The Sun.
London, England, 1833-02-12 00:00:00

•eb

the Tower, had certsiuly Jachiffithat touching the
temporalities of the Church, and destroying the Church,
was the same thing. Now what was the destruc-
tion of the Church? Ministers and their friends
would be loath to say that a Reform of the Church went
to its destruction, and the Right Hon. Member for Tarn-
worth and his friends would, perhaps, be inclined to
,tay, that a very slight interference with the property of
the Church went to its destruction.—(Hear, hear.)
He did not think there was any distinction to to drawn
between what the Hon. and Learned Member had said,
with respect to the destruction of the temporality of the
Church and the destruction in part. If he were to be told
that he was to go into the discussion of this question,
following his own opinion, he could not but re-
fuesober that he had taken an oath. It would he
greatly to the satisfaction of the Catholic Members in
that House, and he thought to every Member in the
/lenge, to have this question set at rest.
An HON. Mamaen said that, as long es the °nth wee
taken, he certainly d;fl eonsider the Catholic Members of
the House differently situated to other Members quoad the
Church.

Au Hox. IVlEmssn. (we understood one of the represen-
t.tives for St. Albans) declared, that if he thought he, as a
Catholic Member, was differently situated to any others
in the House, be would resign his seat at once. He consi-
ler hin self quite as competent to enter upon the dis-
cussion of the affairs of the Church as any Member in
the House.--(Cheers.)
Mr. HUME considered it to be of some consequence,
that the House should be satisfied upon the question,
whether the doctrine laid down by the Hon. and Learned
Member, was that which Ministers invaded to support
or not. He had been asked, this very day, whether it
was the intention of his M.jesty's Ministers to support
such a doctrine. It had occasioned considerable anxiety,
and it certainly was very desirable that some of the
Lew Officers of the Crown, or others, should be preps e.i
to state what the intention of Ministers was on this pan,.
Lord ALTHORP said the Hon. Gentleman alluded to
had no more right to state the opinion he had, except as
his own, any more than the Hon. Gentleman had to state
what was the opinion of that House.
Mr. HUME said he bad nut asked the Noble Lord—

is allusion was to the Law Officers of the Crown.

An HON. MEMBER hoped that the Hon. Member
for Middlesex did not mean to give such An immense
power into the hands of the Law Officers of the 'roan.
Whenever the subject was agitated, the only constitutional
way would be to take the sense of the House upon it.
Mr. O'CONNELL would not allow any min to
dictate to him what his belief ought to he, nor whst con-
struction should be put upon an oath which he had taken.
If he had taken an oath which, in the opinion of the House,
bad a different construction to what he put upon it, at
once he would declare that he had not taken any oath at all.
The cath administered was to be taken in the sense of the
person
who administered it, but still the construction that
persons put upon it would do away with the sense of the
words contained in the oath itself. Having suffered for 20
years because he could not conscientiously take the oath t ea
imposed upon Members by the House, be could not sit
tamely and hear any one say that be ever held that oath
lightly in his esteem. As be understood the oath as to the
Established Church, it was this, that as the law at
present stood, he was bound to abide by it ; but as
a legislator, he certainly considered himself as free
as any man in that House to give his opinion on any sub-
ject that was brought before it. If he were not right in
this opinion let him be expelled from the House, but do
nut taunt him with giving or putting a different construc-
tion upon an oath which lie had solemnly taken, and
which he felt would stick to him through eternity.

Au HoN. MEMBER. here rose and ',imbed to a hirehs
,he House.

Mr. O'CONNELL said he bad not done yet—be wished
to proceed—he was about to oppose the bringing up of the
report on the address. It was painful to him to detain
the House upon this subject, which had for such a
length oft time occupied their attention. But it
was his duty—a duty which he performed most
reluctantly. He believed that none -of his Honour-
able Friends fremolretand, who had already taken part
in the debate, intended low to address the ,House upon
this subject, unless personally attacked. He was contend-
ing. for constitutional freedom, and he felt that the acts
contemplated by Government were s' opposed to that
freedom, that if he could only delay them fur a single day,
he was doing that for his country (of which he was
most proud)—it was an act for which he would

lay down his life if necessary.—(Hear, he,r, hear.)
Upon deliberation be still stizmatiz A it as a most brutal
address, and upon the most mature deliberation he could
not otherwise call it than one hewing a most sanguinary
character. He had been taunted with ingratitude to his
Majesty's Ministers, but he denied that any was due from
him. He did not take the statement of the transactions of
1806 andlBo7 fr orn hie Hon. Friend near him (Mr. Cobbett)
but he would only say that many of the present I.lli-
uisters had come into power on former occasions, when
Catholic emancipation had been completely thrown over-
.

,oard. Did his conduct during the struggle for Reform show

that be had had the slightest recollection of ingratitude? He
did not forget benefits which he had received, but he forgot
altogether the injuries that had been done to Ireland, and he
stood by Ministers, not only during the struggle for
corm, but during that memorable week which they would
all recollect. Would the Reform Bill have been read a
second time but for Ireland? And as the public were not then
Aroused, as the Political Unions were not then completely
orriraniz-el, could it be doubted that the Ministry could have
remained in office but for the support they had received
from Irish Members? Whst occurred on that occasion ?
Toe majority of the English and Scotch Members voted
Against it, and the majority of Irish Members in its favour
decided the question. Yet what return—what gratitude
:lid the Ministers evince? They actually adopted, on the
reassembling of Parliament, the anti-Irish plan of Ge-
neral Gascoigne. He threw back the taunt of ingratitude

on the English Reformers. The Irish Members had joined
in the victory. They hid, in fact, gained it. England's
was the triumph, but Ireland's was to be the coercion, and
they were to witness, in short, the introduction of a

