The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-30 00:00:00

•
one of those measures demanded by his right hon. friend 1
had since been carried. Was it then to be said that he
was inconsistent in now declaring that the imperial Parha:
ment had shown every anxiety to do justice to Ireland
Really such a charge was a very hard one. The hon.
and learned gentleman, in the speech in which he in-
troduced
his motion, went into a long detail of what had
occurred in the ancient history of Ireland. That detail,
however, had been admitted by all who spoke on either
side of the question, not to bear directly on the ques-
tion. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned gentleman
appeared to him to argue, during the whole course of the
debate, as though Ireland,' up to the time of th e union,
had always been in a state of independence. If so, whn_t
became of the great revolution of 1782, which did, indeed,
Ito a very great extent, establish the independence of Ire•
land? Up to that time, surely, the hon. and learned gen-
tleman would not pretend that Ireland was the indeper.;
dent country he endeavoured to represent her.
with the hon. member for the county of Cork, that th(T
should not look at this question in reference to allele',
history, but should rather consider whether the repeal of
the union, at the present time, would be of any ado!'"
tape to the empire at large, admitting that, . Is
such considerations, they should have regard, pri,r.
cipally, to the interests of Ireland herself, thou,
,t 1
constituting the smaller portion of the empire. Tile iiili
member for Cork had stated that the only ground on w. i
to
he would vote for the motion was, that he considered it e
be a preliminary step to " repeal of the union." Tat an,
merely a motion for a committee of inquiry, as t"'"
gentleman who spoke last had described it, the hon. men.t
ber for Cork would not have voted for it. He was ''''
prepared to say that, as a measure of parliamentary tactics;
a motion for a committee might not have caught sl. ?
votes which the direct question could not have obtaine i
hear.) With regard to the letter quoted
but he thought with the hon. member for Middlesex, til
this was so avowedly, in point of fact, a motion for rePe,a,_:
that no member opposed to repeal could vote for it, on the
ground of its being only a committee of inquiry. (gear'
He agretd
last night her
hon.
member for Clonmel, and again by the hon. mein
for Middlesex, he did not know exactly what it was. Froel
the speech of the hon. member he believed that it purport .
to be a private letter from Lord Anglesea to Lord
Now he thought if Lord Anglesea had written such a Pr':
vete letter to Lord Grey, that it would have been show'.
to him. Neither did he think the style of the quotationi
which he had heard at all like the style of Lord Anglesea 5
letters. (Hear.) As far as he remembered what had beeil,l
quoted last night, he mentioned it to Lord Grey, w11,5,„34
that he did not remember any such letter. He had 1`.,..-:
more of it to-night. Of course it was difficult to go"-
direct negative to such a statement, but he believed thait 1,,1
such letter had ever been written to Lord Grey by ."°
-
Anglesea.
privy
Mr. RONAYNE did not state the letter to be apr
one. It was an official memorial, addressed by Lord An-
glesea to his colleagues, on the state of Ireland.
Lord ALTHORP—The hon. member for Cork made
h and
several allusions to him in the course of his sPeee 'hon.
did him an honour which he did not desgrve. Lorde A 1 - ,
gentleman did him the honour to say, that he (That
thorp) would at once understand his statements•
ber
honour he disclaimed. (A laugh.) The hon. lee" 10..
said that it was a most convincing prospect of the agrie
an
• by the
turd ruin of a country when they exported both corn a, a
cattle at the same time. He really could not follow hot
derfr that
ient
doa an
hr individual
vme
member
mh abet
to this conclusion ; nor could he see oof of runt °t
rni
lswduoamru would
epdti
tion
oas soon oobnfe e
meat
be
a tr
referredui nine d
Dublintiof he
ie ,
0-.
~:1.
the agriculture of any district in the circumstancean that 3
rtfhafrioenrcKeo
the same time it had sold cattle and corn. This he kndl•cci
not, and he did not see why the same reasoning shouldn't
apply to a nation. (Hear.) The evidence of his he"'
A cai
smaller than it formerly was. Now this he wold%ing*
that looking at the evidence of that hon.gentleman, 1:1"t"-
„jell
could more strongly prove the great improvement wl`ti at .
had taken place in the agriculture of Ireland thanes let
evidence—and no man, he was sure, was more compecvi,
to give an opinion o the subject. pei of Illete saY i
dence of others, lie might, perhaps, be allowe" •
hat tits the
something of his own knowledge. He knew ti w
ith the
exertions had been made by gentlemen conneete'
the x
agriculture of Ireland to improve it. He knew ,1
su, 1
pense to which they had gone, and he was sure that
;n Iture of
an expenditure must tend to promote the agr---ud dealt
the country. (Hear.) The hon. gentleman
ha
of the
with this question rather unfairly. He had spoken i
ase"'
fair of Ballinasloe, and said that fair had not incre
But that was no proof of injury to agriculture. There well
many good causes why it should not have increased•
07,,
the period of the union the fair of Ballinasloe was the. ~_.a
one of the kind in Ireland, whereas many other fairs 1,1!,1
since been established. (Hear.) The hon. gentian:ll;r
said, " Let us keep our corn, and give us the meal" ~' roe-
suming it." No doubt, if they had the means 1._,1 not
suming it, corn would be kept. But when they 1:",,, be
the means, the only effect of keeping the corn W be
that corn would not be grown, and ag-riculture woulda_ig
effectually ruined. (Hear, hear.) He was not iollres,,,ie
any exaggerated statement when he said, that befs.N L,',..0
union the usual price of land in Ireland was front 1 Tes
gears
0,
to eighteen years' purchase. In 1830, at
_aasahalf
lands in Limerick fetched twenty-two aunrdatase,
.rid 01
purchase; in 1831, twenty-seven years'
p years'put'
1834, in the county of Galway, twenty-seven _
t._
• he supposed, was another proof of r
chase also. This, - t•
ruin which had fallen on the agriculture of Irelai!.l.
