The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-12 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Auausr 11.
ROMAN CATHOLIC MARRIAGE BILL.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE after citing a few cases
in proof of the hardship of the existing law, rendering marria-
ges contracted between a Protestant and Catholic solemnized
by a Catholic priest, null and void, moved the second reading
of this Bill. He called upon their Lordships to read the Bill
a second time, on the ground that it was grounded on every
principle of justice, policy, and expediency.
On the question being put,
Lord CARBERY moved as an amendment, that the Bill
be read a second time that day six months.
Lord PLUNKETT supported the Bill, upon the ground of
its being just to the parties affected that they should be relieved
from the liability of the only remaining penal statute with re-
gard to Roman Catholic marriages. Every penalty had been
removed except that which was proposed to be repealed by
this Bill—the existing law being capable of invalidating mar-
riages celebrated by a Roman Catholic priest between Protes-
tants and Catholics.

The Earl of LIMERICK opposed the Bill. It was either
to grant additional power to the Roman Catholic priest or it
was not. If not, the Bill was unnecessary ; but if it was, then
their Lordships were on dangerous ground. The Noble Earl
then referred to a letter which had been recently addressed by
a Roman Catholic bishop to the foreman of the grand jury of
the county of Limerick, in consequence of the removal of the
Roman Catholic chaplain of the gaol, and the appointment of
another priest to that office. " What right (said the Roman
Catholic bishop) have the grand jury to dispose of my sub-
jects—( Hear, hear)—and this without a single appeal to the
proper authority ?" That was the body to whom their Lord-
ships were about to give additional powers. The letter then
proceeded—" No other priest but the Rev. Mr. Prendergast
shall dare to bold the office of chaplain to the gaol. The world
shall see by the result of this day, not only the usurping pro-
pensity of this jury, but also its impotency in ecclesiastical af-
fairs. I mean nothing personal in this—( A laugh)--but really
I can with difficulty restrain my feelings on such a subject, and
in such times as these." So say I, my Lords, in such times
as these ; and I call upon your Lordships not to give further
power to persons of this description.
The Earl of WICKLOW agreed with his Noble Friend,
that a more presumptuous, more arrogant, more insulting let-
ter never emanated from any person's pen, than that which
had been addressed to a public officer by this Roman Catholic
Archbishop. It was but the other day that Doctor M‘ Hale
had written a letter, in which he dared to call the Church
Establishment of this country, " a falling and sinking reli-
gion ; a bane and a curse of the country." These were the
times when parties felt themselves at liberty to speak their
minds, knowing, as they did, that the Government of the
country was in hands which enabled them to browbeat the
members of the Established Church with impunity. With re-
gard to the Bill before the House he had heard nothing to con-
vince him of its necessity. He should not, however, oppose
the second reading of the Bill, because he hoped, by intro-
ducing a clause to the effect that the parish priest should not
(except under a penalty) marry any individual whom the Pro-
testant clergyman was now by law prevented from marrying,
to make the state of things considerably better than it was at
present.
Lord FARNHAM should give his vote in favour of the
amendment.
The Bishop of LONDON thought if this Bill gave the
Roman Catholic priest power to celebrate a marriage between
a Protestant and a Catholic, it would, of course, give him the
power of celebrating a marriage between Protestant and Pro-
testant. This would afford the Roman Catholic clergyman a
very facile opportunity for proselytism. All that he (the
Bishop of London) asked of their Lordships was that they
should let the Protestant clergyman be placed on equal ground
with the Roman Catholic priest, but which, according to this
Bill, he would not be. He should, therefore, without hesita-
tio 1, vote for the amendment. _ .

