The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-25 00:00:00

REPEAL OF THE UNION,

On the order of the day being read for resuming the
adjourned debate upon Mr. O'Connell's motion,
Mr. METHUEN rose and said he had a question to put
to the hon. and learnedmember opposite (Mr. O'Connell).
He (Mr. M.) understood from the reports in the public
papers, and from hon. members who were present, that on
the first night's debate the hon. and learned member expressed
a wish to put one of the members for Wiltshire into the
witness-box to bear testimony as to a conversation in
which he either took part, or which occurred in his hear-
ing, during the debate on the Coercion Bill. The question
he wished to put, and which he was sure the hon. and
learned member would answer, was, which of the members
for Wiltshire he alluded to, or at least, whether he (Mr.
M.) was the member ?

said he could not object to answer
the question, although it was wholly inapplicable to the
hon. member. He (Mr. O'Connell) had spoken of a
member of that house, and not of one of the members for
Wiltshire. He would, however, ask the hon. member for
Wiltshire (Mr. Benett) whether he did not recollect
having heard a similar sentiment addressed to him (Mr.
O'Connell) in the library?
Mr. BENETT said that he had not the slightest re-
collection of having ever heard one word on the subject.
Mr. O'CONNELL said he would have appealed to the
hon. member had he been present, though it appeared his
recollection would not have borne him out.
The order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate
was then read, and

Mr. E. TENNANT rose for the purpose, he said, of
seconding the amendment of his right honourable friend
(Mr. Spring Rice). He felt no inconsiderable degree
of satisfaction that the hon. and learned member for
Dublin had brought this question before the house, be-
cause it was the only proper course which that honour-
able and learned gentleman ought to take. From
whatever motive the hon. and learned gentleman had
adopted his present course, whether it arose from the in-
fluence of party spirit, or was induced by the increasing in-
telligence of his followers, it could only be a matter of great
satisfaction to the people of Ireland that this question was
now to be discussed in the proper arena, and that it would
no longer be exposed to the bombast of itinerant agi-
tators and hired declaimers. ( Cheers.) He wished to come
to the close examination of the merits of this question, and
to expose the fallacies of the hon. and learned gentleman,
so as to convince those of his followers in Ireland who
could listen to reason, of the emptiness of his arguments,
and also to teach the besotted multitude that this was a
matter which the good sense of that house would never
concede. ( Loud cheers.) The result' of this discussion
would be the more important, because the Irish peasant
would be scarcely induced to contribute his money for an
object which was impracticable, and if money once failed,
the house might rely on it no more would be heard
of the repeal of the Union. (Hear, hear, and cheers. )
In taking part in this debate he must trespass on the in-
dulgence of the house, which as an Irish member
he might, perhaps be entitled to claim, and more
especially as it was not his custom to occupy
considerable portions of the time of the house. If in the
present instance he should ask more than an ordinary in-
dulgence, he trusted the house would recollect that it was a
more than ordinary occasion. The main proposition seemed
to him to be this—that Ireland enjoyed before the union an
unprecedented prosperity, and that it was attributed to her
domestic and independent parliament ; and that the evils
which now exist were the consequences of the abolition of
that parliament. Now, on the contrary, he contended
that the Irish Parliament never was, and never could be,
an independent Parliament ( Hear) ; and that the prosperity,
if such prosperity existed, had its origin in other causes.
And lastly, he would show that Ireland had experienced
since the. union, a measure of improvement—a pro-
gressive increase of prosperity, as well as dignity and
national importance, which she never could have ob-
tained under any other government. ( Hear, hear.)
It had been the fortune or the misfortune of Ireland,
whether it was the one-or the other was not the question
now to be discussed, to be placed in that particular posi-
tion which naturally connected her with Great Britain.
Had she not been placed within sixty miles of the shores
of Great Britain—had she been situate by nature far off
in the midst of the Atlantic, and remote from the other
states of Europe, she might have been left to her
own resources; but her importance to other countries being
comparatively insignificant, and being situated, as she was,
in a position which united her by innumerable connections
with England, and rendered her bound up in the happi-
ness and prosperity of Great Britain. (Hear, hear. )
When England was awakened to a consciousness of that
object, and when the consequent conquest of Ireland in the
reign of Henry the Second had taken place, Eng-
land set herself about establishing the connection
between the two countries. (Hear.) There were but
two modes by which that could be done—the one by force
and violence, the natural result of conquest, and the other
by granting to Ireland such a constitution as would
leave a controlling check in the hands of the Bri-
tish Government. (Hear.) The first mode had been
tried from the sth to the 12th century through that mess
of blood and anarchy which the hon. and learned mem-
ber had so forcibly described. It then gave way, and
Ireland received the shadow of a constitution, with one
crown, and one executive dependant upon Great Britain.
The object of that policy had been to divert the Irish from
massacre and rebellion to a system of legislation, or rather
a farce of legislation. The Irish parliament arrogated to
itself the making of laws to bind Ireland, but by the statute of
Henry H., commonly called Poyning's Act, no matter
could be introduced in the Irish House of Commons, until
it had received the sanction of the British Cabinet.
In the year 1782 the Irish people, with arms in their
hands, and with the Irish Parliament, taking advan-
tage of a moment of English debility, forced England
to ameliorate their condition. That period was considered
the time of Irish independence; England was obliged to cease

, from dictating laws, and also to repeal Poyning's
This had the appearance of independence ; it was called
the era of Irish liberty—her golden age. He (Mr. Ten-
nant) was really astonished to hear the advocates
for the repeal of the union, and the honourable
member for Dublin especiallj, asSeet that the Irish oh-
, tained independence. Na;. nothing ever was' more
foolish or more delusive thn the „pageantry cif incle-
, pendence which was boasted of new/. -in reference to f6f
time. English interests and Engeth influence were al
predominant Over the Irish parliament as trio Irish influ-
ence would fain be over the British parliiinent
at present. If the Irish Parliament had been con-
sidered independent, why was it that the great seal of
Ireland was not to be a test of Royal assent to an
Irish act of Parliament ? (Hear, hear, hear,) The
Irish Parliament could never carry an act into effect
without having the Great Seal of England attached to it,
and it was always at the diScretion of the English Govern-
ment whether they would periiiit thatjact to be passed and
carried into effect or not. (Hear, near.) There was
not a member of the Irish Government was not
liable to be impeached before the English Parliament, even
while Ireland was considered to be separated from Eng:
Land, and yet this was what was called the independent
Parliament of Ireland. The Irish parliament were not
at liberty to pass the commonest set—not even
a common turnpike act, a common police act, without
being tinder the surveillance of the English Parlianient.
To all this degradation the Irish Parliament submitted, and
still it called itself independent. The very Speiker of the
Irish House of Commons, from whom the learned member
derived so many arguments in favour of his speech, had not
failed to say that the Irish Parliament was inferior, neces-
sarily inferior, to the English. It was shut out from one of
the noblest fields of legislation that could possibly give dignity
to any parliament--it was completely excluded from all ex-
ternal legislation. In the passing of all its acts it was
compelled implicitly to follow the dictates of the English Go-
vernment. It could hold no intercourse with the other states
of Europe without the consent of the English Parliament.
The hon. member contended that the supposed independent
parliament of Ireland had exhibited the greatest hostility to
the mother country, and, however repugnant to her feelings,
this country was compelled to submit to taunts from them.
So imbecile was that Parliament, that when the Earl of Buck-
ingham was required to deliver an address to the throne
he refused, alleging that his oath of office prevented him
from doing it. It was notorious, that of the 300 members of
the Irish Parliament, a great many were placemen, and
the majority of the remainder were merely nominees
of the aristocracy ( Hear, hear, hear), who were re-
turned without the least shadow of an election qualifica-
tion. Even Mr. Grattan condemned them, and yet
the hon. and learned member for Dublin attributed the
prosperity of Ireland to her independent parliament. It
was well known that, from 1782 to 1785, Ireland
laboured under extreme commercial and mercantile
distress ; her manufacturers were then distressed, discon-
tented, and turbulent—so much so, that in 1784, she was
compelled to adopt the celebrated measure of non-impor-
tation to England, and in 17.85, she was obliged to
make commercial propositions. She continued to labour
under extreme distress by the restrictions which were per-
petuated by the jealousy between the two countries, which
fell with a very peculiar weight upon the manufac-
tures, as well as the commerce, of Ireland.
What was the prosperity of Ireland, three years after that
boasted year of her independence, 1782? The British
Parliament, with a generosity worthy of them, passed certain
commercial resolutions, and sent them over to the Irish
Parliament, for their concurrence. Mr. Foster, in sub-
mitting these resolutions to the Irish House of Commons,
said that they could not go on as they were, that the spirit of
commercial jealousy was roused and was increasing, that a
separation of interests between the two countries would
produce a separation of connection (Hear, hear, hear),
to which every loyal Irishman must look with ter-
ror, and that it was utterly impossible for Ireland—
and he wished hon. members to attend to the words
of that able and learned man—to compete with Eng-
land in a destructive war of bounties. (Hear, hear. )
In 1782 it was said that no case of difference could arise which
could disturb the harmony between England and Ireland ;
yet, three years after, Mr. Grattan himself was obliged
to acknowledge that an interruption to trade arose
because it was impossible to preserve the interests of
commerce without forfeiting independence. (Hear.) To
such an extent did the incompatibility of the two
go; that Mr. Flood declared if a demon from hell arose
and wished to effect the separation of England and Ireland,
he could not have better means for doing so, than the
propositions which were then made in the English House
of Commons ; and which propositions, though they
were carried, seemed so incongruous to the mi-
nisters, that th dared not ground a measure
on them. (Hear.) There was an open and confessed
point of difference which could not be arranged ; and what
was to extricate gentlemen from the dilemma in which
the occurrence involved the two countries? In the mad-
ness of patriotism a cry was made " Perish our trade
but live the constitution." What was it that could
remove the difficulties in which the two countries were
placed ? Nothing but a union which would identify the
interests of both and banish all apprehension, by removing
the power of dictation. The union was the only proper re-
medy for Irish advancement and English apprehension, in
order to place both, countries on the same basis. England
made many concessions at that period to Ireland, and the
result of these concessions was rapidly felt. He (Mr. E.
T.) was satisfied, from the inquiries he had made on that
part of the question, that the statements of the advocates
and the opponents of the measure, upon that
point, had been greatly exaggerated. (Hear, hear. )
One party represented her as in a state of complete desti-
tution and want, and the other held her up as a political
phenomenon of improvement. He was satisfied that Ire-
land had made considerable improvement since that period,
at the same time he would say that that improvement
was as nothing compared with what it had been
since. The honourable member then went into de-
tails of the exports of Ireland as compared with those
of England and Scotland during the existence of the
Irish parliament ; thence showing that while the exports
of the latter were quadrupled, those of Ireland had de-
creased in proportion. He might observe the results
of a comparison in every branch of revenue or trade ; the
post-office, the stamps, or the customs of Ireland, all
tended to the same result, and exhibited either a decrease
or a scarcely perceptible improvement, whilst the rest of
the empire was advancing by the most surprising strides
to the pitch of prosperity. Her independence enabled her
to enter freely into foreign trade, but what was the fact?
Even in this boasted period of her prosperity, so totally
was she destitute of capital, shipping, or enterprise, that
instead of availing herself of the foreign trade thus thrown
open to her, she actually imported from Great Britain, in
1799, nearly 1,500,000 tons of foreign produce, produce
which England allowed her to have duty free, and on
which she afterwards raised 350,0001., by subjecting it to
taxation at her own ports. It surely would not be said
that her independence could have extorted this any more
than it could have caused the opening of British ports to
her agricultural produce and her linens, of which England
received on an average of three years to 1798, no less a
proportion than 35,000,000 of yards out of 40,000,000,
which she exported, and not only allowed her a bounty of
35 per cent., on these, but actually secured to her the
British market, by subjecting those of all other countries
to an import duty of 25 per cent., thus taxing herself about
65,0001. per annum to support the Irish linen trade. The
whole trade of Ireland with England at this period did not
amount to more than 1-9th of the entire trade of Great
Britain with the rest of the world ; yet so far from her con-
tributing 1-9th to the British revenue, her contributions
were not 140th in proportion to her commerce ; the whole
Irish duties in 1768 amounted to but 47,0001. whilst those
of other countries were nearly. 7,000,0001. But
there remained one other inquiry still. If inde-
pendence did not secure to Ireland external dignity—.
if it failed to promote internal prosperity—did it in-
sure to her domestic tranquillity and happiness ?
He (Mr. Tennant) did not allude to the distant years of
her history, when her parliament was trammelled and fet-
tered—he did not allude to the Whiteboy outrages of 1763
or 1766, for these occurred before the constitutional era of
1782 ; but did that independent parliament secure the
country against the recurrence of such prwdial outrages ?
On the contrary, so far from this being the case, we had,
in 1785, the Whiteboys of Munster, and, in 1786, an ac-
tual civil warfare in Armagh, under the very eye of the
independent parliament, which lasted till it had rooted out
the Roman Catholic population, and sent them abroad to
disseminate dissatisfaction against a government which per-
mitted such outrages. In 1792 and 1793, in Louth and
Meath, in Limerick and Roscommon, in Leitrim and West-
meath, there were perpetual risings and disturbances,
whilst, during the same period, various bands ruled undis-
turbed in various other districts, under the names of Hearts
of Oak and Hearts of Steel, Houghers and Carders, Peep-
of-Day Boys and Defenders, spreading terror and dismay
over whole provinces, and exhibiting, though on a minor
scale, the atrocities and bloodshed which political agitation
had again revived, in the Whitefeet and Ribandrnen of the
present day. For nearly twenty years we manned the
navy with our malcontents, and peopled New Holland with
our Irish outcasts ; and to crown the whole, we had the
sanguinary and destructive rebellion of 1798—a civil war
in which were perpetrated some acts of fierce barbarity for
which the annals of human ferocity could scarcely afford a
parallel. Such were the symptoms of our domestic happi-
ness under a domestic legislature. As to perfect and dis-
tinct independence, he (Mr. E. Tennant) left that alto-
gether out of the question ; for he believed it to be