(Cheers.) If the statements of the hon. member l?..
Kildare were to be attended to, the fact was that the agr;s,
culture of Ireland, instead of being deter:oratel, was greb3:l_,
improved. (Hear.) This was a question which 1i!.., 210 l
sorry to be obliged to debate on such statements• raj.
what he knew of the inquiry now going on into the et,,i,
tion of the poor in Ireland, he hoped and trusted that
the
would be the last time they would have to discuss.otrr,
question on those grounds. The result of that
ni ,
iuri`a:.
would be to
.place the improvement of agriculture a)° Die
nufactures in Ireland beyond question. (gear" a since •
transfer of 16,000,000/. from the funds to Irelani
co,
the union was another circumstance which streng 3 Another
Anot l
firmed him in the view which he had take" 1„t it was
very strong argument against the motion vcas, `n-volving 3
utterly impossible to repeal the union without. ' je which,
separation between the two countries. Thef:rai.amwortl
this had been put by the right hon. mein ber -ge had ati
in his admirable speech was unanswerable. , which ha' .
tentively listened to the whole of the deba`f $ had even
since taken place, and not one of the spe,aser at. bart•
attempted to touch the argument of the right disused to
He appealed, therefore, to those who might he ,a
vote for the motion of the honourable and learn
ssibie to
for Dublin, to consider in what way it would he undere such
carry on the government of the two beet,countries,, wade
circumstances. An experiment of the kind host erile° •
from the year 1782 until the union, and that .es had beeo
had not succeeded very well. The two countrie os-
very nearly separated in their lines of policy t"
"licy of )11',
tion of the regency. If at that period the po_,
w,_tie di(
Fox had prevailed in the Government of Ireland, 440,c1.
policy of Mr. Pitt prevailed in the Government of .1'
e wholcile‘:'
there could be no doubt in the minds of th_orse must hal
what took place on that occasion, that tirliees. Even le,
been a separation between the two couent
--5 be considero
the occurrences of the last two or thr/?)_flarce et• the unioi,i
with reference to a supposed non- s"
,le atly man, who knew
between the two countries. Coutt _
ed member for Dui
the opinion which the hon. and lehe course of policy put:
vernmen, had so repeatedly pronounced on t and who line"t
Go
sued by his Majesty's present d learned gentleman °lust
the influence which that hon• an tha9
for a moment ed.
have in an Irish Parliament, supposeect
~
remained conn ,
the two countries could have long
entlennin
to the hon. and learned g A i
The effect of agreeing lrelan- %t
motion would be to place the legislature of
_,.,„..,. Th _
situation similar to that in which it was before Itti_elre an!
being the case, he (Lord Althorp) could not CO e the to'',
possibility of continuing the connection
betweena Toro:
countries under such circumstances. The hon. an was a%
member for Dublin said that the Irish Parliarnen,toese had
dead, but that it only slept. What power that i'phogie
to establish a legislature for Ireland he (Lor",,utbf ,
knew not ; and •yet how it could be established, u_neeenet
Parliament of this country, he was at a loss to held
.°",..
It had been said that the promises which had heen,ord t,
to effect the Union had not been kept. He )ie P'3,:i.
thorp) admitted that the postponement of Cae,
rest
o;,0
cipation, which was one of those promises, was "lose j.vs
He had always contended that it was so. rorteer pa
quoted his speeches, and those of his friends in.'
fled thaipr
ought to recollect that they invariably maintal rogic..a
justice would be done to Ireland until Catholic
4,,,, the)"alma.oe •t,
tion had been granted. But at the same P..- that rcire•
held that after justice had been done to Ireland in
_code °f
_tor
t'ley would resist any attempt on the part of the rf orew ''', tbo
land to carry such a question as that which wasorters Of ho
, consideration. It had been urged by the sllPrijartien'ear,
motion, that if the existence of the Irish l'ai, have hat
been allowed to continue, that Parliament WOO' acid that
ried the question of Catholic Emancipation ; nrt ofwee
had occurred in 1793 had been quoted in silr-ci Irils,arlia••
opinion. How often, however, had he Irish 'idea,
assert, and in that house, that the . Stone thr.,
ment would have never carried Cathol%roto it wai
tion. Even when the measure was brought tohicll,tealy,
English Parliament, the year before that in tire;lotwoo It,
carried, it was rejected by a large majority
of the Cra heel
when it was brought forward by a minister
f there bael°cl
was carried : but he did not think that l-
_r of the lie
a separate legislatore in Ireland any ,inisite_cipatin% di,,
would have been found to propose encti: greal•ce to
admitted that the delay of emancipation se7t grievail, the.
appointment to the Catholics, and a gr eat evils Olil at
.11
them ; and also that it had inflicted gr not think,lathohc
country ; but at the same time he did
inklreland, C it that
there had been a separate Parliament i. Ile f'
,0
emancipation could have been carried atsoamply ai''to ad,:
the question before the house had been
for lli"'drese°
(I felt
(Hear, hear, hear), that it was unnecessary ,
ose a
net " dbe used
any thing further. Indeed he should
c luty, an a,
the house at all except as a matter 0. 1
„jug trelccer,;
that he ought to apologise to them for '
_,,,,,,, 110._ wit',
upon them even for so short a time. fla" ' elude of
h uld el)" tion 1,5
stated his views upon the subject, he s 0
• st the 01° eob ,
expressing his intention of voting a€ blip [.Til at°
the lion• and learned membel' for Du in; _ „,wo,
.441
lord here sat down, but immediately
had 5' belic OP
begged leave to add a &NY wordo.l. At