The Sun.
London, England, 1833-03-06 00:00:00

CALL OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. O'CONNELL moved that the order of the day for
the call of the House be discharged.
IRISH DISTURBANCES SUPPRESSION BILL.
Mr. LEFROY moved the order of the day to re-
new the adjourned debate on this Bill. The question having
been put, the Hon. Gentleman proceeded to address the
House. He was anxious to address the House on this mo-
mentous question, although he felt the propriety of con-
fining himself within the smallest possible limits, consider-
ing the period over which it had already extended, and as
the House should anxiously guard against every
imputation of indecently delaying the progress of
the measure, yet he trusted the House would indulge him
while he made a few observations, before he entered on
the subject iinntediately before the House, on the topic
which called him up at a late hour last night.—(Hear.)
After the strange observation made by the Member for Drog-
heda upon one of the most respected Judges in Ireland—
after the imputation which had been thrown upon him—
that he was a person who, in the solemn performance
of the duty of charging the Grand Jury would
sacrifice a principle to an antithesis, he (Mr. Lefroy)
should have felt himself unworthy of a seat in that
House, and of the place in society which he occupied,
if he had sat silent without adverting to eo serious,
so injurious, and so offensive a charge. He had ha i the
satisfaction of the acquaintance of that learned Judge
during thirty years; during the most part of that time
he had known him on the Bench, and he must say never
did there sit on that bench a more constitution-d, a more
humane, and a more upright Judge. He was at a loss to
account for the charge, which was so unjust in itself, and
especially as coming from the Hon. Member, himself
one of the profession.—(Hear, hear.) He did not
know what notions that Honourable Member could have
of what belanged to the character of the Judge. What
respect he had for the office, or what sense of justice he
could have to the individual on whom be made such a
charge. The individual against whom that imputation
was cast, was one, he might say, of a fastidious and deli-
cate sense of honour, a gentleman and accomplished scholar,
qualities which, whatever estimate the Hon. M:mber for
Drogheda might form of them, would always be held, at
least, he hoped, throughout the country, in the highest
estinuition. The Hon. Member had thought fit to
speak slightingly of that Learned Judge's knowledge
of the law. On that subject he would go no further for
its defence, than to state that he was the first
Judge called on to propound any opinion on that
most important question bow far passive resistance to
the law was a legal offence, be gave firmly and

boldly, and decidedly his opinion on that question,
and it was to be apprehended that that was the foun-
dation of the disapprobation that was now expressed.
Having, I trust, continued the Hon. Member, therefore,
vindicated to this House and to the public the character
of that respectable Judge, I shall proceed to the con-
sideration of the question more properly and more
immediately before the House ; and I must
say upon that subject, that however gentlemen upon the
opposite side of the House may differ in their views of
the question, there is one point upon which all must concur,
and that is the great importance of it—the great importance
that we should stand justified to our constituents, and lus-
tified to the public upon solid and substantial ground., for
passing such an important measure. It is impossible for
any man not to deplore the necessity of such a
Bill—im-
possible not to tremble at the precedent of such a measure ;
hut yet, persuaded as I am of its absolute necessety,
I cannot reconcile it to my conscience to refuse
my support to it, although I have been in all other
respects the most determined opposer of
his Majesty's
Government. It is of great importance that this Bill
should pass upon a clear and distinct ground. Tne
case should, in my judgment, appear as clear as light, and
evidence upon which it is rested should be beyond all
possibility of suspicion; and yet, admitting these re-
quisites, Sir, I confess, I feel constrained even upon
this principle, and applying that standard, to give support
to this measure. The justification must, as I have stated,
rest upon necessity. That necessity must comprise
not merely the extent and nature of the crimes
it is intended to check and to redress, but also
the ascertained insufficiency of the ordinary laws to
protect those crimes, and to redress the evils arising
from tliem.—(Hear, hear, hear.) With respect to the
extent of crime, very little doubt, I think, can be
entertained. It seems to be agreed on all bands, that there
is an extent of crime almost, if not altogether, un-
paralleled in amount, and nearly unparalleled in
atrocity. With respect to its nature, it is im-
portant to observe this peculiar distinction which at-
tends the crime—that it is not simple confederacy to com-
mit offence—not a contetleracy to commit violence and out-
rage, but a confederacy to baffle and to defeat the law
which is intended for the redress and punishment of crime.
It is therefore from the nature of the conspiracy which
exists, that in the first instance arises the necessity of this
measure. With respect to the extent of crime, another
observation may be made which meets in some way the
report of a charge given at a late Assizes, that there
was no crime in that part of the country to any
amount.—(Hear, hear.) This Bill does not assume that
all Ireland is affected by disturbance, but the words of the
preamble show that it only premises that some parts were
affected. But the crimes are of a tendency to injure and
demoralize other parts of the counzry ; therefore, there
is in the nature and extent of the crime a necessity and
a justification for tee measure. I will now beg
to call the attention of the House to the commissions
which have been issued in the last nine months, and what
have been their results, and I will then compare the pre-
sent state of crime with the state at the commencement of
those commissions, by which we shall satisfactorily see
whether the existing laws have been sufficient to check
those crimes. The first of those commissions issued for
the Spring Assizes, in March, 1832, and there were then
five capital convictions, and 26 transportations, in addition
to the capital cases which were commuted into transporta-
tion for life. Did that produce pease ? On the contrary,
in two months afterwards, it became necessary to speed
another Commission, upon which occasion the Chief Jus-
tice of the King's Bench, who presided, in addressing the
Grand Jury, said that only two months had elapsed since
the previous gaol delivery, the trials with a view to which
lasted from the 15th to the 27th of March ; and yet it
again became necessary that a fresh Commission should be
sped for the trial of offences not arising from the ordinary
frailties of our nature, but for crimes of an insurrectionary
character-300 outrages, from burglary downwards, hav-
ing been committed in the interval, these consisting
chiefly in the administration of illegal oaths, an extensive
system of plunder for arms, the destruction also of
hou-es, barns, crops, plantations, meadows, and cattle.
It had been shown beyond all possibility of question
or cavil that the juries would not do their duty.
In two months from the special commission, the Summer
Assizes took place, and the men who stood charged with
the murder of fourte.ti policemen in the open day, in the
presence of thousands, were put upon their trial, and,
after two or three unsuccessful attempts to procure a con-
viction, they escaped from justice. The events of December,
in which the next commission issued, were attended with
as little success. The next objection, and one of the most
serious that bad been made to the present Bill was, that
offences were to be tried before a military tribunel, in-
stead of before the ordinary ones. It would be impossible to
doubt of the impropriety of making use of military tribunals,
since even the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, in
his eloquent speech upon the address to the Throne, had
put it beyond their reach to use any other. That Hon.
and Learned Gentleman then stated that the people of
Ireland looked with a jealous eye upon the Judges and
Magistrates of the country—that they looked upon them
as the oppressors of the Irish people, and that, therefore,
the GovernMent could not rely upon them, since they had
completely lust the confidence of the people. That body
had been most shamefully calumniated. Those charges
had alienated the people from the Magistracy—had pre
judiced them against that body—and never could Ireland
be governed like this country until those prejudices were
done away with. The next objection to the Bill was that it
did without witnesses. Now he had had some experience
of the administration of justice in Ireland, and could con-
fidently say that the failure of justice in that country
ought to be chiefly attributed to•the way in which witnesses
were tampered with during the intermediate time between
their being called upon to give testimony and the trial.
He considered that their total absence would better further
the ends of justice than their presence. There was another
objection made to the present Bill, namely, that it did away
with the right of petitioning. He contended that it did
no such thing ; all it was meant to do was to prevent
large multitudes from assembling under the pretext of
petitioning the L-gislature. The Hon. and Learned Gen•
tleman concluded by declaring, that the question of tithes
was not the cause of the disturbances. In districts where
the composition bad been entered into, the people were in
a more disturbed state than in the districts where there
had been no composition.

As soon as the Hon. and Learned Gentleman sat down,
several Members rose on the Opposition side of the House,
but the Speaker declared in favour of—
Mr. RUTHVEN—Seeing the state of impatience in
which the House was, he would not address them at any
extraordinary length.—(A laugh.) He complained, how-
ever of the way in which a measure of such importance
to Ireland was hurried through the House.—(Loud laugh-
ter.) He admitted the outrages committed by the White-
feet, but thought that it was not by totally annihilating
the Constitution they should endeavour to repress those
injuries. He complained of the manner in which tt,e
'lrish magistrates performed their duties, and attri-
buted many of the evils of which the people had to com-
plain to that cause. As an instance of their neglect of
duty, he stated that out of 9,000 persons committed for trial
in one year in Ireland, only 5,000 had been convicted ;
and he would ask the House if magistrates could be said
to do their duty who committed 4,000 innocent persons
to prison ? The Hon. Member went into the details of a
ease of great hardship and oppression which took place in
September last, at Loughrea, in Galway, in which a cler•
gyman, named Dwyer, ill-treated and used the grossest
language to a poor widow, who owed him some arrear of
tithe. The Hon. Member was going on with the details
of the case, and read from a paper which he held in his
hand some of the offensive expressions used when—
Colonel PERCEVAL rose and said, he was surprised
that the Hon. Gentleman should bring forward charges
against a clergyman couched in such gross language, in
that informal manner. He (Colonel Perceval) thought,
if the charges were founded in truth, it would have been
more regular to inform the House before be made them.
Mr. RUTHVEN hoped he was not out of order. The
Hon. Member was proceeding to relate how the clergy-
man used the widow while he had her in his clutches,
when—

The SPEAKER rose and said, that though the Hon.
Member was only stating facts, yet, in stating facts, it
was always necessary to use Parliamentary language. No
language could be orderly in a quotation, which would be
disorderly if spoken.

Mr. AUTIiNTEN would not say one word more upon
the subject, which could be considered out of order. He
did not think, however, that it was disorderly to state
that Mr. Dwyer, the clergyman, was fined ten pounds
by the Assistant-Barrister, tor his conduct to the widow.
--(Hear, bear.) The Hon. Member then went on to
argue, that special commissions would have all the good
effects anticipated from this Bill. They had been found
to answer formerly in Clare and Galway, which counties
were reduced by them to a state of perfect tranquillity.
He was of opinion, that this measure would drive Ireland
to resist to the death. He was not one of those who
wished for the repeal of the Union without discussion.
He wished to have it calmly argued, and to decide ac-
cording to the issue of that argument. There was a great
outcry about the Unions in Ireland : the Hon. House
seemed to forget that there were Unions in England, and
the Member for Birmingham could tell them what sort
of Unions these were. His Majesty's Ministers, too,
well knew what these Unions were; for it was these

Unions alone which had kept them in office, and car-
ried the Reform Bill.—(No, no ; Hear ; Question.)
Yes ; when the Ministers began to be aware of certain
little tremulous flutterings in their hearts as to whether
they should be able to remain in office, and as to what was
to be done, then it was that they bad been triumphantly
carried through every difficulty by the people—by the Po-
litical Unions of England.—("No, no," from the Ministe-
rial Benches.) Hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side were
now very loud in their vociferations of No, no !--they had
changed their note lately ; there was a motion for the sup-
pression of these Political Unions, set down in the list for
the 6th of May. But would this motion ever be brought
forward ? No. There was another motion set down for
the same day, for the abolition of sinecures. Flow would
those Hon. Members vote on this question ? He would not
at present go through his objections to the different provi-
sions of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman
then proceeded to state the case of an Irish soldier, who
had been most brutally •treated by his officer, having a
bridle thrust into his mouth, which he was compelled to
wear. This case of tyranny occurred in the regiment of
Sir Watkins Wynn.
That HoN. BARONET started up, and amidst the great-
est uproar and shouts of laughter, vehemently denied, as
we understood him, that his regiment had ever been in
Ireland.

Mr. RUTHVEN—Yes, it was ; I saw it ; it was in
the county of Down. I can bring the most incontestible
-eridence of the truth of what I say.

