The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-24 00:00:00

the Noble Lord on the occasion to which I alluded, that you
intended to p-opose some measure of conciliation—and, first, I
understand that you intend to propose an enlargement of the
grant—Now, I do not know whether you mean an enlarge-
ment of the grant to Mavno ith, or of the grant for the pur-
Poses t•f general education.
An Hoe. MEMBER.—For general education.
111 r• O'CONNELL—You then propose to increase the
grant for general education. I am glad to find that it is so—
you cannot educate the people too much.—(Cheers) You
fu°7 educate them too much for your own purposes. You
1,140 r ay educate them so as to make them turn against you' selves,
your great security is in the ignorance of the people.
(Cheers
and laughter.) You intend to increase the educe-
'en grant—l am glad to hear that such is your intention.
--(Hear, and cheers.) 1 will frankly tell you what
lon ought to do to gain the people of Ireland. Well,
at) next told that you intend to introduce for us the_
Catholic Charity Act—that you mean to extend to Ireland Mr.
Lambs Bill for regulating English Catholic charities.
you cannot do a greater mischief to the Catholics of Ire-
land than to introduce such a measure for them. I do not
object to the Bill. I ought not to do so, for I introduced the
Measure myself. I endeavoured, for two separate sessions, to
pry it, but the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Oxford,
!•ten every evening that it was upon the paper—he
attended most determinedly, and at last he actually tired me
':nt• Having no day that 1 could appoint for it I was obliged
48ieeit op. I complained to the then Administration,
they appointed Mr. Lamb to bring in the measure,
ti`uu, it was carried. Now that Act was a very
rut' Act for England, but it is totally inap-
P leable to Ireland. The statute of superstitious uses was
never enacted in Ireland. The statute of Edward the Sixth
'' Passed only for this country, and it was merely a retrospec-
Z Act ; but Lord Eldon determined that although the Act
A retrospective Act, he would construe it as a declaratory
ille's and hence the Catholic charities in England were declared
-titer but in Ireland that Act never passed. All cha-
b trues for Catholic, purposes have always been recognised
matcourts of law in Irelarl. Twent-five years ago I held
ust a sum of 20/. annually for ever} for the celebration of
1,,1es for the dead. I show you then that there is not the
14ast eenasion for this Act in Ireland. The old statute of
...:rtinain never applied to the Catholic clergy of Ireland. We
, therefore, under the common law, and according to the
feeler' law trusts for charitable and religious purposes are not
jaegal• The Act was necessary for the Catholic clergy of Eng-
it is totally inapplicable to Ireland. But I will tell you
You should do. You should make each Catholic Bishop
1112.(usi corporation, so as to enable him to take land—you may
taklt the quantity,
it if you please, but you should enable him to
tine land which might go to his successor without the interven-
th'u ei heirs-at-law or executors ; by so doing you pass an Act
tt would be really useful for charitable purposes in Ireland
n.i!t. the Bill which you propose will not do so. The next thing
tle_lch I understand you intend to propose is an extension of
yue franchise, and, as I read it in the newspapers,
ta°,4 RePose the abolition of the necessity for payment of all
N;ewl, except poor-rates, borough-rates, and grand jury cess.
to 'why is the necessity for the payment of grand jury cess
1;'ll retained ? It is the most. vexatious tax of any, and is
iected by officers who are now not appointed by, nor under
are control of the Government.—(Cheeers. ) These officers
gr:aPPlainted by the grand jury, and are favourites of certain
Junejury-men. They are responsible only to the grand jury
uctuating body ; one set are appointed in April, another in
the They are changed four times a year. If you insist upon
whiPaYinent of the grand jury cess, you will be creating that
andeh may be made a great
theevxation to a political opponent,
tor you will not compel payment of the grand jury cess,
Yeu prevent its payment by not making its payment
IDs}.• taarr to the acquisition of the franchise. You must also
they l'egulations for insisting on the residence of freemen—
aft should reside, for three months before and three months
th`'t the registry, in the borough. If you insist
on
th e residence of freemen, you will have made a
it 4.! useful change. The county franchise, too, I am told,
Zile altered. Now I speak in no disparagement of the
this Lord when I say that I have no confidence in him on
„fla sUbject. His measure would bring about the extinctio
b„hthe county franchise in Ireland. You should give us the
,Wleficial interest franchise. The solvent test franchise would
trPihilate the county constituency of Ireland. If you
gi,,hing in a Bill for regulating the county franchise, you should
• ea eVery facility for acquiring it.—( Hear. ) There is not
coon in Ireland who could obtain the franchise under the sol-
thi, tenant test. Ireland is a poor country, and if you do any-
ys„ll You should do it generously, and do it at once.—( Cheers. )
" should give us a franchise equally potential with the
,07Zehise in Engl nd so as to have a constituency of the Irish
P...e;itileha equal in proportion to the population of that of the
counties. Recollect, too, that a man having 51. a year
Peland is as independent as a man with JO/. or 151. a year
st,...`4lBland. If you legislate for us justly, I shall hail your
tCurea with satisfaction ; but we must have no restriction of
° franchise.— (Cheers.) We will meet you cordially
oth„3:eu Will meet us cordially.—(Loud cheers.) An-
tie; Part of your plan relates to fixity of tenure.
VitiodJullr Commission is doing great mischief by unfixing the
▪ tha the actual occupants. An idea has gone abroad that
be r eau who have been ejected during the last six years are to
tot
sebstror...ed. It is a great misfortune that this idea should have
ocea,hl"o ;'but such is the case, and the minds of the actual
eitAfets are unsettled in consequence. Now you must act
40. Ttist"V—you must act rapidly, in whatever you intend to
atal ',hould propose that you should take the law of landlord
ehr`unant as it was at the time of the union, by repealing
lied' *relate on the subject which has been passed since. The
as sherds cannot complain, because you will give them the law
h made it for themselves, but year after year since t h
ittucti,ale been making the law more stringent in favour of en
the
tato '4ll m as to enable him to seize even the last growing po-
lite o„,41. Yon restore the law to the state in which it was before
Thercul, the landlords cannot have any right to complain.
la.od laws in favour of landlords were generally enacted in Ire-
t.ng before they were enacted in this country. The sta-
knietfgae?wrY, for instance, which was not passed by the
Parliament until the reign of George 11., was
the`e" by the Irish Parliament in the reign of
*ids to Acne. But you have much more to do if you
toast ? manifest a disposition to act fairly by Ireland. You
alai ea inquire into the financial arrangements made at the
It's 4 --(Cheers. ) You perhaps will not take the trouble to
soti4the documents which have been issued by the Repeal As-
adeol,lull on this subject ; but if you will get those who are
Yoo.--tlou to read those documents, and to report en them to
Pe hey will tell you that there never was a greater injustice
114;1:rated than by the financial arrassgements at the time of the
rail, We have suffered great injustice by all financial ar-
4eueula being made here ; and you will nut satisfy the
of Ireland until you do them financial justice. I will
glance
at corporation reform. Your corporation re-
-14 oas insult, and not redress. You dissatisfied one party
oral :along power from it, while you dissa'isfied the other by
porn ' giving it the shadow of power. Give us corporation re-
equal to that which you gave to England ; we demand no
more. Are you afraid of the effects of the transfer of power
from the dominant minority ? That is past and gone—and even
in those boroughs in which the majority of the population is
Catholic, the proportion of Protestants in the Town Council is
greater than they are entitled to inproportion to the popula-
tion., All offices are equally open ptopall, and are bestowed
equally upon all. Then with regard to absenteeism. Ab-
senteeism is the curse of Ireland. It ought to be punished
et, "crime. You ought to impose an absentee tax. You have
already to some extent done it by your income-tax.
Ea a heavy tax upon the absentee landlord in
efbtland, so as to drive him back to attend to the interests
o,jais wretched serfs.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Stafford
Tien.) I am cheered by an Irish landlord, and one of the
b!ferilt of Irish landlords. I will give ,you full and explicit in-
yol4,e_alion for all useful purposes. But you must not peddle
u the wrongs of Ireland. You must not quack .with them.
175 ulust give us a radical cure. Recollect that Harwich with
175 oltes has two Members, and the county of Cork with
tau ii 7 has only two. The profligate corruption of the b0e,,0,,„
e,,o,,„ a.vras admitted at the beginning of the session, and the
heir'llnittee of the Hon. Member for Bath proved it.—( Hear,
Ittentr), I now come to the Church. You have in Ireland a
eork_euY, a perfect hierarchy, unconnected with the State, but
4,„..,eeted intimately with the people. I do not ask you to
147.,e.any mart of his vested interests. No man in Ireland
bentu interfere with the interests of any Church incum-
tese tielir ; but you must, as statesmen, look to the
esitalit Ireland, and see that without giving religious
told tbf You cannot do us political justice. I have been
elseand at
Elopose to give a salary to the Catholic bishops
'oa rahatngy They dare not accept it. They would lose caste.
y-(v)tei not money enough in your treasury. to pay them.
‘athoh could give would excite but not satisfy them, and the
stet c bishops would rather have seats anywhere that was
that disc bishops
than in Parliament. Do you mean to say
teat that f e
t were not for the Protestant Establish-
Ilta
you t Protestant religion would not stand ?
vaoss, e", me that your religion would fail if there were not
totosjald for instructing others? Oh ! if that be your
shone rot religion, what a triumph to me as a Roman Ca-
*Nth 'The Homan Catholic Church possessed all the
grease which your Church now has—or, at least, the
lioniti Portion of it. There have, I believe, been certain
'l,4r since the Reformation • but the great mass
Beefat bulk of them-9991. out of every 1,000/. were
y Roman Catholics. You took them from
sacs tb,t-4,eu hunted them into the wilds and fastnesses. It is a
igen th.J,!ll set the same price upon the head of a wolf, and
fetera 4-I:::teadi. of a priest. You did all you. could against
anas the Roman Catholic reltgion failed in Ireland
s' 4 f rzwney ? No. It never was more triumphant.
jaty o_,lstle archbishops, twenty-three bishops, fifty deans,
twilotte,
e'uoradte_ayons, and somei 2,000 parish priests, with two or
Mkt " to each—an entire, unbroken hierarchy, in as
lienry 1- regular order, and as perfect as on the day before
kid h lit
ht 4,,,e • ascended the throne. You have despoiled them,
4 /I isrin not the same faith in your Protestantism
?flan 1
t)blet yoh Yk_Catholicism ? Are you sincere in your faith d
fo;lcb et that the scriptural truth, and the support
v te,
to location, talents, and literature give, are sufficient
illetro, Church ? Has :t not the blessing of God if it be
1 4 Wi,"flreh, and what greater bulwark can it have than
then is the couutry to be divided.—( Hear.) Oh,
,4 look ut tres
the 1,04 ss. longer on this subject. But I implore you
the (eoestrol, with the eyes of statesmen. Don't let us see
id...wealth, ,anomaly, that the Church of the buts all
lulssibg
of wntle the Church, of the poor has nothing the
1;44 to d ) I go back. What do you
sea be. letZffaoert Ireland ? I am afraid, whatever it be, it will
to hnriee th. "Y• I wish it were. Years enough have clap-
ahe eve connection commenced between the two countries
te .m.
all the sources of malice and ill-will, and
Vtai all theme
religious rancour. It is time there
til,4llatione end , of it. The time is come when
th as bretTignt to embrace each, other as men
n,bthoot muere, and when charity should be spread
Ili4men land—when the odious distinction between
tht. eat Englishmen—the odious distinction between
lelatierue and Protestant—distinctions odious in all
all• onois. except in the rivalry of purity and mutual
gehe t_ all be abolished, and justice shall be done to
ont..tr )
Utille Blake and Sir R. Peel rose at the same time,
tioilltiaterialiaideurable uproar, and cries of " Order," from the
• g! sat dowben Sir V. Blake, after some little hesita-
th " PEE.
