The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUAR Y 14, 1844.

Sir J. GRAHAM would have preferred that the Hon.
Gentleman should have given notice of the question. With re-
spect to the returns which had been presented to Hon. Gentle-
men that morning, they had been moved for to enable the No-
ble discount, the Member for Plymouth ( Lord Ebrington), to
ascertain the number of troops placed at the disposal of his fa-
ther, when conducting the government of that country. That five
regiments had been withdrawn from Ireland in the course of the
time mentioned in the return for general service, was undoubted.
There were five regiments of cavalry and four battalions of
infantry withdrawn from Ireland, from the Ist of September,
1841, to the Ist of March, 1842. With respect to the other
question of the Hon. Gentleman, he had to state that, on the
motion of the Hon. Member for Coventry, an order had been
given to produce a return of the rank and file stationed in Ireland
from the Ist of Janliary? 1835, down to the Ist of January, 1843.

SMALL DEBTS BILL.
Mr. ROEBUCK wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite whether the Bill introduced relative to the recovery
of small debts, by the Hon. Dlember for Chester, was brought in
with the sanction of the Government ?
Sir J. GRAHAM said, so far from it, that the Hon,
Member for Chester had brought in his Bill as embodying a
rival scheme to the measure introduced by her Majesty's
Government.

STATE OF IRELAND.
Lord J. RUSSELL then rose, pursuant to notice, to bring
forward his motion for a Committee of the whole House to
take into consideration the state of Ireland. He said he felt
deeply how much he stood in need of the indulgence
of the House in the performance of the ardu ius task
which he had undertaken. He would not tres-
pass further upon their indulgence, by making any
apology for taking that task upon himself ; nor, however he
might feel his own inability for such a task, could he for a
moment doubt that it was right that the House of Com-
mons of the United Kingdom should make inquiry into the
condition of the kingdom of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) They
had before them, notwithstanding the somewhat fel-
lacious returns presented by the Right qonourable Gen
tleman, the notorious fact that Ireland was filled with troops,
and that the barracks in which these troops were posted had
been fortified. They had heard, too, that morning, of a regi-
ment of infantry being drawn up in the yard of the Castle of
Dublin—that preparations had been made as if the
Government were in instant_ expectation of a civil
war, and that the country was occupied and not go-
verned by those who now held the reins of power.
He said, and he said it witlaconsideration, that Ireland was not
governed as it ought to be. The Government of this country
mof peace, but the present Government
ent of force. The King of the French
hsohfa should t
told
n edt
the
wea government
vpoapgleooefrnthat country that Algeria would soon be
reduced to a government of peace.—( Hear.) Her Majesty
had told her people the same thing, and yet what was the case?
Why the military. were circulating through the whole
of Ireland, while' st was proclaimed that peace was ex-
isting in the United Kingdom. Was it not curious
that it should now present an appearance utterly at variance
with true government ?—( Hear, hear.) We have received
to-day an account, most extraordinary it was, that the man
upon whom the Irish people looked, and from whom they
had received, or by whose instrumentality they had
received, Catholic Emancipation—(Cries of " Hear, hear")—
was it not curious that that man should have been found
guilty of a conspiracy, and would, probably, by the Judges of
Ireland be condemned to imprisonment ?—( Hear, hear.) Did
the House believe, if that circumstance took place, that it
would be a guarantee for the peace of Ireland ?—(Great cheer-
ing.) He could see no hope for the prosperity or the futere
interest of Ireland in the adoption of such a course. They
ought to insure their affections, and by that means they
would insure peace.—( Hear, hear, and great cheering. )
The consideration of this subject had led him to venture to
propose a question to the House, in the shape which he would
ultimately state. It had led him to consider the question of the
whole condition of Ireland, and he had shaped his question ex-
pressly for that purpose. He was not about to recur to the
state of Ireland during the last year, but he wished to look upon
the situation of that country for some time past. He would
take it for granted that it was the wish of the House
that the maintenance of the union should be preserved ; but,
consistent with that maintenance, he trusted that the
House would consider it was bound to do that country justice.
Assuming such to be the opinion of the House, he would ask
whether the engagements which had been entered into at the
time of the union had been all fulfilled, either with regard to
existing laws, or to the passing of future laws for the improve-
ment of Ireland ?—(Cheers. ) And if they had not, he
would ask the House to go with him into Committee, in
order to consider the measures which ought to be adopted
to reconcile the people of Ireland to our rule —(Cheers.) He
would advert to the address which had been presented by both
Houses of Parliament to his Majesty George the Third, in the
year 1799, just before the union. In that address both
Houses had stated that it was their firm persuasion that
a complete and entire union between Great Britain
and Ireland, upon equal and liberal principles, founded upon a
similarity of laws and of constitution, would conduce tothe mutual
interest and security of the two countries, and tothe allaying
of those discontents which had unhappily existed in Ireland—
would afford the means of opposing the attempts of the foreign
enemy, and would conduce to the stability of the empire.
The two Houses had not been content with that
declaration, they had further declared that in their opinion it
would be for the real interest both of Great Britain and Ireland
that the principle of the union should be a common enjoyment
by both countries equally of the blessings of the Constitution.—
( Cheers.) Now he would ask whether the laws
proposed for the two countries had been founded
upon equal and liberal principles—(Cheering)—if the
laws which had been passed since the union had ex-
tended fully the blessings of the Constitution to Ireland—
(Cheers)—if Ireland was bound to us by a sense of mutual
affection and interest—(Cheers)—and if the people of Ire-
land were united to us by a full enjoyment of the blessings
of the Constitution ?—( Hear, hear, and loud cheering).
These expressions of their sentiments had not been
confined to the address which had been presented
by the two Houses of Parliament. They had received
he sanction of Mr. Pitt, the Prime Minister of the
Crown, when he introduced that measure into the House.
In opposition to those who said that Ireland would be subject
to a foreign yoke, he asked whether a union, entered into
with the free consent of both countries, and upon just
and equal terms, could be branded as subjecting Ireland
to a foreign yoke? Was it not a free and voluntary association
of two countries for the common benefit of both, in which
each would have its proportionate weight of importance, which
would secure equal laws, reciprocal affections, and which would
render them both invincible ? And then the Minister con-
cluded by quoting that remarkable passage:—
" Non Ego, nee Tsneris halos paribus jubebo
Nec mihi regna peto ; paribus felegibus amber
Invictre gentes."—( Hear, hear.)
Sir J. GRAHAM—The poet adds—
., ststernm in fsedera mittant."
uhdte cheese.)
) H
eers.
)e hoped he would recollect
Lord J. RUSSELL was glad to perceive the Right
Honourable Baronet recollected the quotation accurately.
At the same time there
were given assurances, not by the positive declaration of the
Ministers of the Crown, yet by their adherence, that the Roman
The( Csheneetirms'ent.— ss and
sentiment.—(Laud
would be more lik. ely to enjoy the rights of British sub-
heels under the union than if Ireland continued to have a separate
Parliament. Lord Sichnouth declared such an opinion ; but
those hopes were destined to be disappointed. But, before he
entered upon that subject, he wished to call the attention of
the House to another part of the law and constitution
of England, namely, the administration of justice. It
might be said that the laws were the same in both
countries. Nominally, the Irish had the same laws, and
trial by jury existed in both countries ; but was it so in fact?
That it was not so was made matter of perpetual complaint in
Ireland, and more than once in that House. On one occasion a
Member of that Howe, who in those days was accustomed to
represent, with great force and eloquence, the grievances of
those who were oppressed, whether in Europe or America, whe-
white or black—he meant
.Lord Brougham—stated in that
House, in the year 1823, in bringing forward a petition
complaining of grievances that " the laws of England
esteemed all men. It was. sufficient to be born within the
King's allegiance to b e entitled to all the rights any subject of
the land enjoyed. None were disqualified, there was no dis-
tinction between a natural-born subject and an alien. Such
was the liberality of the system in times called barbarous,
that even if a man was an alien born, he was not
deprived of the protection of the law. In Ireland the law
holds an opposite doctrine. The sect to which a man belonged
joined to his religious opinions, and the forms in which he
worshipped his Creator, were reasons for his not enjoying the
same privileges as his fellows. Such a system was most cruel
and unjust."—( Cheers.) Such was the statement of Mr.
Brougham, in those days when Mr. Brougham was the advo-
cate of the oppressed.—(Cheers and laughter.) Was that the
statement of a man ignorant of the state of Ireland ? The same
facts were stated in most powerfullanguage by Sir M. O'Logh -
lin, in his evidence before the House of Lords, in 1839. He
said he had been in the habit for nineteen years of attending
the Munster circuit. On that circuit it was the custom of the
Crown to set aside from the jury all Roman Catholics
and all liberal Protestants ; and he stated it as his
belief that this practice was carried to a greater extent in other
circuits. He stated one case of this practice occurring as late
as the year ,
1834 when Lord Wellesley was Lord-Lieutenant,
and when Mr. Blackburne, the present Master of the Rolls, was
the Attorney-General. He stated that in one case, not a political
case, 43 persons had been set aside, and that 36 of those were
Roman Catholics, and seven of them were Protestants.
Amongst them were magistrates and leaseholders, and persons
of considerable property. He said that the practice was so
well known, and constantly followed, that men of liberal opi-
nions, whether Roman Catholics or Protestants, had ceased
attending the assizes, that they might not be present when such
an insult was offered to them. Now, were these equal laws ? Did
that resemble a jury in Kent, Surrey, or Yorkshire ?
Let him ( Lord John Russell) ask, after what he had stated,
whether the promises held out by Mr. Pitt had been fulfilled ?
Were the laws equal—were they administered with impartiality?
—(Cheers.) Was it not rather what Mr. Brougham had truly
characterised as the distinction of a sect and a party—of those
ho called themselves Protestants, which, in fact, was now in
Ireland a political denomination ?—(Loud cheers.) Was
it not, in fact, a supremacy of political Protestants, corrupting
the sources of public justice and defrauding the people of what
had been gnaranteed them by the Constitution ?—( Hear, hear. )
And what was the effect of this ? He thought he could state
it to them. Sir Michael O'Loglilin said, " in his opinion it
was a system which was fraught with the most injurious effects
on the administration of justice in Ireland, disturbing her
peace, and depriving the people of the confidence they ought
to have in her institutions." Now he (Lord J. Russell) would
ask of the House, could, it be otherwise—(Cheers)—or could
they wonder, if such was the case, that in Ireland the poorer
classes of the people, rather than resort to the regular tribunals
of the country, took any other course rather than go to them
for the settlement of their differences amongst themselves—
even the wild means which revenge and the worst passions
of our nature would prompt'—( Hear, hear.) These
bad feelings were prompted by the unfair administration
of justice, and were not so inherent in the Irish character as
many persons wished to prove. He could vouch it, and in support
of his opinion he would relate en anecdote, on the authority of
Lord Donoughmore, which occurred at th it great Clare election,
which, in fact, settled the question of Catholic Emancipation.
A big, brawny fellow came to the Committee to complain
that he had been insulted by a person. "Why,' was the reply,
" cannot you take your own pert ?" You are bigger than the
mar, who insulted you. " Yes," said h. e, stretching forth his
brawny arm, " I could soon have had satisfaction if I had chosen
to take it, but all violence and quarrelling has been
forbidden by the Association, and, therefore, I could
not punish the fellow as he deserved." Now, if a man
thus showed obedience to the behests of an Association, why
was it ? Because he hart confidence in the Association---he
knew the law which had gone forth had been framed by men
who had the same feeling and sympathies as himself, and who
did not set up the tyranny of a sect as the measure of justice.