The SPEAKER suggest, d that, as the lion. Baronet
whose name had been mentioned had so unhesitatingly de-
nied the circumstance, it would be more in order in Mr.
Ruthven not to persevere.
Mr. RUTHVEN had indisputable proof of the correct-
ness of his statements.

The SPEAKER was sure there was no gentleman in
the House but would see that the manner, the topic, and
the persevering of the Hon. Member, were all disorderly.
Mr. RUTHVEN apologized. He bad not conceived
that the endeavour to substantiate statements was disor-
derly. What he had said with respect to personal obser-
vation referred to the presence of Sir W. Wynn's regi-
ment in Ireland, not to the affair of the bridle. How-
ever, without mentioning names, he would say, that this
dreadful punishment, worse than any other, could be
proved.—(No, no.) He begged leave to cite an opinion
expressed by Mr. Stanley in 1824, in which he himself
(Mr. Ruthven) fully concurred, nor coal conceive how
an alteration of opinion had been brought about in
thirt Right Hon. Secretary, and other gentlemen on
that side of the House. The opinion of the Hon.
Gentleman at the period mentioned, was " that the
worst affliction under which Ireland laboured was the en-
tire ignorance of those who legislated for her, of the
real evils she was suffering under." It was, therefore,
incumbent upon Ireland to let these evils he fully known
to those Legislators. But the real question before the
House was not a mere question about Ireland, but a
question of English liberty—of the British Constitution
—of general Reform ; it was to see whether the present
Reform Ministry were to tyrannize worse than any Tory
Ministry had ever done. He would not detain the House
much longer.—(Hear.) He would only quote some pas-
sages from a speech of Lord Althorp's in 1824, to show
how that Noble Lord had been spoilt by the company he
had got into—(A laugh)—for in his (Mr. Ruthven's)
opinion, never had any man set out with a more kind and
benevolent feeling towards Ireland ; and he had the highest
respect for that Noble Lord's character. The paragraphs
stated the opinion of the Noble Lord, " that the mishchief
was, that while the evils of the Union were clear and
undoubted, the advantages were entirely disendent upon
the good sense and good feeling of the Administration."
He would call upon that Noble Lord, if he had not
changed this opinion, to show the excellence of the present
Administration by the extent of the advantages it would
bestow upon Ireland. The Noble Lord on that occasion
had also alluded to the enormous expense incurred by the
machinery of tit- Insurrection Acts and the Commissions
in Ireland, and had declared his opinion, "that there was
such a contamination in arbitrary measures—that if they
were enforced in one part of the State, they would have
an equal influence over the other portion." Let the Noble
Lord bar this in mind, and not act in dirset opposition
to these his declared opinions.
Lord ACHESON said he would support the Bill.
He wished to say a few words, for the purpose of effacing
au impression which appeared to exist, that the operations
of this Bill would extend indiscriminately to the whole of
Ireland. This was most erroneous. Had this been the
ease--bad the operations of the Bill tended to implicate the
innocent in the punishment of the guilty—it would never
have had his support; but, on the contrary, his firm op-
position. On the contrary, it would tend to relieve the
many who now laboured under that worst of slavery—
the slavery of intimidation—from their bonds, and would
restore them to the full enjoyment of the benefits of the
Constitution ; and this was his reason for supporting it.
Some of the Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the
House, indeed, had appeared to arrogate to themselves the
representation of all Ireland. He could tell them that
their opinions were by no means those of all Ireland. The
present measure was, he admitted, arbitrary and tyranni-
cal ; but he wished to ask what tyranny could equal that
of prescribing the opinions and conduct of other men, of
making loyal men disloyal, and of forcing them, -for their
own security, to violate those laws which, in their hearts,
they were disposed to respect and obey ? However, the
Bill itself would not remedy the grievances of Ireland :
and he Doped that the Ministers would persevere in that
course of remedying the grievances of Ireland upon which
they had entered. The people laboured under, too many
grievances to be at rest; and Ireland, until the causes of
the agitation were removed, never wou'd be tranquil.

Sir CHARLES COOTE rose out of a sense of duty to
his country and constituents to defend the magistrates
and the gentry of Queen's County from the attacks
which had been made on them. He could take upon him
to say that those magistrates had done their duty. He
had been a Member of the Committee which sat last year
to inquire into the state of Queen's County. He had
attended every sitting of the Committee, and approved
of its report. He knew that the Special Commission had
done good, and that subsequent to that the condition of
the county was improved, and therefore he approved of
that part of the report. -But three weeks after his re.
turn to his own county, while he was on a
_visit to his
brother, a gentleman of the name of Hutchinson (we be-
lieve) was dogged and fired at as he was getting over a
style. He was shot through the lungs. He was then at-
tacked with swords, and cut and hacked, and kicked,
and much disfigured. He was almost cut to pieces, and
the only question he asked when he expected to die, the
only thing he wished to know was, how he had given any
offence.—( Hear.) Three days afterwards another man was
shot. Nobody could go abroad without arms, and those
gentlemen who kept up large establishments took their
servants and their arms with them even to church to
protect them. This was the state of the county soon after
the Parliament was prorogued. The Hon. and Learned
Member for Dublin said some few nights ago, that Queen's
County was now tranquil. He wished it was, but he had
letters in his pocket which contradicted that assertion.
One was from a Magistrate who resided in a well-peopled
part of the county, where the people had more employment
than in any other part of it, and less excuse, therefore, for
committing outrages and crimes. "On Tuesday last,"
this Magistrate informed him, " four armed men came to
his quarry, where six of his men were at work ; they
placed them on their knees, and swore them not to work
at the elate-house the writer was building. They then
proceeded to the houses of several labourers, tenants of his,
beat some of them most severely, and gave them similar
orders not to work at building the slate-houses. This oc-
curred between four and five o'clock in the day, and the
people were so intimidated that they did not dare to inform
him of what was going forward. The men who were at
work in the quarry, said that they did not dare disobey
the orders to remain in the quarry for one hour after the
armed party went away. Since that outrage, these stone-
masons had received threatening letters, ordering them not
to work any longer, and they obeyed." He could not,
therefore, get any masons to work for him, add was obliged
to send to Dublin, or some distant place, to procure them.
He was obliged to keep six armed men about to protect
the workmen by day, and to have police patrols at night,
for their safety. The houses he was attempting to build
were not placed on land from which he had turned people
off, but on land that had been in the possession of his family
for 70 years. Other outrages had been committed on
Sunday at noon day by armed men. Under these circum-
stances, continued the Hon. Member, he felt happy to give
his support to the Bill. On the Hon. Member resuming
his seat, there were loud calls for Mr. O'Connell, but—
Mr. DAUNT (as we understood) obtained possession of
the House. Ministers, he declared, had made out no case
against Ireland to justify putting her out of the pale of the
Constitution. They liUve raked together all the Newgate
Calendars of Ireland, and by them they thought to frighten
the House of Commons into suspending the Habeas Corpus
Act.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Secretary might
as well have read the gaol deliveries and police reports
and records of the Old Bailey, and have proposed to
suspend the Habeas Corpus Act and establish martial-
law in England.—(oh, oh.) The Right Hon. Gentle-
man had recited a ballad most pathetically to influence the
passions of the House; to have made the thing complete,
instead of reciting it, he should have sung it.—(Laughter
and cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet, too, bad hor-
rified the House by the detail of a murder which took

place 14 years ago; but that showed what great diffi-
culties they met with in justifying this atrocious Bill,
when they were obliged to ransack the records of crime
14 years ago.—(Hear, bear.) If they were fond of
looking back to find pretexts for cruel laws, might they
not find them in English history? The Right Hon.
Baronet had only to carry back his researches, and he
might find a justification for applying martial law to
England on the murder of Thomas a Becket.—(oll, oh,
and laughter.) He did not know what Ministers wanted ;
but if they had sought to devise a plan to put down anti-
tithe agitation, they could not have found a better than
this Bill. The tithes were the evil of Ireland. He put
it to the English gentlemen to make the case Ire land
their own. If it were, would not excitement prevail in
England ? How would they like that a Roman Catholic
priesthood should lord it over Engl end ? How would
they like to pay tithes to such a priesthood ? He put it
to them honestly and sincerely, to answer honestly and
sincerely, and on a Olin principle of justice, they would,
he believed, refuse, and justly refuse, because, where no
value is given, nothing ought to be paid.—(Cheers.)
There was another circumstance to which he would al-
lude, which had been already alluded to by the Noble
Lord the Member for Donegal—that was, that much of
the agitation concerning tithes was caused by the promise
of the Right Hon. Secretary, that tithes should be
extinguished.—(Hear, bear, hear.) The Right Hon.
Secretary was no doubt sick of that promise, he had been
reminded so often of it—nevertheless he would take care
to remind him of it till it was fulfilled. The Hon. Mem-
ber here made some allusion to the Bill, the force of which
we did not catch, and said (touching his head) that he
would rather lay that head upon the block than submit to
it.—(Leughter.) They might laugh. That laughter
showed him that Ireland could not look for sympathy in
that House.—(No, no.) It was only to be attended to
when it app-aled through the Viceroy, and could only
hope for pates nal legislation, when it had a domestic Legis-
lature. Ii they apolied such a Bill to England, could they
hope to pass it ? He would remind them that men owed
allegiance in return for good government, and that coerci to
and misgovernment did not merit allegiance.—(Hear.)
He was sure that the question of repeal would acquire
irresistible strength by this measure. It would be wiser
to relieve the distresses of Ireland. Absenteeism was a
great curse to Ireland. He should not do his duty to his
country if he did not, to the.utmost of his power, oppose
the Bill.—(Hear, hear.)
On the Hon. Member sitting down, there were again
loud calls for Mr. O'Connell ; and, after a shot t pause the
Hon. and Learned Member rose, and addressed the House
very slowly and emphatically. He spoke to the following
effect :

