The Sun.
London, England, 1832-04-17 00:00:00

GRAVESEND PIER BILL.

The Marquess of SALISBURY presented a petition
front shipowners, smack-owners, &c. of BlaL•kwall, Green-
wich, &c. rgainst the Gravesend Pier Bill, on the ground
that it would obstruct the navigation of the river.
Earl DARNLEY moved the second reading of the
Grave-end Pier Bill.

The Marquis of SALISBURY opposed it.
The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed to-morrow.
REFORM.

Lord DURHAM presented a petition from 15,000 of
the inhabitant householders of South and ti,rth Shields,
stating that in point of population, property, and tax-rates
they were entitled to a larger share of the elective franchise
than had been allowed them by the Reform Bill, and they
prayed for an extension aceordingly.
His LORDSHIP also presented a petition from the Mem-
bers of the Political Union of Bethnal Green, in favour of
the Reform Bill.

Lord KENYON, alluding to the petition from Shields,
suggested that the allegations of that and other petitions,
to the same effect, ought to be referred to a Committee.
The Marquess of CLEVELAND observed that the time
was approaching when a motion for a Committee might be
properly made. But he believed the facts stated in the
petition to be true.

Lord ELLENBOROCGII submitted to the Noble
Earl (Grey) whether the second reading of the Naval
Civil Appointments Regulation Bill ought not to be
postponed till after the recess, as the matter was of great
importance, and there hal been no time allowed for the
due consideration of the provisions of the Bill?
Earl GREY replied in a whisper across the table, but
we understood him to agree to the proposal, and also
state that, as a Noble Marquess (Salisbury) had given
notice that he intended, on the motion for the cotninittal
of the Reform Bill, to move an instruction to the Com-
mittee, and that as be wished to give the Noble Marquess
time to consider what the instructions should be, he
would propose that the recess, instead of being for a fort-
night from Thursday next, as he originally intended,
should be for a fortnight from Monday next; and he hoped
the Marquess would give timely previous notice of the
nature of his intended instructions.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH approved of the arrange-
ment, and said that the answer was what be expected
from the Noble Earl's candour. He begged leave also to
notice that the Naval Civil Department Regulation Bill
made no provision for the mode of performing the duties in
case a Lord High Admiral should be appointed.
NEWTOWNBARRY AFFRAY.

The Earl of WICKLOW rose with regret, pursuant to
the notice lie had given, because he was afraid Le might
be liable to the imputation of standing in the situation of
a public accuser, but he cool f assure their their Lord-
ships he stood forward in no such character. He might
al•o be liable to the imputation of wishing to advert to
the circumstances and situation of Ireland, and of taking
the opportunity of venting his political hostility against
the Government. He, however, disclaimed any such
motives, and he should studiously refrain from entering
into any circumstances connected with the situation of
Ire!and, not involved in the motion before their Lordships.
He was happy to see the Noble Marquess (Anglesea) pre-
sent; for that Noble Lord he professed much respect, and
believed that he only desired, by his system of Govern-
mont, to promote the happiness of the people and the wel-
fare of the country. While he was ready to do ample justice
to the motives of the Noble Marquess he could not ap-
prove of the system of Government lie had thought it his
duty to pursue. The Government to which the Noble
Marquess belonged had constantly recommended a con-
ciliation, and they had followed the system, and all
men ought to open their eyes to the consequences. From
one extreme they had fallen into another, and they had
produced all the evils under which the country was now
suffering. He had on former accasions tried, but in vain,
to get the Noble and Learned Lord (the Lord Chancellor
of Ireland) to enter into the circumstances of that country,
and having failed, he was compelled to bring forward the
present motion, which would oblige Noble Lords opposite
to give them that information for which the country was
panting. It was the opinion of a Noble Duke, and ac-
quiesced in by the Noble Earl at the bead of the Govern.
anent, that what the country wanted to insure its tranquil-
lity. was less a military force than an active and deter-
mined body of magistrates having the support of the
Government. He did not mean that the Government
should screen and protect the magistrates when they were
guilty of arbitrary acts, but that it should show them
some favour i❑ the execution of their arduous duties, and
not sacrifice them to gain popularity for every trifling
error in judgment.—(Hear.) If the case to which he
recant to call their Lordships' attention related only to the
individual, he should still think it worthy of consideration,
because that individual had no other tribunal to which he
' could appeal ; but the feelings of the individual in this case
were nothing in comparison to the interest of the whole
magistracy of the country, which was deeply involved in
it. The conduct of the Government, he verily believed,
had caused that want of energy which was observable in
the magistrates. He knew that the magistrates were pa-
ralysed by the fear of being delivered over by the Govern-
ment to the vengeance of the deinocratical party.—(Hear.)
On this subject he could confirm his own opinion, by
stating to their Lordships the evidence of the present Arch-
bishop of Dublin, who was promoted to his high station
by the present Ministry, and known to be of their party.
The Noble E al quoted part of the evidence given before
the tithe Committee, by the Archbishop, who stated that
be had heard of many magistrates who were afraid to
afford protection, and who were afraid to act in cases of
riot. He also state.' that cases had been mentioned to him
of the troops being afraid to act because of incurring the
legal penalties. They were crippled with fear. The Nubile
Earl then referred to the affair at Knocktopher, to which he
considered that of Newtownbarry owed its origin; and
stated that the conduct of Government at that time might
have led Captain Graham to act as he did. In the autumn
of 1830, instructions were sent to all the magistrates of
Ireland how to act in case of disturbance. He had received
one of these letters, and he would read the concluding
paragraph to the House. The Noble Earl accordingly,
read 'a short passage from Mr. Stauley's circular letter to the
magistrates, stating that his Excellency the Lord Lieute-
❑ant would not fail to Visit thcte magistrates with his
severest displeasure who failed to exert themselves, while
lie should duly appreciate and acknowledge the ser-
vicee of those who endeavoured to preserve the public
peace ; that was considered consolatory by the magistrates,
but it Was not considered sufficient by the Government.
Within another month or two another letter was sent by
the Secretary tor Ireland to the magistrates of the same
tendency, telling them that it was their duty to prevent, as
well as enppreee Tiote, and giving them instructions to