Rob espierrian system at the bands of the very men whore
continuance in office they had secured.—(Loud cries
of " Hear, hear, hear.") The flag of England had
never waved over a battle-field, where, among the
hands and hearts that held it up, Irishmen were not to be
found. Yet theirs was to be restriction, theirs was
to be coercion, and the law was to be taken from
them.--(Hear, bear.) It bad been announced by
the Right Honourable Secretary—by one of those men
who had made Ireland what it was, that Government
oust be feared before it could be loved. Wriat ! was
aver such a principle uttered before by a British Minister
,vithin the wall, of the British Parliament? It had
been uttered by Robespierre ; it had been uttered by men
who had surrounded every tree of liberty with a thousand
heads—(Loud cries of "Hear")—but had ever so atrocious
a principle as that been promulgated by a British Minister
—(Hear.) If he was surrounded by English Reformers,
and if by some chance English Reformers were not
unrepresented in that House, he would ask whether they
would favour the principle of Robespierre, of being
feated before they could be loved ; or should not
the Government adopt measure, of conciliation and jus-
tice before they employed the machinery of terror?
What sort of a Kiug's speech had been presented
to the first Reformed Parliament? There might be a
pretty little commentary made on the affairs of Bel.
•sium and Holland—a note talked about as having
Massed between Don Miguel and Don Pedro. A few
sentences composed upon the charters of the East India
Company and the Bank of England, but why had not
Ministers condescended to notice the distresses of the
people of England?—(Hear, hear.) Why had they not
noticed the oppressive load of taxation under which
they groaned—(Hear, hear, bear)—and then, why
had they not carried their view across the channel, and
aken a view of seven millions of people, degraded and
placed in a situation of the deepest dirtreas—(Hear, hear)
—a people whom it was not for him to praise, but wham
he could not cease to love?—(Hear.) Ought not Ministers
to love, instead of to endeavour to inthoidate them, and
make themselves execrated by that naiion ? Did they
.nean to say that they would make themselves feared
in Ireland?—(Hear, hear.) He would tell them to
their face they never would.—(Cheers.) This was not
lingauge which ought to have been adopted to-
wards that gallant and fearless nation. They should hair:-
used other language. Even if they had wanted coercion,
Ministers ought not to have come down on the very fits.
-lay of the meeting of a Reformed Parliament with threaten
mug language—they should have allowed at any rate fuu
days to pass—they ought to have taken the opportnnity*
setting themselves right with the people of England
before they had resorted to such daring language in re
•pect to unhappy Ireland had received much lip servie
from the Hon. Gentleman who spoke from the other sad
f r,eatlrineeli
dliTisee but there
Member
berwa
s wa, nothing
more
a dissatisfied thawt
othhe !ht it
. thatan
species of political hypocrisy, that talked of love and regard
or Ireland, while it made a compliment
0 the people of that distressed and unhappy country.
xofstgebrdia
it
nit:lnt Ireland.
libertymia na (dle.
Would any man in England permit his Majesty's Mini_d
t. rs to talk of allowing their liberty on the ground of
otuplitnen
tt.
11? e----i n(ICr agitationilea enrds a)wpAhtiecgdhri ae mistakelntoorwe agricultural war, and
i' ere
a political war. Nothing (19%1d by ram different ban

~,

y

these two wart. They were different in their effects—
different in their causer—required different remedies, and
yet they were too frequently confounded. He begged to
assure the Hon. Member for Knaresborough (Mr. Rich-
ards) that he was mistaken in the story which be related
to the House a few evenings back. He had made
strict inquiries, and be found that instead of the wages
of the labourers being limited to- 3s. a week, he assured
him that in many remote counties the wages did not ex•
teed 2s. per week. Agricultural agitation existed quite
independently of politics. What were the political dis-
turbances in Ireland which required these new powers ?
He was perfectly ready to admit the existence of numerous
predial crimes there ; but those were totally ignorant of the
real state of Ireland, and received the wholesale assertions of
his Majesty's Ministers with much too great facility,who con-
founded those crimes with offences of another description.
An Hon. Member had asserted, that he (Mr. O'Connell)
had declared that disturbances bad been increasing in Ire-
land ever since the present Ministers came into office. He
bad never said any such thing. What he had said was,
that they had increased since the speech made by the King
at the close of the last Parliament, in which vigorous
measures were alluded to, and since the strong measures
which had been adopted with respect to tithes. But what
was the present state of Ireland with regard to disturb..
ances ? There were no disturbances in the county of
Cork. The two last assizes for the county of Cork had
been maiden assizes. There had been five tithe meetings
in that county, and not a single assault had been commit-
ted at any of them. By a letter which he had received
that morning, he understood that there were no disturb-
ances whatever in that county, and that not one Whitebov
was out in it. Yet the number of inhabitants in that
county exceeded seven hundred thousand. In the county
of Kerry, in which there were two hundred and fifty or
two hundred and sixty thousand inhabitants, it was eight
months since the last assizes, and there were only, four pri-
soners in the gaol of that county. In Limerick there
were only eleven prisoners in gaol. The county of Clans
was quiet ; the county of Galway was quiet ; the county
of Sligo was quiet ; hut it was said that the county of
Mayo was disturbed, and it was because the county
of Mayo was disturbed that Government asked 'for
these additional' powers.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It was
impossible to b ok batik at what had taken place in the
county of M myo without the utmost indignation. At four
meetings which had taken place in that county, the people
bad been slaughtered by the police. The inhabitants were
prevented from availing themselves of the seawreck,
which was claimed by the Marquis of Sligo. And how
was the validity of the claim tried? By tae agents of the
claimant. By Magistrates, who decided the point on the
Wilful Trespass Act. During the trial one of the Jury
died, but the trial proceeded nevertheless. It had been
asserted that Trial by Jury was a mockery in Ireland--
that it failed ef its just operation. Had it ever failed
when the poor were prosecuted? Oh no ! He spoke it
in the hearing of the Member for the county of Mayo,
who could contradict him if the fact were nut so. His
Majesty's Governtnent might, undoubtedly, overpower the
insurgents; they might send for German troops for that
purpose (for, amone the reports which had been gene-