M. O'CONNELL—I only wish to remind gentlemen
that the question will be put on the amendment. The
question on which the. House will decide is, whether the
word " now" shall stand part of the question : that is,
whether the Bill shall now be read a first titne or not.
A good deal of speaking might hive been spared. A good
many observations have been made which do not go to de-
cide the question whether the Bill shall now be read a
first time. lam bound to say that the amendment is ex-
tremely well calculated to elicit the real nature of the
measure, which goes to destroy the Constitution of Ire-
land, and to which it is most certainly felt that one fort-
night's delay would be fatal.—(Hear.) With these preli-
minary observations, I shall proceed to call the attention
of the House to the real question it has to decide. The
Legislature is now to decide if this sort of law shall he up-
plied to both parts of the British empire. It is one which
relates to the mode of governing Ireland. Are we now
to follow the former precedents of the British Govern-
ment ? Are we to continue the old system, or are we to
make Ireland a part of the British empire ? What was
implied in the consideration of that question ? Had Ire-
land ever benefitted by the connection with England ?
What benefit had Ireland ever derived from the connec-
tion ? if she were totally separated, could she be worse
off ?—(Hear, bear.) It was assumed by all who bad
spoken that she could not.--(No, no.) Poverty, distress,
want, and crime, prevailed. How could she be worse ?
And these things were stated on both sides.—(Hear.) He
asked them what had England done for Ireland?—(Hear. )
Nothing. If they asked what crimes England had
committed, the black catalogue was most abundant.—
(Hear.) Let them take up any period of history, and
they would find acts of the meat atrocious cruelty—
of the deepest treachery—of the most wanton guilt that
ever stained the annals of any country. I formerly spe-
cified the leading character of each century, but what did
I get but to be sneered at ?—(Hear, bear.) Have I not
been taunted because I alluded to the oppressions of the
Henries, the Edwards, the Ellzabeth ? But what was
my reason for adopting that line of argument ? Because
you practise the very enormities of their day, and dis-
guise them under no more than the flimsy cloak of a -dif-
ferent name.—(Cheers.) I will dwell but shortly on this
part of the subject, and merely to illustrate my views.
Every Irishman then found within the pale was executed
as a traitor and enemy. What does the memorial addressed
by Captain Lee to the Brisish Government soon after this
period state ? I will read an extract to the House :
" When notable traitors, who had been in arms against
your Majesty's Government, at length, of their own ac-
cord, offered ample securities for their good behaviour,
promised to perfolm great services, and to surrender at
the assiz ai and sessions, if promise of pardon were given
them ; and when they had so surrendered themselves, yet
secret commissions were issued to the Sheriffs of Shires, and
these men some of them were accordingly killed, and others
escaped. These latter men did, however, submit to the law,
upon which they were tried and acquitted." This was the
spirit—the treacherous, cruel, and faithless spirit, with
which the Irish were then treated. The Government
never dreamed of legislating honestly foi the people. It
preferred the party of the Pale at first, but when a reli-
gion, which was not the religion of the people, was intro-
duced, it attempted to form a new party, still in opposition
to the nation. When did this system end ? Up to 1800 it
had not ceased. To prove that, I will read a passage from a
writer whose name shall be presently mentioned. He said,
" The uniform conduct of the British Government towards
Ireland had been a continued violation of all law, a total sub-
version of the usages of civilized nations. Had there been
a war with a foreign country, the inhabitants would have
retained their possessions and properties, and even in a
conquered province those would be respected. But the
British Government squandered the power and wealth of
the nation on three sets of English adventurers, and the
common title of property became confiscation." These
were the words of Lord Chancellor Fitzgibbon in 1800 ;
he was then, indeed, promising halcyon days to Ireland ;
but the system of confiscation, rapine, injustice, and blood
remained notwithstanding his professions. What are you
now legislating for? To repair injustice, bind up the
wounds of the country, and communicate to it the ble.s-
ings of the British Constitution? Oh ! no. You give
this Act of Parliament—you heal all evils and discontents
with it, and have the effrontery to propose it in the face
of the British Constitution.—(Cheers.) But why taunt
them with the crimes of others where there is so much
matter for their individual accusation? In those periods
there were great men. It will not do the Hon. Gentlemen
opposite -any discredit to be compared with Raleigh or
Essex; but the greatest men at certain periods may be
guilty of acts of atrocity and cruelty, and it may happen
that little men may envy them that unfortunate distinction.
I stand on the threshold of the British Constitution—l
stand up to defend my country from the fatal legislation that
would turn loose upon her every bad passion of the human
heart, and give one man the power of trampling at his
pleasure every inhabitant into a dungeon.---(Cheers.)
This is the question. I ask the first Reformed Parlia-
ment, would they wish to protect freedom in England ?
Will they not do the same in Ireland ?—for surely if
there has been some national exaggeration, it ought not to
be scanned with too jealous an eye, and some allowance
ought to be made for a people standing on the brink of a
dungeon—not because they have committed any crime,
but because somebody chooses to put them there.—(Hear.)
It will be said to me that the Act is not before the House.
But have we not been " talking about it and about it ?"
Has it not passed the other House 2—has it not received
the sanction of the present Government ?—has it not come
warm to us from the praises of those mighty lawyers and
statesmen who are distinguished through the world by the
steadiness of their affection for freedom, and their unde-
viating regard for the great interests of humanity ?—does
it not, in short, come stamped with the approbation of the
" hereditary wisdom" of the nation ? I will not detain
the House by proving how inconsistent the present con.
duct of some of those individuals is with their former
declarations ; that may be of some consequence to
themselves—it may be desirable for them to show to
foreign states and the world that they hold the same
place in principle and public estimation, and are still the
advocates of liberty ; but I care not in what words they
wrap their purposes, while they violate the substance of
freedom, nor shall I stoop
.to expose the fallacy. Let
them proceed to apply to their consciences the balm of self-
hpelance,itit
abolishes
etsaktresial awayby jury. Did
gratulation, and hide their inconsistency from themselves ;
I will proceed to explain to the House the nature and tape.
ration of this precious—this humane—this protecting
estalalishs: trial by jury to enable guilt to
from innocence ;it renounces all the safeguards placed by
dofint:h they not, o
man,
this ,tje
enu
r:thetycofnotrrary,
innocenceinstitute
s totally
t al
lelsyt
as far as human precautions could go,
should
aopunnhploesnecirsie
ittntspuolitrteisir

100
I wish that I possessed the eloquence of t . niainigb).„„hei
for Leeds, wiliout his inconsistency--teat A
( by PO!
I might trace the venerable antiquity of tean,
..riof
prove that it is antecedent to prerogativ writers
stie
stawkeepst,,awwayaytib,ey the Act. Tofhetitrsint
ofeoaeteularbte...te h_elai.e,isteitflef,
alike. But whet? Have not speculative wri '.11_1041
theory of the British Censtitution declared thattilsd
Civil List was voted—the taxes raised--the arsee 'Tied Of
maintainel, and both Houses of Parliamenpt a.nost; jort
no other purpose than that twelve In-ss_sid be 01;
box, with a judge to preside over them,
quu:esiions 0
lowed perfect liberty to adjudicate
life and property ?—( Hear,
therefore, is at an end, for this Act utter y poi or
he Noble f 110
trial by Jury. I can never believe that t tive o
sews) "TolnielCerainstojithli°°oo
posits (Aiding)), so long the
confidenceßepreserA od
pepular Nobi:ity, and the little of
erstwhile
sil: 1
gird between them and the people--whose u,;„, oisile ,
plicity of heart and manners endears him to ':
__sive°
• of rola. L ~,,
sheds a grace even upon his high dignity
_otot 0 w
cheers.) 1 will never believe that he has con se 0,01,
assassination of the Constitution.—(Cheeriug.lo, woes'
evil of the Bill is that it takes away the rightl:, rreeeko
freedom. If this Act pass, I assert that persoeal:
of t.bt
in Ireland is at an end. Some, from the looso.es.se Olt
phraseology, are perplexed on various poinatt! Jed;„,,
Now, what a learned, acute, and well-iln Tint, o,sitUl
would be required to decide upon them ! " ,
ct pal*!
that consideration, I assert, that, dare - die
liberty in Ireland is at an end. No man will to ifelS
please a powerful neighbour—no woman will dare,,o
it theft"- ii
Weise him.—(Loud cheering.) Let me eats - t over -
of the. House to another fact. It is a suffieien r
tbe 1101
an application for a Habeas Corpus to
thatshow it of
under this Act. Its next great feature Wes, of psrl ,
away the right of comp! iint. If two non in 340 VP6 ,
Ireland talked tos,ether of their misfortunes, S _ ode!
meeting, and the Lord Lieutenant could seize 0.0"04000
the Bill. What right of complaint a:mild there be be ore
was so fettered and manacled ? A man migbta :lot Was
built twit
complain to himself—that was no offence;
the use of complaint unless you could pour it 1
ern stltebett
of another ? But if you attempted that, Y°n, mere
a
if this es.
mercy of the Lord Lieutenant. The Bil” an riSti"sr.
away the trial by jury, personal freedom, tusts,olrs,
complaint ;it does more—it annihilates the lib° rest er
press. Let me see the person who will dare tospid 0 _
the truth in a newspaper. If, for instance, be she
sue pule
on the question of tithes, by the Whiteboy Ac4cotoPir*ctit
licatiou tending to excite a combination ore iris
against the collection of tithes sesects th- us Oil;
prosecution for a transportable felony or serl°ooo3 .
tuhiearte..,
tneanor. But by this Act there is left 11° in sd..,°.
the Member inference. The appearance of a newseePer „burst"'
turbed disti ict is conclusive evidence of its P,,bs 10°1
!evenly decided that dropping a letter into theqot tbi
at Dsrby was evidence of its publication there? pestrell
Act left no room for construction, because the got s"
iye'ontiibeneotfoaecqvvuaeisntttnedinsveteieti,i the case or.
_sa, er
of the paper was proof of its publication. friths olft.s,l
feature of the Bill was, that it took away the Mess 0 ,'ll
titian—that rights which had always ranked 11. as pe°V
portance to trial by jury. Why had the Er:4 ii'",ttits° ?-
superseded one family, and introduced another to tfioitie°
Was it not to secure the trial by jury and right a ~ed ?is;
Why are we assembled here? Why has a Reforliwtoii
it
liament been called into existence with so ins,c,° 000
difficulty ? Was it not because the fornier •`ll or
a fro' g tio
were supposed not to listen to the prayers, a° oille--,,,
rupt regard to their own individual interests, to neat w:., ,
petitions of the people? This Reformed Parl'a OF)
was constituted to attend to the petitions °f tl..f(cherstA ,
will its first Act be to annihilate the very right?
arcseer rre I
No doubt, if meetings are hell to laud the rhsoirsr,'
demeanour of young officers, to hold them up ai, porr
of discretion, justice, patience, or for any °tile
s 0061
pleasing to the Lord Lieutenant and the "Saotarerst
permission will readily be granted for such; v.,,,soerji
the man who presumes to ask for redress of gil norsirs
Whet absurdity, to give the very man wia'sn'eplasi°44o
is most liable to become the subject of ° iiiell,
ciisl
right to quash all complaint ! Well, - the Sit
in which It woos,
Bill destroys trial by jury—personal freedoss":e right
of complaint—the liberty of the press, and be
'roil
petition ; all this is done by it. I hope that es befal,oi
tleman, as he would be able to clear his consort be P7l
constituents, will weigh this fearful catalugue's„d • I°4
tabApßebuuensubtfau: ntirtsoct.of.
Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stanley) shakes his u`ing'cAll.,si
repeat it, and defy contradiction, that no o°ln—id Iroo'
ogreone Reformers
meeting,oeaus fttspirt
England,ei :at
ttniost!
op petitionoe. tWliret eichoethnyt
ao,nwwadi
is
nhndaddostepbcyct
renlhagoffusrdeseieipt_rt
ihr
stedeoiir o:gugi
coffee-house,
i ..
ate
110:0" ~..:1;0:e:i
T.
‘.6lrSeot ;di
he:d in Ireland without the permission of thess- to° 0
Is it ignutehstaitonmaasenkeerd in ltshinsotHoyuo,uee?—firslst
je'rcfrho.l:olll::
signed ? But some one gets up and says, " 1..-tbSil 'of
but it is a hole-and-corner-petition." AG0t11";
.klitit
ture in the Bill was, that it expressly cut notbee profit,
of actual discussion and deliberation—it did s Wails',
meeting, because the professed object was Boise; ostiAti
terent front the real—that poor defence it ,bBO prev4;'
open declaration was, that it was designed -sd Pis
meetings for the bone fide object of real petition `o 00.,,,
plaint. Woe to the man who should ask leale t°, be!
' tl°
meeting, the objects of which were not aePreve° , a 004
Lord Lieutenant! I have now briefly toll° Aloost rot
general features of the Bill ; it bas been a t'.-11011LO
phaseswmeh:gol:ale:
some, unpleasant duty ; but I was bound t loc.
Reformed Parliament know what law it is 01, of ssf,
to pass. In the first place, then, the langoss-rset',
r eft
cruel, ensnaring Act is exceedinly loose; 1 l'eves,sseel :i
so utterly untechnical and indefinite in its Pb Boob
Seflri
From the high opinion I entertain of his profoo°oloo4
ledee and legal accuracy, I feel a perfect c°l4so ;SI
though I admit grounded on nothing more * 005
opinian—that the Hon. and Learned GentletOs° 010'''d
(as we understood, the Solicitor-General) never oft°
Act. Ido not know; but if he has seen it, 1 ""orprisios;
astonishment. The looseness of the language is°;sir Pei/
herein
ny triedaftee by
mentioned!co ur ts m a r ti
in the 14th suction it is directed that " er'sione.
charged with any of the offences hereinafter lee,"be,
..o:ns
referred to, may be, and such persons shalt' 06 so
NaVi.h"at aAnsypetgest;deSisiillA:
dangerous a statute! The same vagueness P,",i,115?
the 17th section ; but I come to the 27th, sf". be sr
al
away personal liberty, by which any persons DA tbe of
rested, committed, or detained in custody, 'l°' 004
return to a writ of Habeas Corpus is, that tbe
ope it
done under the Bill. This section further °der)
the prisoner to be confined wheresoever his .!spri°2
keeper pleases. What ! the man is not to be 1-ory
in the King's gaols, where sheriffs, magistrate°, jol
ble officers, may see him. He may be flung f A t'",-J/
black-hole of a barrack, or into its filth-hole.es'soej
from some Hon. Members.) You smile; busst oner?
deny the fact? He might have protection, if vigor /0
an ordinary gaol. The sheriff is a responsible 700"/,
relations would have access to him ; but, by ',bi, sal'
and tyranfiical Bill, any place in Ireland, elh'°7;eo:it
delegated by authority chooses, may be his gwo,
,sfry
hear.) Can Ibe blamed if my temper does °,01.1°14
exhibit perfect equanimity, when such lawstatedss"))
enacted for Ireland? But is it possible that a re; 10;00
liament will grant the power of dragging s Pi'lbie; :el
the
esr
certainly
means
required, for
discriminatet o t
ph oe::::js.:::,:yo
home, to be imprisoned wherever and howeeeooo6.,,ei
mighty
:vghSon cultivatedul
ieuresliyiwf
eathis provision, this admirable .gy 11",01
pceed from no other than, a distinguished 41100'0.
studies that purify and soften the heart, ers'" Built=/
innocence, and securing the latter from opPres',saini,
tellect could have invented such a section. to ';001
Member said be would prefer living in Algiergs'ther_scal
in Kilkenny. But this Act came frog °:). -orient/
dian than that of Algiers. There are sseus they ii
I have mentioned in Algiers ; in Engla°" have
never before heard of. If it be necessarY to if Or te
vere Bill enforced, what mischief would it doted to /
gaols were employed ? How does this clause 9, r
o ofi
Clown crime ? The present law gives the eigeoos4l
moving a prisoner from one gaol to another. _Le Orli
sufficient without giving a military subaltern Lud I'ooy
imprisoning the man where he chooses? are tbi., i
terms of the Act—Any person authorized uoosita,i
whether justice, constable, peace-officer, all C WO PO
officers in command of any portion of his APO!, 0050
or any person whom the Lord-Lieutenant may eV
to empower—can exercise this terrible rights 3 1..) '/
r bea ie i
the prisoner wheresoever he pleases.--(bee 'eo Orb ,
Bill is the great triumph of the Tories over_suwai so),
(Cheering.) When did they bring i° 1,401 e.P;oI
When dad they dream of it? I bore aP: 00 tlrosil
once to the Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) and d 1 sci‘o,
deepened into personal ; but I was wrongn,iins"osity,:ol)
ledged it in person : in my Poiitinal a I Will 13 i
begin to see cause for regret, when such °n 0 the , V
diabolical measures—for words are wasted 0, blia.,/
if such a 131" ofe
introduced by the Whigs. But -0,0 se° is
brought in by the Tories, what flaming orstoloi
they of
the present Ministers deliver against it--h
_, she P
protest against imprisoning the meanest %se pre
4„
subjects. They would declare themselves ' pchr
e
of the people, and the Chancellor of th
dIIIA
with the honest dignity of his nature, wOUI