eall Ota the people for assistaned. Having siated these)
circumstances to show on what authority the magistrates
had acted, he should proceed to describe the parti•
-rulers of the case of Newtuwnbarry. The Noble Earl
accor tingly entered into a long description of the
whole of the circumstances of that case, which have
been repeatedly stated by both parties. He described
Captain Graham, as the senior magistrate, as
having been informed that the distraint for tithes was
to be resisted ; that the people had been summoned for
forty miles round ; that the most inflammatory placards
were issued ; and that he had only, in the proper execu-
tion of his duty, collected the police and the yeomanry
when he found he could get no millitary assistance
to repel these riotous proceedings. For his conduct he
had incurred the anger of Government, which must be
traced up to one of three causes. First, the Government
must have thought that calling out the yeomanry at all was
improper and unjustifiable; Second, that admitting that
it was proper in some cases to call out the yeomanry, it
was not proper to call them out in this case; or, Thirdly,
if it were proper to call them nut, yet the Magistrates
had not acted prudently and judiciously. To prove that
the magistrates were justified in calling out the yeomary,
the Noble Earl quoted part of the judge's charge at Wex-
ford, who stated, that the magistrates were authorized to
call them out as subjects, and that as yeomanry they had
no particular authority. If the magistrates had the sanc-
tion of such authority for their conduct, he contended
that, admitting they were to blame at all, it could only be
an error of judgment, which did not deserve any punish-
ment. Even if the Government thought otherwise, it ought
to have treated the offence with great lenity. The Noble
Earl also quotted a similar case which had occurred some
time before at Tarra-hill, when the magistrates who
had called out the yeomanry and prevented a riot, had re-
ceived the thanks of the Government. That was one of
the cases of the resistance to the law, which was spreading
in a most alarming manner. Another similar occurrence
took place at Ardrie, and the magistrates sent to Mr.
Stanley to know if the yeomanry should be called out.
The Noble Earl quoted the account of a conversation held
between Mr. Stanley and Captain Owen, the gentleman
deputed by the Magistrates to wait on that Right Hon.
Gentleman, who stated that Mr. Stanley asked why the
yeomanry were not called out; and that his impression
from the conversation was, that if the yeomanry were
called out, it would meet the approbation of Government.
The Noble Earl next referred to a letter from Mr. Stanley
to certain magistrates, dated September 18, 1831, in which
the Right Hon. Secretary referred to his circular letter of
instructions, recommended that it should be followed, and
pointed out the propriety of swearing in the yeomanry as
special constables, in order to insure their service, and
make them in that capacity more available for the suppres-
sion of illegal meetings. If Noble Lords thought the re-
commendation to swear in these men as special constables
gave them any advantage in argument, they were welcome
to it; for his part, he did not think the oath of the special
constable was any additional obligation for men by whom
the oath of allegiance had been already taken. He con-
tended that the magistrates were justified in what they had
done, both by the authority of the judges and the Govern-
ment. They had behaved with great prudence and die-
cretion—they
were justified in calling out the yeomanry,
and he thought they deserved the approbation of the Go-
vernment.--(Hear.) Similar conduct had previously re-
ceived its approbation, To show further what had been
the conduct of the magistrates, the Noble Earl also referred
to the trial at the assizes, and quoted the evidence of Mr.
Ralph, Mr. APClintock's agent, to show that the people
were extremely numerous and violent, and Captain Gra-
ham forbearing. The Noble Earl also quoted the evidence
of Dr. Hyde, who stated that 30,000 people were present,
who greeted the police with loud groans and opprobrious
language, and hurled showers of stones upon them as
large as paving-stones. One yeoman was wounded in the
heel by a slug. He quoted that particularly, because it
was said that the yeomanry were not assaulted before they
fired. The same witness also stated that another yeoman
was wounded in the heel before the yeomanry fired. He
knew that evidence was contradicted, but it was by persons
not worthy of credit. The words " fie, fie," used by Cap•
tai's Graham to warn the yeomanry, bad been interpreted
by some witness to be "fire, fire." He was sure, from
all the circumstances, that Captain Graham acted with the
greatest resolution, and the most perfect coolness and dis-
cretion. The judge at the trial had described the conduct
of the magistrates as prudent, moderate, and humane.
These gentlemen were acquitted by two grand jn-
ries ; and after all these investigations, with such testi-
monials to their character, he thought these gentlemen,
notwithstanding she anger of the Government, had reason
to be proud of their situation.—(Hear, hear.) Up to a
certain period, as he had stated, the Government had
