The Sun.
London, England, 1834-02-06 00:00:00

ARRIVALS AT CHELTENHAM,

Major-General Sir John Macleod, Sir George Bishopp, Bart.,
Sir T. Phillips, Lady Pynn, General M'Corri, Colonel Wilson,
Colonel Graham, Colonel and Mrs. Northey, Dr. Fletcher,
Rev. Mr. Hurd, Rev. W. Staughton, Rev. Mr. Hill, Captain
Baker, Captain Stirling, Captain Martyn, Captain Tudor, Capt.
Richardson, Mr. and Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. and Mrs. Stockton,
Mr. and Mrs. Greene, Mr. and Mrs. London, Mr. and Mrs.
Rowley, Mr. and Mrs. Hartley, Mr. T. Avery, Mr. Stapylton,
Mr. Kingan, Mr. Gattens, Mr. Bouchette, Mr. Sstan, Mr.
Crowther, Mr. Ward, Mr. Lushington, Mr. Myers, Mr. J. H.
Bainbridge, Mr. Hare, Mr. Penoyal, Mr. Lawrence, Mr. Curtis,
Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Marsden, Mr. Bannister, Mr. Worthing.
ton, Mr. Barnes, Mr. Palmer, Mr. M`Dowall, Mr. Bailey,
Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Case, Mr. Borthwick, Mr. Fosbrooke, Mr.
It. Gason, Mr. Griffith, Mr. White, Mr. Gilbert Burnet, Mr.
Hughes, Mr. Paynter, Mr. Ite amish, Mr Stewart, Mr. Garner,
Mr. Pennyson, Mr. Heane, Mr. Elliott, Mr. Chapman, Mr.
Deane, Mr. Symmonds, Mrs. Stannas, Mrs. Williams Btowne,
Mrs. Higgeus, Mrs. Blackman, Mrs,-Neeld, Mrs. Sherman, Mrs.
F. Grano, Mrs. Towers, Miss Hallifax, Miss Chamberlayne, Miss
Hayward, Miss Mullett, Miss Home, Miss Frranklin, 4c. &c.

