". la -"I tree le manufactures at the
tip:, Uniehr4eitt at the state of ttie .
..4' R''' L'lt '4." more flourishing than it teas before
°f the wnd,torit,bat it was so flourishing by reason of t e
the,,,
nerd' be l'cr, that repeal would, in the fullest. sense
thee.them sidt,
Ruh deathblow deathblow to its prosperity. First, let
Ghho efwe the"ltitat was the state of the Irish manufac-
aeisUlTeft° Whairi°n• Upon that point he would refer
,-,-Nocee', rian, ", eonstituted the very best evidence
.on
li'teratioentlt•e°l4-jeathe petitions presented to the Irish
fined"'e bean. in th ining of distress, and praying for , at,
,_'''d the commercial laws of the country. 1\ ow
,lea' tl,e'ut those duoue_se to attend to him
.while he briefly re-
'clared . ora the "ments. The assertion of the. repealer
'n.ia • its ind Period at which the Irish parliamenthat
sinel4ll3.tlnhit,s.ePendence, up to the year 1800, Irelanc
h„,i'rupted pros erity • that such•
as 11 satfered were then pr
' unknown ; and that the

peasantry, the 'manufacturers, and the artizans were both
busy and happy. Now he would beg the house to contrast
that assertion with the list of petitions he was about to
read -to them t—
"On the 3 ,th of Octal Cr, 1771, p titian was received from
Cork, representing that th, tif,.cturers :and artificers there
were in the utmost di,trt s ; • i.e
on the 6th of December :bilowing a similar petitioa way r. ivrl
. from Wexford. _ _ _

On the 31st of October, 1763, the Lord Mayor and eiti7,:sns
of Dublin petitioned for duties tm imported goods, and restraint.;
on the exportation. of ma,erials, to re-establish the almost
ruined manufactures;' and on the 3.1 of November following
petitions were received from the Guild of Merchants in Dublin,
and from the inhabitants of Dublin, Cork, Queen's County,
Csrrick.on.Suir, Roserea, and other places, representing that
Ireland was pregnant wills the most alarming circumstances of
distress.'

" On the 2%th of January, 17,,8, Mr. Edwards, of Old Court,
county of Wicklow, petitioned for money to enable him to ma-
nufacture fl,rest cic.a, and bring over a number of manufac-
turers' families fr,m England And on the 31st of the same
month the Londonderry Gre?nland Fishery Company pet,tioned
for 3,0011. to build refining-houses, and to ri pay the expenses
incurred by their outfit, and by bring ng from England expe-
rienced officers, artificers, harpooners, and s amen and alsa all
the materials necessary for carrying on the fishery.'
" On the 13th of February, 179.1, 111e4srs. O'Reilly, of the Argina
Iron Works, Leitrim, petitioned for 10,000/. t:, carry on their
works, as they had incurred heavy expenses in their outfit, and
' by employing foreign artificers.'
" On the 25th of January, 1793, Messrs. Gregg and others pe-
titioned for aid to mMU facture delph and • earthenware in Bel-
fast, their expenses h ,ving exceeded their expectations, and
having been obliged to bring their workmen from foreign
places.' _ _

" Un the 25th of February, 1723, the parishioners of St.
Luke's, in the Liberty of Dublin, petitioned against the police
tax, representing that the greater part of them were dependent
on the produce of their labour as manufacturers, which af-
forded them a very scanty subsistence,' and that within the
preceding twenty years the parish had declined considerably
in value.

" On the 18th of March, the servants of the Irish Nobi-
lity and tientry petitioned, comp Lining of the employment of
foreigners. _ _

•' On the sth of February, 1794, the Corporation for the Relief
of the Poor of Duhlin petitioned for aid, reprPsenting that the
dearness of provision and fuel was one of the principal causes of
distress.

" In 1797 a Bill was presented to the Irish Parliament to re-
gulate the wilding of houses in Dublin, and prevent the exten-
tion of fires. Petitions against it were received from the Cor-
porations of Carpenters and Bricklayers, and also from the
journeymen carpenters, who declared that they were already
reduced to the utmost distress by want of employmzii,.' "

The idea of builders praying the Parliament not to pass a
law to protect houses from fire was certainly a ridiculous
one, but certainly it was not more absurd than that for
which, in all probability, some of their descendants were
now petitioning—he need scarcely say the repeal of the
Union. So far as to the general state of trade and em-
ployment ; but the petitions emanating from particular
trades presented an equally wretched and deplorable pic-
ture. He would content himself by stating a few of those
petitions:—
" On the 31st October, 178,3, a petition was received from the
broad cloth manufacturers of Dublin, representing that, by the
importation of cloths and the exportation of materials, they
were then in a state of unparalleled distress.' And on the fol-
lowing day a similar petition was received from the working
worsted-weavers.