acted well; it did not give way to clamour, but subse-
quently it had acted differently, and given way to an ex-
ternal influence. The demagogues had goaded on the
Government, and it had not been able to resist their
factious influence. In the month of August, the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland wrote, by the
Lord Lieutenant's order, a letter of censure to these ma-
gistrates. As might be supposed, those gentlemen
immediately sent in their resignation, as became
them. In accepting their resignation, Mr. Stanley
bad expressed the surprise of the Lord Lieutenant
that they should have regarded the former letter as such
a censure as justifying their resignation. Capt. Graham
did not resign, because he was the agent of a Noble Lord
in that part of die country, who, he regretted, was not
in his place, as the duty he was then performing would
have been then done by abler hands than his. Captain
Graham was soon afterwards withdrawn by the Govern-
ment from the Commission of the Peace. The Govern-
ment had expressed its surprise that the other Magistrates
had resigned ; Captain Graham they removed. But there
was no difference between his conduct and that of
the other magistrates. They had all co-operated to-
gether, and ought all to have been treated alike. Inde-
pendent of all these proceedings, vexatious as they were,
Captain Graham having applied to the Government,
through his solicitor, to learn if any other prosecution was
in progress, received a reply in the negative, but yet bills
were afterwards preferred against him before the Grand
Jury, and, like all the others, itnrnediately ignored. Tile
Noble Earl, after detailing some of the other circumstances
connected with the case of Captain Graham, concluded by
apologising to the House for having trespassed so long on
its attention, but expressed a hope that he had already
stated enough to warrant the production of the documents
which preceded the removal of Captain Graham from the
commission of the peaCe of the county of Wexford.
The Marquess of ANGLESEA concurred in the course
pursued by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and shared
with him the responsibility. The Noble Earl who had
inveighed so strongly against the removal of Captain Gra-
ham, should recollect that there was a great difference be-
tween placing a gentleman in the Commission of the
Peace, and removing him after he had been appointed—
Captain Graham had not been dismissed. He had been
merely removed from the magistracy by not being included
in the reappointments ; and he (Lord Anglesea) appre-
hended that the conduct he pursued while in the capacity
of a magistrate fully justified the Government in omitting
his name. Captain Graham bad no power to call out the
yeomanry on such an occasion, nor indeed on any occasion
in such a manner, except in case of invasion, or well•cle-
fitied insurrection. Captain Graham had a right to call on
the yeomanry as individuals, to assist the civil power,
hut he had no right to call on them as an organised power
in the manner he had dune. There could be no ques-
tion that Captain Graham had acted most indiscreetly
in calling out the Yeomanry, and the more so, as they were
known to be connected with the Orangemen of the county.
If troops were nece-eary, too, for the preservation of the
public peace, there was a garrison of the King's troops at
Wexford, which might have been more safely employed
on such an occasion. He (Lord Anglesea) did not mean
to cast any undue reflection on the inefficiency of the yeo-
manry corps. He believed they were, as a body, men to
be trusted in the most trying service; that in the event of
foreign invasion, or of anything which would call for their
services from without, they would prove loyal, zealous, and
indefatigable, and prove themselves worthy of their
country's gratitude ; but he doubted much (and he wished
some of them were present to hear )aim), he doubted much
the propriety of employing them tinder circumstanceswhere their pas,ions were excited, and when that excite-
ment was increased still more by hearing it frequently
stated in that House and elsewhere, that the Government
of the country were hostile to them as a body. He
(Lord Anglesea) would not enter at that moment into the
question, of whether Captain Graham had or had not
ordered the yeomanry to fire; but their Lordships would
see how difficult it was fur a body called out in such a
manner, and under such a state of excitement, to dis-
tinguish between the words "fire" and "fie;" and they
would also recollect, that Captain Graham had made uo
exertions to 'stop the yeomanry when they did fire; and
that many of them absconded after the events of the day.
The Noble Earl had alluded to a letter of thanks to a
yeomanry corps, on a similar occasion.
The Earl of WICKLOW—Yes. To a letter addressed
by .oolonel Grossett, in 1830, to Captain Feltus ; in
which he, by order of the Government, thanks the yeo-
manry fur their services in the county of Cavan, and ex-
presses his regret that there was no fund from which the
men could be remunerated for their services. But after
that, Captain Feltus had also been dismissed from the
commission of the peace.—(Hear.)
The Merqueet of ANGLESEA was uuderetood to dopy