rated in ignorance of the real extent to which his Majes-
ty's Government intended to go, was the rumour that they
meant to send for German troops) ; but if they did not
send a very powerful force, they would do well not to
intrust the Magistrates in that, or in any other county in
Ireland, with powers unknown to the constitutional law
of the land. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman pro-
ceeded to read a letter from a Magistrate in that part of
Ireland in which the writer asserted, that while such num•
bets of pour people were out of employment, it was im-
possible to expect the return of tranquillity.—(Hear.) All
parties agreed as to the necessity of tenting an end to the ex-
isting disturbances ; the only difference was as to the means.
These were two questions which ought to be well consi-
dered. First : if there was any necessity for fiat titer
powers? Secondly : What would be the effect of further
powers, if they were given ? To be able satisfactorily to
answer those questions, the present state of the law should
he inquired into. By the law, as it at present stood,
there was not a single crime which a Whitehoy insurgent
could possibly commit, for which he might not be pu-
nished. Whether he raised his hand against a dwelling-
house, opened a door, or solicited at ms in aid of the dis-
turbances, he was equally amenable to the law. Why,
then, did the Right Hon. Gentleman ark for more than
the law, which was already adequate to the object ? Why,
the system of law which already existed was one of such
enegeorated severity, that the Right Hon. Gentleman
himself had brought in a Bill to mitigate it. And yet
that law, which was so severe that the Right Hon. Gen-
rietnan brought in a Bill to mitigate it„ he now proposed
;14, render more vigorous ! If the law were made in Irelaterl
as rigorous as that Right Hon. Gentleman no doubt
wished it to he, he (Mr. O'Connell) would rather live in
France under Robespierre. And he begged, by-the-bye,
to remind the Right Hon. Gentleman and others, that the
reign of Robespierre was very short, with all its rigour.
,neeverting to the trials in the county of Clare, the Hon.
nummo/4 Learned Gentleman asked if any defects had been
nnhilennsd during those trials in the jurisdiction—any
Actilry in obtaining witnesses—mu successful inti-
enidatian practised on juries ? Nothing of the kind.
Every one of the guilty persons was brought to justice.
Were the juries intimidated? The result showed that that
was not the case. Were the witnesses intimidated ?
The inieermer was walking about every day untouched..
Eleven pensons were executed, and a greater number
transported : and the county became, and was at the pre-
ssent moment, perfectly quiet. Jr. land had fought the
battle of his Majemety'e Government in the contest for
Reberm : the great majority of tine Members front that
eatin:ry dividtd with his Majesty's Government on every
disputed point. And what was Ireland now to get in re-
turn ? That the British Constitution was to be trampled
under foot for the purpose of oppressing the Irish people.
To the Queen's County, when the Special Commission was
bent, there had been only a single acquittal. No witness,
no Juror had had been intimidated, In the county of
Kilkenny, every one of the Whiteftet who had been
brought to trial was convicted. No Juror, no witness
load been intimidated or injured. It was true that ten or
eleven policemen had been killed at Cirrickslough, and
that there had t ern no convintien. But why? He (Mr.
O'Connell) had defended the first man tried. There was
190 justification of the acts. He (Mr. O'Connell) admit-
ted that they had been batbarous murders. The only
question was, whether the man on trial was one of the
murderers? He was identified .by three or four of the
policeman who were engaged in the battle, but who had
never seen him before. In their evidence they contradicted
one another in a manner which showed that they were in-
accurate, if not false witnesses. On the prisoner's side,
there were two witnesses to prove that be was not pre-
sent. Oae of theme belonging to a better class, proved that
elle prisoner was thatching his house at the very time
as was charged with being in the affray. The conse-
etannen was that the man was acquitted. Was that any
Arrporai 4or the assertion that the Trial by Jury in Ireland
wag $ tancintry ? And how was that Jury composed?
Ike foreman was an outrageous partisan, whom he (Mr.
O'Connell) challenged for favour. Before seven of the
Jury were sworn, the whole of the prisoner's challenges
were run aut. The rest of the Jury, therefore, were
actu4lly nominated by the Crown ; and yet that, Jury ac-
quitted the prisoner. The Jury bad not been influenced,
by intimidation : they had disbelieved the evidence for the'
prosecution. The Right Hon. Gentleman wished for
more powers, that he might stelh, a dictator, through the
land. If that House gave the Right Hon. Gentleman
more powers, they would give Ireland another reason to
complain. So far were Government from wanting juries
in Ireland, that, as he had shown, they were able to pack
Juries. But they wanted witnesses. Yes, he believed
them. It was testimony that they wanted, and they cared
not how they procured it. Why not destroy the Irish by
wholesale? Why not surround them in a valley, and
render that valley another Glenco? Why not treat
them as some years ago they treated a hundred and
twenty thousand of their eountrymen, whom they
got together for expatriation? Eighty thousand of
whom they shipped to the West Indies. of which eighty
thousand only sixty thousand reached tine Weat Indies ;
sod pf which sixty thousand, in two yeare, only twO
hisedred end fifty sum vived. And yet be was convinced
that the Right Hon. Baronet near him was a much better
Minister for Ireland than the present Right Hon. Chief
6erantary. The Right Hon. Baronet was a philosophical
Stateseleau—be did net confound things which were a cene
fury distiune--he would hesitate to recommend unconatia
tutional measures. Adverting to the murder of a Pro
testant clergyman, the Rev. Mr. Ferguson, the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman observed, that Mr. Ferguson had net
been at war with the Catholic peasantry ; on the continua
Ise bad carried the tithe compueition into effect in Iris own
parish by their aid. After detailing the circumstances of
this case, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman asked the
Right Hon. Chief Secretary if he said that this was a
Whiteboy-murder ? It was nothing of the kind. It
was a robbery-murder. If the House gave greater poweri
to the Irish Government, they would imbue the enemiei
of that Government with deeper hatred, they would
dispose many of their friends to go along with them. The
attempt to confound political with agricultural agitation
showed him what it was that was wanted. He could not
but admire the bonhomie of the Noble Lord, who spoke of
.the good intentions of hie Majesty's Government. Din
the Noble Lord recollect the Spanish proverb, which' saia
that " Hell was paved with good intentions ?" Had there