Lord BROUGHAM said, let the Right Reverend Prelate
reflect for a moment what it was that constituted the difficulty
of dealing with the marriage-law in this country. It was Lord
Hardwicke's Marriage Act. Lord Hardwicke's Act hadin-
troduced all the difficulty of dealing with the subject, this be-
ing the only country in Europe in which a law existed, decla-
ring that all marriages which took place between parties under
age, without the consent of parents or gnardians, or without
the publication of banns, should be null and void. The count-
less evils which had resulted from such a law, the domestic mi-
series, the personal injuries, the offences against public mo-
rals, it was painful, nay, in some instances agonizing to contem-
plate. It was a law which, wielded in its full force, rendered a
youthful pair adulterers and fornicators in themselves, branding
their offspring with the name of bastard. Lord Hardwicke's
Act constituted an anomaly in the law of marriage which was
peculiar to this country. The same difficulty did not exist in
Ireland. There, all that the Legislature had to do was to
repeal a portion of the penal law, which affected only a small
part of the kingdom, and which, in fact, was nothing more than
a disgusting remnant of the Popish penal code. He had been
astonished to hear from one of such usual clearness of percep-
tion as the Right Rev. Prelate who had just Addressed the
House, that in his opinion the Act was intended, or at all
events would have the effect of putting the Roman Catholic
priest on a better footing than the Protestant clergyman ; and
not less had he been astonished to hear from the same eminent
quarter an assertion founded upon a statement contained in
the Report of Dr. Magee's evidence, given before the Com-
mittee of that Muse in 1825, namely, that the allowing a Ca-
tholic priest to marry two Protestants, or a Protestant and a
Catholic, would lead to an increase of Catholics. Unless he
had heard it from the Right Rev. Prelate's own lips, he cer-
tainly would never have believed that one of his penetration
could have been so egregiously deluded. Neither, looking
at the effects which daily and notoriously flowed from the
present state of the law, unless he had himself been
an ear-witness, could he have believed that the Right
Reverend Prelate would have contended for the conti-
nuTice of such a law for a single hour. It was a law
which in no instance went to punish the wrong-doer—neither
the priest who married, nor the man who deceived—in every
instance the punishment fell upon the innocent woman and
helpless children. A man, to obtain a selfish or sensual pur-
pose, might impose upon the woman he proposed to marry,
as well as the priest who was to marry them ; and when his
mind changed—when the personal charms of his wife began
to decay—when he saw another whom he thought lie should
prefer—in short, upon any pretext whatever, or without any
pretext at all, he had only to announce the manner of his mar-
riage, to renderit at once a perfect nullity—to proclaim the
partner of his bed a prostitute, and his children bastards. The
wrong-doer escaped scot-free ; nay, he not only escaped scot-
free, but escaped with a reward. The first wrong-doer—the
priest—(supposing the priest to have a knowledge of the real
religious opinions of the parties he was marrying)—was reward-
ed in the shape of the fee he obtained for performing the cere-
mony; the second wrong-doer—the husband—was rewarded
in the enjoyment he obtained in the seduction of the woman.
Was that a state of the law which any Protestant divine
would wish to continue? Then, the Right Reverend Prelate
contended that if the present Bill were allowed to pass, for
every " couple-beggar" that might now exist among the Pro-
testant clergy, there would become twenty " couple-beggars"
amongst the Roman Catholic clergy. Ile (Lord Brougham)
did not believe that that would be the case. He did not be-
lieve, indeed, that the Roman Catholic clergyman was so
likely to degrade his functions in that way as the Protestant
Clergyman, and he would shortly state why—the Roman Ca-
tholic Church regarded matrimony as a sacrament, whilst the
Protestant Church regarded it only as a civil contract,—
(" No, no," from the Bench of Bishops.) He would only
mention that his authority for the assertion was the highest,
and, perhaps, the most eminent Consistorial Judge who had
ever lived in that country—Lord Stowell, who, in the case of

Dalrymple v. Dalrymple, had distinctly considered the act- of
maniage as a civil contract.
The Bishop of EXETER said the proposition that mar-
riage in the eye of the Protestant Church was nothing more
-than a civil contract, was one which he (the Bishop of Exeter)
would never hear asserted without entering his decided protest
againq it.—( Hear. ) In the eye of the law it Was undoubtedly
a civil contract, but in the estimation of the Church it was
much more than a civil contract. It was regarded as a holy
estate— a state into which a man certainly could not enter
without a contract ; but the contract was merely the gate.
When a man was married, he was in a holy estate— a religious
estate. It was a religious estate, because it was ordained by
God, commanded by God, blessed by God, and rendered ir-
revocable by God. Rendered irrevocable by the Deity,
the law of England regarded it as irrevocable. In illustra-
tion of that fact, he need only mention the case of Miss Tur-
ner—the Bill for the dissolution of whose marriage could not
he sustained on the ground of fraud, and was only subsequently
passed by their Lordships on the ground that no legal marriage
had taken place, in consequence of the violence that tv:s used.
Had their Lordships duly considered what the Roman Catho-
lic marriage law was? It probably went infinitely further than
they were at all aware of. It declared that impediments to
marriage by the law of God, should not be considered impe-
diments if the Pope chose to remove them. It declared that,
with the Pope's permission, uncles might marry nieces, ne-
phews marry aunts, &c. While it thus licensed incestuous
marriages, it tied up the liberty of man even in cases in which
God had permitted its free exercise. The Roman Catholic
marriage law, that law which was at preient in force in Ire-
land, in certain cases made null and void marriages beyond the
Levitical degrees. He should, most heartily, vote for the
amendment.