—( Cheers.) This, then, was his first complaint, that from the
period of the union up to the year 1835, there had been no im-
partiality in the administration of justice. He might be told
that Lord Wellesley was an impartial Governor of Ireland.
He admitted that he was, and that Lord Anglesea
was the same. But it was the misfortune of both, that though
they might have endeavoured they had, unhappily, failed to cor-
rect the abuses in the Chief Secretary's Office.—( Hear,
and loud cheers.) There was the place in which
all bad political passions and prejudices centered.
It was not the fault of Lord Wellesley or Lord Anglesea
that they did so. He would now proceed to another question
—the franchise of the people of Ireland.—( Hear, hear, )
And he knew that it might be objected, as
it had been objected in considering the state of Ireland, that
they ought not to look to this question of political franchise and

power, because it was said it that would not give bread to the
hungry, or employment to the tittemployed.—( Cheers.) He
did not admire or concur in the wisdom of such an assertion.
Ile did not find any record in the history of England for such
an assertion.—( Hear. ) Ths benefits of a free constitution
were the best works by which they could confer benefits on a
free country. In 1792 Mr. Pitt, in his celebrated speech
on. the fin inces of the country, eulogised greatly the
principles of Adam Smith, and said that benefit to a country
was to be found in nothing but free institutions. —( Hear,
hear.) Mr. Fox, at a subsequent period, followed in the same
line of argument and asserted that the true privileges of the people
were to be found in free institutions. It was known that
when men had such institutions a greater stimulus was ,siven
to industry, and the poorest man could look upon the richest
with pleasure and satisfaction. Such were the principles en
which these great men felt that the people ought to enjoy
the Constitution of 1792, and was he now to be told that such
a constitution was a farce, and that it ought not to exist at the
present moment.—( Hear.) He would tell the present Ministry
that the best course they could adopt with respect to Ireland was
to secure to every man the enjoyment of equal rights, by which
means they could alone teach them to appreciate and
bless the benefits of a free Constitution.--( Hear, hear. )
In the year 1793, in a moment of alarm, the Irish Parliament
passed the measure whirl) they had before rejected, and gave
the right of voting to the forty-shilling freeholders. The
franchise thus conferred became, in the hands of the
landlords, a means for filling their estates with miserable
dependents, who were brought up to vote at elect ions. Dr.
Dingenan had foretold that such a mode of carrying elections
would recoil upon its inventors, and so indeed it did. G. eat
abuses had arisen, and persons of every shade of politics were
desirous of applying some remedy.—( Hear, hear.) In the
year 1829 the Right Honourable Gentleman, after, in the
Speech from the Throne, they had been recommended
to agree to measures for the general settlement of the affairs of
Ireland, had proposed a higher rate of franchise. He had given
to Ireland what had been generally supposed at. the time
was a 101. franchise, but which had turned out
to be in reality a 201. franchise.—( Hear, hear.) Inasmuch
as it was required that the person claiming the franchise
should possess 10/. over and above the usual property
derived from his freehold or leasehold, as the case
might be. In the Reform Act it had been intended
to reduce the franchise to 10/.—( Cheers.) A Noble Lord,
now a Secretary of State, had blamed him (Lord John Russell)
for any defect which might have occurred in the Reform Bill.
No doubt, he had trusted much to his Noble Friend Lord
Duncannon, with whom he had consulted on the
subject, and that Noble Lord had given it as his opinion,
that the object which they both of them desired would be
accomplished thereby, but they had since found, that looking
to the decision of the majority of the Irish Judger, they had
been in error in the construction which they had placed on the
clause.—( Hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman when he had pro-
posed that change in the franchise, stated that he proposed to give
Free facilities for the attainment of it--that a person claiming
it had only to go before the assistant-barrister, where, if the
claim were allowed there should be no appeal, but if it were re-
jected then the claimant might appeal to a Judge of Assize.
But some years after, not content with the diminution of
the franchise which had taken place by the inter-
pretation put upon it by the judges of Ireland—not
content with the diminution in the number of voters which
had thereby taken place,—a Noble Lord opposite, not then in
the Government, though now sitting on the benches opposite,
proposed a Bill to correct what he called the evils of
registration in Ireland.—( Loud cheers.) That Bill
was so contrived that by sending the claimant—the poor Irish
voter—from one appeal to the other--( Hear, hear)—by trans-
mitting him to a great distance, through intricate pas•
sages and by costly doors, it discouraged him
from seeking the franchise, and those only who were favoured
by the landed proprietors of the country would be entitled
to enjoy it. —(Cheers. ) Such would be the effect
of that Bill. At that time, they, who were in the
Government said, that though Ireland was far from enjoying
all she ought to have by law, yet as there was a period of tran-
quillity, it was most desirous to allow the wealth of the country to
increase during that period, believing that angry passions would
be assuaged, and that animosities would be likely to abate, by
not introducing any question likely to be the subject of
vexatious contest into this House ; but the Noble
Lord refused to allow this.—( Cheere. ) He thought it neces-
sary to press his Bill at all times.—( Cheers.) At all times
and in all seasons—in season and out of season.—
(Cheers.) The last House of Commons decided they
would entertain that Bill. It was the opinion of a Noble
Friend of his ( Lord Morpeth)--and in mentioning his same
he would venture to say, that no man ever held
office in Ireland more desirous of improving the
eondition of the people of that country—( Loud cheers)—it
was the opinion of Lord Morpeth that since the House deter-
mined to entertain the question it would be necessary, in jus-
tice to the people of Ireland, to propose some clearer definition
of the franchise, to relieve it from all dispute and liti-
gation to which, as it existed, it was subject ; to make
a large and extensive franchise, and to establish upon
that new franchise an important system of registration. What
was said to that ? Why, an indignant refusal to enter into a
consideration of the subject was given. What were the words
of the Right Hon. Baronet the present Secretary of State for
the Home Department ?—" I am determined to stand by the
Reform Bill.—( Cheers and laughter.) Let its provisions be
improved when necessary, but I am determined to guard the
franchise as it stands." Such were the opinions of the Right
lion. Baronet. The Noble Lord opposite went further, because
that Noble Lord accused his ( Lord John Russell's) Noble
Friesid, Lord Morpeth, of bringing in his Bill under false
colours, and false pretences. such was the charge made against
Lord Morpeth. Was he justified in saying that?—(Cheers. )
He (Lord John Russell) appealed to the silence for two years
of her Majesty's Government.—( Cheers.) Ho appealed to
their silence, after having put that Bill forward as a measure of
party opposition.—(Lond cheers.) But had he nothing more
than their silence to appeal to ? Yes, he had the Queen's
Qeech.—(Cheers. ) Ile had the specific declaration in the
ueen's name, advised by the whole of her Majesty's present
Cabinet, that it was not safe to adopt a new system of regis-
tration without, at the same time, adopting a more extensive
franehise.—( Cheers.) Why, then, he looked back with these
lights, and with the experience of their measures, and he
looked back to 1840 and 1841, and he recalled to the Noble
Lord the time when he said that Lord Morpeth brought in his
Bill ender false colours, and he said that the Roman
Catholic Relief Bill, which was passed when the flame
of insurrection was popular, by which Bill Roman Catholics
were made eligib'e to office, and seats in that House, and he
referred to the measure which was brought forward by the
Noble Lord (Stanley), and he asked what would have been
the consequence of that Bill if it had been carried? Why, in
the first place if a Ministry such as the present had been in
power, scarcely a Roman Catholic would have been placed in
any office ; and in the second place, hardly a Member
would have been sent to that House except the nominees of
Protestant landlords.—(Cheers.) The whole of the Bill of
1820, in fact, would have been rendered ineffectual.—(Cheers.)
It would have been in effect a crafty and invidious manner of
repealing that Bill.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord in intro-
ducing that Bill repeatedly raid that he had been advised to
introduce it. He ( Lord John Russell) believed it had been
recommended by persons more crafty than the Noble
Lord, and persons of a different nature.—(Cheers. )
Such, then, was his answer to the Noble Lord, who accused
Lord Alorpeth of fighting under false colours. Such was his
complaint with respect to the state of Ireland, as to the fran-
chise of that country. And when the Ministers of the Crown,
now in office, shrank from the responsibility of maintaining
doctrines which they avowed when in opposition, and hazarded
the peace of Ireland by such flagrant violation of all the princi-
ples of justice, he must say that his confidence in them did
not encourage him in waiting until those measures were brought
under discussion in that House. He had no belief that there
was any intention on the part of Ministers to give a full and
fair franchise to the people of Ireland. He asked them to go
into a Committee of the whole House to consider, among
other important matters, the question of the franchise—
( Cries of " Hear, hear ")—and let them hear what the
representatives of the people of Ireland would say on the sub-
ject of the franchise. Let them beware lest, under the name
of an extension of the franchise, the measure proposed by
Alinisters, might not be a measure for giving increased power
to the Protestant landlords of Ireland, in order to e'ect men of
their choice, and net the choice of the electors, as Members of
Parliament.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He came now to another
subject, to the eligibility of Roman Catholics to offices in Ire-
land.—( Renewed cries of Hear, hear.) ( The Noble Lord
then quoted an extract of a speech from Sir Robert Peel, in
which the Right Hon. Baronet said that it would have been
better if the penal acts affecting the eligibility of Roman Catholics
to office had not been repealed at all, than, when repealed, not.
to be practically acted open.—( Hear.) lie ( Lord John Russell)
would ask to what appointments had the present Government
preferred Roman Catholics. They had hail the appointments
of a Master of the Rolls, of the Chief Justice of the Queen's
Bench, and of three or four Puisne Judges, and yet they had
not appointed a single Roman Catholic.—(hear, hear.) In
fact, they had scarcely appointed a Roman Catholic, in a na-
tion of Roman Catholics, to a single office of trust or power
since their accession to office. And yet that was the power
they professed to give by statute. That statute spoke of un-
just preference and unfair sespicion, and the course that had
been adopted towards Ireland was a course of unjust preference
and unfair suspicion, considering their talents, and the number
of that people.—( Hear.) He now came to an objection that had
been made that would induce hint to enter a complaint and
protest that the whole Roman Catholic body were opposed to
the present Ministry.—( Hear, hear.) If such was the case,
how came it to be the fact ?—( Hear, hear.) Hitherto the
Roman Catholics had acquiesced in such doctrines —( Hear,
hear ) He never heard such charges made against them.—
( Hear, hear.) On the contrary, they had been charged with
having too great a wish for arbitrary power.—( Hear, hear.)
How came it, then, that the Roman Catholics opposed the
present Ministry ?—( Hear, hear.) He could easily answer
that question—( Hear, hear)—and in doing so he was autho•
rised to make • a grave charge against some of the present
members of the Government.—( Hear, hear.) It had been
asserted some time ago that Mr. O'Connell and others had
united to endeavour to excite feelings of among the
people of Ireland to the people of England.—(Hear,
hear.) That was no doubt an offence at law.
They had had a charge in their favour from the Chief Justice.