" On the s;h February, 1787, a petition was received from the
woollen and worsted manufacturers of Dublin, representing
their great di-tress, and praying for aid to avert the necessity of
turning their workmen ad, ift. On the 12th of the same mouth
a similar petition was presented from Cork.
" On the 30th of April, 1793, a petition was received from the
Irish woollen manufacturers generally, stating that, from the
commencement of the failures and distresses in England, the
goods then in preparation in Ireland, and those subsequently
fabricated to keep the workmen employed, were all remaining oil
hands; and that they were unable to continue employing the
working people. of whom there were nearly fitteen thousand
in wretchedness, who would perish unless relieved.'
" On the 18th of June, 1792, a petition was rt ceived from the
working worsted-weavers, &c., of Dublin, representing that they
were then reduced to penury and famine.'
" On the :list of January, 1788, a petition was received from
the manufacturers of sattinets, &c., in Dublin, representing that
they had laboured under insupportable distress during the pre-
ceding year, owing to the price of materials, and that more than
one-half of the working manufacturers were then, 'by want of
employ's ent, reduced to a degree of wretchedness beyond de-
scription.'
" On the 21st of June, 1793, a petition was received horn the
working silk-manufacturers in Dublin, representing that silk-
weaving was nearly annihilated ;' that, in 1791, twelve hun-
dred looms were engaged in silk fabrics in Dublin ;' and that
nine-tenths of the persons then employed were subsequently re-
duced to penury, and were a burden on their fellow-citizens.'
" On the Sth of February, 1787, the cotton manufacturers of
Belfast and Drogheda, the principal manufacturing towns, re-
presented to Parliament that they could not carry on the
trade without a bounty of Si. per cent. on the value of their
home sales, in addition to the protecting duty charged on im-
ports.
•• On the 30th of April, 1793, the Irish cotton manufacturers
represented that from the commencement of the failures and
distresses in England the goods then its preparation in Ireland,
and those subsequently fabricated to keep the workmen em-
ployed, were all remaining on hand, and that the petitioners
were no longer able to give employment.
" On the tith of February, 1788, the Irish calico and muslin
manufacturers petitioned for the repeal of the import ditty on
cotton yarn, as otherwise their trade could not be extended.
But counter-petitions from the cotton-spinners were presented
on the 10th, 12th, and 15th of the said mouth. The spinners
of Prosperous, county of Kildare, stated that they had no ad-
vantage trom their trade in the preceding year hut the amount
of the protecting impost of lid. per lb. And the Dublin spinners
represented that'two.thirds of their machinery had been idle
during the preceding twelve mouths, and that the remainder
would be unemployed if the duty on imported cotton yarn were
repealed.
On the 13th of February, 1797, the cotton-weavers of Dub-
lin petitioned for an increase of the import duty on British
manufactured grey cottons, as great numbers of Irish weavers
were then reduced to beggary."'

But of what character were the measures of the Irish Par-
liament ? Were they founded on principles likely to provo
a check upon the distress so generally complained of ? He
would cite one instance as a specimen of many. In order
to protect the interests of one or two colliers a tax was im-
posed upon all foreign coal. This was done at the instiga-
tion of the owners of the collieries, who, in order to enrich
themselves, limited the Irish people to the option of using
a bad article, or of paying a heavy tax for a good one.
The hon. member, in the course of his speech, stated that
the repeal of the union duties were more for the benefit of
the manufacturers of England than those of Ireland. If
artiocfl e
ever there was a mistake, that certainly was one. What
w
protecting
of
wastoriseTthhee
price the
of the effect
;? It
protection. the
consequence wasthat the artificers were confined to the mar-
kets where the fine was imposed, from which it must at once
be obvious their interests were prejudiced. But what was
the fact? Why, when the last reduction was declared to
take place on a certain day, the merchants and manufac-
turers, finding that the previous reductions had been at-
tended with great benefit to themselves, petitioned Parlia-
ment that the final repeal should take place immediately.
(Hear, hear.) He thought he had now given a complete
answer to the hon. and learned member. (Hear, hear,
hear.) There was something in the name of a pro-
tecting duty which had a strong temptation to those who
were ignorant of its real effect, and of that temptation the
hon. and learned member, it was well known, had availed
himself when exciting agitation upon the repeal question.
In Ireland the hon. and learned member had stated re-
peatedly that if the union were repealed he was ready to
consent to a protecting duty on Irish manufactures to the
extent of twenty-five per cent. This he stated in Ireland;
out he would not state it in that house, for he felt it
would not answer his purpose to do so. (Hear, hear. )
Ireland was an agricultural country that required a supply
of English manufactures, whilst England was a manufac-
turing country requiring to be supplied by Ireland with
corn. If, therefore, it was good for the people of Ireland to
send corn to the people of England, and if it were good for
the people of England to return manufactures in exchange,
what became of the argument that the export of corn was
the cause of poverty in Ireland ? What became of the
doctrine of giving Ireland the benefit of duties which
would restrict this mutually beneficial trade ? The hon.
and learned gentleman was bound to vote against a repeal
of the union if such were to be the consequences. This ap-
peared to him to be a most important part of the question.
It was second to none, and the state of the manufacture of
Ireland was a matter upon whichhe wished earnestly to fix
the attention of the house. The hon. and learned member
had stated that there had been no inquiry into this subject
oefore the union, but he was most egregiously in error.
There had been published the long deliberations in the
committee of the whole house. There had likewise been
an inquiry into the state of Irish manufactures. One
gentleman had stated that the manufactures could not exist
without a protecting duty ; and another had said that a
duty of from 30 to 40 per cent. ad valorem was necessary
to secure the home market, and that every wise legislature
would secure the home market, as it was exclusively
supplied by home manufactures. Mr. Gallighan had
considered the superintending of the parliament necessary
for the protection of the silk trade of Dublin, and yet all
that was done in his time was to send over to England to
get the Spitalfields Act, and to fix the point of wages be-
tween labourer and master. But he would come to the
subject of sugar. Mr. Cross had said that before the union
there had been twenty sugar-houses in Ireland, and that
from ten to twenty men were employed in each; and he
(Mr. S. Rice) asked whether it would be necessary to
call on parliament to repeal the union in order to keep up
the protecting duties on twenty sugar-houses? The next
point was very important. Mr. Grimshaw, of Belfast, had
said that the manufacture of cotton goods in Ireland cost
from 40 to 50 per cent. more than in England, owing to
the price of coals and labour; but now, since the union,
cotton goods were actually printing in Belfast for Man-
chester, in consequence of the removal of the absurd pro-
tection which was one of the consequences of the repeal of
the union. Mr. Williams had said that Irish glass be-
fore the union had required a protecting duty of thirty-
four per cent., and that it was otherwise out of the
power of Ireland to manufacture or send a single article
of this sort to England. What was the case now ?
[he Irish manufacturer not only sent his glass to
England, but he was able to compete with the English
manufacturer in the foreign market. He had a letter in
his hand from a gentleman of the highest possible autho-
rity, giving an account of the state of the cotton manufac-
tures in Dublin. He had said that there had been two
manufacturers in Dublin, and that they were both bank-
rupts. Now calicoes were printed in Dublin, and sent to
England and Scotland, and one house alone had exported
to the value of 80,000/. ; and this was owing to the free
intercourse between England and Ireland, and to the re-
peal of the protecting duties. The silk trade had decidedly
improved. The tabinet-workers were fully employed, and
raw silk was sent from England to be thrown in Ireland,
and to be returned. The export of porter from Dublin
was remarkable. In 1792 the porter and ale consumed in
Ireland was imported from England ; now Ireland was au