The report was then read.
Mr. COBBETT said the first thing that he objected to was
to that part of the address which stated that the agricultural
interest was in a distressed state, although it seemed to say that
tranquillity prevailed generallythroughout the country. Coupling
those two assertions together, he was afraid they would convey
to the country the impression that there was an improper feeling
in the House towards agriculture. That part of the address stated
that the House lamented the continuance of distress amongst the
owners and occupiers of land, although, in all other respects, the
state of the:Esountry, as it regarded its internal tranquillity, its
commerce and manufacture, was perfectly satisfactory. He
ventured to assert that there was no gentleman in the
House, who came from the country, but knew that the contrary
was the fact.—(Cries of " No, no.") He knew that there was
any thing but tranquillity.—(No, no.) He knew that fear and
apprehension prevailed everywhere. The fact was well known,
ftom statements published daily in the newspapers, that
for three months past there had been an average of four fires
per week in the county of Norfolk alone. He asked, therefore,
was it right that the House should tell his Majesty that
tranquillity prevailed in the agricultural part of the kingdom ;
when it was manifest that it did not ? It was not, however,
solely with regard to that he found fault with the address. It
should have offered or held out some remedy for that distress,
and have spoken some comfort to the farmers and occupiers of
land, as well as to the labourers. He intended to move the follow-
ing amendment :—" We have, in common with your Majesty,
to lament the continuance of distress among the proprietors and
eccupiers of land, and we beg to assure your Majesty that the
nature, extent, causes, and lamentable effects of that distress
shall be objects of our own immediate and anxious considera-
tion." He thought the House was bound so to do, and that if
they did not, they would not do their duty to his Majesty,
or to the country.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He begged to
refer to the report of the Committee of last session
which, however, said but little—shame it was that thirty-seven
English gentlemen, proprietors of land in the country, should
say so little, but the meaning of what they did say was, that the
less the House meddled with agriculture the better. He,
however, firmly believed that there were a few Members in the
House who might contrive some means of mitigating the
distress.—(Hear, hear.) A proposition had been made
by the Hon. Mover of the address, that the extinction of
tithes would be one remedy for the distress of the agricultu-
rists. He (Mr. Cobbett) begged to ask what had the extinc-
tion of tithes to do with agricultural distress ? Oh, it opera-
ted as a check to improvement, and prevented the more ex-
tensive cultivation of the land. Tithes had existed for a thou-
sand years, and it was left to the present moment to show that
they operated as a check on agriculture. The evidence given
before the Committee was that the land was not so well
cultivated as it used to be, and that the crops were now smaller.
It showed that at the same time there were too many hands,
and yet that the land for want of hands was not so well culti-
vated. The cause of all this ought to be sought after,
and the House ought to tell his Majesty that they
would endeavour to provide a remedy for it. The Ho-
nourable Member for Hampshire, in his opinion, had fallen
Into an error in stating that tithes were a great grievance—
(Hear)—and hindrance to improvement; the Hon. Member
had forgotten, if that was the case, that the next hindrance to
improvement would be, rent. He defied any man on earth to
shew that tithes were any more a hindrance to improvement
than rent was. .(Hear, hear, hear.) It might very easily
be conceived that, speaking individually, if a man paid
401. or 501. for tithes, and they were removed, that he would
with great alacrity consent to it, but he took upon himself to
deny that it would be productive of general good to make any
"Menge in Mir-tithe- slineur. -Ttrat—such-atbange would add to
the quantity of employment he considered as a fiction and de-
lusion, and if his Majesty's Government acted upon the
opinion that an abolition or a reduction in tithes would
be of advantage to the agricultural interests, unless they
meant also to abolish the rent, he would take upon himself to
say that they were dealing in delusion as absurd as any that had
been practised by the most deliberate quacks in the world.
With respect to the statement of the Hon. Member for Hants,
as to manufactures, he believed the evidence that had been given
before the Committee, to which he had adverted, would prove
any thing but the correctness of the statements of the Hon.
Member. But supposing that he was to agree to the state-
ment of the Hon. Member, that manufactures were prosperous,
was it not a most curious fact, that every thing should be
prosperous, with the exception of agriculture? What, he would
ask, was the commercial interest compared with the agricultural?
Why, if the whole country was divided, 16-20ths of the people
would be found engaged in assiiculture.—(Cries of" Oh.") He
spoke within compass when he made that statement. Why
was the land to be eaten up, or why was the land-owner to be
ejected for the purpose of aggrandising money.mongers ? On the
present morning a petition had been presented by an Hon. Mem.
ber, asking that dissenters might be relieved from church rates.
On the presentation of that petition he asked whether they did
not also wish to be relieved from tithes. In his opinion justice
must be done to all parties, or no satisfaction would be pro-
duced. In his opinion, the words of the address, as they now
stood, were certainly equivocal. When it stated that the
country was tranquil, he was sure that his Majesty must be
perfectly convinced that such was not the case. No man could
say that tranquillity could exist, for in the newspapers of the
present day no less than four fires had been recorded and
many other difffirent acts of incendiarism.—(Hear, hear.)
Out of every forty fires there was but one conviction. So great
was the difficulty of detecting the incendiary, that farmers
came to a resolution of lowering the wages one shilling per week,
till the perpetrators were discovered. It would be the duty of
the House to announde to his Majesty their intention
of finding a sufficient remedy for all this, and tell
his Majesty that they would do it.—(Hear, hear.) A sense
of duty enjoined him (Mr. Cobbett) to make these observa-
tions; he had no desire abdut putting his motion to a division,
but if such a notion was entertained of the state of the country
surely no probable remedy was meditated for it; indeed, as
the Hon. Member for Middlesex said, such an amendment
looked like a desire and a pretext for not repealing the
corn laws.—(Hear.) Such an announcement was no
tranquilliser. He (Mr. Cobbett) would not detain the House
five minutes longer.—(Cries of " Oh, oh 1") He had said at
the beginning, that he would not press for a division. If he
could only draw from his Majesty's Ministers an avowal of
their intention to give the country a hope of investigating
such a state of things as now existed, and of finding a
remedy for them, he would then be satisfied. He was
at a loss to discover what motive there could be in disguising
those facts, as appeared, by the report laid before the House
last session, and he woiUd call on all men in and out of the
House to join in instituting an inquiry into those matters. If
not, the country Would go into'despair, and the address would
produce no effect but mischief. It was disgraceful not to
make that inquiry. He (Mr. Cobbett) should not have done his
duty if he had allowed the present occasion to pass without his
protest against such an address.
The amendment was then seconded by Mr. FINN.
Lord ALTHORP thought that it would be wrong to in-
stitute an inquiry, unless there were such reasons given as
would justify such a proceeding; nor did he think such would
lead to an amelioration of the state of things, if, according to
the Hon. Gentleman, the report of last year advised the
contrary.—(Hear.) That report lay upon the table, and any
gentleman that chose to look at that report might suggest such
measures as appeared salutary to him ; in such measure
his Majesty's Ministers would most strenuously co.operate.
The Hon. Gentleman said, that the country was not in a state of
tranquillity; and this he inferred from the spread of ineendiarism;
but he (Lord Althorp) did not think,that incendiarism had pro.
ceeded so far as to justify the assertion of no tranquillity exist.
ing. The Hon. Gentleman had spoken of the effect of tithes in
relation to Kent, but he (Lord A.) would prove, when the proper
time came, that the effect of tithes on agriculture generally was
very different from that of Kent, and what had been stated by the
Hon. Mover of the address, that tithes would improve along
with any improvement in the general improvement of agricul-
ture, would be perfectly borne out. It was true that the effect
of tithes was to retard and seriously injure tire improvement of
agriculture generally. The Hon.' Gentleman had stated
most truly that no man in the House felt more strongly for
the success of agriculture then he (Lord A.), but he was bound
to say, that he did not see how any legislative measures would
have that effect. He had now stated the reasonsi°why he op.
posed the amendment, and he trusted he had made his position
sufficiently clear.
Mr. E. RUTHVE
../%1' addressed a few observations to the
House amidst much noise. We understood him to deny the
statements of the Hon. Seconder of the address, as far as they
related t o the linen trade of the north of Ireland.
The amendment was then put and negatived without a
division.