the resemblance between that case and the affair of New -
townharry. Wherever military force had been demanded,
it had been given ; but the fact was, that even where
complaints of inefficiency had been made, no such request
had been proffered to the Governtnent; and he ;night,
perhaps, be here permitted to observe, that in his opinion
the Noble Marquess (Westmeath, we believe) did not take
a course likely to promote tranquillity, by writing angry
letters to factious and ungrateful agitators, for the pur-
pose of vilifying the Government. The answer of one of
the witnesses at a late Assize in Ireland was worth re-
peating to their Lordships, as showing the feeling of the
people of Ireland. The witness, who was a farmer, was
asked if he and his son had looked on at these outrages,
and had made no attempt to repress them ? to which the
answer was, " Why, if you who call yourselves gentlemen,
and the magistrates of the county were to come forward
and call upon us to assist you, instead of skulking out of
the country in the very hour of danger, this business
would soon be at end."—(Hear.)
The Marquess of WESTMEATH begged to say, that
he was in nowise actuated by any hostility towards the
Noble Marquess, although the Noble Marquess seemed to
think that he was. The address to which the Noble
Marquess had alluded was not altogether his (the Mar-
quess of Westmeath's) ; for, although he had written it,
it had been submitted to a committee of the magistrates,
and adopted by them with very little alteration.—(Hear.)
As to his bringing forward the subject during the absence
of the Noble Marquess, he certainly had been asked to
postpone the question by the Noble and Learned Lord
(Plunket), but this he had declined, on the ground that
the second reading of the Reform Bill was now at hand,
and no one knew what might take place on that, or whe-
ther he should be able to find an opportunity subsequently
of attending to the matter ; besides which, on general
grounds, be felt that the acts of Government were always
open to discussion, and that any Member of Parliament
bad a right to advert to them whenever he pleased.—
( flear, hear.) He was ready, however, to say that the
Noble Marquess, whenever he had been applied to, had
always shown his readiness to send the King's troops
where necessary; but he (the Marquess of Westmeath)
for one objected to seeing the troops marched back ward
and forward, and exposed to the comments of the inhabi-
tants, who were cunning enough to know just how far
they might go in provocation without incurring any risk.
It would he much better, said the Noble Marquess (An-
elesea) if the people would stay at home and mind their
duty. He (the Marquess of Westmeath) wished to God
that he was at home—(a laugh)—but he was here, and no
man could be in two places at once.—(A laugh.)
The Earl RODEN thought that the charge of injustice
on the part of the Government was fully made out ; and
he had a ri,,ht to say eo, because he had heard no anewer
given to the statement of the Noble Earl who had intro-
duced this subject. He agreed with the Noble Marquess
( Anglesea) that Captain Graham had been turned out of
the Commission of the Peace, because he bad called out
the yeomary, which, according to the Noble Marquess,
was an illegal act. If this were so, it was certainly a little
extraordinary that Mr. Stanley had written a letter to
Mr. Moore, a gentleman of the county of Wicklow, in
which he stated that he would certainly be justified in
calling out the loyal yeomanry.—(Hear, hear.) Was not
this a strange contradiction between the Lord Lieutenant
and the Chief Secretary of Ireland ?—a contradiction
which he must leave that Nobleman and Right Hon. Gen-
tleman to reconcile between themselves. He meant to
contend that Captai❑ Graham's dismissal had nothing to
do with his conduct at Newtownbarry, but had taken
place in obedience to the dictates of the demagogues of
Dublin. Under these circumstances, every Protestant
gentleman in Ireland felt that Captain Graham's case was
their case; and they therefore felt that his dismissal was a
personal insult to themselves.—(Hear, hear.) The ob-
ject of the present Government seemed to be to put down
Protestantism in Ireland ; and he thought that be had a
right to sty so, both from the language of Mr. Stanley,
and from the difference between the English and Irish Re-
form Bills; the children of English Freemen preserving
their franchise according to the former, and the children
of Irish freemen losing theirs according to the latter. He
had already said that the Government was under the die.
tation of the demagogues of Dublin ; and that, he con-
tended, was proved by Mr. O'Connell nominating at a
public meeting in Dublin a gentlema❑ to the Sligo Com-
mission of the Peace, who possessed little or no property
in that county; and within a very few days after, it was
a most remaricable fact, that that nomination had been
confirmed by the Government.—(Hear, hear.)
The Marquess of ANGLESEA, in explanation, denied
that he had ever thrown any imputations on the Magis-
tracy of Ireland; and in order to show that the Irish Go-
vernment had not been lax in the discharge of their duty,
read a list of the persons recently tried in Ireland, enume-
rating those of the convicted who had been sentenced to
transportation, and those who had been left for execution.

