The Sun.
London, England, 1850-08-02 00:00:00

FRIDAY EVENING, AUGUST 2, 1850.

CRIME AND OUTRAGE ACT (IRELAND) CON-
TINUANCE BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this Bill,
Mr. M. J. O'CON.NELL said, that as the Bill in.-
volved forfeitures and penalties, it should have originated
in the Honse of Commons, and not in the Lords, and
as the present Bill was first introduced in the Lords it
ought to he rejected.
The SPEAKER, was of opinion that the Bill should
be 1., jeet.Al, and another measure brought in.
Lord J. RUSSELL thought after what had fallen
from the Speaker it would not be advisable to proceed
with this Bill.
The Bill was then laid aside by order of the House.
Lord J. RUSSELL then asked for leave to bring in a
similar Bill.
Mr. HUME said he had come down to the House
prepared to vote against the measure, and he thought
the Government ought to state the grounds on which
they proposed to extend the provisions of the Bill to
Ireland for a further period.

Sir W. SOMERVILLE said he had no objection to
state the reasons which ir.duced the Government to pro-
pose the continuance e,"t. the Act. It was a gratifying
circumstance that b.e was not able to point, as was thane
when the origin:Al Bill was introduced, to a long list of
crimes and stitrages.—(Bear.) On the contrary, the
condition cid:lreland as regarded crimes and outrageehad
greatly i.mproved since the Act was passed.—(Hear.) Still
there were circumstances which made it necessary that
they should not deprive Ireland of the benefits of the
measure. The two objections which bad been urged to
the measure were, that it was of a coercive character,
and would not answer the object for which it was intro-
duced. Now neither of those prophecies had been ful-
filled; on the contrary, it had not proved to be a severe
measure of coercion to any party except evil doers,
while it had been comp!etely efficient in checking crimes
and outrages.—(Hear.) The judges had at the last as-
sizes allud-.d in gratifying terms to the pre-
sent tranquillity of Ireland, and there could be
no doubt that a grcsst 'part of that tranquillity
was owing to the operations of this measure.—(Hear )
It would be an act o:gre:st indiscretion to allow arms to
fall into the hands of improper persons, and permit the
peace and general trarquillity which prevailed to be dis-
turbed by the commission of fresh crimes. If there wss
any thing to complain of it was that the provisions of the
Bill bad been administered temperately and firmly, and,
he believed, wisely; and he would say again that it
would be unwise on the part of the House to risk the
existing trerqudlity, by removing from the Lord
Lieutenant those powers which he thought it neces-
sary to be entrusted with, and through the continuance
of which the tranquillity of the country might be placed
on a more permanent basis —(Hear.) The Right Hon.
Gentlemaii concluded with a motion for leave to bring
in a Bill on the subject.
Colrnsl DIJI`,INE said he would not oppose the Bill if
the Government ccnsirkred it necessary for the safety of
Ireland, but he thought the period for its continuance
should be as limited as was consistent with the puslic
safety._ _ _