exporting country. The tanning trade, with the manu-
facture of oil of vitriol and of bleaching-powder, were nog•
thriving in Ireland. But the manufacture of machine:,
had sprung up in Ireland, which was the best proof of ai
that manufactures in general were thriving. He shook
say, if any one thing more than another could prove tin
thriving state of Ireland since the union, it was the fact
of that country passing from a rude and simple stat,
of manufacture into the use of machinery. But the
country having arrived at this stage of manufactur-
ing industry, how was capital to be employed in
it ? Unless there were tranquillity, unless then
were security for property, unless there were secu-
rity for life, how could it be expected that capitalist:
would invest money in fixed manufactories, and expos(
themselves to agitation and convulsion ? (Hear, hear. )
When manufacturing industry was rude, and simple agita-
tion was not productive of so much evil, the peasant might
escape with his loom, or would suffer little by the loss of
his loom ; but the capitalist, who had 100,0001. to invest
in fixed property, aslong as alarm was excited, felt him-
self insecure, and as long as his home and happiness were
likely to be disturbed by agitation, would say, " I will not
risk any establishment in such a country." (Cheers.) The
necessity of repose to Ireland was infinitely
.greater now
than it ever had been. There wAs not one single gentle-
man of Ireland, that threw that country into agitation and
confusion, that did not incur the responsibility of injuring
that country, and of depriving its inhabitants of the means
of supporting themselves. (Hear, hear.) He would now
return to the woollen trade. Since the repeal of the coal
duties large steam-engines had been erected in Ireland, and
there had been a very great extension of manufactures.
The principal site of this manufacture had been Dublin,
and before the union there had been 300 looms, and about
2,000 men had been employed in them. He would not
name his authority.