The Marquess of CLANRICARDE disclaimed any in-
tention, in what he was about to say, to throw any impu-
tation on the character of Captain Graham, who, on the
contrary, was, he believed, a very honourable man ; but
he must defend the conduct of the Government of Ireland
in dismissing him. The Noble Earl had spoken of the oc-
currence in question as a trifling matter. But could it be
called a trifling matter when two or three and twenty people
were killed? Had Captain Graham not been dismissed
from the magistracy, Government would have abandoned
their duty, and would have brought the law into hatred
and contempt. Adverting to the various associations in
Ireland, he maintained that of all the societies in that
country not directly illegal, the Orange ledges were the
most injurious. Allusion had been made to the evils oc-
casioned in Ireland by demagogues. Those evils were
doubtless.great ; but after balancing the evils which resulted
from demagogues and the evils which resulted from the
Orange Lodges, he should certainly prefer the demagogues.
The Marquess of WESTMEATH explained. •
The Earl of WINCHILSEA denied that any case had
been made out against Captain Graham and the other
magistrates of having acted injudiciously. It had been
said that the yeomanry ought not to be resorted to, except
in case of invasion or of well-defined insurrection. As a
proof that that was not the case, the assistance of the yeo-
manry whom he had the honour to command in the county
of Kent, had, only a few weeks ago, been required by the
magistrates for the protection of property. In the instance
in question, Captain Graham was complimented by the
judge before whom the case was tried, for the discretion,
humanity, and kindness with which he had acted. As to
the Orange lodges, notwithstanding the attack made upon
them by the Noble Marquess who had last spoken, he
(Lord Winchilsea) was proud to say that he had enrolled
his name rmong them. Their principles were the main-
tenanc • of the laws of the country, the succession to the
Crown, and the Protestant
Lord TEMI'LEMORE stated that the sole reason
which had induced the Lord Lieutenant of the county of
Wexford, whose opinion as to the conduct of Captain
Graham was as strong as his own, not to omit his name
in the next commission was because, as the case was going
to the assizes, such a step might have the appearance of
prejudging it.
The Earl of ELDON contended that the statement of
the Noble 3larqueis (Anglesea) was not agreeable to law.
Lord CLONCURRY said the particular cirtumatances
of the case had not been explicity stated to their Lord-
ships. This was a general question, relating to the con-
duct of all magistrates. It appeared by the evidence on
the coroner's inquest, published by the House of Com-
mons, that the tithe was not due. The people who lost
their lives by the imprudence of Captain Graham said
they would leave the question in dispute to two country
gentlemen, the sons of clergyman. Mr. M'Clintock was
ready to leave it to two lawyers. The Clergyman was
willing, also, to consent to having the Composition Act,
if the people would make him an advance to pay his tithe
proctor. They did pay him in advance, and afterwards
the clergyman wanted them to continue to pay in advance.
This only part of them agreed to. The point in dispute
was whether what they had paid in advance should be set
down to their credit or not. Then came a magistrate,
who issued his orders as a magistrate to himself as a yeo-
mon, and he went forth as a tithe proctor, driver, and
yeoman, to execute the orders he gave as a magistrate.—
(Hear, hear.) He admitted that the laws were not re-
spected in Ireland. but the reason was, that the gentry
were guilty of breaches of the law. They were the first to
break them. It was the duty of magistrates to call out the
yeomanry and military in certain cases, but the magistrates
ought never to leave them to themselves. Much of the
evil of Irelaud arose from the destitution and want of ern.
ployment of the people ; only find them employment, and
double the population, and the people of Ireland would be
a blessing to the empire. But certainly there could be no
peace in that country while a magistrate could go out and
shoot people for something like amusement.—(Hear.)
Captain Graham :ought, in his opinion, to have been re•
moved the instant the actwas comrnitted which had given
rise to the debate.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ELDON admitted that the people could
Ye°;liey, nanrtYve but they would have been
liable
b e
to called
bein outdit re not to come forth when
called
o n
h a
that
subjects,if
thefurther,udges of England were right that the
t,
character of a soldier did not annihilate the duties of a
subject, the magistrates were authorised to call the mili-
tary out and the yeomanry out, as subjects, to preserve
the peace.—(Hear, hear.)
The Marquess of WESTMEATH explained, that he
had stria that to recommend use mogistiatto to go out at