—( Cheering and counter cheering.) They had had a verdict
of a jury in their favour. There could be no doubt but that in
the opinion, both of the Government and of the Crown lawyers,
that was a grave offence, and it did right to bring men, aye,
eminent men, to the bar on such a charge-4 Hear, hear. )
But had there been no persons doing this, reversing the words
England and Ireland ?—( Cheers.) Had there been no per-
sons who had endeavoured to excite in the people of England
feelings of hostility and ill-nature towards the people of Ire-
land ?—( Renewed cheering.) IThe recommendation of the two
Houses had been, that the two countries should be bound by
reciprocal affection, not one-sided affection, not affection on
the part of the people of Ireland to be returned by feelings of
hostility and ill-will on the part of the people of England.
Had no person in this country endeavoured to excite feelings of
hostility in the minds of the people of England, by calling the
people of Ireland aliens ?—( Cheers.) Affixing to them a term
which belonged only to persons born out of the Queen's allegi-
ance, and used for the purpose of depriving them of the benefit
of those corporations which had been granted to the people of
England.—( Cheers.) He would ask why had not the Attor-
ney-General prosecuted this person in the Queen's Bench ?
(Cheers. ) How came it that they had had no speech of eleven
hours stating the enormity of his offence ?—( Renewed cheers.)
The answer no doubt would be, that the words had been spoken
in Parliament, and were protected by privilege. But had that
person in any way been deprived of the confidence of the
Crown ?—(Cheers.) Had he been marked as a person not
proper to be admitted into the Queen's Councils ?—(Cheering
and counter-cheering.) On the contrary, he occupied the
highest place there, and he was at the head of the magistracy
and of the law in England, and stood there as the person to
direct the prosecution against Mr. O'Connell, for having ex-
sited feelings of ill-will among the people of Ireland.—( Cheers. )
Had they ever heard of anything so monstrous as this ?—( Tre-
mendous cheering. ) He did not believe that that person held
his situation on account of any superiority in his judgments
in the Courts over which he presided, for he believed that no
duties were more highly paid, or performed more carelessly,
than those which were performed by that functionary.—( Im-
mense cheering, and counter cheering.) It was on account of
that declaration—on account of that hostility to the people of
Ireland, that that person had obtained his office.—(lmmense
cheers from the Opposition, answered by groans from the Mi-
nisterial side of the House.) Well, Government had had their
conviction—they might have their superiority in this House, but
they should not prevent him from advocating what he thought
was the cause of the oppressed.—( Loud cheers.) A Noble
Lord opposite laid great stress and emphasis on having a Pro-
testaut Government, a Protestant Constitution, a Protestant

' Sovereign, and a Protestant Church, its this country, and he
explained that what he meant by the word Protestant was,
they should not have any minions of Popery in that
Government. ( Hear, hear. ) These were the words
of the Member for Worcester; but were they not terms of
abuse, and were they not contumelious terms ?—( Loud cheers.)
Was his Right Hon. Friend Mr. Sheil—was Mr. Wyse—was
Mr. More O'Ferral, were these minions of Popery ?—( Cheers.)
But more than this, two years ago, a Right Hon. Gentleman
brought forward a motion of want confidence in the existing
Government, which was carried by a majority of one, and the
appointment of those three gentleman to office had beets
alluded to, of whom he would only say that they were hardly
placed in a position high enough for their merits. The Hon.
Member for Canterbury (Mr. Bradshaw) a constant supporter
of the present Government, and one of that majority, attacked
those appointments; and said that each of them was a direct
insult to the nation, and that the Government was upheld by a
body of Irish Papists who were elected by savages not more
civilized than the inhabitants of New Zealand.--(Loud
cheers.) Such was the language used at that time, and now
they had prosecuted some of the ablest men in Ireland, and to
conviction, for endeavouring to excite hostility against
the people of England.—( Loud cheers.) His belief
was, that these directions against the people of Ireland
were part of the stock in trade of the party now in power.
He believed that they worked upon the prejudices, the honest
but ignorant prejudices, of the people of England. They made
them believe that the Roman Catholics were about to hold the
highest offices in the State, and they thus animated them, for
their own purposes, against that portion of the empire.—
(Loud cheers.) He alluded to this subject, because it was
now said that the Roman Catholics could not be placed in office
because they belonged not to the political party in power ; but,
he asked, what man of the least feeling, of the smallest
,spirit,
could join a pasty who treated with contempt and insult, and
unendurable injustice, the great body of the Roman Catholics,
who belonged to an ancient religion, and who constituted more
than 6,000,000 of the people of Ireland?—( Great cheering. )
Having stated what he thought was the injustice done to the
people of Ireland with regard to the administration of justice,
with regard to the franchise, and the disposal of power
and patronage, he would now review the conduct
of the different Governments with regard to those
subjects. From 1836, the gentlemen who held
the offices of Attorney. General and Solicitor-General for Ire-
lan 1, determined to give a new direction with regard to the
administration of justice ; and for this purpose they directed
the Crown solicitors that Catholics and Protestants should be
equally entitled to serve on juries, excepting cases of special
objection. It appeared by the evidence of Sir Michael
O'Loghlin, that after three years' experience of this system,
the confidence of the people of Ireland in the administration of
justice was greatly increased. Evidence to the same effect was
given by Sir W. Somerville ; and let it be recollected that this
evidence was given before the Lords' Committee of 1839, which
was appointed to inquire into the state of crime in Ireland,
under the administration of Lord Normanhy.—( Hear, hear.)
The evidence showed that crime had greatly diminished; that
there was more security for life ; and that property was
worth more by four or five years' purchase, than it had been
some years before.—( Hear, hear.) With regard to the muni-
cipal franchise, the late Government were of opinion that the
same principle should be adopted in Ireland and in England.
This House agreed with them, but the House of Lords rejected
the Bill. But had not the people of Ireland good reason to
complain ? The late Government were not in the same
posit ion with regard to administration and legisla-
tion. It appeared to him, and the people of
Ireland were of the same opinion, that on the whole it were
better for them to have a Government whose administration
was favourable to them, although their legislation in their be-
half has obstructed them—than that they should have a Govern-
ment whose laws would not be more favourable, and whose
administration would be adverse to them.—( Hear, hear.) In
1841 the Right Hon. Gentleman had Ireland delivered over to
him in a state of political tranquillity.--( Cheers.) He did
not wish to exaggerate. He knew there were evils to be
cured, which could not be done in a few years ; but the
temper of the people had improved.—(Loud cheers.) They
had more confidence in the administration of justice ; the
national wealth of the people had increased ; the price of land
had advanced ; life and property were more secure ; and per-
sons were more willing to embark capital in the country. lie
had seen, in the appointment of the Noble Lord opposite (Lord
Eliot) the germ of a hope that things in Ireland would go on
smoothly. The Noble Lord himself was in favour of impar-
tiality. At the commencement of the present Ministry, he
(Lord John Russell) had expressed an opinion in favour of that
appointment. His (Lord John Russell's) belief was, and he
stated it now, that notwithstanding the wrong and injustice
they had suffered, the Irish people would have suited their own
interest better if they had remained in tranquillity, until, by a
gradual increase of strength, they could have produced such
an impression on the Government and the Parliament of this
country, as would have been irresistible in favour of just prin-
ciples. That was not the case. Those who had pos-
sessed more peculiarly the confidence of the Irish people,
were indignant at the treatment they had sustained.
They maintained, with great force, that a remedy for those
evils never could be obtained from the English Parliament.
They said the only remedy for them would be found in a re-
peal of the union. It was a matter for consideration with the
Government how that cry was to be met. The Government
might, either by a motion of their own, or on the motion of
the Hon. Member for Limerick, who asked them temperately
to consider the subject, have done so. The Government
refused to do this. They stood with confidence on the Act of
Union. Tney said they would not inquire into the fairness or
the justice of the Act of Union, but they seemed determined to
act up to its very letter. What was the consequence of that ?
It appeared, from the indictment lately prepared, that meet-
ings had been held in Ireland at which between three and
four millions of persons had been present. These meetings
were held for the pupose of agitating the repeal of the union ;
and resolutions were passed in favour of such repeal.—
( Hear, hear.) Was it not alarming to find so great
a portion of the population of Ireland was discontented?
More than forty years after the union the people of Ireland
declared that nothing but repeal could give them satisfaction.
The people made various speculations upon the intended con-
duct of the Government, and various opinions were given.
Some said they thought the meetings were clearly illegal, or
accompanied with circumstances of illegality ; the Govern-
ment should at once issue a proclamation to prevent any fur-
ther meetings. Others said that such would have been a very
unwise course; if the meetings were allowed to continue mere
numbers would not produce any considerable effect, and at
length the leaders who presided at these meetings would
desist of their own accord, or else resort to some steps
which would be clearly illegal, and on such steps proceedings
would be grounded. The Government took neither of these
courses. They dismissed some twenty or thirty magistrates in
the most strange manner.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
The Lord Chancellor of Ireland declared that certain persons
who were in the commission of the peace in Ireland, could not
hold that commission because they held repeal opinions and
attended repeal meetings, and that after a Member or
Members had made certain declarations in the House
of Commons they should be dismissed for acting
contrary to those opinions, although, as had been pro-
perly remarked in that House last night, the sentiments of the
Right lion. Baronet respecting repeal could he only known by
a breach of the privileges of that House.—( Hear, hear.) In
fact, these could not be known, except through the newspapers,
and the magistrates of Ireland were not aware that the Times,
the Morn:7w Chronicle, and the Herald, were the recognised
organs of Ministers and of Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) But
yet these magistrates were dismissed because they did not act
in accordance with the opinions so delivered. Those proceed-
ings—this dismissal, did not diminish the danger of those meet-
ings—did not lessen the numbers who attended these meetings,
and many magistrates were dismissed, in whom the people
placed the greatest trust, and who were the means of removing
from the magistracy of Ireland, by that confidence, the odium
which formerly attached to that body. Those meetings were
allowed to go on from March until October, and then suddenly,
early one morning, the Lord Lieutenant and the Chancellor
landed at Kingstown—the meetings which had been hitherto
held undisturbed were decried by proclamation, and their sup-
pression immediately direeted.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear. )
There was one circumstance attending that proclama-
tion of a very extraordinary character. He alluded
to the meeting which was to be held at Clontarf. All the
arrangements had been made for that meeting, and had been
published and declared at the Donnybrook meeting, which
preceded it some time previously. In fact, it had been uni-
versally known, for many days before, that a repeal meeting was
to take place at Clontarf, yet not a single step was taken for
its prevention, but a proclamation was issued upon the Saturday
afternoon which immediately preceded the Sunday on which
the meeting was to be held. 'Those who issued that proclama-
tion were responsible for the time at which it was issued.—
( Hear, hear.) He would not say—he should be sorry to make
such a statement—that they had issued it in the hope of blood-
shed—( Hear, hear)—but in doing so they had acted with a
carelessness that showed they had not a sufficient value for.life.
—( Hear, hear.) What had prevented the people from coming
up in crowds ?—( Hear, hear.) What but the exertions of
Mr. O'Connell and his associates ?—( Great cheering.) Not
the care of a paternal Government—( Hear, hear)—but by a
few irresponsible men, and one of those had become a victim in
the cause of peace.---( Hear, hear.) Did not it therefore be-
come that House to make an inquiry—(Hear)—a strict and
searching inquiry, why that which was known to all
the world was not known to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland,
and the Council in which he issued the late proclamation ?