neld _ L proceeded to address the House. He said—Sir, I
qtd not aPPalled by the duty which have to discharge, if 1
4,91 ear, heart confidence in the indulgence of this House.—
a:" rising atLeThe House, I am sure, will consider that in
"` Plata close of the ninth night of this debate, I am
lay , g for thediflay` Purpose of gratifying any personal wish of
at I am not rising for the purpose of any idle
Publie‘l-I,,ea.Cs hear.) I am rising in the performance of
1,11a.t, *4l:Limy towards the House, and towards the heelGovern-
,tu upon me, considering the situation in
din', that isnutuh,. obligati
44/ abilit le debate, conducted
on oiaddressing the House. I know,
loere h Y, every eron each side with extraor-
gurnent has thin exhausted, and that
4.4tuultber"iti°teePrPonarttiunity of adding anyg novel. Yet I have
414 . to
to
titve, ill am to discharge the duty which apper-
-114%, e,
Jo' pat 'Vern),
otn. Present in. a connected, clear, and
ma turn
eefore the/
pinions and views on the several matters
thq °ler th La use. I cannot do that effectually without
ea ' eref at field which has. been already exhausted. I
44,44;)
siriol.er hat to
me
ik srej
aPPeal to the patience andrm olduclugtenee(othe
setitter have another yety gpreeater duty to py;rf—orm. Hear,
ass- that privilege which belongs to the
144 our pit the that part of the Government, I stand here
defe
bespeak .ee• Influenced by those feelings ;
%gin consciousness of having been
."` 414 sulimerited imputation, I may be per-

mitted, in the exercise of that privilege of defence, to give vent
to those feelings. Yet I must not permit those feelings to be I
mixed up in the consideration of the important matters of policy
affecting the interests of Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) Upon all
that part which relaters to public policy—to the question of
future legislation—l trust I shall address myself with that
temper, and moderation, and forbearance, which are becoming :
a subject of such immense magnitude. I hope, also, that in
defending myself from the charges brought against myself and
my colleagues, I will not forget that reserve with which all
matters of a personal nature, affecting the position of the gen-
tlemen who have been made the subject of criminal proceedings,
require. If I transgress the rule I have laid down for myself,
it will be totally contrary to my intention. I wish to
conduct the defence of the Government, with a per-
fect recollection of the position of the Hon. Gentleman
who spoke last. Sir, I cannot be diverted from the question
raised by the Noble Lord by the speech of the lion. Gentle-
man. I wish the Hon. Gentleman, instead of agitating the
passions of his countrymen on the subject of repeal, would give
us an opportunity of meeting him in argument, for I should not
have :any doubts as to what might be the result. I beg you
to bear in mind what are the arguments on which be has this
night rested his appeal for a repeal of the union. What per-
version of history is necessary in order to vindicate the demand
for repeal? Says the lion. Gentleman, " For eighteen years
up to the period of the union, helmet had the happiness of an
independent Parliament." An independent 'Parliament!—
what ! the Parliament that sat £r out 1782 to 1'0(5 an lik..
pendent Parliament, providing for the social ',happiness of
those on whose interests it was to legislate '.happiness
hear.) Why, one of the complaints of the lion. Gentleman
himself to the legislative union was, that it was through cor-
ruption the Act of Union had been effected—(Hear, hear)—
that the rights and liberties of the people had been sacrificed to
the corruption of the Parliament. —s Hear, hear. ) And was
the condition of the people really happy under that Parlia-
ment? What said Mr. Grattan of it ? Long before 1782, if
I remember right, he asked, What has your independent
Legislature effected for you ? Has a Place Bill been passed ?
Has a Pension Bill been passed ? No, said Mr.
Grattan, we have got a Bill against Peers. We have
got a Riot Act, we have got pensions without end, and we have
got a profligate traffic in the sale of the peerage. That was
Mr. Grattan's account of the virtue of that independent Par-
liament, and he said, what has been the affect of that? It has
reduced Ireland to the condition •f a province. Is it true,
then, that the condition of the people of Ireland was then really
happy, or are all the statements at present of the physical con-
dition of the city of Dublin, and of other cities, from the year
1795 to 1800 mere fallacies or delusion. Look at the account
of the trade of Ireland. Look at the actual diminution of the
trade of the shipping interest of Ireland for the ten years that
preceded the union. I will challenge the Hon. Gentleman to
prove the fact that Ireland was advancing in prosperity.
The policy pursued in Ireland during the period intervening
between the years 179.3 and 1800, was- the cause of the Rebel-
lion of 1798, and all its terrible consequences.—( Cheers. )
But I do say, that it the statement of the [lon. Gentleman be
true, he proved that the happiness of the people was quite
independent of the social institutions of the country ; but he
cannot deny this, that if the Parliament promoted the prospe-
rity of Ireland, that Parliament was returned by a small ma-
jority of Protestants. That Parliament was composed of,
elected entirely by Protestants, and during its existence, there
was an Established Church in existence in Ireland. If the
Hon. Gentleman said that the social state of Ireland during
this period was almost perfect, he should recollect that the
Roman Catholic was subject to great disabilities,
that the Parliament was exelteively Protestant, and
the Church in its full power.—( Cheers.) I leave to the
Hon. Gentleman to choose either of those points—namely, that
it was consistent with the interests of Ireland to uphold in its
most exclusive, and as he would call most intolerant form, the
Established Church, and that still the disabilities of the Ca-
tholics should be in full force; or that the Government had
been carried on with that Parliament existing between 1782
and 1800, through the instrumentality of corruption—
( Cheers)—that the social condition of Ireland was
not a happy one, and that that Parliament did not
promote, nor was calculated to promote, the peace and welfare
of the people. I say, Ido think that the Hon. Gentleman
would better have consulted the interests of his country, and
adopt that course which would be most conducive to his own
fame, if he would give us an opportunity of hearing and ex-
amining those statements, and counteracting these arguments,
instead of inflaming the passions of the ignorant by those mis-
statements which he ventures to make in the face of a British
public.—( Cheers.) I shall now address myself to another
portion of the debate. I shall address myself to the motion of
the Noble Lord the Member for London, and I do say that I
think lie will admit that it is a motion exclusively and strictly
deserving the name of a party motion—(Tremendous cheers
from the Ministerial benches)—it is perfectly a motion in con-
formity with ancient precedent, and is a constitu-
tional mode of testing the confidence in the Ministry.
But that it is a party motion, I am sure
the Noble Lord will himself admit. It is not a motion to in-
quire into the state of Ireland. The Noble Lord may have in-
tended to pursue this course, but I must say, that he should not
have mixed up any party consideration with the consideration of
the social state of Ireland. I should say, I will challenge your
conduct—l will put you on your trial--I will separate you from
the social state of Ireland. The Noble Lord did not take that
course, but he moved for a Committee of the whole House on
the state of Ireland, as if afraid of the possibility of the suc-
cess of his motion, and as if he shrank from being compelled
in that Committee to explain in detail his own views as to
the course which should be pursued in Ireland. At the
moment he gave his notice he said I mean to move a resolution
condemnatory of the course pursued by her Majesty's Minis-
ters. I will make it impossible on account of its character to
adhere to that motion.—(Cheers from the Tory benches. )
With respect to the speech of the Noble Lord the Member for
Sunderland, i feel bound to state my conviction that I think it
is wholly free from party bias, and that he expressed his opinions
—much as I may differ from those opinions—in such a manner
that I never was more convinced of their sincerity and manli-
ness.—( Cheers.) But, certainly, I must say, that the Noble
Lord the Member for London, in his. speech, seemed
to me to be engaged in the solution of some great
problem in political fluxions.—(Cheers and laughter. )
He seemed to me to be trying to obtain the maximum of cri-
mination with the minimum of inconvenience to himself.—
( Loud cheers.) I think I could extract from the spirit of the
Noble Lord's motion the idea, "only remove the present Go-
vernment and place me in their stead' —(Loud laughter)—and
if that were his meaning—because the Noble Lord certainly
brought an impeachment and accusation against us—why'would
not he explain his views and policy with regard to Ireland, for at
present he must say that he has said nothing which would compel
him, if in office, to adopt any course different from that pursued
by the present Government ?—( Hear, hear, and laughter. )
Did not the Noble Lord say if he could realise his plait he
would: divide the revenues of the Church, and give a portion
to the Catholics and Presbyterians? But as the object was most
remote, and as no chance of its realisation existed, in
case of his re-instalment to power, he was bound
himself by no tangible engagement in respect to the
Church, or indeed of anything else.—( Hear, and cheers. )
I rejoice to see that the Noble Lord has not committed him-
self to any measure which will tend, in the slightest degree, to
injure the Established Church.—( Cheers arid laughter.)
With respect to the accusation thrown out against her Majesty's
Government, I think the Noble Lord might have shown less
acrimony, for considering the exposed condition in which his own
house stood and the brittle materials of which it was composed
—remembering the Coercion Bill,and:the Appropriation Clause,
I do think the Noble Lord ought to have abstained from throw-
ing stones at his political opponents.—( Loud laughter.) But
the subject is too important to justify trifling. The Noble
Lord had made me, as the head of the Government, re-
sponsible for everything. Amongst the many charges he
made against me, was that I selected the present Lord Chan-
cellor merely on account of his hostility to Ireland.—( Hear. )
The Noble 'Lord denied his talents—(Cheers)—he denied his
claim to the appointment on account of the efficiency with
which he performed his public duties ; and undertaking to
answer, not for the conduct of the act, but for the motives
of other men, the Noble Lord declared it to be his opinion that
I had selected Lord Lyndhurst for office on account of his
hostility to the people of Ireland.—(Cheers from the Oppo-
sition, met by counter cheers from the Ministerial side of
the House.) Nay, it was worse, that I had so disgraced
myself as tol select for the highest office in the
law a man whose chief qualification was that he had used
expressions offensive to the people of Ireland.—( Hear. )
brought without the strongest and most confirmatory evi-
dence to establish it. As I had been already in three admi-
nistrations with that Noble and Learned Lord, in the ear 1829,
and in the short government of -1834.—( Hear, hear.) In the
year 1841, I was called on to form an Administration ; and does
the Noble Lord think that it would be just that I should have
said to Lord Lyndharst—" It is true that I have been twice
connected with you in office—it is true that at the time when
Catholic disabilities were removed, I asked for your assistance
in mitigating the prejudices of the House of Lords, and that I
received your powerful support—but as you have used a hasty
expression, at which offence has been taken, I must ex-
clude you from office, in order to court popularity in Ireland."
—(Cheers.) But Lord Lyndhurst would say to me,—" I deny
that I used any such expressions.—(Cheers.) In a fortnight
after I used the words which were so misrepresented or misun-
derstood, I was taunted by those who said they beard me, with
stating as a reason for not granting municipal corporations to
Ireland, that the people were aliens by descent—that they dif-
fered from us in language—that they considered us aliens
from their soil, and desired to remove us from their
country. My answer was, I did not say so, nor anything re-
sembling it.—(Cheers.) No expression fell from me which any
person, not of weak intellect or disposed to misrepresent my
words, could have so distorted.—(Cheers.) When the Marquis
of Lansdowne, either through kindness or in compliment, asked
me for an explanation, I stated to the House of Lords that I
had nothing to explain, fur I had said nothing like what was
imputed to me."—(Cheers.) Now, Sir, no one could regret
more than myself—(unless it be Lord Lyndhurst)—that my
Noble and Learned Friend had used the hasty expressions
which he did use.—( Hear, hear.) But, Sir, was 1, six years
afterwards to say to him, " I cannot advise the Crown to ad-
vance you to office, on account of those hasty expressions ?"
( Hear, hear.) Sir, when I consider that Lord Lyndhurst
raised himself frem the position in which he was born, and the
manner in which the office of Lord Chancellor has beers filled
for the last eiglit or ten years—an office which has been occu-
pied by such men as Lord Eldon, Lord Brougham, Lord Cot-
tenham, Lord Plunket, and Sir Edward Sugden—when I con-
sider the origin of those distinguished persons, and the compa-
rative obscurity from which they raised themselves to the
highest civil situation next the Throne, I think this is the
proudest homage to the democratic principle of the British
Constitution.—( Cheers.) It is the strongest practical contra-
diction of the phrase quoted by an eminent member of the
Roman Catholic party—
" Ilaud facile emergunt quorum virtutibus obstat

Res auguda
(Cheers.) In this country there is no obstacle to the ele-
vation of men of talent and wisdom, by the buoyancy of their
own character.—(Cheers.) It is true that I have had diffi-
culties to contend with, which the Noble Lord had not, in
looking to the claims of candidates for that high office. The
Noble Lord had exhibited an example of great boldness and
courage unparalleled since the " atrox animus Catonis."
—( Tory cheers, and laughter.) It was an example
of virtue, not of meanness.—( Tory cheers.) The Noble Lord
had the good fortune to be connected with a man who had ever
been the faithful friend of the Whig party—the ornament of
the Irish bar—the friend of Grattan—Lord Plunket—a man
whose name would go down to posterity as one of the
greatest stars that ever shone in the sphere of Irish eminence.