mient to maim the poet, II sa dicknlt causure, of
a mere farce.

Viscount MELBOURNE warned their Lordships
against encouraging such motions as the present, which
would trespass on the prerogatives of the Crows, in
which was vested the power of appointing magistrates.
The motion was most inconvenient, and to persevere in such
motions would give into the hands of Parliament that
power which was now vested in the Crown. The Lord
Chancellor might not always be able to state the reasons
why he had removed a magistrate from the Commission.
He warned their Lordships, therefore, not to consent to
such motions as this, which would lead to most incon-
venient interference with the prerogative. With respect
to this particular case, Captain Graham had been wanting
in prudence, discretion, and moderation. In the first case,
he called out the yeomanry, being all Protestants, to
act among a population of Catholics. Next, they were
called out by the person who commanded them, and on a
question of a doubtful and difficult nature—a question
of tithes. He might and ought to have called out
the military. He was imprudent also in ordering the
sale on a fair-day. This was sufficient reason for net re-in-
serting his name in the Commission of the Peace when it
was renewed, which was very different from taking his
name out of the Commission while the Commission was
yet existing. As to the opinions of the judge, quoted by
the Noble Earl (Wicklow), he thought they were of no
authority, except on a point of law ; and in his political opi.
nion he did not concur with the judge. At the same time
the judge had only stated, if the witnesses for the defend-
ant spoke true, the conduct of Captain Graham was praise-
worthy. The other cases quoted by the Noble E ,r 1
(Wicklow) did not bear on the point; because the Noble
Earl had not stated what were the circumstances of these
other cases; and unless these circumstances were stated,
no correct opinion could be formed. He admitted that the
description given of the affray at Newtownbarry, by the
Noble Earl, was correct; but he must say, that the
whole of the evil at Newtownbarry was caused by the yeo-
manry. The firing was begun by the yeomanry--(No,
no)—and continued much longer than it ought to be,
and that it would be, if they had been military. He
was apprehensive - that there must be some mistake
in the assertion that Captain Graham was informed, on
an application to the Attorney-General, that no further
proceedings should be taken against him. The Attorney-
General could not have made such a promise, because he
could not tell what additional evidence might be brought
to light. A second prosecution might be the result of
such evidence, and showed no particular asperity on the
part of the prosecutor. With respect to the motion, some
of the papers moved for were already published : the re-
port made by Mr. Green was intended solely for the Lord
Lieutenant, and he hoped that the Noble Earl would not
press for that document.

- The Earl of WICKLOW replied, and having restated
his objections to the course pursued with respect to Cap-
tain Graham, concluded by declaring, that after what was
stated by the Noble Viscount (Melbourne), be should not
press his motion to a division.

_
The motion was then put and negatived, and the
House adjourned at Half-past Eleven.

COURT CIRCULAR.

The Duchess of Gloucester, accompanied by the Prin.
cm Sophia, took an airing in a carriage yesterday afternoon
in the Parks. The Duke of Sussex visited the Royal
Duchess on Sunday evening.

A deputation of the South Australian Land Company,
among whom were Colonel Torrens, M.P., Mr. Whitmore,
M.P., Mr. D. Browne, M.P., Mr. J. S. Lumley, M.P.,
Mr. S. Mackenzie, M.P., Major Bacon, Mr. Heathfield,
and Mr. Strickland, had a long conference with Viscount
Goderich, at the Colonial-office yesterday.
Viscount Granville, Viscount Althorp, and the Lord
Mayor of London, bad interviews with Earl Grey yester.
day, at the Treasury.
The Baron de Wessenburg, the Austrian Minister, on a
special mission, and the Austrian Charge d'Affaires, visited
Viscount Palmerston on Tuesday, at the Foreign-office.
The Earl of Mulgrave, the Governor of Jamaica, trans-
acted busine•s at the Colonial-office yesterday.
Count Mastuchevitz, the Russian Minister, on a special
mission, visited Prince Lieven yesterday, at Ashburnham
Home.

PROTEST AGAINST THE SECOND
READING OF THE REFORNI BILL, ENGLAND.

DISSENTIENT,

1. Because in providing for the correction of abuses in
the election of members to serve in the Commons House of
Parliament, we are bound, above all things, t,) bear in
mind that the Government of this country is, what from
the earliest period of our history it has ever been, a Mo-
narchy; that this Monarchy, limited by the laws and cus-
toms of the realm, and by the necessity imposed on the
Sovereign of having constant recourse to the advice and
aid of Parliament, is the form of Government best adapted
to the habits, wants, and wishes of the people, and conse-
quently that no changes, however specious, can be worthy
of adoption which would either strike at the principles of
the Monarchy itself, or would leave the Sovereign without
the power of performing the high duties required from
him, without the free and independent exercise of his law-
ful prerogatives in guarding the general interests of the
State, in upholding its ancient institutions, and affording
due protection to the rights, liberties, property, and lives
of all his subjects. We feel it, therefore, to be the duty of
Parliament, more especially of this House, to refuse to
consign the country to so vast an untried change as is em-
bodied in the present Bill—a change, of which it has been
justly said by one of the most distinguished advocates for
the second reading, that it is in truth " a new form of
Government of which no one has ever pronounced that it
would be practicable, and which, if practicable, would be
perniciou.."