sbeet a petition presented from Ireland, complaining of
distkess or of wrongs, that the Noble Lord (Althorp)
did not find some miserable excuse for its not be-
ing 'printed ? It was said he wanted to dismember the
empire, which be denied ; for- repeal could and ought to
be effected without it. But then, again, they said A was
impossible for Ireland to have a local Parliament. Now,
there was nothing better established in philosophy, than
that what once bad been might be again. The Irish Par-
liament vindicated its own character and dignity oftener
than ever the Boroughmongers' Parliament had done. All
the county Members, and Members for towns, were re-
turned by large constituencies, calumniated as that Parlia-
ment was. Who were they that calumniated it? The
Whigs. Who was it, he would ask, who enacted the
Penal Laws? The Whigs. Who enacted the Insurrec-
tion Act? The Whigs. Had not the venerable name of
that great patriot, Grattan, been stigmatized in that very
House, for having, in a moment of weakness, consented
to join the Whigs in passing that shameful Act? He had
been taunted about the repeal—that it was a new question,
got up for a party or a personal purpose. He would vin-
dicate the history of it in a few words. When did it
hegin ? On the Ist of January, 1801 ; and during all the
discussion and all the agitation of the Catholic question,
it had been continually brought forward. The question
had often been asked, Won't you be satisfied with eman-
cipation? and he always replied, it would be valueless
without a local Parliament. Then it was made a
matter of reproach that he had never discussed it in that
House, especially during the last year. The Right Hon.
Member for Tamworth said the other night, " Why did you not
come to me ? I would have assisted you to bring the question
forward."—(Hear.) No doubt he would, and been very much
obliged to him to have done so. Moreover, he doubted not he
should have been much lauded by the Right Hon. Baronet and
his friends, as fully perhaps as the gentleman in whose place he
then stood.—(The Learned Gentleman alluded to Mr. Hunt.)
He had ever looked upon repeal not as an end but a means—the
means to good government.—(Hear.) When the Reform mea-
sures were brought forward, he had been promised a sufficient
Bill for Ireland and a redress of grievances ; and on this, much
against his own judgment, he consented that agitation should
cease. Accordingly he used what influence he possessed with
his countrymen—and hepossessed none which did not appeal to
their good sense and better feelings—and agitation was given up.
Scotland had a good Reform Bill extended to her; but what
was vouchsafed to Ireland ? A miserable, insulting, paltry, de.
grading measure—one that was dastardly and mean, and told
the people in what ignominy and contempt they were held by
their rulers. Well, he began to see that the old system was to be
continued; but many men said, wait and see what the Reformed
Parliament will do ; all will then be conciliation—all fair deal.
ing—all justice. He said he did not believe it—he would
not trust in such hopes. When he heard the speech from the
Throne, he nearly lost his powers of intellect—but he was de-
termined not to be shaken or to be turned from his purpose. Not
one of his forebodings—not one of his expectations—had been
denied by that speech. If they called changing the form in
which tithes were to be paid enough to satisfy the nation—if
the Church was to be kept up in the same state, with the same
staff', and the same emoluments—it was but a repetition of the
miserable joke of " Joe Miller" about the Soldier and the
Drummer. What did he care—what did it matter—whether
they flogged high or flogged low, if they flogged the people of
Ireland at all ?—(Cheers.) He had stated the grievances of
Ireland and called for redress. Redress was denied, and the
repeal of the Union was looked to. There were many men in
Ireland—rational, thinking men—who had not hitherto joined
in the cry, who, after reading this speech, would do so. Were
the people of Ireland so degraded that they would attend to no
reasoning—that argument must have no weight—but that they
must be checked and put down by the witchcraft of unconsti-
tutional warfare ?—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Secretary
for Ireland taunted him with not discussing the question,
and called on h.m to argue it. This was something like
the man with a loaded gun in his hand humbly asking
for charity, which, if refused, would be taken. The
Honourable Secretary adds coercion to his address, and
then called upon hint to discuss. Now he would tell them
the motives for this Union. The Hon. Member here read a
variety of extracts from pamphlets and speeches by Lord Chief
Justice Bushe, Mr. Saurin, and Lord Plunket, "men of their
own party," condemning the Union and the motives of its
promoters, and then, " to prove he was not afraid to meet the
anti-repealers on financial details," went over an elaborate
figure statement, showing that since the Union Ireland had
materially suffered in her trade, and that in regard to her pro-
portion of the National Debt she had been most unjustly
treated.—(The Hon. Member read these figures in so very un-
connected a manner, and at times in so low a tone, that it
would be impossible to give them with any chance of correct-
ness.) The English Parliament, in 1817, repealed the Act
which defined Ireland's liability in regard to the National Debt,
and thus mortgaged every inch of land in that country. They
were strong and did it. Ohl they must rely on their gene-
rosity. Indeed, without meaning disrespect or disparagement,
he never yet heard that they were not equally as sensitive in
the pocket in that as in any other House. Well, but what
did they ask ? All they required was liberty to argue. Were
they to be coerced because they talked of their own affairs—
because they sought for means to better their own condition
and save that of other people from getting worse? Who,
in Scotland, lowered the condition of her people by work-
ing almost for nothing ? The wretch flung from Ireland.—
( Hear, hear, hear.) Who filled the factories all over
England, and reduced the already too low rate of wages ?
The outcast of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) Who made the poor
rates so burdensome ? The Irish ; not casually, but he con-
fessed it, designedly. Who brought such misery and ruin on
the agricultural labourer? The forlorn Irishman coming
even from the wilds of Connaught, a distance of five or six
hundred miles, and slaving for that which an English labourer
would turn from with disgust. This was extending, day after
day, to town after town, as it were reproaching England with her
injustice to Ireland. What gentleman would introduce a plan
for getting rid of this growing curse ? There was no remedy
but a repeal of the Union, or, as some persons thought, the
enactment of poor laws.—(Cheers.) He rejoiced in those
cheers. Let them but have poor laws, and the rich would be
destroyed, and the poor have no prospect whatever. If they
wanted a thorough disorganization of society—if they wanted
a servile war to commence—throw poor laws into Ireland. But
they might say the Irish poor laws should be an improved
code ; to which he replied, " Gentlemen, before improving
a system for us, improve your own."—(Hear, hear, hear,
and laughter.) There were persons who thought him am-
bitious, and they must think so still. He had no ambition
but the good of his country; and the best consolation he
could have was to be found in the purity of his own
motives and intentions. He saw a system of terror about
to be attempted in Ireland, which would assuredly tend to its
ruin. Ministers were resolved to prevent discussion in Ireland.
How much more discussion would there be when this bad law
was passed ?—(Loud cheers.) The Irish had no faith in their
Government. What trust could they put in the head of a Go-
vernment—however high and chivalrous he might be and was
as a soldier—who, in November, 1830, declared he would not
issue a proclamation, and in January, 1831, actually issued it ?
For his part, he could never trust such a person. But Ireland
found no sympathy with English Ministers. Look at their con-
duct in the case of The Waterford Chronicle—not content with
persecuting the proprietor, they actually grasp at and take the
poor printer. Now he would give them a warning. Let them
attend to what he said—for he meant it—and he would give
them the advantage of a warning. If they assailed the press,
there should be a run for gold. He gave them that notice.
He denied that he had ever httherto recommended such a
course—though the contrary had been asserted—but let them
assail the press, and a run would commence on the Bank. Did
Ministers wish to make Ireland fear them ? He appealed to
English Reformers if they would sanction such a system ?
There was many an exiled Irishman pining to see his
early home—anxious to return to his beloved native
land when better times and better days should dawn upon
her—but hope of those days must not comfort him.
Did Ministers think to repress discontent by these means ? They
might punish—the might for a time alarm—but they could not
overcome the people. Were they so safe at home that they
could safely enter into this gratuitous folly ? Had they no
distress—no starving manufacturers—no unemployed poor?
There were, besides, other dangers. He warned the Govern-
ment, that there were in this town, almost within hearing, one
hundred thousand Irishmen to whom the announcement of
their determination to use measures of eoercion towards Ire-
land, would be most melancholy. There were 100,000 men—
(No)—he did not embellish facts, he only stated them—(A
laugh)—men to whom the announcement of such a determi-
nation on the part of the Government would at once convey
the suggestion of the slaughter, of the murder of their fathers,
their mothers, their brothers,o their sisters, their wives, and
th sir children. He called on the Government to pause before
they subjected the feelings of these men to such a painful in.
diction. He knew that he had detained the House for a long
time—(Hear)—he might, perhaps, do it again, it would be an-
other day of liberty for Ireland, He never expected to see
national ingratitude so displayed as was that which made
the Reformers of England become the enemies of the freedom
of Ireland. . _