perfectly impossible to preserve the connexion be•
tween two countries of unequal powers aria resources,
such as Great Britain and Ireland, without sacrificing
in some degree the independence of the weaker one. Be-
tween two countries on a perfect political equality in every
respect, to whom union or separation might be equally a
Platter of choice or convenience, we could conceive the
idea of such a junction continuing for a time compatibly
with the perfect independence of both ; but in the case of
two nations of different powers., compelled by their mutual
necessities to form a Connection, that connection must
always be in a greater or less degree—one of patronage on
the , part of the more powerful, and of dependence on that
of the weaker state—dictation on the one side, and of ac-
quiescence tit the other. And how long may we suppose
that a Government such as this political abortion of one
Government with twd perfectly independent legislatures—a
" Most delicate manster with two voices,"
could exist in the present state of feeling in Ireland? May
we not conclude, with her jealousy "of all dictation, her im-
patience of all control, that in some moment of spleen or
passion, or possibly of caprice and delusion, under the in-
nuence of some vociferous patriot, she might conceive it
incumbent on her dignity, not only to express ;sat to main-
tain her opinion, and thus precipitate a separatiam, and
pziasitalv hoatiin.Les between the two countries? (Chet; s• )
Ire-late!, re know, submitted, though reluctantly, to tha:
dictation of England for nearly seven centuries ; but it
was during a period when her spirit was unformed and her
reScweeg as yet undeveloped. C!ouist we suppose that with
her present excited feelings she would calmly submit to it
now ; and yet raralvr the two countries distinct to-morrow ?
He (Mr. E. Tennant) maintained that the continuance of
the connection was impossible without such submission eel
the part. of Ireland. In more than one instance filet
proceedings of the Irish Parliament very nearly hurried
the country to the verge of separation when thus imper-
fectly conjoined before. She had scarcai obtained the
concession of free trade, in 1779, when onr of its very
first fruits was a motion in the Irish House of Corn.
mores to declare war, single-handed and apart from
Greet Ftritain, against a country, not only at peace, but
actually in Alliance with England, for an alleged injury
our national cot/imam --He referred to time case of Por-
tugal, which hat; been alluded to by the right hon. gentle-
nian (Mr. Rice). On that occasion Sir Lucius Crßtiew
proposed in the Irish House td send an armament at onee
to chastise in order, (as he sail) to show to the world
that Ireland "had vigour and resources' to maintain all he
rights and to astonish all her enemies." This blustering
proposition ei/tE, rejected ; but was it not a paasible case
that it might hatt been carried, and that Ireland, a con-
federate part of the British empire, might have been placed
in the singular position of decMring war against a country
at peace, and in alliance with the rest of the kingdom ?
He maintained that on the regency qvcstion there was an
actual and literal separation of the two kingdoms. At that
period the only bond of union between the two countries
was their common executive, the King of England. It
was a fact, all mention of which was sedulously avoided in
the present agitation, that Ireland was herself the first to
propose an incorpollting union of the two countries ; that
for nearly two cries England perseveringly rejected it.
(Hear, haat') Independently of the circumstance of Irish
representatives having sat in the Parliaments of Edward
I. and Edward 111., and the disposition manifested towards
an union in the time of Cromwell, it was a matter of record,
that in the reign of Charles 11, in a report of the Board
of Trade to the Privy Council of Ireland, it was expressly
recommended that endeavours should be used for the union
of the kingdom under one legislative power proportionably,
as had been heretofore done in the case of 11 ales. This
report was said to have been drawn up by Sir W. Petty,
who, in his " Anatomy of Ireland," written some years sub-
sequently, confirmed the same view by the expression of his
own individual opinion. The suggestion was of course disre-
garded then ; but again, in 1703, at the moment when the
Scottish Unionwas in contemplation, the Irish Parliament pe-
titioned and petitioned in vain, for a similar incorporation, the
English ministry being resolutely opposed to its concession..
These entreaties were resumed in 1707, when both houses
addressed the Queen, with similar success. As these ap-
prehensions of England wore away, and as she adopted by
degrees a more enlightened policy, the penal laws were
gradually relaxed, and an incorporate union was proposed
and adopted by both countries in 1799 ; and now came the
question, had this union realized the intended object ?
Had it (to try it by the same test) secured the external
dignity or promoted the internal prosperity of Ireland ?
(Cheers.) As to the question of national dignity, he
should, of course, be here met by a direct negative a for
there could inhere no dignity in a motion which was stated
by the opponents of the union to have-been utterly " anni-
hilated" by that measure. But on the same principle
Scotland must likewise have been " annihilated," when
she, in 1707, ceased to be a distinct kingdom, on being
incorporated with England ; and by a parity of reasoningy
if the mere fact of incorporation, by destroying distinction,
involves extinction, England herself must have been anni-
hilated when she became incorporated with the other two.
So that, according to the doctrine of the repealers, the
whole empire must at this moment be ideal, and exist; like
the universe of Berkeley, only in the imagination of its inha-
bitants. ( Cheers.) It was a delusion, therefore, to assert that
when two nations unite, they surrender or annihilate their
rights ; they did not surrender, but, on the contrary, they
interchange and combine them. What a proud gratification
must it have been to every Irish member who conscien-
tiously gave his support to the bill of 1829, which con-
ferred upon the honourable and learned member fur
Dublin, and his Roman Catholic colleagues (Hear),
the distinction of a seat in that house, that he was
enabled, by the act of the union, to contribute his aid to
what he considered a great measure of national and politi-
cal justice—a gratification which he could never have en-
joyed as a mere member of a local legislature. (Cheers.)
Did the hon. and learned member himself (Mr. O'Con-
nell) feel no emotion of Warrantable pride when he two
years ago lent the aid of his powerful talents to restore
the constitution, and reform the abuses which time had in-
flicted upon the representation of this house; and did it
never strike him, then, that this was a triumph which he
could never have experienced as a member of an Irish par-
liament? For his (Mr. E. Tennant's) part he shsukl
never fail to regard it as a proud distinction that he had
himself been enabled, during the course of the last twelve
months, to contribute by his vote to extend the blessing of
freedom from the confines of India to the remotest shores
of the Atlantic, to liberate the Hindoo, and to strike off
the fetters of the African. (Loud cheers.) He (Mr.
Tennant) need not ask whether Ireland has experienced
an increase of prosperity since the union ? After the
comprehensive and conclusive statement of the right hon.
the Secretary of the Treasury (Mr. S. Rice), it was to-
tally a work of supererogation to attempt to enter into any
further proof upon a subject where every circumstance was
an evidence. This, at least, was a department of the in-
quiry in which declamation and sophistry were of no
avail. Every statement, which could be looked upon as
authority, proved that, during the last thirty years the
prosperity of Ireland had been the greatest in aay interval
of her history. During this space her shipping trade had
been doubled :

1801. 1831.
Inwards 711,242 tons 1,420,382 tons
Outwards 703,7) 7 tons 1,073,545 tons
Her imports and her exports have been increased in a like
proportion.

1801.

1825.

-.
Imports £4,621,344 £8,596,785
Exports £4,064,545 £9,243,110
Her cotton trade has been actually created since the
enactment of the Union, whilst its rival, the linen trade,
instead of decreasing, has been nearly doubled-
-1800...36,112,369 yards 11830...57,947,413 yards
Her exports of corn have increased sixfold-
-1800 379,679 qrs. I 1826 ... 2,226,774 qrs.
And that of live stock no less than tenfold—

1800 19,891 head. 11826 195,807 head.
With these evidences of external traffic had we no con-
clusive testimony of the growth of internal comfort in the
home consumption of the country ? The importation of
coals since the Union had risen from 360,000 tons to nearly
900,000. The consumption of wine and spirits, of tea and
sugar, had been more than doubled—

1800.
Wine and Spirits-4,295,498 gals.
Tea

1830.
9,137,015 gals.
3,887,955 lbs.

Raw Sugar 226,936 cwts. I 342,701 cwts.
And that of coffee had been actually twelvefold increased-
-1800 73,370 lbs. I 1830 898,363 lbs.
The town of Belfast had afforded, perhaps, the most strik-
ing, though by no means an insulated, example of such
commercial advancement as promoted by the Union. The
quantity
28,421 tons burden. At the
Union, in 1800, they were 856 in number, and the ton-
nageaanted oftto shipping 76 vessels‘ vhoifeh entered the port in 1786
amounted
67,855, an increase of about one-third. They were
last year 2,600 ships, with a tonnage of 264,377, being an
,taatni odnqusialdicreuptlleiei
nUqnuiaolnitittyo. t(rli velear,t hheeara.m)ouAntt
the
the union, there was not a cotton nor a flax mill in
augmentation
Tarboee
fnr
Belfast, and the cotton trade now gave occupation to up-
wards of 10,000 looms. (Loud cheers.) And taking the
receipts a customs and excise as a fair test of the produce
of home manufactures and foreign trade, they affbrded a
most singular evidence of the comparative influence of
union and independence: The custom-house receipts were,
in 1782, 60,000/. Twenty years afterwards, in 1800, when
we had a full experience of the influence of a free constitu-
tion, they were 62,6681., showing an augmentation of but
1-30th in all that period. The union took place in 1800,
and five years afterwards they were 228,645/. They were,
in 1820, 306,2631., and were at this moment upwards of
400,0001., showing that the trade of the north of Ireland
had actually doubled in every period of five years since the
union. These were our proofs of the prosperity ; these
were the considerations that rendered us attached, and
warmly attached, to British connexion ; these were the
blessings that we have derived under the union ; and look-
ing to these, all we ask from the hon. and learned gentle-
man, in his own emphatic phrase, that he will " let us
alone." _ .

" We seek no change, and least of all such change
As he would bring us." (Hear.)
Whilst he (Mr. E. Tennant) contended for this singular
increase of national prosperity, he by no means asserted
that the unicn was its direct and originating cause ; he did
not say because the two were concurrent, the one was con-
sequent►al. The source of Ireland's prosperity was British

~w

'.4l4st.