Mr. FINN wished to draw the attention of the House to the
unjust distinction that had been drawn in his Majesty's speech
between England and Ireland. In Ireland all was violence,
whilst in England there was nothing but tranquillity; although,
if the facts were stated truly, it would be found that there was
less outrage committed in-Ireland, at the present moment, than

in England.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," and " Hear.") He (Mr.
Finn) would advise the Secretary for Ireland,—and the Hon.
Secretary might recollect that " fas est et ab hoate doceri,"—
he would advise the Hon. Secretary to follow hisown feelings and
♦pinions, and not to listen to the tribe of placemen and pen.
sioners wh• were looking out for offices, and who surrounded
Englishmen in such a manner that it was very difficult, if
not impossible, to learn the truth. The Honourable
Gentleman concluded by moving the following amend-
ment :—" That this House do assure his Majesty,
that the people of Ireland, in seeking f'r the re-
peal of the Legislative Union, do not commit acts of violence,
but strictly confine themselves to the exercise of their un-
doubted rights of publicly discussing the merits, or rather de-
merits of any measure, and of petitioning both Houses
of Parliament for its alteration or amendment.—(Hear.)
Mr. LITTLETON would best consult the wishes of the
House by not occupying time. As far as his own feeling was
concerned, he was decidedly of opinion that the political agita
tion which had prevailed in Ireland, had tended very much to
the encouragement of disobeying the laws. With respect to
the Coercion Bill, he would read a statement which would
prove the happy results of passing that Bill. He would take
the periods of seven months before, and seven months after its
passing. During the former time the offences for house breaking
were 428, during the latter 62; the number of farm-burnings had
been reduced from 30 to 9; injury to cattle from 34 to 5; serious
assaults connected with Whiteboyism, from 151 to 34; illegal
notices, from 127 to 27; injury to property, from 44 to 24 ; fir-
ing with intent to kill, from 17 to 3; robbery of arms, from
65 to 2; administration of unlawful oaths, from 35 to 5. In the
whole, the offences for the seven months of the description
enumerated during tue seven months preceding the passing of
the Coercion Bill, were 1,072, which were reduced in the seven
succeeding months, to 227.
Mr. O'CONNELL said there never was a more fallacious
test of the effects of the Coercion Bill; and what a robbery
was it of Ireland that such men as would take such data for
their proceedings, should attempt: to legislate for that
country. Before the passing of the Coercion Bill the
county of Clare, was in an infinitely more disturbed state
than that of Kilkenny; there had been infinitely more
destruction, and numerous more offences committed in
the one than in the other county, and still the county of
Clare had been entirely tranquillized by the issuing of two
special commissions. He could have no difficulty in taking the
periods already named, and showing to demonstration that the
beneficial effect of the special commissions was as three to one
of the Coercion Bill. He would also prove to the House that
the greatest political period of agitation in Ireland had been uni-
formly the time in which the fewest offences had been com-
mitted. His vote upon the subject of this address would
very much depend upon an answer to a question he meant to
put to the Noble Lord respecting a measure to be introduced by
the Government for the adjustment of the tithe system in Ireland.
By that Bill the burden had been increased one.third. He
would ask the House then, were they honestly disposed to le-
gislate for Ireland when they passed that Bill by which the bur-
den had been aggravated, he would repeat, in one-third of the
cases ? Let them not imagine that they would tranquillize Ire-
land by words; the country must have substantial relief—
acts and deeds, and not words. (Hear, hear, hear.) The
King, in his speech, proposed something in the shape of a final
adjustment of tithes, without lessening the amount received
by any and every party. That was to say, they were to play at
a game at which every body was to win, and no one should lose.
He would tell the House, that the people of Ireland looked for
the total extinction of tithes. (Loud cries of " Hear.")
They looked not for the name, but the reality.—(Hear.) He
did not want to exonerate the landlord, but the labourer;
he wished the landlord to be made to pay in proportion to his
share of the produce, which he took to be about one third. The
great struggle which had been going on between this country
and Ireland for the space of three centuries, was whether they-
should be compelled to pay for a clergy which they did not
want? It was time for them to leglislate and make some pro.
gress in the principle, that no man should be bound to
pay for a church of which he was not a member.—(Hear.)
A good deal had been said about the Coercion Bill, and he