(Hear, hear.) He was not one of those who approved of
meetings that were calculated to excite tumults, or might
end in forcible intimidation.—(Hear, hear.) Previous to
the commencement of the meeting at Clontarf, the proclama-
tion he had adverted to had been issued, stating that it was
dangerous to the public peace, illegal, and unconstitutional.—
( Hear, hear.) What had been the result of that proclamation ?
Far different to what it would have been but for the inter-
ference of Mr. O'Connell.—(Hear, hear.) But, however,
much they might triumph in sending Mr. O'Connell to gaol,
let them not forget that Mr. O'Connell had on every occasion
persuaded the people to keep the peace, and dissuaded them
from violence.—(Cheers. ) At the time that he (Lord John
Russell) had held office, he had on several occasions felt
anxious as to the course which Mr. O'Connell might adopt.
At the time the outbreak took place among the Catholics of
Canada, he had watched the course of Mr. O'Connell with the
greatest anxiety. Mr. O'Connell had held up the conduct of
the insurgents to odium, and had warned all who had any con-
fidence in him not to be guilty of a breach of the peace.
Again, when outbreak was threatened by the Chartists of
England, Mr. O'Connell told the Irish people that the object
of the Chartists could only be obtained by physical force, and
that a resort to physical force could not be justified under any
eircumstances.—(Cheers.) Then, again, at the time of the
agitation respecting trades unions, Mr. O'Connell had not
only exposed his popularity, but his life, to discourage the
movement in favour of trades' unions.—(Cheers.) These
things were worthy the serious consideration of the Govern-
ment; and when multitudes were assembled for the purpose of
discussing the obvious and admitted grievances under which
Ireland laboured, surely it was some safety for a Government
to know, that at the head of that movement was a man who had
always persuaded the people to peace, and dissuaded them from
a resort to physical force.—( Cheers.) It was singular that the
Government should have taken no steps to put a stop to
those meetings, until the time at which the Clontarf meeting
was to have been held, and they had nearly come to an end,
but having done so, they might very well have stopped them,
and waited till Mr. O'Connell should have taken some other
steps too dangerous to pats unnoticed. But they had thought
that it would be better to have recourse to a prosecution, and
that prosecution was for all these meetings which they them-
selves had allowed to pass, for all those acts of which
they had taken no notice—(Cheers)—for articles in news-
papers—which might have been prosecuted as seditious libels—
( Loud cheers)—acts which had been suffered to proceed
without interruption for nine months together, while ono of
the persons prosecuted had only joined the Association at a late
period, when it might well have been supposed, from the supine-
ness of the Government that there was nothing illegal in it, and
that any person holding repeal principles might safely join it.
—(Cheers.) They did not prosecute them for these separate
meetings but for a conspiracy, and he had been reminded by
this prosecution most strongly of the prosecution against
Horne Tooke and Hardy.—( Cheers.) They had brought
together acts extending over a period of nine months in pre-
cisely the same manner as had been done in that instance, and
which had brought down upon the prosecutors the eloquent
denueciatiens of Erskine.—( Loud cheers.) These persons
were indicted for conspiracy to obtain some common end by
illegal means. Those means were the meetings which had
thieoenn
forsu nineffered thelbliyonths._ Hear,
Government
hear-) to go
had without
rea id
nterrup-
tion
able
and temperate speech of the Attorney-General for Ireland,
the able and equally temperate speech of the Solicitor.
General, and the able, but by no means temperate,

charge of the Chief Justice—(Cheers and laughter)
;
and, for his seen part, he could not but come to the co elot,
sion that the meetings attacked were either legal and inuoceo,
or illegal and criminal. If they were legal and innocent,
the:
could the attending them, or any number of them, constitut..;
crime? If they had been illegal and criminal, why had he:,
been - allowed to pass nine months unnoticed 1—(
Surely the Government did nut expect that these recettnege
would cease of themselves, when no notice had been give../
their illegality ?—( Cheers. ) It had been said that they
Liis4
been suffered to pass unnoticed, because the Government
not at the moment a sufficient force in Ireland to suppress ttleo;
It was impossible to believe that such could be the case. IL to
impossible to believe that the Government would seek the eat
entrap men—(Cheers)—that they would conceal lieuto
opinions for the purpose of sweeping all these pets"' • a
their net—( Loud cheers)—that they would seek to obtaoieet
conviction for acts which they themselves had pa',ed.
unnoticed.—( Cheers.) The indictment was for .conster,iteido
Cheers",
and it appeared from the charge of the Chief Justice, that d,
present. law of conspiracy was not the ancient law of the Is
By the ancient law of the land, the combination of peot;edf
secret to commit injustice was necessary to be P/Hesis
in order to substantiate the charge of coespiraey.---( oises
hear.) The alteration in the law had not been ive
by statute. 'the new law of conspiracy was whatoie
Bentham would call judge-made law, and he had read anool
from the last edition of Hale's Pleas of the Crown, which sl
far,
that the law of conspiracy had of late been carried e."llLere
ther than it ever had been in ancient times, and that be.
Ellenhorough had stated that it had been carried far en°ll6 oat
( Hear, hear.) He (Lord John Russell) thought that. g
IQ
caution should be used in the application of that doetrairediog
meetings held for the discussion of public subjects. Aee°bogs
o
to that doctrine, any person might be involved in a Lai'
of conspiracy.—( Hear, hear.) Take the Anti-Corn- of
League, for instance. Suppose that, in censequene_eoo
scarcity, violent speeches should be made, and
should be guilty of riot ; it might be very proper t° Ito an
those persons for their conduct, but what would they say is of
indictment for conspiracy which should include the Margnoes
Westminster and Mr. Jones Loyd, because they were let r.)
hers of the Anti-Corn-Law League ?—( Cheers and laugh into
Or, if a Government of a different opinion should cernesseie
power, he could not see why the Agricultural 1-`4°,.)
might not be indicted for conspiracy.—( Cheers and laugb/orac
h
The being present at an illegal meeting, as he had said ue
was merely a single point to be proved by evidence, aye °r $
and the jury could come to a clear decision upon it. -13° tot
conspiracy ev rything was involved, everything was itairloat
where the law and the fact were at such a distance ,p 1
each other, and it required the utmost clearness of head an,uoj
understanding to consider the subject. It was obvious tby
this law of conspiracy might be used for the oppression °f [led
subject, but what was the remedy ? It was that which eve 01
in the case of Hardy and Horne 'fooke. It was a fairetes•
impartial trial by jury.—(Cheers. ) Was there such a
Lion in Ireland ?—(Loud cheers.) He returned to the se`at, it
ment which he had quoted of Sir Michael O'Loghlin, l,"obst
had been the practice since the union to strike off Ca ,e
e
and liberal Protestants from the jury. He begged the Hegeok
to consider what had lately taken place in Ireland. In thse
place, it appeared by affidavit that in the general list et :v-te,
sons qualified to serve on:special juries there were sixty °
omitted. se
Mr. SHAW (Recorder of Dublin)—That has not
stated on affidavit. e to
Lord J. RUSSELL said it was stated in the challeegot
the array. (The Noble Lord here read the challenge.) eel
flight Hon. Gentleman opposite contradicted this slate'° el'
but he (Lord John Russell) believed that it had been the
mitted by the Attorney-General and the law officers elgoe,
Crown upon demurrer.—( Hear, hear.) The Hight Hit/
Gentleman denied this, but the traversers said there svere, of
names omitted, and Mr. O'Connell said that thirtY""',:er
those sixty were Roman Catholics, being a much greater
portion than was on the array when it was finally struck•ct bat
(Lord J. Russell) did not charge any person with filne 'beet
even supposing that it was done innocently, and with the it
intentions, still he thought, under the circumstancieto"rat
was the duty of the law officers of the Crown and the Gorer't
itself, to see that no advantage was taken of the circule are
otese
It was the custom formerly in Ireland to exempt eel
Catholics from juries and on this occasion ten persae'teef
been rejected by the law officers of the Crown, becau'resolll'
were Roman Catholics. This proceeding was of itself eight
cient to deprive those State prosecutions of the moral naoese
which they would have justly had under other cireue"t osic'
If the object of the Government had been to ensure a eteeets
tion he could understand the mode of proceeding—if 'hi 00
in the case of a private individual, where a private rig eking
contested, he could very well understand this made of re
a jury. The Noble Lord then read an extract fromJO,
deuce of Mr. Keasmis, given before a Committee o'l 11
House in 1839, when Mr. Kemmis was a"ketober
he did not think that placing the greater nocatg
of Protestants on a jury where, in the ordinary
II not
of the panel, the Catholics would preponderate, Iphee
packing a jury ? Mr. Kemmis said he thought not; an ere
asked what he thought packing a jury signified, he said ir tep
ting in a jury to convict or acquit." There were its/
Roman Catholics among these forty-eight ; and all teatbre
verscrs with the exception of Mr. Steele, were Roman vecsl
lies ; yet from this roll was st uck out all the Roman Cat, 1,-1 _
a circumstance which would induce the people of I rej3
It
believe that the jury was appointed to convict.—(HeAtre.eotill
was impossible that, under such circumstances, the peer' attic
believe that their leaders had been tried by a fair and n f
the
jury. He could very well understand why members that
Repeal Association should be excluded from the jur)-°serre
he would himself object ; but two of these ten persoti%too,
not, and never had been, members of the Repeal Ass°o,rre;
and had never contributed to its funds. He a‘Bs,
fore. bound to believe that these two gentlee 11°'
had been objected to solely because they ever fool
man Catholics, and that the other eight, whether they Prsoatiss
repeal principles or not, would have been excluded er sle-
they were Roman Catholics. He held in his hand anreeeer
davit of one of these gentlemen, declaring that he had !eve
been a member of the Repeal Association, and had °
subscribed to its funds. With regard to the proceedincoilt
the trial itself, he did not mean to enter into thern• d
respect to the conduct of the Attorney-General, it ha ad
ready been !wade a subject of comment in that House, The
he had been excused by the Ministers of the Crown. 40
Attorney-General, in a court of justice, When the Judges "
about to enter, surrounded by all the majesty of justiee'er,
the midst of a great anti important trial, so far lost his teierflo
and outraged decency, as to invite a breach of the peace. cos
had been excused on the ground of irritation loY„sh
of the members of her Majesty's Government ; but
eif 'first
allowance was made for the feelings and irritability of teepee
law efficer of the Crown, should there not also be seine A she
' ante made for the exclamations of the Roman Catholie',
'
had been for years subjected to the grossest impuratisetred
( Hear, hear.) Had not their priesthood been &floral,' j 7,"
demon priesthood ?—had not their religion been slandereNeo
had not the people been called barbarians, and worse &leo the
Zealand-srs ?—and yet they were held less excusable lee/ do'
Attorney-General, who had transgressed the bound, ;boo
cency. He perceived, by the newspapers of that daY,_, Mt.;
meeting had been held to celebrate the liberation led Pai
Oastler—( hear)— and a Noble Lord who preen- isel
all kinds of compliments to Mr. Oestler, who was recogn belt
the organ of the feelings of a party, but who, PerhAP-irece
given expression to the feelings of that party with teo°o hs
liveliness—he could not but remember that expreolbe cot,'
fallen from this same Mr. Oastler which might well
pared with the speeches which had been matte by tnololoo
victuals who were the subject of the State prosecutions inti, 010.9
With regard to the traversers who have been convieteelogepa
they shall have received their sentence your procee".s eolle4;
be at an end for the present. But would this have AO'r, those
Bating effects ?—(Cheers.) What do you expect fr°l trioreoi
proceedings ?—( Hear, hear.) Mr. O'Connell, as aeet ss,
pliant speaker—as a man who had forced the Governolerjeie4
Parliament of England into the concession of the E "'obiert if
Lion Act—as a triumphant speaker,was, no doubt, at; ouch of
admiration to the people of Ireland, but he doubted resslier
Mr. O'Connell, convicted by a jury, purposely and el,Po grit
Protestants—(Loud cheers)—convicted and sent
and suffering for the people of Ireland, for whom he es Pee
such results—suffering, perhaps, in health, leer
advanced age, in a prison, would not have 3 Ire
greater hold upon the affections of the people eieattirs
laud—he very much doubted if the sutTeringtbee
eAO
whom you imprisoned would not have more symP3tile,ett,b,
triumphant leader whom you disliked.—( Cheers. ' re staieere
consider what they could do with regard to the futnh' ee flit
Ireland—whether there were not measures—lehetus,
was not a course, by which they might rea
the people of Ireland to this eountrY:ere
evils of the present state of things must be felt iseeroot ceeof
If they considered the finances, what expense must ilootjoares
to govern Ireland by military force and the ere arid
fortresses If they considered the state of their feouritried
lations, and if any differences exited between this °0 fitog,
any foreign State, what advantage would not his Plc feebtea
have with both countries united, arid supported by cry les
and affections of the United Kingdom—(Cheers)decia req,
Minister of Foreign Affairs, who represented a divl.. 00.'1
one portion of whom was governed only by force u,ee ererjo
(Cheers ) On every account they ought to settle Leo,iibeete,
state of affairs. Let them take care care, if theY, ell the pre'
maintain the union, that the people of Ireland had all
rt
nests of that union, all those advantages which the% / A' ou
mised, and which had been sanctioned by the ite:ssiee."l(
1829. Let them have no partial administration of Iwo.) Cr
partial, no sectarian administratiOn of justice.—(C eettildeh $
the House went into Committee, his first resolutioncroe seeete
spect this subject. He would next endeavour to f %le to "'try,
franchise for the people of Ireland as might be agree- eolleot
and conformable with the law prevailing ie at,cee'
If they could not have a 40s. franchise, they slip.. O, sof
have one equal to the franchise in this country, eetret.lrel
nell complained that the whole of the agriculturait of loe.