~'t.. \

\\

,~
's; a

~~

connection, and the participation of British Yesourees. It
was a singular fact connected with the trade of Ireland,
which he (Mr. Tennant) emitted to mention, that the in-
crease in her imports eind exports was confined to her cars=
coerce with :rid alone. In her foreign trade Ireland
had hardly advanced a single step since the union, but
through her intercourse with England her progress had
been immense, her Brstish imports having increased in
thirty years from 3,000,000/. to 7,000,0001., and her
exports from 3,500,000/. to nearly 9,000,0001., whilst her
foreign traffic was almost stationary—:__

1801. 1830.
Imports from Foreign P0rt5...£1,350,994...1,547,849
Ditto, from Great Britain 3,270,350,.,7,048,936
Exports to Foreign Ports 526,819., 411,854
Ditto, to Great Britain 3,537,725,, .8,531,355
With proofs such as these before us of our utter depend-
ence upon British connection, and upon admission to apar-
ticipation in her resources, the question of the union re-
solves itself into one simple, and he (Mr. E. Tennant)
thought incontrovertible proposition. In what position
would England be most readily inclined to bdnefit Ireland,
and assist her in her progress as her partner or her com-
petitor, as her rival or as an incorporated portion of her
own empire? (near, hear.) He (Mr. E. Tennant)
had but one other point to allude to, and he had done
with this inquiry. He admitted it was the most pain-
ful and the least satisfactory. Had the union succeeded
in producing peace and tranquillity in Ireland ? Unfortu-
nately as yet the answer must be in the negative, it would
be interminable to enter into the causes which have pro-
duced this failure, and to trace the means by which the
factious and the vile, the disaffected and the corrupt, have
succeeded in operating on the crude minds of the Irish
peasantry, so as to thwart and to defeat every project for
her happiness and welfare—the means by which, whilst the
Creator had designed Ireland for a paradise—
" Man, enamoured of distress,

Has marred her into wilderness." (Hear hear. )
The evils were in their forms multifarious and innumerable,
the remedy was contained in one single sentence—relieve
the destitute and educate the people. It was the destitu-
tion of the Irish poor, and ignorance of the Irish people,
that exposed them as a ready prey to the dominion of priest-
craft, and the delusions of demagogues. (Hear, hear. )
This was the only expedient to restore Ireland to peace and
to happiness, and this alone could possibly bestow on her
that thorough and absolute independence of mind, not less
than action, to which the hon. and learned member for
Dublin had taught her to aspire. But he (Mr. E. Ten-
nant) had understood, from the speech of the hon. and
learned gentleman that it was not total independence
which he sought to secure fbr Ireland by the repeal of the
union, but a sort of dependent connection—a federal union,
as he called it ; a power to deliberate of her own authority,
for her own local affairs, but to leave all matters of exter-
nal and national legislation to the British parliament.
(Hear.) Now, he (Mr. Tennant) appealed to the house,
to the country, to the speeches of the hon. gentleman him-
self, whether the plan he had here proposed was commen-
surate to the object for which he had taught his countrymen
to clamour, or whether it would be a realization of the hopes
which he had encouraged them to cherish. Every patriotic
repealer professed that his object was to render Ireland an in-
dependent nation, andno longer a subordinate province. The
hon. member here read a quotation from Lord Minto's
opinion relative to distinctions between an independent and
a dependent nation. Granting then the full measure of
repeal, for which the hon. and learned gentleman asked, he
(Mr. E. Tennant) would leave it to the most simple
hearted advocates of the measure in Ireland to say which
of his lordship's definitions would apply to Ireland in its
new capacity, whether that of an " independent nation,"
or a " subordinate province." Was Ireland, in this new
form of government, to have any discretion in matters of
war or peace, or was she not, as before, to follow implicitly
the dictates of England? If she was not, separation, he
contended, must inevitably follow sooner or later ; and if
she was, she was of course to be dragged in as heretofore
for her share of all the costs and expenditure. If, then,
she was to have no authority of herself in matters in which
she was most nearly interested—in war or peace, alliances
or treaties, commercial, colonial, or ecclesiastical arrange-
ments, he (Mr. E. Tennant) would ask whether this be
the full national independence for which the hon. and
learned gentleman had taught his countrymen to insist,
and would the Irish peasantry be so dull as not to discover
the cheat? Would they not demand from the hon. and
learned member whether this be the independence they
were taught to struggle for? Whether it was for this
subordinate rank that they had been holding their tumultu-
ous meetings and signing their petitions, deserting their
peaceful industry, and robbing themselves and their families
of the common necessaries of life in order to raise 15,0001.
a-year for the hon. and learned member for Dublin. ( Im-
mense cheering.) No doubt the hon. and learned gentle-
man's eloquence would be sufficient to avert their indigna-
tion ; but even should it fail with a few, he would still have
the consolation of an amiable character in Horace—

" Populus me sibliat ; at mihi plaudo
" Ipse dom', simul ac nummos contemplor in area."
(Cheers. ) This then, at length was the hon. member's
plan for getting rid of the " sassenach" and the " stranger."
It was thus he proposed to liberate Ireland from the thral-
dom of the " Saxon Parliament." This was his notable
expedient to liberate " the hereditary bondsmen," and to
render Ireland once more--
44

Great, glorious, and free,
" First flower of the earth, and first gem of the sea."
(Hear.) He (31r. E. Tennant) knew the ardent and
susceptible temperament of the Irish people—he knew how
deeply the love of country and of freedom was engrafted in
every Irish bosom, and how easily every app. al to these
wins its way to the heart ; and was it not a cold-blooded
tampering with the feelings and passions of the nation
—was it not a seething of the lamb in its mother's milk,
thus to convert the best affections of a people into instru-
ments wherewithal to delude and plunder them? (Cheers. )
Bat we have at least learned this by the present discussion,
that the hon. member's object in the repeal of the union is
not to render Ireland an independent nation, but to esta-
blish a sort of federal connection between her and Great
Britain. He remembered a very striking description of
that kind of connection given by the Irish Speaker, Mr.
Foster, in the year 1800:—" It must ever be the dearest
interest of Ireland," said he, " to be an inalienable and in-
separable part of the British empire, not joined togetherby
the nonsense of a federal union—a connection which hangs
on a thread, exposed to all the attacks of party, and all the
effects of accident ; and unfortunate, indeed, would it be
for us, if Ireland were held by a connection of the mere
person of the King." And it is this nonsense of federal
union with which the hon. member now came forward to
appease the excited imaginations of the deluded people of
lr _land. Against such a species of connection they had
not only all the arguments of theory, but all the practical
experience of history to warn them. America was, he ad-
mitted, a bad example for either party, because it was an
imperfect example. Its union was too recent to form an
illustration for his opponents, and too unripe to afford a sa-
tis.a.tory argument to himself ; but he conceived that it
must be evident to every individual who knew the con-
dit on of that country—the jealousies of the northern and
southern states—the distinctness of interests on which each
was dependent—and the disunion in feeling which already
existed, and was rapidly gaining head between them—that
before many years—so soon, at least, as they had strength
to warrant them in making the attempt--they would have
more than one Carolina proposing to repeal the North
American union. The whole range of history could not
furnish them with an example, in which these species of
confederacies, from their internal weakness, and the defects
of this constitution, had not fallen an easy prey to foreign
enemies, or dropt asunder by their own rottenness. The
instance of Spain and Portugal was in every respect a
perfect illustration of the proposed federal union between
Ireland and this country. Philip 11. of Spain claimed the
throne of Portugal in right of his mother ; and in 1581
the two kingdoms formed a federal union under one crown,
on the express stipulation that Portugal was to continue a
distinct kingdom. How long did this connection last ?
Not sixty years. The jealousy of the weaker country
could not brook the connection; and in 1640, Philip IV.
was expelled, and John of Braganza seated on the inde-
pendent Portuguese throne : and what had been the result
of that independence ? Would any Irishman wish to see
his country placed on a footing of either nation of the
Peninsula to-d ? Denmark, Sweden, and Norway,
formed a similar federal union in 1397 by the treaty of
Palmas—it lasted scarcely three generations, being dis-
solved by the revolt of Gustavus Vasa in 1523, and the
union which now subsisted between Sweden and Norway,
he had good authority for saying, had no other effect than
by the mutual jealousies of the two nations, that of sub-
jecting both' to the intrigues and influence of Russia. In-
ternal enemies had ever found such alliances the most
favourable to their designs of conquest and subjugation.
It was by attacking independent Ireland that the enemies
of England had ever sought to aim a fatal blow at her.
Witness the expedition of the Spaniards in the reign of
Elizabeth, and afterwards in 1717—the efforts of the Pope
in the time of the Commonwealth, and of the French at
Carrickfergus in 1760, at Bantry in 1796, and Killala in 1798.
Had the seven provinces of Holland been incorporated into
one nation, instead of hinging together by a thread, each
state. possessing a negative on the general will of the con-
federacy, could they have been overrun in nine days, as
by the French in 1795 ? In Holland, too, they had lately
had a " repeal of the union," and what did it promise for
either country ? (Loud cheers.) It had left Holland a
shattered and decaying trunk, and Belgium a reed shaken
by the winds, and both in all probability likely one day to
fall before the ambition of France or some other conti-
nental neighbour. (Cheers.) Germany and Switzerland
had each in turn felt the weakness of federal alliances
against external aggression ; and in short the whole range
of history could furnish forth no one precedent of such an
alliance being either prosperous in its constitution or per-
manent in its duration. (Hear, hear, hear.) If they
could form a conjecture of the probable duration of power
in any dominion, they had in fact only to inquire whether
its subjects be united and identified, like those of China,
or divided and indepeudent,•like the hordes of Arabia or of
Tartary. One fact they had learned beyond a question or
a doubt from the experience of seven centuries in Ireland,
that whilst British connexion was indispensable to the well-
being of both countries, that connexion could never be
secured unless by the thorough union or the thorough sub-
jection of Ireland to Great Britain. (Cheers.) Every in-
termediate system had been tried in vain, and the nearer