understood the votes for that Bill had been obtained in a manner
so disreputable, that be did not believe it. It had, how-
ever, been publicly stated, and the name of a Member of that
House had been attached to that statement.—(Hear, hear).
He took his information from the public papers which contained
the charge he alluded to against Ministers, and before he gave
his vote on this address, he wished to give, Ministers an oppor-
tunity of answering that charge. He would now call the at-
tiption of the House to a statement made by the Hon. and
Learned Member for Hull, and which had appeared in all the
newspapers of the British dorninions. It appeared from it that
Government possessed, and put in play, a species of secret ma-
chinery for the purpose of obtaining votes. He should like to
know what this secret machinery was; and he trusted that he
should not find that the King's Government or the Noble Lord
had been guilty of the unpardonable offence of obtaining votes
by anything so dishonourable as secret machinery. He said• all
this mainly for the purpose of giving the Noble Lord (Althorp)
an opportunity of repudiating the statement. The Hon. and
Learned Member then read the following extract from a speech
said to be delivered by Mr. Hill at a dinner at Hull :—" It is
impossible for those not actually in the House to know all the
secret machinery by which votes are obtained. I happen to
know this (and I could appeal, if necessary, to a person well-
known and much respected by yourselves), that an Irish Mem-
ber, who spoke with great ♦iolence against every part of that
Bill, and voted against every clause of it, went to Ministers, and
said, Don't bate one single atom of that Bill, or it will be im-
possible for any man to live in Ireland.' What,' said they,
this from you who speak and vote against this Bill P" Yes,'
he replied, that is necessary, because if I don't come into Par-
liament for Ireland, I must be out altogether, and that I don't
choose " Such a Member as this would be no loss to that
House, and still less would he be a loss to Ireland. The consti.
tuents of Ireland that sent such a personage to that House had
an indubitable right to know who he was. He would add that
he believed that the assertion contained in the extract he had
just read was totally untrue, and that no Irish Member had ever
made any such communication to any Member of the Govern-
ment. This was his opinion, and Ministers should say what
was theirs, since the afPair had not been as yet cleared up. Be-
fore he concluded, he would ask the Noble Lord whether Go-
vernment possessed a secret mode of obtaining votes, and whe-
ther they ever asserted they had; and whether the assertion
contained in the extract, or any such assertion was true, of a
communication of the species described, having been made to the
Noble Lord or to any of the King's Cabinet Ministers ?
Lord ALTHORP said, that with regard to the first gum-
tion, he had no hesitation in saying that he never had made,
nor did believe any of his colleagues had made the assertion
referred to by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. As to whe-
ther any Irish Member who voted and spoke against the Coer-
cion Bill had made any such statement as was used in the
paragraph in question, he believed that no one had made it to
any Cabinet Minister. (The stress which the Noble Lord
laid on the term Cabinet, occasioned very loud cries of
" Hear, hear.") He, however, thought he should not be
acting a candid part if he contented himself with answering
the question so shortly.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Al-
though none of the Irish Members, to his knowledge, had
made any such statement to any Cabinet Minister, he
had good reason to believe that one—he might
say more than one—of the Irish Members who voted
and spoke against the Coercion Bill, with considerable
violence, did, in private conversation, use very different
language.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," from both sides of the
House.)
Mr. O'CONNELL rose. He was astonished at that cheer.
Why not name ? Why shrink from it ?
Lord ALTHORP—I do not shrink from it.
Mr. O'CONNELL would withdraiv the word shrink—he
ought not to have used it ; but he trusted the Noble Lord would
say who it was that had told him so, or who it was that made
the statement.

Lord ALTHORP said that he was answerable for what
he had stated he believed, and he would not shift that respon-
sibility.—(Loud cheers.) With respect to the Member adverted
to, he was ready to name him if called upon.
Mr. O'CONNELL—Then I am authorised by every Irish

Member of the House—(Cries of No, no," and great confu-
sion.) If that is the feeling of the House I will take another
course, and I will ask the Noble Lord if he means me ?

Lord ALTHORP—No.
Mr. FINN—Or me ?

Lord ALTHORP—No.

The SPEAKER here rose. It was quite out of order for
that House to deal with questions like the present, unless it
involved the public character of some Hon. Member in the
shape of a breach of privilege, with respect to his conduct in
that House.