Mr. S. CRAWFORD felt himself under the necessity
of opposing the re-inirofiu.ction of the Bill, which it
would be recollected he opposed on a farmer coca.
sion us being a measure of coercion that ought not
.to be placed over the people of Ireland. The extermi-
nations and clearances which had taken place in that
country were the chief cause of the outraeets and crimes
committed by the people, and until the present ysiena of
tenant right was placed on a better footing much
of the existing abuses would he continued. The lion.
Gentleman alluded to the letters of "G. S. 0." in the
Times, for the purpose of showing the wretched condition
of the peasantry (many of whom he found lying in
ditches under the sire's, and rubbish of their demolished
houses), and that a very large amount of their misery was
occasioned by the wanton and unfeeling sett; of landowners.
Government ought to take some steps to put down the
evictions which are constantly occuring in Ireland before
they called upon the House to pass a Clime and Out-
rage Bill, at a time when the country was perfectly
tranquil. It was far be:ter to remove the cause
of ciime than to enact laws far its punishment.
One of the most exciting causes was the
absence of a tenaec right rccogniz'd by the lewieand he
must decline to support any Bill of this nature till the
landlord and Tenant question had been satisfactorily
set at rest. The late Sir Be bert Peel, when he attempted
to pass a Bill of a similar character to this, Is as told by
the Noble Lord at the head of the present Government
that coercion Bills should not be sent to Ireland unaccom-
panied by measures of relief, and since that declaration
carried the Noble Lord into power, he insisted upon his
now acting upon it. Ho might, however, be told that
already Government had done all they could to improve
the condition of Ireland, and perhaps he would be re-
minded of the Encumbered Estates Act, but though the
improvement of Ireland was the objf.ct of that Act, it
had served to promote evictions, and increase the miseries
of the people. Fifteen years ago the House recognized
the right cf Irish tenants to something in the shape of
protection against his landlord, and repeated, though
futile, bad been the attempts since then to establish the
right by legislative enactment. But, in the mean time,
Arms Acts and Coercion Bills had been carried without
end. The time had, however, arrived when a stop must
.be put to this mode ot proceeding; and now that
the hopes of the Irish tenantry had been excited by the
promises of her Majesty's Government, he warned
"them that the passing of this Bill in the place of• some
remedial measure would be productive of end-
less discontent and insurmountable difficulties.
But, independently of all this, there was no
necessity for this Bill; the country was tranquil,
and comparatively free from extensive crime, why then
persist in passing a bill of coercion? The other day
when it was proposed to renew the Alien Act, the House
of Lords refused the motion; there was no necessity for
it, they said, but if. hereafter, any occasion for it should
arise, then would be the time to ask for its
renewal. Now, why could not the same course be
adopted ,with reference to this Bill? He con-
cluded by moving the following amendment:—That the
distressed people of Ireland have borne unexampled suf
ferings, produced by famine, and by evictions froni the
soil, with praiseworthy submission to the laws; and it is
the opinion of this House, that it is not just to renew and
continue measures of coercion subversive of the consti-
tutional righte of the Irish people as British subjects,
whilst the redress of acknowledged grievances connected
with the laws which regulate the relations of landlord
and tenant recommended to the consideration of Parlia-
ment in her Majesty's Speech, has been neglectedOr
postponed.
Mr. REYNOLDS seconded the amendment. The
Eight Hon. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville) bad on this
occasion adopted a different course to that of his prede-
aeasor in office when asking permission to suspend the
constitution of Ireland, and to curtail the liberties .of
the Irish people. The habit on former occasions was, to
relate a long list of crime and outrage; but,
the habit ot the present Secretary for Ireland
was to ask permission to reenact the Act of the 20th
December, 1847, and in doing so he said he was free to