I• err, J
-Y,', against • . . 'Loud ebeelitiri.:)t
ihr i s the oppressive lass.--(
Oa le'! Len, that some things I hear are true, . and t
'itf!;7- . to be no enalition between such discordant iinrab;,,
'": The circumstance 1 shall notice is an at.'nwl,io-,
'44' of I, gislatien. The Dublin Gazette, 01
it in
ihle".l,,ai_ti,,,i! You wish to conceal anything, advertisea
district
, I,a h„ 4'‘ I Gazette—ii to be evidencet
thati with pub-
-1 li,h. "5!1 Proclaimed. The people are; charged i
th,i'rus ilh'Ral notices, and this, I suppose, is correct
to
when
I the ii, tfa'te in that rtsrect.—(A laugh.? N,towwas
__.
et arm Bill as to be put into execution,
linf
the i;,_
fish, Ybto Post notiees on the church and ch.apte
dlitritt hat the Dublin Gazette is sufficient when
hear.)
If the 'As. to be P°' under martial law.--.--( ewarl;en the
what
hat,
w'tt was not to he consistent in all its parts,notice? Ti
Itelestutoaalil there be in gi,ing the sa'ne., , they will
the question of courtsmartial, I thi,,ic.
no,t4iltltil.leffect,ial fur their purposes. The arms
44, to dsparaee.....l braver f.tinlY
cet 41't5(1---the officers also claim no (m)ferinteins,hislcth:pkleln'raan:r:;
triied:elalf to concede to them; some are men of t
~.,
titztti'la,e of plain capacitie, and others are noi, and
' ''"" for any shining talents ; hut, good, ha(• judges
litlaiii:lani, take tliem altoo-ether, they are the worst
ee
raott:i7:thl. The ease 'of Somerville supplies . n
ph. '
„'a that point.--(llear hear.)
I'lliePhrsiNival duties I have met threelnortlifeourUe)Cvu'arssees inf
saw that the
Iliii,PaYinasters were involved, and I
atoth Party pulled one way, and the colonel's party
et.
A (3,
with 14,ANT OFFICER, from the gallery, exclaimed
Ili isueh warmth, t, No, no!"
1 to mince
tisttroet„CONNELL—l say, Ye, yes l'
iteAnnil speak of
flsitt„
;4(4,T:tic)
ifritter away my case,
tillZ'ffi' name) . alv e
will myself
t ment witnessed—(ioiin amells e;
a_rb'nui:i :la r;elPasenaa:ti
icatcith•e'ra are not fit to be Judges of land. totrit eof(;it Officer himse.lf has. n. ot been fitted by the
Nth , 'la education for discharging thclr
discrimination of
duties: and
qt 5 uas not ac ir A that delicate
et,i,c,,,i(lives and characters of witnesses or prosecutors
t pfe4 tineessary to a Judge. I cannot adequately ex -
tl'e I°Y
centernet for courtsmartial as
l''aPle Iv n
five • ie ensigns or lieutenant _
tribunals
tot 7,
t!siilslialie firld o'ffiieetrl',efnocmthner, nlicourt, and thepresenceot
Ilitte'itl :Auer is the first guaranteeb of impartiality.
4tet, i's nother precaution, to
1,. a ue ttvent
ad th •Y-one years of age. e;
but,_sure, on'he the other vitt; that bust be two years in
.the any in order to
(Het, kat obedience is the first virtue of a soldi
jeurTe
out t,' heir. The reformed Parliament turns
..the I
f:';att,uebb.int, the Judge who had sdtudtineddih,ution.ganni:biattuir,ee
atihie ', Y eXprrience had learne
.dt,o
Ofg rnvereities of guilt and inno:•ence, and to. pour the
l'tillsh 4'srcY into the pr soner's scale, whieunca'tbtw,a7,oe7rieeds
a" '..-(Chee ) His vi inti annorum .
't'sWo -• ".' 9 and he himself is removed to
tin.,v,a,
_aside as useless,
'ltil''' is Yes.Mernethe field.officer.
by
a British subject conliie-
twelve Jurors, and
illshi,e,ll e, he is tried
, Lsi„. ' to an,.
Irishman
s twenty-one oyn the panne! if he
utteronly
' 4 5t,541 their countenances; but let an !
They
ate
to again t
ensigns
4., dteid 8 any of the
,' they: the ease ; they were ordered
sis
tn o h
etyo
orders,eoine
.4
ars there their business IL "Prison dos •s,
etltr er must be content with.m them,,— be im'hagyßwigehltl
ti,. 1r el (Mr. Stanley) triumphs—he h
rules her with uncon-
-11,114 15'auil is his domain, he
'tivi at biro Three ensigns may,
under
experience of
tl,',ltallar°,Y, man ; but has Ireland had no
„.-4 dreadful
All their Acts certainly were nt,,,itevn,iektehde,
Nastt'"'"d atrocities were committed by
tltaiitt:',ltaient of which stared out and caught their at.
cedeiSlitsithl only the grossest wer- remembered. Need
ds he r, fusing, and
h% taid- the only
case of G.' a ••",
'lll ' unable to identify a prisoner,wof,
was in-
whose person
:tlailyjjes., a fib)" occasion given a description,offence
?
He was
.
ialleti% 4 out and whipped for this. offelie
Iblahility, a ',teem(' time—a second time he
d (Hear.)
,„ed.e_clared his
, t'i5i1,1,,5," a second time he was ',fused, and
' thitil `,`"iel on a ti,ird 'hoe, a third time
was the eele -
14'4 tl4la he watt floe g, d. 1 r., tri„d before
tltloo'rae4Q sf Sir Edward Crosby. who' n as ,
ho was a
„.e•ftaial, when the presiding officer,
-1' had since
"'Nis '44aeoons, and a field officer of rank,
would bear
trith ON the ease. He hoped the t
l,ail eftittai if pot for his sake, at le”nfoornsteliesake of the
ttqa k 1 lt Sdward Crosby,
tat, ,etter,
„.,
all doubt, the
1. ',tee ' which proved, almost beyond)
while he read a passage
11l the letter
that alit; Of his lamented father- —( Hear: his
ttt'a,
it'sanj kind enough to
to the
i rittet, it ent on to state, that a
expressrmateitude to
° 1114)4WIedge a few days ago
t'tally ' vihich gave a decided confirmation
(the filttle crgabetoi ntghdeagteed_
present Sir Edward
I,7rost,y,:elived opinion of his (the
t,,, little', tathented father's innocence(,Haenadr.t)hatThhise jleetattelri
%''t to to than a nourtler.—
rettal loyeNte, that when Major Dundas, a relation o
commanded that district,
thatva`l the
,S.rlaa, and who
did 'as sense port of the courtmartial, he at once saw
t, actite,r`ence was moat unjusta, aenidm,tihwadtiattheelyevseidnetnacne
f„Presi te‘
.aut the conviction.
lo s,. the ei staP all further proceedings,,
Commander at Car-
-0•0;1 1,0',,, ease of Sir Edward.and with an order
11i2 ta otedv"' antieipated th it a Irhepe!ieae
of its interference,
1144 th,
oohs to prevent the possibility,would be sent,
Ist°tstlitlhaPPY gentleman shot by torch-light, 'tit azPre ' • .d Archibald
D.
14,,,,, ati,„ ss arriv, •
be`stiet,hl'iligned by the Rev. gi
sh t 1 one
hwona st
ttild 'jaw of Sir Edward Crosby. And,
l'Y s, . that
4 111,11
__‘!ntirts such as these were
were the proper courts
An
to be tried ? t
44'ra:4,111'17e ces in his country
nett
who
had called out tohim_ to name any cour-
tho',ttl th.,4a Powers were abused.
1 lilt ' and he asked the Hon. i•
IHleemdlitlei
004 i
"hi"
) In one o . f the southern
sodth„ nurt ?--(Hear. r name—hewhat he
)4 ,iti ti, 're Was an attorney who
.titled ~ 'a course of his practice, partly
had partly inherited,
madeconsderablesubject to a
Judtte ProPerty •
tittle let debt Y' part of this propeity was
tsd• Nor, to El lady—not an
for their a
uncommon mode at. that
.
The
Itotnan Catholics of providingthem
living as a
Zi'44y ge- 41'11 lady had three sons—one ofnd
the third at
ts°''.l. Th--anan, another at college, and , -gist es titt
hat was cenom
,'sons
to he tate of 1 ntney was w
her theee . used
i inated a loyal
tlise art,tt 799. This attorney ca
tue ''''rete el and thrown into gaol.
seemed, had coin-
t,4tal pro„ tothe mother, who, it The attorney
to
ilet;:ki litt.`ealings for recovery of !he] , udgment,
in Limerick:—
(.0h) \het thtnat unless she immediateyj released the
If the' b
1',4 sons should be hanged
411 th ll't of ec•
• crick, he would inform
1'
" S retary o ask
Ihrow, 4.t tl,t
lehancery in Lim the Cursitor
imprison-
tltat 'I Into pr. Hy was his own mother, that she. was
arid 1 Into
N'ili that he also suffered. a long
(ii. anacied . ich he was
i ht.—
P '"') " tvitil ' -xtv-eight pounds in we g
tt"
g ttl'. treated with much cruelty,
totti The Irons NI
..
tier 0,4 Y to , courtunartial, however,
threatened, but
eittl,i4,ltio, c"OY t 0 day the did not take place.
mother wasd
her
firmness was
rith,.to her "iir her son was stronF,
ttlpti I:aff.ection. She inflexiblyLarntd Member) feel greats
11,4 trier fot.kid the Hon. and ,and
to yield her
ikt,He[l by it'it Mother ; e Id act like her ; she wa
iisy 'la aed dice courtmartiai,
tar 4 is, charged by
proclamation, but the following
fe'w' would
was brought up to the
t.tt ~ "4 tent back to gaol. Thus you
Neod 14 th
have these fea-
th tr 4
it,' Bill—the Habeas,
be
to—courts-
otigi -ay h • prisoned in any place that may
t°ll'ittlalt
aNkr..-5 ailln-meetings arepfuntran end
;I'. G,,,t,t, UOiversally instituted;
not universal. Not-
15.thtt -,iean
toil that they are
.let not the Right
cao Yt lawy g the general
affirmation
Stet
144i°
44
teL
me
declaration in the first section,.
still :rye,- edti Will tell him, that a particular .
t•ve can-
ht
11,ti0,. thinish the force of a general affirma i
person
"' . he Lord Lieutenant, or any. person whom
ellwi, y et,o. • d to imprison any
..,
tlitqati tvith°Wer, is authorize
and ask, , effenees, and calls
venteenth section,
list, 'lto -!tit• eourtmartial. In these
them to be summon!)
eet,t, 4,e eight an
seventeenth
in
the i
t these ' h d ninth, several Acts of Par-
ss houNett referred to ; and, even
the f t t1,,,,4,t I aul now going to state may
coupled with
t 'art "qtful • this clause, be considered
0 he t
,ttntb , s but from
ofr. 'lel L , it fully appears, that an
be tried for any
any person ordered
filial
ttst„l' the Lord Lieutenant may ! from
tio taol 'ttersvil • d —(Read thetenthsec_
Bela, ti d sy, 1 • en commute •
stiletibe4.4 I have read the tenth. The.. tenth
el.i k ha tlla i . here cour , .
Med
tisarnit p aces w
a pro-
cot only within
','er the aitrits they are to be held tsmartial must be
be sent to
the tar ' tot,i'l,htit under the fourteenth section, who-
corn' °Niro ' Lieu; thinks proper may
it Mittett eti lis , enant
g of this say
to,triet--may be tried—and for offences
i ' NA . tt ~ ao, e.
ess co
I mplain
of.
49 here, i either before or after the pass-
-8' 0 111114 the' This is the sort of loosen
Mitsed ethee aeventeenth section, the only
been corn-
'hall n 641),,N,11'e nffence so charged, having
qu 'Hew ion
of th 4 114,,e ''t to the passing
the palsing
roan
,),:l.i. Ti, Committed committed subsequent
of thist Act, shall or
ro tolaw; and
and th ;ght h i theretote was ones postjac
4fteeta4 for 0 54innioned, 'after a district was proclaimed,.,__e
AIN, a •sed
41,t'hat took place six months before. The
rh
every
seetieuallot thalkteentb seeti,ins should be read it' Enna! Oro' House, I ask, what is the object oi those
theta
ofglatiti tet:i• these sections there is not a single. .
c-
n, ahrl tp;„,,tnaY uot be brought within
Or
,;" 'tetic, .s.s° hYI these courtsinartial. By the al n
the jurischx-
otitUtsnot . its....'; ' s
ingle'i individual, either in this
there
is
~,ivutteci 'ildiviZ..l , it may be suppos, d that their
le
and tried...Z(l4o:m tit
House upon whom it wou ,
thi' Art Y.e e04,4.4)---ia liable to be taken to Ireland,
Irelattd. In
$9 the,
till4attial; for there is not one word in
"Y 4l;nilrer of bending these wrrants t.o
taanth sections a similar ,power it