The Bishop of HEREFORD said he would vote for the
second reading of the Bill, in the hope that the clause de-
scribed by a Noble Earl, to the effect that the Roman Catholic
Priest should not be at liberty to solemnize a marriage where
the Protestant clergyman was not at liberty to do so, would be
introduced into the Bill in the Committee.

The Marquis of CL A NRIC A RUE made a brief reply.
Their Lordships then divided--
For the amendment
Against it

Majority against the Bill
At half-past Nine the House adjourned.

.-2G

HOUSE OF COMMONS, AUGUST 11.
CERTIORARI BILL.
On the motion of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL the Bill
was read a first time.
BOGNOR IMPROVEMENT BILL.
Lord G. LENNOX brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee appointed to draw up reasons for not agreeing to the
Lords' Amendments to this Bill.

ST. STEPHEN'S CHAPEL.
Mr. HAWES begged to ask the Right Hon. the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer, whether it was the intention of his Ma-
jesty's Government to direct the pulling down of St. Ste-
phen's Chapel, and the adjoining cloisters. He was the more
anxious for information on this point, as many persons were
ir.terested in the preservation of those buildings.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
it was not the intention of his Majesty's Government to
direct any part of these buildings to be pulled down until
the plan for the new buildings had been sent in and
approved of. There were some temporary repairs directed
for their preservation, until it was ascertained whether they
could be incorporated with the new building or altogether re-
moved.—( Hear.)
REDUCTION OF THE MILITIA STAFF BILL.
On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, the House went
into Committee on the Bill for the Reduction of the Militia
Staff.

After a short discussion the House divided on the first clause.
The numbers were—