Mr. GRATTAN here requested the right hon. gentle-
man to name his authority.
Mr. S. RICE—He would not name, but he would state
his reason for not naming, lest it might be said that he
was speaking from anonymous authority. Such a question
was dealt with very quietly on this side of the water, but it
was a very different case on the other side of the channel.
Even he himself had been denounced before a large meet-
ing in Ireland because he differed in opinion from certain
gentlemen in that house. He did not complain of this,
but he did lament that if a fault should be found in him, it
should not be found within that house, where he would
have an opportunity of answering it, rather than before an
excited multitude. It had been told to the people of Ire-
land that there was no chance of justice being done to their
country as long as he continued to be a servant of the pub-
lic. This had been said. It was too much the custom to
hold up persons to public obloquy for merely a difference of
Opinion, but he did trust that it would be found that in no
case had he ever acted unjustly. When he found that the
Irishman who was hostile to a repeal of the union was de-
clared to be weak and wicked, and deserving of contempt,
or dishonest, and deserving of execration—when a person
for differing in opinion on this subject was even held up as
deserving of assassination—when he found that names,
vulgar, abusive names, were unjustly applied to individuals
of the highest rank and respectability, the hon. member
would excuse him if he now refused to give up the names
of those from whom he derived his information. He would
expose no man to be held up as an object of public execra-
tion to a misled and excited populace. He spoke upon the
best information, and all gentlemen who had known him,
and he trusted that the house would not believe that he
was capable of manufacturing such statements, or of giving
them an undue colouring. (Hear. )
Mr. GRATTAN—WiII you give the facts ?
Mr. S. RICE was happy to give the facts. There had
been 300 looms in Dublin employing 2,000 individuals of
all classes. Small as this number might appear it was
tolerably correct, for the importation of English wool was
not allowed. Spanish wool was not imported, and Irish
wool was alone worked up, and this was coarse and
amounted to only 8,000 bags, equal to 4,000,000 stone,
which, at 15s. a stone, amounted in value to 256,0001.
This was not equal to the consumption of two Yorkshire
manufactories. The trade had been ruined, not by the
acts of the English Parliament, but by the combinations
of the Irish workmen. Such had been the effects of the
protecting duties. The abolition of the anti-union duties
had given a new impulse to trade, and were it not for agi-
tation the Irish manufacturer would have nothing to fear
from competition. He would now come to what had been
said respecting the woollen trade of Kilkenny. The offi-
cial returns had shown that the number of mills worked
by water was only eleven. The woollen manufactures ol
Kilkenny had always been confined to coarse cloths and
blankets until 1806, and all the operations had been carried
on by manual labour. Afterwards water-power mills had
been introduced, and now the manufactures had increased
two or three fold. Carpets were now made there, and
this perhaps accounted for the petition from Kidderminster
in favour of the repeal of the union. Dr. Doyle had said
that if artisans could be convinced of the evils of com-
bination great advantages would result to them and to the
country at large. At Kilkenny, whilst he (Dr. Doyle)
was there, 400 artisans had applied for relief, and the
blanket manufacture had been extinguished. Although
the artisans were relieved out of the public funds, yet
when the manufacturers received an order they would
not work except upon higher wages than the manufacturers
could pay. What, then, became of the Kilkenny
case ? So far from the union having injured the manu-
facturers of Kilkenny, it had nothing to do with it.
He would now say a word on the linen trade. He de-
plored the necessity of detaining the house with details of
this description ; but he had no alternative. (Hear.) He
held in his hand a letter from an individual in the north of
Ireland. That letter denied that the linen trade had suf-
fered from the union. At present linen goods were manu-
factured much more extensively than before the union.
The Irish Parliament, by prohibiting the importation of
foreign yarn and flax, had deeply injured the linen manu-
facture in Ireland. The Parliament of Great Britain,
however, had acted more wiiely. That branch of the Irish
manufactures which had been almost lost by the absurd
conduct of the local legislature had been regained by the
better system of policy which had been adopted by the Im-
perial Parliament. In answer to a letter which he had
written to ascertain the state of trade at Belfast and its
neighbourhood, he had been assured that one single mill at
present produced more yarn than all the mills in the North
of Ireland had done before the union ; that the protecting
duties which formerly existed had greatly retarded the pro-
gress of the trade, by preventing competition ; that it was
difficult at present to procure a sufficient number ol
brewers, that they were never before so comfortably off;
and that the same remark was applicable to all the work-
men engaged in the foundries, and to the millwrights. And
yet the hon. and learned member for Dublin held out pro-
tecting duties as essential to the success of the manufac-
turers in Ireland. It appeared by the same letter, that
since the union, nine flax mills and fifteen cotton mills
had been erected at Belfast, and ight more were in pro-
gress. He thought, therefore, that he had completely
made out the proposition which he wished to establish—
namely, that the manufacturers of Ireland had greatly
risen since the union, and that the cause of their progress
was the freedom of intercourse which the measures of the
imperial parliament had introduced in contradistinction to
the unwise policy of the local legislature. (Hear. hear. )
To repeal the union, therefore, and to return to the old
system of restriction on trade, would evidently tend to the
utter destruction of the manufacturers of Ireland ; and he
called upon hon. members opposite, who must now be ren-
dered aware of that fact, to go back to Ireland and unde-
ceive the people on the subject. (Hear, hear.) The-
hon. member for Limerick knew the true interests of
commerce too well not to be aware that if the union be-
tween the two countries were dissolved, and a system of
drawbacks and bounties, such as existed before the union,
were re-established, the effect upon the manufacturers of
Ireland would be most detrimental. And yet it was such
a state of things that the Irish manufacturer had been
taught to believe was all that was requisite for his pros-
perity. Let him be undeceived ; let the manufacturers of
Ireland become good political economists, and sure he was
that they would become stanch anti-repealers. (Hear,
hear.) He would now address himself to the condition
of the city of Dublin. They had always heard it stated,
that before the union the city of Dublin had been in the
greatest prosperity, but since the union it had fallen into
the greatest decay. Now he found that so far back as the
year 1780 the greatest distress had existed among the
weavers in the liberties of Dublin. The hon. and learned
member knew well where those liberties were, for his use-
ful and benevolent exertions had frequently mitigated the
sufferings of their inhabitants. It appeared, however,
from the statement of a gentleman of the highest character,
and of the most unwearied charity, of the name of White-
law, that before the union the condition of the weavers and
their families, who resided in the liberties of Dublin, was
such, that anything more horrible it was impossible to con-
ceive. Mr. Whitelaw described the difficulties which he
found in reaching a house to which he was directed for the
purpose of relieving the tenants from the dreadful distress
under which they were labouring. He stated that the roof
was shattered ; that torrents of water were pouring into
every room ; that nothing could be more frightful than the
gaunt and sallow looks of the unhappy wretches whom he
saw ; that in one garret seven persons were dying of want;
that the landlord, unable to obtain any rent, had taken up
the floors of the apartment, which nevertheless contained
thirty-seven persons, all in a state of extreme destitution.
This description proceeded from an authority of most un-
questionable character. It related to a state of things a
year or two before the union ; a state of things, there-
fore, which could not be considered as a consequence of
the union. ( Hear.) He did not mean to reason from
this particular instance to any general conclusion, but
merely to show by it that great distress did exist at
the period in question in the heart of the great metropolis
of Ireland, and that it was not too much to suppose that
the general condition of the people of Dublin before the
union was not so exceedingly prosperous as it was now repre-
sented to be. But what had occurred in Dublin since the
union ? It had been maintained that the trade of Dublin
had decayed. What were the usual indications of the
decay of trade in any place ? The destruction of houses,
and the abandonment of the inhabitants. He held in his
hands a calculation of the number of houses—and houses
of no common description—which had been built in Dublin
since the union. From that calculation it appeared that
the number of houses which had been built since the