granted to courtsomartial to bring witnesses before them ;
and when they have them there, thy can try them for
what they please. Oh ! there is another feature which
I must not forget. It was for the first time de-
clared in the history of legislation except in the
instance of offences under the excise and
the revenue laws, that where a man was charged by an
indictment, he was not to be considered innocent till he
was proved guilty. I ask how it is such a change is now
contemplated? How is it that the first reformed Parlia-
ment can propose to take away this safeguard? Even the
Hirrection Act, or the Arms' Act, were not equal to
this. Under these Acts no man was to be convicted un-
less it could be proved that he had a guilty knowledge of
the possession of arms ; but under the present Act, all
that is necessary to prove is that a man has arms in his
house, and he must be convicted unless he can do that
which is most difficult to prove, that he was ignorant of
their being in his possession—so that were they hidden for
that purpose by an enemy, the probability is that the man
must be convicted.. As to signals also, this Act is most
remarkable—all signals by smoke are declared illegal. The
Bill indeed is as ludicrous as it is atrocious. It is as
great a compound of absurdity and atrocity as ever was
perpetrated by a Whig Government. What poor man
was the re whose chimney did not send up daily a signal of.
smoke, if he had anything to cook for his family's dinner ?
But here was the absurdity of the Act, that a party of
police may see the smoke rising from a poor man's cabin
on a tell, which they may fancy to be a signal, and three
months after will call on him to take his trial before a court.
martial, and call on him to disprove the fact that
the smoke is a signal, taking it for granted that
it is a signal, unless that fact can be disproved.
I hope the Reformers of England will look to
this Act. -You talk about confidence in the Go
vernment ; and you say that you will pass the
Act on account of your confidence ; hut I lope that you
were not aware of what this Act really is; and I hope
that now you are aware of it, you will feel that it is en
Act which ought not to pass this House. It is au Act
which places innocence in the situation of guilt—which
gives the Government the power of throwing us into
secret dungeons—which takes away all ability of re-
sistance, and suppresses the power of complaint. I fear
I weary the House in deecribiug the Bill, but I feel it to
be my duty to do so. And this is the composition to
which the Noble Lord opposite is about to lend his name
—this is the Act which is to have his sanction. I ask
you whether this Act is to be taken as a proof of the
Union between England and Ireland ? It is, indeed, just
such a union as some of the tyrants of old instituted be-
tween a dead body and a living man, though it not unfre •
(ineptly happ-ned that the patre•cency of the dead body
affected the life of the other. I beseech the Reformers of
England to consider this, and also to consider how it is
likely to affect England itself. Let but this Act once
take 'dace in Ireland, and let a successful Court manoeuvre
or intrigue throw the power of the State into the hands
of some of the present Administration, and of some who
do not belong to it, and with such an Act in operation in
Ireland, Schedule A will he revived, and sou will have
one hundred and five Members for Ireland ready to back
any Mini-try, however corrupt or despotic. Ministerial
machines might anon be put in motion, and you will have
just as good an unreformed Parliament as you had be-
fore. At all events, if you do not, it will not lie
from w int of power or inclination, but from want of
dexterity.—(Hear.) I ask on what evidence you are about
to pass this measure ? Such a Bill as this ought to be
grounded upon the most irrm fragahle, complete, and abso-
lute evidence of its necessity. It is not sufficient to talk
about confidence. We must not consent to see the Con-
etit ution abolished. without the atri test, most irresistible
evidence of necessity. This evidence cannot be obtained
without a painful, deliberate investigation and inquiry.
It is not sufficient to prey- there are crimes ; we all ad-
mit th,t crimes exist. It is not sufficient to say that
crones must be put down ; we all admit that climes must
be put down. But is it necessary, in order to do this, to
annihilate the Constitution.'—(Hear.) Every body ad-
mite tee necessity of putting dea' ermine; but, in order
to do this, must we put down the Conseitution?—(Hear,
hear.) I shall notice but very briefly the observations of
Hon. Gentlemen who have spoken on the other side dur-
ing the course of this debate. I shall refer to the speech
of the Noble Lord, the Member fir Devonshire, to the
speech of the Hon. and Gallant General, of the Hun.
and Gallant Naval Captain, of the Hon. and Learned
Baronet, of the Hon. and Learned Member for St. Al-
ban's—the Noble Lord, the Member for Nottingham, the
Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Right Hon. Secre-
tat), for Ireland. With regard to the Noble Lord, the
Member for Devonshire, the only argument that I could
collect from him in favour of this Bill, and the only reason
why lie would support it, was, because he was frienthy to
Ireland. It this be the case, all I can say, and I say it
with great sincerity, and unaffectedly, " May God pre-
serve us from our friends !"---(A laugh.) As to the Hun.
and Gallant General, he did not do much more than de-
scribe several conversations, which he had with the pea-
santry in Clare and the North of Ireland ; and be also
bole testimony to the hospit mlity with which he was re-
ceived. All I can do in return is to present my compli-
ments for the manner in which he has thought proper to
evince his gratitude. The Gallant Naval Officer stated,
that he had disported himself by hunting in the county of
Kilkenny, and he also spike in warm terms of the Irish
hospitality—l must say that I do not think he makes us a
very good return. He seems to have allowed his appre.
hension to prevail so far as to lead him to utter calumnies
against the people of Ireland.—(" No," from Captain
Berkeley.) I say, Yes.—(No.) I say, Yes—and I tell the
Gallant Captain I can prove it. It seems that from some
apprehension—l do not use the word in an offensive
sense—the Gellant Captain went about armed. He stated
that he followed their example.—(" No, no," from Cmpt.
Berkeley, " I did not.") I beg pardon of the Gallant
Captain. I certainly so understood him, but it appears
I am mistaken. The Hon. and Learned Baronet (Sir G.
Grey) favoured us with a dissertation upon agitation, and
his reasons for supporting the Bill, and, amongst other
things, he commented upon some observations of my Hon.
and Learned Friend, the Member for Tipperary. I think
the Hon. and Learned Baronet induces rue to become a moat
incurable Repealer—for when I find a gentleman of his
great talents, legislating in such utter ignorance of the state
of Ireland, I cannot but feel more strongly than ever the ne-
cessity for a domestic legislature. The history of agitation
which lie gave betrayed the most complete ignorance of
the subject. But what I was more particularly surprised
at was his ignorance on a subject more peculiarly con-
nected with his own profession. To a remark respecting
the trial of capital felonies by Special Commissions, he an-
swered as though it was said they should be tried by spe-
cial juries. It would cause much amusement in Ireland to
hear of capital felonies being tried by special juries.—
(Hear.) The Hon. and Learned Baronet had said that
Repeal of the Union was brought in as soon as the Reform
Bill came into this House in order to meet it. There
never was a greater mistake—there never was greater ig-
norance in point of fact. Repeal of the Union was agitated
in 1830, when the Tories were in power, and they issued
proclamations to put it down. It was agitated in 1831,
when the Whigs were in power, before they brought in
the Reform Bill, and they also issued proclamations against
it. It had been time subject of agitation from the year
1810 to the year 1817, and its postponement was pub-
licly avowed. Indeed, I myself gained an equality of civil
rights in Ireland. Instead of its being brought up to meet
the Reform Bill, it was, in point of fact, suspended by the
Reform Bill ; and I have little doubt that it would have
been totally given up when the Irish Reform Bill was
brought in, had that Bill been equal to the English Re-
form Bill—bad its provisions been framed in a spirit
of fairness and equality.—(Cheers from the Irish
Members.) So far, therefore, as the Honourable and
Learned Baronet is about to legislate on a supposition of the
accuracy of the facts which he stated, he is about to legis-
late under an erroneous impression. The Hon. Member
for St. Albans declared that his support of the Bill was
founded on the intimidation that prevailed in Ireland ;
and in proof of that intimidation, referred to the case of the
trial of the murderers of the Rev. Mr. Goring. I wish
very much that an inquiry could be instituted into time
trial of that case, as I am sure I could prove that no intim
midation did exist, and that a very exaggerated and erro-
neous impression has gone forth to the world on this sub.
jest. The murder of Mr. Goring took place about
ten years before the trial took place, and I assert, without
fear of contradiction, that his son-in•law was not a mate.
rial witness, and that he was not absent through intimi-
dation. What would have been the conduct of the Soli-
citor-General, or of those who attended to prosecute on
behalf of the Crown, if he had been a material witness;
more especially if threats were used to prevent
trial t
nthts atten-
dance b
tene-
dance ? Why they would have caused h
postponed, and have detained the prisoners, or at least
placed them under strict rule. The Hon. Gentleman ms
totally misinformed. Ile son-in-law was nut a material
evidence, three or four witnesses were produced. The
ease was a measuring cast ; the Judge expressed doubts;
the Jury gave the prisoners the benefit of the doubt, and
acquitted them, and nothing ever happened to any of the
witnesses who came forward to give evideece against
them.—(Hear, hear ) I have great respect for the talents
of the Hun. I.lleinber for St. Albans ; and when I
see a man like him legislating for Ireland under such li
ignorance of her real state, it adds another circum-
stance to strengthen the conviction of the necessity of re-