Mr. S. RICE should not attempt to go into the question of
perscnal attacks—(Hear, hear)—but he should follow step by
step the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in the statements which
he had made upon the question of the Union itself. He thanked
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman for those statements—he
thanked him for thus at last coming forward and endeavouring
to prove in the proper place, before the Legislature of the
United Kingdom, that the Union of the two kingdoms had been
productive of evil to Irelaud. In discussing this question with
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, he should not touch one
point with reference to the interests of England, for on the part
of England there had not been a suggestion of a wish for
the repeal. It was, therefore, unnecessary to go into any
argument to show how the interests of England were af.
fected by the proposed repeal, and he should, consequently
confine himself to the question as it related to Ireland. Before,
however, he did this, he must say a few words in defence of his
party, and of the Government. The Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man, in the course of his speech, had used the words Protestants
and Roman Catholics, words which, as marks of distinction,
he (Mr. S. Rice) hoped never to have heard again in that
House, and for the use of which he had, on one occasion,
called General Grosvenor to order, when the Gallant General
had applied the words, Roman Catholic Member, to the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman himself. With this single remark, he
should proceed at once to the question of the conduct and cha..
racter of the Whig party.. Could
_the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber forget the character of the Whig party ? Who had been
Members of that party ? Was not Mr. Molyneux one of the