2. Because, admitting it to be expedient to correct
abuses which may have grown up under the present sys-
tem of Parliamentary election, and to extend to large po-
pulous and wealthy towns the privilege of returning Mem-
bers to Parliament, we are bound to bear in mind, that it
bas been also admitted by the authors of the Bill, that,
notwithstanding any abuses and any deficiences, " the
House of Commons, as at present constituted, is above
all other institutions, of all other countries in the world,
the institution best calculated for the general protection of
the subject."

ocmeApaltpa rep avowed 3. Because by this Bill, that scrupulous regard to tie
sacredness of chartered rights and vested interests, which
has always hitherto been deemed part of the essential
policy of the British Constitution, and a fundamental
principle of British justice, is now, for the first time,
utterly abandoned. The most ancient charters and the
most valued interests are treated with a reckless indiffe-
rence, which, whilst it is unnecessary to the attainment of
the proposed objects, the correction of abuses, and the
improvement of the existing system, shocks every feeling
of justice, and cannot fail to be made a precedent for still
more fatal violations of those principles in future.
4. Because, in contemplating the violence done by this
Bill to the great principle of prescription, we cannot dis-
guise from ourselves the dangers which must arise to the
most venerable of our institutions, which mainly rest on
that principle ; above all, to the highest of all, to that one
on which all others depend.
5. Because, even if the principles of the Bill were con-
sistent with the stability of the Monarchy, and with the
on
safety of our most valued institutions, yet the provisions
by which
mostiat sle;;;Ikr
t anomalous u
s ton unjust in
in
carry
inthose
theirthm character,e
e principless le s,
ppartial
intort
illia l
in
adapted effect,
their
to
are
theirr
for
the :
ted
p
onderating influence in the election of the House
coaon, we anti
purpose, and still more to the extensive Ana
interests of this mighty empire,
tieenat , of
otfh
giving
i greatving
to commercial
it
an
increase
of
representation com-
of Commous is conferred upon the lowest class of inhabi-
tants in towns, thus virtually closing the doors of the
House of Commons to the vast monied and colonial inte-
rests, and leaving but few opportunities of admission to the
idi
The landed interest, notwithstanding the professed in-
oninensurate with that given to the great towns, is left ex-
posed, even in the elections for counties, to the influence of
the trading
and manufacturing classes of the very places
which are themselves to return Members to Parliament,--
an influence so great as must leave in many instances the
representation of counties and divisions of counties, in the
power of voters from the towns.
. The populous suburbs of the metropolis have been sub-
jected to the same innovating spirit which marks the
gelation of this Bill in every other particular. Though
it is manifest that this vast district, being connected in
interests with the metropolis itself, and being the seat of
Government and of Parliament, must command attention
whether immediately represented or not, and equally
manifest that the only real danger must be, lest the in-
fluence of the popular voice of the metropolis would ise
too powerful ; yet it has been thought fit to aggravate this
danger in an incalculable degree by creating new districts
for representation, and virtually consigning the elections
to universal suffrage, thus insuring a perpetual recurrence
of popular excitement in a quarter where, above all others,
it is most to be deprecated, as injurious to the best interest
of the industrious orders of the people, dangerous to the
public peace, and hardly compatible with the free and co-
dependent exercise of the high functions of Parliament
itself.

Of because the exorbitant increase of the derpociAtiE

LONDON,
TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 17, 1832.

The Earl of WICKLOW last night brought
forward his promised motion in the House of
Lords, for papers relating to the dismissal of
Captain GRAHAM (who, our readers will re-
collect, was the officer in command during
the Newtownbarry affair) from the Commis-
51°n of the Peace in Ireland. After a very
lengthy discussion, not only on the subject
of the Newtownbarry transactions, but also on the
general position of affairs in Ireland, the motion
Was negatived without a division. Without en-
tering into the merits of a question on which
the public mind is already made up, we shall
only observe, that a very strong case having been
proved against Captain GRAHAM by the Go-
vernment, he was very properly not re-appointed
---for it amounted only to that, and was conse-
quently not a dismissal.

In the Commons, Lord STORMONT brought
forward the motion of which he had given no-
tice, respecting a breach of privilege in the
Publication of a letter and of a placard, at
Sunderland, on the subject of the proceed-
ings of the Committee upon the Sunder-
land Wet Docks Bill. Mr. HODGSON having
explained that the letter was not written with
a view to publication, the matter was ordered to
be taken into further consideration on Monday,
the 7th May. Notice was afterwards given by
Lord ALTDORP, that on Wednesday next he
in tended to move the adjournment of the House
till Monday the 7th of May, and to move the
consideration of the Scotch Reform Bill on
Wednesday the 9th May. Mr. DIXON having
complained of the seizure of British ships
by the Brazilian Government in 1826-7,
for which no compensation had been
given, Lord PALMERSTON allowed that
the transactions in question were against
every principle of national law, but would not
consent to the production of papers on the sub-
ject at present, as matters were in a course of
prompt and speedy settlement. Mr. STANLEY
moved the third reading of the Tithes (Ireland)
Bill, which, after some discussion, was carried
by a majority of fifty-two to seven. The Bill
was then read a third time and passed.