peal. I trust, however, that the mistake into which he
has been led will not be auffered to operate to the injury
of Leland, hut that be will review his opinion, and not
take part against Ireland, at least without previous inves-
tieation. As to the Noble Lord, the Member for Not-
tingham, who came forward with much of that diffidence
which is frequently to be found united with an excellent
character, and a mind not altogether unconscious of its
own powers, he certainly has made a very important
statement respecting the state of crime in the county of
Carlow. He said there had been 400 crimes in that
county within the last two months; but he did not take
into consideration that all the assaults which had hap-
pened at two contested elections, which were contesteif
with peculiar animosity, were included in that list ; and I
do not doubt that at least 250 cases of that description are
included in the 400.—(Hear, hear.) And what was the
proof which he brought forward to show that the Sheriff
could not obtain a sufficient number of Jurors through the
intimidation practised—that he was obliged to furnish
them with an escort? No ; but that he had raised the
fine on absence, from 201. to 501. I will not detain the
House by any lengthened allusion to the observations of
the Hon. and Learned Member for Leeds. He said he
had read my speech, and that he drew cert tin deductions
from it. I say the Hon. Gentlemen is mistaken—that lie
has not read my speech, or at least that he has not read it
in an authentic form. I will refer him to three papers
—the Resister, the Pilot, end the Freeman's Journal.
In these papers my speeches are generally correctly
given—not, perhaps, with the exact phrassolney, but
at least with sufficient accuracy of sense. The Govern-
ment in Ireland has taken one paper into its pay, and
established another for its own purposes. I do not blame
them for this, but I will mention one circumstance. One
of their reporters, no friend of mine—the man, indeed,
who gave information against me to the Marquis of
Anglesea—l did not exchange one word with him till I
met him at the Political Union—and he there declared
that he had never reported my speech in the manner in
which it "'as published, but that the editor of the paper
had altered it unknown to hint after it had been sent in,
and in the presence of the other reporters there he felt it
his duty to disclaim it.—(Hear.) If the Hon, and
Learned Member wishes to read my statements as to Ire-
land, let him look to the Edinburgh Review. He will
there find c ilumnies enough in relation to Ireland. There
never was a composition containing more falsehood. Let
him refer to one article in particular on the subject of
Elections in Ireland, and I will undertake to prove it to
be full of calumnious assertions and falsehoods on the po-
pular party in Ireland.—(Hear.) I shall dismiss much
of incidental observation and remark, and come at once
to the more immediate consideration of the measure before
the House. The first thing that is said of it is, that it
is so unconstitutional—so foreign from every principle
of that Constitution which has been so long our boast
—so utterly destructive of every principle of civil
libetty, as to find particular favour in the eyes of
its framer..—(Hear, hear, hear.) This, they say, con-
stitutes its great merit, as there is no danger of its ever
being brought into a precedent. Ridiculous assertion !
It is as a precedent that its greatest danger consists. The
courtssnartial have already firmed a precedent for it—and
it in turn will form a precedent for future invasions of the
Constitution Hereafter when any Minister brings forward
an unconstitutional measure, and when he shell be op-
posed by those who will call themselves Whigs, be will
refer to this teeasure with triumph, and will say—" You
gave five judges only—l give nine, and they must be
unanimous. I send my prisoners to the common gaols—
son to some private and secret dungeon." Anti when he
fells short of you in the slightest degree, instead of blushing
for his infraction of the Constitution, he will feel himse f
entitled to boast of his fiber day in bringing forward a
measure less arbitrary and I levoric than yours. Oh, hew
I fancy I heir the cheer which will ring from those
benches when he shall taunt the minority with this mea-
sure. This Bill goes to the very furthest limits of uncon-
s irutionality, and leaves a wide bound within which to
range,—(Hear.) I know that I am wearisome to the
House, and what is worse I have only begun.—(A laugh).
Yiiu have two things to establish the necessity of this Bill
as applied to predi-il agitition, and the necessity of coer-
cion as applied to political aeitation. In order to do this,
you must first pursue an investigation as to the causes of
predial agitation. No man could legislate for the removal
of this evil without perfectly understanding the cause. I
(lid expect the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), who
supported this measure, would have given us some states.
ma like dissertation on the causes of this agitation. It was
his duty te have done so. He did riot, however, think
proper to enter into this subject.—(Hear.) It was ad-
mitted by some Members, that tithes are one of the
causes. The Right Hon. Gentleman denied this ; but
the Noble Lord, the Member for Nottingham, who was
well acquainted with the state of Ireland, said that Ire-
land would never be tranquillized until the system of tithes
should be put an end to. the vestry cess and grand jury
ee-a, the rack-rents, and the conduct of the landlords,
also had borne their part. Now, if these are some of the
causes of predial aeitation, in what manner does this Act
provide a remedy? It gives more power into the hands of
the clergy, and do you think they will not use it? It
gives more power to the collectors of cess of various kinds,
arid gives more power to the landlords; it gives them more
dominion over their tenants; and the Right Hon. Baro-
net has himself spoken of a Parliament of landlords, and
referred to the improbability of landlords entering heartily
itito a reform of these abuses. But the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet himself has done much, no doubt unintentionally,
to increase the distress of Ireland—l mean by the change
of the currency.—(Several cheers.) I know that many
a family has been ruined by that change—a change which
has increased their rent and their burdens, but diminished
the value of their commodities, and driven them from
comfort to distress, and from distress to the commission
of these very crimes. I have often deliberated whether
it was not my duty to use my influence for the pur-
pose of driving the Government to a bank restriction,
and to a cheaper currency. I have not done so yet.—
(Oh ! and, Hear, hear.) But I am quite con-
vinced that much of the distress which exists can-
not possibly be alleviated without a cheaper cur-
rency.—(Hear, bear.) My Hon. Colleague has rather
unceremoniously introduced the name of the Rev. Mr.
Dwyer; that man is proved to be a persecutor and an ex-
tortioner. A poor widow obtained a decree against him
for exacting too much tithe ; she went with a bailiff to
enforce the decree, and point out the tithe, and he actually
took advantage of an Act passed for very different pur-
poses, summoned her before a bench of Magistrates, who
fined her 21. under the Wilful Trespass Act, though she
was merely seeking to enforce a legal decree. This is a
fact which is supported by a letter that I have from Mr.
Stantoe Lambert, late Member of this House for the
county of Galway, and a most respectable gentleman.—
(Hear.) It was the duty of Ministers to show, before
bringing forward a Bill for authorizing unconstitutional
measures, that all legal means of remedying the evils of
which they complained had been exhausted. It was also
their duty to show that there existed no other unconstitu-
tional means going beyond the law which they had not
exerted. On this ground, too, I shall be able to show
that there exists no necessity for having recourse to such
measures. If his Majesty's Ministers had applied for any
such measures, there is not a single man who would not
have been ready to support them in such measures. The
House would have voted them unanimously. Now some
such measures had been suggested by the Committee in
Queen's County ; and they must have known of their
existence and of their efficacy. This is why I ar-
raign them ; this is why 1 accuse them ; because they
knew that there existed effectual means, and because
they did not use those means which I can demon-
strate that they kr.ew they had ready ; for here is the
evidence before the Committee of last year. My accusa-
tion is, because they have not used the means which had
been tried before, and tried successfully. They have never
tried Special Commissions in Ireland in any instance in
which they have not been successful. They have tried
them also successfully in England. The report states,
that the Special Commission in Queen's County had been
eminently successful for the time. His Majesty's Mini-
sters ought not, therefore, to have hail recourse to such
steps as they now proposed, unless they had already tried,
without success, those means which have been found
suc-
cessful both in England and Ireland. If we are to
suffocated—if the liberty of Ireland is to be trampled
upon—if we are to be taunted as the protector° of crime
—let then the Reformers in the House require the Mini-
sters to show that they have tried ell the means which
have been suggested in the report ; for whose is this re-
port ? Though the Right Hon. Secretary, who was a
member of that Committee, did not attend (I also was
a member, and was able to attend only one day), the
Right Hon. Secretary must at least have read it. He had
the power of exercising his judgment with respect to it.
If he hid objected to any parts of the report, would Sir
Henry Parnell have made such a report without carefully
listening to his suggestions ? They tell this House that
the Queen's County was quieted by a Special Com-
mission, and give as their authority the evidence of
the Lord Chief Justice, which states that such has
always been the case in Irtiand, and that of Mr. Bat rington,
for seventeen years Croon solicitor on the Munster circuit,
the largest in li eland—one inure intelligent, more honour-
able, mote entitled to meilit in point of integrity than
whom does not exist among those whom I now address,
or one more entitled to the character of a gentleman, and
none his superior fur trustworthiness. I implore the