w.,~

4Vhigs of Ireland ?—(Hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man thought they were wrong in claiming Grattan as one of
their number—their claim, however, was well founded, and
to his name they might add those of many others. What
was the conduct of Mr. Grattan ? Why he would at any time
lend his support to the measures of his opponents, if he
thought those measures would prove beneficial to Ireland ;
and in examining them, in order to make up his mind, he
would lay aside all considerations of the party of the men from
whom they emanated. This fact was proved by an extract
which he should read from a speech of Mr. Grattan's delivered
in 1808 or 1809. He should read some few words from that
speech, and then allow the gentlemen on the other side, who
might have been led astray for the moment, by the bold assertion
of the other side, to form their own judgment upon the man, who,
by the admission of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin,
was one than whom a truer friend of political liberty, or a
more steady defender of popular rights never existed. The
words were these :—" Sooner than run the risk of losing the
Constitution altogether, he would take upon himself his full
share in common with his Majesty's Ministers "—these Mi-
nisters were his political opponents, the Tories—(Hear)—" of
the responsibility that was attached to the measure." Was not
that judging of a measure by its real merits, and giving his sup-
port to it, if it were good, without any party considerations as
to who were the men that proposed it ? (Hear.) When the
Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin ran away with big as-
sertions about murder and slaughter, and devastation; asser-
tions which he wished not only to produce their effect in that
House, but to send out with all the weight that his name could
give to them to the 100,000 whom he had described as within
hearing—(Hear)—to whom he suggested the announcement of
the resolution of the Government would bring tidings of death
to their sons, their fathers, and their mothers ; when he did
this, did he think he was imitating the conduct of Mr.
Grattan ? He (Mr. S. Rice) asked how it was that the Hon.
and Learned Member pretended to know 'and ventured to
impugn the intentions of Government ?—(Hear.) What right
had he to do so?—(Hear.) Let him make his case good
when the Bill came into the House, and he should be ready to
meet that case. What right had he to attribute to them war
and destruction, when those imputations could at least as fairly
be cast upon him as by him on any among the Ministry ?
(Hear, hear). The Hon. and Learned Member had attacked
all the Whigs, therefore he had attacked Lord Charlemont and
Mr. Grattan—(" No," from Mr. O'Connell)—he had attacked
them, for he had attacked without discrimination the party to
which they belonged. There were in that House descendants
of those illustrious men—there were within hearing men who
bore their great and honoured names, and who could tell them
to what party these pztriots did belong. What was it they
had done for Ireland ? Had they not given her a Constitution
in 1780 ?—(Hear, hear, from Mr. O'Connell.) And what was
it the party to which they belonged had done for Ireland ? Who
was it that first submitted the question of Catholic emancipa-
tion to discussion ? Charles James Fox.—(Hear, hear.) And
who was it but the party which he led that had maintained
the interests of Ireland, when those who now represented
her interests were by the state of the law prevented from
sifting in that House ?—(Hear, hear), If he asked who had
done the greatest service to his country—who, since the
Union, had laboured incessantly for her benefit—where was the
man, Whig or Tory, that would deny it was the venerable, the
honest, the consistent Sir John Newport—(Hear, hear)
always at his post, and always anxious for the promotion of
the advantage of Ireland.—(No, from Mr. O'Connell.) The
Hon. and Learned Member dissented, and the reason probably
was, that in these very walls, when he was about to close his
Parliamentary career, he left to his countrymen the warning,
that if they were led astray by delusions, practised upon them
to seek for the repeal of the Union, they would be seeking for
the repeal of a measure from which had flowed to them the
highest advantages, and would be forfeiting all the benefits
which he and others had so anxiously laboured to obtain for
them, and all their hopes of political improvement must termi-
nate for ever.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet had
concluded his political life with that warning ; and perhaps the
dissent of the Hon. and Learned Member opposite, and his
shake of the head might be easily accounted for by the weight
which he had felt belonged to an opinion coming from such a
quarter.—(Oh no, from Mr. O'Connell.) There was one au-
thority which, with respect to this argument about the
conduct and character of the Whigs, he should like to
mention, and he called the particular attention of the
House, who had heard an account of the demerits of
the present Ministry, to that authority. The state-
ment he was about to quote was made on the 22d of June, 1831,
and related to a Right Hon. Friend of his. The speaker from
whom he should quote said " he was quite convinced, and he
spoke from practical experience, that no set of men are more
heartily disposed to do good to Ireland than this Government,
and in his opinion they deserved for their conduct the support
of every independent Member."—(Hear, hear.) On the 10th of
May, 1832, when the present Ministry were about to retire from
office, a debate came on in which the same speaker said that
" they retired from office with a character unsullied.—(Hear.)
—with public confidence in them undiminished; and they
would return shortly to the possession of power, which they
would employ only for the benefit of the people; he hoped
that they would again wield it for the permanent accom-
plishment of the desires and wishes of a great and enligh-
tened nation; that whoever wished to bring about such a
change as would produce the restoration of the Ministry,
would be conferring the greatest benefit on his country ; let
but a short time pass without that restoration, and he must be
a bold man who would undertake to say where the consequences
would stop; but that if the danger was as great for Ireland as it
was for England, he asked whether the change with regard
to Ireland would not be frightful ?" That was the evidence to
which he now applied himself in answer to the speech of the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman, and he did it with the more
confidence, because he read the statements from the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman's own speech.—( Hear, hear.) He (Mr.
S. Rice) thought that upon the principle of mathematics these
two quantities destroyed each other, and they had no right per-
haps, at least they had no disposition, to forget the praise, and
retort the vituperation.—(Hear, hear.) Did the Hon. Mem-
ber not know, when he spoke of the neglect of Ireland, that a
single measure introduced during the disputed progress of the
Reform Bill was not capable of being satisfactorily discussed ;
but though that was the fact with one question, was there not
one of importance that had been actually carried ? Was the
question of education nothing ?—(Hear, hear.) How nu-
merous had been the statements of the Hon. and Learned Gen.
tleman on that subject? The present Government alone had
ventured to grapple with it, and had produced a measure which
had met even with the assent of the Hon. and Learned Gen-
leraan. It was indeed opposed by others. That they should
say the Ministry were wrong was natural; but that the con-
duct of the Ministry should now be unsparingly, and without
limit, attacked by those who through them had obtained that
which they had asked for during many years, was to him matter
of extreme surprise. But were there no other measures ? He
thought there were ; and that brought him to a particular
point. The Hon. and Learned Member had dealt with
financial statements. He (Mr. S. Rice) should like to know
what was the tax of all others, the repeal of which was
advocated by the friends of Ireland ? It was the coal tax.
The coal tax had been mentioned in all the petitions on
the subject of the taxes in Ireland ; and if the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman looked through the journals of the House
of Commons, he would see that within the last three years the
petitions had especially applied themselves to this tax. He
should now take a view of the financial state of the country
before and after the Union. The Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man had spoken as if Ireland had been prosperous before the
Union, and had decayed since ; as if she had had before the
Union a careful, prudent, a kind Legislature, but had since
had a careless, unkind, and partial Legislature. Before the
Union the financial condition of Ireland stood thus :—her in-
come in 1791, was 1,190,0001. ; her expense during the same
time, was 1,153,000/. Ten years afterwards her expenses had
increased in the ratio of nearly double her income; for at that
time her income was 2,684,0001., and her expenditure 5,893,000/.
To bring it to a practical test—taking the interest of the debt,
and the charges for Ireland at the time of the Union, they left
no greater surplus than 4,600,0001. to meet the expenses of the
whole civil, military, and political government of Ireland.
That was the starting point. Was it possible for any one to say
that such a surplus was sufficient for such a purpose ? Perhaps
there were some reasoners who thought that Ireland might be
permitted to retain all her income, and that England ought to
bear the expense of all these charges. That would tie
like Sir Boyle Roche's description of an Irish bargain, where
all the mutuality was on one side,—(A laugh.) He came then
to the period of the consolidation of the Exchequer. At the
time the balance of the debt was struck, the interest and
charges of the permanent debt of Ireland amounted to
5,900,000/. To meet those charges was an income of 5,700,000/. ;
so that the country had nothing to do but to live, as some indi-
viduals among them were said to live, upon the deficiency of
their income.—(A laugh.) Neither the state of things before
the Union, nor when there was a separate Treasury, was such
as to be calculated to induce any one who considered it to wish
to return to it. At the time of the Union there were taxes
on carriages, on horses, on servants, and there was a tax on
what he would appeal to the speeches of Grattan for a descrip-
tion of, and tothe recollection of those who had seen it collected,
for an estimate of its misery—he meant the tax on hearths and
on windows. These were not the creatures of an Imperial Par.
Bement. Were they imposed by England on Ireland? No.
It was a separate Legislature which had imposed them, and it
was a British Legislature that had freed Ireland from the
burdens.—(Hoar, hear, hear.) The separate Parliament had
imposed difficulties upon the exportation of Irish produce. At
that time there were corn laws between England and Ireland,as
strict as they now were between England and the Continent.
Did the Hon. and Learned Gentleman think that the establish-
ment of a free intercourse between the two countries could take
place without benefit to Ireland ? Was there any man who
would not admit that it must be an advantage to the empire ?
That free intercourse had been the concession of the Imperial
Parliament, as the contrary system had been the creature of
the separate Legislature ? He knew it had been said, that
the amount of exports only proved the poverty of the land.
—(A laugh.) How could that be ? The export represented
labour—the produce was grown by the peasantry, who did
not work without being paid for it. Was not the mea-
sure of these exports the direct measure of the increased de.
mand for labour; which, after all, was the thing most wanted
in Ireland ?—(Hear.) But to return to the taxes. Did
Honourable Gentlemen know the amount of taxes which Eng-
land had paid most severely, and from all of which Ireland
had been exempted ? England had paid a property tax of
152 millions—assessed taxes to the amount of fifty millions—
a beer tax of eighty-two millions—a soap tax of twenty-four
millions—a candle duty of ten millions—a duty on printed
cotton of thirteen millions—from all of which Ireland had been
free; and which made, together, the sum of 333 millions, to
contribute to which she had. never called on Ireland. He
did not argue against his country in stating these things ; bijt