—But, Sir, Lord Plunket was the sen of an Irish Presbyterian
minister, and he rose to the office of Lord Chancellor.—
(Hear, hear.) He was advanced to that eminence by the
Noble Lord. But the Noble Lord challenges us with over-
looking the claims of eminent Irishmen to office. Why, Sir,
the Noble Lord had in office the most eminent man that ever
adorned. the Irish bar ; and yet six weeks before the Noble
Lord retired from the Government--(Cheers and counter
cheers.) The Noble Lord is sensitive of Irish feelings.—
( Tory cheers and laughter.) He is jealous of offences offered
to Ireland.—( A laugh ) He is jealous of promoting English-
men instead of Irish to office in Ireland. But be had
in office the man who was the pride and boast of the Whig
party in Ireland; and to that Irishman—to Lord Plunket, the
Noble Lord signified that it was expedient fur him to retire ;
and for wkat purpose ?—in order to gratify the vanity of a
Scotehman.—(Cheers and laughter.) I do not deny that he
was an eminent man. I do not deny that he was a distin-
guished lawyer, of whom I wish to speak with all respect.
Still I must say that the Noble Lord, in the instance to which
I refer, superseded Lord Plunket to gratify the vanity of a
Scotchman—(Laughter and cheers),-for six weeks—for only
six weeks' tenure of office.—(Cheers.) Sir, if I were so
placed that I had only the alternative to make oucb a choice, I

would not retain office one hour.—(Renewed cheers.) Then
the Noble Lord quitted Lord Lynlhurst. What was his next
topic ? Why, the Noble Lord who stood forward as the re-
presentative of a area' party, and came to the rescue of the
country, occupied his time in raking into the kennels for the
refuse of election dinners—(Cheers)---and quoted the speeches
merle at an election dinner in Canterbury—(Cheers)—in order
to charge me with participating in and adopting the sentiments '
there expressed.—( Hear.) This would be a hard rule for
public men.—( Hear, hear.) It is hard to make me respon-
sible for the expressions, either used by Mr. Bradshaw
at Canterbury, or attributed to him.—(Cries of " Hear,
hear.") The Noble Lord is followed by a powerful party,
confederated with him in promoting political objects—who will
vote to night, naturally and justifiably, for the purpose of die-
placing us, and replacing us with him. But I would think it
unjust to make him responsible for everything uttered by every
one of those who support him.—( Hear.) It would be very
unjust to charge the Noble Lord with the responsibility of
everything that may be said at Anti-Corn-law meetings. It
would be unjust to charge him .with participating in the senti-
ments of those who denounced the landlords as being cold-
blooded and selfish, and insensible to the sufferings of the
people. ---( Hear, hear.) Why, then, should he make
me responsible for the after-dinner speeches at
Canterbury ? But, Sir, suppose I have always disclaimed
the statements attributed to my lion. Friend, why should I be
held responsible for the very language which I have disclaimed?
—( Yeer, hear.) Is nut this the fact, that when Mr. Wyse
was appointed to an important office under the Government, I
declared that I saw no objection to the appointment, as the
Ilonourable Gentleman was in every respect quali-
fied by character and ability, and his being a Roman
Catholic should not be an obstacle to his promotion.
I consider this a most important matter, said the Noble Lord,
speaking of the manner in Which the Government behaved to .
Roman Catholics. Can you expect them to consent to receive
favours from a Government whose supporters calumniated their
priesthood? • What the Noble Lord really wished to effect is to
make it impossible for Roman Catholics to accept favours front the
present Government, and then to turn round and say, See what a
gross injustice you have done to Roman Catholics, you have made
twenty appointments, and yet not one of them has been filled
by a Roman Catholic. You first strive to create an impedi-
ment by reviving unjust prejudices, and then you found an
unjust accusation against the Government for not making
those appointments which you have deterred the Roman
Catholics from accepting. I stated publicly what my opinions
were on the subject of the position of the Roman Catholics, but I
had been taunted by Hon. Gentlemen who say, 0, these arc fine
declarations that you make in debate, but you do not practice
them. Allow me to say, Sir, that that is a matter of great
difficulty.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) I
recognise those principles which place the Roman Catholics on
an equality with their Protestant fellow-subjects. I say there
should be no practical disability. I speak in respect of every
office ; and I care not what prejudice these declarations may
create against me. I say now, whilst in the possession of
power, as I did when I was not, that in every office
to which Catholics are eligible there should be no impediment
whatever to their appointment on the ground of religion.
Since Parliament last met, there was only one office of a judicial
nature vacant in Ireland ; it was an office in the Ecclesiastical
Court; and I apprehend that no one but a member
of the Church of England ought to be appointed to
that situation. The appointment was placed at
my disposal by the Lord Primate. I stated to the
Primate that I would accept the patronage, but that I should
place in that situation the most eminent man at the bar, with-
out regard to anything except his professional qualifications.
I believe, Sir, I acted according to my promise, in appointing
one of the most eminent men at the Irish bar—Mr Keating.
He vacated the office of sergeant, and another vacancy took
place. How was that office filled? I wanted to
destroy the prejudices which it has been attempted
to create against the Government. I wanted to show
to the Mph people that I did not participate in the
opinions enunciated at election dinners, and that it was not in
the heat of debate that I gave utterance to those sentiments
regarding the Irish Roman Catholics.—(Hear, hear.) I will
take the liberty of reading to the House a letter which 1 wrote
to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland on the subject of this ap-
pointment. It was not written in anticipation of this debate,
but in the course of the last year. It was dated the
22d August, 1843. (The Right Hon. Baronet then
read extracts from his letter to Lord De Grey,
in which he strongly recommended the appointment of such
Roman Catholics as had not joined in the agitation, or made
themselves obnoxious to the dispensers of patronage. The
letter proceeded to say that Roman Catholics ought to be
appointed to those situations which they were qualified to fill,
and, although preferable claims might be urged by
Protestants, on the ground of their attachment to the
Protestant Church, still that the rights of Roman
Catholics should not be merely nominal, but that they should
be placed on an equality of civil rights. The letter further
observed, that although for every office which would be va-
cant for the next ten years Protestants might be found highly
eligible, still if Roman Catholics were not appointed,
they were practically disqualified, and what motive
was held out to them to refrain from joining in the
present agitation if every office was closed against them. It
might probably occur that fifty appointments would be made of
Protestants who had preferable claims. But why had they
preferable claims ? Because they had for a long series of years
been excluded from the privileges of their Roman Catholic
fellow-subjects, and were constantly cherished by the Go-
vernment. The policy and the laws were changed, and
they ought' not to allow the effect of those former
causes of preference to influence present appointments. The
inferiority of Roman Catholics should not be shown by the ex-
clusive appointment of Protestants. Having read the extracts
of which the above is the substance, the Right Hon. Baronet
proceeded to say that Mr. Howley had been appointed to fill the
vacant situation.) There is not the slightest doubt:that if we had
not been anxious to appoint Roman Catholics, several professional
men could be found in the four Courts professing the Protestant
religion, and of equal legal ability.—( Hear, hear.) But did this
appointment satisfy Hon. Gentlemen opposite? No, it did not ;
far from it. Although Mr. Howley was a Roman Catholic,
the Government was attacked in the severest manner for ap-
pointing him. That paper, which is the organ of Hon. Mem-
bers opposi'e, makes the following observations on the an-
nouncement of the appointment of Mr. Howley.
An How. MEMBER—What paper?
Sir R. PEEL—The Morning Chronicle. The Right Hon.
Baronet then read an extract from an article in the Morning
Chronicle, which stated that though the Government had made
many absurd appointments, they had not made one so grossly
improper as that of Mr. Howley. The explanation of the reason
of this appointment was not difficult—it was only necessary to
suppose a little shallow cunning and a little blockheadism on
the part of the Cabinet, and the appointment was explained.—
(A laugh.) This, to be sure, said the Right Hon. Baronet,
was very encouraging to the Government to make Roman Ca-
tholic appointments. The Morning Chronicle proceeded to
say that the appointment of Mr. Howley was an insult to the li-
beral bar of Ireland, and that it was quite clear that Sir Robert
Peel's Government could not continue to govern that country.
—(Renewed laughter.) However, Mr. Howley had the moral
courage to retain his appointment to the sergeantey, notwith-
standing the denunciations of the Noble Lord and the organ
which represented his party. How had the appointment of
that gentleman been received by the gentlemen of the county
of Tipperary, in which Mr. Howley was assistant-barrister ?
An address was presented to him, signed by 105 magistrates of
that county, congratulating him on his appointment, and
expressive of a deep sense of gratitude for the admirable mariner
in which he had discharged the duties of assistant-barrister,
all corning forward to bear testimony to the integrity and
ability with which that Roman Catholic gentleman had dis-
charged the duties of his office. There was also an address to
him from the grand jury, and another which I believe was
unanimously signed by every practising solicitor in the county
of Tipperary. Now, I say, then is this fair warfare against
the Government—is it fair towards the individual whom we
selected ? Is it fair towards the character of an honourable
man, as soon as we gave him the fair reward of his professional
merit to turn round upon him and injure his character and
depreciate his merit, in order that through him you might
strike a blow at the Conservative party 7—(Cheers.)
Sir, I think, this is an answer to the attempt of the Noble
Lord to involve me in the responsibility of expressions which
might have been used by gentlemen with whom I. am connected.
Now, as to the disposition to encourage offensive or hostile
expressions used towards the Roman Catholic body. The
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Shell) made an appear
to me on that subject last night. The Right Hon. Gentleman
referred to some addresses from the Protestant Operative
Association in Dublin, and asked me whether I approved of
the sentiments contained in those addresses, and whether I
approved of the sentiments which were offensive to the Roman
Catholics of Ireland. I will read the answer to those addresses.
—(Mr. Sheil here made some observation across the table
which we were unable to hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman
dropped his voice when he spoke. The Right Hon. Gentle-
man said " warm encouragement was given," and then a burst
of loud cheering prevented the rest of the passage being beard.
Now it often happens that' owing to the business which public
men have to discharge that they will pass over long ad-
dresses presented to them, and not read those addresses very
accurately, and then they return a common official answer,
very civil and courteous, but they never expect that those
answers will be brought forward in the House of Commons,
I am sure the House will allow me to do the Government just
tice on this point. I have had memorials addressed to me to
the same effect as that from the Protestant Operative Associa-
tion. I had one before the agitation began. I had one ad-
dressed to me in the year 1842. It was from the Protes-
tent Operative Association of the City of Cork. In th o
memorial was this passage :—" We, the members of the Pro-
testant Operative Association of Cork, feel ourselves called
upon, by a sense of duty to ourselves, our country, and our
God, to address you on a subject of the first importance with
respect to the best interests and welfare of the community."
'fire subject was that of national education. "If the homilies
be true, and those who sealed them with their heart's-
blood have raised up a testimony against error which can
never he overthrown, then the priests of the Romish Church
are Antichrist—then are they the special instruments of the
devil."—( Loud laughter.) The climax improves as its pro-
ceeds, but I have read enough to show the nature of this
address. Now I will read to the Right Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Sheil) my answer to that address. This was in De-
cember, 1842. The answer I returned was to the following
effect—" Sir, I received your letter accompanying the address to
me from the Members of the Protestant Operative Association
of Cork. lam sorry that they felt themselves called upon by
their duty to God to express uncharitable sentiments in offen-
sive language."—(Cheers.) Now, I have shown the Right
Hon. Gentleman what my feelings were' on the subject of
. offensive expressions with respect to the faith of the Roman
Catholics.

Mr. S HEIL—I did not think you held such sentiments.
Sir ROBERT PEEL—And I wish to confirm you
in that impression.—(Load laughter.) I must in justice
to the members of the Association, say that my letter was cer-
tainly received in a very becoming manner. It is but justice
to them to read how they received my rebuke : " We fee
great pleasure in acknowledging the receipt of your letter,"—
( Great laughter.) Really it is a most becoming answer to my
letter. " We feel great pleasure in acknowledging your reply
to the address of the Association on the subject of nationa
education. We beg to offer our warmest thanks for the promp
and gentlemanly manner—( Roars of laughter)—in which you
answer our communication. It was what we expected—( Shouts
of laughter.) The reply itself has not disappointed our ex-
pectations."—( Continued laughter.) There was another ad-
dress to her Majesty on the same subject.
Mr SHEIL—That is from Dublin?
Sir R. PEEL—This is from Dublin, but mine was fre
Cork. My Right Hon. Friend, the Secretary for the Home
Department was requested to lay the address before her Majesty,
and I hold in my hand the answer he returned. But I had
better not read it to the House.—(Cries of " Yes, yes.")