House to hear, before it proceeds, the testimony of this
man—that special commissions have been tried, and have
succeeded'. The Hon. and Learned Membir here men-
tioned the cases of Cork, Kerry, Limerick, and last of all
of Clare. With what face, he continued, could they pre-
tend that they had not already sufficient powers, when
with these powers, such as they were, they had succeeded
in quieting that county at a time when it was in a state
of actual rebellion—at a time when the peasantry were
actually in possession of the county, when they dug up
the potitoes, took possession of the tolls on every railroad
in the county, committed murder in the open day, and
were, in short, in military possession of the county. I wish
the Reformers in this House to weigh dispassionately the
evidence, and report upon this subject before they ven-
ture to give their sanction to the suspension of constitu-
tional law in Ireland. It is proved that special commis-
sions have produced their effect in England ; and in the
name of justicet—in the name of the Constitution (and
then they might sneers—in the name of liberty, I. t
them call on Ministers to retrace their steps, and tell
them they ought not to presume to ask for unconstitu-
tional powers, until they prove that there exist no
constitutional means adequate to the occasion. I differ
from the opinions of eery Honourable Friend the Mem-
ber for the University of Dublin with respect to the
Assizes. The Assizes have civil business to perform.
the Special Commissions have nothing to look to but the
object for which they were sent—rhe putting a stop to
the outrages in the disturbed districts. It has been tri •
umphantly shown that special commissions never were
unsuccessful. The Hon. and Learned Member proceeded
to read various extracts from the report and evidence on
the Queen's County, to show that they already possessed
adequate means for the suppression of disturbance. If a
case such as that which had been made out had been ad.
dressed to an impartial jury (I mean nothing offensive), I
should have been stopped in my evidence, and the jury would
have hurled the plaintiff out. But the Ministers took
care not to have recourse to these constitutional methods,
because they would then not have had it in their power
to treat the nation as they pleased. You have heard, by
their own confession, that they had these means; but they
have thought this Act preferable, because their doing so
would have destroyed the grounds which they had for
claiming such measures as the present, and would have
disturbed their progress to the authority and despotism of
this measure. Teat despotism and that authority which
they now claim would not have existed if they had first
had recourse to the constitutional expedient of special
commissions. I utterly deny that any evidence whatever
has been adduced to show the necessity of ulterior mea-
sures. The Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Secretary
(Mr. Stanley) have made, it is true, some particular
statements. They have mentioned a threatening notice
against Parson Dwyer, and I do not know how many
Parson Dwyers may be in that red box. The Right Hon.
Secretary has told us of a number of Lord Lieutenants
who have written to him on the disturbed state of their
respective portions of Ireland, and urging the adoption
of measures of coercion ; but he has not mentioned the
name of one of those Lieutenants; so that with respect
to us who are called upon to legislate according to their
evidence, their evidence is entirely unanimous. I will tell
you a little of the history of some of these illegal notices.
In the county of Wicklow, a number of these notices were
sent to ladies and their husb drids. Among others, one was
addiessed to the son of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland—he
would not call him one of the young Hannibals, but the
Vicar of Bray, for lie was the Vicar of Bray. He pose
screed something of his father's shrewdness, and observed.
I think I know that hand. He set to work, and traced
it to a Protestant, a poor Orangeman, who was soliciting
a place in the police. Thus the Rev. Mr. Plutiket served to
show a little of the nature of these notices. It always
happens, thad when the number of these notices are
numerous in any district—that diseict is censidtered dis-
turbed, and the number of the pot.e is in c nse quetice
increased. It is, therefore, the interest of all who are
desirous, and have any hopes of being so employed, to
make the number of such notices as great as possible. The
ground fer the adoption of these meaedires is Agrarian
crimes ; but I have stated, that doting the last twenty
years, special commissions have repeatedly put a stop to
that sort of disturbance. Tee Hon. and Learned Member
then noticed the remarks on the case of an assassinatioe, and
observed, that it was equally atrocious whether it had been
committed on account of an aged female, or on account of
tithes. I have thus (continued the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber) said enough to prove that the House ought to be sa-
tisfied that there existed a necessity for having a recourse
to unconstitutional measures, and should proceed only on
the evidence of the necessity. But now I will take up
the other side, and demonstrate that they were not ne-
cessary, on the evidence of Members on the other side
itself. I am sorry to be obliged by my duty, at this
late hour of the night, to trespass on the patience of the
House.—(Hear.) I will demonstrate, on their own
showing, that the passing of this Bill is not necessary.
First, the disturbance is merely local, and confined to par-
ticular districts. There is no disturbance in Ulster or in
even Munster, nor is it universal in Leinster. I deny
the existence of any in the county of Louth. There it
is admitted that there exists a deceitful tranquillity. In
Dublin county and in Dublin city there is no extraordi-
nary disturbance. Ia King's county, iu Kikenny, in
Longford, in Drogheda, and other counties, the people
are tranquil. In Meath several persons have been convicted
lately of assaulting the police, the persons who so assaulted
them being drunk at the time; when the chief of the
police observed, that as the people of Westmeath behaved
NO peaceably, he thought it would be best for the police
to forgive them. Only a small portion of Ireland is actu-
ally disturbed—only a population of about five hundred
thousand out of eight millions. And is that trifling
proportion of disturbers to afford sufficient reason for
outlawing all the rest?—(ll.ear, hear, hear.) I would
ask the Member for the Tower Hamlets, if the
Union between England and Ireland be really entire,
whether it would be equally just to extend the same mea-
sure to England and Wales on account of these partial
disturbances? I have to ask on what grounds it is stated
that witnesses have been intimidated? The Noble Lord
has stated that he has heard of no instance of injuring a
witness.

Lord ALTHORP (as we understood) denied that state-
ment, and observed, that he had referred to Queen's
County.
Mr. O'CONNELL—Witnesses have been threatened,
for they have a deep interest, es it is the invariable prac-
tice, in the case of such threats being used, to remove the
witness from the abode of wretchedness to a place where
lie can live in plenty. One instance bad been brought
forward by the Right Hon. Secretary, which occurred 19
years ago, of two witnesses, husband and wife, of the
name of Delain. The barony of Colinaugh was much
disturbed, and these came forward as witnesses on a Crown
prosecution. I defended the prisoners. The husband,
Delain, gave a very good, and a very consistent account
of what he wished the Jury to believe to have been the na-
ture of the transaction in question. But his wife, on
being subjected to a cross-examination, and not having
heard her husband's testimony, betrayed the whole plan,
although she perfectly agreed with her husband's evidence
on all those points which they had settled between them.
Baron George said, " Mr. O'Connell, here's a capital in.
dictment. You need not take up the time of the Court
with it, for no Jury could convict in such a case." What
was my astonishment when I was informed that the pri.
soners had, notwithstanding this, been condemned ? The
Whiteboy Act gives the power of trying an offence
of this nature either as a misdemeanor or a trans-
portable felony.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The same facts
had been laid as a midemeanor, and the four pri-
soners suffered the full severity upon this conviction.
Delatii and his wife returned to the country. They were
assassinated. The husband and wife were both assay.
sinated ; but the child, whom the mother had held as
a protection, was taken away and kindly treated. But
what reason does that affo:d for having recourse to any
unconstitutional methods? Eight men were executed
for that crime. (file innocent man was executed, who
was proved to have bad no more connexion with the
murder but that be had walked for a short distance along
with the murderers before the commission of the act.
He had served in the navy, and was returning home. He
left them to go to his house. If Juries commit these
mistakes with all their inclination to do justice, and
Judges anxious to assist the prisoner by every means in
their power, what can be expected from the tribunals
which it is now proposed to set up, consisting of five
military officers, of whom three are to decide the sen-
tence of the criminal, to transportation—to the horrible
passage by sea, and to the removal from their friends
and families? It was evident therefore that there was
a sufficient protection in the already existing laws for
the protection of the subject. Mr. Barrington, who had
directed his attention to the point for seventeen years,
asserts, in his evidence, that these crimes uniformly
arose from local causes. I have -now done with
the subject of witnesses. The next case to which I
have to allude is one from which I cannot be shaken. It
is that with respect to Juries. The assertion that jurors
had been injured for the purpose of intimidating others,
is most unfounded. Nothing could be a greater ca-
lumny. Tile crime which was alluded to was committed
SO years ago, and the party was no juror. It was on
account of his conduct under the Insurrection Act that
he had become obnoxious. Ii his conduct as a Juror had
been the objectionable part of his conduct, when acting in
that capacity at the special commission, the August pre-

ceding, the parties to whom he had become obnoxious ha,'
opportunities of effecting their purpose before the time of
the murder. As to the subject of the injury done to
jurors, we have heard a story of a horse belonging to one °I
them dying in a ditch ; and are these old women's tales—
these foolish stories, to be considered sufficient to cause the
suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, of the Trial by
Jury, and of Constitutional Liberty ? Am I in an Eng •
elish assembly? Can I believe that it is an English as
senibly who are willing to think, for one moment, of
doing away with constitutional liberty in Ireland ? Am I
not sure to stand triumphantly in its defence ? If it car
be believed that she can ever he enslaved, or that she will
ever crouch to any despot, let them send for the Dey nt
Algiers, who is disengaged. I thank the Member for
Leeds for the suggestion. I will give all up that I have
said, if it can be shown that I am incorrect in these as
sertions. Do you think that this forbearance with re•
spect to Jurors was accidental? Listen to the evidence
of Mr. Barrington, on the point of the discrimination
which the peasantry exercise in these matters. He dis-
tinctly states, that he knew no instance of hostility t,
Jurors on the part of the people. This is the evidence of a
man who, for 17 years, hail the best opportunities of Jude-
ing on the subject, and the business of whose life, during
that long period of it, had been to attend to these thing•.
At the same time his evidence had certainly proved
that persons acting under the Insurrection Act had cer-
tainly been attacked and suffered injury ; but there was
not the slightest hostility against jurors. English Re
formers, this is the evidence of a man in the confidence 0
his Majesty's Government. If he he not so, why do the y
not dismiss him? Why, because all Ireland would laugh
them to scorn. He is possessed of that honour and inte-
grity which is deserving of confidence. I do not sly so
because I boast of the honour of his friendship, hut because
he is known to me and to the public of Ireland in general
as an intelligent and upright man. Think, Reformers,
think for a moment of the extensive and atrocious mea-
sure, and see whether it be fitting that this should be the
first Act of the first session of the Reformed Parliament—
that Parliament which contains the men who struggled
through good report and through evil report—who strug-
gled against hope in the cause of freedom—is it fitting
that that Parliament should open with such a measure as
this ? It depends on the spirit of the patriarchs of Reform
to prevent the people of Ireland from being fettered by
Ministers, on the ground of foolish, false, and he would say
lying (if it were not too undignified) calumnies. Because
jurors dare not, it is said, do justice in consequence of in-
timidation, it is proposed to abolish trial by jury. Oh
tell them I shall never return to her unless a domestic
legislature be established. It has been argued against that
too, that a domestic Parliament would indeed restore the
absentees ; but they would never equal the generous and
noble-minded noblemen and gentlemen of England.
Here is the occasion to show their noble-mindedness
and generosity—here it is. I will not believe, I cannot
credit, that this will ever become law—that they will re-
fuse to yield to argument—that they will allow it to be
supposed that they have no inclination to redress the evils
of Ireland—that they will let injustice swelter at the
hearts of Irishmen. Think net that they are not intelli-
gent—that they are not a shrewd people. Think you they
will not see that the low possesses the means of redressing
wrongs or crimes committed by law, and that your msa-
sures are therefore uncalled for? Think you they will cot
remember that you have not had Special Commissions,
and therefore were not called upon to destroy the Consti-
tution ? Think you they will not recollect that they have
no right to pretend that jurors cannot act from intimida-
tion ? They cannot say that justice cannot procure con-
victions ; for the Attorney-General himself has stated.
that in 39 prosecutions which he had instituted he had
p•ocured 38 convictions. I defy them to a tow an in-
stance of failure in obtaining justice. As to witnesses, it
is known that sixty of those who had app -.red for the
Crown were fed and well-cloth-d in a barrack in Dublin,
one of whom, having state, teat he had gone into a shop
to purchase somethinz, declared, on his cross-examinatit n,
Vast he did not know who furnished him with the money.
The Carrickshau:h murders (and who con doubt that
these were murders?) were said to afford an instance of
jurors being intimidated. He had defended one of the
prisoners on that occasion. The matter was of so much
importance that be could not omit that opportunity
of mentioning the grounds on which he did so.
He defended him, not because he considered the act to
be murder, but because there was a doubt about his
identification.—(Hear, hear.) The first Crown wit-
ness did not identify him. In that case he could speak
from his own knowledge that no intimidation took place ;
and the Jury, who acquitted the man, consisted of seven
Protestants and five Catholics. The Hon. and Learned
Member then proceeded to state a number of other cases,
to show that the Juries had not been intimidated. It is
an old wife's dream. John Ryan was put upon his trial
on the sth July; 35 of the Jurymen were challenged b)
the Government. The trial came on ; a beggar-boy was
put forward, dressed not as a beggar-boy, but in such a
style that be looked like a little gentleman from Merion-
square. He was interrogated as to the nature of an oath,
and found to be so ignorant that he was put down. A
man named Ross was indicted ; he was proved to be a
kind- hearted man, and one quite incapable of committing
such an offence as that which was charged against him.
He was acquitted, though 132 Jurors bad been put by
by the Crown, 45 of whom were Protestant gentlemen.
Ross was again indicted, and again acquitted. Was an)
one of those an improper acquittal? Is there a gentleman
now present who will say that any one of them was?
There is not the least ground for saying that there has
been a failure of justice. You do not show that any of
the witnesses have been injured, nor any of the Jurors—
nor that there has been a failure of justice. Why, then, do
you claim these extraordinary powers? Instead of look-
ing to special commissions, which would quiet the
country, what have they been doing since August
last? What, but enforcing your new Tithe Act, go-
ing from parish to parish with horse, foot, and artillery,
to collect tithes, and turning the Lord Lieutenant of the
country into a Proctor-General. You say you have not
fabricated these insurrections, nor the evidence of them.
I believe you incapable of doing it; but if it was your in-
tention to fabricate evidence, you could not have acted
more completely for such a purpose than you have done.
You want to get up a case to put his Majesty's subjects in
Ireland at your disposal ; and what do you do ? You
avoid the means of putting down the disturbances, and at
the same time you stimulate us in what you know is our
most sensitive point. That is what you have done—
without the intention, perhaps, of exciting us—but seeing
what you have done, are you surprised at the result ?
You may well be surprised that it is not more than it is.
You have done your best to make it more. You have
done all that it is possible to do. I should like to know,
when you talk of these murders by the people, how many
of the people have been shot by the police in this tithe
campaign ; I know that the number is extraordinarily
great. It was great in Mayo. I should like to have the
accounts from Mayo. It is great in the Queen's County.
Many have been shot in Kilkenny—many in Waterford--
and in Cork multitudes. Four of the last verdicts I knew
of before I left Ireland were against police or marines for
wilful murder. To show the system of provocation with
regard to tithes, I will state the case of Wallstown.—
(Hear.) There is a statute of 7th Georg:, 111., c. 21,
by which the people were enabled to serve notices
on the etergyman that they would sever his tithes
by a particular day, in order that he might come
and draw them off—(Hear)—end that statute made it
necessary for them to leave the tithes on the land,
secured and protected as long as they left their own
crop on the ground. A trick was resorted to by the peo-
ple. They did preserve the tithes as long as their own
crop was on the ground ; but they availed themselves of
the absence of the clergyman ; they kept off his tithe proc-
tors, and having removed their own crops, they destroyed
the tithes. A proceeding of this sort was met by the 27th
George 111., which made it penal in any one to obstruct
the clergyman or his tithe proctor. The clergyman acting
on that statute, or without it—for what does he care for
statutes ?—had been in the habit of geing upon the land
to value the growing crops. That was an act of trespass;
any lawyer will say it is so. The clergyman had no right
there—he had no right to the tithes till they were severed.
Some tithe proctors who had done this were attacked by
the people as they were going to market. Major Fitzge-
rald, a physician, who had been turned into a stipendiary
magistrate, bearing that the people bad attacked Archdea-
con Cotton's men, applied to the Castle for advice about
calling out the military. The case was laid before the
Crown lawyers, and their opinion was, that the question
w was so
the
policedouttt fu
to
othat protecttheytheou valuators
uneottn
rs authorizeund r em-
ploythhiemnitroeutn..
stances I have here stated. This is the evidence of Mr.
on the 18th January, 1832. He stated that the thing oc-
curred in August, 1831. Notwithstanding that opinion
of the Crown lawyers, the Irish Government sent
horse, foot, and artillery.—(hear, hear.) Since August
last,ae while you have avoided special commissions, you
nave employedemployed the police and military, and at Walls-
town, no less than four persons were shot.
Are you surprised at insurrections after this? Let me be
answered on tht: and 1 shell be able to reply. I have
been of necessity longer than 1 anticipated in making these
observations ; and yet I have nut gout through a part of
the case which most interests myself, or I would do so,
if I could feel an interest stronger in what related to my-
self than in what concerned my country. 1 care not fOr