Ireland had not more electors than the single cot:) of pee
that while Wales had 36,000 electors, the counkn• see
which was nearly equal in population, had only 2,iiej if ite
were obvious inequalities, which must be reenetook aml Ir.
wished to proceed in concert, and acted in good notbise
to the engagements of Mr. Pitt in 1799. It fra°' the,
O'Connell alone who spoke of the inequalities Of
e'utteoinor"
in the two countries ; but the Right Hoe-
Member for Waterford, and the Duke of Leieslers' „greeore,
Charlemont, who were no levellers, no agitators' there" de'
representing it as a great evil. They oug.n then
in „l7.
to set about a cure. They ought to acl•
claration of the Right Honourable Gentlema h,y
Jf be of
There were two courses they might pursue. troy rat
tamed the law as it formerly stood, they had pity. 11°
cerity of scruples, justice to all parties, and Sec u,, heareo, he
they passed the Act they lost the whole.—( Hea'resoeitiot,ject
should, therefore, assert that principle in an),:i, to st,sejack
should propose to the House. He came n° to of `rjeetl),
which nearly touched and related to the peonfe.t ofec
upon which they atte opted to legislate, but °ersoe•,,ear.),
either for the people of Ireland, or for any, par, tet,
alluded to the Ecclesiastical Establishment.• 4 otet'e and
Wherever that was advocated it was invarteeeYdefeee.: 0,5
our Establishment raised jealousies, produced
_.,l'noipte 'of dell
stated, evila. With rard to the voluntary P7o,.,ers ee°
stated, that the evil of it would he that the:we ,
ligion wonld be dependent upon their flocks too,Tticai egti.otte I
that, being so, they would join in every act ofcltoue list !„„irei
—( Hear, hear.) With regard to the last obi('
ci,_usiasticabl s)ci
it was evident) every where. But the le
vinerltreedl.andTicieompeboinpleecifeblotththtahtethoelyij:e.etriennesxctioeuedicia'Lcihiitheleaers,r.:,hegearlrir.:!:
—that there was a class paramount over them;
eetorekeYtielte
But then he would come to the evils of he F..ut ? irlejaea
ciple. What was the fact with respect to tn_aonle
the clergy of six millions arid a half of the
en,eo_lo, t ode
were supported by it. But it was said that ty tee.
to whom the greatest praise was due, were cOrcey, and
political discussion more than any other set ot.
gotut"v ins
Quarterly Review he had seen it stated that, %the %re, )
or other, it was necessary to remove the clergy Iru_, thee' var.
and the platform. Would it not be betterl,hear,
of the
unite both systems in one great pririciple7, tkainieg to the
Then with respect to the union. if the lea'aantiatable es. oh'
terms of_ the union was rot in accoedance or I r sce el'eer,)
rs • e woe
some
people of Ireland, for his own part he could n°par, ne the
jection to the alteration of the Act of -.no- •
~,ja re; see t
He confessed that he did not think they ee' oialoeectet re'
grievances of the people in Ireland, but uyt.or one owe.
alteration in the Established Church. He The elect "'
effective' be en tea
think that the voluntary system would be ea,.e t
he should prefer would be one that woulece
ea eretansert°,
putting the Established Church of Engl,aunrldiainio tilt(
Roman Catholic and the Presbyterian
Cit
however, chit'
but j
of Ireland, upon an equality. Ile did no
n_,3 tin
that could be done at the present ,rl-0 fair e'
the HOll5O would only proceed in a fPir"

not Leo

Impartiality, and grant to thc people of Ireland what they were
jclearly entitled to, he should not despair of the Roman Catholics
oining heart and hand with such a proposition. For the pre-
sent, he thought that everything should be done to improve the
College of Alaynooth—( hear, hear)—and that double the
amount that was at present allowed by the Government
to that establishment ought to be granted to it.
There ought to be greater means given to colleges at which
il!liberal education could be derived. When he spoke of a
beral education, and when he spoke of the nom Catho-
vcs of Irel its& he most say that he was not one of tho•e who
thoug,ht it at all necessary that Roman Catholics should be
taken from a higher class of soviets-, or that they should be.
linng to a ciao-era class' to that to which they at present be-
?oged. lie thought there was a great defect at present in
littleir education. Still, however, there was a princi, le in the
ettlau Cath lie Church which was not unworthy of any
ether Christian Church, by which a person, however low,
o°llld rise to eminence in the Church. Such, then, were his
Pinions with respect to this subject. All that he would do
olt present would he to improve the system of education in
'elands and to give larger sums towards it. He thought they
nitight to give the same advantages to the Roman Catholic
as were possessed by the clergy of the Protestant
ot. ureh. At all events, he thought those derogatory distinc•
3 ought to be taken from the Homan Catholic clergy.
lie IIY should not the bishops be allowed to call themselves by
hename of the diocese over which they were placed?-(Hear.)
ts thought it was an unwise and a foolish thing not to allow
jier° to do so. Why should not Dr. Murray be called the
s•entarl Catholic Archbishop of Ireland ? He was the Arch-
sash°
*jun P of Ireland. His character was held in the highest estima-
the It although he had not received much countenance from
Lori' Lieutenant of Ireland. If there was any advantage
;yell by the Act of Union to the Protestant Church, which
L,113 not given to the Catholic Church and the l'resbyterian
untedit,
the should at once be abolished. There still ro-
-4i ta toe question of the E tablished Church in Ireland.
Ctile believed that Archbishop Whately had pug forward a plan
iltnake the Church a Church of c
mgrcgations and not a
there were two Protestants in a parish, a minister was endowed
Win, a
ores sufficient income to attend to the spiritual wants of
two rersons. In that parish there might have been 3,000
tiistt)oo Cathol es, and it would be evident that no parochial
fast Sear.
could fairly be made. Another instance was stated
minister was
In a parish, where there were 1,000 Protestants, a
tbi"lter was appointed with 1001. a-year. In such a ease as
_%he thought the income of the minister ought to have been
reased, lie thought the income of the Iri,h Church was
t4100:0n any Church- on the Continent possessed. They had,
bout 450,00 N. as a perpetuity fund. How this large
ti,llollonrt was applied he was at a loss to imagine. By the abolt-
aoo the 25 percent, of the tithes of the clergy, a sum of
sion'yutte• had been saved. Had this sum gone to the eaten-
triaaati
spiritual instruction—had it gone to the extension of
:obi!n y
H
. No, it had gone to benefit the landlords. e
tb_ught, therefore, that if they could diminish the income of
fur such a purpose, they might at least do
now advance spiritual instruction and education. He came
that t° the most important uestion of all, namely,
stm of landlord and tenant. Ile would refer the House to the
stal,,nieut Made by Mr. O'Connell on this subject, and if that
nient ;sere founded on truth, it became incumbent on that
A5r115,5,t0 enter seriously into the consideration of the subject.
in "
c Connell said the connexion between landlord and tenant
'eland was a most vicious ono. The labouring population
5 t then the extreme verge of destitution. The system had led
siarMost horrible crimes. It was, therefore, necessary to
fair e stteh a revision of the system as would give the landlord a
trb_r,eannt for his land and the tenant a just return for his labour.
eitit;!y dilord and tenant question was one of the utmost
6ilaitthi's:
factor t was indeed a task to place these relations on a
hot t footing. It was imposible to read those passages and
Rhos ° admit that Mr. O'Connell, the leader of the people,
1,023 business it was to hold out for immediate advantages
taste ren.al
• must have been deeply impressed with the impor-
filies °f thin question, when he said th it. the relation of it was
t, 4 With danger. He (bad J. Russell) would not ven.ture
'll4_ll what should be the course of legislation on this subject.
e,ii;e9overnment had appointed a Commission toobtain furtherar
l‘litotilt_e• He doubted whether further evidence waC"tome necessary.
an r,l'ad already been given on the subject before. _
phi Commissioner;. Such statements as were in the pam
P.ece e_,Utitled " A Cr) from Ireland," and which recorded the
Lodeeulngs of one of the landlords, Richard Shea of Blackwell
thergas were truly painful to peruse. The narratives recorded
read ,tere truly -heart-rending, and he would not venture to
by ;nein to the House if they were not supported
*Neck' evidence. All these statements could not be
that)fu, and if there were an of them tre, it sucientlyt. prohved
hear, abthe name of the the.y law, theu powers offif the aw ari
excised ?sells and that the power of the landlords bad been ex-
Ves to an extent truly dreadlul. He thought it would tend
esi4 nlu
to the mitigation, if not to the removal, of those
itchfile steps were taken to make the administration of jus-
elsalre PUre, and above all, to separate more from the land-
er,a, °I. the country the functions of magistrate. He thought
In iiiet"ion of stipendiary magistrates would be very desirable._
tesedeiwords of M. Fox, he wished to see the laws
.adannihs-
dtnce tn a spirit of equity and impartiality, so as to give con. -f
those ° the people. He hoped, by such means, that many o
Ince acts of rapaei.ty and violence on the one hand, and te and cruelty on'theother, would be curbed and deehecke ; b,dut
for sc,ettld not venture to say that he knew of any direct rents
Ity
has -,,great, so extensive, and so long-enduring an eveil.