Well, than, my Right Hon. Friend said " I cannot commend
a passage in the address which I find tends to insult a large
class of her Majesty's subjects, or which, at any rate, is open to
misconstruction ; and I cannot think that such an address is
fit to be laid before her Majesty." Now observe, this was in
the year 1842, and 1 do think that nothing is more indicative
than this of the spirit in which we were desirous of administer-
ing the Government of Ireland, and that we were content to
relinquish support rather than gain it by fomenting prejudices.
—(Cheers.) I come now to the conduct of her Majesty's Go-
vernment with respect to the recent trials. We took office in Sep-
tember, 1841, and up to March, 1843, there appeared no great
dissatisfaction with the manner in which the Government was
conducted. I have shown you that we were desirous of abat-
ing religious animosities ; and we did what we could to stop
any attempt to insult the faith of Roman Catholics. We have
been charged with a desire to govern Ireland by military forcee
You have admitted that the necessity existed for that force
being in Ireland. Yes, and I want to know with whom the

responsibility rests for 'that military force being in Ireland ? I
(Cheers.) I want; :2n know to whom it is owing that our ex- !
pectations and hopes of presenting reduced estimates were de-
feated ? I want to put that fairly before the country—before
the intelligent and reast ming classes of the community, and to
make an appeal in the I louse to all impartial men.—(Cheers. )
We took ofice in Sept ember, 1841, and in March, 1843, so
far from having evincet 1 any disposition to govern by military
force, I will state what the real force in Ireland was
at the two periods athat I have mentioned. When we
took office on the Ist, .of August, 1841, wo found the force in
Ireland to be 14,822. On the Ist of September, the force was
16,257 rank and file. In March 1843, there were only 13,5()0
Thus between the tv ro periods that I have mentioned the force
was reduced from 16,200 men to 13,500.—(Cheers.) That
shows that there was. no disposition on our parts to rule with a
military force. In. March 1843, be...,an that systematic
agitation which • vas not the consequence of any
act of the Govemu nent—for which we were charged
with no injustice o r any undue partiality. No; my :
belief is, that rhero existed a strong and settled deter-
urination in certain got rters that we should not be successful.

—( Cheers.) That ie termination was taken, and it was acted
upon.—(Continued sheers.) About this time the poor-rate
began to be levied. '_'throughout many parts of Ireland there
was great dissatisfacti 011 with the poor-law—an Act brought in
and passed by the No hl,e Lord, the Member for London, and
supported, I admit, bey me. But that Act was most unfortu-
nate in some of its pr ov isions, for it subjected every occupier,
almost without excel sti.on, to the payment of the poor-rate.
There were thousands. of instances in the west of Ireland wherein
rates from three farth lugs to three-halfpence in the pound were
demanded. There vas almost universal consternation and
alarm. It became our eluty to apply a remedy to the blunders
which the Act contan red. I don't say anything about neg-
ligence.
Hosuisre
R.
Lords.--,—(IHI
te,cagr, fir,aorndiotobetiOiepop.osistitoinli.?
Lord J. RUSSELI e—These clauses were introduced in the
the alterations
were adopted by the t ..'oveinment, and that unfortunate this •
take I have alluded kt did cause a multitude of annoyances,
which created great t liseontent and vexation in many districts
of Ireland. But I will say no more on these subjects. I con-
fess I was anxious te pay the Noble Lord back in his own coin.
—(Laughter.) I have' tried to do so--( Hear, hear)--he
offered it to me in the -.first instanee, and having returned him
with great pleasure that which I sincerely believe him entitled
t o—( Laughter )—I will proceed to other matters.. Well, as I
have said that Act was a most unfortunate one,
Concurrent with the sle.mand for the rates under it, agricul-
tural distress visited Ireland, and its effects were most severely
felt. Concurrently too with these things, the new tariff I had
the honour to propose began to be felt. I do believe that the
reduction of price caused by the tariff, following closely on
the demand for the- poor-rate, alienated the minds of
the people from the. Government—l do believe that
these two countries,. the poor-rate being for the
first time levied at a period of considerable agricul-
tural depression—did give great facilities to the agitation.
--(Cheers.) The co entry at that time was in a very peculiar
state. In the West of :Ireland you had great excitement, and,
consequently, great congregations of people, whose embittered
minds were all dexterously directed against the present Go-
vernment.--(Hear, hear..) They were all demanding the abo-
lition of poor-rates—l ru n sorry to say not a few also looked
to a serious inroad upon rents.---(Hear, hear.) Then
unhappily came the determination to agitate for the repeal of
the union.—( Hear, hear-) We watched the progress of that
agitation with the deepest regret, and, after proper deliberation,
we determined in what mode to deal with it.—( Hear, hear. )
We are now charged with supineness, and with permitting
these meetings to continue in order to entrap men of eminence
into a violation of the law. I declare here in public
that that accusation is utterly false and' without
any shadow of a femndation.—( Great cheering.) We
determined at once riot to apply to Parliament for new
powers.—(Lond cheers.) I confess, after the long experience
I have now had of public life, that I am not at all favourable to
any application to Parliament for any increase of the ordinary
powers of the Government.—(Loud cheers.) I don't think
there is anything which has a greater tendency to impair the
ordinary power of the law than to listen to applications
founded, as they generally are, on local alarms, to get
some extraordinary powers from the Legislature in aid of
the Executive.—(Hears hear.) So far from adding to the
authority of the Govern;ment, in my opinion it tends to weaken
it.—(General cheers.) The evil effect of these extraordinary
powers is particularly marked in this—that no man relies on
the ordinary law—nay, the people get out of the habit of look-
ing to protection for, or exerting the ordinary powers which,
the law affords.—(Hear, hear.) Now the Government, our
predecessors, did not take the same course.—(Cheers.) Hon.
Gentlemen opposite, amongst them several members and many
more supporters of the late Government, charge us with
supineness in the first instance, and then with precipitate
vigour in the second.—(Hear, hear.) Now, I tell you to re-
collect that you were not content to take our course—you
were not content in your time to rely on the ordinary forms
of the law—(Loud cheers)—you applied to Parliament—
Lord J. RUSSELL—And you supported us.—(Cheers.)
Sir ROBERT PEEL—I did support you.—(lronical
cheers.) I did not try to aggravate the difficulties of your po-
sition.—(Cheers.) 1 entered into no confederacy with those
who were destitute of any honourable or sincere sympathy
with me.—( Great cheering.) But you applied to Parliament,
and got from it a new Act, and a tolerably strong one it is.
Do you forget it? Here it is; and it is intituled an Act
for the more effectual suppressing of disturbances, and also of
dangerous Societies in Ireland.—(Loud cheers.) It is, I as-
sure you, a very stout Act of Parliament. It recites, that the
laws are inadequate, and what do you think ir enacts ? That
the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, by proclamation, may supersede
the ordinary tribunals of the country, and order the trial of
delinquents to take place—not before a judge—not
by a jury—but by a court to be formed of
from seven to fifteen officers. That is your Act !
We relied on the efficacy of the existing law ; the Noble Lord
did not. He took these precautions against those signal fires;
lie passed a Bill, by which it was enacted that " no person
should make any fire, bonfire, light, flash, or blaze—( Laughter)
—or any signal by smoke—(Laughter)—or be present at the
snaking of such signal." This was the Noble Lord's Act ;
the Government thought it necessary, and therefore they
passed it. I am only showing that the Government felt the
extent of the evil to be so great that it asked extraordinary
powers to put it down. Thus, lighting a fire, or making
signals by fire, blaze, or smoke, was made an offence, punish-
able by martial law, and the persons committing it were to be
tried by a court-martial, consisting of not more than nine
officers, nor less than five.—(Cheers.) We asked no such
powers; we all concurred in trusting to the ordinary energies
of the law, and in not adopting the system of the Whig
Government. We had the support of the Protestants of Ire-
land, and that of the Roman Catholics, who were opposed to the
agitation. We were determined not to avail ourselves of the
offers made by them ; we determined not to avail ourselves
of the yeomanry force that was ready to come forward in aid
of the Government. They made a voluntary tender of their
assistance ; but we knew the consequence of accepting that
assistance.—( Hear, hear.) We knew that the consequence of
accepting that assistance must be the raising of a spirit of re-
ligious animosity in the people; we knew that we could not
have embodied the yeomanry force that was offered us ; that
we could not call the Protestants of the north to the aid of the
Government without running the risk of engendering re-
ligious animosities it would have required the lapse of years to
allay.—( Hear, hear.) We were determined, except only in
the last extremity, to waive any such assistance. But we not
ofrnilindlostl
teari(ol—nlywerellaisnecoe was,uraged and dispirited
e the ordinaryiospiritdman vigouryofthose
of the law. The charge against us is, that we were supine at
first ; to that I give a peremptory denial.—( Cheers.) I say
we gave public proclamation of the view we took of the repeal
agitation. As Ministers of the Crown we gave it ; at the end
of the last session of Parliament we advised her Majesty to
declare from the Throne her disapprobation.—(Hear, hear. )
You say we issued no proclamation in the name
of the Crown. What proclamation could speak in more
emphatic language, in more emphatic terms,
than the proclama-
tion made by her Majesty from the Throne?—(Cheers.) Her
Majesty said, '° I have observed with the deepest concern the
efforts made to stir up discontent and disaffection among my
subjects in Ireland, and to excite them to demand a Repeal of
the Legislative Union." Her Majesty further said, " I am de-
termined to maintain inviolate the bond of connection between
the two countries, and I hope my subjects will discou'rage this
pernicious agitation, which disturbs the industry, retards the
animosity." That was the proclamation made by the Govern-
ment with respect to this agitation. We dismissed the magis-
trates who took part in the repeal agitation. Was that no sig-
nificant indication of the intentions of the Government ?
—(Cheers.) You complain that we dismissed them
without a previous proclamation. I believe the Noble
Lord opposite considered himself entitled to dismiss
Mr. Frost from the magistracy for being a member
of the National Convention I—( Loud cheers.) The Noble
Lord had written to Mr. Frost, whom be had appointed a
magistrate—(Cheers)—asking him whether or not ho was a
member of that Convention. The Noble Lord, I believe, at
first thought the answer satisfactory, and made no comments
on it. He subsequently dismissed him, not for any express
act, but for taking part in meetings at which seditious and
inflammatory language was used. I think lie did not prosecute
him, but he thought himself entitled to dismiss him without a
proclamation.—(Cheers.) We did dismiss magistrates for
taking part in an agitation for the separation of the two
countries, and we think we were justified in it." But we also
gave these instructions to the Lord-Lieutenant:— The moment
you are entitled by law to interfere with meetings that may
endanger the public peace, that moment we authorise you, and
desire that 'you will put them down." I want to show that the
charge against us, that we remained dormant and with folded
arms, looking on at these meetings, is utterly without foun-
dation. It was our intention to interfere whenever
the law should enable us to do so._(Hear, hear.)
But if these meetings were not legal, and as they still con-
tinued to be held then it is said that we should have called in
the military power to disperse them ; but in what a condition
we would have been in if wo had used force. But there were
periods when it is said we might have interfered according to
law. There was to have been a great meeting at Cashel, and
the Lord-Lieutenant sent down a gentleman well qualified to
confer with the magistrates. His instructions to them
were, that if they apprehended any danger—such as a
firm-minded and sensible man might apprehend—
then, and not till then, were they to order the
meeting to be dispersed; but the meeting was not to
be interfered with, unless men of firm and strong minds testi-
fied that they apprehended danger from the meetings of the
people. At a Cabinet Council,held on the 15th April, 1843,
we issued instructions to the Irish Government that we thought
they should consult the Lord Lieutenants of the different
counties where those meetings were about or likely to be held,
and if those meetings gave apprehension to the people, thereby
creating reasonable grounds for alarm in the minds of firm
upon all lawful subjects of her Majesty
og ; but if persons persevered afteran and sensible
toola
gaioa
persons,titooo
th that
then might the Irish Government issue
acallingm
this notice in coming to that meeting, then they
must use coercion. Then there was another meeting respecting
which we had every reason to think there would have been a
collision, and when we heard that there was to be this great
meeting at Skibereen to consider the question of repeal, we
again advised the Irish Government that if those proceedings
gave apprehension to reasonable and firm-minded men, then,
and not till then, must the authorities interfere. Then there
were other meetings held at Dungarvon, and another at Clones.
Why did we not interfere with these meetings? Simply
because those apprehensions were not expressed, and would we
have been mad enough to provoke a collision ?—(Cheers.)