the terms of connexion }cad 'approached to independence,
the nearer hittl lien the approach to total separation.
Witness the 'rebellion of 1798. Not Only did he consider
the ;onion as it it present 'stood to be sound in its nature
and beneficial in its resign, but, what was of almost equal
importance in the present position of affairs, he believed
the rellecting portion of the two nations to be so tiny sa-
tisfied of its advantages as it existed, And Of .the ruin which
must inevitably ensue from its iepeal, that he looked on
the accomplishment of that measure as utterly and abso-
lutely impraetiCable, and its present agitation to be fraught
at (Mee with mischief and delusion. There were in his
ktiintltwo insuperable obstacleswhich had erected themselves
against the repeal of the union—two barriers which, taken
together, were in his opinion insurmountable, 'and these
were, Roman Catholic tmancipation and Parliamentary
reform. Ile Would be the last individiial to introduce sec-
tarian prejudices in that lionse, or to give utterance there
to language which might tend to perpetuate sectarian dis-
tinctions beyond it ; but as he looked upon this topic as
vitally andinseparably connected with the present ques-
tion, he would not hesitate to deal with it unreservedly.
He knew that in doing so, he should expose himself to
slander and misrepresentation elsewhere ; he knew that he
should incur the risk of being again denounced in Ireland,
as he had already been by the hon. and learned member
for Dublin, in that strain of mingled filth and eloquence
Which, out of that house, was so peculiarly his own.
(Loud and continued cheering.) He had been a friend to
the emancipation of the Roman Catholics, but in common
with almost every liberal Protestant with whom he had
spoken on the subject in Ireland, he had been compelled at
last to question, not the justice of that measure, for that
he had never doubted, but the existence of the content-
ment and moderation which they were led to hope would
have been exhibited by the Roman Catholics after that
measure should have passed. Their own proceedings dur-
ing the last three years, had compelled him at last to alter
his opinions of the Roman Catholic body and their leaders ;
and if he (Mr. E. Tennant) was less of a liberal on this
head to-day than he had been twelve months ago, he could
safely say he owed his conversion in common with thou-
sands in Ireland, of similar opinions to the proceedings of
the hon. and learned member for Dublin and his associates.
Let him (Mr. O'Connell) pursue his present career for a
short time longer—let him continue to arouse the passions
and the jealous ambition of the Roman Catholics of Ire-
land, and, before twelve months were elapsed, every Pro-
testant in the country must, for the preservation of his
property, become in his own defence a Conservative.
(Cheers.) He considered it as a circumstance not a little
extraordinary, that the Roman Catholics, who were now
the exclusive friends of repeal, were, in 1799, if not the
active promoters, at least the silent advocates of the
union. Their motives in both instances were simple and
obvious. They supported the union, as the only expe-
dient through which they could ever hope to obtain
the remission of the penal laws. The obstacles to their
emancipation by the Irish Parliament were insurmount-
able, because, being in that country the majority, this
admission to a share in the legislation, with their.
known hostility to Protestantism, would have been certain
destruction to the Established Church and the other Pro-
testant institutions of Ireland. It was evident, therefore,
that an Irish parliament never would, because with safety
it never could, admit their claims ; but it was equally evi-
' dent that a united parliament might, because the Protes-
tant party of Ireland being then incorporated with that of
Great Britain, the two united would form as great a ma-
jority, in proportion to the Roman Catholics of the king-
dom, as the latter, taken in a separate state, did to the Irish
Protestants. Mr. Hutchinson, and other strenuous advo-
cates of emancipation, did not fail to state in the Irish
House of Commons, in 1799, that they advocated the union
mainly on the ground of its being the only possible avenue
to the enfranchisement of the Catholics. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Pitt, in introducing the question of the legislative
union to that house, avowed the same opinion ; and at the
very moment when he confessed himself friendly to their
claims, he admitted "that no man could say that in the
present state of things, and whilst Ireland remained a se-
parate kingdom, full concessions could be made to the Ca-
tholics without endangering the state, andshaking the con-
stitution of Ireland to its centre." Nor was this feeling
peculiar to the friends of the Roman Catholics alone—it
was entertained in an equal degree by their bitterest op-
ponents. The celebrated Dr. Duigenan, a man who owed
his notoriety in Ireland to his furious hostility to their
claims, admitted long before a union was seriously pro-
posed, and published it as his opinion, " that if that
measure were once carried, his hostility to emancipa-
tion would be at an end, and that no further pretext
could exist for the continuance of the penal laws.
It was the conviction of its safety, as insured by the union,
that operated with the Protestant Parliament of 1829 to
pass the Roman Catholic Relief Bill. If, then, that union
be now repealed--if by cancelling the only guarantee'
which the Irish Protestant now held for the security of
his private property and of his public institutions, what
other were they prepared to give him in its stead ? On
the faith of the union he surrendered the security which
he held in the penal laws ; if they deprived him of the one,
were they prepared to re-enact the other ? To repeal the
act of union now would be precisely to place the Irish Par-
liament in the same position in which it would have stood
had emancipation and reform been carried before the incor-
poration of the two countries. The effect of such a mea-
sure, then, was thus described by a member of the house,
Mr. Douglas, afterwards Lord Glenbervie—" I have no
scruple to state my opinion (said he), that an attempt to
grant what is called Catholic emancipation, whilst the local
Parliament (of Ireland) remains, would excite such a
struggle between property and numbers as would greatly
aggravate many of those mischiefs which now exist in
Ireland, tending to revolution and separation, through
the medium of a civil war of the most destructive and
ferocious kind." He (Mr. Tennant) might be told that
Lord Glenbervie, though friendly to the union as a step
towards Catholic emancipation, was in reality no friend to
the Catholics. He (Mr. Tennant) would, however, quote
to the house one other opinion on this subject, to which
this objection could not lie. The author of a popular work,
published in Ireland during the debates of the union, thus
speaks of the effects which reform and emancipation to-
gether would have upon an independent Irish Parliament:—
"Reform the Irish Parliament," said the writer, " and you
have a democracy—the consequences is unavoidable, if the
alterations be on a very capacious scale. Repeal the dis-
tinguishing laws—good ; but you cannot by your act of
Parliament reach the spirit of distinction, and the tendency
to disunion will subsist with all the irritating circumstances
which accompany that temper ** *. If many Roman
Catholics get into Parliament, they would form a Catholic
opposed to a Protestant faction, precisely as in the last
century, when the parties ran at length into civil wars,
in which one was reduced to a pitiable subjugation." TIA;
was the ivophecy of no protestant bigot—no exclusive
churchman, these were the words of distinguished Roman
Catholic favourites, Mr. Theobald and Mr. Kenna, who
was himself, he (Mr. Tennant) believed, at one time the
official organ of the Roman Catholic Association in Ire-
land. Such, then; on the showing of one of their own
body, would be the result of restoring the Irish Parliament,
constituted as it would now be of a large proportion of Ro-
man Catholics ; for observe, this author does not say that
it would require even a majority to produce this jealousy
and discord. To leave Protestant institutions and the Pro-
testant church out of the question altogether, would Pro-
testant property be secure amidst the• contentions of their
Protestant and Catholic factions ? Nine-tenths of that
property had been at various times confiscated from Ro-
man Catholic insurgents—unjustly confiscated as their
descendants contend ; no proscription, it was known, can
amend a defective title ; and would the Catholics fail to re-
claim their right? They were told, to be sure, that the
Catholics have no such intention, that the title of the public
would be respected, but they should never forget that they
had fallen upon evil days when men did not blush to ridi-
cule " the cant of public faith." (Great cheering.) It
was not without cause that anxiety and alarm were felt for
the present movements of the Catholics in Ireland. This
want of candour left the Protestants no reliance in their sin-
cerity ; they seemed to act with two objects—one ostensible
and the other concealed. They advocated the union in 1799
with a view to Catholic emancipation, and now the hon.
member for Dublin tells us that he only advocated Catholic
emancipation in order to get rid of the union. (Cheers.)
After the most solemn assurances, reiterated throughout
thirty years, that Catholic emancipation was all that was
wished or wanted to quiet the country, they were now un-
blushingly told that these professions were a mere ruse de
guerre, and that so far from emancipation being the end of
their desire, it was only sought for as the means to the
end. ( Cheers.) When, then, were they to get rid of this
jesuitical agitation ? When were they to learn the real end
to which the hon. and learned member was looking? Were
not the chapels the theatres of political discussion?. and
did they not collect round their very altars the miserable
pittance of the peasant, which was to form at once the
odious stimulant of the base reward of agitation ? ( Great
cheering.) Were they not at the present moment the ac-
tive agents of one-half the elections in Ireland ? ( Hear. )
Was not the elective force of one half the constituencies
which sent members to this house marshalled and officered
and directed by Roman Chatholic priests? ( Hear. )
Should this create no alarm in the Irish Protestant mem-
bers of that house, whom a repeal of the union would send
single-handed to contend with this gigantic influence—an
influence which they every day and every hour saw becom-
ing more firmly grounded and more openly and unreserved-
ly existed? To repeal the union now would be to hand
over Ireland to the control of men such as those whose
influence they knew, whose ambition they had every rea-
son to dread. The hon. and learned gentleman had dwelt
long and powerfully on the historical evidences of the atro-
cities and corruption by which the union was originally
carried ; but however revolting and opprobrious these facts
might be—and no man was more willing than he (Mr. E.
Tennant) was to admit their enormity—he confessed that
he was unable to discover how these external circumstances
could possibly afford external evidence of the merits and
demerits of the union: But besides this, he (Mr. E. Ten-
nant) thought it an unfortunate topic to be broached by
the hon. member. If it proved anything, it proved
merely this, that in the roughest era of Ireland—in the
high and palmy days of her independence—she was
liable to be seduced, and actually was corrupted by
the resistless force of English influence. Was she
in better condition to resist it now ? Was her virtue
more incorruptible, her patriotism more stern to-day than

'‘ '

.---ii

in
i the days of Grattan and Ponsonby, and of Flood, and
of Charlemont? (Cheers.) Were they to suppose that
the parliament of 1799, under the leadership of such men
as these were, less sterling in its purity than an Irish par-
liament would be in 1.834, under the guidance of the hon.
member Tor Dublin ? (Hear, hear, and laughter.) For
whatever office that gentleman might fill under the new
form of government in Ireland, and in all probability he
would take the charge of the Exchequer, he (Mr. Ten-
nant) presumed that he would be the leader at least, if
not the ruler of the Irish Commons: (Laughter.) But
if they had paid and purchased advocates of 1797/had they
no paid oppenents to the measure now ? If the argument
was not worth any thing in the one instance it was equally
good in the others ; and if the introduction of money could
throw a suspicion over the enactment of the union, must
if not equally cast an imputation on its repeal? (Cheers.)
The hon. and learned gentleman might discover a salutary
warning for himself in his own eloquent denunciations of
his predecessors. If the touch of gold had cast a shadow
over their reputation, would his own go down to posterity
more pure and unspotted, or would not the hard-earned
pittance of the Irish peasant cling to him like the silver of
Naaman to the servant of Elijah, entailing on his memory
the taint of advice, and on his motives the leprosy of sus-
picion? The hon. and learned gentleman had alluded
most forcibly to the evils of absenteeism, and the miseries
which it had inflicted upon Ireland. But he surely did not
mean us to infer that absenteeism was an evil which has

had its growth since the union? He must surely
be aware that centuries had elapsed since it was
denounced as the curse of Ireland. He must cer-

tainly remember that it was computed by Prior to
drain off nearly 1,500,0001. of her specie, so long since as the
middle of the 17th century, and that nearly a century later
it was proposed by Lord Hardwicke to the Irish Parlia-
ment in 1773, to restrict it by an onerous tax. All this
was before the union, before the Parliament was removed

from Dublin to Engfand. It was not the absence of a do-
mestic Parliament, but the absence of domestic tranquillity,
which had increased the band of Irish absentees ( Great
cheering), and it was to the restoration of tranquillity, and
not to the restoration of her legislature, to which they were
to look for their return. It was an observation of Cowley
as applied to Cromwell, that when the Almighty in his
vengeance saw fit to visit Egypt with his wrath, he sent not
upon her the lion and the tiger, the fierce and lordly mo-
narchs of the forest, but the toad, the reptile, the fly, and
the creeping thing. ( Loud and long continued cheers. ) The
inference applied with less force to Cromwell than it did
to Ireland at the present day, when heaven in its wrath had
sent upon her a worse than Egyptian plague—it had se-
lected as its scourges as the instruments of its chastise-
ment, not the noble and the illustrious, but the base and
the most indigent of men. (Continued cheering.) They
were not the men of rank and intelligence, the opulent or
the influential, who at the bidding of the hon.. and learned
gentleman and his associates, disturbed the tranquillity, and
retarded the improvement, of every Irish hamlet ; but the
needy and the adventurous, the turbulent and the unprin-
cipled wretches, who had all to hope for, and nothing to
risk by agitation and by tumult. Hew long, then, were these
petty despots tobe permitted to reign and to riot unrestrained?
Had not the Irish people a right to look to their Parliament
for protection from their outrages,and a release from this domi-
nation? He should conclude with the forcible and impressive
declaration of the ill-fated Lord Kilwarden, on the same sub-

ject, that he regarded an union with Great Britain, on the
terms of equal laws and equal commerce, of mutual trade
on equal principles, and taxation proportioned to the abili-
ties of both countries, as essential to the stability of the
empire, the preservation of the religion, the independence,
and the tranquillity of Ireland. He was on the point of
giving his vote upon this momentous question, and he did
most solemnly declare that he thought the vote he gave
was for the preservation of his country, its laws, and its
religion, and for the peace,- the happiness, and prosperity
of all its inhabitants, and were it the last word he was to
utter he would say " Content." The hon. member, on sit-
ting down, was loudly cheered.
The original motion having been read, ;with the amend-
ment,
Mr. F. O'CONNOR rose and said, he was not going to
tell over to the house the twice-told tale of Ireland's op-
pressions and miseries for the last seven centuries. He
was not going to repeat the history of the religious perse-
cutions, the mental coercion, the bodily torture inflicted,
which every successive race of Irishmen had undergone
from every successive race of her tyrants. No, he would
rigidly follow, not the example, but the advice of the right
hon. gentleman. He would forget that he had a consti-
tuency, but he could not forget, like that right hon. gentle-
man, that he had a country. (Hear, hear.) He re-
peated, he was not going to give the history of the
wrongs of Ireland for the last century (Hear, hear ) ; his
business was to show that she had been wronged by the
union, and to show that he could meet the right hon.
gentleman on his details, which he had made so much of,
and would show that they were so many fallacies got up
for the occasion, and that, consequently, all the deductions
drawn from those details must be fallacious. In doing so
he would most carefully avoid uttering an expression
which might hurt the feelings of any one. He wished
the hon. member who had just sat down had observed the
same rule. Although he was very glad that they had
selected that hon. member to second the amendment
( Vehement cheering, in which Mr. Sheil's voice was
particularly distinguishable), the only pity was that the
hon. gentleman appeared to have written his speech be-
fore he heard that of the right hon. Secretary. It was a
sad thing that the two had not compared notes first, for as
it was, there was a terrible discrepancy between them as to
their details; in fact, in almost every instance (lid their
details differ. Last night the right hon. mover of the
amendment stated that before the union the importation of
corn from England had cost Ireland many millions ; to-
night, however, the hon. seconder of the amendment
made quite a different statement. Not only had the hon.
member contradicted the right hon. secretary, but he had
contradicted himself. His opinions at one time had been
very different from those he expressed to-night. The hon.
and learned gentleman,then read a short extract from one
of Mr. E. Tennant's works, in which that gentleman said
(as well as we could understand)—" When we are asked
how we are to seek liberty, let us look to Washington, and
see how he acted. (Hear, hear.) Let us beware of the
insidious arts of our enemies ! Let us remember the number
of our paupers. Let us regard as injurious to liberty the
system of hereditary legislators. Let us follow up the re-
volution of 1688, but never let that revolution be remem-
bered by Irishmen but with shame and disgust." These
had been the sentiments of the same hon. member who
now seconded the amendment. (Hear, hear.) The au-
thority of Chef Justice Burke, Lord Grey, and Lord Plun-
ket, had been held up to the house as naught—as " rub-
bish ;" the opinions of the right hon. secretary were, at
any rate not any better. He (Mr. F. O'Connor) would
pledge himself that night to overthrow the whole of the
hon. secretary's arguments, and, like the right hon. secre-
tary, he called upon the house to act as a jury ; and he
would stake what little character he might have, that, if he
found a just tribunal, he would, meeting the right hon.
secretary " shoulder to shoulder, and elbow to elbow,"
drive him from all his positions. (Hear, hear, hear.) In
the first place he could not but look upon the manner in
which the motion had been met by the amendment, as most
despotic and arbitrary ; it appeared to him an attempt on
the part of the mover of the amendment, to induce the
house to give up their feelings and judgment into his keep-
ing ; but did the right hon. secretary think that with this
parchment amendment of his he could successfully oppose
a whole nation ? (Hear, hear.) No, the feeling, the de-
termination, to effect this cherished object, was too deeply
fixed in the minds of the Irish nation ever to be eradicated.
The report of the committee of 1825, the credit of which
had been attributed to a noble friend of the right ho-
nourable secretary's, it was stated had brought about
the Catholic emancipation (Hear), by opening the eyes
of the English to the real state of Ireland and the
wishes of its people. That committee had very justly been
commended by the right hon. gentleman for effecting such
results. Why, then, should he now object to giving the
English an opportunity of understanding the wishes of Ire-
land on the far more momentous question now before them.
The right hon. secretary had talked very ostentatiously of the
sums of money granted to Ireland. How were those sums
expended ? In gaols, in bridewells, and in bridges, to en-
rich the aristocracy. (Hear, and a laugh.) He was not
going into the history of past atrocities, the question was,
whether it would be better for Ireland that the union
should be maintained. The right hon. gentleman, tri-
' umphantly alluding to some former proCeeding of the vo-
lunteers, had said, " But if we allow the Irish Parliament
again to assemble, it would only be to have them acting
L as a subordinate body to the volunteers, who would again
assemble in convention, and dictate to the revived Parlia-
ment what to do. Everything would be under " club
law." Now it appeared to him that any reference, much
less objection to " club law," came with curious effect
from the right lion. secretary, who had been so active in
getting club law established all over Ireland. The question
was, had Ireland been benefitted by the union? He denied
that it had ; he asserted that Ireland had lost much by the
[ union, and he was prepared with his proof. He would
first consider the history of Ireland since 1782, he would
consider how that union had been brought about: What
was the condition of Ireland at the time of the union
—what its prospects—and what was its condition at the pre-
sent time ? The right honourable member had set forth
that Ireland had prospered beyond measure since the
union ; he had trumpetted forth now, that its imports
and exports were increasing, now that it was, exempt
from taxes. As to the taxes, taxes were laid on to suit
English wealth, not Irish poverty. The Irish had no mo-
ney wherewith to pay taxes, therefore they were not taxed.
The exports were increased ! Yes ; those exports were
the food which ought to feed the cultivators of the soil.
The imports were increased, solely on account of the ruin
and fall of home manufactures. 'the right hon. gentle-
man said that 103 millions had been sent over to Ireland ;
the poor Irish had seen very little of the money, but had
felt that since the union there had been a depreciation in
fact, in Ireland, of a great deal more than the one hundred
and three millions. He would pledge himself to prove this
statement. The Irish peasantry had formerly some little
money in their pockets, but it had been wrested from them
by the system pursued towards Ireland. The sheep-walks
had been broken up, and it was very well known that the
result of that would be that the stock would be taken off
altogether. Did not this account for the appearance of