•%,

' 1
_ ` L.

he was not the worse Irishman for wishing to do full justice to
England. Whatever might be said as to the ques.
tion of exports, the same observation would probably not
be made with regard to imports ; and if they found an in-
creased consumption of the necessaries of life, they were justi-
fied in saying that improvement had taken place in the con.
dition of the people. In 1777 the imports of Ireland amounted
to 2,716,0001. in value ; in 1783, to 3,043,000/. ; in 1793, to
4,164,000/. ; in 1800, to 4,002,000/. ; and in 1826, to 7,491,000/.-
(Hear, hear, hear.) In 1827 the account was defective, be-
cause the trade of Ireland having been freed frem Custom.
house regulations, so far as regarded this country, there were
no entries of goods imported from England, and consequently
no documents could be furnished. Well, but then he knew
it was said that the blanket and stuff trade had been de-
stroyed, and the people of Ireland had been told that that was
one of the consequences of the Union. Now Ireland was
a wool-importing country, and he would show them how the
wool importation had gone on. In 1777, Ireland imported
857,0001b5. of wool ; in 1783, 841,0001b5. ; in 1793, 1,160,0001b5. ;
in 1811, 4,065,0001b5. ; in 1820, 6,068,0001b5. ; and in 1826,
6,680,0001b5. He wished his Honourable Friend the Mem-
ber for Bolton were there to hear this statement, and
see how he could treat it-he who had discovered that the
only alarming evil which Ireland ought especially to take
care to shun was the getting rich. She must not have too
much capital-(A laugh.) His Hon. Friend had now come
in-(A laugh)-but he should not be tempted by that circum-
stance to do more than make this passing observation on
his very capital speech.-(A laugh.) From the statement he
had just made, it was evident that Ireland could do something in
manufactures. But on that point he was encountered by another
very great authority, the Member for Oldham, whose argument
was, that in proportion as there was a consumption of raw pro-
duce for the purpose of manufactures, in that very proportion
was misery increased. He was afraid, if that doctrine was true,
that he should give some colour to the opinion about the in-
creased misery of Ireland ; for he should show an in-
creased consumption of raw produce in manufactures. In 1777
the importation of cotton yarn was 883,0001b5. ; in 1783, it was
545,0001b5.; in 1793, it was 276,0001b5.; in 1800, it was 558,0001b5.;
in 1811, it was 972,0001bs ; in 1820, it was 1,279,0001b5. ; and
in 1826, 2,510,0001b5.-(Hear.) During the same time the im.
Portation of cotton wool had increased from 428,0001b5. to
4,368,0001h5. ; all of which was to be manufactured by Irish
labour, that would not have been employed if the absurd
sYstem of protecting duties existing before the Union had
been continued, and which would, no doubt, be again
called for if that Union was repealed. Perhaps he should
be told that this increased consumption of other articles
of manufacture was at the expense of the linen trade ;
and that, in proportion as the others improved, that de-
cayed. What was the fact ? In 1777, the export of linen was 80
millions of yards; in 1783, it was 18 millions; in 1793, it
was 34 millions; in 1800, it was 36 millions; in 1810, it was 40
millions ; in 1820, it was 48 millions; and in 1826, it was 56
millions of yards. The Hon. and Learned Member should see
these documents, if he wished; or should have them laid on
the table, if he moved for them. That which he had stated was
not vague declamation, but plain truth ; for his aim was to
convince, and not to mislead.-(Hear, hear.) Under a system
of free trade, Ireland had become a manufacturing and export-
ing country. There were certain branches of manufacture
more advantageous to one country than to another. In one
hand-labour was cheaper ; in the other fuel being plentiful,
labour was performed by steam; and, what was still more
interesting, that which could be best done in Ireland in the
earlier stages of the process, could be best completed in
England ; and that led to the principle that the interests of
the countries were not two, but one.-(Hear, hear.) The
article begun at Belfast, was completed at Manchester; and
if he could show that the interest of both was bound up
in the same object in some measure, he obtained a pledge
for the peace and repose of the two countries. Were
they to break asunder these bands of Union-were they to say
that Belfast must no longer begin, nor Manchester finish, but
that each must do that which would be better performed by the
other-that each were to be actuated by hostile interests, and
not to pursue a common good-and that all this was to be
done in the weak endeavour to work out a local salvation by
the operation of petty and mistaken principles ? Repeal the
Union ineeed ! When that was said to Mr. Canning, his an-
swer properly was, " Repeal the Union ! restore the Heptar.
chy !"-and truly the one would be as beneficial to the country
as the other. There was one other subject to which he would
now most especially direct the attention of the House-he al-
luded to the importation of raw sugar. In 1777 an average was
taken of the preceding year, and that average was found to
yield but an annual import of 212,000 cwt. ; while at the pre-
sent time it would be found that the average import was
342,000 cwt. This advance, be it observed, had taken place in
the very face of an increasing taxation. He was sustained by
similar facts with regard to the article of tea. In 1777 the im-
portation of tea was 808,000 lbs., while the average of the pre-
sent time was 3,887,995 lbs. Hon. Gentlemen had said, and
might continue to say, that Ireland was not a coal country.
That might or might not make for the argument ; but the
quantity actually consumed was very material. In the three
years, ending 1777, the quantity of coal imported amounted to
but 330,000 tons ; and in 1783, being the first year of Irish inde-
pendence, the consumption was 227,000. It Was rather sta-
tionary between that time and the Union. From 1800, then, to
the present time, the consumption had gone on gradually increas-
ing. The average of the three years, ending 1832, yielded
a consumption of 851,000 tons ; and 1831 had to itself a con-
sumption of 940,000 tons. He was aware that Hon. Members
might tell him that the consumption of tea and sugar proved
nothing with regard to the actual condition of the poor and
degraded peasantry of Ireland; but it was to the last degree
unstatesmanlike to assume that the condition of the lower
classes was not advancing, when the state of the middle and
higher classes was in a state of evident progression. But there
was one article of consumption which was essentially a
favourite with the people. That article could have no con-
sumption whatever, unless created by the lower classes of the
Irish peasantry. He found that the advance of that article
was as follows :--In 1790, the consumption of it was 2,599,000;
in 1800, it was upwards of 4,000,000 ; in 1826, it advanced to
6,000,000 ; and in 1832, it was upwards of 8,000,000. Now,
what was that article ► What could it be but whisky.-
(Cheers, and laughter.) He believed there was not an im-
partial and intelligent man in the country who would not be
willing to admit that England had done a great deal for Ire-
land. At the period of the Union, a contract was entered
into between the two Legislatures to pay a sum of 63,0004 for
a period of six years, these payments to be derived from
votes of the Imperial Parliament, and handed over for the pur-
poses arranged under that agreement. These sums were
to be devoted to the advancement of charity, literature, and
manufactures in Ireland. This sum ot: 63,0004 was estimated,
according to an average taken on the six years antecedent to
the Union. This sum in twenty years amounted to 1,465,000/.
He would ask the House whether the Imperial Parliament
had or had not performed its contract ? If the Imperial Par-
liament had violated its pledge, the advocates of Union might
very consistently call out repeal ! But what was the fact ?
The Imperial Parliament had, instead of confining itself to
1,465,0004, actually voted for those purposes in Ireland no less
than 6,979,000/., exclusive of 5,513,0004 granted for other pur-
poses connected with the local improvement of Ireland. Since
the Union, a sum of 6,4.32,000/. had been advanced out of the
Consolidated Fund for the improvement of harbours in Ireland,
of which 2,500,000/. had been repaid. There was, however,
an additional loan of capital to the extent of 3,899,9004, con.
fined to local improvement in the interior of the country. The
total amount of grants, then, to Ireland, for the articles of
charity and literature, amounted to 4,225,000/. ; for the ad-
vancement of agriculture and manufactures, 1,340,000/. ; for
public works in Ireland there was an advance of 3,072,000/.
When cholera visited the British empire, the necessary ad.
vances in England amounted to about 12,000/., while those for
Ireland were 164,000/. It had been said that the Public
Works' Bill produced no beneficial effect in Ireland. Now
how did the fact stand with respect to the pecuniary part of the
transaction ? No less a sum than 179,000/. was granted in the
form of loan, and 9,700/. in the shape of gifts. Did he advert
to all these circumstances for the purposes of denying that there
existed in Ireland poverty and distress to a very fearful extent;
but did any one attempt to say that poverty and distress had not
existed before the Union, to an extent quite as painful and
quite as extensive as at any time since ? Was it not a matter
well known to every man acquainted with the state of Ireland,
that the wool trade and the manufacture of cotton had been
from the earliest period bolstered up and sustained by the votes
and the bounties of a mistaken and ill-judging Parliament ?
Did he make these observations for the purpose of discouraging
the munificence of England ? He, on the contrary, should be
the last man in the world to utter a word to diminish the sym.
pathy, and kindness, and good feeling of the people of England
toward the Irish. He warned the advocates of repeal to beware
how they stopped those sources of benevolent assistance which
the people of Ireland had hitherto enjoyed at the hands of the
British nation. He warned those gentlemen to beware, for to use
a metaphor powerfully turned to account by a distinguished coun-
tryman of theirs, even if they might go about sowing dragons'
teeth-even if they succeeded, those seeds might spring up
armed men. They might for a season go abroad scattering
hatred and ill-wili, but even if they succeeded in revolution,
they might themselves be the first victims. The question of
repeal was in fact the question of separation-that it involved'
the destruction of Monarchy and the establishment of a Re-
public, the founders of which might make up their minds to
fall the first victims. Of course, as soon as the Hon. and
Learned Member, and the 104 others, were installed as the new
House of Commons for Ireland, they would set about forming
a new Constitution ; and it had been generally said, if not
avowed, that one of the first measures of the Irish Parliament
would be to impose a tax of 75 per cent. on absentees. But did'
it never strike any body, that in that stormy society, some one
might possibly be found just to hint or whisper that the King
of England himself was an absentee ? He was satisfied that
the repeal of the Union could only end in separation, and se-
paration in ruin. The Hon. and Learned Member had con-
tended again, that strong measures would lead to civil war ;
but the object of Ministers was not to excite commotion, but
to strengthen the law ;-to avert, not to provoke the threat-
ened evil.-(Cheers.)