Where was the necessity for calling out the military but when
we ,
meetings being held where the public
100 was perilled? Then we gave orders that a
peace
had apprehensionslikely
tohe of
proclamation should be issued. The magistrates of Dungarvon
addressed the Government, and expressed their apprehensions
of danger to the public peace. The Government directed that
if affidavits were properly.and regularly sworn to that effect,
then the magistates might interfere, and order the meeting not
to be held; but no interference was called for, and, therefore,
was not necessary. We had an objection to issue those pro•
clamations where there was no necessity. We had no covert
design to entrap men into the commission of conspiracy or
sedition. We did hope that this state of things would cease.
We wished to see matters return of themselves to repose and
quiet. We wished this pernicious agitation to cease of itself,
without the application of force. We thought it our duty to
take every precaution that prudence with forbearance might
dictate, although you now charge me with a desire to govern Ire-
land with military force, while we were doing all in our power
to obviate and prevent such a grievous and lamentable necessity.
The meeting was held on the anniversary of a certain day—
the anniversary of the Irish rebellion.—( Hear, hear.) I
wished to conduct ray defence with as little acrimony as pos-

sible, and I will only state what is absolutely necessary in
that defence. This meeting was held on the anniveisary of
the Irish rebellion and in the county of Tipperary.—( Hear,
hear.) The inhabitants of that county were called together,
and in a short time after it was the scene of one of the most
horrible tragedies in the records of crime.—( Hear, hear.) It
was a eounty also in which agrarian disturbances prevailed.
Why were those scenes selected for the meetings which took
place on the Hill of Tara, at Mullaghmast, and Clontarf ?
Every appeal was made by some of the speakers to revive the
bitter animosities of barbarous times, and to evoke that fell
spirit which exasperated the different races against each other.
—( Hear, hear.) Now, look to the day chosen and the scene
of the meetings, and I ask you, was there not evidence of the
existence of a conspiracy to effect a legal object by illegal
means 7—( Cheers.) Not by the present use of those means,
but by the display of physical force. But it may be asked,
why did you interfere at Clontarf and not More ? Why, this
is always the charge brought against those who act with
forbearance. You are charged with having forborne so long,
and acting at length, if you show the least forbearance. But
we interfered with the Clontarf meeting on this account : It
was the second meeting which was held in the neighbourhood
of the metropolis. The Clontarf meeting followed the meetings
of Tara and Mullaghmast, but it had this distinguishing cha-
racter, that there was a military array attending the meeting
at Clontarf—repeal cavalry were invited to attend the meeting.
Were cavalry necessary for the purpose of petitioning Parlia-
ment ?—(Cheers.) They were invited by proclamstion to at-
tend as a military body, and military terms were used through-
out the proclamation which was issued from the Corn Exchange.
Mr. ROCHE—It slid not issue from the Corn Exchange.
Sir R. PEEL—I think the documents will bear me out, and
lam pretty sure that the first proclamation bears the same
proof of having issued from the Corn Exchange as the second
proclamation.—(Hear, hear.) Am I right in what I state ?
( Loud cheers.) (The Right Hon. Gentleman then read the
tedwhic
the
h Cornh as
beprocedlamsoatiooritienrerspefeeertriendg
toth, eandrewpthsailch cwavasalrdya,
Exchange on the 3d September.) Why did co order this
meeting to be suppressed;?; When this proclamation was issued
we consulted the Lord Chancellor, the Attorney and Solicitor li
-
Generals, on the subject, and we put this question to them—
Whether independently of other circumstances, this summoning
of a meeting in military array, with military organization, con-
stituted an illegal meeting? because if it did we were deter-
mined on interfering by proclamation. The answer we re-
ceived was, that that particular meeting differed in character
from the meetings which were held in Cashel and Mullagh-
mast, not on account of the numbers who assembled, hut on
account of its military character; and that it was therefore
illegal, and that the Government would be warranted in issu-
ing
a proclamation to suppress it. W e resolved on issuing
that proclamation, and the reason why it was issued so: late has
been so fully explained, that I will not go over the same
ground again. The shortness of the time was unavoidable. It
has been said that we did not issue the proclamation till late on
the day—till five or six in the evening. I can refute that state-
ment by a reference to the counter proclamation referred to by
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. O'Connell). His
counter proclamation was issued on Saturday the 7th at three
o'clock.—(Cheers.) Now observe that this proclamation must
have been printed and arranged, and that it is dated at three
o'clock.—( Hear, hear.) I lament the shortness of
the time, but do not, for the purpose of aggravating
the charge against the Government, depart from
the real facts.—(Cheers.) We determined on occupy-
ing the ground, and making such a demonstration as would
prevent the possibility of a collision, and we determined also,
after the notice we gave at the close of the session in the speech
from tho Throne of our determination on the subject of the
repeal of the union, and after the dismissal of the magistrates, to
prosecute the parties who were instrumental in getting up those
meetings, and we determined on prosecuting them for that
conspiracy, of which wo have convicted them.—( Cheers.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite had asked why we did
not prosecute the printers, and my Right Hon. Friend never
had answered that questiBn. The Government would then
have been covered with ridicule for not striking at the authors
of the danger, but contenting themselves with the
punishment of those who were the mere instruments.—
(Hear, hear.) Sir, I will not go into the history of these
transactions ; but I ask the House to remember the references
to the United States, the publication of the speeches which the
son of the President thought it decent for him to deliver ; the
declaration of the son of the chief executive officer of the
United States says—" but the libation of freedom must some-
times be quaffed in blood." The reason why we read the ex-
tracts from the newspapers was, that the writer belonged to an
Association which undertook their circulation. Those news-
papers contained appeals to the army—strong, continued ap-
peals to every prejudice which could be raised in the mind of
tho Celt against the Saxon. lie asked the House to bear in
mind the scenes which were chosen for their meetings, scenes
selected for the express purpose of reminding the Irish population
of events in past history which they could not reflect upon with-
out feeling irritated. He called upon them to bear in mind
the selection of the 23d of May—he called Olson them to re-
member the songs which were introduced by some one—
he knew not by whom—into the barracks of the troops, who
was responsible for the introduction of such songs as the fol-
• _

lowing—
Who fears to speak of Ninety-Bight?
Who blushes at the name?
When cowards mock the patriot's fate,
Who hangs his head for shame?
He's all a knave, or half a slave,
Who slights his country thus ;
But a true man, like you, man,
Will fill your glass with us.
Can you mistake the object of the studious circulation among
an inflmunable people, of songs like that? Who was the re-
sponsible party ? Was it not the man, whosoever it might be,
who belonged to an association having subordinate officers,
whose duty it was to circulate the newspapers containing these
songs, and these appeals, as a return for the subscriptions which
they received ?—( Hear, hear.) ;Should we have been justified,
in the state in which the country then was, in declining to ap-
peal to our only instrument—the ordinary law of the country
for the repression of such evils ? I will not go into the trials,
the subject is completely exhausted. We determined, how-
ever, to appeal to the law, and we did appeal to it. I declare
that nothing was further from our wish than that the jury
should be constituted upon any other principles than such as
were consistent with perfect justice ; or that Roman Ca-
tholics should be excluded from the jury, simply be-
cause they were Roman Catholics. We appealed to
the law and we succeeded ; the offence charged was within
the law. We had only one instrument—we had no Coercion
Act ; we determined not to avail ourselves of Protestant feel-
ing. You make it a charge against us that we resorted to the
only instrument in our power. Let me put the House in
possession of the state in which the country was placed by
this continued agitation.—Wear, hear.) The Right
Hon. Baronet then read a description of Tipperary on
the 20th of October, 1843, when fires vrer3 lighted on
the hills every night, and the inhabitants were in constant ex-
pectation of an insurrectionary movement.) Was this (con-
tinued the Right lion. Baronet) for the purpose of petition?
—(lronical cries of " Hear, hear," from the Opposition
benches.) Was not this the result of that fearful system of
agitation which left us at last no alternative, if we really
wished to prevent an insurrectionary movement ? The only
recourse loft to us was to summon the chief authors of this
agitation to answer for it to their country.—( Cheers from the
Ministerial benches.) We preferred the charge under the
same law by which you had prosecuted Vincent—under the
same law under which you had read newspapers and made
parties responsible for their publication. We brought the
charge, not against subordinate parties, but against
those who said " we will prove to you that thi,
do-nothing policy will not succeed ; we declare , that
the Queen has power to repeal the Act of Union; we will
drive a coach and six through all your laws; we will prove
to you that we can evade and defeat the law." Well, then
we stepped forward, not in consequence - of these
taunts, but in consequence of the state into which
the country had been brought by this pernicious
agitation. We saki , " We will go before the country
and ask whether theie things are tolerable where civil go-
vernment is maintained." I repeat, we succeeded. The
Bench unanimously declared that the law had not been per-
verted, but that it applied to the offence charged. The jury
brought in a discriminating and considerate verdict, and the par-
ties charged were convicted of the offence laid in the indictment.
We have done all this without coercion, without applying to
Parliament for extended powers.—( Cheers. ) Having done all
this without the effusion of blood—(Cheers)—without conflict
or collision—(Reiterated cheers)—we find a powerful party
arrayed against us who find fault with us for our forbearance
at one time, and for our vigour at another.—( Cheers.) They
are wise after the results are known—(Cheers)—and every
effort taken during that anxious time to carry the law into
effect by the law has been tracked with' all the sagacity
of party, in order to find out some little error.—(Cheers.)
They charge us with being reckless—(Cheers)—with having
endeavoured to trample liberty under foot, with being desirous of
governing Ireland not according to law.—( Cheers. ) If we
had taken such a course, if we had acted too precipitately, if we
had dispersed meetings which we were not legally entitled to
disperse, if we had charged any single individual with attending
an illegal meeting, and had failed, if we had selected some poor
printer for prosecution, and sent him to. gaol—(Cheers)—the
walls of this House would have rung to sounds very different to
those with which they are now ringing.—( Cheers.) You would
have told us that we interfered without necessity, that we had
evinced a desire to interfere with the rights of petition—
(Cheers)—that Ise had not the Mirage to select the favourites
of the people--(Cheers)—but that we had pursued the unmanly
and paltry course of inflicting voneance upon a printer, but
that we had not dared to attack .the powerful leaders.—(donti-
naed cheering.) I will, however, say, in the face of the coun-
try, that in repressing this agitation, we have had no assistance
from those on the other side.—(Loud Ministerial cheers. )
This I. may say- with- -perfect truth. (Continued
cheers.). You know what it is to be exposed to the
same -dangers.—(Cheers. ) You have had organised meetings
against the Constitution to contend with.—(Cheers.) It has
been your painful fate to have to deal with the fires at Bristol—
( Cheers)—with the attack upon Newport—( Cheers )—with an
insurrection in Canada—(Cheers)—and if at that time you
found a powerful party ranged against you—(Load cheers)—if
we had taken up M. Papineau—(A laugh)—l do not mean
taken up the man, but if we had espoused his cause—( Cheers)
—if, while your proceedings in Canada were pending, we had
brought forward a motion inculpating you for sending up ex
officio informations when the grand jury had ignored your bills
—if we had tracked every step taken by you, and contented
ourselves with expressing a faint condemnation of the acts of a
man who was advocating the cause of liberty, yen would have
found it a much more difficult task than you did to vindicate
the law.—( Cheers.) I have thus offered a vindication of the
Government for the forbearance which we manifested at first,
and for our determination to make use of no other instrument
than the law, and for our application to the law when the con-
tinuance of the agitation left us no other alternative.—
( Cheers.) I have now to state to the House the course of
policy which we hereafter propose to pursue. I do not
hesitate to declare, that, as the Hon. Gentleman says, we must
consider in the present state of Ireland what measures its pub-
lic interests may require, and I will not be driven, by the
fear of any taunts or of quotations from Hansard, from fully
and freely expressing my opinion as to the course which we
ought to pursue.—( Cheers.) I should be ashamed of myself
if I were prevented by the fear of being charged with incon-
sistency, from adopting any measures which I believed would
be conducive to the restoration of peace in that country.—
( Cheers.) My apprehensions on this important subject are
enhanced by the position of Ireland with respect to its physical
and to its moral wants—by its position with respect to its civil
and political, and more especially with respect to its religious
state. The Hon. and Learned Member for Cork attached
great, but not undue, importance to the influence of the physi-
cal condition of Ireland.—( Cheers.) He stated very truly
that the sense of political grievances would be much less if the
physical condition of the country were better.—(Cheers.) But
when he was demanding an exact identity of the franchise, I
wonder it did not occur to him that, if wealth and intelligence
are to be taken into consideration in the bestowal of the fran-
chise in a country where seventy per cent. of the population
were in a state of absolute destitution, it must be
more dangerous to grant an extension of the franchise than in a
country where such a state of things is not in existence. There
is one subject, however, in the consideration of which, without
reference to political questions, we can all unite. I mean the
improvement of the social condition of Ireland—that wss a
matter of the deepest consideration with us last session. The
, Hon. and benevolent Member for Rochdale brought in a Bill
towards the end of the session, for improving the relations
' between landlord and tenant. He promised the Hon. Gentle-
man to introduce some measure on the subject ; but we found
it was a matter involving such vast interests, that we could not
legislate on it safely, without full previous inquiry. We,
therefore, advised the appointment of a Commission,

composed of landlords of Ireland, distinguished equally
by their rank and by their kind consideration for their tenants,
and to that Commission we intrusted that inquiry. In order to
show that no religious feelings were mixed up the appoint-
ment of the members of the Commission, it was certainly our
wish that it should have consisted, in addition to the Earl of
Devon, of tsvo Protestants and two Roman Catholics. The
gentlemen applied to were prevented by considerations of
health, and other imperative duties, from rendering their as-
sistance, and we proceeded therefore to constitute a Commission
suited to the public interest. The relation of landlord and
tenant is of a peculiar nature in Iceland. I do not hesitate to
say that there is an unfair and unjust prejudice against the
great body of landlords in Ireland. There is a presumption
that they are guided by different principles from those which
guide the landlords in this country. No account is taken of
the peculiar position in which they are placed. We could not
think of legislating on the subject without inquiring into the
practice of different parts of the country—the practice of the
north—taking the example of the estates where the tenants are
prosperous, and bringing to light and exposure those
landlords who pervert the law—and discriminating
between the good landlords, the vast !majority, and
the harsh and overbearing landlord. Such, we
thought, would afford the best foundation for useful
legislation. The Noble Lord referred the other night to a
pamphlet called " A Cry for Ireland." I have read it, and I
am shocked at how legal powers are, as it states, employed for
the purposes of oppression. 'I he Noble Lord says, why not
bring in a short Act of Parliament? Will the Noble Lord per-
mit me to ask what has he been doing the last ten yers on this
subject if he thinks legislation necessary ? The Noble Lord
says that a Commission is thingeroes. Why that is an argu-
ment ageinat every inquiry. We could not inquire into the al-
leged grievances it! Wales wi:hout a Commission.