• .
that prosperity which had been inferred from the fact of 1 fair and legitimate way ; and whatever may be the success 1
their having been an increase in the sale of stock? The of any attempt made to smother it in that house, the
right hon. gentleman had come down with a red box full people of Ireland had set their mind too intently on the
of details, but the statements which they contained would measure to permit it to be thus got rid of. (Cheers from
not bear examination. How was it that since the union, the Irish members.) The house would do him the justice
if Ireland had become so prosperous, the price of land had to say, that he was not the person who would say one thing
considerably decreased ? Land, estimating it according to there and another in another place. What he said he
the value of money in 1814, would not now sell for one- meant ; and he would assert, that if the fair and free dis-
third of the price that it would then. [The hon. and cussion of this measure of repeal were got rid of by un-
learned gentleman here remarked on the absence of Mr. S. fair means, it would justify rebellion, and make resistance
Rice.] The right hon. gentleman had taunted his hon. a virtue. (Cheers.) The question for the house to take
and learned friend last evening for not being present to linto consideration was, whether it was prudent to perse-
hear the reply to his speech ; where was now the right vere in a course which might hazard the dismemberment
hon. gentleman himself ? ( Shortly afterwards Mr. S. Rice of the empire ? He had spent much time, and taken great
resumed his seat.) Theright hon. gentleman had referredto pains in the consideration of this measure; and if he were
the increase of houses as another proof of prosperity; but not fully satisfied that the course he adopted was not for
would he find it inhis philanthropic nature to cram 8 millions the benefit of his country, he never would pursue it for
of people into a number of houses built to hold only four the purpose of courting an ignominious popularity. There
millions? The right hon. gentleman would, perhaps, ask, were, he knew, some who supported it without principle,
if he was not to draw his evidence of the prosperity of the and made stilts of it to help themselves to other objects.
country from the excise, the customs, the shipping, the Hume—not the member., but the historian ( A laugh )
rt impos or the exports, whence he was to draw it He described such persons as " going about, proclaiming that
(M ir. F. O'Connor) would tell him to what sources he , they were not so well governed as they might have been."
must not go for such information. He must not go to the ,He (Mr. O'Connor) denied that he was one of such—he
absentees—to the ruined 'squires—to the uncultivated threw the taunt from whence it came, and would fearlessly
waste—to the half cultivated soil—to the furrowed cheek ' say, that there was more intelligence, patriotism, and
of the artisan—to the emaciated form of the agriculturist. ' purity on his side of the house than on the other. (Cheers
The right hon. gentleman was not impressed with a due from the Irish members.) Much had been expected for
sense of the miseries existing in Ireland. How should Ireland from the Whigs ; but for whatever benefits she
he be ? He did not go amongst them ; and what the eye received she was indebted to the Tories. Emancipation
did not see the heart did not feel. ( Hear, hear, hear.) had been surrendered by the Great Captain of the age—.
He should have been glad to see the hon. member for and justly surrendered, when he found it would be madness
Sligo and the hon. member for Donegal in their seats ;if any longer to withhold it. Ireland, even now, would ex-
they had been he might have referred to them as affording pect more benefit from at Tory than a Whig Government.
examples of what ought to be the conduct of Irish land- i They (the Tories) were straightforward, open, and manly
lords towards their tenantry. He knew that men's ordi- foes,
nary feelings prevented them from walking abroad, or "Of all the ills which Heaven in wrath could send,
riding abroad, where of necessity would be forced on their Save him !—oh ! save, from a pretended friend."
view the distresses of the tenantry. (Hear, hear.) They .To be sure the Tories did not give much, but then they
dared not; he did not mean they wou dbe deterred by any never promised; they, however, gave something. The
feeling of fear ; but they dared not on account of the
feelings of reproach that it would excite to walk amongst worse than nothing. They did not even
fulfil their pro-
Whigs promised much, but they gave nothing, or what was
their tenantry and see them in a state of destitution. mises to the people of England, by whom, and through
( Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman told them whose unions, they had been kept in place, and enabled to
that there had been 61 committees and 114 commissions ;
carry the measure of reform. (Hear, hear.) They had
but was this any proof of the improved state of the . violated every pledge with regard to Ireland. The Tories
country? He had shown that the argument founded . were bad enough ; but a contrast with the Whigs re-
on an increase in the imports and exports, and the I deemed them. It would be better for England to repeal
home consumption, was bad ; he had shown that the the Union, and let its own legislature proceed with the de-
exportation of cattle was accounted for by the sale of liberations which were now greatly retarded and confused
stock. (Hear.) If the noble lord opposite (Lord Althorp) by the introduction of Irish business ; but of 128 commit-
were offered a sum for 1,000 acres of his land in Northamp- tees, 61 were Irish. (Hear, hear.) A right. hon. baronet
tonshire, and he gave the party leave to use it as he pleased had stated that one-third of the property of England
for five years, what did the noble lord think he would get was expended in maintaining the Legislative Union ; and
for it the following five years ? The argument of the hon. yet he was for maintaining it, even at this loss. Let this
member for Kildare went far to prove that there were no be told to the people of England. Much had been said of
retail markets in Ireland. The fact was, persons bought exportation, and an argument was founded on it to prove
wholesale in Ireland at one-fourth the price at which they the prosperity of Ireland. All the wealth of Ireland was
sold retail in this country. He thought it impossible for any certainly exported, and she was now worth one-third less
country to be prosperous in which there were not country than she was fifteen years ago. He hoped the right hon.
markets. The aristocracy seemed determined not to give gentleman opposite (Mr. Littleton), for whom he had an
the tenantry any interest in the land; and this would ac- unfeigned respect, would not be led away by
.the wishes of
count for the falling off in the stamp duties. Complaints his colleagues, and induced to smother his opinion on this
were constantly made of the influence the hon. and learned question. If it was to be debated, let it be debated fairly,
member for Dublin had over the Irish people ; but he (Mr. and not opposed with the parchment shield of the right hon.
F. O'Connor) would ask, would that hon. and learned gentleman who proposed the address, which had been se-
gentlemen be able to persuade a people who were comfort- conded by such a seconder. He would put it to the Irish
able and happy, that they were in a state of misery? (Hear, proprietors in that house whether, if the country were to
hear.) Then there were the petitions, which in this year, send 300 members to a domestic legislature, the candidates
1834, so long after the union that was to be, and was so for the representation would not canvass the constituency
beneficial to Ireland—there were the petitions which even by their good works, and illustrate their fitness for the trust
this year were presented in such numbers to the house. by pointing to the manner in which they had filled the
Were they to be told, that without the union they would other offices of magistrates and grand jurors? The errors
not have progressed as well as this country ? It had been of the Irish parliament were emphatically dwelt upon, but
urged against the motion, that if the union were dis- the house should remember that the British had, by its
solved, the hon. and learned member for Dublin would own act, voted itself incompetent and corrupt. (" Hear,"
et an ascendancy of Catholics in Ireland. This was from the Irish members.) Yet was this the parliament of
not a fair way of meeting the question. He defied the " the envy of surrounding nations and the glory of the
right honourable gentleman to prove his proposition, world ?" Had the Irish parliament continued and retained
He (Mr. Fergus O'Connor) was a Protestant ; and he its independence, would it not have shared in and exhibited
for one would be amongst the foremost to raise his arm, its portion of the improvement which with such rapid '
amongst others, against the hon. and learned member strides was advancing over Europe ? If the prosperity—the
for Dublin, if he attempted to establish a Catholic as- alleged prosperity—of Ireland was owing to the union, how
cendancy. The right hon. gentleman had remarked on was it that other countries shared in the prosperity without
the political contributions of the Irish people ; this was no sharing in the cause? If there was improvement in Ire-
evidence of their not being in distress, it being apparent land, which he denied, was nothing to be attributed to the
enough that they were ready to give their means on the general improvement of mankind in the useful arts and
promise of a recompence. Poyning's Act, which was sciences? Was all to be the creation of the magic wand
passed in 1782, corrupted the Irish Parliament ; he ad- of union ? He regretted that the hon. member (Mr.
mitted that the Irish Parliament, after the passing of that Tennant) was not present when the extract was read from
act, pursued a course of most servile dependence and pro- his democratic speech, but as he was not, he would now read
fligacy : but this was no reason why they should not have it. [Here the hon. member read the extract from a small
any Parliament at all. Subsequently even to that period volume, but was so frequently interrupted by triumphant
several acts were passed which were greatly beneficial to shouts from the repeal members, that we could only catch
Ireland, public works were undertaken—works, many of disjointed passages. The extract was very democratic ;
which were yet unfinished—and the country enjoyed a con- insisted (as well as we could ascertain its substance) on the
siderable degree of prosperity. The hon. and learnedgen- mastery of the people over the governors whom they them-
tleman next adverted to the state of Irish affairs in 1709. selves set above them ; alluded to the achievements of
In Jan. 22 of that year, Mr. Secretary Dundas presented Washington ; spoke of a pampered aristocracy ; and con-
an address from his Majesty to the House of Commons, to eluded by saying, that though England may boast of her
asitwould not be retracted. He (Mr. O'Connor)
the following effect:— revolution, she could never be named by Ireland but with
" GEORGE it.—His Majesty is persuaded that the unremitting detestation. ] He(lr.
Washington—hereOCo wriansosre)pawraotuilodn. ask(,Cownatsinuneodt
industry with which our enemies persevere in their avowed de- this agitation? (al ..foe nwd cheersmonth frommonths,
and the
th e repealre
w as mneomsab eyrisn.
g)
sign of effecting the separation of Ireland from this kingdom
cannot fail to engage the particular attention of Parliament, and
haamlleinutagoef could never have anticipated that the hon. member would.
his Majesty recommends it to this house to consider of tile most. cheers. ) But the hon. gentleman should not yet be classed
effectual means of counteracting, and finally defeating, this de. with the Greys, the Plunkets, and the Bushes. The speech
sign ; and he trusts that a review of all the circumstances which was uttered only
i-Iwhetherer e.
have recently occurred (joined to the sentiment of mutual of
if such a measure( -'had been proposed a short time ago to
breoctthi okninagnddocmosmtmo optriovinittiee,reisnt
most expedient, for settling such a complete and final adjustment have seconded a proposition to crush inquiry. He imagined,
interest) will
millandniseprose whichthe they Padsi
as may best tend to improve and perpetuate a connexion, es-en-
tial for their common security, and to augment and consolidate the hon. member Mr. Tennant),
the strength, power, and resources of the British Empire. he would have indig-
,, G. R.. nantly flashed back the democratic principle in the teeth of
He contended that Ireland had been eminent for her the proposer. Indeed, the hon. member was too demo-
loyalty. She had certainly been as much goaded as any cratic for him (Mr. O'Connor). The hon. gentleman had
country could be. If she had been in possession of liberty, gone beyond what his colleagues would wish, for he (Mr.
she would not have sought protection of any foreign power. O'Connor) believed it was their desire to avoid intemper-
It was the catholics of Ireland that had a right to complain ance in this discussion. There was not one of them who
of the English, and not the latter of the former. Yet out would have adopted the term robbery, used by the hon.
of near one hundred persons confined in the state prisons in member. Did the hon. member know that Fox, Grattan,
1798, they did not find more than three catholics. If, Tooke, and other high names, had received grants from
however, they had joined in the revolution, would it have the people, differing in form, but in one respect alike, be-
been wonderful that a people out of the pale of the consti- cause the contribution was voluntary? Robbery was no
tution had followed the example of those who were emu- word to be thus applied. As to what had been said of po-
lating the great effort that had been made with a view to litical adventurers, he (Mr. O'Connor)believed there might
political regeneration? Would it have been extraordinary be such in the House of Commons, and he dared to say
if a people so excluded had felt the shock of this great po- there were. (Cheers from the Irish members.) Healing
litical earthquake? The late Mr. Canning was of opinion measures, too, had been talked of ; but the hon. member
that the act of union was passed to prevent the infliction of had taken rather a curious mode of promoting tranquillity
further penal laws. What Mr. Canning said was this : and repose. To talk of priestcraft was not the way to
" Here, therefore, we have the creed of the protestant conciliate the people of Ireland ; to taunt a member of that
party. They are willing to adopt the union • failing in house with the performance of a respectful rite to a mini-
that, to continue their struggle for the ascendancy." Have ster of his religion, was the way to promote not peace, but
they received any of the advantages that were promised prejudice. If the repealers in that house were so bad—if
from the union? No ; and he would tell them why—be- they were treacherous political adventurers, agitators, and
cause the people were no parties to it. The slave-mer- the dupes to priestcraft, the sooner the house got rid of
chant was sent amongst them backed by English gold, and them the better. (Hear, from the repeal members.) They
the liberties of the country were bought. The hon. gentle- (the Irish members) had characters to protect, dear to
man then referred to the treatment of the Irish tenantry, them as was the hon. member's for Belfast ; and he (Mr.
and contrasted the general character of a landholder's O'Connor) could assure the hon. member it did not add
agent in England with that of the agents for the Irish much to his reputation to designate a respectable body by
landholders. The former, he said, sympathized with the the title of political adventurers.
tenant, and by showing due consideration for the tenant's Mr. TENNANT rose to explain, but in so low a voice
interests, maintained the value of his principal's property. that it was with difficulty we could catch his meaning. We
The Irish agent, on the contrary, was often a lawyer—felt understood him to say, that, in his own district, a class of
no interest in the land—and resorted to all possible means men had been called into operation as leading agitators,
of drawing money from the tenant, in order that he might who had neither property, occupation, nor character. With
put it into his own pocket. The agencies in Ireland, in regard to the other point, we understood him to express
consequence of the absenteeism of the proprietors, was an- his regret at finding the seeming of religion made a cover
other
great source of Irish evils, and, in fact, acted as so to political purposes.
many premiums for pauperising the land. What the harsh- Illr. F. O'CONNOR resumed—Did the right hon.
ness and cruelty of the agency begun, the expense and chi- gentleman think that his speech or his declarations would
canery of the law finished, and the tenantry neglected by retard the progress of the repeal question in Ireland? If
the landlord, oppressed by the agent, and fleeced by the he thought so he was much mistaken ; on the contrary,
law, were driven to beggary or exile. In England, though the opposition exhibited to it in England would increase
the law was still too dear for the poor man, still when he the feeling in Ireland in its favour ten-fold. For his own
resorted to it, he had his chance of justice. In Ireland it part he would only desert the question with life. As long
was otherwise. Party and sectarian feelings polluted the as he lived he would be the advocate of repeal. No threat
course of justice ; and though the evil may have been should deter him—he would maintain it to the death. No
routed in high quarters, it rallied again in the jury box. act of the united parliament of England should ever prevent
(Hear, hear.) Religion was not in England, as, unhap- him from giving it his support. He was aware that his
pily, in Ireland, the bane of social intercourse ; because in Majesty's ministers would not listen to his advice—he was
this country the ministers of the established church did not aware that they would go on heaping insult upon insult,
pronounce as damnable and idolatrous the tenets of those and oppression upon oppression, until, as he had already
from the sweat of whose brows they wrung the means of their said, they would legalize rebellion and make revolution a
pampered luxury. It had been argued that Ireland was virtue. (Hear.) The noble lord opposite had himself
not taxed in her proportion, because the taxes were not said last year, that they could not legislate for Ireland.
taken directly and on the spot ; but taxes, however indi- What,.after this admission, was Ireland then to expect from
reedy drawn, were taxes still. What but taxation and ex- a reformed parliament ? In what way had that house acted
cessive drain would reduce a country so naturally rich as towards Ireland ? They had received her complaints, it
Ireland to her persent state of destitution ? Was not was true, but they treated them as so much waste paper.
every trade and every profession' in Ireland taxed addition- Promises of relief were lavishly held out ; but in no in-
ally by the consequences of the union? Was not Ireland stance had those promises been realized. But when they
taxed by the unavoidable absenteeism and expenditure of said they would continue to
legislate
for Ireland, there was
the members sent to that house? Was she not taxed by the a question which it would be judicious for them first to
necessity of the members of her liberal professions being corn- solve. Would the people of Ireland permit them ?
pelledto come here to the Inns of Courts, to eat their dinners He said—no. The power of public opinion would
and spend their property? Why was this? Because the be too great for them. Would they venture to de-
gentry of Ireland abandoned the place of their birth, and spise that power? Have they refused to listen to the
the arts and literature of the country were compelled to united voice of eight millions of people? He would never
follow their natural patrons. (Hear, hear.) But,did not give his ' sanction to any measure that would lead to
England also feel the evils of absenteeship ? The Irish the shedding of blood. It was to save the effusion of blood
peer, living in Piccadilly on ten or twelve thousand a year, that he advocated repeal ; and he would warn the Imperial
is almost as wealthy, in comparison, as the English noble- Parliament to beware, lest, by resisting a just request,
man with 40,0001. per annum • , for the former has no poor they might create a demand which they dared not refuse.
law to fall in upon his property, and make him pay the He had now delivered his sentiments. (Loud cries of
price of the wretchedness his absenteeism was instrumental " Hear, hear.") Honourable gentlemen might be impa-
in producing ? It was idle to say, that Ireland was not tient, but his words would be registered, and the remem-
immediately taxed in these indirect means ; and, to add brance of them would rise against the Whigs at a future
further to her distress, the protecting duties had been re- day. (A laugh.) That his words would have but little
moved from her trade. Arthur Young had been quoted effect there he was well aware, but they would not fall
on the state of Ireland; but if the quotations had been unnoted on the other side of the Channel. In conclusion,
more fully pursued, it would have been found that he spoke he wished to address a few words to the right hon. Secre-
in high terms of the aristocracy and landed proprietary terry for Ireland. He urged him to reflect on the wishes
before the union. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman of that country ; and in speaking to Ireland, to speak in
who seconded the amendment would make the discussion such a manner as would insure a civil answer. He had
of the repeal question treason, and an undue interference great respect for the right hon. gentleman, nor did he
with the prerogative of the crown. The hon. gentleman doubt the goodness of his intentions. He hoped the right
did not know the proper definition of treason. Treason hon. gentleman would consult his own natural disposition.
made its progress in darkness and night—it cloaked itself He cautioned him not to be made a tool of by others ;he
in obscurity, and made oaths its bonds. He (Mr. O'Con- cautioned him not to give his sanction to declarations and
nor), and those who worked with him, were no traitors. Acts of Parliament, which, though they might pass through
He desired to see the lords and commons of Ireland legis- that house, could not be carried into effect in Ireland.
lating for Ireland in Ireland. If that was treason—if to He would tell him that those negative qualities for which
love his country, and endeavour to compass her prosperity, he was so much praised at the commencement of the ses-
was to be a traitor, he gloried in the name. (Loud cheers sion, would not do now. Decision and action were now
from the Irish members.) It would require more inge- required, and he called on him to remember, that he who
nuity and dexterity than the hon. gentleman possessed, to made himself the stepping-stone by which others were to
convert the discussion of this great national question into mount to power, must inevitably cover himself with
treason. This was a question which must be met in a disgrace. He had now done. (Loud cries of " Hear.")