personal attacks. If I had not the consolation of know-
ng that my intentions toe pure an 1 di.int, rested, and
that I am anxious only for peace, good order, and freedom
—if I had not e comfort of my own feelings in this re-
pect—if my conscience did not approve, not of eve-v
xpression perhaps, but of my motives—if I did not feel
bat my motives were only those for the increase of human
irpiness and liberty, wherever the slave is oppressed or t e
ppressor can be found—if I had not these things to c,nsole
,nt-, I feel the attacks that have been mad, upon me ;
but having them, I care not for the taunts of those who
‘, See all things are clear
With fifteen hundred pounds a year,"

and who might see otherwise with a different income, or
if that income was taken away. But, Sir, the wrongs
of my country have been mixed up with attacks nit diel
Why not banish me for a year and a halt? I tell yoo
what—l will consent to it. You shall banish me—but
do not thus oppress my country.—(Hear, hear.) Whet is
this Reformed Parliament, the Representative of the great
arid generous people of England—whet is it doing? Dis-
,uise it as you will, you are legislating against a single
individual. I really pity you. You do this b cause my
name is made to rhyme with a line of a miserable ballad.
Oh it was excellent Wit-it was superabundant cause of
merriment.—(Hear.) You may delude yourselves with
his, but you will not delude the sensible people of Ire
land, of England. They will see that this atrocious
of Pains and Penalties is passe,/ agains- me. There ate
many men existing who think—l 3111 one who say—that
it you cannot do without such a measure. you ought to
nh-
dicate. If you cannot govern Ireland without it, it it
most necessary that you should abdicate. The advseetage
of England calls for your abdication. What will hero;?,-
of your national debt and its interest if you oppress us till
you drive us into a servile war? Do you think you can
preserve Ireland in the teeth of this injustice? You comet
for these measures—you do not tell us of what effsct they:
will be after you get them. I have shown you that toils:
ness may be produced by the special cetnmissions. It
advise you, it will be said I threaten—if I prophecy, I
shall be taunted with provoking what I prophecy: Sueh
is the miserable condition I am in that I cannot tell yeti
of your danger without having it said that I am creatiti.
that danger. I abandon giving you advice—l know what
is its value—but I avoid giving it. I will say nothing
inure of the consequences of this measure—sof what will be
its effect—for take notice you must, that it is not sufficient
far you to hare shown what you have in order• to put
down the Constitution. If the special commissions etti
to be at an end—if murder is still going on, still you are
not warranted in trampling on the Constitution ; you
must show that by doing it you can cure the evil.
You must not pass such a measure merely to gratify
your own idleness, to enable yourselves to sleep on ram
beds of down. You must show that what you propose
is a cure for the evils you have been talking of. You
aunt show it. The measures may produce temporaty
tranquillity, but it will be followed by greater rancour-es;
there will be greater cause for rancour. Now poverty
struggling to maintain a miserable existence—then both
judgment and reason will enter into the contest, and for-
tify the despair of distress. Labour has no certainty not
any reward. It does not get a bounty of 6 ;., no, nor `lido
Asday, out of lands producing U. an acre on green lands,
and sometimes 81. an acre for potaoie lands, and yet this
is all that the miserable wretch who culrivetes them has to
subsist on. These are the evils ; and then the tithes.
Did not one Noble Lord tell you, that unless you ahceished
tithes this measure would not be sufficient? There is not
an individual of more honour or honesty than the Noble
Lord, the Member fir Nottingham.—( Hear.) I know
teat he is opposed to opinions that I hold to b most true s
but he does it conscientiously—he is a man of high minds
He is a M amber, too, of the Government; and what
does he say?—That you must abolish tithes. The Right
Hon. Gentleman ooes not agree with those opinions; he
would flog not high but low. Toe Noble Lord tells bon,
th it till you change the distinction of tithes, till yet
tike them from a supernumerary and unnecessary clergys
you gain nothing.—(Hear, hear.) What will your
Bill do without this ? It will make the breach more
wide ; it will make men cry out for justice, and
mike the old exclaim, that manly vigour is gone, and
the country is no longer able to vindicate its rights. Do
not deal with us thus—for your own sake I would im-
press it on you—it is for your own benefit that I give this
advice. What were the grievances of America when she
left you ? You had not dared to trample on them as you
have trampled on us, yet you did enough to make them
separate themselves, you spurned their" petitions, you
t unted their messenger, Franklin. I will not venture to
compare myself with him. You accused him of being
the forger of a letter, which was as genuine as the heart
of the man was true. You sent him from your House
with insult ; and what was the result? Yet there was
no party in that country, as in Ireland, clinging to some
measure of egregious despotism, and supporting you in it,
with a view to ruin your character and to give them
strength. By whom, I ask you, will you execute this
measure ? By the Orange party ? By that Magistracy
which every Ministry has promised to reform and to cor-
rect? By that Magistracy whom the Right Hon. Gen.
tleman instructed Lord Manners to revise, and who would
have been reformed, but that by the influence of some
Member of the Government, the bad men were restored
ag tin to power ? This is the effect of the evidence of
General But ke. They are in fact the instruments named
in this Bill. They will be the agents, the hosts, the en-
tertainers, of those who are to execute this offspring of
the spirit of their party. Lord Cloncurry—what does he
say of them? He says he had known the debtor magis-
rate transport his creditor 1 There is the adtninistration
of justice in Ireland. He had not heard it—it was no vain
rumour—be bad known it ; he had known too of the ad-
mirer of female beauty transporting the father or the bro-
ther of the female. These are not the only instances of
abuses under the Insurrection Act. Are these the men
to whom you will again give such power ? Is that the
intention of this Reformed Parliament ? If you do not give
them the power, but suppress the Orange Lodges, as you
will suppress the Political Unions—if, in truth you act
impartially, Ireland will be against you to a man. You
must bring them to your bosoms, or this will be the con-
sequence. I know that others know it—one especially,
who, though he differs from me in opinion, I respect most
sincerely for his honesty of opinion and for his talents.
If you will not rule by them, they will not act with you.
--(Hear.) You may execute your measure, and what
will it produce? The tranquillity of the grave—a death-
like silence and a dreary repose; but not peace—not quiet
—not confidence. You may bury ashes, but they will
burn again. You may sow dragon's teeth—take care they
do not rise armed men.—( Hear, hear.) I say, that, in
the first place, you have not made out a sufficient case to
justify you in calling for this measure. In the second, you
have not shown that this is the proper remedy for the evils
of which you complain. In the third, you have given co.
thing like legal evidence for the measure. Fourth, you
have not shown that one witness or one juror has been
injured since the special commission in the Queen's
County. As to the danger to the witnesses, the county
of Clare was quieted by two special commissions. Wit-
nesses were examined before the Judges—where arc
those witnesses ? In thatched cottages in the very
district it-elf. One of them, on whose evidence five
men were convicted, lives in such a cottage in a dreary
part of the country.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He has re-
sided there ever since. A Catholic clergyman wrote to
me the fact, in order that I might state it to the Govern-
tuent, to let them know where the man was, and to per-
suade hint not to tempt his fate.—(Hear, hear.) He was
an informer ; on his evidence five men had been executed
on charges of murder. If any man can be supposed to be
in danger from giving evidence, that man is. If the pre-
caution to protect witnesses is not superfluous, protect
him. If it is, this measure is not wanted ; but because I
suggest the possibility that such precaution would be ad-
visable in his case, I am to be met with a taunt and a
laugh. The man has resided there for two years. I show
you that your witnesses are safe; that no juryman has
been injured; that Special Commissions have not been
resorted to; and having shown this, I say that I have
established the absence of the necessity for this measure.
I say that till you have tried others, you bare no right to
introduce this, and that this House ought not to adopt it
till then. I know it is said that if the powers thus given
are abused, the Ministers will be responsible to a Reform, d
Parliament. But who will complain here or elsewhere ?
You stop all complaint—you step even petitioning, and
that in the most efficacious way, and then you mock us
with scorn, and talk of responsibility. I now come to
another part of the subject. You say that this measure is
necessary against predial and political agitation. How do
you show the connection between them? Has there been
any direct allegation of their connection ? Is not the offence
already provided for with a punishment of transportation for
life ? If that is not enough, you have the general law of con-
spiracy to meet every case. When there were public meet-
ings, which you deemed improper at the end of last year.
you put them down by those Acts ; you prosecuted, and
you never failed of a conviction. But I deny, with the
most indignant scorn, that political agitation is in
You
n tohe
slightest degree connected with predial agi"nioni
cannot deny us inquiry on this point. Separate Cent_
naittee this measure into two Bills, and let us have an in-
quiry. Let us not be tried on scraps of newspapers, con..
tuning, one of them, at least, a gross falsehood—taut 0d —that Nvi,l,l,
Attributed to me the creating of Arbitration Courts, and
holding up to thehatred of the public those who would not
attend them. The fact is, that political agitation is cal.