and
s°tltsaa"searlY a century since circumstances
inlreland
'heal 's as general as now existed, occurred
ermietnt think that a few pages of an Act of Parliamentlwould
the ire such evils. —(Hear, hear.) Having nosy detained
class itulse at such length—(Cries no, an lou
antern,' t` Hear, hear," from the Oppositton)—he would not
lit° the various complaints which hail beau, made ra-
ther, ng the present condition of Ireland. (The Noble Lord
/ery sTieael an extract from the speech of Mr. Fox, delivered
the sni ?rtlY after the union had been carried, with respect to
s%ps4;tt in which that country should be governed, and which
Rats )4uul were applicable to the present state of Ire-
*ere
PoitO4, Mr. Fox denied that the people of that country
Isl°Yals or tainted with treason, and with the
thaw, of Jaeobinical principles and he said that. no
°I taiSe"un existed, except what had resulted from the faults
Peat r,erurnent,( Hear, hear.) Mr. Fox said he knew a
440 mail of Ireland both front having been in that country, and
*es, ,!°,113' private' individuals. He knew that that people
!instil) .rritabi_
e and alive to injury—that they possessed quick
ItllSs4.sull quick resentment ; but he said, that of all the feel-
actuated them none was more predominant, from the
ghcand C' to the lowest classes, than gratitude for benefactions
thang se to
of kindness. Let the English Government
ferente thew' system of policy, and they would find them a dd.-
kid Pe°Ple—let them try the effects of good government,
for os Impartial), administered, and there would be no need
ti military governments or executions. Such were the ten-
aoants of Air. Fox, who had been long in his grave, and
remains were who
close at hand, in that receptacle
_lxh_agnr,eat and the good of all ages. Such were the words of
tuuprornotli was the spirit that must animate all who endeavoured
promote the welfare and the happiness of the Irish people.
That as the system %\
ire, knew would he a system to conciliate
which Mr. Frmi, lavin Irelan, had said
pish eople.—( Loud cheers.) Theffnn,et the
now
tonsan nopf
por the_ ,
tnilt'ilit-tY—a late opportunity it was true, butigstaidlalffnesecufficiently in
Poreuilitt:te-:tof
irte.a_lis(ing that which Mr. Fox had said was the true
for thc country to pursue after Ireland should have been
Cheers.) He was reminded of what had been
aisur
isle respecting another country which had been long greatly
tle,o4red after its union with England, and which had been
ed,,,bY one of Scotland's ost gifted sons, Sir Walter
sli,
t---kkAleers.) Sir Walter Scott stated that when George
tosrartixtue to the throne, the people of Scotland began to look
rebeni s the young sovereign for repose after the disorders and
sairtle cluss and redress of those wrongs which had agitated the
ParCrY during the rein of his randfather, after the Acts of
lanaelarntent proscribing the language' and dress of the High •
"lltsers which had produced irritation and resistance. An
toy,ll',d been proposed for a commission in his Majesty's
the sidelt was represented to the Sovereign that he fought on
;Noe,in Pretender, and had performed many gallant
n°Rist 'us service., " Well," replied the King, "if he has
~.oicheellreapglayi,n,,st me he will no doubt, fight equally for
said' Sir Walter Scott, "was circulated
their Litlighlands, and, although the Highlanders retained
rlash ;vs act notions of the right of the House of Stuart, yet
lozatlid,xisaythedinrwanttatch.hrtuenit IO reigning family that they
forte a Prince of the House of
threit°s,er.--(Cheers.r Wlevehsadnow a young Queen upon the
trinest bxud during the t. f her grandfather many cala-
t`tedsethweardefallelveneraulpon Ireland.lme e There had been a rebellion—
ralglish Par°lll)pressive lawst_
eecneaclatends, both by the Irish
had produced re-
lett
_se on the
part
atoent, and h
re-
she sersrei2l of the people.—( Hear, hear.) Their pre-
avh, was
84arviaatsd as young as George lll.had then been.
11.44 sholdd not thee from the memory of those calamities.
Deal 'objects present Queen reign over the hearts of her
h, as a__ • , so that ,however attached they might be to re-
tve Isuo abstract question, the real benefits which they could
th,Partic T,4
.Pejlect equality of laws, and from an equal and
04,14 071tnistration of justice—( Loud cheers )—would bind
descountry by a real, a perfect, and an indissoluble
orsijOhla °°(l cheers.) What was there to prevent such. a
lstn •
ha tacver • .—( Cheers.) Not the personal wish
than the 11, eign.---(Loud cheers.) That Sovereign he
.had
r:11 she JnOUr to serve, and for any one to be more anxious
ow" ,;‘,,s to secure the benefit and happiness of the Irish
De
tiled 4°Possible.—( Loud cheers.) Ilehad never, when
tech% r office of Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ts,'Pealtec:lted an intimation from tt Sovereign
andCatholicise Presby-
Va° Peol,l eheers. ), Who, then, would stand between the
° wool,and this most desirable consummation ?--(Cheers.)
yn ut (it,"erl,Tevent Ireland from being what Scotland was
tlo ejt rs,,N)—from being united with England by a real
then't 'Procal affection ?—(Cheers. ) Would the House
th, jagirense cheering.) If the House should. or? decide,
tla'titnselve, b' would they be taking a heavy responsibility upon
tlishers of exposing their country for many years to the
tut hwer Pr.et'arious dominion over Ireland, and of dim-
-140. the 4.,,,th regard to foreign nations...--(Loud cheers.)
two's stiecrin_"use, rising above those prejudices, and showingltg
. NTI to Ilse spirit of party, should desire to unite the
to the
and to ins;
10 In the bonds of reciprocal affection, and,_ve
gisri tiaa,teen !putt of justice, should rely upon the lo
Wosi°,ll3 the Irish people to make that country a
Wool] verito;2rices and the source of strength for England, he
ord`L not be`,?o answer for it, that the hopes of the House
tsera"..erloudet:lsa,,ppoitited. - (Immense cheering.) The Noble
ills,sntlous `SY moving Ins resolution, and sat down amidst
b Wy ePring from all parts of the House.
4the Nub
s,eneord
iSE seconded the motion which had been proposed
el Plat Isd in the eloquent speech to which the House
taittsn
°th ay b A speech distinguished as much by its
th. d Y Its justice, calculated only to awake England
angers
182,3Tltntsast 13. she was incurring. How marked was
.emir tb etween the present period and the year
Warl down,
antit Year they had a Minister of the Crown
4ttlet e would stating that rather than run the risk of civil
Tbe use
__ sacrifice his own friends, and break dnwn the
ether Si i'ePP,ression which he had assisted in building
thervecii,n flash accepted the proffered boon with kindness
those was no'th. VI him the Ematiciisation Act had been passed,
eolitie,Perso, ulgi either in the statute-book or in the roll of
its iry, to were to carry out the administration of the
the bbetlefits B.lnw that the -Catholic's were admitted to
oh!, ssef,rtn' It might be said of that Act, as of
,two ifittt, that it was a failure. There were
cotta Juste
a etgible courses to pursue, one was to act
i.t..ar was tt, nd fairness towards' the people of Ireland, the
%ma despotism
.and force. The conduct offauf
unman ir,re!, rt. was intelligible, so was the conduct o
ties" 'eou
to aithnenrws
min‘lrelanci.—(
ties the Pita E The Right. Hon. Gentle-
ny instances of oppression it
rthis ngland inwards Ireland from theinvasions)
rlot only brought miser t the oppressed, but
ti°:[ned hvil)"„t." "Ppressors themselves, as though it were
vi tie i‘,r_'',,,elenee that there should'be a day of retribu-
Jtill_Wtetlithe
.urr:a.,--ai(llear, hear.) The penal laws were de-
penia:
of ct, ingenuity to harrass and oppress the
siso:ier4elgtrlliemet.in,\,%a,,enrn:it.htnernl.g The country grievously suffered
trill' 'ere obtainedland was in difficulties conces-
people were allowed to receive
„ration
and conferred power,
stree)'es first Tetnimin aamengsmaltlhe and power led to
rooopmpreisnsed.a
poorl'he
1410'41 t4lhatiltnhhalin, till, at length, their numbers increased
teit struggle
erncombination could not be resisted. eAfte; a
fie end espec.„ ~_t_telPation was obtained, and the people of
same(
salt benefits which ought to have
actirwed it. Clan-I)n'
't
of itq
stshsatilgl,!)avl ;;;es and rendered it as littleseoffel
the
sisteescisithhleat
cotnigveraes
Itlisattnatifthstealatao7rl,,nit.nr
inthlerelNanodhlwe
eLeoeradptphaerenfitrst Symptoms
for the - 'Aintienht twoeottfieeletandfea ufepv,o,t, the late Govern-
He reeol-
di Point
Roman Catholics.

t He was him elf in Germany when his appointment was made,
; and he recollected the observations made in Germany at the
time. They asked whether it was possible that a country so
free as England, and which preached freedom and liberty to
all foreign States, could act in such a narrow spirit
towards Ireland ? (Hear, hear.) But so it was.
The Right lion. Gentleman soon after came into power.
He looked forward to the Noble Lord opposite, the Member for
Cornwall, fir impartial justice, but such had t of turned out to
be the case. He had felt no doubt that, although they had not
the Government of Lod Normanby or the Earl Forteseue,
that justice would be done to Ireland.—( Hear, hear. ) What
had taken place ? A State prosecution, for what ?--Why,
doing that which every Irishman was entitled to du. Every
proceeding had been taken against the Catholics of Ireland
that could be. They had b, en removed from the
bench and magistracy, and in the selection of
judges the wishes of the people had not beep con-
sulted.—( Hear.) He thought they looked in vain in Ireland
for the promotion of Roman Catholics to any offices of honour
or S ate.—( Hear, hear.) Even if they were offered, he doubted
that any man would accept office from any member of the
rresent Government.—( Hear, hear.) Every wish of the
Irish people had been met with the statement, that concession
had reached its ulGunatum—( Hear, he •r)—and was it sur-
prising that such things had taken place in Ireland?—( Hear,
hear.) Or that the people should say, if the House of Com-
mons would not redress their grievances, they must look to
themselves, and consider the Government the criminal.—
( Hear, hear.) He would give credit to the Government in
their proceedings, that they had a wish to vindicate the law,
but in doing so, their first act ought. to have been to take care
that they should act with impartiality. Had such been the
case in the late trials ? Certainly not ; Catholics had been
excluded from the jury, and Tory spies had been employed.—
( Hear, hear.) The leople of Ireland believed that they had
been struck off the jury list because they were Catholics, and
that a very different result would have taken place in the late
trials if only one Catholic had been on the jury.—( Cheers. )
If they imprisoned Mr. O'Connell, did the Government sup-
pose that others would not spring up in his place ? If they
imprisoned Mr. O'Connell, they might find the necessity next
week of a fresh prosecution. By imprisoning Mr. O'Connell,
they would be only adding fuel to the fl tine of agitation. He
could assure the Government that the followers of Mr. O'Con-
nell had not diminished in numbers. He. could assure them
that there was an organised system of agitation in Ireland,
which coercion could never put down. The Governmert were
struggling against the repeal agitation ; and yet they were
pursuing that course which was most likely to keep it up.