great cause which he supported, hilt, forpthitely.
needed no such humble assistance, for the ,!it.,i4e Of fte.?!,
He was aware how imperieetiy chtild advocate the
dom was the cause of God. (Cheers from the repe,ili.,rs.,),
Mr. LITTLETON said that the man the most cow
versant with the Ergumeirts, historical, financial, and coin-
mercial, which bore upon this question,
difficulty when called on to follow the speech of the hoe
.
member who had just sat down—a speech as wide of the.
question, containing as little argument, as discursive anl
as declamatory, as any he had ever heard within the wall?
of that house. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned
gentleman by whom this important question was intr,
duced to the house, founded his motion on a varieTot
statements of a financial, statistical, commercial, and is'
torical nature, and his right hon. friend (Mr. S. Bic he
might feel one
in that extraordinary and powerful speech in which a;
replied to him (Loud cheers), had followed the hon. a,tr,
learned gentleman through all his arguments, and in iv,'
opinion had most irrefragably confuted them, (Ha'',
The hon. gentleman who had just sat down had tinder,
taken to answer his right hon. friend, but he had lefnthis
only the thread of his argument unbroken, but eve
minutest details untouched. (Hear, The great 11;;"e
evinced by his right hon. friend in that speceltmtd t hog
been felt by all who had the good fortune that
it ; and he could say with confidence, this
would hereafter be referred to as a complete manual on
subject by all who on any future occasion should feel in'eri
csted in the state of the question as a matter of Historical
inquiry. His right honourable friend had enlarged to
otherwise
enter
in t
o felta it his t
idount yotfo
these
er
variousi nt o.
fully on this subject as to render it unnecessary f°r
_,hlTase
go into many of those particulars which he shoulu, not
Hdeetallshsrib-11-,t hoe
would for a short time invite the attention of the Bolt
the means by which this question was fostered in Irelano t
and to the inducements which were held out in its
hie
by the honourable and learned member for Dublin ad;"the
supporters. One great argument was the existence °AI the
various evils alleged to arise from absenteeism, an j°
hon. and learned member proposed as the first act of a
sub'
mestic legislature to make various enactments on this
ject. Now, it was incontrovertibly the fact that the es:0",1
of absenteeism existed from the earliest to the latter pet?o,
of Irish history. The speeches of Flood and of gull
and the motion of Vandeleur would establish the faett!.,-,t,
any gentleman who would give his mind to the 5,11.44
would soon be convinced that absenteeism was an evil r.'n'o,
ing to as great, if not to a greater extent before the lAt;jl
than since. (Hear.) This sentiment in favour of re!",-,li;
was not of the natural growth of Ireland. It was at' he
timent wholly conceived at a late period, and pursd.`Zahle
was bound to say, for purposes of a selfish and unkist";, it
description. (Cheers. ) If this was not the ease, t4:l,
not a most extraordinary thing, that from 1800 to ti-Tit
is
the question of repeal was never once mentioned/I'par'.
the walls of the Imperial House of Commons,? of
ar. ) For the purpose of creating this cry 1° ' our of
house, had addressed to the people of Ireland,
r, peal, the hon. and learned gentleman, whose abseil, 'tio
rEgretted in common with most of the members °' no.
m rous meetings he was in the habit of attendin, ties 9
riety of arguments which, however absurd and hair."
th, y might be in that house, were calculated to proolo,
powerful effect on the public mind in Ireland. The° abesg
ments the hon. and learned member had, for motives ing
ktrAvn to himself, thought roer to keep back in diseurjr
the question here. (Hear, hear) The house would, t"-iteis
fore, forgive him if, for a few moments, he direcgedho
attention to this point. He should set aside what the clie3l
member for Belfast had justly called the rhaPs° -Nor
rhymes in which the hon. member usually indulged. ,d the
should he attempt to describe how often he had Wont.
Irish people that a domestic Legislature was al°n° -
ng to make Ireland std the
yr