For it 96
Against it
Majority
The other clauses of the Bill were agreed to, and the Bill
went through the Committee.
ORANGE LODGES IN ENGLAND.
On the motion of Mr. HUME the following Committee was
appointed to inquire into the institution and extent of Orange
Lodges in Great Britain and the Colonies.
Hume, Joseph Ferguson, R. C. Price, Samuel Grove
Aglionby, H. A. Finch, G. Pringle, A.
Baines, E Finn, W. F. Shell, R. L.
Bethel!, IL Hindley, C. Smith, R. Vernon
Campbell, Sir J. Howick. Lord Somerset, Lord E.
&Unclog, Marquis of Leader, John Temple Thorneley, Thomas
Clerk, Sir G. Potter, R. Wallace, R.
Colborne, N. W. R. Ward, H. G
ORANGE LODGES (IRELAND).
The Order of the. Day for resuming the adjourned debate
on Orange Lodges in Ireland was then read.
Mr. HUME before the debate proceeded, wished to state
to the House that it was his intention to omit the fifth arid
sixth resolutions, which had reference to the civil part of the
question, in order that the discussion should be confined to
Orange Lodges existing in the army.
Mr. FINCH had great satisfaction in seconding the amend-
ment moved by his Hon. Friend the other night. He did not
deny that the House had just as much right to deal with the
malversations of the highest as well as of the humblest per-
sons in the realm, but then that was a privilege which ought
only to be exercised with very great caution ; and he must say
that the Hon. Members opposite would do well to assume that
virtue if they had it not.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The
Hon. Member for Middlesex was not a member of the Com-
mittee, but he had read some statement in a newspaper re-
flecting upon an illustrious individual, and he at once said to
himself, " Oh, this is enough for me, I'll have a shot at the
Duke of Cumberland."—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) That
was his great object, and therefore the course which he had
pursued was unparliamentary as well as unsuitable to the sea-
son when it was taken. The Honourable Member for
Kilkenny brought forward a resolution on the subject of
secret associations, and that resolution was directed, of
course, against Orange Societies, though the terms of it
were so general that it might include even Freemasons.
But could it be said Low that Orange Societies were
secret associations, when not only their signs, but the whole
course of their proceedings, were known to every Member of
the Committee ? It was true that they were in some respects
exclusive societies, because they did not admit Roman Catho-
lics as members, although they were open to all other sects;
but until the Hon. Member for Kilkenny could satisfy him that
Roman Catholics could unite in defence of the Protestant re-
ligion, he must maintain that their exclusion was justifiable,
and deny that it was any more an act of intolerance than was
exercised at Brookes's and every other club-house in town.—
( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Kilkenny might,
therefore, light his pipe with his resolution. It was untrue
that the institution of orangemen had produced either reli=
gious bigotry or religious feuds in Ireland, and in proof of
this he had only to mention that the association of United Irish-
men existed four years before the first Orange lodge in that
country was established. The association of United Irishmen
was formed in 1791, and the first Orange lodge in the north of
Ireland was not established until 1795, and its institution was
the result of self-defence, and these facts he proved by a refe-
rence to " Plowden's History of Ireland" and other authorities.
He described the frightful condition of Ireland from thence
down to 1800. There was, &ring the whole of this period,
a party hostile to England, to the Protestant religion in Ire-
land, and so recently even as 1807 it was stated by Mr. Wynd-
ham, and admitted by Mr. Grattan; that a French party exist-
ed io that country, which fully justified the continuance of
Orange societies, as a means of preserving British connection.
The Hon. Gentleman proceeded to show the existence of so-
cieties in Ireland, from that period to the present, which had
in view objects not consistent with the constitutional princi-
ples of Great Britain, but his voice was frequently so low as
to render him very inaudible. In 1825, the interference of
the Catholic Association with the Courts of Justice in Ire-
, land was totally repugnant to the fair and unbiassed admini-
stration of the law. There was no period of Irish history
more rife with disturbance and insubordination than 1821 and
1822. Parties appeared in open day upon the hills, and
murder was as openly committed. At this period there was
no disturbance in the north of Ireland, whilst in the south
eighteen counties were placed under the Insurrection Act, and
seven others were about to be proclaimed. The Catholic
Association at this period interfered with the Courts of Jus-
tice by their paid agents, and even avowed a determination to
erect tribunals of their own. A complete organization ex-
isted in the south of Ireland, of which in 1825 the Roman
Catholic Priests formed 2,500 members. People might call
this a highly-coloured statement, but it was one which he
could support by authorities. The Hon. Gentleman then quoted
the opinion of (we believe) Lord Plunket, to show that
the Association set themselves up as the redressors of all griev-
ances, and the advocates of all measures, from Parliamentary
Reform to Repeal, and that they interfered with every Court,
from the very highest in the kingdom down to the Court of
Conscience. Surely a state of things like this was most un-
constitutional. For the levies there was an army of 30,000
collectors. The whole, or nearly the whole, of the Catholic
Priesthood of Ireland were attached to the Association, and
yet what an outcry was raised if a few of the Protestant
Clergy joined the Orange body. The Hon. Gentleman
then referred to Mr. Wyse's book to show the admitted con-
nexion between the high Ecclesiastical Dignitaries and the
Association, as well as the enrolment in that body of 2,500
Roman Catholic Priests. When the law to put these down
was passed, the Orange institution, which was purely defen-
sive, ceased to exist. But this law was evaded, and organiza-
tion and agitation proceeded as usual. The law was hiug,hed
at, and by a mere change of name the old Association still
existed. The Hon. Gentleman then referred to the simulta-
neous meetings which took place in Ireland with the threaten-
• aspect which Irish affairs then presented, and said that
ing
the Orange body were called upon to re-organize itself in
self-defence against the system of intimidation, and the tumul-
tuary meetings which took place in the South of Ireland.
He maintained that there did exist a necessity for some system
of protective union amongst the Protestants of Ireland. Un-
der existing circumstances, therefore, he thought the system
of Orane•eism should not be abolished, even if there was a
means of doing so, but that, on the contrary, it ought to be
preserved and improved, for he admitted that it was susceptible
of improvement. In conclusion—.( Ironical cheers from the
Ministerial Benches—)—in conclusion—(Renewed cries of
" Hear, hear," from the same quarter.)- He hoped the House
would allow him to conclude—(" Hear, hear," and " Order")
.__and he would do so by expressing a fervent hope that the
House would pause cautiously before it proceeded to interfere
with an institution, which he maintained was the best and most
loyal friend of the mother country in Ireland.—(Cheers. )
Lord E BRING TON thought the question before the
House was simply as to the existence of Orange Lodges in
the army, and the connection of his Royal Highness the Duke
of Cumberland with them. He would not enter into the ques-
tion whether the prevalence of Orange Lodges in the army
was subversive of the principles of military discipline. Suffice