The agitation would never he put down by prosecutions, but
it might he put down by justice.—( hear, hear.) Let them
do justice to Ireland, and they wool, restore that country to
peace; but as long as they turned a deaf ear to its just tls.
mands, so long would there be discontent and disaffection. The
cqnsequence of the present state of In land vt as the depre-
ciation of properly and the stagnation of trade. By increasing
the tranquillity of Ireland, they thereby increased its prosperity.
One of the great causes of discontent in Ireland was the limited
franchise at present possessed by the Irish people. They re-
quired, too, an addition to the number of Irish Members. They
should be more proportioned to the number of English Mem-
bers in that House. With respect to the landlord and tenant
question, he was glad that a Commission had been appointed to
inquire into the subject ; but he could not but regret that
rrsons from the tenantry had not been chosen to form a por-
tion of that Commission. At present it was a one-sided Com-
mission, and could not be looked upon by the Irish tenantry
but as a landlords' Commission. There wore subjects for the
consideration of such a Commission, into which it could not

fairly enter without the assistance of persons who were
tenants themselves. The present system of education in Ire-
land was extremely defective, and reform in that respect was
very much required. He thought the grant to the College of
Maynooth ought to be largely increased, and that the Univer-
sity ought to be very much extended ; to which University, he
thought Catholics ought to be admitted, or that a Roman Ca-
tholic university should be established. There was one ques-
tion that he had not yet touched upon, and that was the ques-
tion of the Church of Ireland. It might be said that he as
a Roman Catholic Member, would violate his oath by inter-
fering in such a question. He weuld appeal to the Right
lion. Baronet who had introduced the Catholic oath, as to
what manner he intended that oath should be observed. Did
he intend that that oath should allow the Roman Catholic
Members to support the Noble Lord who had commenced the
debate, or did he intend that by that oath the Catholic Mem-
bers were precluded from interfering in ecclesiastical questions ?
He would not do anything to the Protestant Church that he
would not do to the Catholic. Ile would be for improving the
condition of both. Why should a Roman Catholic be re-
quired to give stronger testimony in favour of the Protestant
Church than Protestants themselves—than those who sat on
the same side of the House with him? Did the Constitution
debar them from meddling with Church questions? If so,
then his constituents would say to him—" You shall not re-
p. esent us—you are curbed and fettered—you would net half
represent us. We will have a Protestant, nut a Catholic."
Why, if such a principle were acted upon, the Catholics of Ire-
land would have reason to say they were not half emanci-
pated. Were seven millions of people to be kept in constant
disaffection? It was useless to think of effecting any concilia-
tion by pensioning. The Catholic clergy of Ireland would not
receive Government styport.—( Hear, hear.) A short
time ago, when he ( Mr. Wyse) happened to be in
Dublin, there was a solemn enunciation, on the part
of the Chatholic hierarchy of Ireland, not to receive anything
in the shape of salary or endowment. The causes of this were
manifest. The Catholic clergy must have deeply felt the as-
pe.sions that have been cast upon them by a large number of
the people of this country—they had been slandered in the
grossest manner ; and it was not only Irish feeling, but the
feeling of human nature, that they should be filled with re-
sentment. The Catholic clergy were not hostile to British
connection, and when Lord Normanby was Lord Lieutenant.
there, they showed the utmost disposition to assist the authori-
ties in restoring and preserving tranquillity. The Noble Lord
said in the course of his speech that he saw no reason why the
Catholic clergy should not be selected from the humbler classes
of the Irish people—neither did he (Mr. Wyse). On the
contrary, he would prefer that they were selected from the
humbler classes, for they would understand the condition ot
the poor better, would sympathise in their distresses, and be
more alive to their wants and wishes. The attachment of the
Catholic peasant to his priest was almost proverbial—the at-
tachment of the priest to his flock—they had suffered together
—they had been identified since the days when Catholic
clergymen were transported to the \Vest Indies for their
profession—when a premium had been offered for their heads,
and a still larger premium for their abnegation of the
creed of their forefathers. He had no wish for the ascendancy
of his creed—every good Catholic would dislike it—but they
wanted impartiality in the administration of the laws, and
equality of civil rights with their Protestant fellow-subjects.
Was not th• present condition of Ireland a disgrace to England?
And was it not at present a source of great uneaFiness to the
people of this country ? It was a just principle of retribution,
that no country could injure another without being ultimately
affected by those injuries itself. There was Ireland in the
midst of poverty and discontent—at all times and in all sea-
sons--there she was, miserable and afflicted, whilst they were
rolling in the midst of luxury. She was like the Roman slave,
continually reminding them of their mortality. England
might boast of carrying her commerce and introducing
civilization to the remotest parts of the globe—she
might be the mistress of the ocean, and the most
prosperous of nations. She would be the friend of the slave
far away, and the enemy to oppression in forei.in countries ;
but as long as Ireland continued as she was—as long as Eng-
land neglected to tranquillise that country by healing and
conciliating measures—as long as there was domestic discon-
tent—no prosperity, however great, could be of long standing.
The cure was simple.—let them administer to Ireland
those laws which they so much valued themselves, and have
them administered in the same spirit with which they were ad-
ministered in this country—let them not coerce but conciliate,
and let the Government a second time imitate 1829, by doing
justice to Ireland.—( Cheers. )
Sir J. GRAHAM did not complain of the time consumed in
the two speeches he had heard. The magnitude and the immense
importance of the interest involved fully justified the length ot
those discussions. The House, he was sure, would feel that the
task which he undertook in following the Noble Lord, and the
Right Hon. Gentleman was a very difficult one. He would
not trespass on any more of their time than was absolutely
necessary, but candidly state the case on the part of the Go-
vernment. Before proceeding now to notice the general topics
of these speeches, he should notice a matter which was per-
sonal to himself. He could not help lamenting that upon this
fatal Irish feeling be first parted from the Noble Lord—on the
same feeling they had afterwards met in hostile array, and in
this feeling he feared that, after the expressions used by the
Noble Lord, they would never again unite. What had fallen
from the Noble Lord had sufficiently convinced him that their
opinions regarding Ireland differed very widely. In one
thing he cordially agreed vvith the Noble Lord, who said
that no sovereign had ever been more intent upon
lromoting the contentment of the people of Ire-
and without distinction of party or creed. He had
the greatest satisfaction in stating that all the instructions
which he had received from her Majesty led him to entirely
concur with the Noble Lord, arid to believe that the Noble
Lord was perfectly accurate and correct. On another point
also he agreed with the Noble Lord; he passed a glowing pane-
gyric on Mr. Fox, in which he entirely concurred. Mr. Fox
said that military government and military executions were
not suited to Ireland. What was the policy of the Govern-
ment towards Ireland ? What was the conduct of the Govern-
ment which he was called upon to defend ? Was it in favour
of a coercive Bill? Did he stand up to advocate trial by
court-martial? It was not military law nor military execu-
tions he was called upon to defend. He stood up to advocate
the propriety of governing Ireland according to the
established laws of this country—the trial by jury ; and it was
those laws which, he was happy to say, had triumphed in that
country, and which he stood up to vindicate. He desired to
imitate as much as possible the temper of the Hon. Member
for aterford, which was quite unobjectionable—( Hear, hear)
—and well worthy of imitation. The House would remember
that the Noble Lord had said that her Majesty's Government
were the real criminals, anti as they stood there charged in
this manner, he trusted the house would give them a patient
hearing. The Noble Lord had, unintentionally no doubt,
spoken of the past policy which had been pursued towards
Ireland, and of that which he supposed they would adopt
for the future, in a manner which did not make
the distinction between the two sufficiently obvious.
He would divide the subject into two leading branches, and
first he would speak of the conduct which had been pursued
recently by the Government, and speak of the more general
policy hereafter. He would gladly go back to the period to
which the Noble Lord had referred, but his duty at present was
to defend the conduct which had been pursued by the Go..
vernment. He was surprised at the manner in which the
Noble Lord had spoken of the Government of Ireland by Lord
Wellesley and Lord Anglesea.—( Hear, hear.) Surely, the
Noble Lord remembered that he himself was a Member of the
Government at that titne—(Cheers)—that he had adopted
their policy and shared in their responsibility.—(Cheers.) The
Noble Lord had complained that the union had yielded no
fruits. At the time that he had been the colleague of the
Noble Lord in office, great and important measures had been
carried, and which he believed had been productive of great
advantages to Ireland. When Lord Grey came into power,
emancipation had been carried. He would observe in passing
that from the time that he (Sir J. Graham) had left Lord
Grey's Government, the interval was very shoe. before the re-
spected head of the Government left it aisn' and however
glowing was the eulogium which the Noble Lord had passed
on Mr. Fox, Lord Grey was as worthy of it, and
he thought that the Noble Lord would agree with
him in opinion upon that point..—(Loud cheers.)
Was it contended that Lord Grey had passed no measures of a
liberal nature for Ireland? He was satisfied that Lord Grey
would not have held office for five years within four months
without giving effect to that liberal policy with regard to Ire-
land, for the sake of which he had sacrificed office for so many
years.—( Cheers.) He would state the measures which they
had passed. They had enlarged the franchise. They had es-
tablished a system of national edv7.ation. They had passed the
Church Temporalities Act—an Act which he believed eon-
duced to the stability of the Established Church, by enlarging
the basis, while it took away Scorn the capital.—(Cheers.)
The Noble Lcrd admitted that the pol.ey of Lord Grey's Go-
vernment had been conceived 'n a spirit of kindness towards
the Catholics, anti that there h d been a wish on their part to
admit Catholics to the benefit of a full participation of all ad-
vantages.—( Cheery.) The Noble Lord had said that when
the late Government had left °tree, they had left the country
in a state of tranquillity, and 'hat the repeal agitation was
quite insignificant. Now he 1 rd extracted from the Pilot
newspaper a list of the repeal neetings held during 1840.
On July '2l, 1840, a repeal meeting had been held at Castlebar,
which had been attended by eightess, RS • an Catholic clergy-

men, and several gentlemen. On the '26th of August there
had been a repeal breakfast at Mallow, which had been attended
by 200 persons, and in the same month there had been a public
repeal meeting, attended by 10,0,0 persons. On the 20th
there was a meeting at Skibbereen, attended by several thou
sand persons ; and during that year there were meetings at
Kilkenny, attended by 200,000; at Drogheda, by 60,000; at
Waterford, by 20,000 ; at Dublin, by 6,000 ; and at Maynooth.
by 10,000 persons. In 1841 there had been meetings at Bel-
fast, in the Curragh of Kildare, attended by 80,000 people;
and on the 18th of August, 1841, just before Ministers went
out of office, there was a repeal meeting at Drogheda, attended
by 25,000 people, which was the state of affairs antecedent to
the present Government coming into power. Considering the
present position of Mr. O'Connell, he would not allude to the
speeches which had been made by the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman on those occasions ; but he would state generally
that he had expressed himself with the same zeal and energy
which had characterised his former speeches. The Noble Lord
had alluded to the jury law, and, as it appeared to him, had
confounded the lass regulating common juries, with that by
which special juries were regulated. With regard to common
juries the Noble Lord had eulogised the rule which had been
established by Mr. Justice Perrin.
An How. Masieett —By Sir M. O'Loghlin.