admit he could give no list of crime and outrage. There
,were indications of such thintse the Right Honourable
Gentleman said, but ho had not condescended to
favour the House with any translation of the word in-
dication. He (Mr. Reynolds) denied that there was
any political disturbance in Dublin, or any agi-
tation in Ireland at present. All agitation in
Ireland was at an end; and because those pleasing re-
cults bad followed. tho Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir W,
Somerville) came into that House, with about forty
Members present, and demanded a suspension of the
constitution of Ireland for four years, and the only
excuse he gave was that Lord Clarendon had nut
abased the provisions et that Act. He (Mr.
Reynolds) would ask her Majesty's Government
royalt
submittedm igh
i—f answeredhuthey
iit was true, °t. ;eel, Lnevertheless.na
nS:I.
ter f) ThHeh ae t
they had made to the people of Ireland? Echo
echo in the Paddy Blake sense—(Renewed laughter)
this Bill was an insult to the people of Ire-
land, whom the Queen had declared wore loyal and
might
promisesb
that an
attached to her ; and the reward they were to get
for that loyalty and attachment was, the
suspension of the constitution, which suspension would
hand them over to the tender mercies of whoever
might represent the Queen in Ireland. He (Mr. Rey-
nolds) was not prepared to place the liberties of the
people of Ireland in the hands of Lord Clarendon or any-
body else. A man holding the office of Lord-Lieutenrint
was made of flesh and blood, and, like other men, he
might abuse the powers which the law entrusted to
him—(Cries of " Hear, hear'')—and, therefore, the
name of Lord Clarendon ought not to have been
introduced in connexion with this question. He
(Mr. Reynolds) asked in the name of common justice if
one House was prepared to sanction such a Bill as the
Right Honourable Gentleman (Sir W. Somerville) had
laid before them? If Hon. Members were so prepared,
then he (Mr. Reynolds) would say the Irish people had
nothing to expect from a British- Parliament. but
"coercion, coercion, coercion."—(Elear, hear.)
Mr. NAPIER supported the Bill. He was desirous of
legislating in the most equitable spirit towards all parties
in Ireland; and ho hoped that, at all events, a very short
period would elapse before the House of Commons would
honestly and fairly legislate with a view to the. settle-
ment of the question of landlord and tenant.—(Rear.)
But when the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville)
came to ask the House for a measure which did not sus
pend the constitution of Ireland—(Hear, hear)—which
did not seek to interfere with the privileges of any honeot
man, which only asked for the continuance for a short
and limited period of powers which, if called into action
at all, would only be called into action in the event of
dieaffrction and disturbance again arising in Ireland, he
(Mr. Napier) did not feel himself justified in withhold-
inghis support from such a measure. He thought it
was quite right that the House should extend that power
which they sought to the Government. In legislatiug fur
Ireland, it was their duty to take the country as they
found it. It was their duty to proceed with
temperance and fairness—to look at both sides,
and with a just regard to the circumstances of the
poor. With:regard to the murder of Mr. Maulevere,
to which the Hon. Gentleman had referred, he hal
looked into the circumstances of the case, and had in-
quire • d into the proceedings of that gentleman for many
years back, and he was unable to find one unjust or
cruel act on the part of the victim of that bar-
barous murder. All his proceedings hod been marked
with 'the utmost moderation and temperance. The
Hon.. and Learned Getleman then went at some
length :into the; case of Mr. Dlaulevere and others, in
order to show that there was a deep-seated agrarien
combination among the peasantry against the rthtsast
property.
Mr. HUME rase to order. They were at present
called upon to vote on a Bill for the remedy of present
evils, aud lion. Gentlemen were going into circara-
stauces which hod happened long ago.
Mr. NAPIER detsreled the course he was taking.
ILfO. Members had attached the landlords, and oppor-
tunity ought.to be allowed foisdefence.. lie should giv.
his cordial support to the present measure, and also to
their Landlord and Tenant Bill when it came on.