it that the Commander-in-Chief had forbidden their existence
amongst the troops. With respect to the connection of the
Duke of Cumberland with the.,,e proceedins, it was not
enough to say that his Royal Highness was not aware of what
took place. His Royal Highness was the head of the Orange
institution, and be was thereto: e responsible for whatever was
done by its agents and in his name.—(Hear, hear.) His
Royal Highness had written a letter denying all knowledge of
the existence of Orange lodges in the army. But how was
this denial to be reconciled with a document which he held in
his hand, purporting to be a report of a meeting of the Grand
Lodge at the house of Lord Kenyon, on the 17th of February,
1831, his Royal Highness in the chair, wherein he read amongst
other resolutions, the following :—" That the following war-
rants be approved of, namely, No. 254 (we did not catch the
name), of the 6th battalion of the Royal Artillery; No. 258,
James Smith, of the 94th; No. 260, private Wilson, of the
17th ?"—( Hear, hear, hear.) The report then concluded
with a.vote of thanks to his Royal Highness for his " conde-
scension and his attention to the business of the day."—( Hear,
bear.) The Noble Lord then recited other documents, most
of which had been used the other night by Mr. Finn, in the
course of his speech in support of the fact of the existence of
Orange Lodges in the army, and of the cognizance of the
Noble Duke of that fact. Under these circumstances he felt
bound, by a sense of public duty, to support the motion of the
Hon. Member for Middlesex, that an humbletddress be pre-
sented to his Majesty, with a view to instituting an inquiry
into the circumstances of the case.