--.

inion, within the Circular-row, was 2,213 ; and that
about 1,000 had been built within what might be called
he city, but wit! out the Circular-row. It might be said,
,ahaps, that these houses were of a mean and wretched
escription. Such, however, was not the case, Fitz-
illiam-square had been altogether built since the union.
Jerrion-square had been completed since the union. Fitz-
.villiam-street, Sackville-street, and a variety of others,
lad either been entirely built or completed since the union.
the value of the houses which had been thus erected he
,vould bring to a fair test. He would calculate it upon
he average value of the houses in Dublin. The number
if houses in Dublin was 70,324, of which the rental
was about 701/. Now taking the average rental of the
whole city of Dublin as applicable to the houses which
had been built since the union, he found that the rental
of those houses was 123,526/. Was not that a proof of
,ecreasing prosperity ? Was the building of houses a
?roof of the decay of a city, and the increase of rental
proof of the poverty o' its inhabitants ? (Hear, hear,
hear.) But this increase was not confined to Dublin ; it
ran through all the towns of Ireland. In Limerick, Bel-
fast, &e., buildings had greatly increased since the Union.
Fhe hon. and learned gentleman had told the house that
the people of Ireland were taxed to build Regent-street
and the National Gallery in London. In the first place it
should be remembered, that the workmen employed in
these erections were principally Irish. (Hear, hear.) But
if the people of Ireland had contributed to the improve-
ment of London, the people of England had equally contri-
buted to the improvement of Dublin. And here he must
beg to allude to one part of the argument urged by the hon.
and learned gentleman which appeared to him most extra-
ordinary. The hon. and learned gentleman contended that
injustice to Ireland had been done in two ways ; that
injustice had been done to her by increasing her tax-
ation, and that injustice had been done to her by dimi-
nishing the expenditure of
.public functionaries. They
had been charged with reducing offices in Ireland, and it
had been alleged that of that reduction the Irish had a
right to complain. Undoubtedly the Irish had a right to
the maintenance of whatever establishments were neces-
sary for the interest of the country. But to say that esta-
blishments ought to be kept up, not for the purposes of
public business, but for the benefit derived to individuals
from the expenditure among them of the salaries of the
officers of such establishments, was, in his opinion, to talk
the most absurd nonsense conceivable. The hon. member
for Middlesex would recollect that soon after his Majesty's
present Government came into power, the hon. and learned
member for Dublin had asked whether it was not their in-
tention to abolish the offices of postmaster-general and vice-
treasurer of Ireland. There had been no difficulty in an-
swering that it was the intention of his Majesty's govern-
ment to abolish them. But was it reconcileable to common
decency to press on his Majesty's government, within the
walls of Parliament, the expediency of reducing certain
establishments, and then to go back to Ireland and com-
plain to the Irish people of the injustice which they suf-
fered from the reduction ? (Hear, hear.) He was per-
fectly at a loss to conceive how the hon. gentlemen oppo-
site could justify or account for conduct so extraordinary.
He approached his end. (Cheers and laughter.) lie as-
sured hon. gentlemen he felt the most earnest gratitude for
the indulgence which had been shown to him, and he
would justify their kindness by going rapidly over the re-
maining topics which it was his duty to touch upon. It
was not his case—he repeated it was not his case—it was
the case of his country (Loud cheers) ; and though he
should not be so vain as to call himself the counsel for his
country, he would still be bold enough to assert that he was
on that occasion the advocate of usefulness. (Cheers.) In
what he was now going to state he knew he subjected him-
self to unpleasant personal allusions—he knew he should be
taunted as one without feeling—as cold-blooded and heart-
less. This was ever the meed of those who, not believing
in, had the manliness to deny tales of distress. There
was, he believed, nothing which would render a
man more thoroughly unpopular as doubting dis-
tress. Now, he did not doubt the distress which
had so often been alluded•to—he grieved, indeed, there
ever should be distress--and if any efforts of his
could ever relieve it, no man would strive for so good an
end more eagerly or more zealously ; but he repeated lie
was not doubting that the distress in Ireland had been ag-
gravated since the union—he was not doubting, but he
was denying it. (Hear, hear.) In a curious manuscript
on the state of Ireland in the year 1740, which had by
chance come to his hands, he found that from the revolu-
tion down to that period, the land had been so reduced
that it had cost five millions to renovate it ; and he also
found that every third or fourth year in this period Ireland
had been afflicted with a scarcity. Thus he found such a
state of distress that grain had to be imported from abroad ;
he found a periodical famine ; he found heavy taxes un-
posed on almost all raw materials, and yet he was told that
the legislature of Ireland had been a boon and a blessing
to her people. (Cheers.) In 1770 he had a description
of Ireland and the moral condition of her people--all this
be it understood, before the union—from the pen of the
celebrated Arthur Young ; and he found from it, pretty
plainly, that there was a " larger law than that of liberty—
a power which allowed a man to break another's bones—
knocking one another down in a fashion that would really
make an Englishman stare." This statement might be