Lord J. RUSSELL said he was anxious to address
the House, because the Hon. Gentleman who seconded
the motion had refused to grant a continuance of these
powers to the Governinent fcr a limited time, on
grounds with which he (Lord John Russell) could not
agree. What the Hon. Gentleman in fact said was this—
You haye had a law subsisting for some time by which
you have changed the State of society teem one of pre-
valent crime and outrage, and of terror on the part of
peaceable inhabitants—from one of murder and assassi-
nation, frequently end repeatedly committee, into one
of peace, order, and tranquillity. Crime has greatly dimi-
nished ; these outrages have been far less fre-
quent than formerly—tho peaceable inhabitants,
whether they be landlords, tenants, or labourers, have
felt greater confidence than they have hitherto done—
the country has consequently had those means of im-
provement
which it cid not possess when erime and
outrage ware the rules and orders of society; and
because you have done this, and had powers
entrusted to you by Parliament which we do
not allege you have abused in establishing that
tranqifillity, the Government is undeserving of our con-
fidetice; and therefore we refuse you such a continuance
of those powers, and declare that you are utterly un-
worthy of the powers for which you now come forward
to ask.—([fear.) Now he contended that that:was by
no means a justification of the House refusing to
grant a continuance of those powers.—(Hear.) He
did not mean to say thattsuch powers were to be for ever
continue d, but at the same time, when the Hon. Gentle-
man described them as subversive of the constitutional
rights of the Irish people as British subjects, he did
mean to contend that that was an erroneous de-
teriptiou of the poweta which were given by the
Crimes and Outrages Act.—(Hear, hear.) It wa
not an Act giving powers which in 1833 and 1334 were
granted by Parliament to prevent any discussion in
public meetings of any alleged grievances of the Irish
people.—(Hear.) It was not an Act like former insur-
rection Acts, by which even peaceable inhabitants of a
district were prevented going out at nights. It
was not an Ac: which at all, es he thought,
affected the legitimate rights of the innocent and pc ast-
able. On the contrary, it was an Act which gave
power to the Lord-Lieutenant, when a district was
in a state of disturbance, and when offhnces against
the law were frequently committed -in it, to pre-
claim that district, and thereupon certain con-
sequences followed. The Lord-Lieutenant might
place in that district an increased constabulary, which
would be protection and security to the peaceable inha-
bitants of that district, end at the same time orders
might be issued that fire-arms should not be held by
any one except by porions to wnom liconces
were granted for that purpose. And thews
powers were not granted to kcal magistrates
or persons at all effected by the local or political pas-
sions of the district, but they were committed to per-
sons named by the Executive Government.—(Hear,
hear.) It was then not a right description of this :Ilea-
su-e to say that it was subversive of the constitutional
rights of the reply. He was quite ready to admit
that such powers should not be asked unless they were
necettary for the welfare of the people for whom they
were enacted; but he thought enough had been said on
this subject to induce Lim to observe thet the Govern-
ment would Lot ask fur powers fur preserving the
public pe aee if they did not feel confident
teat the ordinary law,:witheut such extraordinary powers,
weed i not enable them ton a:wain that peace.—(Hear.)
Altaic very coathaencenicnt of the present Government it
would be recollected they proposed the continuance of an
Atrns Act, whicn they tound existing on the statute-
book, from the month of August until tine following May,
so that in the meautene they might consider how it ope-
reted; and how it was received. But it was said that tee
people of Ireland should have been allowed to
exercise their own discretion on the subject, arel
that ito arbitrary measure of the kind shuuid
have been unposed on them without their consent.
What, however, would save been the consequence if the
Government had not consented to tike such porters from
Parliament, and bad Itft the peace of the county t t be
prestrved witffout the interfercr.ce of any act of
the Government? The open purchase of arms
by persene who procured them f the purpose
o; disturbing the peace of the country, to make the high-
ways unsafe, would have lett the nidustrious farmer
untafe and unprotected, and placed the whole country in
a state of insecurity.—(flear, hear.) He contested
he never telt the weight of responsibility
morn than when he bed to consider the
propriety of abandoning the continuance of a measure
which had tended in a great degree to abate the state of
ditturbaeca end insecurity which then existed. And if
on that occasion he had a lesson read to him
as to how he should act in future, it was
that he should not prematurely part altogether
with such powers as were given by the present
Bid. Ile must, however, admit that though he did
not consider that these powers were, as the Honourable
Gentleman the iemLer for the city of Dublin had stated,
sunversiver of the constitutional rights of the people,
yet he did think they were extraordinary powers,
and ought not to be granted by Parliament fur
any long period, and he confessed a very fair objec-
tion might be taken to the period for which the continu-
ance of the Bill was originally proposed, but he should
be quite satisfied if the Bill was allowed to continue
from the 31st of December next until the end of
mitt session, instead of for four years, as previously
intended.—(Hear.) At the lapse of that time Parlia-
ment would again have the question before it, and