Mr. COBBETT—H tying been in some measure called
upon by the Hon. Member who has just sat down, I shall
trouble the House with a few observations, and I promise
not to trespass long upon its attention. With regard to
the question of the dissolution of the Union, and the con-
sequences to which it may lead, upon those matters I offer
no opinion. I have never thought of the subject suffi=
ciently to warrant my giving an opinion upon it ; but the
Hon. Member (Mr. S. Rice) seems to think that I was
in error in the principles I put forth the other night in
answer to the Hon. Member for Knareshorough (Mr.
Richards). It was not of principles I spoke. I made

use of no arguments. I offeted n opinions—they were
facts that I stated. I said in answer to his observation
relative to the increase of trade in Ireland, that all might
be very true, and still the people be in great misery; aye,
and in greater misery in proportion to the increase of
trade. I mentioned from certain information, one of these
days to be laid before a Committee of this House, to be
proposed by my Hon. Colleague, that in proportion as the
cotton trade of Manchester increased, in that proportion
the profits of the master manufacturer declined, and the
misery of the workman augmented. But there were doc-
trines advanced, and principles laid down by the Hon.
Gentleman, evhich I must take this opportunity of con-
testing. He laid it down as a principle, that because the
exports of Ireland bad increased, and because those exports
were produces! by Irish labour, because they represented
Irish labour—that, therefore, eit was a proof of the pros-
perity, and of the increasing prosperity of Ireland. Push
that argument home, and you will find it exactly suit the
negroes of Jamaica. What ! did ever any one hear that
the happiness of the negroes incre seed in proportion to the
increase of the demand for sugar ? On the contrary, all
who have ever advocated the abolition of negro slavery
have constantly asserted that, in proportion to the de-
mand for labour was the lash inflicted.—(Hear, hear.)
I appeal to the books and publications on the subject ;
and I remember a passage in one of them to this effect :
" The price of sugar has been announced to be so and so;
dreadful orders have therefore been issued ; the hours of
labour are to be so many more, and- the lash is to be
called into additional activity." There was a little exagge-
ration, perhaps, in what fell from Mr. Cropper, of Liver-
pool, nut long ago, when he said that there was no pros-
pect of abolition as long as Parliament did not interfere;
that, in proportion to the increased demand fire cotton,
was the increased infliction of the lash to quicken the
labour of the negro. But upon this point I will not
fatigue the House with details. The great evil of Ireland
is, that her produce is all sent out of her land. You may
talk as long as you please about the benefits of her exports.
I remember the Primate of Ireland living for twenty years
in the parish of Fulham; during the whole of that time
be was receiving his immense revenues from Ireland. He
died worth 300,0001. in personal property; having
been a younger son without hereditary estates. Where
did it all come from ? Why, from Ireland, to be
sure.— (Cheers.) Ireland, poor Ireland, It td enabled
this Archbishop to leave behind him 300,0001., besides
what he annually spent. When people talk of the faults of
Government, I do not mean to say that they have not
done all that was possible to amelierate the lot of Ireland.
They have always done it ; • and why should they not ?
It is the interest of Ministers to keep Ireland tranquil, and
to avoid all causes of disturbance.—(Cheers.) But that
country can never be in a good state where grants from
the Treasury are wanted to put industry in motion.—
(Hear.) And this is the history of Ireland—the whole of
her produce and riches has been always drawn away. I
was very much surprised to hear the Right Ron. Baronet
(Sir R. Peel) the other night—" Ah ! tell the this—have
we imposed a corn law upon Ireland ?" Gentlemen, I
take it, would hardly impose corn laws upon themselves.
The land is theirs—the produce is theirs—the profit of
the Church is theirs; and all is drawn away hither. They
would be strange sort of gentlemen, with less sagacity
than I give them credit for, if they imposed corn laws
upon Ireland. No, no ; they lay corn laws upon a coun-
try where they have no land, where tithes and Church
property ,eire not theirs—there they impose corn laws, and
pretty heavy ones, too.—(Cheers.) Another thing has
been urged. It is slid that England has paid such amass
of taxes, while Ireland has only paid so much. It is very
shallow to put it in that way; if the produce of Ireland
comes to England, the taxes of Ireland are paid in Eng-
land.—(Hear, hear.) That is the real cause of the exist-
ing misery ; the Irish do not gain the fruits of their labour
—it comes here ; here it is expended, and here it is taxed.
Therefore it is not more fair to estimate the amount of
taxes of Ireland th tn to estimate the amount of taxes of
Jamaica, when we know that the owners of estates in Ja-
maica are resident here, and are taxed here. There is
very little difference.
Mr. G. ROBINSON remarked, that the head and
front of the offending of Ministers against the Hon. and'
Learned Member for Dublin (Hr. O'Connell) was, that
they had inserted a paragraph in the King's Speech decla-
ring a determination to support the Union, and no at-
tempt to conciliate him would have the slightest effect as
long as they stood in the way of his favourite project,
He (Mr. Robinson) strongly objected to the line of con-
duct pursued by a certain portion of the House during the
last week ; it was calculated to impede public business, to
sow distrust, and to lead the Irish to believe that there -was
a want of sympathy for their sufferings among the English
Representatives.—Cheers.) No doubt the Hon. Member
for Dublin had been bitterly disappointed by the result of
the division the other night ; his forty votes had caused
him nu little vexation, and the renewal to-night of the
course pursued I ist week made it almost seem as if the ob-
ject of the Irish Members was to disgust the English
Members, and to drive them to a dissolution of the Union
in order to avoid the infliction of Hibernian orasory.—
(Cheers and laughter.) He (Mr. Robinson) believed that
Ministers were the sincere friends of Ireland, and if the
object of Irish Members were really to promote tranquil-
lity, they would accomplish it much better by inculcating
upon the people the necessity of patience, and reliance on
the honest exertions of those who could have no interest in
rendering their condition worse, but every motive to im-
prove it. He was no party man, he did not profess to be
a supporter of Ministers, but it was only fair to give them
time to look at abuses, and to_ provide remedies.—( Hear,
hear, bear.) He agreed that the paragraph in the King's
speech, Si much commented upon, might have been bet-
ter worded; more might have been said about redress and
less akout coercion ; but in voting for the address, he did
not consider himself at all pledged to support any measure
of vigour that might be introduced. The Irish were a ge-
nerous and a confiding people, and he believed that they
woeld wait with patience for the remedy of their griev-
ances if the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin would
but take half the pains to allay that he did to excite.—
(Much cheering.)
Mr. RICHARDS said that he had voted for the ad-
dress in order to show the country and the King that he
was rea'!y to give all constitutional means of preserving
entire the Union with Ireland.—(Hear.) Like the
Hon. Gentleman who last spoke, he did not on that ac-
count feel himself pledged to measures of coercion,
should tey not appear necessary. He then proceeded to
answer what the Hon. Member for Oldham (Mr. Cobbett)
had said on a former night on the subject of the introduc-
tion of the poor laws into Ireland, and contended that their
adoption was absolutely necessary. On a late occasion, the
Hon. Member for Oldham had replied by a sophism
which might do very well for the Political Register, but
was very unfit for the Clouse of Commons. He had asked,
if the poor laws would remedy the evils of Ireland/ how it
happened that they had not prevented the evils of England ?
But he forgot to consider what would have been the present
situation of this country had the poor laws not been in
operation for the last 2bo years. The Bill of the Right
Hon. Member for Tanaworth could never have been borne
but for the effect of the poor laws ; and if Ireland had
possessed the same resources for her starving population,
there would have been no insurrection or nightly outrages.
The Hon. Member for Oldham had compared Ireland and
Jamaica, and had reasoned as if they were in the same con-
dition—omitting all notice of the main distinction, that in
Ireland labour was free, while in Jamaica it was performed
by slaves. Consequently, an increased demand for the
produce of the West Indies was attended with increased
suff•rings on the part of the negroes, both of labour and
punishment. The Hon. Member concluded by relating
nine particular facts in favour of poor laws in Ireland,
which had come to his knowledge through a land agent
from Dublin, which did not appear very convincing to the
House, front the manner in which they were received.
Mr. J. BROWN (of Mayo), said that the charges
which the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin brought
against him and his father had no foundation in truth.
He denounced those charges as untrue, and he did so
at a time when every honest man should come forward—
at a time when every Irishman who valued his country, or
was loyal to his King, should rebut unfounded statements.
He did not mean to accuse anybody of cowardice for
having " registered a vow in heaven," when it was done
useuitthifatvhieers of following
evlceruinsome
that
Hou pseaarmticanulaur course
singtl,eof fglrieue;
power he possessed to cause acts of turbulence and violence
—if there were Buell a man, inflaming at public meetings,
and in every way possible, the minds of a whole people,
and stirring them up to riot and bloodshed, without at all
endangering his person or his property—then would he
say that such a man was a coward. That might be pain-
ful to the Hun. and Learned Gentleman, and he would not
have made such an allusion, if the Hon, and Learned Gen-
tleman bad been in the habit of respecting the feelings of
of others. So far from doing that, he had taunted him
iftM. B.)
wrusnis
pranot-onlyutiu in h
e to
ointsualtt
every
yse b
man,
auu,tweiltshet elsewhere
—_in
offering any
yearned Member had
means of reparation. With respect to thoefHivoina.yaon,dlieLetvato
ned
uld
that a poor
ssAaalyiedTabfieenrw'asdwevtoaerrtetdimsn.genttoTs ahtibe:Hetroutnehietyacnoodfunttte
police,
woman singing a song upon the road was sufficient to ex-
cite their wrath, and that upon such a trifling occasion
they discharged their pieces, and caused the loss of two
or three lives.—(No, no, from Mr. O'Connell.) The
Hon. and Learned Member made also another statement
touching the cruelty of the police. Upon this ettittulent