Great, glorious, and free ;
First flower of the earth and first gem of the.seo ad
Laughter. As a further inducement to Irelandt ford,
vocate repeal, the hon. and learned member P, gear,
proposition of confiscation. No ! and loud cries floes 0„
hear !") He declared that one of his first Hie
of 7$ vet,
domestic Parliament would be, to propose a he wee,
cent. on all absentee landlords. (Hear.) l'ato:ks, rather
further. Lest it should happen that some )land) the risk o
than be compelled to return to Ireland and run ood,
the denunciation to which they might be the , ,'het meet
member consent to hold their estates on such terms, mer.t
member (and now the landlords might see the t. nu
domestic .e•
cies which they might expect to derive from a „..,ovember,
gislature ) proposed in a public meeting, the 2Sth ons
to forego the proposition of a tax, and to sub
..trioml_ hold'
preventing any man having an estate in Ireland tt this
ing an estate in any other country. (Hear. ./5.
) ember er,
was one of the expedients by which the hon. nt itis.ess
pected that English capitalists would be instatedty
speech of the hon. and learned gentleman's,
lkine dinner'
in the Dublin Pilot, made at the Clonda
bishop ;
was made in proposing the health of a Catholic h
the hon. and learned member stated, what -
their capital in Ireland. (Hear. ) This doges:nrepoo
tend to raise the public estimation oat'ya,
Hanes of Dr. Doy:e and Dr.
h d 3"ignurrd. the paper
spectable body only one "-", Hear.)sl The sal'
the repeal of the union.
•k
held out en another occasion at a
on the 19th of December. There the hon.
member said—he entreated the house to rei
however ridiculous it might appear in thei
parish meet
things produced a great effect in Ireland—"
bthoadtyo't
improve
wouldmpre o voalmosteftthhee
hc
ora
enpd.pi appear reo
member's
ob
a, e r
10,`
measure he should expect to receive the
why
a domestic legislature was one for prevent
having an estate in Ireland, from holding
where." That hon. and learned member we
athndenh,efobrelrieepveeadi wlats
rneomtinsdpeodkehninirt ono if eala 1
liament would pass such a law. (Laughte)
all
laugh), and this tyrannical proscription was„
sure to be expected from that domestic pa; "i
was to make Ireland " great, glorious, and
,_
was an extravagance in the proposition which
absurd. (Hear.) But was it certain, if the hen'
member ever had the misfortune to wee' ~I
domestic legislature in Ireland that the proPes'
s'antchokau,tndtenrsyotranr
oeeyneb,dut
tion of such a measure would be impossibl
Was it not, on the contrary, quite clear, that
measures by which he had raised this poP'
would still be compelled to maintain his do
(Hear, hear) ; and that although he believed
learned gentleman had already become weari.,
tient of the burden, in order to keep the roan
favour, he would still be compelled to run I
demand? (Cheers.) But this restriction
sion of property would be a measure of pure
jus'ice in comparison of many which
would speedily be under the necessity of prof
domestic legislature. (Cheers.) But let
a moment consider what would be the effect
bond of property, one of the strongest links
wl
flier the people of the two countries, would g
destroyed ; the ties of a common inter est wouh
altogether, and whenever it should please th.
gislature of the hon. and learned gentlemat vte'oe
separation of the two countries, he would not be e.ht pe,A,
by the interested clamour of any man who mlCio
patriotically apprehensive of the loss of his proper,), groo
land. (Loud cheers.) But the hon. and learde" V•t,
man said he was for a federal union, and that 11;0
separatist. Let him say so. For his part, lie kg of 4f
teton) must say, that the man by whom measure
description should be carried would be a separatist 1,C11,t
tice (Hear, hear) ; and that the man, on the setatl'',,.l
p'e, by whom they should be proposed was a serto'LlOt
theory. (Loud cheers. ) But they were told til,ite
effects would ever ensue, because it would be recirtle t 0.5: p
all measures, if an independent Parliament iced oitPfoot"
Ireland, should be submitted to both houses, an °stieit
ceive the Royal assent. True, such was the trtheke sr
constitution ; but to what extent was it mewl, ) ratio°
should practically be true in Ireland? (Ctliee',- tleto of hi!
pealed from the hon. and learned gentlemso etite:‘t otis"
that he was no separatist to the whole cha,t, se 4,11;
speeches and his conduct, and he maintained t' 30 "
he must be, if he were in his senses. (Cheer,s... aebtoeg'
ter.) Shylock did not demand the life of iTeart k
only demanded a pound of his flesh, near the trod;
hear) ; and in like manner the hon. and learocleeil,oT
man did not demand separation; he only de°,.,,3hle. 4
sures which should render separation ine"A'"all tttle
'
cheers.) But the house had not yet heardoines3l4b;•
vantages which were to ensue from ,e rell" t,
gislature. He regretted extremely that tnesell
and learned gentleman was not nosy, Ph
he was most anx ions to have directed
tion to an extract of a speech which wt.
the Pilot newspaper as having been deliver'
the dedication of the new Roman Catholic
dare. " How," asked the hon. and learnt
" how can any men sitting in London know
our wishes, and what is right to be done 0
conduct of our affairs? How can you let
sib
and Why, if the Parliament were sit
and your representatives were doing wrong.
your short sticks in your hands Loud C'
hear") some fine morning, and go 'up a1ic..1..b;,
honestly and rightly." ( Shouts of " "lent
approbation from Mr. F. O'Connor ant, ;
The hon. members for Cork and Droghen,
recommendation. (Hear, hear. ) fie
they did so. (Hear.) This was said to
great and principal advantages of a dertu
( Hear, and laughter), and yet, in the same
the hon. and learned gentleman gave suen
cates violence, and talks about ,4 the red arm
geance being for ever lifted up against the
a fellow-creature's blood." One arguniet
thousand rhetorical flourishes—,. Take :your
your hands, and go up and tell them to v!
rightly !" (Cheers and laughter. ) If there,
man present, and peradventure there
ha,
were pluming themselves on the idea of h
hon. member 'a domestic legislature
h a\
o
(A l
beg most sincerely to tender them is or
tions on the brilliant prospect before
hi them
mentary independence. (Cheers.)
y, w_ eI
rational and sober-thinking men they
inviting, he could perfectly well understate
Bey
ut

lie bisnuy
e.
of
L!h,neeo
mtcelieju.
t:rn:htmeugiaasei
nnolPna
nttydifhtrdnfe
srtiacte
eiaienEaoa
rttutguitl,:nu:tresria
st
of
nting any
another e
ent on
thong to sai):';,
Lilyn,
a Irish 11,
Hurra
ter.) la
„ 0
story to
, in oru'-/
• - tes
its n°, inea'
firs., • h
s the t wine e
liantel,l-
-
was dlearne
an • $
Lan• havoc ,
eea acioy,
posaocheer,,
ble ? ( e saln`.
th
bat J ter) h
n
oce,
olniniooti.
that
,1 an 03-
poi pi
Dad of
before
on the Pk(
an
n a unclne obt,
sue ding jet
wounTh„tisedto
the
!et of Pia
Nhicll beeetir!;:t
soon
sbee toe:r
eso'
the• a°—oere'eki
an to liyucio,

the j:evseittell'
P':
ter' h"orte
" d
reP,
c t,
er-jler`P
g,e;w„fl3
11
rnea
o'flie nor
e :
tro .„
10
T,t3
of tocof°
of
tell the el
atia hey fi
0111 t11:1
a applaul„ 51,
s ectreroc;f :4
be one .lao,
leStie tx131:,,, a
speeell def'
advicebei,s,•¢l4o
of
an 6010
51"
Man cOro
t.
ent 11 a 5 tt
ur short 5 oy
t t
iota 1101154,e11d,,
e was ao,),fr,
Ott be I, jo
lying sete k,
,angb), ",rotilfe- t:
)rdial e°ll6rsP'tt
of their
pile to inteo,u, itv tt
!re eitrenietioY t
itand 1)0

heat-mass of ignorant deluded Irishmen such prepositions
would be eXtreing • captivating as a Parliament exclu-
-4blVrisii; consulting none but Irish interests, to which
eifare of Ireland would be exsclusively dear, and
established only on Irish predilections ; but he would have
them bear in mind, that if a Parliament exclusively Irish
sat in College-green, Dublin, a Parliament exclusively
British would sit in Westminster. (Hear, hear.) Already
we were told by Mr. Sharman Crawford, when insisting
ell the necessity of a local legislative body in Ireland, "The
trre: n 1
aeni Pdt iVolich now actuates England is not kindness to
, it is kindness to herself. She indulges the
lai hope that the cries of the starving peasants would no
longer reach her ears—that their incursions would no
€,lger be the means of reducing the wages of her labour-
ers and mechanics.", Such was the language of an advo-
Ne for repeal. God forbid that the hope so unnecessarily
layited to us should ever be realized. (Cheers.) God
ti'irbid,that the ears of England should ever be closed to
4,‘ cries of a starving Irish peasantry. But this he would
that such an unhappy state of feeling could not be
f
in„,,,°!ei effectually promoted than by that exclusive system
(CF.ation which they were endeavouring to establ.sh.
) He warned them that there did exist on the
art the labouring community.of this country a strong
i,Ttug that their interests were injuriously affected by the
iceearsions of the Irish peasantry ; and if the views of the
,-n' and learned gentleman were unfortunately realized,
-e table of that house might soon be laden with petitions,
l'lraYing for protection against the competition of the
stratiger," to use a favourite expression of the
tris(tourable and learned gentleman (Cheers), and that the
itt"might be shut out of England altogether; nor would
I,bl;‘erY difficult to foresee the result of such appeals in a
te -"arlient exclusively British, consulting only British in-
4ests, founded only on British predilections, and in
a„,161 not only the eloquent advocacy of the hon. and
;;"ed gentleman would be wanting, but in which not
, 'avowable voice would be raised, however feebly, by
• one connected with Ireland by property, or by any
rti"s of honour or interest inclined to romotethe
the are of that country. (Cheers.) In the speech which
e of
last thereawnd learned. gentleman delivered the night before ,
assiduo as no ponigtewnhich he seemed to labour more
ustY to establish than the purity, importance, and
it 'less of the independent House of Commons, as
tiuttisted in Ireland/82 ; and he was ready to admit, I
jiartai_f the hon. and learned gentleman had proved that
five ,Tent, as then constituted, could have been prod.ue-
krt.; any advantage to Ireland, one position of great un-
se—" would have been made out ; but in one of his
eeches that hon. and learned gentleman declared that his
adhew domestic legislature should not be like the last. (Hear,.
o Sure was, if his views were ever effected, it
theu, resemble no body of men who had ever aspired to
views and situation of a.deliberative.as!embly. ( Cheers. )
te‘_' Mockery was more pitiful, no spectacle was more con-
:nptible, than that of a body of men decked in all the
,7•Ppings of eloquence, and assuming the natae and bearing
a deliberative assembly, while crouching beneath the
'trrors of an armed constituency, impelled by the hon.
tad learned member. (Loud cheers.) He believed
that the profligacy of the Irish governnient, acting,
11 • they necessarily did, in connection with the Irish
use of Commons, exceeded all belief. ( Hear, hear.) The
Pension list 20 years before the union exceeded 85,0001. which was more than half of the customs at that day. The
most undisguised traffic in places and pensions was carried
iithe crown was permitted by the House of Commons
tit't` °llly to retain all the hereditary revenues but to pros-
theateh to the most unworthy purposes (Hear, hear
L whole of the establishments of the country wer) e
tlieenght forward on the most extensive scale of prodigality;
shorstPi.rit of corruption pervaded every department ; in
vent," might be said that the conduct of the Irish go-
tgenistiat7tirt4 act al a -s of with an scandalous)ndependent
in Ireland was not more in its treat-
the e:°' the Irish peasantry than in every department of
then Iva service. (Hear, hear.) Anterior to the union
wase existed no knowledge of great public rights ; there
teve rtio kind of respect for political purity (Hear), and no
Orleaeril!
for sound constitutional principles of government
as to "ear) ; the state of the representation was so bad
(theelnake the late Lord Londonderry a radical reformer
rights " and a laugh); the oligarchy mocked at popular
the, and even sought self aggrandisement at the expense
Great De°4ll, try. In the struggle for a free trade with
the —main it fortunately happened that the interests of
amPtriz!prieters were advanced with those of the people,
l'ideotj Principles of justice and reason for a time in-
look were adverted to ; but in vain would they
L'istorv—`,Pughout the whole range of the parliamentary
liiitr„;°l any clear and sustained recognition of those
-" Constitutional principles which alone ought
hek.---thate the government of a free country. (Hear,
resoitiand cheers.) If to all this they added the evils
tuan:g from a wretched, demoralizing system in the
thereernent of property, hon. members would have before
tOly Pi,ire which certainly would not fill them with
iultr.Y. high expectations as to the great advantages to
tic lefr-I.(lPoted from the re-establishment of such a domes-
Thosre ~tore as had been described. (Loud cheers. )
Played ti,44a fere not merely historical ; they actively dis-
%Hi h ealielves up to the present moment. (Hear, hear. )
the o,ittwaver, they were not- the natural growth, nor did
were insepteablin the peculiarities of Irish character ; they
obliged tom
tality of connected with a government which was
bni. such a , s movements through the instrumen-
cneved if it domestic legislature. (Cheers.) And he
nil arid ein were now again re-established, in times of
ergeney,
*ustif when the exigency of the case seemed
ocbe eil the means, Ministers, it would be found, would
backward in availing themselves of the facilities
sil Were afforded, and corruption would again, secretly
Illth„entlY, become the settled system of their government
dttv 7' country. (Hear, hear. ) He had it bis
tp.rf to the first place to bring into the present discussion
Cie of those arguments which the hon. and learned gen-
L'lan who originated the present motion had constantly
%,7„,4 in the habit of advancing and urging in Ireland
IC melancholy effect, and which had produced a
ft-'t malignant spirit in that country, but which,
6,„ motives best known to himself, had been
(if: entirely in the back-ground on this occasion.
rnl hear.) He did not wish, as indeed he had
t? question the purity of that hon. and learned
tole was at' s motives in having introduced this question.
as willin
hen corn g as any man to admit, that up to the period
tor p ete reli t Ireland, gious toleration had been accomplished
far
or, his hon. and learned gentleman had coo-
t 'clear, hear is country the greatest possible benefits
e official 1314 he must be permitted to say, and from
;he
with situation
(k in which he stood he was entitled
he
ir• O'co me degree of weight,—since that period
the linen) had proved a most unfortunate obstacle
ItZt""ero—euet'.al(hLappiness -of Ireland.and her progre 'ye im-
;.sslH did
st hen
thato,ud and long-continued cheers. . e
i)kerjesolt of non. and learned gentleman had witnessed
tF Laraeot the solemn adjudication of both houses o
tht:o ighe2'n this proposition, he would see the prudence,
it if reagitartynotive would induce him, of abstaining from
per,ll prodn'°n of it in Ireland (Cheers), and at all events,
ite"„ll',.lo of ,i-inee did not prevail, the united voice of the
• worth?, country would join with all that was intelli-
Pliblipent 1;1, 'um respectable in Ireland, to support Ge-
eourtoe,4 an the means in their power to maintain
amid r• (The and the existing free institutions of the
- tom e
Afr. 1 and, right hon. gentleman resumed his seat
listed o,Alteng continued cheering.)
( at solyi CI,N in supporting the original motion, in-
14 been e
e 1 ngt'h on the evils of absenteeism, which
reply
t‘, eatly
aggravated, if not created, by the union.
tptle, that `ue assertion of,
the hon. member for Cam-
re,oiaged the the imperial parliament had greatly en-
utiorls fisheries of Ireland, he quoted certaiN
t,,p at ta„ Which had recently been passed at a meet-
have 'Dr iggan, M which the fisheries were stated
itithdrawaluffered great iojury in consequence of the
, was , of the bounties in 129. Under those bounties
k.;l:e,,..seds,tateti that the number of fishermen had greatly in-
A, whilst since their withdrawal the number had much
er ',led. As a proof of the dissatisfaction -ith which the
vepilhstaen of Ireland looked upon that measuvi'T of the go-
l'row''',,e4t, he stated that the fishermen who had been
otett out of employment by it had in a southern borough
4:141,4 a mass for a stranger of whom they knew nothing,
rejected a near neighbour of their own, who, though
14,^as ire ejected
of his own, he had no hesitation in saying,
,eeao,e lurid landlord and an estimable man, merely
Irr',4l4'ent.'e was considered friendly to the present go_
hen)an ar. Then as to the incrase of
heer;',, actures the city of Waterford,e there
the• l• ien, st union large manufactories of
now Ws, sere& Several of these manufactures
;lot d; offs,
g'
' i .saPPe eIY disappeared, whilst such of them as had
°ll of "red were greatlydeteriorated. Out of a popu-
-"Is which that city contained, there I
,000 persons who were unemployed
tar, and who were employed during
which in this country would not be
Tense for labour. Though the hon.
sury might imagine that Ireland was
'liged to cite these instances, which
.cnowledge, to prove the contrary.
sere were great exports from Water-
iswer to the starving mechanics of
that 2,000,0001. of the raw produce
annually exported from their city to
was not the effort of any individual,
,n•ty which existed in Ireland in con-
inrnent by its nobility and gentry,
agitation which now existed in that
said that the people of Ireland owed !
of England for the grants which
:rection of public works in Ireland,
lon of the exchequers of the two
id took upon herself the debt of
las all plausible enough, but unfortu-
ie. He would remind the house
Tort, in speaking of that debt six-
' union was accomplished, said
formed on a false estimate of
id. Lord Plunket in the sam de-
-le of contribution for Ireland fixed at
'eportionate to her strength. Mr. Fitz-
't Britain had contracted with Ireland
'as not in the power of Ireland to
:11 had been presented to the house
to consolidation of the exchequers of
tamed a statement of similar opi-