Sir J. GRAII SM thought it was by Mr. Justice Perrin ;
but it mattered not which of them had established the rule, for
the Crown ordering common jurors to stand bye, that rule re-
mained in operation, and had never been varied from in the
slightest degree. To say that the Crown should not, on any
occasion, order a juror to stand bye, would be an absolute
denial of justice. The calm and temperate manner in which
the Attorney-General for England conducted Crown prosecu-
tions had met with general approval, and yet, at the recent
trials at Cardiff, A panel of seventy-five jurors had been ex•
haunted by the challenges of the prisoners, and of the Crown,
those of the prisoners being limited by low to twenty. The
power should be exercised with justice and discretion, but it
was necessary that it should be possessed by the Crown. The
Noble Lord seemed to labour under some misapprehension with
regard to the difference between ordering a common juror to
stand bye and striking a special jury; he was not aware that the
rule regulating the ordering a common juror to stand bye, had
been introduced by Sir M. O'Loglilin, but the striking
a special jury was regulated by Act of Parliament—
that Act having been brought into this House by Sir
M. O'Loghlin, at the time that the Noble Lord was in
office. The special jury list contained the names of 716 special
jurors. Ile would, in passing, observe on the fact of certain
names having been omitted from that list. The Noble Lord
had stated that sixty names had been omitted, and he relied or
making that statement upon a statement which had been made
in the Queen's Bench. He (Sir James Graham) believed
that that statement was a gro,s exaggeration. Not above
one half that number of names hail been omitted, and no one
could contend that the Government was at all responsible for
the omission. His Right Hon. Friend, the Recorder for
Dublin, who was present, would, doubtless, in the course of
the debate, give some explanation on tne subject. Ile deeply
r •gretted the omission, and he agreed with the Noble Lord
in expressing his sorrow at finding that that circumstance
should have created a prejudice, and have given even an ap-
pearance of unfairness to the administration of justice.—
( Hear, hear.) But as the number of names omitted did not
amount to thirty, and that the names of Protestants as well as
of Catholics were among those omitted, it was hardly possible
to imagine that as forty- eight names were chosen by ballot out
of the list of 716, that the emission of those names would have
affected the composition of the jury in any material degree.
According to the Act of Parliament, the parties were to
strike off the names alternately, and if there was anything re-
markable in the Crown striking off the names of Roman
Catholics, it should be recollected that the traversers had not
struck off the names of any Roman Catholics. The case, as
originally represented to the public, had been that ten Roman
Catholics had been struck off by the Crown, not be-
cause they were repealers, but because they were Roman
Catholics. He was sorry to see that that respectable
hbffoi,dlytt.hheutshe English Catholics, had resented this striking
o
jury as an insult offered to themselves, and
given to what was really merely a matter of political
difference a character of religious strife. —( Hear, hear.) He
regretted this exceedingly, for he entertained the greatest per-
sonal respect for many of the gentlemen who had attended the
meeting which had been called to express the feelings of the
English Catholics on that occasion.—(Cheers.) It had been
stated that these persons had not been members of the Repeal
Association, and the traversers, who of course had access to
the hook', had been challenged to verify their statement by
affidavit. This challenge had been accepted, but the affidavit
had not been filed until towards the close of the proceedings.
That affidavit was most important—it disposed of eight out of
the ten cases. ( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Now he
could not understand how the striking off the names of
those persons could be considered as an impeachment of their
fidelity to the sanctity of an oath. If, in a fox-hunting county
he should bring an action of trespass against the master of the
hounds, of course, his solicitor would take care to exclude all
the members of the hunt from the jury.—(Cheers.) If he
brought an action for tithes, of course, he should have little
chance of success if his solicitor did not strike off all lay impros
priators from the list of the jury.—( Cheers. ) They did not
question their honour, they only questioned the strong precon-
ceived opinions and feelings.—( Hear, hear.) He should cer-
tainly be astonished if any one would have the boldness to stand
up in that House and contend that those Roman Catholics who
were members of the Association ought to have been re,ained
on the jury.—(Cheers.) He would now consider the eases of
those two who were not, according to the statements of the affi-
davit, members of the Association, although they were Roman
Catholics. These persons were Mr. Michael Dunn arid Mr.
Hendric. Now, with regard to Michael Dunn, it appeared
that he resided in St. Patrick's ward, Dublin. Now, there
were four persons of that name, three of whom had signed the
v eTrayr
Michaelanri
winhosth. had
Patrick's si raes
ward. Dunn himself, in his affidavit, negatived the fact that he
aresqtuhiesitoiffioncefrosrofeathlleingG the
er
n mr eepnetal believed,n:lee t meeting
t h iast
one
esealof mteheotsineg
aDunn,
requisitionfhe bfio.araiceari,linwaasa
was a member of the Repeal Association, but he did not nega-
tive the fact that he had signed a requisition for calling a re-
peal meeting. Now, with regard to the composition of the
jury, he would observe that the Government might, had they'
chosen, have tried the traversers before a common jury, and in
that case the traversers weuld not have bet n entitled to chal-
lenge a single man, whilst the Crown might have ex-
ercised its Ixerogative of ordering jurors to stand aside.
They did not like to act in such a way, because they thought it
would be unfair towards the traversers; and they thought it
right that they should be tried by a special jury, which would
place both parties in the same position.—(Hear, hear.) There
were forty-eight persons drawn from the general panel, which
were reduced to twenty-four, from which twelve were selected.

It was not only in their power to strike off some of the names,
but it was imperative on them, and it was obvious to common
sense that those whom it was likely must have been prejudiced
as being members of the Repeal Association, were the persons
who ought to have been struck off.—( Hear, hear.) But he
would go further, and say that the instructions of the Govern-
ment were not that Roman Catholics should be struck off etc
Roman Catholics, but only to strike them off under such
cir-
cumstances as would induce them to strike off any other per-
sons.—( Hear, hear.) He was sure that his Noble Friend
would confirm his statement, and he was satisfied that these
instructions had been fulfilled to the best of his Noble Friend's
judgment. Thus, nine out of the ten of the cases were
disposed of.—( Hear, hear.) The tenth person was Mr. Hen-
dric, and he could assure the House that he was
believed to he a Protestant when he was struck off. He was
struck off for reasons quite independent of his religious opinions.
It would not become him to state what these reasons were, and
if he were asked to state them he would not do so, because he
would consider it to be a direliction of his duty. He had now
dealt with this question—( Hear, hear)—and he could assure
the House, and could conscientoualy state that nothing was so
opposed to the wishes and feelings of her Majesty's Govern-
ment as the exclusion of Catholics on account 01 their religion.
On the contrary, positive instructions had been given to avoid
prejudices could be more
thanisdsunbejtewetithnsotanding the prejudices which
With regard to what the Noble Lord
unfounded. —( llear. )
hadsuch b eaenne rxacilsuesdi oonn,
had said respecting their not interfering before, he
could assure the House that throughout the last session of Par-
liament her Majesty's Government was unwilling to interfere
with the right of petition. They regarded the meetings in
Ireland with the greatest anxiety. He would not say that they
were unlawful or lawful, but they went to the very verge of the
law. Violent language had been used at them. There was
marching in order and military music—( Hear, hear)—which
they believed were outside the law. The reason why they did not
act before was, that if they instituted a prosecution
for individual acts in some obscure corner of Ireland,
no moral impression would be produced by a conviction,—
( Hear, hear.) They had an instance of this before. Lord
Grey's Government instituted a prosecution against Mr. Bar-
rett, for a '.er which appeared in his paper. A conviction
was obtained ; and although Mr. O'Connell's name was ap-
pended to the letter, he did not own himself to be the author.
Mr. Barrett was convicted, and went to prison. An opinion
might be entertained whether he was handsomely treated on
that occasion.—( Hear, hear.) But no moral effect whatever
was produced. Mr. O'Connell himself said that it was a mean
and shabby proceeding thus to attack individuals, and, upon
reflection, he ( Sit J. Graham) thought he was right in that
observation.—(Laughter.) The object of the present Go-
vernment was to obtain the punishment of the "head and
front " of the offenders, arid, by pursuing the course they did
to allow the whole scheme to develope itself—they obtained a
conviction by a jury fairly constituted, under the direction of an
unanimous bench, in a trial at bar, and in the metro-
polis of Ireland, and to which the eyes net only of Ireland but
of Great Britain were directed. It had been acknowledged
that the Attorney-General conducted the case with great
temper ; they had the assertion of Mr. Whiteside, who distin-
guished himself as one of the counsel fur the traversers—that
on the whole the Attorney-General conducted the case with
great fairness. They were urgent in pressing the case unti,
the traversers pleaded. They made various motions for the
purpose of delay, which were resisted by the Crown, but
after they had once pleaded, a reasonable time had been
allowed the traversers.—( Hear, hear.) They had waited for
the revision of the jury list, with regard to which such
compliments had been paid to his Right Hon. Friend ( Mr. Shaw )
for the impartiality which he displayed. Had they proceeded
in an opposite direction, and proceeded against, the traversers
for attending illegal meetings, it was clear from the ver-
dict of the jury that they would not have obtained a
conviction. He would not say that those meetings wi re ille-
gal. They were held for a particiilar purpose— he was about
to say for the purpose of intimidating the Govern-
ment, and to force Parliament into a breach of national
faith.—(Cheers.) But the jury thought that though those
meetings were riot illegal in themselves, they became so from
combination. The Noble Lord had spoken of the law of con-
spiracy, which he compared to constructive treason. He said
it was a novel law. He (Sir J. Graham) denied that there
was any novelty in the law of conspiracy ; but if there were any
novelty in ',it, he contended that they had to deal with a new
state of facts, which made it justifiable for thorn to have re-
course to it. One of the most, sagacious of living men fixed
his attention on a terse saying of a celebrated female
writer—The Duke of 'Wellington called les attention to a pas-
sage in a work of Madame de Steel :—" On ne conspire pas sur
la place." In these times Leaguers meet in theatres—(Loud
cheers)--Chartists meet in market places, and conspirators
hneet in conciliation halls to disseminate sedition amongst the
multitude.—( Loud cheers.) He denied that this was a new
law, but even if it were, the circumstances of the case
rendered it necessary. Again, it had been said that in the
issue of the proclamation, prohibiting the meeting at Clontarf,
great carelessness and want of prudence marked their course.
The Noble Lord passed a high eulogy upon the exertions of
Mr. O'Connell to stop the meeting, and he reminded the
House of the opposition he gave to Chartism and trades
unions. Ile agreed with the Noble Lord in the
merit due to Mr. O'Connell for the steps which he took to
stop the meeting at Clontarf. He did not wish to aggravate
the ease against, him, but all those points had been urged in
his defence, and they were proved by the Crown to be part
of the means by which the conspiracy had been proved. the
Noble Lord in more than one passage of his speech spoke with
Christian forgiveness, and in high praise of Mr. O'Connell ;
and he spoke of Lord Lyndhurst in terms of a very opposite
description. "I am the colleague of Lord Lyndhurst—( Loud
ironical cheering from the Opposition benches ) I am his
colleague.—(Continued cheering from the same quarter,) I
am his friend (said the Right Hon. Gentleman, with vehe-
smheonuelde )h—and
beseuesrmPriinsgedhi s that theo
Nospebalke
fLord
Lord Chancellor of England in the terms which he did—
(Loud cheers.) You may talk of your high birth and of aris-
tocratic feelings." The Lord Chancellor of England was a man
who from his first entrance into public life had risen by the
exhibition of pre-eminent talents to the first place at the bar.