Colonel VERNE R contended that the reports from which
the Noble Lord quoted were drawn up after the proceedings
to which they related took place, and that, even if their accu-
racy were strictly to be depended on, it was very probable that
the Noble Duke at the time was not aware of half the busi-
ness transacted on the occasion.—(011, oh, and hear, hear.)
He was no advocate himself for the creation of Orange lodges
amongst the troops, but he believed, nevertheless, that upon
more than one occasion it had been found that those regi-
ments which comprised Orange lodges were the only
ones which could be depended upon by the Government.
The Hon Member here quoted at great length a vast number
of passages from the recent letters and speeches of Mr.
O'Connell, to prove his adulation of the Orangemen at one
time, his slander of them at another—his at one time courting
them as the representative of the true Protestant spirit of Ire-
land to co-operate with him to procure Repeal, because with-
out their co-operation Repeal could never be carried ; if they
leagued with him Repeal would pass in twelve months. At
another time he said as the Orangemen were impracticable,
as they resisted his five years of solicitation (cajoling would,
perhaps, be the more appropriate word), as they were not to
ba diverted from their devotion to their principles, but still
clung with dogged obduracy to the connection with England,
he gave them up as an irreclaimable body, and he would sweep
them before him, and carry Repeal without them, and in spite
of them. He wished to exhibit to the House and the country
the real character of the opposition of the Hon. Member op-
posite, and his dependents to the Orange Institution. He
I wished to show how contradictory were his opinions, and, be-
cause contradictory, how insincere, and how unworthy of con-
fidence or respect.—(Loud cheers.) He wished to show
to the gentlemen of England how unfounded were the slan-
ders against the Irish Orangemen. If the House wished that
Repeal should be carried—if it wished for an extirpation of
Protestantism in Ireland, and a dissolution of the strong bond
that held the Legislative Union between the countries—then,
and not till then, would it put down the Orangemen of Ire-
land.—( Loud cheers.)
Mr. WILBRAHAM was strongly opposed to the introduc-
tion of Orange lodges' in the army; they were calculated to
introduce insubordination and evil, and make the army, per-
haps, more dangerous to the friends of the country than to its
enemies. There was discord enough without following the
track of the Ribbonmen and the Whiteboys. He would sup-
port the motion. —( Hear.)
Sir E. CODRINGTON, Mr. SHEIL, and several Members rose
together.
Sir E. CODRINGTON proceeded—He would warn the
House against the introduction of these secret societies into
England. It was the establishment of secret societies that led
to mutiny in 1798.
Mr. S HEIL said it was remarkable that the Deputy
Grand Master (Colonel Verner), who was twice examined
before the Committee, did not say he was ignorant of the ex-
istence of Orange lodges in the army. His silence as a mi-
litary man was rather curious on this point. The Grand
Master, the Grand Treasurer, and the Grand Secretary—
they were all Grand—(A laugh)—declared they had no
knowledge of the existence of Orange lodges in the army. It
was said that the Committee was unfairly selected. Why, of
whom did it consist ? -There were the Members of Sligo and
Cavan, Mr. W. Batten, Colonel Wood, Lord Castlereagh,
Mr. Nicoll, Sir James Graham—(he did not well know in
which rank to class him)—( A laugh)—Sir J. Y. Buller, and
others equally favourable to the Orange politics. Well, then,
what was done before that Committee—were its proceedings
unfairly conducted ? Why, the Orange party were allowed to
open the'case themselves, and for the first fifteen or twenty
days none but Orange witnesses were heard. There was first
Colonel Verner, who was twice examined. Then came the
Rev. Martin O'Sullivan, certainly a good witness, inasmuch as
he had the benefit of memory as regarded the Catholic reli-
gion, and of hope as regarded the Protestant.—(Cheers.)
This witness was examined no less than seven times. Then
came Mr. Swan,ihe Secretary of the principal Orange lodge.
Then Mr. Blacker, and after him Mr. Warde, thesolicitor of
the Orange body—of course produced to show that that body
did not interfere with the administration of justice. Then,
again, for the eighth time, came " the Rev. Martin O'Sulli-
van." Ecce iterum Crispinus—( A laugh)—and lastly, Mr.
Baker—every one of them were wittnesses favourable to the
Orange body, and for 20 days were they under examination.
Well, and what did these impartial witnesses prove ?
Did they not prove that there existed in Ireland societies in-
corporated, provided with arms, and headed by a Prince, not
next, but near the throne ?—( Cheers.) And what more did
the Committee elicit—was not the detail frightful? Did it
not present a picture the most appalling that could be con-
ceived ? Look to the cases of Dundalk, Newry, Kills, and
Armagh, as there detailed. The Hon. Member then pro-
ceeded to allude to the position the Duke of Cumberland oc-
cupied as Grand Master of the Orange Lodges. Should any
calamity happen to her who was alike the object of Eng-
land's affection and England's hope—to her who, if her mo-
ther's virtues were hereditary, would be good, gentle, prudent
and virtuous—he need not say he alluded to the heiress pre-
sumptive to the throne--(Loud cheers)—if by some fatality
and fatality it would be considered by the people of England,
his 'Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland became successor
to the 'British Throne, what must be the expectation of the
people ? Would he commence by surrounding his Throne with
some 100,000 Irish Janissaries? He submitted to the House
that the poner which the Orangemen had arrogated to them-
selves should be wrested from their hands. It remained for
him to ask a plain question—What would the House do, or
what were the Government prepared to do? if they did not
put them down, the Orangemen would soon put the Govern-
ment down ?—( Cheers.) Would they turn them into a pat-
tern instead of, by condign chastisement, exhibiting them as
an example ? If the Orangemen were not suppressed the
other party would have a right to form counter associations.
If the millions in Ireland enrolled and armed themselves, what
would be the consequences of a collision ? Woe to the vic-
tors and the vanquished; In the abyss of blood which would
be the result, the hopes of Ireland would be extinguished.
The Government had already given a pledge of their affec-
tion to Ireland, and shown their intention to act with firmness
and determination. He would not say he expected, because
he knew they would do their duty.—( Immense cheers.)
Mr. R. PLUNKETT was free to admit that a stronger
case had been brought forward by the opposite side than he at
first expected.—( Hear.) He would leave.the question as to
the existence of Orange Lodges in the army to be treated by
Hon. and Gallant Officers, merely observing that he saw no
objection to an institution having within it the seeds of de-
voted loyalty.
Mr. H. TWISS contended that no case of danger was
made out to call for further inquiry, and the only question was
as to the form of passing the resolutions before the House.
The Ribbonmen were as illegal as Orangemen, and should be
embraced by any decision to which the House might come.
Sir E. H AYES said that whenever it suited the purpose of
the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin to agitate the ques-
tion of the Union he would do so, and who then could the Go-
vernment rely on but the loyal Protestants of that country ?
Lord J. RUSSELL only wished to state the course .he
wished to take on this occasion. He had no objection to
pointing out the danger of those warrants that had been
issued, but until further information he was not disposed to
accede to the sth or sth resolution; and, as regarded the
resolution that applied to his Royal Highness the Duke
of Cumberland, he did hope that some more satisfactory
statement would have been made, which he thought might
have been made, than the bare offer to withdraw the warrants
which had been issued. He did think that after all that had
occurred, the friends of his Royal Highness ought to have
expressed their indignation against those unfaithful and un-
worthy persons with whom they had been allied, and to have
announced their determination to withdraw from such an
association. With these sentiments he should vote for the
resolutions with the exceptions he had named. He looked
upon it that it was necessary for the safety of the Crown to
put down those societies, and he should meet the question re-
gardless of the menaces that might be thrown out from any
quarter. He should act with equal determination to put
down all other societies. He wished to see all equal in the
eye of the law. He had no notion that the Government of
Ireland should be left without authority, because it did not
belong to a certain party. He should support the resolution
of the Hon. Member for Middlesex.
Mr. SHAW was sure the House would not sanction such
an insinuation against his Royal Highness as this Resolution
conveyed. The Hon. and Learned Member sat down amidst
cries of " Divide."