The Protest against the second reading of
the Reform Bill, which bears the signature of
the Duke of WELLINGTON, is one of the most
grotesque, suicidal productions we ever read, or
attempted to understand. His Grace objects to
the Ministerial measure, for the very same reason
that the Reformers advocate it. He is dis-
sentient, " because in providing for the correction
of abuses in the election of Members to serve
in the Commons House of Parliament, we are
bound, above all things, to bear in mind that
the Government of this country is, what from
the earliest period of our history it has ever been,
a Monarchy ; that this Monarchy, limited by
the laws and customs of the realm, and by
the
necessity imposed on the Sovereign of
Paving constant recourse to the advice and aid of
arliament, is the form of Government best adapted
° the habits, wants and wishes of the people,
ci?el e"sequently that no changes, however spe-
eic;' Can of be worthy adoption which would
itoll"ever strike at the principles of the Monarchy
the. or would leave the Sovereign without
Pot
q 4. of performing the high duties re-
n?"cei'l ,fronz him, without the free and inde-
rivareci4,'ln exercise of his lawful prerogatives in
uphold ihg the general interests of the State, in
due prog its ancient institutions, and affording
and lives eetlOn to the rights, liberties, property,
nf all his subjects." His Grace, though
a great w •
or he Ivo:tor, is
,clearly but a small logician,
yeeti d scarcely venture to put forth such
s°trjonol°‘:l3 as these, not one of which but tells
Whvw''
It a,gainst hi; own view of the question.
Is Precisely because they desire to see

the cc free and independent exercise of the So.
vereign's lawful prerogative, in guarding the '
general interests of the State," restored, that the
reformers are so earnest in the support of the
Nlinisterial Bill ! As at present constituted
the Monarchy is little better than a name—
shadow. It is an oligarchy that rules every thing
—an oligarchy unknown, even abhorrent to, the
principle of the Constitution, but which yet, by
the aid of fraud, and menace, and corruption,
carries all before it. The boroughmongers are,
indeed, King, Lords, and Commons. The public
purse is theirs, and theirs only ; the public taxes
are their perquisites ; the army, the navy, the
colonies, and more especially the church, are
the Charitable Asylums—the foundling hospi-
tals, for the decayed and destitute Members of
their fraternity. Does a young Lordling evince
symptoms of more than average aristocratic sto-

lidity, he is forthwith thrust into some snug
rectory or golden prebend or deanery, whence,
as a matter of course, in the fulness of time,
he is elevated to a bishopric ! Is the needy
fourth cousin of my Lord so wedded to the dis-
sipations of society as to threaten much pecu-
niary inconvenience to his titled relation, his
unwelcome claims are got rid of by a colo-
nelcy in the army, or a lucrative post in the
colonies ! Has the SOVEREIGN any control
over these appointments ? Not the slightest.
Has he the power of withholding them, if he
thinks them injurious to the public interest? Not
the slightest. The Constitution says he has,
the boroughmongers say he has not, and these
last are right, for they have proved it by their
conduct during the last fifty years.
Adopting then the Duke of WELLINGTON'S
argument, we say that it tells against himself; that
it is all but decisive of the necessity, the stern,im-
perious, inexorable necessity of Reform. It is by
supporting, not opposing, the Ministerial Bill, that
the SOVEREIGN'S and the people's emancipation
must be worked out. This great sanatory measure
will restore the old equilibrium of the Constitu-
tion. It will reduce the theory of King, Lords,
and Commons, to practice, instead of consigning
over the attributes of all three to the borough-
mongers. As for its giving undue power to
what his Grace is pleased sneeringly to call the
" democracy," it will do no such thing. It will, in-
deed deprive the Aristocracy of all that they ought
not to possess, but it will still leave them in the
full and perfect exercise of their legitimate rights.
The Reform Bill is nothing more than an act of
justice to the three Powers of the State, awarded

,hem in strict accordance with the principles of

the Constitution. No one party gains exclusively,
but all are bettered, by it. The SOVEREIGN is
restored to the exercise of his rightful authority

the influence of the Lords is confined within the
pale of the law ; that of the Commons is kept
within the same sacred boundary. In a word,

;he Reform Bill is neither more nor less than

the British Constitution cleansed of long-
standing abuses and restored to its ancient purity.

The Duke of WELLINGTON'S allusion to the
" disciplined" freedom of the subject is highly
diverting and characteristic. By " disciplined,"
his Grace, of course, means the discipline of the
camp, that peculiar and indulgent species of
martial law, which so delighted and improved
Ireland in the memorable 1798. But the days
of such discipline are gone by. Already they
are with the years beyond the flood. The school-
master has elbowed the soldier, and it is to the
discipline of the primer, instead of the sword,
that this country will henceforth owe its pros-
perity.