exaggerated, but still it showed the severity which the rich
exercised towards the poor—the tyranny which the high
assumed over the low—at the boasted period ere Ireland
had lost her paternal legislature and been bound in the
withering bond of union with England. (Cheers.) Could
any thing better prove the progress of amelioration in the
condition of the sister people ? Where was the man in that
country who dare now use his horsewhip to his tenant, de-
pendant, or humble neighbour? Who dare take the law
into his hand? Who dare put might in collision with
right ? Where was he—bold and daring indeed—
who would even dream of such a thing in a country
where all now knew their respective rights and respective
stations—where all (save those who were lost to all shame)
respected and maintained them ? (Cheers.) In proof of
his position as to the increased comforts of the Irish people
since their connection with this country, he would refer to
the evidence of Mr. Musgrove, of ill.. Millar, of Mr.
Williams, of Mr. Clayton, and of many others, given be-
fore the committee of 1830, all touching on different
points, yet all arriving at the same conclusion—the gra-
dual improvement of the country : not alone in manufac-
tures—not alone in agriculture—not alone in commerce
—but in everything which constituted the wealth, the
prosperity, and the true greatness and happiness of a state.
But he had other proofs of what he said. Oh ! he had
many others—he had them in abundance ; and would, but
that lie had already greatly wearied the house, produce
them at once. (Cheers.) There were one or two he
would just refer to. About the year 1825 an Act of Par-
liament was passed, giving the power to transfer stock
from one part of the empire to another, for the advan-
tage of receiving the interest in any part where the per-
son entitled to it might happen to reside. And what was
the amount of funded property transferred to Ireland ?
No less than sixteen millions : thus giving an increase
to her national income of 562,000/. per annum. (Great
cheering.) Now, would the honourable and learned
member for Dublin (Mr. Ruthven) say that Ireland was
getting poorer—that she was getting every day more and
more steeped in misery ? No ; he was by far too candid.
(Loud laughter.) He (Mr. Rice) would tell the house
what remarks would be made on this subject in Ireland.
It would there be told to the people that this sixteen mil-
lions was an amount not of wealth to her, but of debt.
—actually of debt; and this would be pointed out by those
who could, and seldom hesitated, to point out things their
own way ( A laugh), as one in the long catalogue of conse-
quences which had resulted from the union with England.
Another fact—for facts were the things for that house—
other than facts might do out of doors. (Cheers.) The
total amount of property passing by probate had increased
since 1819 from 2,000,0001. to 3,612,0001. Surely Ireland
was not so utterly ruined as had been stated. (Laughter. )
There had been strong political causes at work, which had
at one time great effect on the savings banks, causing dis-
tress and ruin to many a poor man ; yet, 'notwithstanding
all these exciting causes, the deposits, during the last year,
had amounted to 349,0001., and the sums drawn out only
to 252,000/. (Hear.) There was another case in point
more particularly referable to the higher classes, and it was
almost the only thing in which a comparison might be in-
stituted, as it was well known there were no assessed taxes
in Ireland—he meant the duty on wrought plate, which
had risen, on an average of three years, 1801, 1802, and
1803, with 1815, 1816 and 1817, 65 per cent., and on
an average of the period first mentioned, with 1827, 1828,
and 1829, 197 per cent. This increase--this large increase,
was on an article of pure luxury, usedby a gentry who were
ruined—in a country which was deserted. Surely these facts
showed how utterly fallacious were the statements and prog-
nostications of the hon. and learned gentleman who had
opened the debate. (Hear, hear.) Another proof of the
progress of civilization and the increase of comfort was to
be found in the number of Roman Catholic chapels, and
the extent to which many had invested their money. He
rejoiced to see these edifices rising, for they were unde-
niable indications of the humanizing influences of religion.
In Dublin there was, previous to the union, only one Ro-
man Catholic chapel of any extent; now there were eight
or nine of large dimensions, one of which he believed had
cost little less than 40,000/. Again, lie thought that the
very large contributions which had been made by the
peasantry of Ireland on several occasions, and these for
political purposes, showed that there state was not quite so
distressing but they could help a friend in need. (Loud
laughter, and cheers.) Another proof of his argument
that he should very hastily glance at was, the increased
domestic intercourse, as shown by some canal returns. He
would take the Grand Canal, the Royal Canal, and the
Borough Canal. On the first comparing the years 1831,
1832, and 1833, with 1821, 1822, and 1823, there was an
increase of sixty-two per cent. ; on the second, of sixty-one
per cent., and on the third of forty-nine per cent. The
tonnage down and up had also increased twenty-six per
cent. So much or the internal traffic which, combined,
as it ought to be, with the increase of the export trade,
gave a damning negative to the assertions which had been
so boldly, and, as he thought, so recklessly hazarded.
The same results would be found by investigating
the other modes of communication in Ireland. He
had greatly condensed these points, for lie felt the
necessity, after so long detaining the house, of so
doing ; but if honourable members would, at their conve-
nience, look closer into them, he was satisfied they would