nions, and alleged in addition, that while the taxes of Eng-
land had increased two-fold, the taxes of Ireland had in-
creased five-fold in.2o years. The fact was, that England
had kept Ireland in her debt until she became bankrupt,
and England would not even then have taken upon
herself the debt of Ireland, bad she not felt that the credit
of Great Britain would have been impaired if she had re-
fused to do so. Moreover, the debt which England took
upon herself was a debt contracted after the union for
English purposes. But had they, in point of fact, exempt-
ed Ireland from her liabilities for that debt.? No such
thing; on the contrary, they had made Ireland liable for
a debt of 800,000,0001., contracted before the union. Be-
sides, had not England governed Ireland for the last six
centuries? And if Ireland was poor, who was justly cul-
pable for her poverty? England, and England alone,
was to blame for it. There were two grand objec-
tions, as it appeared to him, to the repeal ques-
tion. The first was the dread of Catholic ascendancy in
Ireland, supposing the repeal carried. Now he begged to
remind the house, that by the constitution the King must
be a protestant. Among the peers of Ireland there were
not more than four or five catholics ; so that two out of
the three branches of the state must always be essentially
protestant. It was acknowledged that, under the late ex-
citement, a larger number of Catholic members had been
returned to that house than was likely to be returned on
any future occasion. If a dissolution were to take place
to-morrow, there would not be so many Catholics returned
to the new as had seats in the present Parliament. Be-
sides, if there were a protestant gentry residing in Ireland,
they would soon regain that influence among their tenantry
which they had lost of late years owing to their absence
from the land of their forefathers. The three estates then
would be essentially protestant, and that being the case,
the dread of Catholic ascendancy was absurd and vision-
ary. The next objection was, that repeal would be fol-
lowed by separation. Now, why should the people of
Ireland wish to be separated from the people of Eng-
land ? (Hear, hear, hear.) Would it be for their in-
terest, to be so separated ? No, it was for the interest
of the people of Ireland to be on terms of the most
intimate friendship with those of England. They knew
that the market of England was the best they
could find for their agricultural produce, and they likewise
knew that England could produce manufactures cheaper
for the Irish market than any other country, owing to her
superiority in skill and machinery. The people of Ireland
felt the advantage of British connection, and they would
therefore be madmen if they rejected it. The interest of
the two countries was the best chain to bind them together,
and far superior to any laws or any parchment. However
this motion might be disposed of, he hoped that English
members would not be disposed by any angry feelings
which the discussion might generate to turn aside from the
consideration of the grievances of Ireland. Ireland was
now standing at the bar of the house requesting Parliament
to be allowed to legislate for herself. The house might
say that that request it would never grant ; but if it did,
he would then implore hon. members as Christians, as
men, and as Englishmen, to look at the distress of Ireland,
and to pity and relieve them.
Mr. RUTHVEN then moved the adjournment of the
debate to this day. (Cries of " No.")
Lord ALTHORP thought that though the hour was
late, there was yet time for the hon. member to address
the house that evening.
Mr. RUTHVEN persisted in his motion.
Sir J. SEBRIGHT suggested that if the hon. member
was not in a condition to speak that night, he would per-
haps give way, and allow some other member to speak in
his stead. (Cries of" Divide," and " Adjourn.")
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but previously to
the gallery being cleared,
Lord ALTHORP rose, and said that if the adjournment
were assented to, he trusted the hon. member for Dublin
(Mr. Ruthven) would not abuse the courtesy shown him by
speaking at greater length than was absolutely necessary
to-morrow. (Hear. )
Mr. RUTHVEN said he would not trespass unneces-
sarily on the patience of the house.
The debate was then adjourned till to-morrow (Friday).
A conversation ensued between Lord ALTHORT, Mr.
HUME, and Mr. Wass as to the presentation of petitions
from dissenters. The result was that Monday se'nnight
was fixed for that purpose.
FOREIGN ENLISTMENT REPEAL BILL.

Mr. MURRAY moved the second reading of this bill.
Mr. FINCH opposed the bill, and thought that the bet-
ter course would be to amend, and not entirely repeal the
existing law. It was expedient that the crown should have
the power of preventing its subjects from enlisting in the
service of foreign states, under particular circumstances.
Sir R. INGLIS said that was an evil so considerable,
that it ought not to be undertaken lightly even by states,
still less by individuals. No man should take the life of
another except in self-defence, or at the command of his
lawful sovereign. Regarding the present measure as one
which diminished the security at present existing, that the
King's subjects should not involve the country in sudden
war, and as weakening the restriction on private individuals
taking their swords to market, he must give the motion his
decided opposition.
Mr. PLUMPTRE thought it contrary to Christian
principles, to allow the subjects of a state to interfere in
the quarrels of neutral countries.
Mr. PEASE considered the act of sending our fellow-
subjects to fight the battles of Don Miguel or Don Pedro,
whichever happened to pay the roast, as a corruption of the
morals of the country. Such a proceeding was disgraceful
to British subjects. He should divide against the bill.
Mr. MURRAY defended the measure, which was in-
tended to put an end to the evils and inconveniences of the
exiting law ; and asked what was the Christian principle
which prevented any body from aidinggreatthereascaounsefoo
For the
repeal op-
pressed nations such as Poland? A
repeal of this law was, that it was ineffectual, and therefore
ought not to remain on the statute-book.
Mr. R. JOHNSTONE contended that individuals
should be prohibited from exercising their discretion in
joining what power they liked. He moved that the bill
be read a second time this day six months.
Lord AL THORP sad he was much opposed to the ori-
ginal introduction of the Enlistment Bill, but it did not
appear to him that if this bill passed it would place the
country on a more Christian footing than before. The
present law was entirely ineffectual to prevent persons from
serving in foreign states, and he believed it would be im-
possible to frame any law that was not too severe to be
carried into operation which would prevent them. Another
important reason was, that the effect of placing such a law
on the statute-book gave a claim to foreign countries on
us to exercise a power which we did not possess, which
might involve us in disputes. He was ready to admit that
there had been an unseemly exhibition of training men in
this country which ought to be prevented.
The house then divided, when there appeared,
For the second reading ..
Ag,inst it
Majority 5l
ROMAN CATHOLIC MARRIAGES (SCOTLAND)

, ea - ----/-
,c
L 1 ,f, -,, were gri
s,
i„
tiwriere clew 5-43,,,,,000 souls.
~t the rig or, ""uu or 6,0
e eth ? half the yew
oi,
co.n.aideerrecillalf at a rate a
0,1 , tre,.,,,„ as a reeompe
1 l!ros,,e7.'Y of the Treasu
1,1
r ri ,
),„i titae „,tligi,i he was 01,14
it'' for44lr4itterld his own kr
,}.'' th ' hut ,„.
.t•tat there
~r,
tlkt eity -as It any arcs
~ their Ito tell them ti
',i
;t at Itattd. Were rit, ~ anr
i, „1% MI -41 •It wa
~ -eoti... . e ,„„_s
0.
t,,.
notch
°f ass I Pover
'pe t haq 'ls abandon
~.. °lltury errs
the a„
much i' Ith
ct she b. P the had been s;
1,.., and f''..n tnattxuerosity
tour:t°r. the Con"'er
.the er
I I, Nes when khdatim
-vlaro. en t,.
I,''; tlatel ." Now '4gland
'ol.' that it „. that w,
,', tee 4 ,it
Jas not true
' that ..e51.5 aft NewP°
ti:i the
it „, er the
,1 ~,
bate e re. as a debt
0., oourees ~
l'' the aid, that°I Ireland
tii:
ictoeraki
saoni(,vaths scaledispropor
0 •''' uni the
''''' ' said,
' at Great I
,:t,,. r'eet. A whieh it wo
i',!.`',, jY the eo_rePort, whit},
ly
tl., the two 'ieo4itztlittteriees°,eothn4l
: , A 7
I -