With respect to the recommendation of a short
Act, the course pnrsued for the last ten years
was that some individual Member, not connected with the Go-
vernment, brought in a 13ill, which, having been read a first
and second time, was allowed to go into Committee, when the
unfortunate Member was met with so many objections, that
no further progress was made, and the session passed without
anything being done. We could permit that to be done.
We could permit the useful Member for Rochdale (Mr. B'.
Crawford) to adopt that course, but we thought it better to act
as we have done. The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Cork
(Mr. O'Connell) recommends the repeal of all the statutes
passed on the subject since the union. The Honourable
and Learned Member for Dangarvon (Mr. Sheil)
said that they contemplated interfering with the law of
landlord and tenant, brought in by Mr. Lynch, which gave
much greater power to the landlord. I cannot pass by the
speech of the Hon. Member for Roscommon—and in that
speech I could not see one particle of party feeling.—( Cheers. )
The Hon. Member had acknowledged that the Government
had a conviction that, under all the difficulties with which the
case was beset, they had pursued the best course. The Go-
vernment was influenced by no oilier motive than a just desire
to protect the rights of property, and, instead, of encouraging
vague expectation, to probe the evils of Ireland to the
bottom. With respect to the franchise, I will say that I should
wish to carry out the principles of the Bill for the removal of
the Catholic disabilities. I know not what may be the wish of
the Noble Lord, the Member for London, with respect
to the disturbance of the Reform Bill.—( Great laughter.)
but this much I will say, that with respect to the Irish franchise,
I think it ought to be substantially equal with that of Great
Britain. I do not say that there should be an identity of fran-
chise between the two countries, because that is impossible;
but there aught to be a substantial equality of civil privileges
for Ireland, and compared with all the other parts of the em-
pire. That there ought to be an identity—that there ought to
be a nominal equality between the two countries, is what I
feel confident that many Hon. Gentlemen en the other side of
the House would be the last to desire, because gentlemen who had
been most anxious to deprecate the extension of what was
called the Chandos clause, would encourage the landlords to
refuse granting leases to the smaller class of tents. But I
shall give no opinion upon the subject, and only refer to that
argument in the course of the debate to show that there can
be no chance of identity of franchise between the two countries ;
but OM, I think, it will be sufficient for the purposes of
this debate if I say that the franchise of the
two countries should be substantially equal.—( Hear.)
Sir, I now approach by far the most important subject of all—
! the course which I think we should take with respect to the
Established Church. And I will, without reserve, and with
the same explicitness, follow the course my Noble
Friend, the Secretary for the Colonies, and my Right Hon.
Friend, the Secretary for the Home Department. I find the
Protestant Reformed religion, anti the Episcopal Church, esta-
blished by law in that country for 280 years; and I find the
Establishment ratified and confirmed by Acts of Parliament
partaking of the character of a solemn covenant, as much as
such Acts could partake of that character.—( Hear, hear.) It
was the intention of the Legislature, at the time of the union,
to assure the Protestants of England arid Ireland that the
union should not endanger the Established Church ix, Ire-
land.—( Cheers.) I hope that gentlemen will not interrupt
me in what I have to say.—(Cheers.) At a subsequent period
—in 1829—1 have found that those who passed the Bill of
Emancipation, and used all their influence to combat the ob-
jections of the Protestant portion of the people—always kept
in view that it was necessary to give an assurance to the Protes-
tants, that if they acquiesced in removing the disabilities
of the Roman Catholics, there should be security for the Es-
tablishment.—(Hear, hear.); I say, that so far as a compact
can have force, that compact has force. At the time of the
union with Scotland it was settled that Presbyterianism
should he the established religion of that. country—and so it was
with Ireland.—( Hear.) I was astonished, Sir, to hear the
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Edinburgh, in his
very eloquent speech, refer to the subject of slavery, and
state (as a proof that men sometimes changed their
opinions) that Mr. Wilberforce pulled down the present
Duke of Northumberland, then a Member of this House, and
told him not to moot the abolition of slavery. In that allusion
the Right lion. Gentleman drew something upon his ima-
gination.—( A laugh.) I have referred to the report of
the debate, and I find that what Mr. Wilberforce said in
explanation was " I never said that slavery should not be
abolished. I only said that the abolition should be post -
coned until the minds of the negroes should be prepared by
education, to enjoy freedom." However that, may have been,
I cannot see how it could affect the paragraph in the Act of
Union.—( Hear, hear.) I say also, that so far as authority
can go, the highest authority is in favour of that view of the
Act of Union. 1 do not speak of the Church, but of men
who were of the highest authority, as expressing the opinions
and feelings of the Catholic party. Could I name any higher
authority than that of Mr. Burke, Mr. Grattan, Lord
Plunket, and Sir John Newport ?—( Hear, hear.) Mr. Burke
was the earliest, the ablest, and the most powerful advocate
of the Catholic claims. He wrote much on the subject
of the Penal Code, and those who had afterwards written
and spoken on the same subject, had only followed the argu-
ments which suggested themselves to his no-
tice.—( Hear' bear, and cheers.) Mr. Burke did not
conceal from himself any part of the truth, He said you base
an ecclesiastical establishment which, although it is the reli-
gion of the Prince and the landed proprietors, is not the reli-
gion of the majority of the people. Mr. Burke was of opinion
that the connexion of religion with the State should be
held fast. Ile wished well to the religion of the great num-
ber of the primary landed proprietors of the kingdom—that
religion which was one of the pillars of the Christian religion
in this country.—( Hear.) Such were the opinions of Burke.
Lord Plunket said he would fling to the winds the question
of the removal of the disabilities of Roman Catholics rather
than compromise the existence of the Established Church. The
dying request of 31r. Grattan was, that the removal of the dis-
abilities of Roman Catholics might be combined with the
maintenance of the Protestant Church in Ireland.—( Hear,
hear.) The opinion of Sir John Newport, who, though he
did' not rank to high in intellectual endowments, loved
his country, as well as either, he was in favour of
Catholic emancipation, but was of opinion that the Protestant
Church ought to be maintained as an establishment in that
country. The compact was of a sacred and solemn nature, which
guaranteed the preservation of the Protestant Church ; but if
he were convinced that the social welfare of Ireland required
a departure from the strict terms of that contract, and if it
were sought to bind up our legislative functions, so as that we
must not alter it, ho must say he was not prepared for that.—
( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) But he must at the same
time say, that nothing had so great a tendency to lower the
character of that House, as to break pledges solemnly made
by it—to make a compact. ten years ago, and violate it now.—
( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches.) Nothing could
tat) so destructive to the prospects of future legislation,
and unless there be some strong and over-ruling necessity—
( Hear, from the 1 linisterial benches)—l will maintain the
Established Church in Ireland, not only on the existence of the
compact, and the opinions of the most eminent statesmen, but
on my own pure convictions.—( Hear, hear, from the Oppo-
sition benches.) I bring reason and conviction in aid of that
compact, and I do not defend it upon a narrow ground. I do
not believe it would be for the interests of Ireland, or any
part of it, that I should accede to the motion fur impairing
the Established Church in Ireland, and I will assign my .
reasons. I am not now about to determine what would be
the best measures for a new state of society, in which there
were seven millions of Roman Catholics, and two millions
whose faith was identified with the Established Church. But
I talk of a country in which an Established Church has
existed for more than '2OO years, and which has been
guaranteed by compacts, and by prescription. I consider that
under all the circumstances of the case the present is the
best regulation that could be effected. First of all I contend
for the necessity of an establishment, and I apprehend my
right to contend for that will nut bo disputed.
You have an example of an Establishment in Euglani and
Scotland, and my conviction is that it is necessary for the pur-
poses of religion that an establishment of some kind or other
should exist.—( A laugh.) Do not take an advantage of an
1 expression. I am now addressing myself to the first step in the
argument of whether we should have establishments or not.
One of my reasons for maintaining an establishment in Ire-
land, and it is a cogent one I trust, is that if you had no
establishment in that country you would have more bitter
religious animosities than exist at present. 1 look,
therefore, to its effect upon Ireland ; but of this I am
perfectly certain, that if you establish a precedent
of having no establishment in Ireland little time will
elapse before that precedent will be sought to be ap-
plied to England. The other night my Right lion Friend,
the Member for Pontefract, gave notice of a motion to make
provision for the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, to which
notice of amendment was given by the Hon. Member for Shef-
field, to the effect that no provision for the maintenance of the
secular Roman Catholic clergy in Ireland was just or expe-
dient, unless based on such a revision of the whole of the ec-
clesiastical system as to place the clergy of all deno-
minations upon a footing of perfect equality. The
Honourable Member for Montrose would not wait
for the passing of the Bill. He would not wait for
the motion, but on the day the original notice was given he
was good enough to signify his intention of applying the same
principle in Grcat Britain the moment that principle was
affirmed. He also gave notice of a motion for an address to
her Majesty, that she would be pleased to institute an inquiry
as to what numbsr of her Majesty's subjects dissented from
the discipline of the Established Church, in England and
Scotland, as well as in Ireland, with a view to the appropria-
tion of the surplus revenues of the Church to the purposes
of education, or some other national charitable purposes.
Now, I say, if you apply this principle to Ireland, it will soon
be sought to apply the same principle to England.
I say, therefore, that nay opinion is decidedly in favour of an
establishment; and it is decidedly in favour of maintaining the
Protestant. Church as that establishment.—(Cheers ) I can-
not conceive a more important question than that which will
arise as to the nature of the relation between an Established
Church ant the State. The Roman Catholics say, that they
will submit to no regulation by law. The Protestant Church
is controlled by law. You subject it to great restriction—.
you have prevented the meeting of the convocation, you regu-
late its acts—you aro jealous of its authority—you subject it to
the restraint of the law, but you subject it also to the milder
influence of favour, and of patronage. You claim for the Crown
that species of influence which is derived from the
nomination of a great part of the preferments in the Church.