would have to consider whether these powers ought
to be continued ; but he would entreat tee
House not at present to declare that such
powers were quite unnecessary, and that the Lord-
Lieutenant should be left during the whole of the autumn
without any effectual means of quelling disturbances.
The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Rochdale, who
proposed the amendment, referred to the sub-
ject of legislation on the relations between land-
lord and tenant. Now the Government had re-
peatedly endeavoured to introduce a Bill which
might give satisfaction on the subject to the coun-
try. Last year a Bill was referred to a Select Committee,
and that Committee made a report, which was laid on the
table of the House; and in the present session
another Bill was introduced by the Government, founded
mainly on the result of the deliberations of that Coin-'
cnittee, bat the subject was one of such extreme difficulty,
and so much opposition was manifested to its provisions,
that the Government were forced to come reluctantly
to the conclusion that, so far from remedying the
evils complained of, it would only aggravate the
discontent and excitement that already existed
on the subject. Then the Honourable Member
for Rochdale was constantly starting objece
tions, and while he opposed the Bill he asked for
the insertion of other provisions, which ho (Lord
John Russell) did not think to be of a nature
that Parliament could sanction. He (Lord J. Russell)
thought that while on the one hand they should give
every Security to the tenant which legislation could
give, it was not right on the other—when the
engagement between - the landlord and tenant
is that the tenant -should held his land
for a certain term, such tenant being known to thelaw
either as a tenant at will or for a then of years, it would
not be right for the Legislature to step in and say,
h We will make such a condition between the parties
as will place the right to the property not in the land-
lord but in the tenant."—(Hear, hear.) It would be
contrary to all principles of law and justice that Parlia-
ment should assent to such a principle. Ho thought that
principle was not only unjust, but contrary to all the rules
and maxims which guided the rights of property.
Under those circumstances the Government were com-
pelled to say they would ptuse fur a time and cedes-
your to see whether such provisions as they had
proposed could not be modified or amended, or whether
other measures could be introduced which would give to
tenants all the rights they could possibly ask for with-
out interfering with the acknowledged rights of landlords.
—(Hear.) He did not think, however, that the absence of
some provisions of that kind was a reason for refusing
the sanction of the present Bill, though be was free to
confess that the law as it at present stood was in a very
unsatisfactory state. He did not think it advisable to
enter into the consideration of other measures; such, for
instance, as-that suggested by Mr. Napier, with regard
to waste lands. Though the Government did abandon
a Bill on that subject, they very much increased
the sums which were advanced by the Exchequer
for the purpose of what was called arterial drainage, and
he thought it of much greater importance that they
should increase the productive powers of land already
cultivated by measures of that kind than apply their
resources to entirely waste lands. which could not
yield crops until after the lapse of a considerable period.
—(Hear, hear.) He had no wish, however, to enter into
any. disputed question on that or other subjects
at present, • but would at once ask the House
to give- the Government leave at least to
bring in this Bill. It should be limited to two years,
and he thought it would be imprudent on the part of the
House if it did not concede these powers for the preser-
vation of the peace of Ireland, to which it was deemed
on all hands the Acts of Parliament and the conduct of
the Administration had tended.—(Cheers.)
Mr. MORGAN J. O'CONNELL said that the cir-
cumstances under which this Bill had been originally
introduced were very different from the present state of
-Ireland, when everywhere there was tranquillity and obe-
dience to the law. He hoped that no time would be lout
in settling this question, for they might rest assured that,
if tieey did not, it would speedily settle itself.
Mr. BRIGHT said that he had intended to
have entered into the:e case of Mr. Mauleverer,
in defence of the coroner, bad he supposed that
the Honourable Gentlemen the Member for the Uni-
versity, of Dublin would have brought- it forward.
With respect to the Bill itself he thought that no case
had been made out for it. The cessation of crime and
outrage in Ireland he attributed to other causes than the
existence of this Act, and he certainly should vote against
its continuance.
Mr. NAPIER explained, stating that' he had not gone
so fully into the case as hgmight have done.
Mr. MOORE moved the adjournment of the debate.

1.,,,rd J. RUSSELL hoped that course would not be
pursued, but that the House would allow the Bill to be
introduced, and reserve any further discussion till the
second reading._ _ _

Mr. C. ANSTEY complained that the rules of the
House had been violated by the introduction of this
quc4i3n without notice, and be sbouhd therefore oppose
tee progress of the measure, and vote for the adjourn-
ment.

Sir G. GREY observed that the former Bill Laving
beet withdrawn, no notice for its re-introduction was

Mr. S-GULLY said some returns bad been laid- upon
the table within the last few days connected with the
Atrlte (f crime and cutra'.:e in Ireland, and the debate
ouf,tit to he 4djourrod tilt the I.l,;u:se had had an opp:4-
ttl2),%y 4.flookine. thew heti 2..eung 2f th,.r, teal:y
;,-r JA:
Mr. M.CULLAGI-1 thought the statements of the ,
Hob. Member for the University tiere. calculated to