be more than ever convinced of that for which he was coo,
tending—the great benefits which Ireland had received
from her connection with England. (Hear, hear:) And
now he had closed his case—he 'stood on his eVidence•' and
ha he called upon te house to state whether he or the!
and learned member for Dublin had right and truth and
.
reason on ins 7;'-'l2: Hts thanked the liseise deeply for hav-
ing so long and so patiefitly Eats-tied to him—their indul-
gence had been great indeed; belt hP eottld net take that
indulgence to himself ; he who had nd cl tim, frowever fondly
he might aspire to it, could not, ought not, dare not appro-
priate it ; he knew it was given to the consideration of that
grave--he might say, that awful question in which wtat
ina,olved the happiness, the interest, aye, the very existence
of this country. (Cheers:) That was indeed no ordinary
contest; it was not an ea-gin:tient for victory, but for truth;
a inighsier stake had been played for—greater duties were
to be performed—the duty of shrouding in everlasting ob-
livion personal contests and party difference. (Great
cheering.) The conduct of hon. members ought to be
swayed solely by the consideration of doing their duty, for
they would have to answer .t to their own conscience now
—to a more terrible tribunal hereafter. They ought to
forget for the moment that they had Constituents, and act
as if they had a country—a country's honour, a dOitntry's just
liberty—a country's happinessaloneto strive for. (Chea'a
They had great names to think on—high titles associated
with the question—glorious c eeds ; but they had greater
motives than these to inch ce them to bestow their at-
tention on a subject whip h it was impossible to
hear debated without being animated by the spirit
of those mighty men—alas ! too soon departed, whose
• names were still green in the pages of history.
He would adjure them to look at this question in such a
light, and to treat it in such a manner, as to deserve a far
. higher reward than that_ of becoming members of that
'house. Even an unreformed Par ifiment had treated Ire-
land with a liberality that ought never to be forgotten.
Where would the Catholics of Ireland have been, but for
the liberality and the constancy of the English Parliaments
many members of which, with a courage that time only,
and the justice of mankind could do full honour to, advo-
cated manfully their claims, in all circumstances, under
every disadvantage, without regard to personal inconveni-
ence, and often not merely at the risk, but at the certainty
of giving high displeasure to their constituents? (Cheers.)
What sacrifices had not there been made, how had the
yearnings for personal eminence, how the ambition of
parties, been lost ,in one overpowering feeling of affection
for the peace and comfort of their common country ?
(Cheers.) And had not the later days shown even sterner
examples of ennobling patriotism—where the bonds of
affection had been rent asunder, where the ties of kindred
had been rudely severed, the endearments of home aban-
doned—where every connexion that had previously soothed
and delighted had been given up, for Use sake of the per-
formance of what appeared to him a duty to his country,
even though, in fulfilling this duty, after all his previous
sacrifices, he went in the very teeth of one of the most
powerful constituencies of the .kingdom? [We suppose
the right hon. gentleman was alluding to Sir R. Peel's
conduct on the Catholic question.l It was, indeed, not
uninstructive in these times, that they should look
back to the period previous to the union, and to the bear-
ing since of the Imperial Parliament towards Ireland—that
thy should glance at the grovelling conduct of the inde-
pendent legislature, as it was called—its selfish designs and
ignoble trafficking, and compare it with the anxiety, the
willingness, the readiness, the eagerness of the English
Legislature to do its duty. (Cheers.) On this subject
there
.could be no compromise, neither should there be.
(Great cheering.) He should meet the proposition of the
hon. and learned member for Dublin in the most direct
manner possible (Cheers), and he should call on'hon. mem-
bers to support his amendment, and justify their votes by
the great interest which was at stake—regardless of any
despicable triumphs which a fleeting and spurious popu-
larity might offer to them. He should take the liberty,
before he sat down, of quoting words infinitely better than
his own—words that might be looked upon as the dying
legacy of the great Henry Grattan—great because he was
essentially and truly good—words which embodied advice
of the purest and wisest character, and to which on that
important occasion, he earnestly invited the attention
of those he was then addressing :—" I most strongly re-
commend that the two countries may never separate, and
that Ireland should never seek for any connection except
with Great Britain." (Cheers.) [Mr. Rice here took out
a paper, evidently supposing it was the copy of his amend-
ment, but it proved to be otherwise, and the right hon.
gentleman, though assisted by several of his colleagues, was
unable to find it. This accident caused a good deal of con-
fusion on the ministerial bench, and considerable merri-
ment in the house, Mr. Rice resuming the speech, which
had evidently been finished, in order to give time to his
friends to find the missing document.] He would ask
hon. gentlemen did they consider that this sort of
connexion asked for by the hon. and learned member for
Dublin could last one twelvemonth except by force of arms?
(Loud cheers.) He (Mr. Rice) maintained, that if they
once granted the repeal, the connexion would go next,
and then there would rise up a fierce democratic republic
(Great cheering from the Treasury benches, vehemently
responded from the repeaters)—a democracy which some
might hail as a blessing (Renewed cheers from the re-
peelers), but which he, happily a subject of a constitutional
government, mild in its form and just in its operation,
should deplore as one of the greatest evils that could befall
his country. (Cheers.) If such was not the object of the
hon. and learned member for Dublin, what could be made
of the beginning of his speech ? Why the reference to
America—to Bonaparte? Why, in referring to the United
States,-use the words " and now I approach the Atlantic,
and feel the fresh breezes that come from a country where"
(Great cheering, in which the close of the sentence was
entirely lost.) What but such a motive—such a hope,
could account for such language as the following :—" The
emancipated convicts of Botany Bay have a Parliament of
their own—we have none, and we arc eight millions.
( Cheers.) The slave drivers in the West Indies, and the
fishermen of Newfoundland, have domestic legislatures—
we are without one, and we arc eight millions. (Hear. )
The United States of North America, the western boun-
dary of Ireland (Cries of "Hear" reiterated) threw off the
British yoke, and gained freedom by the sword—they were
three, and we are eight millions." (Cheering.) What was
this but an appeal to the spirit of democratic liberty ?—what
was it but an attempt to raise up the hydra of democracy
on the ruins of sound constitutional liberty ? (Cheers. )
Again he would refer to the words of Mr. Grattan, and
then close. That great man, on this subject of a repub-
lic, said:—" My next advice is, that the people of these
countries should not look to a demoeratical government.
(Hear, hear.) They are not fit for it. (Cries of " Hear"
reiterated.) He did not wish to cast any disparagement
upon his own country, but he would ask the house whether
it would feel itself justified, with this knowledge of the
state of party feeling in Ireland, to hand over the people of
that country
.to the mercy—must he use the word—of a
domestic legislature? Did they think that the contest
and collision of opinion, which such a measure would in-
fallibly produce, would not produce in Ireland a civil war ?
( Hear,hear. ) Did hon. gentlemen think that because
they possessed a certain force in certain parts of Ireland,
they could compel other parts of Ireland to submit ?"
(Loud cheers from the Irish Anti-Repeal members. ) He
(Mr. Rice) denied that there could safely be any indepen-
dent legislature in Ireland ; it would create two parties,
between which a contest would arise, quarrel and crime
would follow, and the ultimate consequence would be the
entire subversion of the constitution of the country.
Again he thanked them. If he could have safely com-
pressed his matter more, he would have done so, but he
preferred the risk of wearying the house to any thing
which could bear even the appearance of a neglect of duty
on so important an occasion. He must throw himself in
some degree on the courtesy of the house. He was placed
in a situation of great embarrassment, having an amend-
ment to propose in the shape of an address to his Majesty, the
copy of which he had unfortunately mislaid. (Cheers, and
cries of " Adjourn, then.") He would entreat the indul-
gence of the house, and state the substance of his amend-
ment, which was, " That an humble address be presented
to his Majesty, and communicated to the other House of
Parliament, declaratory of the fixed determination of that
house to maintain inviolate the existing legislative union
between England and Ireland, believing it to be necessary
for the genuine good of the state, and the happiness of all
classes ; that both on general and special grounds, that
union had been hitherto eminently conducive to the inte-
rest of Ireland ; and that they had enacted, and had still
under contemplation various measures for the good of that
country, and concluding by an expression of their unalter-
able intention to persevere in their endeavours to remove
any just cause of complaint, and to promote the happiness
of her people, and the cause of sound and rational liberty."
(The hon. gentleman then resumed his seat, and was for
many moments greeted by loud and very general cheers.)
The following was the amendment proposed on Mr.
O'Connell's motion :