And it is difficult to estimate the effect of that influence on the
Church. What do the Roman Catholics say ? They say we
do not want an endowment. We refuse to submit to any such
thing. You shall not bind us by any law. We will not sub-
mit to the nomination of spiritual persons being controlled by
i the Crown. We refuse to enter into any connection with you;
and if you give us any endowment, we will not give you any
control in our affairs. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Mem-
ber for Kildare, speaking with great deliberation and point,
said, " If you try to solve the difficulty by entering into any
arrangement with the Pope, and if you obtain a concordat from
{ the supreme authority of the Church, even then, I tell yen,

- ,
that your regulations will TiOt be observed in
I 1 Ireland, and your authority will-not 'lS.B.4bet .._ el, -1 tell you that
I the ecclesiastical outhorities in Ireland 'ysi ,rebereitainst your
arra: gement." That was the declarati.oirlff Right Hon.
Gentleman. Wit the Hon. Gentleman's; • 411 me what
equality there would bo in giving an endown.'ent to that Chun*
while it refuses to submit to those regulations
which are sits--
blished in this country with respect to the Protestant Church ?
On the part of all Churches there is a disposition to remonstrate
against the exercise of civil power. You think it necessary in
this country to control the affairs of the Church by
very strict enactments,. In Scotland you have lately
found two par, ies in the Established Church claiming
exemption from civil control and asking for independence. In.
that ease you looked with the utmost jealousy at those claims..
You positively refused to accede to their demand of exemption
from civil authority, and you permitted a great part of that
Church to sever their connexion, rather than enter into any
arrangement. What would your own Church do? If file
Protestant Episcopalian Church asked for its present property
1 awl rights—you being the Established Church—would your
permit that Church to have them ? Or will you ;allow the
authority of the civil power, the rights of the Crown and
others to presentation, and the title to endowments? But the
1 Roman Catholic a ys, we claim independence for ourselves;
an.l yet you would give revenues to a Church, and authority to
a Church, that will not hold herself in allegiance.
And this you call equality !---(Loud cheers ) Now, I
do not believe that the preference is given to the Protestant
Episcopalian Church from any wish to show disrespect—least of
all to throw insult—upon the faith of others. Ido believe that
iii this country a preference is given to the Protestant Episcne
list) Church from a preference to its doctrines—(Cheers)—
from a decided preference to its doctrines—(Cheers)—and r
contend also that that preference implies no insult upon
those who dissent from its ductimee, arid that it
is extravagant to say that because I have a pre-
ference for its doctrines, that it involves rue in the neces-
sity of persecuting any other Church whatever:—(.Loud cheers
from all parts of the House. ) Whatever reasons lor you may
have for ]:referring the Establishment—and there is ris2 necessity
for going into them at this moment—that does not imnilv that
we have any right whatever to question the right of other.' to
the fullest freedom in the exercise of their faith. A
turn to the propositions of the lion. Member for Sheffield (Min'
Ward). I consider those propositions exactly tantamount
Lo a total suppression of the Protestant Church in Ireland.—
( Hear, hear.) That Hon. Gentleman says—Let us divide the
revenue of this Chnrch—let us give 70,0001. to the Protes-
tant, 70,000/. to the Presbyterians, and 450,0001. to the Roman
Catholics. Why there is no equality in this.—( Cheers.) Se-
verity thousand pounds to the Protestants who submit to our
civil authority, and know no foreign one, and four hundred and
fifty thousand to a Church which prides itself on dividing that
authority, and being independent of all national control
whatever !—(Loud cheers.) Why this is the reverse of
equality—and it is more than that, it is gross injustice.—
( Cheers. ) But a Noble Lord (Howick) talked by analogy.
Is that Noble Lord prepared to permit those who acknowledge
allegiance in Church matters, not to the Crown of England
but to a foreign spiritual authority—is he, I ask, prepared to
allow the Catholic bishops to take their seats in the House of
Lords 1 If he is not, then your principle of analogy is good
for nothing.—( Cheers.) Here is the religion guaranteed by
several Acts of Parliament, by long prescription, by
thousands and thousands of ties of the strongest and
most endearing character, by an alliance with the
State of two hundred and fifty years, and we are told not to
maintain it, because its existence is inconvenient.—( Cheers. )
I ask, what, then, will promote religious peace in Ireland?
Do you suppose that it will promote mutual cencord and
peace to say to the Protestants—" Equality of franchises is es-
tablished. You now must give up your Church ?"—(Loud
cheers.) You little know the spirit you would evoke.—(Loud
cheers.) But your equality. your division of revenues, your
analogy, you never attempt to work out so that we may look
upon practical results. Supposing you to get your
proposed 450,0004 of revenue, what will you do with
the churches ?—( Hear, hear.) Do you mean to call
on the Protestants to sacrifice the endowments and give up the
churches too ?—(Cheers.) You must do that, or where is
your analogy. If you give the endowments in the proportions
proposed, you must, by your own rule, give the churches
in the same proportion.—( Hear, hear, and cheers. )
I believe that a proposition more calculated to ensure discord
was never propounded.—( Hear, hear.) I am, therefore, pre-
pared to offer just as decided an objection to that proposal of
the Hon. Gentleman, as I am to oppose the transfer of the
revenues of the Establisument to the Roman Catholic Church.
There is another proposal. It was, not to venture at once to
destroy; the Church, but to undermine and sap its foundations.
I think that course just as fatal as any other. I think that,
not to destroy life at once, .but to infuse some
slow poison into the veins, which will ultimately
cause its destruction, is a course as little likely to promote
either social or religious peace, as either of the others.—
(Cheers.) I therefore come to the conclusion, founding my.
self upon compacts, on authority, and on the convictions of my
own mind, that the best course—and the course which I, for
one, as far as my humble powers can effect it, the Government
will pursue—is to maintain in its integrity the Protestant
Church Establishment.—( Loud and continued cheering.)
When I say in its integrity, I do not mean to exclude all
such reforms as may increase the efficiency of the Establish-
ment for the purposes of religion; but I do mean that I will
neither consent to overthrow the Church, or to establish three
forms of religion in Ireland, or to make a division of
the revenues of the Church between the Protestants,
the Presbyterians, and the Roman Catholics ; nor can
I consent to any of those smaller proposals, which mean
nothing if they do not mean the ultimate destruction
of the Church. I have therefore stated the grounds
on which Ipr opose to act with respect to the religious esta-
blishments of Ireland ; does that compel me to exclude alto-
gether the consideration of the position of the Roman Catholic
Church in that country ? Am I to consider that Church as
altogether outcast, and to be excluded from any consideration
of regulations that may improve its condition ? Endowments
from the State you absolutely reject. We were assured that
by the voluntary endowments of individuals it might
be provided for without the violation of conscience,
and yet with the concession of a great boon.
The Noble Lord, the Member for Tiverton, threw out this
suggestion last session in a friendly spirit, and we professed our
readiness to consider in As usual, we are met with a state-
ment that it will not be of the slightest value ; it is rejected
on the authority of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman We
. were assured that many Protestants would be disposed, for the
sake of promoting peace, and for the purpose of improving the
condition cif the Church and charitable establishments,
to make voluntary endowments to' the Catholic clergy.
The absence of such endowments is alluded to by Mr. Scurry,
in his work on Ireland, as a great evil. (The Right Ho-
nourable Barocet read the passage, which stated
that the doubts whether such funds would not be appropriated
to Protestant establishments, amounted to an absolute prohi-
bition to their being made.) That absolute prohibition (con-
tinued the Right lion. Gentleman) we are willing to remove,
accompanied with such securities as would prevent any abuses,
that might arise from the removal. I was certainly surprised
to-night at hearing, for the first time, the offer met in the
manner it has been. We are, however, still prepared to con-
sider our promise. There only remains the subject of edu-
cation.—( Hear, hear.) I might refer you to the
course we have taken on national education as
sufficiently indicative of our determination to adopt
those measiiree we believe conducive to the welfare of Ireland,
even at the risk of offending many of our supporters. We pro-
pose in the present year to make a considerable increase in the
grant for the purposes of national education. I should
be very sorry to refuse 'to consider the means of still
.urther increasing that education. It has been suggested
that instruction in the science of agriculture might be usefully
given in Ireland, and advantageously engrafted on the present
system of education. ( Freer, hear.) I should be sorry
, to exclude all considerations of matters of this kind; I
should be sorry to exclude a consideration of the means
of providing an academical education of a higher class
than that given in the national schools.—( Hear, hear.)
But at present we do propose to make a considerably
increased grant for the purposes of national education. I have
now done. I thank the House for the attention with which it
has heard me.— ( Cheers). I trust it feels that I 'have only"
trespassed at such a length on its attention from A sense of the -,
necessity of discharging a public duty.—(CineerS4 A have
stated our general views of the policy and measures we. intend
to adopt. In themselves they may not be immediate and
effectual remedies for the evils under which Ireland labours ;
but I trust. I have said enoneh n‘ show the spirit
in which the Government ois prepared to consider
the questions connected .with:: the- legislation of Ireland.
I was reminded by the Hon. 'Gentleman, the Member for
Shrewsbury, in a very able speech, not the less to be admired
because it departed froth the general rule of Parliamentary
usage-1 was restinded by the Hon. Member—that I said that
the question of the state of Ireland was one of far too much im-
portance to he sacrificed and treated as a question of party ex-
pediency, I said, that however Hon. Gentlemen might be
attached to the party of the Government, that if, on the
question of the state of Ireland, they might consider larger and
more extensive measures necessary than we were inclined to
promote, I said, and I said with perfect truth, that I
thought this questien one of such paramount importance, that
till questions of party consideration must give way to it, and I
thought that any gentleman giving his vote; was bound to give
a free vote—an unfettered vote on this important question. I
would on no question make any sacrifice of principle, but for
the good of Ireland, and for any question or measure tending
to promote her welfare, I would make any personal sacrifice, and
have made sacrifices before now, for the purpose of extending
peace to Ireland.—(Loud cheers.) I have for this end made
sacrifices of which the loss of office was the least. I
have suffered the loss of private friends—and the
alienation of personal attachment and private esteem.—
( Cheers.) Why am I not this moment the representative, in-
stead of the rejected candidate of the University of Oxford ?
When we proposed emancipation in 1828, the loss of official
power was certain, and I yielded in the hope of promoting
peace in Ireland, but with deep emotion; and for the same
purpose I sacrificed also that which was the proudest distinction
of my life, the representation of the University of Oxford. I
regret that I must consider the present condition of Ireland as
not being what it ought to be ; but I hope the civil
power in Ireland will continue to maintain itself,
eithout the aid of the military power. While see
remain in office we will assert the power and dignity of the
law.—( Loud cheers.) We will assert the power of the law
firmly, powerfully, and calmly, although we deprecate the use
of extreme measures, which should only be resorted to in 'lases
of the most urgent necessity ; but having resorted to them,
and vindicated the insulted dignity of the laws, we are satis-
fied. Our object was to restore peace and tranquillity, and
with them to bring prosperity and happiness to the country. We
have succeeded in restoring friendly relations with France
and all other foreign powers. We have succeeded in improving
the commerce of the country. We have succeeded in
securing a surplus in the revenue over the expenditure.
We have seen the revival of commercial and manufactur-
ing prosperity; but in the midst of these cheering prospects,
we have bad to contend with that baneful " intestinum et
domesticum bellum ;" and we cannot, I regret again to say,
express our satisfaction with the state of Ireland, but I trust,
however, that that alternative which party suggests, which
says that we cannot govern Ireland without military force—l
hope and trust that this suggestion is not well-founded. It is said
that by party influence, peace may be restored ; but I think
that without party influences or party motives, we
may be able to govern Ireland as she ought to be governed.
I see much cause for congratulation and hope, when we view
the treble applications of science and its wonderful progress. I
shall not be surprised if in my day I see the interval between
Dublin and London shortened to within a twelve hours' journey.
The reports of engineers show that the interval between both
cities could be shortened to a journey of fourteen hours.—
( Hear, hear.) My belief is, that with the progress of im-
provement it will be still further shortened. ( Hear,
hear.) I cannot help thinking that in the upper classes of
society there is a growing disposition to obliterate past animo-
sities.—(Hear, hear.) Ido not now hear debates on the state
of Ireland as compared with what I have heard in debates to
former times, without seeing prevailing through the
creed, and
a strong disposition to forget differences of _
other side
When anything is said by lion. Gentlsmmenet
by,
obliterate distinctions of race.—( Hear, heoanrst:,:d cheers.)
on. Gentle.
of the House in kindly disposition, it
6 is rmade.—( Hear, hear.)