Lord J. RUSSELL rose:and said that it was not his wish
or intention to agree to any resolution which insinuated that
his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland had been aware
of the issue of these warrants. He understood that the Hon.
Member for Middlesex had no objection to insert the words,
6' which warrants had been afterwards issued." It appeared
to him that this would do away with all objections.
Mr. SHAW wished to leave out the words " blank war-
rants."—( General cries of " No, no.")
Lord J. RUSSELL contended his Royal Highness's letter
denied the fact. He stated that as soon as the proposal was
makto him he denounced the lodges as contrary to the regu•
lations issued from the War Office. After this every person of
the Society that had anything to do with the issue of the war-
rants ought to have been more cautious.—( Hear, and cries of
" Divide.")

Mr. NIC HOLL would withdraw the first four Resolutions,
and retain only the fifth and sixth.--( Cries of " They are with-
drawn already.") His object had been to afford an opportunity
of the strictest inquiry.

—.Mr. SHAW rose, and atternct,xl to soy a few-words, but he
was-inaudible from the cries of " Spoke, spoke."
Sir C. DA LBIAC concurred in the strong impropriety of
establishing Orange Lodges in the Army ; but he contended
that no such Lodges had ever been formed- in the sertice.
Sir R. FE RG,IS S SON contended that Orange Lodges had
been long foNned in the Army, and they had been held to
cunningly, that even the non-cominissiened officers were not
aware of the fact.

Mr. HUM E replied. He had no objection to separate front
the motion that part of it which related to the Army. He ac-
ceded to the proposal of the Noble Lord.
Sir C. DALBIAC explained.
The Gallery was. cleared for a division, but eventually Mr.
Hume's altered motion was agreed to, without the House di-
viding.
Mr. H. TWISS moved that the last four lines and a half of
the last resolution, conveying a censure on the Duke of Cum-
berland, be omitted.
On this question the House divided,
For the resolution
For the amendment
Majority
The other Orders of the Day were then proceeded with,
and at half-past two o'clock,
Mr. BROTH ERTON moved that the House do noW
adjourn.
The House then divided, and the numbers were—
Ayes
Noes 6B
Majority —s6
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at Three o'clock.