We, your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the
Commons, in Parliament assembled,
feel it our duty humbly to approach, your Majesty's Throne, to
record in the most solemn manner our fixed determination to
maintain unimpaired and undisturbed the Legislative Union
between Great Britain and Ireland, which we consider to be
essential to the strength and stability of the Empire, to the con.
tinuance of the coni,ection between the two Countries, and to
the peace and security and happiness of all classes of your Ma.
jesty's subjects:
We feel this our determination to be -as much justified by
our views of the general interests of the State, as by our con-
viction that to no other portion of )our Majesty's subjects is the
maintenance of the Legislative Union more important than to
the inhabitants of Irela,.d ti,enlselves

We humbly represent to out Majesty, that the Imperial
Parliament have taken the affairs of Ireland into their most
serious consideration, and that various salutary Laws have been
enacted since the Union, for the advancement of the most im-
portant itterests of Ireland, and of the Empire at large
In expressing to your Majesty our resolution to maintain
the Legislative Union inviolate, we humbly beg leave to assure
your Majesty, that we shall persevere in applying our best atten-
tion to the removal of all just causes of complaint, and to the
promotion of all well-considered measures of improvement "
Mr. FERGUS O'CONNOR rose and moved the ad-
journment of the debate.
The SPEAKER said the amendment had not been
seconded.
Mr. EMERSON TENNANT seconded the amend-
ment, and moved the adjournment of the debate, which
nwoa agreed
rs
being
gttho idoasmdesfetaategdood d
in
hiesalinof mtenterironimoefntad, Adrler. addressing
Cothe
house immediately after Mr. S. Rice.
On the disposal of the different orders of the day, Mr.

II TIME rose .anfl said, in allusion to the abolition of the
(-nee of Clerk of the Pite hi Scotland, that he was sorry
the bill ; r-a.s having an opportunity of
de:iariiig his ire conduct of 'his hen. and
learned fi iud the member iii Leith, who had most gene-
firilAy relinquished its emuluments. His conduct could
only be contrasted with that of the Marquis of Camden,
who had given up so large, so magnificent a sum for the
public service. (Hear. )
Mr. MURRAY thanked his hon. friend the member for
Middlesex for the remarks which had fallen from him.
He had resigned the profits of the office alluded to, because
h felt it wtis a duty which he had owed his country. He
net deserving of the praise which had been bestowed
upon hit*;. (Hear.)
Mr. WALLACE said many offices had been bestowed
by an individual well remembered, Henry Dundas, which
were a disgrace to Scotland. lie was a radical reformer,
and lie disowned them. The conduct of his hon. and
E.arned friend the member for Leith had been so generous
*lld noble, that he doubted if King William the Fourth
would be received with more respect in Scotland than his
Len. and ittained friend would be for his high and generous
conduct.

Lord ALTHOE.P must interrupt the hon. gentleman
i!t his remarks. Without observing at all upon his allu-
e!ops 4o the Sovereign, and without saying whether he was
(inite erjyrt,4 in bringing the name of his Majesty before
is house, he bifght to have remembered that King Wil-
liam lind, on his anititig„ to the throne, given a large por-
tion of his hereditary raenties to the public. ( Hear, hear. )
Mr. WALLACE explained; and the house adjourned
et half-past twelve o'clock.