I do therefore earnestly
suasion ins. spirit cor-
mreespnoonpdpinogsitteo othe
the p
ill,.
it
that the influence of public
control agitation, and may
11as of the law, may
minantwr?rsitctholitic pe
opinion, as we
of Ireland—that it impedes improvement,
the best interests
application of capital—prevents the redress of
which I am persuaded can .
application of individual interposition and
re-
dressedtph, :
svce prevents s
b tyh et
grievancese

than by anYthin tbat the Government can do.
Ihave a arm conviction thatif peace and tranquillity were
sectored in Ireland, no part of the British empire would make
such rapid progress in prosperity.—(Loud cheers.) There
are facilities and opportunities for improvement in that
retry, which, I believe, would cause it to advance more
eigclly in prosperity than any other portion of the empire.—
e.) I conclude by expressing 'an earnest hope that this
eititation, and all the evil consequences that follow from it,
will be permitted to subside.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
fehotdii rejoice, in whatever capacity I was, considering
would be the happiest day of my life hen I could
See the beloved Sovereign of the realm fulfilling the fondest
wish of a heart—(Cheers)—full of affection towards all her
people, but mingling affection with sympathy and tenderness
towards Ireland—(Loud cheers)—and should hail with joy
the dawn of that auspicious day when she could alight, like
110 m• beneficent spirit, on the shores of Ireland, and lay the
ibundations of the temple of peace—(Cheers)—when she could,
in accents which, proceeding from the heart, would speak to
the heart rather than to the ear, call en her Irish subjects of all
Slum and denominations—Protestant and Roman Catholic,
ilaxon and Celt —to forgot the differences of creed and of race,
and hallow that temple of peace of which she had laid the
handatieu—to hallow it with sacrifices holier than those with
'Mich the temples of old were hallowed—by the sacrifice of
those evil passions that dishonour our common faith, and pre-
vent the union of heart and hand in defence of our common
seuntry. (Tho Right Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst the
loud and long-continued cheering of the Ministerial benches. )
Sir Valentine Blake, Lord John Russell, and Mr. Roche,
stood up together, for the purpose of addressing the House, but
the Noble Lord add the Hon. Member for Cork gave way to
Sir VALENTINE BLAKE, who attempted to address the
Douse several times, but at each attempt was met with such
shouts as " Divide, divide," " Spoke, spoke," " Lord John
Russell," that the Hon. Gentleman was obliged to sit down,
after having moved the adjournment of the debate, amidst con-
siderable laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh."
Mr. ROCHE said he rose for the purpose of seconding the
motion of the Honourable Baronet who had just sat
down, and, under present circumstances, he would not
attempt anything so unreasonable, but the House would recol-
lect that the party with which he and the Hon. Baronet were
connected, had been accused by the Right Hon. Baronet of a
crime the grossest that human nature could be guilty of,
namely, that of willingly deluding their countrymen by a wilful
perversidn of history.—(Laughter, and cries of "Oh, oh.")
Considering the position which he held with regard to Ireland,
he did not think it would be very unreasonable to trespass
open the attention of the House for a few minutes. —( Cheers. )
The Right Hon. Baronet had represented his Learned Col-
knee as saying that the Parliament which existed before
1800 was • desirable one, and he charged them with
wishing to restore a corrupt Legislature. What
his Hon. and Learned Friend had said was, that in the 18
yearaprevious to 1800 no country had made such strides in
advancement as Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) Why did not the
Right Hon. Baronet controvert his Hon. Friend's statements
with regard to the subsequent acts of the Legislature towards
Ireland? He thought that such a course would have beets
more appropriate. He regi etted that the Right Hon. Baronet
did not give them more hopes for Ireland—that instead of
dinging unworthy appellations at the agitators, he did not
grapple with the grievances which made them agitators.—
( Hear, hear.) He might depend upon it, that if he did
not grapple with them, they would grapple with him.
.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) They were agitators, he would
never deny it ; and he was sorry to say that they were likely
to continue agitators, for there appeared to be no disposition on
the part of the powerful majority in that House to take from
them their spell.—( Hear, hear. )
The motion for the adjournment was then withdrawn.
Lord J. RUSSELL, in rising to reply, said that in the ex-
hausted state of the House he would not address them at any
great length, but there were some points which had beea
raised in the debate, to which he could not avoid adverting.
The Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State; for the
Rome Department, had taunted him with the course which
be bad taken on that occasion. Now, he had stated last year,
his opinion with respect to repeal, and the repeal agitation,
but be did think the period when Mr. O'Connell was convieted
in a Court of Law was not the proper period for saying any-
thing disparaging of that Hon. and Learned Gentleman. He
had stated when the country was to a large extent confided to
his care the preservation of the peace was essentially aided by
the course which Mr. O'Connell took with regard to
tbe Chartists and the trades' associations.—(Hear, hear.)
He should never regret that he had subjected himself to that
imputation, for if any thing could be said in favour of the
course which Mr. O'Connell had pursued for the preservation
of the peace of the country, he thought that the present was
the moment for saying it.—(Loud cheers.) The Right Hon.
Gehtleutras had said that he (Lord John Russell) must wish to
see his motion defeated, because if he had not, said the Right
Hon. Gentleman, he would have proposed resolutions at once
for the purpose of bringing under the consideration
of the House measures to remedy the grievances of
Ireland. He could not, however, but recollect
that such a motion had been proposed in the course of last ses-
sion by an Irish representative, had been treated as a vote of
censure on the Government, and rejected. He was, therefore,
perfectly justified in bringing.forward the present motion. The
Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department in speaking
of his (Lord J. Russell's) observations with regard to
Lord Lyndhurst had left out the purpose for which
those observations had been made. The traversers in Ireland
had been indicted for attempting to excite feelings of ill-will in
the minds of the people of Ireland against the people of Eng-
land, and his object was to show that Lord Lyndhurst, the
Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies, and Dlr. Bradshaw,
(perhaps he might as well have left his name out), had pre-
viously used expressions tending to irritate the people of Eng-
land against the people of Ireland.—(Cheers. )
Lord STANLEY—What words did I make use of ?
Lord J. RUSSELL—The words used by the Noble Lord
were " minions of Popery."
Lord STANLEY—Those were not my words. They were
cited:by me "as used by the Hon. Member for St. Alban's, on
the other side, and were never applied to Catholics at all—
(Ministerial cheering)—but to the Noble Lord and the mem-
bers of the Government who acted with him.—(Cheers and
counter cheers.) The denial that the words were ever used
by me, was made last session ; and if the Noble Lord will re-
fer to the debates, he will see that they were never used by me
except as a quotation from the Hon. Gentleman opposite,
and were never applied to Roman Catholics at all.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was not aware that the Noble
Lord had made this explanation last session. He had stated
that the words had been used by the Hon. Member fur Wood-
stook, but the adoption of those words by the Noble Lord--
Lord STANLEY—I never adopted the words.—(Cries of
" Oh, oh.")
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought it extremely strange, if
the words had never been used that they should have been
quoted in the sense they had been by the Hon. Member
for Sheffield. But with respect to Lord Lyndhurst, he had
said nothing against that Noble Lord's character no one
amid have a higher opinion of that Noble Lord'S talents
than he had; but he contended that it was his hostility to 1
Ireland which had procured him his 'present office. He had
spoken of his carelessness the performance of his judicial
duties. Perhaps the,. was an ill-considered expression ; but
he considered knatihe Noble Lord was more indebted for his
high station to his political talents than to his judgments in
the Court of Equity ; and with regard to the charge of judicial
sareleasness, none of those who had spoken on the other side had
taken the pains to contradict that, nor had any one thought proper
in defend the charge of the Chief Justice. The Attoirney-Ge-
teral for Ireland, who had passed a high panegyric upon that
minent persists would, he thought, have praised him for the
-gay of that Calmness and sobriety
judgeof demeanour which be-
a in the exercise of hisjudicial functions ; but the
ionourable Attorney-General had completely passed
-cm without observation. The Right Hon. Gentle-
snimencement of his speech, had stated that he
k with the acrimony which ho (Lord J. Rus-
hut with great temper and forbearance.
.Gentleman scent on to say, after some
s condeict had been, that he would
t. hand than have retained office in
ti they (the late Administration)
to Lord Plunket, he (Lord
'oinking that the Right
-ed of some of that
T ord John Russell).
'-e retirement of
"n stated to
-iced age,

41k
PAO •
Right a.
by the chat..
a", se the ce
should not apes-.
sell)) ha-A st
It on
T v
Then the
deeeri:iitlon of what fie
ratter have cut off his ripe
the eircumstancee untier whice
retained office; and, with respete
Jahn Russell) could not help I.
lion. Gentlemen's expressions savou,
acrimony which he had attributed to him (e
Some o the circumstances connected with ti.-
Lord Plunket he gould now mention. It had loe.
Led Melbourne, that Lord Plunket at his then adv
Cam
ae
was desirous of relinquishing his post. Lord
wished to know; as the dissolution was about to take plb-
if he should go and stand as a candidate at the ela°7A
tion for Edinburgh. Lord Melbourne, on Lore
Plunket's desire to retire being communicated to
him, directed that the Attorney-General should be
made Lord Chancellor of Ireland. A few days after that had
been communicated to Lord Campbell, it was ascertained that
Lord Plunket was not desirous to retire. Subsequently it was
ascertained that Lord Plunket would retire, and then Lord
Campbell went to Ireland. No disrespect was ever intended
to Lord Plunket. He (Lord John Russell) had always
considered that Lord Plunket was the most eloquent
man he had ever heard in Parliament. But with re-
gard to Ireland the measures that would sustain autho-
rity which they proposed were always supported by gentlemen
opposite ; while those measures which would conciliate the
people of that country, and tend to restore tranquil-
lity, were invariably obstructed by them. The Right
lion. Gentleman had alluded to the Coercion Bill. Did
he disapprove of that measure? If he did, he could much
better get an account of the details of it from the Noble
Lord (Lord Stanley) near him, as he was then
Siaretary for Ireland, than from any ether person.
The great reason which he (Lord J. Russell) had for the in-
troduction of this 13111 was, for the protection of property and
the prevention of outrage and murder in the rural districts, and
for no abstract motive, and on these grounds he gave full eon-
sent to it.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Gentleman
had spoken of his Landlord and Tenant Commission in Ireland.
He (Lord John Russell) looked upon that Commission with
some doubt. The Right Hon. Gentleman must admit that it
wee calculated to disturb the public mind, by raising indefinite
espectations in Ireland on the subject of tenantcy. He (Lord
John Russell) could not forget that when Mr. Drum-
mond used the expression that property had its
duties as well as its rights, it drew down a strong
leeture from the Right Honourable Baronet opposite;
and now he (Lord J. Russell) bad heard with some surprise the
Right Hon. Baronet declare that one of the objects of the
Commission would be to bring to light the abuses of this
system. The Right Hon. Baronet had spoken of the great
question of the Church, but he could not support the Right
„Moo. Baronet's views on that subject. It had been said that
the Church was meant for the instruction of the people, but
in one case of which he read to-day, there was
only one Protestant in the parish, and how
eould that clergyman be called the instructor of the people
when he held not the slightest communion with thousands of
Catholics in his parish ? He thought there could be no doubt
about the feasibility of paying the Catholic clergy by
the State, when in the year 1825, Dr. Doyle
consented to the adoption of such a measure. The Right
Honourable Gentleman had said that he (Lord John Rus-
sell) had been very careful not to put his motion
in sn4i a manner as should commit him to any
particular course if he were again to come into office.
Now, considering that he (Lord J. Russell) had proposed the
extension of the franchise in Ireland, both Parliamentary and
municipal, an increased grant to Maynooth, and a perfect
equality in civil rights with England, he did not
think that, during the ten years when the Right
Honourable Gentleman was out of office, he had proposed
any ;Founts so distinct and so oomprehensive.—( Cheers. )
The ble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies cautioned him
to weigh well the responsibity of bringing forward this motion.
He (Lord John Russell) thought there was much less responsi-
bility in making the motion than in leaving the state of
Ireland undiscussed. If he had not brought forward this
motion the repeal party would be strengthened. It would be
said, that no matter how Ireland was governed, it would give no
concern to the English Parliament—that the House was very
busy about the Horse-racing Bill, but that it was nothing to
them what was done in Ireland.—( Cheers. ) The whole course of
the debate appeared, on one side and the other, to induce
, the people to think that their case would be considered in the
nglish House of Commons.—( Hear, hear.) The manner in
which he bad been supported, and in which the debate had
been conducted, would- show the Irish people that to that
House their petitions should be addressed, and